nalves
sailing in a NAU
Just to say that I'm not a modder and I'm loving this release
Whats so good about C3C?
- Thread starter JoseM
- Start date
Just to say that I'm not a modder and I'm loving this release
Originally posted by nalves
Just to say that I'm not a modder and I'm loving this release
Ditto here. The enjoyment that I've gotten playing the WW2 scenario alone has been worth US$30.
Clown2TheLeft
Prince
My advice to Yoshi was based on his (her?) desire to have a playable epic game. In their post, they stated they could care less about the scenarios. Gameplay was what they were after.
C3C, in my opinion, has not enhanced gameplay in the core game. I feel it has detracted from it. The bugs can be fixed with a patch. The altering of core rules cannot--this must be modded (where possible).
The standard response to one who dislikes the changes to core rules is "Change it in the editor." Voicing your dislike of changes to the core rules, even if you offer a viable solution, invites this response every time from the modders.
I mentioned it was for modders because I feel they are the ones that will benefit most from this release (they, by definition, do not mind changing things in the editor; they do this frequently enough so that it is second nature to them). Yes, I'm guilty of a sweeping generalization there. If this offends anyone, please accept my apologies.
My reasons for saying C3C is for modders is based (in part) on the emphasis on scenarios: it is modders that create these, therefore, get the most satisfaction out of playing them as they can appreciate the work that went into them fully. It is much the same as a "musician's musician," or a "writer's writer." That is: if one engages in the activity themselves, they get more out of it. C3C, in my opinion, is a modder's mod.
While I, too, enjoyed the scenarios (after figuring out the further modification of core rules in each one), after going through them, I'm left with very little that is desirous.
Yes, the new units are neat. Yes, the graphics and animations are neat. I'm not saying it's all bad, because it's not. But I'm not saying it's a 91 out of a 100, either.
Later!
--The Clown to the Left
C3C, in my opinion, has not enhanced gameplay in the core game. I feel it has detracted from it. The bugs can be fixed with a patch. The altering of core rules cannot--this must be modded (where possible).
The standard response to one who dislikes the changes to core rules is "Change it in the editor." Voicing your dislike of changes to the core rules, even if you offer a viable solution, invites this response every time from the modders.
I mentioned it was for modders because I feel they are the ones that will benefit most from this release (they, by definition, do not mind changing things in the editor; they do this frequently enough so that it is second nature to them). Yes, I'm guilty of a sweeping generalization there. If this offends anyone, please accept my apologies.
My reasons for saying C3C is for modders is based (in part) on the emphasis on scenarios: it is modders that create these, therefore, get the most satisfaction out of playing them as they can appreciate the work that went into them fully. It is much the same as a "musician's musician," or a "writer's writer." That is: if one engages in the activity themselves, they get more out of it. C3C, in my opinion, is a modder's mod.
While I, too, enjoyed the scenarios (after figuring out the further modification of core rules in each one), after going through them, I'm left with very little that is desirous.
Yes, the new units are neat. Yes, the graphics and animations are neat. I'm not saying it's all bad, because it's not. But I'm not saying it's a 91 out of a 100, either.
Later!
--The Clown to the Left
First, I should say that I guess I am what could be called a MODer and a very picky one at that. I'm not really one for Civ3 scenarios because let's face it, no events scripting makes for little more than an elaborate version of the vanilla game. But since I haven't played the C3C scenarios, I won't knock them...yet.
Warpstorm has cleared up the main features offered with C3C.
It should be noted that as I understand it, there is nothing in any of the scenarios that is "hard-coded" to that particular scenario (i.e. you can apply the same features to your own scenarios through the Editor). I assume features like the 'pearl harbor' effect are available in the vanilla (default) game now?
The Stealth attack was a needed feature and the Stealth Attack Barrier improvement ability seems logical enough, especially in situations where you want to avoid a specific unit being 'cherry picked.'
And that's all fine and good, but it really only covers unit/improvement/tech/terrain 'ability'-related features and features that are really just fixes (like the FOW editor which is is clearly a requirement where scenarios are concerned).
What about the suicide-inducing, life-spanning, excruciatingly slow turn rate?
What about erratic AI settlement (although PTW included the ability to set terrain to 'Cannot be Settled' only a partial solution)?
What about nonsensical AI responses during diplomacy I know Warpstorm mentioned that as not having been changed...but no change at all?
What about Worker feedback loops (which were only partially addressed in PTW)?
What about the AI's chronic low treasury problem?
