Civilization III v1.16f Additions/Changes/Fixes

[Schmuckzoid]

OK, kids!
Mike is dead on! This game has serious problems, and he only posted his concerns so that they might be heard. You all need to back off and keep your Pavlovian loyalty inside or Fraxis just may get complacent.
Mike is doing us all a service, and his post were NOT out of line. I have yet to continue a game into the Modern era (after the first) because I lost every war due to useless fighters just "looking pretty." I know there are many strong points in the game, but there are also a bucket-load of weaknesses. Just because Sid Meyer put his name on it does not mean it is gold.
Please do not rip into people for just trying to get something they spent good money on (I'm a teacher. I make almost nothing!! $50 is a lot for a game that is full of bugs and misprints in the manual and Civilopedia) to work properly.
That's all I wanted to say, keep up the revisions, Fraxis. (Remember WWII? Carriers were useful because air power can not only find, but also SINK ships, for example) OK, Back to trying to rape the world before flight. (glad that one got fixed)

 

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by Essex
Dan,

It's great to know someone from Firaxis is around this forum and responding to posts. I am confused as to how you choose which questions to answer though. I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge to most people by now that the lack of upgrade ability for special units is purposeful. However, I'm fairly sure that for most of us (MP desperados excluded) the burning issue for the next patch is things which speed up the more tedious micromanagement issues of the mid to late game. To that end please an indication at least of whether or not it is possible to address the following issues in a patch:

1) Stackability of units including possible foreman type units for stacking workers

2) Overall Trade Screen (and if possible as a bonus the auction idea mentioned above




3) More explicit automation orders for workers

I'm not asking for you to tell us yes/no on these just whether or not it is possible to program them at all and perhaps an indication of whether firaxis is leaning towards adressing them

Thank you for your time.

P.S. Watch out for coke machines some can be particularly nasty

My rationale for responding to posts is really simple: I tend to answer the ones I know the answers to.

In your case, I really have no idea about these, but I can certainly pass them on to the "programming department"...


Dan

 

[ajohn505]

I'm sure there's plenty of people here who have had experience in the real world, in real companies (even software companies), before and after the dotcom bust... and I think it angers us a little more to see so many oversights in the game, as well as the lack of communication with the community. Ultimately, it's some individual's poor choices that left the game in it's (unfinishable) condition. And it's some individual's poor choice that left us without a sense that Firaxis et al. were listening to us. Jeez... it's not that hard. One hour a day spent in an official forum would be enough. Firaxis, we love the 'civ of the week' feature and all, but it's not really endearing us to you.

With the success of the franchise, you know there'll be other companies that release bigger/better/faster civ games, and I'll be running to them with my wallet open. When the competition heats up, you'll see Firaxis lamenting the fact that they gave the silent treatment to the community. That, and the fact that their game requires 4 minutes between turns. Use these numbers, and you can calculate how much time you wasted waiting for the computer to take it's turn during an entire game. It's actually hours.

Not that I don't love the game... but there's just not enough other options right now. At least we have the patch., albeit about 3 weeks late. And we know it wasn't delayed because of QA

 

[goodyhut]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS



My rationale for responding to posts is really simple: I tend to answer the ones I know the answers to.

In your case, I really have no idea about these, but I can certainly pass them on to the "programming department"...


Dan

Dan I know you are tired of hearing about it, but as long as you are at it could you also pass along the us "MP desperados" would greatly appreciate a little bit of info on Civ 3 MP to curb our appetite a bit.

 

[Endureth]

You should try a seccesion game to tide you over until MP comes out. They are pretty fun. They take longer but the end redult is worth it.

Endureth

 

[goodyhut]

Originally posted by Endureth
You should try a seccesion game to tide you over until MP comes out. They are pretty fun. They take longer but the end redult is worth it.

Endureth

Thanks for the invite Endureth but Succesion games just arn't what I'm looking for. I have played Civ 2 multiplayer for 3 years and it is a LOT better than playing the AI. I believe I can speak for all of us hardcore MP players when I say that we would REALLY appreciate some news on what is in the works.

