Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Another idea to improve Civ 4

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:00:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
couple of things that would be a big help:

1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
available for movement.

2) A command that says fortify until healed.

3) Bombardment mode. It would occur at the start of the turn. A
grid would appear like when you select B but it would show *ALL*
squares that can be hit and in each square would be the number of
units that could hit it. Expendable bombardment weapons would not be
available in this mode. It wouldn't bother to show you where the
units were (but the pattern would pretty much tell you), it would
leave the cursor where you were, you just keep clicking. You could
also enter the mode later on in the turn if you wanted to.

4) Ferry mode. You would take a transport unit and designate another
square. It would then travel back and forth between those squares,
loading any units adjoining the original square and offloading them at
the target square. The original units could be fortified, they would
be awake when landed.

5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
would get a single line with a quantity.

More about : idea improve civ

Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:37:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Loren Pechtel" <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote...

< snip good suggestions >

I would be happy with the ability to give an order to a stack of units.


Peter Smith
January 10, 2005 7:23:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 22:00:52 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
>couple of things that would be a big help:
>
>1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
>available for movement.
>
>2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>
>3) Bombardment mode. It would occur at the start of the turn. A
>grid would appear like when you select B but it would show *ALL*
>squares that can be hit and in each square would be the number of
>units that could hit it. Expendable bombardment weapons would not be
>available in this mode. It wouldn't bother to show you where the
>units were (but the pattern would pretty much tell you), it would
>leave the cursor where you were, you just keep clicking. You could
>also enter the mode later on in the turn if you wanted to.
>
>4) Ferry mode. You would take a transport unit and designate another
>square. It would then travel back and forth between those squares,
>loading any units adjoining the original square and offloading them at
>the target square. The original units could be fortified, they would
>be awake when landed.
>
>5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
>My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
>would get a single line with a quantity.


along these thoughts....

Patrol mode. pick two to four points for the units to travel around
so you can keep abreast of what is happening in the shadows.

Re-explore - a similar mode to the above where the units travel
throughout areas it is allowed but have been explored.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 10, 2005 7:25:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 22:00:52 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
>couple of things that would be a big help:
>
>1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
>available for movement.
>
>2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>
>3) Bombardment mode. It would occur at the start of the turn. A
>grid would appear like when you select B but it would show *ALL*
>squares that can be hit and in each square would be the number of
>units that could hit it. Expendable bombardment weapons would not be
>available in this mode. It wouldn't bother to show you where the
>units were (but the pattern would pretty much tell you), it would
>leave the cursor where you were, you just keep clicking. You could
>also enter the mode later on in the turn if you wanted to.
>
>4) Ferry mode. You would take a transport unit and designate another
>square. It would then travel back and forth between those squares,
>loading any units adjoining the original square and offloading them at
>the target square. The original units could be fortified, they would
>be awake when landed.
>
>5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
>My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
>would get a single line with a quantity.


Cause the Wealth Option to expire in ten turns so if there are new
improvements desired for the city, it automatically asks for orders
every ten turns.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 10, 2005 7:58:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 22:00:52 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
>couple of things that would be a big help:
>
>1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
>available for movement.
>
>2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>
>3) Bombardment mode. It would occur at the start of the turn. A
>grid would appear like when you select B but it would show *ALL*
>squares that can be hit and in each square would be the number of
>units that could hit it. Expendable bombardment weapons would not be
>available in this mode. It wouldn't bother to show you where the
>units were (but the pattern would pretty much tell you), it would
>leave the cursor where you were, you just keep clicking. You could
>also enter the mode later on in the turn if you wanted to.
>
>4) Ferry mode. You would take a transport unit and designate another
>square. It would then travel back and forth between those squares,
>loading any units adjoining the original square and offloading them at
>the target square. The original units could be fortified, they would
>be awake when landed.
>
>5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
>My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
>would get a single line with a quantity.

Another improvement that would be nice: Don't forget where troops are
when you pass them. i.e., when a ship passes another but travels far
enough away from the opponent not to be seen, remember where that ship
or troop is for the rest of the turn.

I'm not saying to watch an opponent's ship when it passes you, but
when you pass them, why not be able to remember where it was for that
turn.

