what is the throne room?

[Arvedui]

The advisors in Civ II were interesting and fun, in my opinion, but mostly didn't have much to do with gameplay. Like you need an advisor to tell you that you have a weak military... It was a little newbish.

Personally, I like the Civ IV movies a lot, I think they are very well made, but I also liked the Civ II movies.

 

[T.A JONES]

The advisors in Civ II were interesting and fun, in my opinion, but mostly didn't have much to do with gameplay. Like you need an advisor to tell you that you have a weak military... It was a little newbish.

Personally, I like the Civ IV movies a lot, I think they are very well made, but I also liked the Civ II movies.

Never cared for what the advisors thought unless it was in comparison to another nation's forces. At that point, the info pertains very much to what an expeirenced player would be looking at prior to, during, or even without, the thought of invasion.

Civ3 did this well Im not complaing about 4 in this regard ether

 

[The Lance]

The nice thing about the advisers in civ II is that you could just skip them if you weren't in a mood for their antics.
I always did love the throne room though, it was sweet having my marble chair and palm frond back drop in the middle of an empty cave (The Man always needs a quality chair)

 

[Blaarg]

SMAC has more flavor than any of the Civ games

 

[King Flevance]

For full clarification:

Civ I (PC) - Palace
Civ I (SNES) - Throne Room
Civ II (PC & PS1) - Throne Room
Civ III - Palace
Civ IV - Nada.

The animated advisors in 2 were fun at first but after a while, they got kind of annoying once you had practically memorized every single line they had said. Alot of times I just clicked past them after a while. I much preferred the advisor screens in 2 & 3 over 4's though. I can't seem to find much use at all for 4's advisors. I would love to have the civ 3 military advisor back. Also, either Civ 2 or Civ 3's Domestic advisor. It seems 4's domestic advoisor is just a generic limited redo of 2's.

I heard when 4 came out that the Throne room would come out in the next expansion (Warlords) but I guess it has been pushed back again. I don't know if it is getting the axe because of the multiplayer focus or what. Stardock recently released some interesting reasons why they didn't take Gal Civ 2 to the MP level. Alot of it is very clear to see how multiplayer can strip the flavor out of a game. I am thinking that this is possibly what has happened to civ. Perhaps they should do away with the MP function in 5 and throw more flavor into the series again. As Stardock pointed out, most people that play TBS games don't even play online. From their numbers only about 10% of all buyers actually use the multiplayer function. If this is true for civ as well, perhaps it is better that it stay a single-player game so that the game doesn't end up so bland and railroaded, or 'streamlined', for multiplayer purposes when not many buyers are actually utilizing it.

 

[1889]

I love all the info that Civ 4 provides in the advisor screens, after all when I call my advisors I expect answers not comic relief.

As for the MP function, it took a long time for me to use it but now that I have its all I play. The flavor provided by interaction with some good PBEM players have lead to stories and diplo that are always different and much more entertaining than some extra animations or text programmed by the designers.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

It was a nice touch to the game.
The civ3 palace too.

 

[T.A JONES]

For full clarification:

Civ I (PC) - Palace
Civ I (SNES) - Throne Room
Civ II (PC & PS1) - Throne Room
Civ III - Palace
Civ IV - Nada.

The animated advisors in 2 were fun at first but after a while, they got kind of annoying once you had practically memorized every single line they had said. Alot of times I just clicked past them after a while. I much preferred the advisor screens in 2 & 3 over 4's though. I can't seem to find much use at all for 4's advisors. I would love to have the civ 3 military advisor back. Also, either Civ 2 or Civ 3's Domestic advisor. It seems 4's domestic advoisor is just a generic limited redo of 2's.