 

[royfurr]

gibbie99,
Your point that this is not a wargame is a good one, still, it seems out of whack when it DOES try to "referree" (sorry) warfare, and a very "weak" unit can destroy a relativly large number of more "powerful" ones, more then an extremely small number of times. Also, I like your point about offensive units weakness as technology is starting to really take-off. This is historically valid- the defense begin to dominate the attack probalby around the US civil war- maybe before. Certainly by 1900 and the advent of true "industrial" warfare.

But this doesn't help with Middle ages mismatches- the "Knight vs. the warrior" situation (although, admittedly, it is less extreme then "swordsmen vs. tanks). Again, there is a probablility thing here, sometimes the weaker guy DOES triumph- dooodoo happens, after all), but if MANY people are experienceing a warrior wasting 3 Knights (or similiar face-offs) frequently, that seems a bit disproportionate.

Firaxians!! Whats your policy here? Is this truly a "keep the weak position gamer in the game" tactic, or is it POSSIBLE there is a need for a fix in the patch on probabilty issues??
Thank you.

ANYONE ELSE got any impressions on the patch and this issue?

 

[Risbinroch]

The things I want to know, want to see in next patch etc:

1) Starting positions should be correct, this is most important I think, when playing on a world map, wich is the only thing I do... Don't realy like playing on a fantasy map.

2) The scenarios... In Civ II I almost just used scenarios, bought some kind of special edition with a second CD on wich contained a lot of scenarios, allthough I mostly played WWII, this was very very good. Hope there will come scenarios soon.

3) Think there should be more specific units per civ. Like now all civs have the same tanks etc. Would also be good if there where more choices to build much of the same unit: Like tank, you could build a light, a medium or a heavy tank. with specific attributes each unit.

4) The possibility that a part of your civilization declared independence, especially if it was far away from you capital, perhaps on another continent.

5) There should be the possibility that there was oil in sea too, but to harvest them you would have to have a certain technology

6) Ability to harvest sea resources far away from the city.

7) If you add a building with the editor, and then later build it in the game. When you then go look at the city view - will the game crash? what is city views purpose anyway, is it there just to look at or has it a purpose in the game that I am not aware of?

8) Burning down cities should not be so common, I think this is a terrible act of war, and so should all other civs in the game if you do it. Perhaps a new wonder called "Human Rights" or "Amnesty International" could solve this? Anyways I realy hate this feuture, its should perhaps be available, but at a cost... And a much higher cost in modern times.

9) You say that you could adjust your fortress so that they work, how exactly does I do that? Haven't seen my fortress fire yet. As with the SAM battery also.

10) When in modern times, many civs still build old units, is there any chance of this improved so that only modern units could be built?

11) When mech infantry is buildable, there should also be the possibility of still building ordinary infantry.

12) Easyer to add units, should be possible to add units wich wasnt animated also. Don't understand why it had to be, liked the way CIV II was.

13) When you are allied with another civ and recapture on of their old cities you should have the option of liberate that city and give it back to it's rightful owner.

14) In modern days, a city like IRL don't produces food would get it from other cities. Think this should be in the game somewhat. Don't like the idea of starvation, when another city of yours producing tons of food.

15) Will you release more civs: Spanish, Portuguese etc.?

16) Is there a limit to how many cities names that could be added to a civ? What about if you are another civ than english/american having another then NEW in front of the city, like Neu for german for instance?

17) Think Tundra is higly overated, And why isn't it possible to add polar terrain with the editor? Like greenland should have lots of polar terrain.

18) Does installing the patch, destroys some of the work you yourself have don with the editor, like changed stats of units etc.?

19) When you discover a technology and start building tanks, you should be able to yourself set a few points on them, like attacking, defence, armor and speed, so that you could then yourself name a few units? Is this possible at all, I have always wanted this. Like I want some tanks to be realy strong, but not so fast and I want other tanks that are just fast...