This is especially needed during the game where your ships are in
scout mode and you suddenly find out that you met an opposing civ, but
have no way of knowing where he might be.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 10, 2005 8:23:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:

> 4) Ferry mode. You would take a transport unit and designate another
> square. It would then travel back and forth between those squares,
> loading any units adjoining the original square and offloading them at
> the target square. The original units could be fortified, they would
> be awake when landed.
>
> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
> My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
> would get a single line with a quantity.

I like those last two ideas :-)
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:58:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Peter Smith" <pmsmith@evilnet.net> wrote in message
news:sdydnelhWakURH_cRVn-iw@comcast.com...
> "Loren Pechtel" <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote...
>
> < snip good suggestions >
>
> I would be happy with the ability to give an order to a stack of units.
>

How about a button or keystroke to cause all automated units to execute
their instructions NOW in a turn. Many a time I've wanted to get the
automated move and worker stuff out of the way, and had to hit Wait, Wait,
Wait, Wait, .... until I got the automated stuff going.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:23:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:58:31 GMT, Dennis Edward <nospam@nowaynohow.org> wrote:
> "Peter Smith" <pmsmith@evilnet.net> wrote in message
> news:sdydnelhWakURH_cRVn-iw@comcast.com...
>> "Loren Pechtel" <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote...
>>
>> < snip good suggestions >
>>
>> I would be happy with the ability to give an order to a stack of units.
>>
>
> How about a button or keystroke to cause all automated units to execute
> their instructions NOW in a turn. Many a time I've wanted to get the
> automated move and worker stuff out of the way, and had to hit Wait, Wait,
> Wait, Wait, .... until I got the automated stuff going.

Similarly, a "finish the automated thing you're doing, and then ask
for instructions", instead of "stop what you're doing right now".
Unless that's what you just said, in which case "me too".
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 7:56:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:

> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
> couple of things that would be a big help:
>
> 1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
> available for movement.
>
> 2) A command that says fortify until healed.

A fortify or sentry command in the open will do this. But one that
works within a city would be nice.

[snip]

> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the
> screen. My inclination is they should be sorted out and all
> identical units would get a single line with a quantity.

That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
barbarian stack.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 2:46:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 11 Jan 2005 04:56:45 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>
>> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
>> couple of things that would be a big help:
>>
>> 1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
>> available for movement.
>>
>> 2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>
> A fortify or sentry command in the open will do this. But one that
>works within a city would be nice.

But that won't wake it up when the unit is healed.

>[snip]
>
>> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the
>> screen. My inclination is they should be sorted out and all
>> identical units would get a single line with a quantity.
>
> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
>how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
>barbarian stack.

Have you never invaded in the modern era??

In my current game I have my entire continent. I am in the
process of invading the other continent. I'm producing about 35 land
units per turn plus some naval and air. My enemies are hitting me
with land forces similar to what I'm making but they don't have any
offensive air power to speak of and I've managed to take out some of
their resources--Korea keeps hitting me with cavalry and I think I
just got China's last oil this turn.

Any city I take needs to be fortified with a massive stack of mech
inf if it's going to survive.

In the past I've had stacks too tall for the screen annihlated in
a single turn. I love to land a big pile of mech inf on a mountain in
order to bleed the AI's offensive power.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 8:34:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:46:39 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 11 Jan 2005 04:56:45 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
><thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>>news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>
>>> I'm using a lot of airpower in this game and I thought of a
>>> couple of things that would be a big help:
>>>
>>> 1) The ability to toggle on and off what units are currently
>>> available for movement.
>>>
>>> 2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>>
>> A fortify or sentry command in the open will do this. But one that
>>works within a city would be nice.
>
> But that won't wake it up when the unit is healed.

It will, if the unit is not in a city. Tell it to fortify, and once
it heals it will wake.

During an invasion -- either attacking or defending -- I often set
wounded units on fortify in a city. It *would* be useful to have a
command to tell them to fortify until healed.

I don't think it would be especially hard to implement.

--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/&gt;
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/&gt;
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 8:46:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95DAF39C6308kdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
> Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>
>
> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
> how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
> barbarian stack.
>

I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a cross-ocean
assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of boats, then hit the enemy
at one point, and two turns later at the opposite end. Hoo-haw!
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 8:46:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:46:12 GMT, "Dennis Edward"
<nospam@nowaynohow.org> wrote:

>"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns95DAF39C6308kdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
>> Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>
>>
>> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
>> how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
>> barbarian stack.
>>
>
>I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a cross-ocean
>assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of boats, then hit the enemy
>at one point, and two turns later at the opposite end. Hoo-haw!

