Online petition for an updated Civ III editor
- Thread starter Rob (R8XFT)
- Start date
vingrjoe
Landlocked Shipwright
Hey all, I’m not in the habit of reviving old threads, but this one seems to come and go. So forgive me of any wrong doing on the part of reviving older threads.
I have been playtesting for roughly the past two weeks. I am trying to be of some help to El Justo with the effort to improve gameply for TCW scenario single player version. At the moment I am tackling naval warfare, IMO a very ignored aspect of Civ3 from the development point of view . It was created way too simple and shallow. Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it should’ve been super complex, but a little more depth to what it is right now would have gone a long way.
I am trying to get the AI to use battleships and gun cruisers to do ASUW and NGFS missions as a priority over escorting transports and carriers. However, because of the limitations of the editor and the AI, it is almost impossible to force the AI to use specific ships for specific tasks. Right now, if a unit has the Requires Escort flag, any ship marked as a Naval Power is used. The problem with this is destroyers, cruisers and battleships need to be marked with the Naval Power flag, or they will just sit there and do nothing. Now, the AI tends to always choose the Naval Power ships that have the most hit points and highest A/D rating. What makes this a problem is that when a surface combatant is in a transport or carrier stack, it does nothing in regards to Anti Surface Warfare (ASUW) or Naval Gunfire Support (NGFS). If there is an enmey ship near the stack, the whole stack, including any battleships, cruisers or destroyers ignore the enemy ships. Furthermore, when the AI lands troops, any surface combatants with bombardment capability in the stack, do not even prep the landing site with shore bombardment (NGFS). What the editor is lacking, is an Escort label, that would make the ships marked with the Escort flag, escort the transports and carriers and any ships flagged with Requires Escort. (I think I may have made a post about this in this thread earlier.) The AI should not use Naval Power flagged ships to escort. You may say, then don’t flag ships with the Require Escort flag. This doesn’t matter, if the AI has a large enough navy, it will assign ships to escort transports and carriers regardless of whether they have the Require Escort flag or not. So, this in itself may be a bug. When a person plays a regular Civ game, this is not as much an issue, because there is not cap on certain unit types, such as battleships. So the AI has plenty of battleships and crusiers to escort and to do ASUW/NGFS. However, in El Justo’s TCW scenario, historical accuracy in classes of ships and numbers is desired. For example, there are four Iowa Class battleships in TCW, just as in real life. If the AI doesn’t use them for ASUW/NGFS, what’s the point of even having them, or any other specific ship for that matter, like the Sverdlovs, Kirovs, Vanguard ? It boils down to this, Civ3 may as well only have carriers, transports, subs and destroyers, because without any extra flags in the editor, the AI in Civ3 makes no distinction in usage between destroyers, cruiser or battleships and their roles.
I realize Civ3 is not intended as a wargame, but it has military weapons and the potential for warfare, so why was this area of the game and editor cut short ? It seems any game that is not a true wargame, but is an RTS or TBS with military weapons, has the situation where the developers don’t know there butt from their elbow with regards to the use of and missions of weapons. They just throw them into the mix, and make little effort at creating depth of warfare.
So, why am I posting about this in this thread ? Partly because after these few weeks of tweaking and testing, I’m banging my head against the wall at short sightedness of the developers of Civ3/C3C, and want to vent. Another reason is to plead with them to release the source code to a small group of capable modders who can program.
I want to ask Firaxis/Atari/TakeTwo…whoever owns the Civ3 code: Why won’t you release it ?
As said before, a small goup of modders with good programming skills could sign whatever legal paperwork is necessary to calm the fears of any piracy. They then could work on attempts to implement suggestions such as posted in this thread. Of course not all suggestions could be implented, but ones that would not require a whole rewrite of the game code. I mean how old is Civ3 anyway ? With Command and Conquer Generals and Zero Hour, they realized the value of the modding community and how it prolongs life of the games. They released everything needed to totally and fully mod those games, this with the release of the newest C&C game coming out soon. Granted, Civ4 released modding tools sooner in the time frame that EA did for C&C. But EA/whover had no fear of mods for C&C Genrals/Zero Hour threatening the newest C&C title sales.
