JtheJackal
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2002
- Messages
- 1,521
It says about wild animals say they are only a threat to early settlers.
thanks Firaxis, another preview
- Thread starter mitsho
- Start date
josephstalin
Kremlin Highlander
Yes, it does. However, we all know Yahoo! Their news are not better than their search engine. They just want to show how cool they are. Probably there will be animals but not so evil to capture workers and scouts.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
I know it may be that Barbarian 'Mini-Civs' will not have their own diplomacy table, which is unfortunate-and that they can't build up culturally. However, this does mark a huge step forward for barbarians in the game, and shows that developers are at least prepared to meet the fans half-way.
Also, Barbarians as 'Mini-civs' is a very good starting point, and does leave the door open for future improvements in expansion packs-in the form of diplomatic engagement and incorporation into your nation!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Also, Barbarians as 'Mini-civs' is a very good starting point, and does leave the door open for future improvements in expansion packs-in the form of diplomatic engagement and incorporation into your nation!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Urederra
Mostly harmless
So, no more non-populated isolated Eastern Islands. I wonder which stage of barbarian development and power you will find in a island which no civilization can reach until the discovery of astronomy/navigation. (I suppose that ocean travels are penalized until the end of the middle ages, or until the discovery of astronomy).
ThERat
Deity
this makes my day...not...animals? roaming? as everyone agreed in the other thread, how could roaming animals be a threat? we're not taking about 1 settler that wanders about to found a new city...utter crap...
nearby equal set of resources...boring...where is the thrill and excitment...and now don't come and tell me it's not the same resources. Since they want to even it out, we can assume they talk about early resources and not uranium. I simply don't like this concept at all.
vbraun
Raytracing
You guys should of listened to me in the Attack of the Show preview when I said I saw a Barbarian City... 
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
@ThERat. I really think its too soon to be complaining too loudly about how resource distribution is going to work in this game, because we still really don't know enough about how resources-as a whole-will work in this game.
As for roaming animals, I admit this is a bit lame, but again we don't know how much of a threat animals will be in the game. We certainly know that they will not pose any threat to a military unit, and I doubt that they will pose anything more than a mild risk even to settlers and workers. Just think of it as another reason to ensure that your settlers are escorted in the earliest part of the game.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
As for roaming animals, I admit this is a bit lame, but again we don't know how much of a threat animals will be in the game. We certainly know that they will not pose any threat to a military unit, and I doubt that they will pose anything more than a mild risk even to settlers and workers. Just think of it as another reason to ensure that your settlers are escorted in the earliest part of the game.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
ThERat
Deity
I hope there is a disable option for dinos and other roaming creatures and I will check that box always, period.
mudblood
Warlord
I like the wild animals. I doubt they'll be a threat much beyond the very early game, and it sounds like they've been added to change the strategy of that part of the game. My guess is most of the annoyed people will have to change their early game strategy because of this -- no more settler mills.
Did anyone else notice the last part? "the next four months"?? It looks like we have confirmation the game will be out in November.
Did anyone else notice the last part? "the next four months"?? It looks like we have confirmation the game will be out in November.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
This is the only part which really concerns me thus far. I think four months is way to soon. I would rather that they release in early to mid December, and truly make sure that this is the best game ever , rather than rush it onto the shelves early and risk their being bugs still in the system 
.
Oh, and anything that helps to reduce the REXing strategy in the early part of the game is a good thing IMHO. Also, if people have trouble with them being wandering animals, perhaps it will be possible to Mod them into Nomadic barbarian units??
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
.Oh, and anything that helps to reduce the REXing strategy in the early part of the game is a good thing IMHO. Also, if people have trouble with them being wandering animals, perhaps it will be possible to Mod them into Nomadic barbarian units??
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Thyrwyn
Guardian at the Gate
ThERat - I read through the SG threads pretty thoroughly and I know of you mostly through there. And I have a great deal of respect for you and your skill - so please do not take offense at this.
Sure, because we all know that new cities were 'founded' by the intentional, directed relocation of thousands of citizens. Not.
Early settlement patters were very haphazard: a family group would settle by a river, become established, and attract others. These early 'settlers' were terribly at risk from the environment - the elements, disease, starvation and preadtory animals.
Predatory animals were threats to early settlers - even as late as the 1700's. The game is trying to model that by placing settlers and explorers who expand ahead of their defenders at risk. Now the designers could have introduced a simple % chance that units just died every turn to represent these many risks, but they chose instead to introduce a problem that the player can solve - much smarter and much more fun.
[[As late as 1898 two lions were enough to keep 1000's of workers from completing a railway bridge in Africa for several months]]
During the historical era represented by the expansion phase of the game, the environment was the threat - I think that wild animals represent that in a very game friendly manner. The solution trains the player to establish a pattern they will need later, once the AI civs have been encountered - defend yourself! It also makes the early game more than a dot-mapping exercise
Sure, because we all know that new cities were 'founded' by the intentional, directed relocation of thousands of citizens. Not.
Early settlement patters were very haphazard: a family group would settle by a river, become established, and attract others. These early 'settlers' were terribly at risk from the environment - the elements, disease, starvation and preadtory animals.
Predatory animals were threats to early settlers - even as late as the 1700's. The game is trying to model that by placing settlers and explorers who expand ahead of their defenders at risk. Now the designers could have introduced a simple % chance that units just died every turn to represent these many risks, but they chose instead to introduce a problem that the player can solve - much smarter and much more fun.