Bigger maps allow for more units. So on a big map, especially in
the end game, the stacks get huge. It is easy to run into several
stacks like this.

A human could avoid some of the management issues by not stacking
them all together, but often that is the best position in an attack.

The AI is quite happy to put every single attack unit into a single
square, so even on smaller maps they sometimes overrun the screen.
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/&gt;
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/&gt;
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 11:33:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:46:12 GMT, Dennis Edward <nospam@nowaynohow.org> wrote:
> "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns95DAF39C6308kdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
>> Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>
>>
>> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
>> how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
>> barbarian stack.
>>
>
> I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a cross-ocean
> assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of boats, then hit the enemy
> at one point, and two turns later at the opposite end. Hoo-haw!

Well, if they have rail, the only person that distance hurts is you,
right?
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 11:38:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

In article <1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com>,
Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
> My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
> would get a single line with a quantity.

It sounds like that in Civ IV there will be a limited number of units
which can occupy one tile.

Doug
January 12, 2005 2:14:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Buck <iam@this.site> wrote:

> Another improvement that would be nice: Don't forget where troops are
> when you pass them. i.e., when a ship passes another but travels far
> enough away from the opponent not to be seen, remember where that ship
> or troop is for the rest of the turn.

Civ2 (or was it Civ1?) had this.

--
Daran

The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that
English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words;
on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them
unconscious and riffle their pockets for new vocabulary. -- James D. Nicoll
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:25:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:8q98u0pjv5dtbole82dfvfhlh0h4po5l5f@4ax.com:

> On 11 Jan 2005 04:56:45 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>>news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>
>>> 2) A command that says fortify until healed.
>>
>> A fortify or sentry command in the open will do this. But one
>> that works within a city would be nice.
>
> But that won't wake it up when the unit is healed.

Yes it will.

>>> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the
>>> screen. My inclination is they should be sorted out and all
>>> identical units would get a single line with a quantity.
>>
>> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this,
>> and
>>how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it
>>was a barbarian stack.
>
> Have you never invaded in the modern era??

Actually I've thought about this and part of the reason I don't see
stacks this large is that I play with a screen resolution of 1600x1200.
Stacks of a dozen or two are commonplace in the modern era, but that
isn't half the screen height.


--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 1:14:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

seriously! how the hell do you play this game and still keep your day
job? really though; when i read posts from people who seem to have
played hundreds of different variations on full length games, i say to
myself, where in the hell do you get the time?

perhaps the truly advanced civers are on SSI, or living off trustfunds?
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 11:40:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 12 Jan 2005 10:14:22 -0800, commandoLine@yahoo.com <commandoLine@yahoo.com> wrote:
> seriously! how the hell do you play this game

Seriously! Who the hell are you responding to?
January 13, 2005 6:25:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 12 Jan 2005 10:14:22 -0800, commandoLine@yahoo.com wrote:

>seriously! how the hell do you play this game and still keep your day
>job? really though; when i read posts from people who seem to have
>played hundreds of different variations on full length games, i say to
>myself, where in the hell do you get the time?
>
>perhaps the truly advanced civers are on SSI, or living off trustfunds?

Long weekend nights! Some weekdays when I don't have to work.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 13, 2005 6:35:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

>> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the
>> screen. My inclination is they should be sorted out and all
>> identical units would get a single line with a quantity.


I agree that they need to be sorted, but I would not want them to be
listed by quantity. The details about their health is important and
would be lost in that type of stacking.

When it comes to stacks so large they need to scroll, I break the
units up into stacks no larger than 30. Altho it is possible to lose
all 30 in an attack against a city well defended by superior troops,
it has been my experience that the AI isn't good at fighting stacks
that large. I can usually keep the necessary troops together close
enough that two or more stacks can make an attack on a city, or I just
wait the extra turn or so to surround it so all can attack if
necessary.

I tried stacking in tens, but found that to be too small a number when
dealing with large militaries. Twenty is ideal, but 30 is maximum
(actually I think it might be 33 or 35, but I never need those last
few troops.)

