1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Firaxis is working on Civ3 again

Discussion in 'Civ3 - General Discussions' started by Scirocco16V, Jan 27, 2015.

  1. Scirocco16V

    Scirocco16V Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    Messages:
    157
    Location:
    New Jersey, US
    I thought people in this forum might be interested to know that Firaxis is currently working on Civ 3 again.

    https://steamdb.info/app/3910/history/

    The link is to the steamdb.info page for Civ 3 showing it's history. You can see there's a private branch called "sp" which they added about a month ago and have been working on ever since.

    The changes have been limited to a a few MB, which rules out a graphic update. I'd guess they're restoring online multiplayer.
     
  2. vmxa

    vmxa Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    13,879
    Location:
    Oviedo, Fl
    We can hope they are going to give it the "HD" treatment and bring it up to current dx standards. At least make it support much higher res levels.

    That sort of thing can be done using interns, giving them training and us improvements. Reissue for 19.99 like other games are doing. No need for much new content, maybe add some of the scenarios that are already around.
     
  3. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,809
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    I hope they finally fix some of the more annoying bugs like the submarine bug or the Scientific Golden Age...

    Will people who bought the Steam Edition, automatically get these updates? Will they be released as a downloadable patch for the non-Steam customers? This would be quite interesting to know...
     
  4. Quintillus

    Quintillus Archiving Civ3 Content Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,558
    Location:
    Ohio
    Last spring, there were some articles about how Civ3 was supposedly going to get a Steamworks multiplayer update to replace the now-defunct Gamespy version. Civ4 was also supposed to get such an update (and did in June), as was Borderlands (I don't know if it did as I don't play it). So perhaps they're getting around to adding it in Civ3?

    But it certainly would be great if they did some additional improvements while they were at it.
     
  5. vmxa

    vmxa Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    13,879
    Location:
    Oviedo, Fl
    The sub bug was fixed at one time, so it is not like they have to figure what is wrong.

    As to the free or download, I guess that depends on what they do to the game. I would think free, if all they do is add the MP functions.
     
  6. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,809
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    Yes, the sub bug was fixed in one of the PtW patches --- and then "re-introduced" with C3C... :crazyeye:
     
  7. Desertsnow

    Desertsnow πr²

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,794
    Will the SGL bug be fixed?
     
  8. vmxa

    vmxa Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    13,879
    Location:
    Oviedo, Fl
    No bug fixes, since 1.22 and that was many years ago. Though I hear something may be cooking with the game at Firaxis, so who knows.
     
  9. Kyriakos

    Kyriakos Alien spiral maker

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    60,665
    Location:
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Maybe someone of us should now get in touch with Firaxis, given they seem interested in Civ3 again :)
    You can even ask Plotinus as Admin to try to have Thunderfall briefly introduce what we also are interesting in doing for Civ3 (eg changes, even if they are not as drastic as an event file; gfx, code etc).
     
  10. Desertsnow

    Desertsnow πr²

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,794
    Yeah, including bug-fixes. :wallbash:
     
  11. WarpCircuits

    WarpCircuits Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2015
    Messages:
    29
    Dear lord, they better fix the random scientists popping up and rushing wonders...
    And the OP bombers...
    And the OP armies (Or at least teach the AI not to make stupid PIKEMEN armies!!!)
    Make something to stop Mayans from making insane Settler farms very quickly (*Cough* Agricultural and Industrial on someone who does need to research something to get a defensive unit... *cough cough*)
     
  12. Theov

    Theov Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Location:
    Taiwan
    requests:

    AI uses armies properly.
    AI is able of making a proper attack from sea
    Coastal Fortress fix
    Submarine Bug
    SGL Bug
    Fascism and Feudalism changed into something useful
    ...
     
  13. Midnight-Blue766

    Midnight-Blue766 The filidh that cam frae Skye

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,452
    Location:
    Northern Equestria
    A SOURCE CODE RELEASE! :cool:

    ... a man can still dream, right? RIGHT? :(
     
  14. nick0515

    nick0515 Fantasy World Builder

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,510
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Ah, the source code. That magical mythical substance of dreams. What a happy day it would be if it were made available to mere mortals like us.
     
  15. Buttercup

    Buttercup King

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    854
    Absolutely!

    Then I could finally see exactly what it is that causes a Veteran Sipahi Cavalry 8.3.3 to get red-lined while attacking a non-fortified, standing on Plains, not across a river, not in a Town, not a Unique Unit, Veteran Horseman 2.1.2. :)
     
  16. tjs282

    tjs282 Socially distancing since 1975

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    3,382
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    here, for the job/ handout / woman
    I agree with all of these, but I'm surprised that no-one's mentioned the Barb NE-SW (or is it NW-SE?) tunnel vision bug yet. I mean, NoAIPatrol=0 is really only a partial fix, since the Barbs tend to fall asleep as soon as their target is off-axis...
     