[[As late as 1898 two lions were enough to keep 1000's of workers from completing a railway bridge in Africa for several months]]
During the historical era represented by the expansion phase of the game, the environment was the threat - I think that wild animals represent that in a very game friendly manner. The solution trains the player to establish a pattern they will need later, once the AI civs have been encountered - defend yourself! It also makes the early game more than a dot-mapping exercise
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
@Thyrwyn: I'm in total agreement. At first I thought the idea of animal roaming around was ridiculous, but I think I've come around on the idea.
I think what it comes down to is what those animals represent: any kind of natural threat to people. It's kinda hard to represent adverse weather, tropical diseases or avalanches on the map and I think the 'random % death' would just frustrate players and take a lot of fun out of the early portion of the game. Just think of the roaming animals as mother nature's little minions, making trouble for humans on the frontier...
I think what it comes down to is what those animals represent: any kind of natural threat to people. It's kinda hard to represent adverse weather, tropical diseases or avalanches on the map and I think the 'random % death' would just frustrate players and take a lot of fun out of the early portion of the game. Just think of the roaming animals as mother nature's little minions, making trouble for humans on the frontier...
Even if multiplayer is only 8 people, if they are going to have this persistent server, they need to have it so you can plan moves in advance without having to log on. It'll need to at least be an option (I know they have a hatred against cluttering the screne with buttons and commands), otherwise it will take AGES to play a 400 turn game.
I think it's hard enough to keep 4 people on at the same time for more than 2 hours, and a persistent server will do a lot to keep the game going, but there's got to be an option that says "automate next five turns, build x units, move them here, de-automate if i get attacked."
I don't claim to know exactly how this server is gonna work, but trying to make sure that all 18!!! people have logged in for their turn will be a nightmare, and just result in hurt feelings, and people dropping out. But with some simple automation, I bet even a huge game like that would take only a few weeks even with erratic schedules (judging by civ3 experience, and how much I would have loved some turn automation in those games)
I think it's hard enough to keep 4 people on at the same time for more than 2 hours, and a persistent server will do a lot to keep the game going, but there's got to be an option that says "automate next five turns, build x units, move them here, de-automate if i get attacked."
I don't claim to know exactly how this server is gonna work, but trying to make sure that all 18!!! people have logged in for their turn will be a nightmare, and just result in hurt feelings, and people dropping out. But with some simple automation, I bet even a huge game like that would take only a few weeks even with erratic schedules (judging by civ3 experience, and how much I would have loved some turn automation in those games)
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
Aussie_Lurker said:
They've been testing this for over a year already, if what I read is true. At GDC '04 (which was in May '04), Soren had already said the MP game was already working and had been played for months.
Barry, "We have been playing MP games for a year and a half already".
In an article with Barry (which I seem to remember but can't find), he said that they had the hardcore elite Civ players banging on it for the past year. This is a lot longer than any Civ game to date.
IGN, "Since all the big features are in place, the team will be spending the time between now and the release tweaking the math and balancing the game's AI."
My opinion (and it is that), is that this will be the most tested version of Civ yet.
Aussie_Lurker
Deity
Thats true, Warpstorm, and proves that MP has been in working form for many months. However, we also know that many key features of the SP game are still being tweaked as we speak-as is the AI itself. As a person who primarily plays SP games, I dearly hope that they have thoroughly tested all elements of the AI and SP game for many, many months before they finally release the game!
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.
Double Stack
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 357
In addition, we knew Fraxis will make Civ4 when Atari announce that they will sell the franchise to someone else. Why sell unless Fraxis planning a new game and Atari doesn't want to foot the bill for long development time.
So Sid and his team of developers have done a lot of work on it. They just doing mainly fine tuning and try out numerous possible methods of getting around some of the worse problems in Civ3. I am not complaining about that but I will complain if they decide to bump it Dec 31, 2005.
Bring it on Civ4!
So Sid and his team of developers have done a lot of work on it. They just doing mainly fine tuning and try out numerous possible methods of getting around some of the worse problems in Civ3. I am not complaining about that but I will complain if they decide to bump it Dec 31, 2005.
Bring it on Civ4!
Ivan the Kulak
King
So the wild animals thing is solid info now? Oh my Gaawwwdd...
I can see it now:
ROWF THE WOLF PRINCE:
That's a mighty tasty looking Settler you've got there, Xerxes. Our savage pack will refrain from scattering his gnawed bones across the grasslands if you give us what we need.
ROWF DEMANDS:
Beefsteaks
6 lambs
No Fur Trapping Treaty (20 turns)
I see no point to this. None. Even in caveman times animals steered clear of bands of travelling humans armed with stone weapons and tools. Don't tell me there aren't a few spears, pitchforks and such stashed away in the Settlers goods for just such occasions.
I can see it now:
ROWF THE WOLF PRINCE:
That's a mighty tasty looking Settler you've got there, Xerxes. Our savage pack will refrain from scattering his gnawed bones across the grasslands if you give us what we need.
ROWF DEMANDS:
Beefsteaks
6 lambs
No Fur Trapping Treaty (20 turns)
I see no point to this. None. Even in caveman times animals steered clear of bands of travelling humans armed with stone weapons and tools. Don't tell me there aren't a few spears, pitchforks and such stashed away in the Settlers goods for just such occasions.
warpstorm said:
Yeah, I have to agree here. Remember Civ III had no such testers... and now Civ IV has hundreds. That's good for everyone.
BTW, for MP, Jesse did say that they were "going way over the top with moding." I take that to mean that when it is modded they can play with more than 18 people?
Similar threads