What about bias AI tech-trading?
What about skewed combat?
If Warpstorm is correct (that they haven't included ANY of the things I requested), then I assume there are no new unit combat-modifying flags aside from '2x Amphibious Assault?' I also assume that units are not available items in the diplomacy screen? The reason why I mention those two in particular is because a horde of civers asked for them and both have always been hot topics on this forum.
A favorite request among many civers (including Warpstorm as far as I know) is the Helicopter "Pick-Up" flag (i.e. air units given this flag can load units outside of a city/Airbase). No chance huh?
Well, I guess that was to be expected. I'd just like to say to all those who previously said, "You never know, you might be pleasantly surprised" when referring to possible additions in C3C, that I told you so.
Just for the record, most of the requests I posted in the C3C Request Forum were just meant to bring up the topic of what 'Civ3 could/should be' and were not realistically intended for Conquests although I really would have liked Individual Unit Maintenance Costs (dogdammit).
As a half-assed MODder, I agree with Clown (why is it that people can't help smiling when they hear that word), most gamers are not interested in MODding, so it's up to publishers to make the Rules work before MODders get their finicky hands on them.
When it comes down to it, what players want is a challenging game of CIV that has competent AI in every sense. Does C3C offer that? Not from what I'm reading thus far.
BTW, if some of you are snickering and saying, This guys living in a fantasy land Civ2s AI sucked, I reply that using the Events you could take Civ2s pushover AI and turn it into a nasty (and I mean hundreds of T-34s, Yaks, and all that other cool Red Army stuff unstoppably heading straight for Berlin kind of nasty), counter-attacking just when you think its safe, blitzkrieging, god-of-war-like killing machine that would make Sid sid his pants. Civ3 equivalent: Soviets are busy setting their cities to produce Settlers to build cities along the Arctic Circle while you cream their few meager units only get them down to their last few cities and hear them order you to give them all your gold or else and theres not a whole lot you, as a MODer can do about it.
If you want a good example of what kind of AI improvement I'm talking about, take a look at the upcoming Counterstrike:Condition Zero AI descriptions. CS goes from bots that were okay but always knew where you were, could get head shots from 300 yards away using a pistol, right after turning a corner, while running, to bots that supposedly fire realisitically, don't know where you are but check every corner and won't make the same mistake twice. What's more you can MOD the AI (and other aspects of the game) to your preference. Now that's what I call putting Intelligence into the Artificial!
Warpstorm has cleared up the main features offered with C3C.
It should be noted that as I understand it, there is nothing in any of the scenarios that is "hard-coded" to that particular scenario (i.e. you can apply the same features to your own scenarios through the Editor). I assume features like the 'pearl harbor' effect are available in the vanilla (default) game now?
I assume disasters are Volcano tiles. What is the "plague" effect in the Medieval scenario about? Is it essentially renaming of 'Disease' from Flood Plains or something separate?
The Stealth attack was a needed feature and the Stealth Attack Barrier improvement ability seems logical enough, especially in situations where you want to avoid a specific unit being 'cherry picked.'
And that's all fine and good, but it really only covers unit/improvement/tech/terrain 'ability'-related features and features that are really just fixes (like the FOW editor which is is clearly a requirement where scenarios are concerned).
What about the suicide-inducing, life-spanning, excruciatingly slow turn rate?
What about erratic AI settlement (although PTW included the ability to set terrain to 'Cannot be Settled' only a partial solution)?
What about nonsensical AI responses during diplomacy I know Warpstorm mentioned that as not having been changed...but no change at all?
What about Worker feedback loops (which were only partially addressed in PTW)?
What about the AI's chronic low treasury problem?
What about bias AI tech-trading?
What about skewed combat?
If Warpstorm is correct (that they haven't included ANY of the things I requested), then I assume there are no new unit combat-modifying flags aside from '2x Amphibious Assault?' I also assume that units are not available items in the diplomacy screen? The reason why I mention those two in particular is because a horde of civers asked for them and both have always been hot topics on this forum.
A favorite request among many civers (including Warpstorm as far as I know) is the Helicopter "Pick-Up" flag (i.e. air units given this flag can load units outside of a city/Airbase). No chance huh?
Well, I guess that was to be expected. I'd just like to say to all those who previously said, "You never know, you might be pleasantly surprised" when referring to possible additions in C3C, that I told you so.
