Giant Death Robot in Civ !?

[stealth_nsk]

You basically just said that the game is unbalanced before the GDR hits, because atomic weapons come way before Fusion.

No. I didn't say anything about game balance. GDR provides:
- Nuke use limit.
- More strategic choices.
That's what I said.

Also, "cool as hell" is mega-subjective, to me and many others it looks extremely stupid.

I mean just plain strength characteristics to compete with nukes.

 

[nmcul]

It should also be considered that the GDR is in a league all its own, which is part of both balance and image problems. You've got all your modern units representing today's battlefield, and then BAM! Giant robots. The tech tree doesn't progress far enough to represent the theoretical underlying technology, and there are no intermediate stops - futuristic infantry or tanks or gunships or whatever - to account for the military suddenly deploying this impossibly impossible machine. It's basically the same problem that befell ships in Civ IV, with your navy advancing from Age of Fighting Sail frigates to War in the Pacific oil-fueled warships with a single tech. It was pretty crazy and definitely unbalanced.

As far as Easter eggs in the series go, this is the first to have a significant impact on gameplay. Elvis showing up on Elvis's birthday in the esoteric Civ III Easter egg didn't suddenly give you the ability to run over tanks, and the High Council in Civ II, while amusing, didn't give advantages beyond a simple computer-generated production and strategy suggestion list. GDRs have too much o an impact on the game.

And really, if Firaxis wanted to make a completely over-the-top end-game unit based on the principle of looking cool, they should have made the GDR into a poorly disguised version of Mazinger_Z. Also, the robot should call all of it's attacks. I mean, really, might as well try for refuge in audacity at this point.

 

[aziantuntija]

They could have also named it "Evil Space Duck". It's not really important.

"They could have also named archers (and make them look like) 'magic elves'. Its not really important."

Also, "future armor" is horribly generic and boring.

"Also, 'Musketman' is horribly generic and boring."

 

[KrikkitTwo]

"They could have also named archers (and make them look like) 'magic elves'. Its not really important."



"Also, 'Musketman' is horribly generic and boring."

Well I do agree it is less realistic.

Perhaps something like the Dreadnaught in Next War would have been better. A nuclear powered land battleship.

You could still call it Giant Death Robot

 

[Red Wegener]

Giant Death Robots are the single best improvement in Civ 5.

All kneel before our prophet, Perfection

My words are backed by Giant Death Robots...

 

[12agnar0k]

The reason it might be important for balance reasons is to improve late-game conquest, as civ's capable of progressing into the late modern era will field large armies of tanks and what have you, conquest at this point might be a little hard, take late modern combat in Civ4 for example, I never liked it because I found it hard to win against opponents the same size as me destroying my stacks before they could do the job. If however I can tech again to get a further advantage over them this makes late-game conquest and thus victory a little easier, also Uranium while already strategically important because of Nukes, if the GDR is something that will clinch the victory for you over a modern enemy, (as apposed to nuking them off the map and have everyone not like you as much) then this makes the Uranium even more important so if thiers a source of an enemies border (like an iron source in the early-game) you may consider stealing it off them so they can't build GDR's.
To me all this added depth on the late-game stage wouldn't be possible without the battle clincher that is the GDR. Which is a reason why to have it in the game, to balance Conquest with other possibly easier forms of victory that involve turtling up and working on culture/science/relationships.

Their are also plenty of other valid reasons brought up Aza and co to not allow the disabling of the GDR with a button.

- Developer time is better spent elsewhere
- Why should you few people get your "disable GDR" button when the 10's of thousands of potential Archer and ranged combat haters don't get thier disable ranged button.
- In the case of fairness, a giant list of options could be brought up, lets call it the "nit-pick" button, to disable/allow every single thing in the game, similar if you will to the "Worms" option page, which listed every single weapon, and you could pick and choose what to have in the game.
However this again IS A MASSIVE waste of developer time that could be spent on better things.
- Why ask developers to make the button, you can mod it in yourself, from the get go, the theme has been to make Civ5 extreemely easy to mod and very modable, this allows you to choose what you want by doing it all yourself. Much better than the developers personally catering for every whim.

I'm sure their are more reasons not to include the button, one of them being,
- the GDR is super awesome,
- the GDR is an unstoppable killing machine and you really want to make him angry by installing a disable the GDR button, good luck with that you suicidal maniac!
But those wouldn't have much sway I wouldn't think

 

[aziantuntija]

The reason it might be important for balance reasons is to improve late-game conquest, as civ's capable of progressing into the late modern era will field large armies of tanks and what have you, conquest at this point might be a little hard, take late modern combat in Civ4 for example, I never liked it because I found it hard to win against opponents the same size as me destroying my stacks before they could do the job. If however I can tech again to get a further advantage over them this makes late-game conquest and thus victory a little easier, also Uranium while already strategically important because of Nukes, if the GDR is something that will clinch the victory for you over a modern enemy, (as apposed to nuking them off the map and have everyone not like you as much) then this makes the Uranium even more important so if thiers a source of an enemies border (like an iron source in the early-game) you may consider stealing it off them so they can't build GDR's.
To me all this added depth on the late-game stage wouldn't be possible without the battle clincher that is the GDR. Which is a reason why to have it in the game, to balance Conquest with other possibly easier forms of victory that involve turtling up and working on culture/science/relationships.