I can't say it wouldn't be nice to be able to pick out the top 15 or
so easily to move them to a separate cell, but I can imagine that
being a programmer's nightmare.

Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 13, 2005 6:37:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:13:01 -0600, Jeffery S. Jones
<jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:46:12 GMT, "Dennis Edward"
><nospam@nowaynohow.org> wrote:
>
>>"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
>>news:Xns95DAF39C6308kdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
>>> Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>
>>> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this, and
>>> how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and it was a
>>> barbarian stack.
>>>
>>
>>I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a cross-ocean
>>assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of boats, then hit the enemy
>>at one point, and two turns later at the opposite end. Hoo-haw!
>
> Bigger maps allow for more units. So on a big map, especially in
>the end game, the stacks get huge. It is easy to run into several
>stacks like this.
>
> A human could avoid some of the management issues by not stacking
>them all together, but often that is the best position in an attack.
>
> The AI is quite happy to put every single attack unit into a single
>square, so even on smaller maps they sometimes overrun the screen.


I must be missing something. Is this when you right click to check
the list of troops in the stacks, or the graphics?


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 13, 2005 6:48:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 11 Jan 2005 20:33:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:

>> I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a cross-ocean
>> assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of boats, then hit the enemy
>> at one point, and two turns later at the opposite end. Hoo-haw!
>
>Well, if they have rail, the only person that distance hurts is you,
>right?


They still split their troops to build defenses at both ends of their
countries. Diversionary attacks work very well against the AI. If
the AI doesn't know you have troops out of site to the south, and you
attack to the north, it will start moving excess troops north. When
it does, it leaves the southern cities poorly defended so a marine
attack more easily results in taking over a city.

If moving that many troops, I usually create a diversionary attack to
the side opposite my nearest city. Then I make a coordinated attack
and take several coastal cities nearer my continent/island in the next
turn or two. After that, I start moving my troops together toward the
closest cities in size order (larger to smaller). Once a number of
their larger cities are taken, their production is reduced and they
have little chance of regaining advantage.

If the opponents has few coastal cities, I either take the coastal
cities for myself or give them to an ally so my enemy has no more sea
service. If nothing else, it keeps enemies on other continents from
bothering me while I handle more important tasks.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
January 13, 2005 6:50:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:46:39 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

>> A fortify or sentry command in the open will do this. But one that
>>works within a city would be nice.
>
> But that won't wake it up when the unit is healed.

I don't know what makes the distinction, but I see them wake up in the
city as well as in the open when they have been set to sentry as a
wounded troop, however, I don't know why some do and some don't wake
up in the cities.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 11:33:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 12 Jan 2005 04:25:55 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>> Have you never invaded in the modern era??
>
> Actually I've thought about this and part of the reason I don't see
>stacks this large is that I play with a screen resolution of 1600x1200.
>Stacks of a dozen or two are commonplace in the modern era, but that
>isn't half the screen height.

What's the *EXACT* syntax to set the screen res? I haven't had any
luck getting it to listen to me.



As for stack size--I was just on a rampage through bablyon, I took out
about half of their empire (up to a bottleneck) in one turn. I think
my assault force started at perhaps 90 MA.

I've had IIRC something like 60 MI's on a mountain killed in a single
turn--getting the AI to bleed it's mobile units before the real
assault.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 7:41:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Buck <iam@this.site> wrote in
news:4pccu09n27u0aak430u8qm5anbqibpg3bo@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:13:01 -0600, Jeffery S. Jones
> <jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:46:12 GMT, "Dennis Edward"
>><nospam@nowaynohow.org> wrote:
>>
>>>"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns95DAF39C6308kdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
>>>> Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1k54u01c9vfq8rhhd85kk1bg85spsehrmn@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's a good idea, but how many people see stacks like this,
>>>> and
>>>> how often. I have only once ever seen a stack that large, and
>>>> it was a barbarian stack.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I've had stacks like that often, when I'm staging troops for a
>>>cross-ocean assault. Stack up the troops, get a good supply of
>>>boats, then hit the enemy at one point, and two turns later at
>>>the opposite end. Hoo-haw!
>>
>> Bigger maps allow for more units. So on a big map, especially
>> in
>>the end game, the stacks get huge. It is easy to run into several
>>stacks like this.
>>
>> A human could avoid some of the management issues by not
>> stacking
>>them all together, but often that is the best position in an
>>attack.
>>
>> The AI is quite happy to put every single attack unit into a
>> single
>>square, so even on smaller maps they sometimes overrun the screen.
>
>
> I must be missing something. Is this when you right click to
> check the list of troops in the stacks, or the graphics?

