|
Post by Stormbringer on Nov 7, 2005 4:37:19 GMT -5
I agree the AI should be used when you need to go to the washroom ;D but if you don't return within a set time (10 minutes sounds fair) then you shoul dbe considered dead and report. I disagree. Back in C3C this goes w/out saying.But this is the next generation,and as Civ grows,so the rules should adapt.We now have this new feature,hotjoining,& IMHO,it oughta be utilized.How many X's has your comp gone down for 15-30 mins during a game?Lots. I'm not saying suspend the 10 min wait,simply after that continue the game w/AI.Only that player has the civPW,& obviously in the case of a win by the AI,victory would default to the next player,& reports would be as per a drop.
|
|
|
Post by Snarf on Nov 7, 2005 16:11:20 GMT -5
I found this bug in SP but as soon as people start playing futures I know it will be an issue. I tried to load a fighter on a carrier and the pop up box would come up and ask me which carrier and I would click on it, then the game went right back to the fighter again. I finally had to put him on air superiority over the carrier no idea what would happen if I moved the carrier.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Nov 7, 2005 16:16:45 GMT -5
If you do that Dragon then no one can hotjoin, we may need to make a rule about how many turns a AI is allowed to remain, we give people 10mins to return or we continue with a AI, perhaps we should only give the person so many minutes to hotjion after that and then you reload in the lobby and kill the AI civ there. Thoughts? CS My thought is do not kill the civ as it opens up the lack of balance of placement we had problems with before. I am not willing to have the balance off that much.
|
|
|
Post by tonia on Nov 10, 2005 12:12:57 GMT -5
Speaking of carriers.......
It is simply unrealistic that bombers cannot be loaded on carriers. Please fix this in the next patch and list it as extreme priority.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Nov 10, 2005 12:32:59 GMT -5
Speaking of carriers....... It is simply unrealistic that bombers cannot be loaded on carriers. Please fix this in the next patch and list it as extreme priority. Yeah, General Doolittle proved it.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Nov 10, 2005 12:56:18 GMT -5
Speaking of carriers....... It is simply unrealistic that bombers cannot be loaded on carriers. Please fix this in the next patch and list it as extreme priority. Yeah, General Doolittle proved it. True, but he had to land in hostile China(Japanese territory) and not back on the Carrier. Modern bombers don't operate of carriers either, although "fighter/bombers" like the F18 do. CS
|
|
|
Post by Vermillion on Nov 10, 2005 13:04:27 GMT -5
Yeah, General Doolittle proved it. True, but he had to land in hostile China(Japanese territory) and not back on the Carrier. CS wasnt that because of fuel and damage issues?
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Nov 10, 2005 19:44:17 GMT -5
Two reasons, they didn't have the fuel, but more importantly the bombers didn't have arresting hooks so there would be no way to land on the short carrier, they'd roll of the end into the ocean.
CS
|
|
|
Post by umbra on Nov 10, 2005 19:58:01 GMT -5
lol bombers on carriers sure, what fantasy worl do you live in? i would like to see a B52 take of from a carrier. only fighters with bombs in that case should be able to be loded on the carrier, nothing else. great that you cant put bombers in carriers.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Nov 10, 2005 20:32:25 GMT -5
symantics.......
if it floats it's a ship
if it sinks (and comes back up) it's a submarine
if it drops bombs, it's a bomber (albeit a carrier-based bomber).
B-52's can also launch air-to-ground cruise missiles, which by definition, aren't bombs.
|
|
|
Post by ozmono2005 on Nov 11, 2005 21:44:35 GMT -5
Sorry I just going to ignore the preceding post and just post my views
Firstly civs always been a great game.... still is....
but now I'm playing MP especially ladder games I am kicking myself that I didn't get high speed INTERNET connection earlier.
Secondly I want to say that I disagree with the no treaties rule in CTON.
Civ has always been a game about more than war, it involves cunning and even some diplomatic skill
Since their are no PM allowed everyone would be able to see the treaties people would get reputations for breaking them and also as far as people ganging up on each other, thats a huge part of CIV and the dynamics of the game means people are going to be able to counter a deal working against them ________________________________________________ EG. P1 is winning by 300 points with 25 moves left
P2, and P3 who are roughly equal to each other in score openly agree to attack P1 and somewhat share a victory or at least get one more win from the game
P4 who trails everyone by allot now has only one real chance of gaining extra victories from the game
And thats simple P4 logical choice is to support P1 thus counter balancing the agreement _____________________________________________
To sum it up diplomacy requires skill and only if someone has good skills in regards to deal brokering can than substantially (more importantly consistently) gain advantages for themselves
PS its also better them mates just having an unspoken agreement that no one knows about as thats worse than PM
|
|
|
Post by Sly_time on Nov 13, 2005 12:50:09 GMT -5
my friend there are games like that...they are called FFA style where everything goes...all diplo including alliances and backstabbing(which is frowned upon but legal)
They were popular early in civ MP and have seen a little bit of a comeback, but people got away from them do to issues during the game and some questionable practices by some....i myself still enjoy them...
|
|
Trayk
Worker
Lets Party at your place!!