  17. r16

    r16 not deity

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    6,907
    ı would love if one could put starting locations and the like on seas , my attempts to make space scenarios failing repeatedly . And something weird but nothing particularly important that scenes of massive fighting could turn into victory locations that one can gain some points , perhaps for a limited period of time ; but then it would certainly depend on the size of work being done .

    sipahi is Turkish , horseman is foreign , right ? Ought to explain it already but then actually ı have no right to complain considering once my elite warrior stopped a 3 bar tank , am not sure if destroyed it ...
     
  18. Buttercup

    Buttercup King

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    854
    There are many little bugs in the game, as mentioned by theov, however, his first two aren't bugs, they are just a case of idiotic AI, the same issue which has cursed the entire series of Civilisation games, and this isn't a bug, this is the design. Solving the AI to be something intelligent would be to make a completely different game where you wouldn't even need so many difficulty levels, it'd be like human vs human on Regent.

    The AI can make successful naval landings, I've had 12 Cavalry arrive on a small island before, it's just more noticeable with islands because the AI doesn't know how to use foot units, but give it Cavalry and it can spam those at you and destroy you in seconds, land or sea. If the AI also knew how to make Cavalry Armies then no-one would ever win anything above Emperor. Imagine the AI pumping Military Generals every 3 turns without having to pay for them...

    But the biggest problem I have with Civ 3 is still the military RNG. Darski bleated on about it for years and I also am not adverse to droning on about it, but all you ever get round here is people telling you to build Artillery, farm Armies and win. While this is great advice and does work really well, it is two kinds of cheese, both of which are designed to circumvent the whole point of units in the first place.

    :spear: is a :deadhorse: meme for a very good reason.

    At 4000BC you have the following units available to you (depending on traits):

    Warrior 1.1.1
    Spearman 1.2.1
    Archer 2.1.1
    Chariot 1.1.2
    + Unique Units, anything from 1.1.2 to 2.3.1

    Moving on just one line of Techs and the number 3 becomes a lot more prevalent with some Unique Units getting up to the number 4. But, essentially, the Bronze/Iron age is 1-3.

    The Middle Ages are then all about the numbers 3 to 6 (with some minor Uniques breaking up to number 8).

    But then the Indistrial Age is about the numbers 6-12 and the Modern Age 14-24, really quite massive leaps.

    But the numbers don't guarantee anything. There's no screamingly obvious huge advance you can make in the field of military advancement whereby, as a player, you can make a definite decision about how many of which type of Unit you need in what part of the Battlefield, other than one Elite Modern Armour will always defeat one Regular Warrior, either in defence or in attack. So you have to go all the way from the first tech in 4000BC all the way to virtually the last Tech in the Modern Age to attain one simple military guarantee. And this is the one solitary difference between Civ 2 and Civ 3 which makes Civ 3 less of a tactical game than Civ 2.

    Why?

    Because a tactician needs to know how best to assign their troops. A tactician needs to know how best to assign their gold-to-troop ratio. With such great uncertainties in Civ 3 this becomes virtually impossible, because nothing adds up. It's virtually impossible to make your combined attack/defence economically viable, you almost invariably always have to go either all out attack or all out defence. Because if you leave one Mechanised Infantry defending your border town then a group of Cavalry can still over-run it quite easily. Leave 2 Mechs and the Cavalry can still over-run them relatively easily. Leave 3 Mechs in a town and you soon run out of units to attack with due to lack of Gold. Choose a Military Government System to compensate and your research drops to a snail's pace, not an option for any victory condition except Military Victories which still then run the risk of slowly becoming out-Tech'ed which hinders the Victory Condition.

    But if becoming out-Tech'ed means you have weaker armies, aren't I acknowledging that the numbers mean something? Of course the numbers mean something - en masse - it's the fact that they don't mean anything individually that is the problem. Let me explain with an example:

    1. How many Archers do you need to Kill three Spearmen Fortified in City on a Hill? Let's say the Spearmen are two Veterans and one Regular. The Archers are all Veterans.

    Now reverse this:

    2. How many Fortified Spearmen do you need to defend a City from an invasion of 10 Veteran Archers?

    For question 1 the minimum answer is 3. Three Veteran Archers can defeat 3 Spearmen, it can happen. But what is the maximum? Is it unlimited? Let's argue that 75% of the Archers inflict at least one Hit Point of damage and the first Archer fails to inflict any damage at all. One rough draft of this scenario produces a requirement of 23 Veteran Archers to defeat the three Spearmen. So the answer to question one is between 3 and 23.

    For question 2, the maximum number of defenders you need is 11, but the minimum, even at the Archer's same 75% only doing 1 Hit Point and 25% no damage, is 2. So you need between 2 and 11.

    And this is just for the first round of attacks. You'll need some attacks to fend off the invaders or you'll need some defenders to safeguard your new town from the inevitable counter-offensive.