Right click.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 7:49:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in
news:3r7cu09rbjrohbm9u5lfqqe0phgn8o3jap@4ax.com:

> On 12 Jan 2005 04:25:55 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>> Have you never invaded in the modern era??
>>
>> Actually I've thought about this and part of the reason I don't
>> see
>>stacks this large is that I play with a screen resolution of
>>1600x1200. Stacks of a dozen or two are commonplace in the modern
>>era, but that isn't half the screen height.
>
> What's the *EXACT* syntax to set the screen res? I haven't had
> any luck getting it to listen to me.

Add the following line to the appropriate .ini file.

Video Mode=1600

Replace the number as you see fit, it will set the height by itself.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 7:49:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote...

<< Add the following line to the appropriate .ini file. >>

What's the difference between using "Video Mode=1600" and "KeepRes=1"?
Assuming, of course, I'm running 1600x1280.


Peter Smith
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 10:22:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 13 Jan 2005 16:41:23 GMT, Kevin 'Keeper' Foster <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
> Buck <iam@this.site> wrote in
> news:uubcu0pdmi1cufus5c5i9mtigpvas7gh99@4ax.com:
>>>
>> The taskbar is hidden when the game is playing. (1024X768)
>
> Press the Windows key.

Taskbar? Windows key?

Dave "Oh yeaaaaaah, I remember those..." Hinz
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 1:58:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

< cut >

> Actually, I do have a clock too.
> I look at it and say
> "I've got time for one more turn."
> Then I look at the clock and say
> "One more turn. Maybe? Yeah, I can do it."
> Sometime later, I look at the clock and say
> "What time do I have to get up for work? Oh, five more minutes, guess I'll
> save and get some sleep....."
>
> Not really, but it seems like that sometimes....
>
Yep. It's not having the clock, it's how to read it...

Alfredo
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:26:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:37:27 -0500, Buck <iam@this.site> wrote:

>> The AI is quite happy to put every single attack unit into a single
>>square, so even on smaller maps they sometimes overrun the screen.
>
>
>I must be missing something. Is this when you right click to check
>the list of troops in the stacks, or the graphics?

When you right-click. Not just to check the units, but what
happens when you want unit #90 from the stack? You have to click the
@$%%Q#$% down option a gazillion times. Furthermore, it will jump to
the top after you pick something even if you do a ctrl-click. Try to
wake up units 90 through 100 of a stack and you'll be ready to take a
sledgehammer to the game.

Note, also, that things like wake all etc are below the units.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:26:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:35:24 -0500, Buck <iam@this.site> wrote:

>I agree that they need to be sorted, but I would not want them to be
>listed by quantity. The details about their health is important and
>would be lost in that type of stacking.

I'd treat each different health as a separate line item.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:12:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Peter Smith" <pmsmith@evilnet.net> wrote in
news:S8ednYNQ2o1mM3vcRVn-1Q@comcast.com:

> "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote...
>
> << Add the following line to the appropriate .ini file. >>
>
> What's the difference between using "Video Mode=1600" and
> "KeepRes=1"? Assuming, of course, I'm running 1600x1280.

Video Mode=1600 will set your game resolution to 1600x1200, not
1280. :-)

I assume there is no difference as I use KeepRes=1 and not Video
Mode=1.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:12:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 14 Jan 2005 05:12:56 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
<thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:

>"Peter Smith" <pmsmith@evilnet.net> wrote in
>news:S8ednYNQ2o1mM3vcRVn-1Q@comcast.com:
>
>> "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote...
>>
>> << Add the following line to the appropriate .ini file. >>
>>
>> What's the difference between using "Video Mode=1600" and
>> "KeepRes=1"? Assuming, of course, I'm running 1600x1280.
>
> Video Mode=1600 will set your game resolution to 1600x1200, not
>1280. :-)
>
> I assume there is no difference as I use KeepRes=1 and not Video
>Mode=1.