To achieve this however, we do not need a fantasy unit. They could of come up with something less

- Developer time is better spent elsewhere

Like how? Changing spearmen and rifflemen to fantasy units? How long do you really think it takes to make one option? Before you start throwing any insane numbers (like 10's of thousands hours ) just think how much civ4 has different options.

- Why should you few people get your "disable GDR" button when the 10's of thousands of potential Archer and ranged combat haters don't get thier disable ranged button.

Few people and 10's of thousands? Where do you get your numbers from?

 

[12agnar0k]

To achieve this however, we do not need a fantasy unit. They could of come up with something less

just think how much civ4 has different options.

Few people and 10's of thousands? Where do you get your numbers from?

We do not need fanatasy units... in your opinion. In my opinion and in 2k's opinion and for all you know 95% of people who will play Civ5, may very well want those fantasy units. But this is besides the point, you asked for a reason it might be needed (the unit not the units description) for balance purposes, I could care less if it was called Beefy Tank, and looked like a rolling stick of pepperoni (made out of pork!) as apposed to the GDR. Although the first has less appeal, as would a modern armour, am I the only one who saw the video footage of the GDR and heard the GDR's footsteps, BOOM BOOM BOOM, and nearly got a bit too excited in my unmentionables? Yes? Oh, Nevermind then.

Civ4 has barely any more options than Civ5. It certainly doesn't have "disable macemen button" for people who think its a bit weird to hit someone with a mace.

I like my 10's of thousands of ranged hater's figure and my newly used 95% of people love the GDR figures aren't really supposed to be correct .
However we do know that Civ5 will sell to a large amount of people presumeably, lets just take the rough figure of Civ4 sales as a good estimate.

As of March 26, 2008, Civilization IV has sold 3 million copies according to Take-Two Interactive

Ok so if 3 million people buy Civ5, and we know from this thread that around 121 people are confirmed to want this button.
(The number 121 isn't even correct because people have voted Yes to the question thinking it was "Do you want GDR's in the game" but meh, I reckon some people voted No to that question too so it should even up.)

So 121 out of 3 million is 0.004% of customers are confirmed to want the button in the game, now I really do not think this number is in anyway going to influence 2k/Frixasis to waste time implementing it as an option, I can honhestly tell you the majority of those 3 million people, lets go with a random abritary 2,950,000 just don't give a rats ass about the GDR. I'm fairly sure they would be quite disapointed if they had to put up with bugs in their vanilla version if those bugs were put off being fixed to rally the entire development team to make a button (note: an artist will need to create it, you wouldnt want any old button would you) for a few pedantic nit picky fanatical lunatics (aka a CFC forum member), the fact that we had the influence to put the GDR in the game in the first place is as lunatical as I'm prepared to let the influence of a few people dictate development resources for Millions, and by me I mean 2k will be prepared to let influence... because I have no real say on anything, its a sad realisation that some of you are still deluding yourselfs exists with this poll asking 2k to input a silly button.

 

[Louis XXIV]

But definitely less than the ones needed to insert the unit in the game In fact, if things are as they were in civ IV, it would be a matter of some hours top , and most of them would be compiling ( so , no actual human presence would be needed )

Well, they're entirely different departments, so it's tough to say.

Adding it to the game required:
1. Designing and Animating the Unit
2. Adding it to the game and playtesting the stats

Adding an option to remove would require:
1. Designing a GUI to incorporate this option
2. Editing the already existing artwork so as to incorporate this new thing
3. Programming the functions of the interface to do your stated goal
4. Playtesting this for bugs.

Considering removing it from the game by modding will likely require simply editing a text file, it's far less work for them to do option one and let you do option two.

 

[aziantuntija]

Ok so if 3 million people buy Civ5, and we know from this thread that around 121 people are confirmed to want this button.

Those numbers does not have anything to do with this question how many people doesnt really care for fantasy units in civ game. I have pre ordered civ5, but that doesnt mean i want to have fantasy units in my civ game. So as you can see your math is flawed. Its like saying that Firaxis should not try and repair any bugs from civ5 because 3 million people buy civ5, so they like those bugs They should just use the saved time by making some magic units. Thats crazy!

I like my 10's of thousands of ranged hater's figure and my newly used 95% of people love the GDR figures aren't really supposed to be correct .

Yeah i can see that for sure And it looks like this 'aren't really supposed to be correct' -thing doesnt stop there.

I could care less if it was called Beefy Tank, and looked like a rolling stick of pepperoni (made out of pork!) as apposed to the GDR.

Cool! I think we have found our new Jon Shafer here for civ6!

 

[12agnar0k]

I don't know anything about coding, I would make a terrible game designer, Idea's though, I'm an idea's man!, Sign me up!

 

[Psyringe]

I don't know anything about coding, I would make a terrible game designer, Idea's though, I'm an idea's man!, Sign me up!