Just for the record, most of the requests I posted in the C3C Request Forum were just meant to bring up the topic of what 'Civ3 could/should be' and were not realistically intended for Conquests although I really would have liked Individual Unit Maintenance Costs (dogdammit).
As a half-assed MODder, I agree with Clown (why is it that people can't help smiling when they hear that word), most gamers are not interested in MODding, so it's up to publishers to make the Rules work before MODders get their finicky hands on them.
When it comes down to it, what players want is a challenging game of CIV that has competent AI in every sense. Does C3C offer that? Not from what I'm reading thus far.
BTW, if some of you are snickering and saying, This guys living in a fantasy land Civ2s AI sucked, I reply that using the Events you could take Civ2s pushover AI and turn it into a nasty (and I mean hundreds of T-34s, Yaks, and all that other cool Red Army stuff unstoppably heading straight for Berlin kind of nasty), counter-attacking just when you think its safe, blitzkrieging, god-of-war-like killing machine that would make Sid sid his pants. Civ3 equivalent: Soviets are busy setting their cities to produce Settlers to build cities along the Arctic Circle while you cream their few meager units only get them down to their last few cities and hear them order you to give them all your gold or else and theres not a whole lot you, as a MODer can do about it.
If you want a good example of what kind of AI improvement I'm talking about, take a look at the upcoming Counterstrike:Condition Zero AI descriptions. CS goes from bots that were okay but always knew where you were, could get head shots from 300 yards away using a pistol, right after turning a corner, while running, to bots that supposedly fire realisitically, don't know where you are but check every corner and won't make the same mistake twice. What's more you can MOD the AI (and other aspects of the game) to your preference. Now that's what I call putting Intelligence into the Artificial!
It is pretty standard now to put out two expansions for many games just for squeezing som extra juice from the marked.
Simply enough - they earn more money this way - cynically or not. But still I must say I appreciate at least one extra expansion.
They added at least the PTW civs to C3C.
Simply enough - they earn more money this way - cynically or not. But still I must say I appreciate at least one extra expansion.
They added at least the PTW civs to C3C.
troytheface
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,262
Interesting comment Clown. There has been something bothering me about this release since i got it, and i have not been able to really put my finger on it. I liked the idea of new goverments- only to find that now all the civs just go Facist instead of Communist for war. Not much of a change. I find that the Temple of Zues and Templar thing are cool ideas, but don't add all that much. I find Armies better, but now not so rare or fun. I suggested in another thread that the balance achieved also created "still waters" no extremes, which can amplify "no strong differences" - the spice of life ...What you have stated- that it is like a modders game- like
"musicians music" -really hits the nail on the head- that is exactly what has happened-i fear they listened to die hard fans so closely that they tried to make "good" ..."great" ..the kiss of death for art....(a sure way to ruin a "good" painting is to overwork it in an attempt to make it "great" -what u really end up doing is take away certain flaws and nuances that give it charm and life - Thor's hammer was suppossed to have a handle a trifle to short-yet it was the most powerful weapon the Norse Gods had...Michangelo's David was carved from a piece of Marble that had a crack in it, no one wanted it....In other words, flawed things make for greatness- not over thought out precision
(like them super bands- that usually really sux) What you suggest happened really fits i think. PTW for all its flaws, was actually , not that bad in retrospect...
The strengths of Conquests are all but left in the dust , Volcanos are cool. Terrrain that DOES something. Plagues were left out. (general game)..why? i suspect beta testers are those that want everything "just so" ..therefore a random plague probably threw them into to fits of "no!" Plagues was a good idea that was commiteed into oblivion.
New techs would have been more exciting than simply adding new units or civs. A tech that provided Blimps that float around surveying and bi planes to blow them up. In other words new stuff doing new things...not more land or sea units with zzzz new stats. Terrain that LIVES, earthquake cracks, glacier flows, terrrain is not stagnant, platonics and Flora changes make terrrain an active thing, ice melts, water freezes, whirl pools, River travel that can be blocked by rapids or waterfalls, ect..... Stealth units with different ablities, slavers, ect. Inventive creative things, not more of the same, then balanced to the point of ...sameness.
"musicians music" -really hits the nail on the head- that is exactly what has happened-i fear they listened to die hard fans so closely that they tried to make "good" ..."great" ..the kiss of death for art....(a sure way to ruin a "good" painting is to overwork it in an attempt to make it "great" -what u really end up doing is take away certain flaws and nuances that give it charm and life - Thor's hammer was suppossed to have a handle a trifle to short-yet it was the most powerful weapon the Norse Gods had...Michangelo's David was carved from a piece of Marble that had a crack in it, no one wanted it....In other words, flawed things make for greatness- not over thought out precision
(like them super bands- that usually really sux) What you suggest happened really fits i think. PTW for all its flaws, was actually , not that bad in retrospect...