I don't know why it didn't like my attempt to set the video
mode. KeepRes=1 works, though. The stupid thing still puts it's
splash screen up at low res, though. Any way to get rid of that??
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:12:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Loren Pechtel" <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:o 4teu0dq2fa651mbdfk6i5udifj150eu16@4ax.com...
> On 14 Jan 2005 05:12:56 GMT, "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster"
> <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote:
>
>>"Peter Smith" <pmsmith@evilnet.net> wrote in
>>news:S8ednYNQ2o1mM3vcRVn-1Q@comcast.com:
>>
>>> "Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote...
>>>
>>> << Add the following line to the appropriate .ini file. >>
>>>
>>> What's the difference between using "Video Mode=1600" and
>>> "KeepRes=1"? Assuming, of course, I'm running 1600x1280.
>>
>> Video Mode=1600 will set your game resolution to 1600x1200, not
>>1280. :-)
>>
>> I assume there is no difference as I use KeepRes=1 and not Video
>>Mode=1.
>
> I don't know why it didn't like my attempt to set the video
> mode. KeepRes=1 works, though. The stupid thing still puts it's
> splash screen up at low res, though. Any way to get rid of that??

If you mean the intro movie... PlayIntro=0

You can also set the refresh rate the same as your desktop via Refresh=75
(or whatever you use) to keep it from switching that.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 5:51:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:26:44 -0800, Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
> When you right-click. Not just to check the units, but what
>happens when you want unit #90 from the stack? You have to click the
>@$%%Q#$% down option a gazillion times. Furthermore, it will jump to
>the top after you pick something even if you do a ctrl-click. Try to
>wake up units 90 through 100 of a stack and you'll be ready to take a
>sledgehammer to the game.
>
> Note, also, that things like wake all etc are below the units.

Oh yes (sigh).
What I would really like to see are expanding context menus on a
"per unit type" base. It would only have to use up one line in the base
context menu, like this:

Terrain Info
By Unit ->
All Mech Infantry
All Modern Armor ->
Activate
Wake
Fortify
Skip turn
(you could include advanced stuff like)
Fortify all injured
All Radar Artillery
All Mobile SAM
(rest of normal context menu)
(list of units)
(other commands)

Andre
--
Winners don't lose frogs.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 11:05:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Alfredo Tutino" <powernews@libero.it> wrote in message
news:92DFd.3090$GU.86332@twister1.libero.it...
> < cut >
>
> > Actually, I do have a clock too.
> > I look at it and say
> > "I've got time for one more turn."
> > Then I look at the clock and say
> > "One more turn. Maybe? Yeah, I can do it."
> > Sometime later, I look at the clock and say
> > "What time do I have to get up for work? Oh, five more minutes, guess
I'll
> > save and get some sleep....."
> >
> > Not really, but it seems like that sometimes....
> >
> Yep. It's not having the clock, it's how to read it...
>
> Alfredo
>
Lately in Sydney it's not a clock I need, it's a thermometer - "in one more
turn it'll be cool enough to go to bed - nah, one more turn, it's still a
bit hot!"

Garrie
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 2:19:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Garrie Irons" <girons@optusnet.deletethis.andthis.com.au> wrote in message
news:41e78b9d$0$26176$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Alfredo Tutino" <powernews@libero.it> wrote in message
> news:92DFd.3090$GU.86332@twister1.libero.it...
> > < cut >
> >
> > > Actually, I do have a clock too.
> > > I look at it and say
> > > "I've got time for one more turn."
> > > Then I look at the clock and say
> > > "One more turn. Maybe? Yeah, I can do it."
> > > Sometime later, I look at the clock and say
> > > "What time do I have to get up for work? Oh, five more minutes, guess
> I'll
> > > save and get some sleep....."
> > >
> > > Not really, but it seems like that sometimes....
> > >
> > Yep. It's not having the clock, it's how to read it...
> >
> > Alfredo
> >
> Lately in Sydney it's not a clock I need, it's a thermometer - "in one
more
> turn it'll be cool enough to go to bed - nah, one more turn, it's still a
> bit hot!"
>
It's a bit of the opposite here.....
It's the bed that's too cold and never gets warmed up....
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 12:16:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 04:37:22 -0500, "The Stare"
<wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote:

>> I don't know why it didn't like my attempt to set the video
>> mode. KeepRes=1 works, though. The stupid thing still puts it's
>> splash screen up at low res, though. Any way to get rid of that??
>
>If you mean the intro movie... PlayIntro=0

It's in the .ini, I'll try it.