Sorry to say, but that's exactly the pitch that will not get you signed up in the gaming industry under any circumstances. Everyone has ideas, they are one of the cheapest commodities imagineable. You need solid command of at least one craft (preferably more) and/or a presentable track record to at least have a chance.

Telling a development studios "I got great ideas, sign me up" is like selling stones to a quarry. Sure, they are important, and to a degree everything revolves around them, but it's not as if there was any lack of them.

 

[Lord Tirian]

Ok so if 3 million people buy Civ5, and we know from this thread that around 121 people are confirmed to want this button.

So 121 out of 3 million is 0.004% of customers are confirmed to want the button in the game...

That's not how statistics work.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Mango Elephant]

I read the question wrong.

But, yeah, hate the GDR.

 

[r_rolo1]

Well, they're entirely different departments, so it's tough to say.

Adding it to the game required:
1. Designing and Animating the Unit
2. Adding it to the game and playtesting the stats

Adding an option to remove would require:
1. Designing a GUI to incorporate this option
2. Editing the already existing artwork so as to incorporate this new thing
3. Programming the functions of the interface to do your stated goal
4. Playtesting this for bugs.

Considering removing it from the game by modding will likely require simply editing a text file, it's far less work for them to do option one and let you do option two.

Ok ...

1. Designing a 3D unit is hard work. Something like the GDR graphs surely took a good bunch of hours alone, given the ammount of detail a unit like that needs ( pseudo-arms, legs, missiles, cannon ... ) ... ask any Civ IV graph modder. And I'm already not counting with making the movement scheme.

2. Adding it to the game is a kid's joke compared with 1. and even more with the tools designed for allowing this in game ( obviously you would need some civilopedia text and a icon version, but neither of that is as time consuming as making the 3D model of the unit) . Playtesting ... let's hope they actually have made some serious testing

I'll bundle the second 1 to 3: if the structure of the code is minimally similar to civ IV, adding a option to is a rather simple task , a matter of changing 3 or four lines of code in this case. The interface is probably made in a way that allows a option to be added with a simple line of code as long as it is already defined ( like in Civ IV ... I would actually be surprised if it is harder in Civ V due to the "modding" hype it was made ).

4. Well, suposing they would make more playtesting than they did with BtS No espionage option ( a nice example of Firaxis adding a option just because some people asked for it , btw ), sure it would take a while, but surely not as much as with a added unit.

So, making a conservative estimate, I would bet on 16-20 worker hours for a basic insert of a unit in game from scratch ( with little playtesting , just enough to see if the unit performs correctly ) and 6-12 for adding a option ( again, with skeleton playtesting )

 

[Louis XXIV]

Sorry to say, but that's exactly the pitch that will not get you signed up in the gaming industry under any circumstances. Everyone has ideas, they are one of the cheapest commodities imagineable. You need solid command of at least one craft (preferably more) and/or a presentable track record to at least have a chance.

Telling a development studios "I got great ideas, sign me up" is like selling stones to a quarry. Sure, they are important, and to a degree everything revolves around them, but it's not as if there was any lack of them.

Yeah, it's why I'd never work in Civilization. I love thinking of ideas and I have a decent grasp of history, but neither of those are great skills (especially when you've got an experienced Civilization player, guy with ideas, probably pretty good with computer coding, and knowledgeable in history running the development this time).

r_rolo1, I don't think your numbers are that far off, but you have to keep in mind that you're adding the first numbers to the second when doing that second thing (which, at this stage, isn't a smart idea). I also feel designing UI screens can be more difficult than people imagine.

 

[r_rolo1]

The options part of the GUI would need a actual insert of the code for adding a option line in it and the blocking of unit icons in the city screen. Basing on Civ IV, the first would require a line of code in literal sense (something like "add "No GDR option" "xml definition of the option" ... ) and the second would follow automatically of the unit being unable to be built.

Note that no one sane would ask to insert a option now ( atleast I don't recall anyone asking for it anyway ), with the DVDs already in the forge. People are just asking for a option

Anyway, I still feel the best solution for this would be to add a "stop teching at X era" like we already had ( and most likely have ) the option of in what era we start. It is something that has been asked for quite a while anyway and would make everyone here happy

 

[Louis XXIV]

Oh, I would support an option to limit research to a certain era. That has lots of practical uses and doesn't just single out one unit that some might not like. Of course, it has a side effect of doing that, which is fine.

It certainly would require a decent amount of work, though, so it's obviously too late.

 

[Me,myself,and,I]

I think they provide interesting tactical situations, You obviously can't stand toe to toe with them, you have to use air strike, artillery, and naval bombardment to soften them up for some modern armor.

 

[Snoopaloop]

Its definitely to late for any new options to be included in the game now, but we all know there will be patches a few weeks/a month or so after release, and the way it seems - lots of random DLC.

Would not be difficult at all to add an option then. This way us consumers can play it and see how it works, and maybe some people will change their minds on the subject.

i'll still be prepared to give this thread a bump then, if my opinions do not sway.

EDIT: what am I saying??? DOWN WITH THE GDR!