I heard when 4 came out that the Throne room would come out in the next expansion (Warlords) but I guess it has been pushed back again. I don't know if it is getting the axe because of the multiplayer focus or what. Stardock recently released some interesting reasons why they didn't take Gal Civ 2 to the MP level. Alot of it is very clear to see how multiplayer can strip the flavor out of a game. I am thinking that this is possibly what has happened to civ. Perhaps they should do away with the MP function in 5 and throw more flavor into the series again. As Stardock pointed out, most people that play TBS games don't even play online. From their numbers only about 10% of all buyers actually use the multiplayer function. If this is true for civ as well, perhaps it is better that it stay a single-player game so that the game doesn't end up so bland and railroaded, or 'streamlined', for multiplayer purposes when not many buyers are actually utilizing it.

Ya I think your right on the money with that King, about the military advisors as well. Civ3 had the best system, the one I discribed using above. Im at a loss to recall any system for tracking army sizes that was set up so well.

But ya for me, Civ4 does seem to have diminished 'returns' See I always thought this was intentional, like part of a broader plan to push more X paks or something.

 

[KMadCandy]

SMAC has more flavor than any of the Civ games

SMAC flashbacks spoilered to spare the rest of you.

Spoiler :

oh i loved the voiceovers in that game! just try to read this without hearing pravin lal's voice in your head, i dare ya. especially on the word "painfully" haha.

"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."

not that i don't love leonard nimoy, particularly the "beep beep beep" one, but those were more fun since they were longer and they were read by different leaders, who all had their own personalities. and the whole game really did have flavor, a story of the history of the planet that developed as you went along. then again, civ doesn't have that freedom since it's not set on some futuristic world with a clean-slate for making stuff up.

the graphic when you eliminated a civ! who wouldn't want to see isabella in there! then again, good thing she and sister miriam can't get a permanent alliance.

i often wish that you could bribe the civ4 AIs on UN resolutions the way you could in SMAC for planetary council. and how sometimes they'd say they'd vote that way and then not, that was cool. dastardly, but cool.

 

[T.A JONES]

SMAC has more flavor than any of the Civ games

Hows the modding sector with that Game? I doubt its so elabrate as to have over 800 units(majorty ethnic custum) 200 hundred techs, 40+resources 31 Civs, 4 era leaderheads, twice the usual buildings and wonders (including 2x national ) as Civ4.(all complete pedia entries and some work better then origianal developers! )

Thats a taste of whats available, same rules, presented like a lisenced X pak, one package, and right here in the form of a few choices, all being popular mods playable on the Civ3 console.

To me the flavour is ripest in this world and soon Civ4 may get there aswell. Its the modders who make the flavour and Civ has the best team out there producing it(as far as I know....which isn't so far ..., basicly its just a hunch so correct me if I'm wrong ))

 

[KMadCandy]

Hows the modding sector with that Game? I doubt its so elabrate as to have over 800 units(majorty ethnic custum) 200 hundred techs, 40+resources 31 Civs, 4 era leaderheads, twice the usual buildings and wonders (including 2x national ) as Civ4.(all complete pedia entries and some work better then origianal developers! )

oh i'm not saying i don't love civ4. i haven't played SMAC in months now.

and the modders here rock. they can do things i never thought possible, and UI interfaces i never thought of but now i can't live without. and what's more, they're patient with my questions! trust me, that's not easy, i'm totally dumb about that sort of thing.

i don't know a thing about modding the game of SMAC itself, but one spiffy cool thing was that you didn't just build defined units. there was a unit workshop in-game where you'd design what you wanted, more options as you get more techs obviously, mix and match, decide if it's worth the "sheilds" compared to another version. you want a spy that is physically a boat, moves on the water without a transport? go for it. you want, say, artillery with an attack bonus vs specific types of enemy troops, have at it. you could make units with a military police bonus, that pretty much is equivalent to making them count as two troops under hereditary rule in civ4. design your own personalized ultimate Stack of Doom depending on your target's strengths and weaknesses. so you'd mod in game, not simply thru promotions like in civ4 (altho i do like the promotions here and as i learned more about how best to mix and match them i missed the unit workshop from SMAC less and less).

it's just different. in the same way that i love there are different types of victory conditions for different sorts of people/different moods (in both games), i like that both games exist, i like having options.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

For full clarification:
I heard when 4 came out that the Throne room would come out in the next expansion (Warlords) but I guess it has been pushed back again.