>You can also set the refresh rate the same as your desktop via Refresh=75
>(or whatever you use) to keep it from switching that.

Flat panel, it doesn't really matter.
January 18, 2005 5:14:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"DigitalXS" wrote:
> Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
>> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
>> My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
>> would get a single line with a quantity.
>
> It sounds like that in Civ IV there will be a limited number of units
> which can occupy one tile.
>
Which, while aggrivating to those who like to stack dozens of troops in a
single square, makes more realistic sense. It also corosponds well with
tabletop wargames - of which games such as Civ are mearly an electronic
version of - with all of their stacking limits rules.

Dave
January 19, 2005 3:49:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:49:10 +1100, "Garrie Irons"
<girons@optusnet.deletethis.andthis.com.au> wrote:

>, there's
>already someone warming the bed up.


If that were the case with me I wouldn't be playing CIV that
late......



Buck
--
For what it's worth.
Anonymous
January 19, 2005 8:28:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 02:14:02 -0500, "Dave"
<dgreenlaw_no_spam@rogers.com> wrote:

>
>"DigitalXS" wrote:
>> Loren Pechtel wrote:
>>
>>> 5) A better way to handle a stack of units taller than the screen.
>>> My inclination is they should be sorted out and all identical units
>>> would get a single line with a quantity.
>>
>> It sounds like that in Civ IV there will be a limited number of units
>> which can occupy one tile.
>>
>Which, while aggrivating to those who like to stack dozens of troops in a
>single square, makes more realistic sense. It also corosponds well with
>tabletop wargames - of which games such as Civ are mearly an electronic
>version of - with all of their stacking limits rules.

If they are going to limit the defenders in a square they need
to limit the attacks, also.

I'm currently playing on that 8-nation map where everybody
starts on their own arm of a big structure connected only at the
center. With considerable difficulty I took the center and now I have
tons of mech inf in forts on mountain chokepoints holding back those
who I'm not destroying. Once I had a stack of over 20 wiped out.
What if you don't have so good a defensive position, you could need a
lot more to hold the line.
Anonymous
January 20, 2005 7:37:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 17:28:18 -0800, Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 02:14:02 -0500, "Dave"
><dgreenlaw_no_spam@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Which, while aggrivating to those who like to stack dozens of troops in a
>>single square, makes more realistic sense. It also corosponds well with
>>tabletop wargames - of which games such as Civ are mearly an electronic
>>version of - with all of their stacking limits rules.
>
> If they are going to limit the defenders in a square they need
> to limit the attacks, also.

Well, of course. The system doesn't know how to distinguish
one from the other, they're all "units".

> I'm currently playing on that 8-nation map where everybody
> starts on their own arm of a big structure connected only at the
> center. With considerable difficulty I took the center and now I have
> tons of mech inf in forts on mountain chokepoints holding back those
> who I'm not destroying. Once I had a stack of over 20 wiped out.
> What if you don't have so good a defensive position, you could need a
> lot more to hold the line.

That sounds like a great game, do you have a link to a downloadable
file so I could try it?

Dave Hinz
Anonymous
January 20, 2005 7:37:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

In <35a52hF4krbg3U12@individual.net>, Dave Hinz wrote:
>Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
>>I'm currently playing on that 8-nation map where everybody starts on
>>their own arm of a big structure connected only at the center.
>
>That sounds like a great game, do you have a link to a downloadable
>file so I could try it?

Here's something that seems similar:
http://www.civ3.com/maps.cfm?startimg=13&page=5

I haven't actually played it yet but it's on my list as looking
interesting.
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 3:33:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 20 Jan 2005 16:37:37 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:

>> If they are going to limit the defenders in a square they need
>> to limit the attacks, also.
>
>Well, of course. The system doesn't know how to distinguish
>one from the other, they're all "units".

You can keep moving in more attackers.