Posts: 148
|
Post by Trayk on Nov 13, 2005 19:10:41 GMT -5
FFA's can be fun, unless your a high rank ladder..then its 7 vs1 as you get a bunch of rank hunters gang banging you...not much fun at all. It can still happen in CTON but a lot less likely.
|
|
|
Post by civerdan on Nov 19, 2005 21:39:22 GMT -5
I had a game today and found that some variations on civ3 tactics DO still work. The end-game city plant can still work. While "lux maxing" per se is gone, if you can get drama, you CAN crank the lux near the end if you want to eek out a couple of border expansions where they otherwise would not occur.
For me its still feeling around as to what works and what doesnt (im sure im not the only one). Couple other thoughts: Yet to see a swordsman in an MP game. I guess since everyone tends to use axes no one feels worth building these. People probably afraid that someone will send an axemen stack towards the stack en route. Anyone unlucky enough to not have horse, iron or copper will have a rough go of it in most cases until longbows. Seems like its very tough for these people not to have their flat terrain pillaged at a minimum, since archers at bad against almost any other horse or melee unit.
|
|
|
Post by jumanji on Nov 21, 2005 14:07:23 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the correct place to put this, but for the life of me, I can't find anywhere how I can set up a mod or make a map. Am I missing something or is it just not there yet?
|
|
|
Post by civerdan on Dec 4, 2005 23:31:10 GMT -5
This is a bit off the current topic of this thread, but I had to say something about three things that I have seen occur on a recurring basis which get to the point of ruining games:
Leaving Games: I have seen 3 games today alone where 2-3 ppl left a game after it started. Please dop not join a game u cannot finish
Not passwording your civ: it is very frustruating to have random players repeatedly enter an ongoing game, holding it up and sometimes causing crashes, etc.
Entering Games you did not start (unless you are a sub): I have seen ladders and non-ladders alike do this. If people passworded there civ this would be a non-issue. Regardless just dont do it.
It is getting to the point we need to start taking action against ladder players who act in this manner.
|
|
mezi
Settler
Posts: 23
|
Post by mezi on Dec 4, 2005 23:40:10 GMT -5
yup i was in that game today where the same ladder player held us up twice by joining a game in progress each "join" took about 3 min, was a super lame thing to do or be doing let alone repeditively, after being told not to.
|
|
|
Post by Vermillion on Dec 5, 2005 13:31:50 GMT -5
I was in that game also and agree that this needs to be addressed. This is not the first time this has happened.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Dec 5, 2005 19:40:38 GMT -5
There also seems to be alot of people unable to join after ctd/ windows fatigue(stupidly clicking on the X in windowed mode) etc,etc as well, which can make the above situation more prevalent. Whilst I'm sure some people might use it as an excuse saying 'I tried honest', please remember to go and trawl the lobby for a missing player after or whilst waiting the requisit ten minutes; then you can say in all honesty that the player never showed up. AND players who drop please remember to hang around for at least 15 mins if your having trouble connecting. This should be a standard rule by now: even if it isn't official, it makes good common sense.
A bit off topic but honestly I find the inabilty to join a game you could join np in the lobby a little odd, but it seems to happen with some regularity. Also there seems to be no rhyme or reason to why you can join some games and not others, sometimes you can say ah that guy has a router issue, but sometimes you just can't join for no apparent reason, then you reboot comp resign on, all the same players, et voila np? Utterly bewildering connection issues atm. And then sometimes I can play with one player one day, and then the next I can only play if he leaves the game? Utterly, utterly bizarre? Bring on the third patch.
Oh yeah, does anyone get a wierd bug where the scroll gets locked and you have to click into city mode or click on the chat thing to stop it? 'Skinda annoying mid battle.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Dec 5, 2005 20:58:08 GMT -5
I personally think many of the "bewildering" connection issues from day to day aren't code bugs but simply related to the way CIV tries to use advanced features of GS. The down side of this is that when ever GS "drops the ball" we have unrelated connection problems. Remember to always refresh the list to get current data from GS, even with this it does take time for GS to update the game list/status. There are some bugs being worked on, Whiplash is giving the programers some interesting senario's to work on as we speak. So some MP connection issues may get better as the bugs are ironed out, however CIV's code will never be able to solve GS problems or internet congestion causing problems with the peer to peer model CIV uses.
CS
|
|