what is the throne room?

[Sebiche]

i always play marathon

 

[T.A JONES]

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:


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.

ya so true on the bit.
But ya, you break it down good here (good grammer to boot)
Im glad you see the real deal we got packaged. Seriosly man, glad you wern't bought. You'd make one heck of a dangerous paid poster or worse, the 'likes', as a secret axis team tester, lending services first on trials of the game then more so over here on others patience, to those whom lay down legit design flaws only to be mocked on their good standing machinery(according to the box). This place seemed rigged with that stuff in the early days..now everybodys bought in so they could all walk out, job done.

Oh well same ol spiel for me I know, I know. Only modders I trust will get things done right them, or otherwise a good sequel, one that will move us forward done up right, back in the Civ3 spirt.

 

[King Flevance]

Thanks T.A. ...I think. Naw I love that some people still hang out on Civ 3 boards. That is probably where I will end up coming back to once I get my civ itch back. Civ 4 really took it out of me, as I kept trying to give it a chance but the more I played the more I spotted things I didn't like. The more I follow Firaxis's intentions towards the game and reading what people would like to see, the more I learn that they aren't the same thing.

Alot of times I don't mean to attack the game, it just happens. I really don't even put effort into it anymore trying to tell anyone what is wrong with it. I guess maybe in the early months I was on a small crusade but that was more of just wanting to be heard. I will admit, sometimes I throw in some statements (always true to my opinion) that are meant to see what people respond with. Not really trolling more so just wanting to hear why people think it is perfectly fine. My favorite one to do this with is the new religion system because I see it as very pointless and way unbalanced as it currently stands. I honestly just don't get why this is "such a cool feature" when it works against the AI to make foolish decisions no player would make, supports an unreasonable economic backbone, AND allows free FOW busting in rival territories.

Oh well same ol spiel for me I know, I know.

Hehe, you crack me up when you go into tangents T.A. I agree with alot of what you say and sometimes stay in the lukewarm. LOL. You can really get revved up sometimes. But I know where you are coming from. You actually have me staring at a new copy of Civ 3 Complete to try out the balancer reloaded mod. Actually, I have been digging around in the Civ 3 mod section looking around at different mods - there are actually a few I would like to try out. I never played mods with 3 when it was out.
It is pretty much garaunteed I will end up buying another copy of 3 to regain conquests but not for a little time yet.

Only modders I trust will get things done right them, or otherwise a good sequel, one that will move us forward done up right, back in the Civ3 spirt.

I would count on the modders over the company themselves anymore. Already I saw the company discussing that the next expansion is going to focus on making modding easier. I could go into a whole new spiel about the approach to modding done with the game as well. Quite a bit but I really don't feel like it currently. Hehe. Trust me, if the right thread popped up I probably would.
I will just say that I think the modders here do excellent work. There is some awesome stuff here even even if you exclude the well-known mods. I just think it sucks that the community is responsible for making the game awesome and not seeing anything for the time they put in doing... pretty much what Firaxis is actually getting paid for. I think alot of it is my favorite title has been destroyed in my eyes by the owners themselves on so many levels. I hope not but I don't hold out to much expectation of the series anymore. I don't have a problem with anyone that likes the game as it is... even if they think it is somehow perfect.

I just don't like when I see people say stuff like "The next expansion pack will probably be crap. But I will probably buy it anyways." As this isn't helping the game evolve. This is helping someone get rich off the title of Civ. And that is why most of the 'Tycoon' games suck anymore. To me, if Firaxis stops making quality games, I will eventually just quit bothering with them and let them finish slowly milking a dry cow if that is what it has came to.

 

[LucyDuke]

My favorite one to do this with is the new religion system because I see it as very pointless and way unbalanced as it currently stands. I honestly just don't get why this is "such a cool feature" when it works against the AI to make foolish decisions no player would make, supports an unreasonable economic backbone, AND allows free FOW busting in rival territories.

I'm with you on this one, for the most part. I don't see it as completely pointless, I think it definitely makes for an interesting game. Still, I find myself wishing (way more frequently than I would have expected) that there was a "No Religions" checkbox the same way there are "No Barbarians" or whatever options in the custom game screen. As it stands, it's way too integrated to do that (it would nerf all the religion civics), but after a marathon of Isabellic Holy Wars™, it would be nice to take a break without having to switch back to Civ3. The way it's implemented, though, it's definitely overkill.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

LucyDuke:
Is there a simple way to do this, e.g. disabling civs' ability to declare a state religion? It seems like what most people complain about is not religion per se, but the wars and things that result from it. If there is a simple way to turn off state religions, that would seem to solve it for the most part. (Just force civs to adopt free religion in the code, thereby eliminating the other religious civics and the ability to declare a state religion.) Hmm. I may actually do this in a mod.

