More Details On Civ IV Moddability 59
dfrankow writes "Gamespy has a preview of the upcoming Civilization IV title, where they go into more details about the moddability of the game. From the article: 'Civilization IV promises to be the most moddable game in the franchise yet. It'll ship with an in-game worldbuilder that allows you to shift units around and redraw the map, similar to a scenario editor. More hardcore modders can jump into XML files and tweak all of the unit stats and variables in the game. Beyond that, users who know the Python scripting language can actually go in and set up scripts and triggers to make game events happen or alter the way the game plays, while a Game A.I. SDK that'll be available shortly after the game ships will allow players to completely change the way the A.I., combat system, or game rules work.'"
It should be team based. (Score:2)
*That* would be a kickass mod.
Re:It should be team based. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It should be team based. (Score:2)
My favorite part of Civ3 was the low quality graphcs that told you exactly what you needed to know and nothing else. The animations annoyed me because they were just pretty jazz that added nothing to the gameplay.
It's different now. The days of solid gameplay trumping graphical shiney are being mocked by this release. If the Civilization line is tarnished by anything it's Civ4 as it currently stands. If they're going to go as far as t
Sweet! For Firaxis, that is (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, kinda like this. [twcenter.net]
Re:Sweet! For Firaxis, that is (Score:3, Funny)
Perhaps soon we shall have the legendary battles of "Warrior vs. Tank" or "Worker vs. Mechanized Infantry?"
Re:Sweet! For Firaxis, that is (Score:3, Insightful)
pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus, even if someone actually stopped being sloppy, it can happen that the "flaws" in a game are actually WAD (Working As Designed.) I.e., it's not buggy or untested, someone actually wanted it to be like that. In which case it's easier to just mod the game than argue against their grand vision.
E.g., wha
Re:pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:1, Insightful)
Well, call me a bitter old cynic
Cynicism is based on a reasonable, if brutal, interpretation of one's surroundings. If I call you something, that will hardly be it.
but I've pretty much given up on any hope that PC games will start being anything but unfinished stuff shoved out the door.
I find this sort
Re:pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:2)
You know.... I've never really thought of it that way. Genius!!
Re:pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:2)
Yeah yeah, I know it sounds stereotypical. It's stereotypical because it's common. Turns out that there'
Re:pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:1)
Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
If you think you have a point, actually argue that point, don't just throw insults around and pretend your point is right ju
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:1)
I am reminded of Italy in Northern African / Greece during W.W.II. They had almost every conceivable advantage... However due to poor tactics, and ineptitude they basically got smoked and Germany had to "rescue" their sorry butts... at least for a while.
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
Still, even (A) Ethiopia did have imported rifles, and (B) Italy used mostly infantry there too, which is probably just as well, since Italy's tanks were closer to WW1 level anyway. So IMHO in Civ3 terms we're talking at most 1 tech level difference, _not_ a 200 man Phalanx with bronze spears vs a 20,000 man t
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
name drop ("Peter Molyneaux cried when I told him what his career meant to me last E3"),
How is it name dropping? You were the one that said Peter Molyneaux, not me. In fact, other than my mother, I did not discuss anyone you didn't. You, however, named characteristics of a bunch of
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
1. If you can compare WW2 battles where both sides had rifles and AT guns, to a battle involving bronze spears against tanks, I rest my case. You do have a perception problem. By Civ 3 standards every WW2 battle involved _at_ _least_ Riflemen.
Ditto about infantry taking on tanks. If you'll actually researched how that was done in WW2 or now, you may discover it involved AT rifles, bazookas and AT magnetic mines. If for you that's the same as poking it with a bronze spear, tha
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
1. If you can compare WW2 battles where both sides had rifles and AT guns, to a battle involving bronze spears against tanks, I rest my case. You do have a perception problem. By Civ 3 standards every WW2 battle involved _at_ _least_ Riflemen.
No. One man, no rifle. I said that three divisions had 60 guns. That's more than a thousand people.
Hey, here's a thought. Go read about it before guessing what happened. The thing you think is a perception problem on my part is a
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
E.g., get this, fanboy: we're not arguing sloppy programming, we're arguing sloppy testing. Look at the message which started your spoiled pre-schooler tantrum, and try to find a single sentence where I said "sloppy programming".
If in your world buggy stuff being shoved out the
Re:Ah, a troll. How cute (Score:2)
Somehow I don't believe you will, even though I did.
And here's the dictionary.com link for you (Score:2)
2. modify or modification.
This abbreviation is very common - in fact the full terms are
considered formal. "Mods" is used especially with reference
to bug fixes or minor design changes in hardware or software,
most especially with respect to patch sets or a diff.
Re:pipe dreams, eh? ;) (Score:2)
Nobody has fixed that - it's been 'bust' in Civs I-III, Call to Power, Freeciv - it's essentially a sacrifice of realism with the aim of making the game fun (which is the whole point anyway).
Re:Sweet! For Firaxis, that is (Score:2)
Firaxis in their various forms have always taken the balance of their core games very seriously.
Re:I don't like it... (Score:4, Interesting)
Spore [google.ca] is looking very interesting right now. Procedural generation will hopefully generate the kind of epic scale I'm looking for.
