There might be all kinds of reasons, so i abstained from eleborating it. One reasoning is that with respawning of AIs both the total of humanity and the total of technological progress is closer to what it was IRL and it ensures that there are enough other nations left to interact with.
Blatant cheating, what's the excuse with this one?
- Thread starter Buttercup
- Start date
There might be all kinds of reasons, so i abstained from eleborating it. One reasoning is that with respawning of AIs both the total of humanity and the total of technological progress is closer to what it was IRL and it ensures that there are enough other nations left to interact with.
I do not understand what you mean.
It's an illustration of me playing a random game that fits your quote, a game without a win-goal and no interest in speed where I'm mostly trying to just experience all of the game. Now that the art is out there and abstract without clarification in its own post you could apply any interpretation you liked to it though.
If you don't know the answer then you don't have to feel the need to struggle-up an answer. It's perfectly ok to not know stuff. You don't lose internet points for saying "lol, no idea mate".
Your attempted guess about Total population/Total tech progress/Real life comparisons/Number of nations to interact with is a bit strange and makes little sense, baring in mind the game pays virtually zero heed to any of that stuff and number of nations is even promoted as a major toggle itself. Really, gloriously convoluted theorising, have an internet point from me anyway for the entertainment value.
As need_my_speed said, it's likely nothing more than something that has always been there but no-one ever thought about it enough to ask why it was there. I might start a thread in the Civ1 forum and ask that lot what they use it for and why they think it's a major thing. Seems the most logical way to proceed.
tjs282
Stone \ Cold / Fish
I do not understand what you mean.
"Here be Sea-Serpentes"...? I just assumed that you'd created that sock-puppet shape intentionally, while playing around for aesthetic effect.
I thought you'd played Civ1, though? If not, it has only 2 victory-conditions: total conquest, or space-race, and my impression was that (just as in Civ3) the space-race was intended as the canonical 'good' ending, in that it's the one that rewards the player with a victory-animation, as opposed to a simple filled wall of trophy-leaderheads.But space-races by definition take (a lot) longer to play through. This was especially true for Civ1, where (due to software/coding limitations) the player didn't always get to choose his preferred next-tech-to-research/buy, and tech-costs simply scaled by number of techs known. This meant that a player might have to waste beakers/turns/gold on researching/buying a 'useless' tech first, just to make the 'desired' tech visible -- but also more expensive. For longer games, it's therefore helpful to keep multiple (developed) civs on the map for as long as possible, to act as e.g. research-partners (and/or military allies, if attacked). So I speculate
that AI-respawning was put into Civ1 precisely to make full-length space-race games easier/ shorter, by preventing the AI-Civs (or the Barbarians) from wiping each other out too early.Conversely, as you say, respawning makes conquest-type games incredibly annoying for people trying to win as fast as possible. e.g. On the Civ1 Earthmap, killed civs frequently respawned in South America or Australia, a long way from anyone's default starting-points. This effectively turns 'simple' conquest-games into long, tedious slug-fests, since the player is then 'forced' to colonise the entire world so as to leave no respawn-space available (and/or be familiar enough with the game that he can predict exactly where the AI-civs will respawn, and then herd those respawned Settlers into Mountainous terrain; see relatively recent thread in the Civ1 forum titled 'Checkmate' from CFC-user @Posidonius ).
In Civ3, with its multiple victory-conditions, and variable map-sizes (Civ1 only had variable landmass-size, mapsize was fixed), the same arguments apply, but to an even greater extent on larger maps: hence (I speculate
) Firaxis simply decided to keep respawn, but make it toggle-able: for quick and dirty kill-'em-all games, especially on larger maps, the player can switch it off, for longer/ more challenging games, he can switch it on.
Last edited:
need my speed
Rex Omnium Imperarium
Oh, okay. That looks like a fun map - I should play on an archipelago as well at some point, after I am done conquering the Earth (see my signature
). "Here be Sea-Serpentes"...? I just assumed that you'd created that sock-puppet shape intentionally, while playing around for aesthetic effect.
But space-races by definition take (a lot) longer to play through. This was especially true for Civ1, where (due to software/coding limitations) the player didn't always get to choose his preferred next-tech-to-research/buy, and tech-costs simply scaled by number of techs known. This meant that a player might have to waste beakers/turns/gold on researching/buying a 'useless' tech first, just to make the 'desired' tech visible -- but also more expensive. For longer games, it's therefore helpful to keep multiple (developed) civs on the map for as long as possible, to act as e.g. research-partners (and/or military allies, if attacked). So I speculate
Conversely, as you say, respawning makes conquest-type games incredibly annoying for people trying to win as fast as possible. e.g. On the Civ1 Earthmap, killed civs frequently respawned in South America or Australia, a long way from anyone's default starting-points. This effectively turns 'simple' conquest-games into long, tedious slug-fests, since the player is then 'forced' to colonise the entire world so as to leave no respawn-space available (and/or be familiar enough with the game that he can predict exactly where the AI-civs will respawn, and then herd those respawned Settlers into Mountainous terrain; see relatively recent thread in the Civ1 forum titled 'Checkmate' from CFC-user @Posidonius ).
In Civ3, with its multiple victory-conditions, and variable map-sizes (Civ1 only had variable landmass-size, mapsize was fixed), the same arguments apply, but to an even greater extent on larger maps: hence (I speculate
You would be correct, except I didn't purposefully make it, it was just serendipitously the last area that needed cleaning and when I scrolled my screen across to move the boat into it I thought, haha, that looks like a sea serpent.
I also think it would have been great to have fantasy creatures in the game, it would make everything a lot more entertaining. Instead of "your boat sunk in treacherous waters" you could have animations of Krakens and etc tugging boats to their depths or violent storms ripping boats apart. A Rationalisation technology in the late industrial age would negate the monsters by making people stop believing in them and so be more willing to sail the large oceans and Improved Navigation would negate the storms (getting rid of the stupidly powerful but also rather pointless current Navigation and getting rid of the rather silly and pointless Advanced Flight to make room, for example).
Now that's applying imagination to game design where imagination is needed... and historically required. [likewise have monsters spawn in dense forests, jungles, mountains (but they don't leave that area) etc for land units, but that's a different topic].
Your knowledge of Civ 1 sounds quite convincing. Civ 1 is the one I've played least out of 1-4, to a percentage so small that I might as well not count is as having played it (in Civ terms). If I make a thread over there I'll be sure to use your post in my opening post!
There are a few Scenarios in the C&C forum, which have implemented that feature. For example the early GOTMs used a special Mod that had Krakens spawn like barb galleys, making early exploration quite dangerous... And in the "Pirates - Yarr!" Scenario, there is an AI-controlled "nation" (which is at war with every one else), which can build sea monsters, zombie ships and pirates etc. (Though unfortunately that Scenario is a bit buggy in some aspects.)
Regarding the respawn feature: I agree with justanick and tjs282 that it can be nice to have in some situations. And tjs282 probably hit the nail on the head as to why it can be turned on/off.
I can't speak for the devs, but I use the preserve AI in early game feature because I like to see as many unique units to be able to fight as possible. I don't think historical accuracy is everyone's most important "feature" that Civ 3 has.... For the challenge runs of games, I wouldn't want it enabled as I'm playing for domination and if one opponent gets the boot early on, tough rocks to crash your boat on. For the power-playing games where I intend to run the board and want as many challengers around as possible, it's definitely a welcome option, as the AI gets itself into trouble almost exclusively compared to getting itself out of trouble. Makes for fun war-mongering games, though.
Similar threads