I actually seem to recall seeing screenshots of a Throne Room for Civ 4. I think it was the Aztec/Meso-American one.

EDIT: Ah, yes, here it is:

Spoiler :

 

[King Flevance]

I actually seem to recall seeing screenshots of a Throne Room for Civ 4. I think it was the Aztec/Meso-American one.

EDIT: Ah, yes, here it is:

Spoiler :

Nice screeny. I am glad to see that they plan to go back to the Throne Room instead of the Palace Screen. I figured it was still sitting on the to-do shelf. The palace IMO was kind of dull and alot of the pieces didn't mix-match so well. The throne room was great because as you added stuff, it all sort of blended with various styles. I think I only ever fully upgraded my throne room a few times and that was because I played passed the end game.

I love all the info that Civ 4 provides in the advisor screens, after all when I call my advisors I expect answers not comic relief.

As for the MP function, it took a long time for me to use it but now that I have its all I play. The flavor provided by interaction with some good PBEM players have lead to stories and diplo that are always different and much more entertaining than some extra animations or text programmed by the designers.

Actually, IMO 4 offers less advise and accessability than the advisors in 2 & 3 if you played them. I personally do not see how anyone can actually get any use out of the military advisor on 4. Everything there is already visible on your main map and you can't even access the units themselves so you are better off just using the map.
The domestic advisor just tells you about your cities but gives you no access to them like in 2 and 3 so IMO you are better off just cycling through your cities.
The financial advisor really doesn't show you a real budget or any realinsight into where your money is going. I personally think that the economic aspects of the game have been left out almost entirely though.
I suppose the foreign advisor is pretty decent though and the science advisor. But those are basically borrowed designs from 3 anyways.

I actually play multiplayer as well. I too am in the minority but to me it feels the series got real dull this time around when the game was streamlined for multiplayer functionality. I think that is why the game is so boring singleplayer and why alot of people don't finish their games. Just a guess. I think Civ would benefit more from something like the Metaverse for Gal Civ 2. It is basically HOF but just managed by Stardock themselves.
Since looking over an article on Stardock I have wondered if the advisors were actually 'simplified' for multiplayer more than to target a new audience. I think it was to keep people out of their advisor screens in multiplayer games. But what I find myself doing is racing my arse off around the map to do everything when it could be as easy as cutting to and from an advisor screen.

Anyways, I would be willing to bet that with civ's multiplayer options we are missing out on alot more flavor features. It came out with Xfire I know, then switched to Gamespy. It had quite alot of different problems when the game came out that probably occupied alot of time and rsources spent on the game that could have been used adding more features. Simply comparing the stuff added in with Gal Civ 2 XP (Dark Avatar) and Civ 4 XP (Warlords) shows a marginal difference in what it actually brings to the game for the player.

 

[Tee Kay]

Yeah I agree the advisors in Civ4 are useless and unentertaining (only nice touch was with the foreign advisor) Bring back the High Council!

 

[T.A JONES]

oh i'm not saying i don't love civ4. i haven't played SMAC in months now.....
it's just different. in the same way that i love there are different types of victory conditions for different sorts of people/different moods (in both games), i like that both games exist, i like having options.

taken in context

You give some some strong points, ones I was actually admiring early on the main thread in the lobby (under Gal Civ2 ) I agree, Part of its uniqness and its similar to what you say about SMAC, I find sets it apart from any civ game. Its the way flavour is delt with. The amount of custums made available easier to the player is notably a factor for some of its success. Its definatly a candidate for best turn based 'concept' but not some much the best flavoured game in the regard I meant( i guess Im taking realism into account but thats not entirly it).

Being able to craft your own modules, spaceships, whatever "units" so to speak in-game, bring unlimated levels of the mod potential to the game. Still, even with being able to load other artist's/visionary's custum files, it feels like where talking about the something differant here, rather defenate concepts rather then flavour if you now what I mean.

