Three sensitive polls - Alpha Centauri Forums

  Alpha Centauri Forums
  The Game
  Three sensitive polls

profile | register | prefs | faq | search

Author Topic:   Three sensitive polls

Freddz posted 06-26-99 07:06 PM ET
Okay, let's test our faith in Firaxis.
A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore? Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit?
B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us...
C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches....
MichaeltheGreat posted 06-26-99 07:11 PM ET
A - I don't play full SP games anymore, just PBEMs, or partial test games to play with certain ideas, plus recently I started playing with aceplayer's scenarios. I quit full SP games because playing against the AI is even worse than taking candy from a baby.
B - SMAC extension and eye-candy.
C - revolutionizing AND with much much much better AI.
Krushala posted 06-26-99 07:23 PM ET
1) I still play smac.
2) No I don't think it will be revolutionary
3) I would prefer an extension of smac in a civ environment. They would just mess up trying to do a new game altogether. Kind of like CTP
OldWarrior_42 posted 06-26-99 07:33 PM ET
1)..still play smac but spend more time on forums lately than playing smac
2)an extension of smac with candy ..blah blah
C)Smac on earth with revolutionary new AI (yea dream on)
And yes I know I posted 1..2..C
Resource Consumer posted 06-26-99 07:35 PM ET
A. Yes I do
B. As with MtG and Krushala
C. Completely with Krushala here. Let's build om what we know works and enhance the AI. Why reinvent the Model-T (Cryptic but see my respnse to TD's post)
Resource Consumer
- not consuming at the moment -
- perhaps those later generations have a chance after all -
Nell_Smith posted 06-26-99 10:20 PM ET
a) I still play solo SMAC when I get the chance, but now mostly PBEM... when I do play solo I only play up to the point where I'm evidently going to win (or lose, when Miriam's infesting the Monsoon Jungle!) and then restart. No time to go further!
b) The CIV and SMAC format is so successful that I don't think we'll see much fundamental change in CIV3. As they say, if it ain't broken, why fix it? (Before I get flamed here, I don't mean that SMAC is bug-free or can't be improved, but rather that it sells perfectly well and that, in the end, is a game company's measure of success, whether we diehards like it or not).
c) I do like the CIV format, so I'd vote for SMAC with brighter, funkier graphics, far FAR more diplomatic options, new techs, new facilities etc (i.e. some sugar-coating) and a much smarter AI - possibly a learning AI so that the same trick by the human player wouldn't work twice. But on the whole I like the central functionality of CIV/SMAC and would like to see it improved rather than binned completely. It's got a lot of potential.
Nell
Q Cubed posted 06-26-99 11:30 PM ET
a. yes. i do play smac. but right now, i'm trying to figure out ctp. damn that feckless interface!
b. smac with really really good extensions and several new features.
c. revolutionizing smac. which means, nothing as bizzare and corrupted as ctp. curse those idiots at activision!
Shining1 posted 06-26-99 11:42 PM ET
A. Yes and No. I did a heavy edit of alpha, so I would enjoy the game more (less conqueror rush stuff). So I do still play SMAC, but not in the conventional form.
B. Who knows? I'm not 100% sure there is a revolutionary CivIII game to be made - but you can definitely do a lot to tidy up the late game stuff, like managing 50 cities or moving 100 units around each turn. Ativision showed that attempting to revolutionise the game can lead to an inferior product.
I definitely don't expect a shallow makeover of SMAC with better eye candy. Let's face it, the SMAC graphics aren't much of an improvement over CivIII - I'm not sure Firaxis considered this issue to be a priority, like Activision did. BR likes A.I, and it makes for a good point of difference over other companies who don't focus on this issue at all - look for this to be the main improvement for CivIII, I think.
Moreover, CivIII is meant to linkup with SMAC. So I can't see a quantum leap ahead anywhere.
C. I want the improvements in A.I, interface, micromanagement, combined with a relatively attractive graphics engine. I think SMAC is basicially sound, but is let down by some major aspects of the player interface. So there's room to extend the basic idea.
Koshko posted 06-27-99 12:54 AM ET
1)I still play SMAC, but I just bought Might and Magic 7, so my playing time will probably decrease now (at least for a while).
2)There will be some new features and some eyecandy.
3)Maybe it could be on an fantasy planet with a chiose of races. Each race could get different bonuses.
I'm kinda hoping for a next-generation Master of Magic, but that probably won't happen.