 

[King Flevance]

If you took off the declaration of state religions, as LucyDuke said you would have to look into modifying Organized Religion, Theocracy, and Pacifism civics. As they require state religion for their abilities. Theocracy would actually be a civic where no religion could spread in your empire.

Is what I am planning to do in my mod is make the AI top out at a +2-4 "brothers and sisters of the faith" bonus. (Depending on if they have a holy city. But I am also going to make war declaration a -4-6 to relations. I have been thinking of going ahead and trying to introduce a new trade system and then add in a "You are a good trade partner" at a max of +6.

My main annoyance with religion is when I see AI do something foolish over a religion modifier. Not "foolish" as in it screwed me over and now I am mad. But foolish as in they screwed themselves over and without the religion modifier they wouldn't have. Like when a small civ has the Buddhist Holy City and hates me even though I am HUGE and have even been generous to gift them free luxury resources and a strategic resource and so on and try getting them to invade a neighbor. Then they turn on me lose the resources and end up getting crushed after a small attack force tries to invade my territory. However, without being a different religion, that wouldn't have happened. And in MP that would not have happened as most players don't care what religion everyone is.

Also, in my mod, state religion is not going to offer Fog busting in rival cities. But I am going to make a unit able to made under Organized Religion and Theocracy that allows you to see into any city you permanently plant one in. But it must have the religion first. Also religion is going to be pulled off of the tech tree and most religions are going to be founded very early. I am working on trying to add in something for a religious victory too. I am just unsure of what I am going to have the circumstances be. So far, it will be to raze all Holy Cities and have your religion take over 80% of all the cities. All other religions will also require to be purged down to only 25%. Also, I am considering giving each religion a UU specific to it.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

I'm really missing the palace view / throne room feature in the game. Perhaps they will include it again in a future expansion ...

heppcatt

I'd very much like to see the throne room back. I simply don't get the comments that "it has no purpose". People who feel like that should play checkers instead of playing Civ.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

For full clarification:

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

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.

I completely agree with all this.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

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 agree. I think the concern for the tender feelings of multiplayers has run out of hand. In fact, Sid Meier gave the impression of feeling the same way in an interview some time ago.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

If you took off the declaration of state religions, as LucyDuke said you would have to look into modifying Organized Religion, Theocracy, and Pacifism civics. As they require state religion for their abilities. Theocracy would actually be a civic where no religion could spread in your empire.

What I was thinking was more along the lines of forcing all civs by default to have free religion when the game starts, and to eliminate the other religion civics. (Maybe I'd give them an unobtainable tech or something so the AI can never switch.) That way, religions are still founded and can spread, but they would only affect culture and happiness, not diplomatic relations.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Actually, the main purpose of religion was not to increase happiness and culture (many buildings do that) but to increase feelings between civilizations! So there is really no sense in disabling civs' ability to declare a state religion, but keep religion in the game. Just disable religion and add a few buildings which increase happiness and culture.

What annoys me a bit, that you can give the civilization techs and money for the whole game, byt the bonus will be +4 "Our trade relations have been fair" after first two donations and stop increasing after that.

 

[King Flevance]

I'm with you on this one, for the most part. I don't see it as completely pointless, I think it definitely makes for an interesting game. Still, I find myself wishing (way more frequently than I would have expected) that there was a "No Religions" checkbox the same way there are "No Barbarians" or whatever options in the custom game screen. As it stands, it's way too integrated to do that (it would nerf all the religion civics), but after a marathon of Isabellic Holy Wars™, it would be nice to take a break without having to switch back to Civ3. The way it's implemented, though, it's definitely overkill.

I would love a no religion checkbox. I might actually play a game here or there with that. Eventually, I will get to religion in my modding. Right now I am working on the tech tree and units at the same time. I will probably be on it for a while. I am just taking my time slowly learning how to use all this mod stuff.

Actually, the main purpose of religion was not to increase happiness and culture (many buildings do that) but to increase feelings between civilizations! So there is really no sense in disabling civs' ability to declare a state religion, but keep religion in the game.