Thanks for your thoughts. Excuse me for not filling it out more but ive got a muddled perspective right now. Ive been looking into Gal CIv2 as well. Not sure where hey differ as of yet, both look like games I'd enjoy to some degree

 

[Sebiche]

i want the actors for the high council. the current ones are just "recommended"

i WANT CHARACTER

besides, is it sad that one occasionally would like an advisor to make small talk with in civ?

 

[LucyDuke]

besides, is it sad that one occasionally would like an advisor to make small talk with in civ?

If you mean what I think you mean, then... it might be.

 

[Sebiche]

yeah, im just kidding

i just think the just RECOMENDED: MILITARY is a little boring.

id like to know WHY! (and id rather it not just say "too few troops" or "enables Musketmen" i need sentences.

 

[vsipinen]

I actually play multiplayer as well. I too am in the minority but to me it feels the series got real dull this time around when the game was streamlined for multiplayer functionality. I think that is why the game is so boring singleplayer and why alot of people don't finish their games.

I dont't think that the single player game is boring at all, except perhaps the very end of it sometimes. However I agree that the single player game should not be simplified in order to enable multiplayer games, but I never play multiplayer games, because I want to play the game when it suits me and not when it is suitable for several other players also.

 

[King Flevance]

Yeah, you fall into the majority then for the TBS genre. I think the problem with TBS is that it just takes so long to play a decent game. For instance, I love Marathon games when I play. However, when I go online, I am pretty much forced to play quick/blazing because that is what everyone plays. I could sit there all day hoping 1 or 2 people come along that won't mind playing a marathon game. But I don't have that kind of time to sit around waiting for the possibility that I may find a marathon buddy. SO I jump in the all the quick/blazing ones. Not like it matters anyways, as soon as someone is unhappy with how the game is going they quit and you have an AI opponent. Most of the 6-8 player games I start end up as 2-4 players in the first 20-45mins.

Now, eventually when a double pack or some decent deal for vanilla+warlords comes out a friend of mine is probably going to end up picking the game up. Then I will have someone to steady play marathon with. But here is where TBS comes in. The only reason I am sure that I will ever gain someone to play marathon games with is because I know him in RL. That is not a common scenario for most buyers unfortunatley. Now I am just hoping that T2 will stop milking the title and make a double pack this Easter. They may hold off for Christmas which wouldn't shock me really. But holding out past that is marketing suicide IMO.

Anyways, in regards to MP you also have the fact that playing with the general public tends to suck - because everyone is trying so hard to be cool (talkin smack, using every obsenity in their vocabulary) that hardly anyone ever is. I tell you, log in to the lobby on like a Thursday, Friday, or Saturday night, just to see the chat for 5 mins. You will see the word "faq" with a backwards q tail many times, multiple names for genitals being flung around like they are running down a checklist. And don't forget of course, many, many lame mamma jokes.
Now I ain't trying to start a movement on language in the lobby or nothing. I have a mouth of my own at times but you guys know what I am talkin about. Basic general public on the internet. These are not steady game mates... it's possible to find some good mates after you sift through all the cyber-egos. I am just too busy and perhaps too old to mess with all that anymore. It's just way too much trouble to find anyone from the general public that are a steady gaming mates. Your best bet is ladders but that stuff is taken too serious for my tastes.
In other words, as you say Vsipinen:

I want to play the game when it suits me and not when it is suitable for several other players also.

LOL. I always gotta laugh at the guy in the staging room going:
>ROXORBOY: COME ON!!! WAT R WE WAITING 4?!?!
>ROXORBOY: LAUNCH!!!1
>ROXORBOY: WTH

All names have been changed to protect the identities of those in question.

I don't mind having a game on hold personally. I don't play Civ that much anyways. So I am a pretty relaxed person as far as waiting for when it is suitable for everyone. But I also have the luxury of knowing who I am playing in RL. That is not a common luxury from the sounds of it. Namely with TBS games. Now RTS, I can find people... Heck, even ROXORBOY will be acceptable for me on a RTS. As RTS is waaay too repetative in strategy.