    So your attacking troop needs to be between 5 and 34 Units strong and your defensive troop needs to be between 5 and 34 Units strong. So in order to attack an opponents city in the north while defending your city in the south from an invasion while you're away you need between 10 and 68 Units (and this is just to cover the two cities in question, let alone an empire with sprawling weird boundaries.

    There is no correct decision a tactician can make as to the correct course of action as the variables are too wide. Which then effects your strategy, such as forcing you to trade a crucial Tech like Writing to the empire to the south to ensure peace, or, as is much more often the case, delaying combat until you have access to Mobile Units - which you won't even know about until The Wheel is discovered, making non-Horse starts extremely depressing, almost as depressing as Horse but no Iron or Saltpeter. Delaying invasion then gives the AI so much time to spam new cities everywhere that your 10 Horses suddenly look like chicken feed, looks like now you'll need 30 or 40, but, oh dear, you're neighbor's the Carthaginians, let's call the whole thing off...

    So we either make spam for Armies to beat the impossibility of the uncertainty or we try our best to gain such a large Tech lead that we will need between 10 and 48 Units instead of 10-68 (but then the new Units cost more production, costing a fortune in upgrades or a depressingly slow creation rate, tempting one to then wait for Railroads and Factories) or we just spam the crap out of Unit Production and to heck with the Tech and Gold levels.

    These are the three sole tactics which work in Civ 3. Armies, Tech superiority + high Productivity, or mindless Unit spam. None of which are what you would describe as 'tactical' towards a greater 'strategy', beyond performing a simple routine.

    Watching 300 the other day, that movie is all about Choke Points. 300 Elites defending unlimited armies by means of funneling the enemy into a narrow passage. Can you do this in Civ 3? Nope, a group of Longbowmen can cut down a Rifleman Fortified on a Mountain (a whole Tech Age in difference) and it's actually worse of your defender starts out as Elite.

    Watching Lord of the Rings the other day, does it matter if you line up a group of Fortifications? Nope, not really, Your lone Rifleman will still buckle under the pressure of a group of Longbowmen and, again, it's worse if he starts out as Elite. And the Fortification doesn't prevent the enemy just walking round it, it has no greater sphere of influence than one square. How many single square choke points do you get in a game of Civ? Hardly any, especially with those diagonals often making one square passable 3 ways.

    In Civ 2 you could leave one Tank to act as attacker and one Infantry in your town as a defender and all the enemy could do was pillage until the Tank got round to killing them. Longbowmen would just die, no matter how many attacked, your Hit-Points would never deteriorate. A Rifleman in a Fortification would be the proverbial rock. In Civ 3 you seem to lose a Hit-Point with such incredible ease that absolutely nothing is guaranteed. Your Modern Infantry can be reduced to a red-line simply by attacking a Pikeman, leaving the Unit needing cover while it recovers, because you better not leave it in a town, because you'll rage when it flips on all your 2/3 Hit-Point recoverers - so how many units do you need to cover...? Gaaaaah.

    And then two of your Cavalry die attacking a sticky Pikeman and your entire empire goes into revolt... nevermind that pre-mass media it took catastrophic failure of an entire campaign to cause this to happen, not just the loss of one or two posses in an otherwise utterly triumphant campaign.

    It's all just such a complete mess, all in the name of 'balance'. If you ask me then the biggest glitch in the game is having no hard-coded barriers between different military Units of different eras, or, at least, a heck of a lot more thought put into what would be more 'tactically useful' for the player to enjoy a better variety of tactics and therefore strategies.
     
  19. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,809
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    I have no problem with that "uncertainty" you describe here. It's just like in real life warfare: superior numbers don't "guarantee" success.

    Just think about the battle of Little Bighorn, or the battle of Isandlwana. In both cases basically "stone age people" beat a technologically advanced 19th century army! It happens very seldomly (in 99% of the cases the more advanced weapons will win), but it does happen once in a while. Which is the same in Civ3: in most cases the tank will beat the spearman, but sometimes, very rarely, sand gets into the motor, or the tank crew is very stupid or drunk or whatever, and the stone age people crack the tank... ;)
     
  20. justanick

    justanick Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,168
    Location:
    Germany
    Not having iron is not so bad and if you play the iroquese you can even skip salpeter for cavalry. If you go for monarchy a very important measure is the attack per shield ratio. Per 100 shields you get

    5.71 attack from knight
    6.67 attack from horsemen
    7.5 attack from cavalry
    10 attack from Iroquese horsemen

    Losses need to be compared to the ability to rebuild. Horsemen are so cheap that losses are easily replaced. Better techs just reduce the upkeep costs and they help with war weariness, too. But as monarchy those are not very important.

    I would not take 300 as 100% historical. But that aside it is possible to create choke points. 15 elite greek phalanx fortified on mountain with barricades have a defensive value of 9.75 and 75 HP. Attacking archers would need to lose 366.625 HP on average before cracking the last defender. So you need more than 90 attackers for a winning chance of 50%.

    In C3C the proper counterstrategy is to avoid such points, possibly via naval means.
     

Share This Page