20) In Colonization I think I remember a few more resources than in CIV III, like cotton and tobacco at least. Any chance of these comming back into the game?

21) In modern times we can make rubber ourselves (or so I believe) So perhaps a tech about this? Syntetich rubber...

22) Will you at some time release a scenario pack as you did with CIV II?

23) Perhaps an off topic question: Is it possible to still buy Colonization? I don't have it anymore, it's been some years since I played it, but I remember it was a realy good game. And an idea for CIV III, in colonization the tribes started in correct places, could this be possible for CIV? Like the celts shouldent start in Asia etc?

24) When people start to make units with animation and such, will you include this in future patches?

25) Is it possible in the future patches to have more than 16 civs play at once, and at even larger maps?

26) Is it possible to have further diplomacy, like when you are an ally, you should be able to move troops into a friends city to help defending it?

27) Remember in CIV II that you could give youre friends units to help them out? Is this possible in CIV III? At least I haven't figured it out.

A bit long, but good work have you done allready on CIV III, when the WWI, WWII and american Civil War scenarios arrive I will not get any sleep no more, I do not get much now either and haven't been to school all week...

 

[Proteus]

Great, the patch covers a lot of things
A lot of things are covered even some things, i didn´t realize, they are a Problem.
I really hope in one of the next patches there is also a Button to add new Units to the Game in the editor (at the Moment there is only the Option to include new Civs and the Patch-Fixes don´t mention that it has been added)

btw.
What is meant by

Shield bonus from clearing forest can only be received once per game

It sounds like the Shield Bonus is only applied for clearing your first tile of Forest and you get no Bonus if you thereafter clear any Forest-Tiles

or do I misunderstand it and it means, that if I for example have cleared Tile 2345 (and therefore don´t get any Shield-Bonus for further replanting and clearing it) I can still clear Tile 2346 (which hasn´t been cleared before in the Game) and get the Shield Bonus?
(one thing which could be implemented by adding a "Cleared"-Flag to every tile, I think)

 

[Flak]

First off I'd like to say congrats on getting that thing out the door. I too have had to work feverishly on major patches (although these were to betas, never final releases) and know the kind of strain it can put on all involved.

I was wondering about the Theory of Evolution bug. I realize that not a lot of fuss was raised about this one since it's a relatively small deal comparatively. But I think it's still important because this 'Wonder' is effectively canceled out by the bug.

Just in case, I will describe it again. The Theory of Evolution is supposed to give it's builder two advances upon completion. How it in fact works is that it looks to see if there are any 'optional' advances that were passed over. If none or only 1, it then checks to see what current advances are available. It chooses two and gives them to you. Unfortunately, it is quite possible (I've done it twice myself. Others have posted similar or identical results) to have researched all of your optional techs and have only the current tech being studied (or perhaps one other), available. As a result, the Theory of Evolution gives only one on ZERO techs upon completion.

Please read this.

Please let me know if this bug was even addressed. Very much appreciation is gauranteed.

 

[2xhelix]

Patch still doesn't fix fortress , or did I read wrong??

Arggggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


FIX THE FORTRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIX THE FORTRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIX THE FORTRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIX THE FORTRESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry for being so lame, but Fortresses in Civ2 played a huge role for me strategically. And I really want them to work in Civ3.

also

where are

FIXED STARTING LOCATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIXED STARTING LOCATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIXED STARTING LOCATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

anyway that's my rant.

 

[KALIROB2k2]

Originally posted by TotalNewbieHead


I'm sorry, i just have to comment, by law- this even if based in the united states is not free-land, its a private forum and whomever owns it can do whatever they want on it, at any time, without warning. Although, most people don't go powerhungy when they own things, there is not a darn thing you can do if he wants to *smack* you around.