>> I'm currently playing on that 8-nation map where everybody
>> starts on their own arm of a big structure connected only at the
>> center. With considerable difficulty I took the center and now I have
>> tons of mech inf in forts on mountain chokepoints holding back those
>> who I'm not destroying. Once I had a stack of over 20 wiped out.
>> What if you don't have so good a defensive position, you could need a
>> lot more to hold the line.
>
>That sounds like a great game, do you have a link to a downloadable
>file so I could try it?

It's one of the scenarios in PTW, no need to download anything.
January 22, 2005 3:55:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:33:22 -0800, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:

> You can keep moving in more attackers.


If you have three enemies with 20 attackers each and you are limited
to 20 defenders. Then all three enemies get an attack, i.e. 60
attacks against your 20.

The extra 200 scattered about behind the city are useless in this
case.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 1:11:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 00:55:57 -0500, Buck <iam@this.site> wrote:

>On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:33:22 -0800, Loren Pechtel
><lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You can keep moving in more attackers.
>
>
>If you have three enemies with 20 attackers each and you are limited
>to 20 defenders. Then all three enemies get an attack, i.e. 60
>attacks against your 20.
>
>The extra 200 scattered about behind the city are useless in this
>case.

You're forgetting railroads.

You hold a chokepoint with 20 defenders. He has 20 attackers in
front of you, he attacks. He then moves up 20 more an attacks. And
20 more. And 20 more. And so on until your chokepoint falls.

Right now I have my entire ground defensive force on 4 squares.
I just bled Carthage's forces--I moved about 50 MA past my fortress
onto a mountain square of his. I didn't see exactly what the kills
were but I think I got at least 100 of his units and I got back most
of my MA including a nice pile of elites to make armies out of. When
I moved in there wasn't a single unit of his adjacent and there was
nothing within recon range that attacked me at all--all the attackers
came from deep in his empire.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 10:37:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On the 10 Jan 2005, Buck <iam@this.site> wrote:

<snip>

> Patrol mode. pick two to four points for the units to travel around
> so you can keep abreast of what is happening in the shadows.

Good one. I'd find that particularly useful in the ancient era where
I'm patrolling for barbarians, or for naval patrols. Shuffling the same
unit up and down the same route manually quickly gets dull.

--
Jades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm
The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web.

nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address!
Anonymous
January 24, 2005 1:10:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
> You're forgetting railroads.
>
> You hold a chokepoint with 20 defenders. He has 20 attackers in
>front of you, he attacks. He then moves up 20 more an attacks. And
>20 more. And 20 more. And so on until your chokepoint falls.
>
> Right now I have my entire ground defensive force on 4 squares.
>I just bled Carthage's forces--I moved about 50 MA past my fortress
>onto a mountain square of his. I didn't see exactly what the kills
>were but I think I got at least 100 of his units and I got back most
>of my MA including a nice pile of elites to make armies out of. When
>I moved in there wasn't a single unit of his adjacent and there was
>nothing within recon range that attacked me at all--all the attackers
>came from deep in his empire.

If anyone should ever try this with me, he should remeber there are
few problems which can´t be solved with a single, decent sized nuclear
warhead.

Although I have never seen the AI using one on me.

Cu
Jan
January 24, 2005 5:21:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:10:33 +0100, Jan van Beers <tnp@gmx.ch> wrote:

>Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel@removethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
>> You're forgetting railroads.
>>
>> You hold a chokepoint with 20 defenders. He has 20 attackers in
>>front of you, he attacks. He then moves up 20 more an attacks. And
>>20 more. And 20 more. And so on until your chokepoint falls.
>>
>> Right now I have my entire ground defensive force on 4 squares.
>>I just bled Carthage's forces--I moved about 50 MA past my fortress
>>onto a mountain square of his. I didn't see exactly what the kills
>>were but I think I got at least 100 of his units and I got back most
>>of my MA including a nice pile of elites to make armies out of. When
>>I moved in there wasn't a single unit of his adjacent and there was
>>nothing within recon range that attacked me at all--all the attackers
>>came from deep in his empire.
>
>If anyone should ever try this with me, he should remeber there are
>few problems which can´t be solved with a single, decent sized nuclear
>warhead.
>
>Although I have never seen the AI using one on me.
>
>Cu
>Jan


I have been the victim of a first attack by an enemy with nukes. It
wasn't in Conquests. I think it was in vanilla c3.

It has only happened once tho

Buck
--
For what it's worth.
!