So, does Firaxis/Take Two fear that in the hands of capable modders, that Civ3 would draw people away from Civ4, if new life were to be breathed into it ? I’ve played CivIV, and don’t care for it. I think in a few years, there will be some good mods for it, and the average computer will be able to handle higher poly graphics, by then. But still, for the forseeable future, I and many others will stick to Civ3.
If it weren’t for fan-made mods and graphics for Civ3, I would have stopped playing the game many years ago, and I think others would have too. I’ve already vented about my discontent over what I considered nothing more than a mere money grab that was Civ Chronicles. I mean us die hard modders want meat and potatoes, good stuff, more creating ability and modding power, not cheesy gimmicks.
Again Sid, Firaxis, Take Two, whoever, why are you witholding the potential for more modding ability and extended life for Civ3 ? Why are you snubbing the loyal, talented Civ3 mod base ? Greed ? Fear ? Indifference ?
What happened to passion about one’s work and creations ?
I have been playtesting for roughly the past two weeks. I am trying to be of some help to El Justo with the effort to improve gameply for TCW scenario single player version. At the moment I am tackling naval warfare, IMO a very ignored aspect of Civ3 from the development point of view . It was created way too simple and shallow. Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it should’ve been super complex, but a little more depth to what it is right now would have gone a long way.
I am trying to get the AI to use battleships and gun cruisers to do ASUW and NGFS missions as a priority over escorting transports and carriers. However, because of the limitations of the editor and the AI, it is almost impossible to force the AI to use specific ships for specific tasks. Right now, if a unit has the Requires Escort flag, any ship marked as a Naval Power is used. The problem with this is destroyers, cruisers and battleships need to be marked with the Naval Power flag, or they will just sit there and do nothing. Now, the AI tends to always choose the Naval Power ships that have the most hit points and highest A/D rating. What makes this a problem is that when a surface combatant is in a transport or carrier stack, it does nothing in regards to Anti Surface Warfare (ASUW) or Naval Gunfire Support (NGFS). If there is an enmey ship near the stack, the whole stack, including any battleships, cruisers or destroyers ignore the enemy ships. Furthermore, when the AI lands troops, any surface combatants with bombardment capability in the stack, do not even prep the landing site with shore bombardment (NGFS). What the editor is lacking, is an Escort label, that would make the ships marked with the Escort flag, escort the transports and carriers and any ships flagged with Requires Escort. (I think I may have made a post about this in this thread earlier.) The AI should not use Naval Power flagged ships to escort. You may say, then don’t flag ships with the Require Escort flag. This doesn’t matter, if the AI has a large enough navy, it will assign ships to escort transports and carriers regardless of whether they have the Require Escort flag or not. So, this in itself may be a bug. When a person plays a regular Civ game, this is not as much an issue, because there is not cap on certain unit types, such as battleships. So the AI has plenty of battleships and crusiers to escort and to do ASUW/NGFS. However, in El Justo’s TCW scenario, historical accuracy in classes of ships and numbers is desired. For example, there are four Iowa Class battleships in TCW, just as in real life. If the AI doesn’t use them for ASUW/NGFS, what’s the point of even having them, or any other specific ship for that matter, like the Sverdlovs, Kirovs, Vanguard ? It boils down to this, Civ3 may as well only have carriers, transports, subs and destroyers, because without any extra flags in the editor, the AI in Civ3 makes no distinction in usage between destroyers, cruiser or battleships and their roles.
I realize Civ3 is not intended as a wargame, but it has military weapons and the potential for warfare, so why was this area of the game and editor cut short ? It seems any game that is not a true wargame, but is an RTS or TBS with military weapons, has the situation where the developers don’t know there butt from their elbow with regards to the use of and missions of weapons. They just throw them into the mix, and make little effort at creating depth of warfare.