My problem with it is though, if a player is your neighbor and is the same religion as you but you see him building massive forces on your border and won't trade with you while another player beside you is a different religion but has been trading with you - who are you going to put up a front against?

The AI will attack the guy that is trading because the points haven't built up enough to counter the -4 from not being the same religion. While they hold a +6 with the guy that is planning an invasion.

 

[T.A JONES]

I would love a no religion checkbox. I might actually play a game here or there with that. Eventually, I will get to religion in my modding. Right now I am working on the tech tree and units at the same time. I will probably be on it for a while. I am just taking my time slowly learning how to use all this mod stuff.

Cool Im up for a mod with you designs at hand. There would probably be a good grasp on the needs like you've mentioned. Sounds like a lot of work though I hope it sees the light of day.

On to other news...Hey thats awesome! you thinkin of acquiring The Complete package hmm?. Its a good bid a buisness for sure!. I use TBX-R as a stand out (my demo display ) cause it dosn't stray from a game you'd wanna pay!. Good for easing in to the scene I mean.... same pedia, fully bug sprayed, all the stuff you'd expect from high grade product.
But Hey your right thought!. There's plenty more quality were that came from! Just keep looking for the T.A 's stamp of approval over in the Civ three C n C's. Truly, Im not a modder, I don't play for the sake its a mod to learn or steal from. I only want mods that X-pand the expierence and improve performance, also no flimsy pedias make the grade so you count on the seal of quality from me.

JUST IN!!! Well, look! the timing was just right. This might be the last 'modcast' coming from the Civ3 side for a while. The locals here are starting to grown restless.

Man!, Can't really say I blame em anymore. Thanks folks

 

[Stylesrj]

Just be glad that the Civilizations take into account on what your military power is and know when to back off... unlike SMAC!

One time, I was a superpower. I had dominance over nearly all the world and then The University (they had wiped out the Spartans! Not the other way around like my brother always gets) had decided that my gathering of "wealth" was enough (I was Morgan Industries, filthy rich, Capitalist pig, whatever) and he declared Vendetta against me. In a couple of tuns, my Singularity Grav Gunships rolled into his borders and took over most of his cities and he still wanted Vendetta because of my Wealth policy.... same with the believers, they hated my democracy, their cities were being sieged (took over all sea cities leaving a small landmass left to be conquered) and then they got wiped out.
So yeah, in SMAC, the AI declares war for stupid reasons, while in cIV, only Montezuma would or Isabella would, and even then if you're a superpower they would not do it.

Can we get back on topic on throne rooms? I wish SMAC had that feature though. cIV is ok, but I've gone to SMAC ever since I found it somewhere in my house. SMAC had some really great features.

Anyway, I liked the Civ II Throne Room, and Civ III was on the decline in throne rooms. I hope cIV has a better throne room/palace design that'll really blow us away and change our mind about the game's direction

 

[LucyDuke]

Can we get back on topic on throne rooms?

Hardly.

A massive improvement would be to tweak the throne room / palace into a minigame with some impact on the rest of the game. Any ideas on how it could be consequential? Something like improving diplomatic relations with Catherine when you renovate the master bedroom...?

 

[Naismith]

A massive improvement would be to tweak the throne room / palace into a minigame with some impact on the rest of the game. Any ideas on how it could be consequential? Something like improving diplomatic relations with Catherine when you renovate the master bedroom...?

Isabella:
-2 "That shade of pink doesn't go with maroon!"

 

[King Flevance]

What would be cool is if it showed your thrown room as your background to your leaderhead. (Assuming AI's gain thrown room upgrades too which I doubt.)
Or when they add in the throne room button, it actually places you inside of it instead of a simple view screen. Then they could have a table or something that has access to better advisor screens.

 

[LucyDuke]

What would be cool is if it showed your thrown room as your background to your leaderhead. (Assuming AI's gain thrown room upgrades too which I doubt.)

Wouldn't be hard to implement for the AI. Their taste might come into question, but it does now, too.

You never see your own leaderhead, though, so what would be the benefit for the human player outside of MP?

 

[King Flevance]

Actually in MP you dont see leaderheads as they are replaced with chatlog boxes so the two parties in question can communicate. So no benefit for MP either.

 

[LucyDuke]

Actually in MP you dont see leaderheads as they are replaced with chatlog boxes so the two parties in question can communicate. So no benefit for MP either.

Ah, I've never played MP.

So the leaderhead adjustment would be for the AI to look at? I like the idea of a 3d throne room with advisors, though.