laurens posted 06-27-99 01:16 AM ET
a. I only play in PBEM (one with Michaelthe Great with five other experts and another with Gyllius), juz waiting to try out scenarios when there's time.
b. Might be a SMAC extension, though of better interface and of course, steeper system requirements ...
c. Any new games that would be revolutionizing would be welcome.
Any SMACX would be preferred with an improved AI that thinks more about social eng. and design workshop models.
JohnIII posted 06-27-99 09:20 AM ET
A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore?
I don't play SMAC anymore.
Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit?
The Cricket World Cup.
B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us...
Well, there is The List on the Firaxis forums, so hopefully just a great evolution, not a revolution.
C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches....
See above.
John III
Gungho posted 06-27-99 09:49 AM ET
A - I still do , just not as frequently.
B - An extension, remember its supposed to tie in with SMAC somehow.
C - A bit of both actually. I don't see them changing a winning formula. I would appreciate much better AI, faster (esp. mid to end game) turns. What about a few new (revolutionary?) ideas.

Freddz posted 06-27-99 12:14 PM ET
This is very interesting. My own thoughts:
A/ I stopped playing SMAC quite early, picked it up again, played a few games a month ago, then layed it to rest again. The reason I didn't play it THAT much: 1/ The game's too easy, first time I played the real game on thinker I nearly won (I'm no genius) 2/ The game is Civ 2 with new interface and lots of renaming. Realizing that bored me.
B/ I think they will introduce a couple of new things, but revolutionizing: no chance. They can do lots of things to make us think the game is newer / better / more revolutionizing than SMAC: for example, wow, lets make a spherical world, now no one will figure it out...
C/ I want it to be revolutionizing. The people who say that Firaxis with the 'geniusis' of Sid and Brian are incapable of it may be right. May be. Why take a risk and bungling up our reputation? It is a small company. Money is survival. Still, that kind of talk just bores me. Bores me big time. Like, lets make Space Invaders 2 with some new weapons and graphics. Will they still worship us then? Or will they see through it? The customer is always stupid, a rule Firaxis have found out, will work fine here.
Argue with me if you will, but I'm not sure it will help. But, I realize that I'm probably in the minority when I say I want a revolutionizing game. Sadly, I have to accept that.
jig posted 06-27-99 11:10 PM ET
[A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore? Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit?]
I do.
[B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us...]
Evolution, not revolution.
[C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches.... ]
The latter.
Smeagol posted 06-28-99 01:18 AM ET
A) Haven't played SMAC in over a month. I grew tired of the same repetive play and ease of victory over the AI. Don't PBEM because it just doesn't interest me, so this game has lost its appeal. Also, I picked up Imperialism II, which is much more challenging, and HOMM II, which is surprisingly more fun than SMAC even in its simplicity.
B) I don't think anything revolutionary will come out of Civ 3, but if most/many of the ideas coming from the suggestions at the Apolyton forum are implemented, then I will buy the game. Since they will be using the same basic design for this game I think the only thing "revolutionary" could be the AI-- for me, that will make or break the game.
C) I guess my answer is that I want better AI with SMAC-style play, but I'd also like them to consider the ideas coming from the Apolyton forum. Just by reading those I get excited about Civ 3.
Shining1 posted 06-28-99 01:28 AM ET
Freddz: Well, remember that Brian isn't really in the revolutionary genius business - he's just a TBS fan with an eye to making improvements rather than wholescale new developements - or at least as far as the Civ franchise is concerned. Basicially, his last couple of projects were CivII and SMAC - each of which tried, and mostly succeeded, in improving on the earlier game in the set. As such, I think there will be further evolution in Civ A.I and some further refinment of the game environment, and, if enough voices are raised, possible a quantum improvement in interface.
