Online petition for an updated Civ III editor

[I_batman]

Aw come on batman, nothin' lasts forever.

Granted, we may all grow old and lose interest in Civ before they change their minds, but anythings possible.

I say keep this thread alive, hope for the best and maybe try something new every once in a while.

Yeah, and I will keep hoping that Pamela Anderson and Scarlett Johanson knock on my door wearing naughty nurses' uniforms.

That has the same chance of happening as Firaxis releasing the source code.

Deal with it folks. Either learn to hack the source code (I tried and failed), or live with Civ III and its failings, or move on to the new Civ IV.

I have learned some new stuff about the biq format in the last couple weeks, but that is a long, long way from hacking the Civ III source code, which is the only hope, and that has a zero probability from what I have seen.

 

[Mirc]

^ Well, reading some of the posts in this thread I understand that it's far from impossible, and has a probability much higher than zero...

 

[Keroro]

EmbryoDead has recently worked out how to get new LM terrains into the .biq files, so there are some hacking possibilities. Skyer 2 was having some success also with things like stopping city razing, but he was working from a no CD version of the game and his work is not compatible with most people's version of civ 3.

 

[Barret]

All I really want is to have the 32 civs limit removed. I think it was a big mistake to set it so low to begin with.

 

[Ozymandias]

All I really want is to have the 32 civs limit removed. I think it was a big mistake to set it so low to begin with.

Believe it or not, the 32 Civs thing is OK from my POV. While the number of Civs increases arithmetically, the number of interactions among Civs (come on, someone mathematically inclined please help me here) increases - exponentially? Meaning WAY more processing time and accordingly longer turns.

Best,

Oz

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

Believe it or not, the 32 Civs thing is OK from my POV. While the number of Civs increases arithmetically, the number of interactions among Civs (come on, someone mathematically inclined please help me here) increases - exponentially? Meaning WAY more processing time and accordingly longer turns.

Best,

Oz

Actually, one of my points was to raise the limit of potential civs to choose from at the outset of the game, rather than increase the number of civs in any one game - i.e. still max 31 players, but have a larger pool of civs to select it from.

However, having almost completed Anno Domini Classic, I'm kind of glad that there was a limit, or else I might have been creating that forever .

On a side note, I started this thread months ago and never thought it would be still going strong at this time!

 

[Barret]

Actually, one of my points was to raise the limit of potential civs to choose from at the outset of the game, rather than increase the number of civs in any one game - i.e. still max 31 players, but have a larger pool of civs to select it from.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Gary Childress]

I would really, really like to see the ability to add terrain types to the editor instead of working with just the fixed number of types we have now.

I still like Civ3 a LOT, LOT better than Civ 4.

 

[Stormrage]

I am soon going to like it LOTM better than Civ 4

Yah, the potential civs addition sounds good Otherwise you`d just have to have 46278238389 .biq versions for all the combinations you might want

 

[King Flevance]

Would it be really costly on their part to release the source code?

 

[Theryman]

They would essentially forfeit any opportunity for a 'collectors' edition, because the game would be available essentially for free on the net.

 

[King Flevance]

Meh, yet they won't patch it. I always looked at Civ 3 Complete as the collectors edition. hehe.

 

[Stormrage]

Something occured to me.. if they are the kind of people who would make and release the kind of abomination that is civ4.. why did we ever think they would give us the code, or some other "gift"..

 

[Gary Childress]

Something occured to me.. if they are the kind of people who would make and release the kind of abomination that is civ4.. why did we ever think they would give us the code, or some other "gift"..

I like Stormrages word "abomination", I think that sums up Civ 4 very well.

 

[Gen. Rommel]

They would essentially forfeit any opportunity for a 'collectors' edition, because the game would be available essentially for free on the net.

Isn't already?! As I see it, anyone wanting to download Civ 3 ilegally will do so anyways, so the release of the source code would not start a trend, it would rather offer a different method for the same goal.

 

[I_batman]

EmbryoDead has recently worked out how to get new LM terrains into the .biq files, so there are some hacking possibilities. Skyer 2 was having some success also with things like stopping city razing, but he was working from a no CD version of the game and his work is not compatible with most people's version of civ 3.

Yes, EmbryoDead did do some very cool things with LM terrain within the biq, and I sorted out a couple weeks ago how to modify shield costs beyond the 1000 limit, to essentially 65000. But this is kid's stuff compared to hacking source code.

The biq is a read-only file with repetitive structured format. The source code, oh man, that is another world. Yes, Skyer pulled off an amazing thing with the source code, but he seems to have disappeared.

Until another coding genius shows up, this thread has become pointless.

 

[cubsfan6506]

Where Can I find out how to add mor Lm terrains.

 

[T.A JONES]

Yes, EmbryoDead did do some very cool things with LM terrain within the biq, and I sorted out a couple weeks ago how to modify shield costs beyond the 1000 limit, to essentially 65000. But this is kid's stuff compared to hacking source code.

The biq is a read-only file with repetitive structured format. The source code, oh man, that is another world. Yes, Skyer pulled off an amazing thing with the source code, but he seems to have disappeared.

Until another coding genius shows up, this thread has become pointless.

Well, it not totally pointlesss, I mean its lured you back a number of times to speak with us.
-but I understand You(I think). When you try hard and reap nothing satasifactory in result, can feel a bit frustrated at times, especially when a thread pops up to constantly remind you, all of us, what we've been denied in terms of what easily 'could-be' the best real strategy designed game in our lifetimes, and for what?.. virtually no reason but promote a ilegitatmate hier's succession to the thrown

I say we have come far and if Embryodead types even manage to duplicate the progress we made last year CIv3, we will continue to outshine its predessor and all other strategy games. Thats good enough for me while we wait for a next big break.

Lets keep this up as motivation or at the very least not detract/discourage the interest Civ3 still manages to still garner .

 

[rifleman]

Well said Jones.

On the issue of 32+ civs in a game, I'd like to see more - even though I understand oz's reservations. I've always been a big fan of variety, and historically big kingdoms and empires were always outnumbered by independant cities, tribes and kingdoms. By limiting their growth (or even restricting it altogether) we can avoid the increased processing times that can slow down games.

Of course, this could possibly be solved by the old Civ II solution - have 'barbarian' controlled cities. I don't suppose anyone has figured out how to do that in Civ III?

 

[Virote_Considon]

Skyer did, I think, kinda.