So, why am I posting about this in this thread ? Partly because after these few weeks of tweaking and testing, I’m banging my head against the wall at short sightedness of the developers of Civ3/C3C, and want to vent. Another reason is to plead with them to release the source code to a small group of capable modders who can program.
I want to ask Firaxis/Atari/TakeTwo…whoever owns the Civ3 code: Why won’t you release it ?
As said before, a small goup of modders with good programming skills could sign whatever legal paperwork is necessary to calm the fears of any piracy. They then could work on attempts to implement suggestions such as posted in this thread. Of course not all suggestions could be implented, but ones that would not require a whole rewrite of the game code. I mean how old is Civ3 anyway ? With Command and Conquer Generals and Zero Hour, they realized the value of the modding community and how it prolongs life of the games. They released everything needed to totally and fully mod those games, this with the release of the newest C&C game coming out soon. Granted, Civ4 released modding tools sooner in the time frame that EA did for C&C. But EA/whover had no fear of mods for C&C Genrals/Zero Hour threatening the newest C&C title sales.
So, does Firaxis/Take Two fear that in the hands of capable modders, that Civ3 would draw people away from Civ4, if new life were to be breathed into it ? I’ve played CivIV, and don’t care for it. I think in a few years, there will be some good mods for it, and the average computer will be able to handle higher poly graphics, by then. But still, for the forseeable future, I and many others will stick to Civ3.
If it weren’t for fan-made mods and graphics for Civ3, I would have stopped playing the game many years ago, and I think others would have too. I’ve already vented about my discontent over what I considered nothing more than a mere money grab that was Civ Chronicles. I mean us die hard modders want meat and potatoes, good stuff, more creating ability and modding power, not cheesy gimmicks.
Again Sid, Firaxis, Take Two, whoever, why are you witholding the potential for more modding ability and extended life for Civ3 ? Why are you snubbing the loyal, talented Civ3 mod base ? Greed ? Fear ? Indifference ?
What happened to passion about one’s work and creations ?
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
Some people suggested that the code might not be owned by a single company.... That could be the main thing that keeps them from doing this.
Okay Gang, I've just sent the following communication to Firaxis. Needless to say, I'll keep everyone posted on replies etc.
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am a die-hard fan and mod-maker of Civilization 3, and I assure you that this is a serious question coming from a seasoned and successful businessman.
I would like to see the source code for Conquests released. My questions are simple:
1. Would Firaxis be amenable to selling the source code for STRICTLY non-commercial use by the ardent Civ3 modding community? (I am assuming there would also be non-disclosure agreements etc. involved.)
2. If so, what would the approximate (+/- 10%) asking price be?
Most Sincerely,
-and, no, I didn't sign it "Oz"
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am a die-hard fan and mod-maker of Civilization 3, and I assure you that this is a serious question coming from a seasoned and successful businessman.
I would like to see the source code for Conquests released. My questions are simple:
1. Would Firaxis be amenable to selling the source code for STRICTLY non-commercial use by the ardent Civ3 modding community? (I am assuming there would also be non-disclosure agreements etc. involved.)
2. If so, what would the approximate (+/- 10%) asking price be?
Most Sincerely,
-and, no, I didn't sign it "Oz"
my gut tells me the new parant company dosn't want work from rivals given new life and being fed directly into the pool where its target audience feeds, currently on its Civ4 product.
Like Mirc said the rights are split up between a few competiters. If only they could come to a consensus then they would all make a tidy profit, I imagine, off a upgraded Civ3 release.
Anyway nice thread and great post by vingerjoe
Like Mirc said the rights are split up between a few competiters. If only they could come to a consensus then they would all make a tidy profit, I imagine, off a upgraded Civ3 release.
Anyway nice thread and great post by vingerjoe
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
Add button on terrain has indeed been mentioned. 
It's one of the things I'd like and need most.
It's one of the things I'd like and need most.
Virote_Considon
The Great Dictator
You can alter the movement cost for LM terrain, too, just if a unit can ignore the cost of the parent terrain, it can ignore the cost of the LM terrain, too.