Re:I don't like it... (Score:2)
Re:I don't like it... (Score:2)
Maybe we can take an informal poll; If you're a Civ fan (defined as; was late for work/school at least once because you stayed up all night playing) , what do you want from it? Epic scale and depth or a finely tuned shorter game? Turn based? (that's important to me) Deeper tech trees?
Re:I don't like it... (Score:1)
Re:I don't like it... (Score:1)
Re:I don't like it... (Score:2)
What I would want would be three versions:
1) Blitz game that's highly abstracted and goes quickly. I like the trade-off between early development at the cost of war capability (but better ability to kick ass later) vs. swarming around the globe, but being very primitive. Basically, a turn-based RTS (yes, I know what RTS stands for) - 15-30 minute games at best.
2) Civ 3 style: Long enough to where you can indeed do all kin
Re:I don't like it... (Score:1)
Re:I don't like it... (Score:1)
Parent -- now with formatting! (Score:1)
One thing that I wish is that they would go back to some of the things from Call to Power II:
Resources represented in the tens, hundreds, and even thousands (produced per city per turn) as opposed to basically ones and tens. This allows the game to be more fair, in my opinion. Also, resources are gathered equally from all available squares in each "band" around your city (your city can end up taking squares up to five tiles away).
Being able to feed and pay your citizens less, and work
Re:Parent -- now with formatting! (Score:1)
Re:Parent -- now with formatting! (Score:1)
If you want to do it in HTML just write your paragraphs like this:
<p>text text text</p>
Re:Parent -- now with formatting! (Score:1)
Re:I don't like it... (Score:2)
I'd also like to see the corruption reduced. Late built or captured cities are too useless.
Re:I don't like it... (Score:1)
My problem is time flies by so quickly during a game. Before you know it, you've missed all your meals.
Re:I don't like it... (Score:2)
And I, for one, am glad... (Score:2, Funny)
I've lost too many hours to CivCTP as it is, and I don't need another addiction.
So you Windows people can keep your games, and we will keep our productivity.
After all, all Windows is good for is games, right?
Re:And I, for one, am glad... (Score:2)
If you're a virus-writer, there is no better platform. No joke. Windows is elite/heaven for this kind of stuff.
This is fantastic! Communities will flourish! (Score:2)
Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:5, Interesting)
But at the same time, they're dumbing other aspects down to the degree that units only have one combat stat, instead of separate attack and defence ratings?!
I'm really not sure I like that. Half the strategy of the early game comes from trying to keep a balance between fast-moving, hard-hitting units like chariots, and the slow but tough units like phalanxes that you need to hold onto the cities you capture with them. What's going to be the point of a phalanx in a game where a chariot has the same defensive ability and (presumably) moves twice as fast?
I really don't see the rationale behind this particular change. Did anyone really find the two-stat system to be hopelessly complicated?
Re:Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd like the decision to use a unit to be difficult... cost vs attack and defence stats vs speed vs speed of manufacturing etc. The samurai in civ III if youre janapese, were too strong compared to other units, so you just make hundereds of samurai and youve won the game.
Real life is more complex and you have to balance many other variables. The most successful armies have a large diversity of units to succeed, and that should be reflected in civ.
Theres another thing that I've been wanting in the civ series for a while. You can make 'armies' in civiii but thats limited. You should be able to group units like in tiberian sun, make military units, and movement formations like in kohan, and do much more with a group of units than just select each and give them a destination.
Alexander's army was successful because of their direct attacks into enemy units with a blitz. But Genghis was successful because he would attack, and withdraw, pulling enemy units out of their formation and stretching and confusing them. All these should be doable.
Another thing I would suggest in civ is the diplomatic alliance. The alliances should allow cold-war type superpowers to indirectly control other civilizations and get them to fight each other. And to implement embargoes against other civs to kill their economies and science.
Maybe someone can do all this with some fancy python scripting. Why didnt they use perl anyway?
Re:Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:1)
1) Combined arms. He had very tough infantry that he could rely on to be an anvil, and very tough cavalry that worked well as a hammer.
2) Strategic intelligence. Alexander brought scholars with him and looked for all information that would help him know his enemy. Geography, whether, customs, whatever.
The latter is obviously outside the scope of this, but combined arms won't work in civ unles
Re:Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:3, Insightful)
No. Game theory is the branch of economics devoted to agent behavior and best-course actions (minmax trees, ply trees, risk minimization, saddlepoint grids, quanta, that sort of stuff.) This is game design and game balance.
The samurai in civ III if youre janapese, were too strong compared to other units, so you just make hundereds of samurai and youve won the game.
You need more skillful opponents. The samurai is too expensive to overweight the game. If you're able to flood t
Quibble (Score:2)
Game theory may be more accurately described as a branch of mathematics [wolfram.com], which has applications in many areas, including economics... and military theory.
Re:Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:2)
Actually, these are being incorporated from Call to Power and Master of Magic, both of which were Microprose/Hasbro games (ie, they were one of the early Sid split off teams.) It can be argued that Sid is simply taking these mechanics back.
(Maybe they could introduce "fundamentalist" units, which you can infiltrate into opposing civilisations in order to slow their science rates...)
In Civ:CTP and Civ:CTP2, there are units
Re:Smartening up but dumbing down (Score:2)
Re:FreeCiv (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:FreeCiv (Score:2)
Furthermore, that's not what irony means [tri-bit.com].
Well it's a good start (Score:1)
Good to see they're shipping with much more solid support.