Layers

[Komoda]

As with civ2:ToT, you had layers in which to extend play.
In the extended original scenario, you had orbital expansion and planetary expansion
In the fantasy, you had the option of either starting in the clouds and on land, just on land, on land and in the sea, or on land and in the caverns beneath the ground.
I would like to see in civ4 that they would do this again, but only with orbital expansion, satellite and planetary expansion, and perhaps even extra-terrestrial expansion to alpha centauri.
I would like to see more opportunity for exploration and development in the game, than having only a game that is no better than a first-person shooter.
So tired of games that only consider the genre of war, not every civ is war-like as depicted in civ3.

 

[Graadiapolistan]

civilization is turned base- ost strategy games are real time. Civilization is a unique game, and it needs work, but actually exploration of earth can be more exciting then expanding into space wich will take up too much memory and time to create, and will onl;y be mildly fun and ruin a lot of the gameplay

 

[Komoda]

In many of the games that I play on my pc, most have two things in common: exploration and development.
What I don't get, is that in the critics point of view, ToT is in the top of the game hits in comparison to civ3.
So one has to figure that perhaps the layering within the game of civ2:ToT did appeal greatly to the majority of players out there.
I was very disappointed when I had purchased civ3 initially, only to find out that they did not continue with the format. Then perhaps I was a little naive to think that when they released c3c, that they would have done it in that, they did not. Yet it did not prevent me from playing the game.

No doubt, by reading through the various posts, scenarios and mods. Everyone likes WAR!
Do not think that the history of the world is primarily about war, there are many civs that exist today that have never gone to war.

I like the game for the exploration and tech development, micro-management is also a good thing as well. A little conflict is okay, but not when every AI civ wants to go to war with you, just because one is, they all have to

 

[jupiterkris]

I personally think that 3D format in civ4 would be more amenable to layers, ie more than the older sprite based versions .

Incorporating Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror genres, with a factual Historical core would be cool .

It would be like a dream cum true for the mods .

Ditto on layers .

 

[Graadiapolistan]

Do not think that the history of the world is primarily about war, there are many civs that exist today that have never gone to war.

list one

And i think civilization chould be more about history than fantasy. the point of the game is to change history basically, I think that along with easy gameplay is what makes civ 3 appealing

 

[mastertyguy]

Liting for Komoda I'll say... Monaco? Luxembourg? Switzerland? not even sure. Even Quebec has a (little) military history.
And it is not CHANGING history, but building a NEW history (aztecs and Zulus at war, China against Iros,...)

 

[Komoda]

Rroma and Inuit to name just two off the top of my head, as I am sure there are others civs that have lived without ever having warred against their neighbors. Why change history as we already know the outcome, unless of course you wish to change history because something was done historically that the player does not agree with.
If one really wants to change history, why do it through war scenario?
It would seem that is how the AI is programmed, to wage war without reason.
As I said I much prefer to explore and develop as a nation and lead by discovery until I can get my civ off the planet so the other civs can annihilate themselves. Another reason for layers in the programming is a continuance after you build a ship and leave the Sol system.

 

[Yuri2356]

Inuit

The Inuit attacked and destroyed Viking settlements in Newfoundland back in the 1000s. Not that they werren't provoked, but it was a 'war'.

 

[mastertyguy]

Wasn't it the Inus?
And Roma? if you talk about Roman Catholic Empire, they were dominant before, even if now it is opnly 1000 poeple

 

[Komoda]

not Roma(nian), the actual tribe of people that once resided in Kazakhstan. They consisted of three classes, only two I can remember off hand. The Domani and the Romani. there was another, their name escapes me at this time. As they are referred to now, the Rroma, were once called Gypsy, though this is a slight against them, as they were not thieves, though history writes them as being that way. One could say the same thing about native american aboriginals. Being both of metis and rroma heritage, both opinions I have little to no regard for people calling me a thief.
The idea, is that both people would see you have something you were not using and borrow it, bringing it back to you when done with it. Eg: the sword on the mantle gathering dust, you're not using it at the moment, so it would be borrowed, when it was returned, it was usually sharpened and polished.
The point is, that history is written mostly of the lies told by others, only to make themselves look better that the rest.
As a Canuck myself, what is a pure canadian as to a pure american, both are a hodge-podge of different nationalities, and both really have no business being part of the ancient peoples during the ancient age.
If in the event that civ4 gets released, then to have the americans or even the canadians as a tribe, then civ4 should just be of the industrial, modern and space age. Then again, the whole civ genre of games would be no better than most of the games out on the market.
Personally, my thoughts would be of having the first tribes, and depending on the outcome of the game when it reaches its end. It be up to the player what they call their civ. That is if they continue the whole ancient age at the beginning.

I really dislike being called Romanian "I am Rroma"

 

[DoTheMath]

This way people could choose if they wanted the game to end in the near future, or after colonising a few star systems. No more debate, everyone gets the timeframe they want!

 

[Komoda]

To the whole idea of layers.
After reinstalling civII:ToT, and going through the terrains. Found that it was not so much layers but a change in terrain, though the unit were using still occupied the same square, it was only the terrain that was changed. Which made for a very interesting format to the game.
Now with all the mods that have been created, thanx to the civfan modders. The old option of being able to do what you could do in CivII:ToT, is not a possibility, with current mods. You either play one type of world or the other and never the twain should meet. In such a case, I have found that CivIII, after playing it for some time, gets boring after a while, why I play mods mostly now.

Truth is, after reinstalling CivII:ToT, found that the graphics are kind of lame. It just does not have the same draw that it once did.
I do miss being able to build my capitol from being terran based to in orbit, and then building it on Mars or in the clouds of Jupiter

Just hope that CivIV does not make itself out to be just another wargame?