Keroro
Dororo: Ninja Frog
With the terrain - it's a pity in some ways that the developers bothered with landmark terrain. It would have been far better if they had developed an add terrain system that would let you change all the properties of the terrain, rather than just the food/shield/gold output. It would have been so much more flexible than the system we have now.
Ozy - Well, at least someone is matching their theory with praxis.
If you get a reply I will be over the moon.
Ozy - Well, at least someone is matching their theory with praxis.
If you get a reply I will be over the moon.I_batman
Emperor
Okay Gang, I've just sent the following communication to Firaxis. Needless to say, I'll keep everyone posted on replies etc.
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am a die-hard fan and mod-maker of Civilization 3, and I assure you that this is a serious question coming from a seasoned and successful businessman.
I would like to see the source code for Conquests released. My questions are simple:
1. Would Firaxis be amenable to selling the source code for STRICTLY non-commercial use by the ardent Civ3 modding community? (I am assuming there would also be non-disclosure agreements etc. involved.)
2. If so, what would the approximate (+/- 10%) asking price be?
Most Sincerely,
-and, no, I didn't sign it "Oz"
Oz, good luck with this. What link did you email to?
The ironic thing is if you get a positive response and 2K has you sign an NDA, you can't tell anybody you got a positive response.
BTW, I have decided to wait one month from now to tell what I think will be a sad, angry story. Considering the context of this thread, you may already know what the story is.
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
Thanks a lot for doing this Oz. Hope never dies!Okay Gang, I've just sent the following communication to Firaxis. Needless to say, I'll keep everyone posted on replies etc.
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am a die-hard fan and mod-maker of Civilization 3, and I assure you that this is a serious question coming from a seasoned and successful businessman.
I would like to see the source code for Conquests released. My questions are simple:
1. Would Firaxis be amenable to selling the source code for STRICTLY non-commercial use by the ardent Civ3 modding community? (I am assuming there would also be non-disclosure agreements etc. involved.)
2. If so, what would the approximate (+/- 10%
Most Sincerely,
-and, no, I didn't sign it "Oz"
Unfortunately, Stormrage tried this before, and he didn't get a positive answer. He didn't get a negative answer either, it was just ignored.
Here.
Virote_Considon
The Great Dictator
Is it to do with some kind of editor limitation?
Ogedei_the_Mad
Caffeinated Khagan
Very slim chance of Firaxis responding to one e-mail. But we can all dream, I suppose.
Oooooh, I like a bunch of the ideas here.
I too wish for most of the things you do.
Too many things to mention, but, I ESPECIALLY second the ideas for mercenary units, different barbarians per age, make demands for tribute a little more realistic (I don't know exactly how to say it, but CIV's demanding tribute is more realistic than Civ III.)
I too wish for most of the things you do.
Too many things to mention, but, I ESPECIALLY second the ideas for mercenary units, different barbarians per age, make demands for tribute a little more realistic (I don't know exactly how to say it, but CIV's demanding tribute is more realistic than Civ III.)
I wrote to the Corporate email link on their website (dshirk@firaxis.com) although the "shirk" part makes me a bit nervous ...
Re: a hypothetical NDA - it all depends. The one's I've both written and signed have pertained to release of proprietary information; I've never seen one prohibiting the mention of the fact that an NDA agreement has been made. But we'll see.
@Keroro - you get 10 points for using the word "praxis" in a sentence!
Best,
Oz
Lord Cooper
lovinn' it!
i doubt they'll do anything. 
would be friggin' awsome if they did.
would be friggin' awsome if they did.
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
I am very interested in this. However maybe a native English speaker will do a better job at writing the message than me. This is a great idea!
This is a great idea!
We should ask a native English writer, not an native English speaker.
Ya Im behind this Yorgos, so are I bet, alot of people who probably, usually would be silent. Mybe if we had the most direct mailing address posted here, we could all target the same account. (or mybe its better to spread shot all departments )
Is the 'shirk' the best place to send it?
)Is the 'shirk' the best place to send it?