The strengths of Conquests are all but left in the dust , Volcanos are cool. Terrrain that DOES something. Plagues were left out. (general game)..why? i suspect beta testers are those that want everything "just so" ..therefore a random plague probably threw them into to fits of "no!" Plagues was a good idea that was commiteed into oblivion.
New techs would have been more exciting than simply adding new units or civs. A tech that provided Blimps that float around surveying and bi planes to blow them up. In other words new stuff doing new things...not more land or sea units with zzzz new stats. Terrain that LIVES, earthquake cracks, glacier flows, terrrain is not stagnant, platonics and Flora changes make terrrain an active thing, ice melts, water freezes, whirl pools, River travel that can be blocked by rapids or waterfalls, ect..... Stealth units with different ablities, slavers, ect. Inventive creative things, not more of the same, then balanced to the point of ...sameness.
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
True, the beta testers did everything to increase balance (Why are there no cheaper Granaries?), but a "just so" crowd, that is definetely wrong. Lots of things where subject to endless discussion (guess I don't reveal a secret when I mention ToZ/ Ivory), but not adding the Plague to the epic game was most likely done to avoid frustration for new players, not to even out the game for the rather experienced beta testers.
Just try a game with Plague turned on, and you'll get a catch how this will deterre someone new to the game.
Lots of good points otherwise. From my impression, the big difference between the Civ2 and Civ3 evolution is:
Civ2 - add anything possible, as long as the human player can handle it, and don't care about the AI (s.v. Carriers
)Civ3 - add only things the AI can handle (or at least, is supposed to do so), and don't priorite human demands (ex: unit support settings - guess the AI cannot handle that in any way).
troytheface
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,262
i am not sure new users would be so deterred (although a friend i spoke with said he would hate plagues...) however, perhaps we should not underestimate people's ability to adapt ...after a plague strike a few times perhaps new users would free themselves up from a predetermined style of play, kind of , "let me see what happens and i'll have fun with this...." in truth , determining what the buyer would like is always a gamble...one never knows....i suggest earthquakes, icebergs, plagues ect. would not only be eventually accepted as part of the play, but would be sorely missed if left out....speculation.
As to the beta testers psychological make-up- ur right there -
people are different-by my own arguement- i think i am looking for a target-
As to the beta testers psychological make-up- ur right there -
people are different-by my own arguement- i think i am looking for a target-
so far i'm still not sure wheter is hould buy it
first of still alota bugs, also sum ppl claim MP is still poor, and not much ppl claiming otherwise so...
second, i'm pretty pissed at the release dates. They keep shoving is back...this is the reason i'm still considering even buying a game wich will be out after the first patch if u ask me.
third, why buy?
fourth, i'm saving for a new monitor as well...so i'm still thinking it over. For me the hype is over...i heard so much about it its almost as i played it before i even have it.
At this point a the new flat screen is winning
first of still alota bugs, also sum ppl claim MP is still poor, and not much ppl claiming otherwise so...
second, i'm pretty pissed at the release dates. They keep shoving is back...this is the reason i'm still considering even buying a game wich will be out after the first patch if u ask me.
third, why buy?
fourth, i'm saving for a new monitor as well...so i'm still thinking it over. For me the hype is over...i heard so much about it its almost as i played it before i even have it.
At this point a the new flat screen is winning
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
The beta testers are different with different tastes. There were some who were very competitve on the MP scene and they were very concerned about balance and made their opinions known (you know who you are).
troytheface
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,262
Ah, so what ur suggesting is that the MP players are more responsible for the new "balance" than others...that makes perfect sense...By the way, how hard is it to make terrrain that has animation? Can u even do it? Above i suggested Whirlpools, Ice melting, Icebergs floating, (Forest Fires would be kind of cool now that i think about it) Earthquake Cracks, Waterfalls, Floods,
Avalanches...living terrain-as it actually is-...(movement once in a awhile like Vocanos )
Avalanches...living terrain-as it actually is-...(movement once in a awhile like Vocanos )
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
AFAIK, the Civ3 engine has no support for animated terrain at all. This is the kind of feature that is fairly easy to build in at the beginning of a project, but a royal PITA to add in later.