Alright, I ignored the first 2 responses since I figured only 2 people didnt understand, but before this gets out of control I will clear this up. When I said "This is an online forum not a dictatorship Endureth, people are bound to make normal post now and then. You cant stop that, not to mention it is a free country, if you dont like these post then just dont read them its that simple. " I mean that NORMAL users like us, (NOT the moderator) need to stop complaining. If they dont like the pety talking on the boards here and there then maybe they need to just give up on life because its bound to happen. Just like you 3 all responding to say something is basically doing just what you say you hate. So drop it and forget it because you cant stop pointless post, they've been here for years.
It must be hard to have any friends if all you do is come on and rag on people on message boards cause you have no power in the real world. If you do, well then I guess I wont get any response to this post.

 

[KALIROB2k2]

I also wonder if the starting positions will be correct now, or at least you can have a choice between the 2. I mean it seems the computer purposlly group Civs close to each other in some instances.

 

[mr.biswas]

I'm going to miss the Ocean squares ability. It gave you a HUGE trade advantage and was a central point in my strategy for playing huge/ archipelago/ 70% water maps. But having less corruption is worth it...

 

[OneInTen]

This is intentional.

Can someone explain to me why unique units were intentionally made disadvantageous to the civ that has them? (ie having to forego a step in the improvement chain due to not being able to upgrade them?)

 

[Iron Chef]

Originally posted by OneInTen


Can someone explain to me why unique units were intentionally made disadvantageous to the civ that has them? (ie having to forego a step in the improvement chain due to not being able to upgrade them?)

Strange, isn't it? I figure that it must have been too powerful to let certain civs to upgrade to their uu's while others got no benefit at all, e.g., the Germans. Still, I think the French get royally screwed because they can't upgrade from Pikemen to Musketmen like every other civ, and must build all new Musketeers to defend their cities. But then again, think about how powerful it would be for groups like the Romans and/or Persians. I could have 10 warriors and once I discover Iron Working (and a road to Iron), I could have 10 legionaries or immortals (an upgrade from 1/1/1 to 3/3/1 or 4/2/1). That's pretty darn powerful, and might allow that civ to dominate the early game.

 

[goodyhut]

Originally posted by Iron Chef


Strange, isn't it? I figure that it must have been too powerful to let certain civs to upgrade to their uu's while others got no benefit at all, e.g., the Germans. Still, I think the French get royally screwed because they can't upgrade from Pikemen to Musketmen like every other civ, and must build all new Musketeers to defend their cities. But then again, think about how powerful it would be for groups like the Romans and/or Persians. I could have 10 warriors and once I discover Iron Working (and a road to Iron), I could have 10 legionaries or immortals (an upgrade from 1/1/1 to 3/3/1 or 4/2/1). That's pretty darn powerful, and might allow that civ to dominate the early game.

I think a balanced way to fix this situation is to just increase the cost of upgrading to the special units. As it stands now the Chinese, for instance get hosed when they can't upgrade thier horsemen.

 

[Traquenard-fx]

I don't want AI or me taking more easily cities cy culturals borders(pardon my english).
If disable the cultural victory erase this feature?!

 

[Zoroaster]

Firaxis,

Sounds like the patch will help a lot of things. However, will there
be any attempt to resolve the SafeDisc-related problem that leaves some of us unable to get anything past the intro splash screen, even with new CD drives? After going through everything on my system, the only thing that works is to bypass the Safedisc protection.

I shouldn't have to get a cracked file to play a game I own...

Thanks,

Zoroaster

 

[walkergrae]

All in all, the patch looks good. And I like some of the suggestions that have been tossed out, especially since they are things I've been wishing were included like:

1) Access to to current trades from the trade advisors window.

2) Seeing red print and icons on the domestic advisors window showing cities that are about to go into disorder or are currently in disorder like the city status window in civ 2.

Unit groups might be nice. When you have three battle groups, each with a couple armies, 10 tanks, 15 calvary and 8 artillery it gets to be time consuming moving three collections of 8 artillery I'm using essentially as a groups anyhow. However I'm not sure about workers being grouped as I move them dynamically. Piling them on to a polluted square that appears, spreading them willy nilly to individual tasks and then piling back on the next polluted square again, ad infinitum.