Remember, its Sid's job is to produce the revolutionary stuff, rather than Brian's. So, look for the brand new ideas in SMEG, rather than CivIII.
I agree with your assessment of SMAC - too easy, once you adopt the intended strategy, and too similar to CivII overall to push the player's imagination much. Honestly, I would have to say there's less of a gap between CivII and SMAC than there is between Warcraft II and Starcraft.
Aredhran posted 06-28-99 06:12 AM ET
I still SMAC a lot (both SP and PBEM).
My most recent game is a challenge, Morgan Transcend, Arid rocky planet, lotsa fungus and worms. I forgot to check "do or die", so Miriam got away from my early rush. I'm on an island by myself which allowed me to develop nicely, but no special terrain features . Let me tell you, I lost more units and bases to MWs than anything else. And Deirdre has jungle, Yang has crater and uranium... Tough game.
No Civ3 Revolution for me, thanks, Just improve on an already successful design.
Aredhran
Freddz posted 06-28-99 07:43 AM ET
First of all, I respect everyone's view in this subject.
But after playing Civ, Civ 2 and SMAC I would long for something really enticing and surprising that still keeps many of the general concepts of a Civilization game. Looking back it strangely feels as though I've played the same Civilzation game over and over and over, with only interface and minor changes happening. I do realize that there will be first time buyers of Civ 3 that will be perfectly content wth a SMAC extension. But I'm thinking more of my self here.
I'm really curious how low(?) minority my view really is in here though. So keep posting here please, so we get more votes...
MikeH II posted 06-28-99 08:25 AM ET
A\ No. I don't play anything but Half-Life on the internet at the moment I will go back to it when I have more time.
B\ See A.
C\ Revolutionary.
aceplayer posted 06-28-99 09:09 AM ET
weird that ppl who dont play SMAC - still post here - I guess that means they still like the game and will play soon - just currently distracted.
I think my scenarios will appeal to some of you not playing a great deal of SMAC anymore. 1) games are short 2) you can pick your game length to suit you 3) you compete against others
see MTG's comments way above...
The URL to play in my contests is:
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Dome/3802/
Rackam posted 06-28-99 11:31 AM ET
A/ I still play SMAC
B/ SMAC extenstion with eye-candy
C/ A better AI. Most of the time 'revolutionary' = 'buggy' and 'feature-rich and all useless'
threeover posted 06-28-99 11:36 AM ET
1.) Hell yes, I play...
2.) Civ 3, will in fact be a prequel to SMAC, so I really don't know what to expect...
3.) ...
Darkstar posted 06-28-99 01:38 PM ET
1) Occasionally.
2) I expect it will be a Civ mod pack to SMAC, since this is what I interpretted the buzz from Brian and others to mean.
3) I'd like something seriously evolutionary, but expect it to be very minor.
-Darkstar
Freddz posted 06-28-99 01:46 PM ET
Thanks for the response, friends. PLEASE keep it coming.
Shining: I forgot, SMEG? Um, forgive an inquiring mind. Where can I find info on this game? Or is it something unofficial?
Darkstar posted 06-28-99 01:52 PM ET
Freddz - SMEG is Shining1's shorthand for...
Sid
Meyer's
Extra
Game
... or SMEG. Its the game that is suppose to follow the Sweep of Time of Civ3 ( Starship to) SMAC.
Its also called Sid3... Moo3 (although not a Sid game)... and a few other things. It's the mystery game that Sid is working on with HIS team as Brian and HIS team work Civ3.
-Darkstar
googlie posted 06-28-99 07:20 PM ET
I'm still playing, but mostly Challenge stuff:
All at TI blind:
One City (base) Challenge (Transcendence before 2300)
Forest City Challenge (beat pop size 9 using only plant/harvest forest at that base)
Energy Challenge (beat 3300 energy/turn)
Waterworld (Military conquest on a 384 x 256 map with 90% water)
And I still haven't been able to corner the energy market at TI as Santiago.
But mostly the reasons I play are to generate fodder for the fiction.
googlie
Putting a spin on it
trippin daily posted 06-28-99 07:34 PM ET
1. SMAC sucks no longer play it at all
2. it is just going ot be civ 2 with eyecndy, cause that is what SMAC is
3. I want Civ 3 to be an actually seperate game from smac and civ... the source code is getting more than a lil old.. time to rewrite the whole thing
Trippin Daily
Rudebw0y posted 06-29-99 12:21 PM ET
A) Still play SMAC at least a couple nights a week

B) Expect CivIII to be mostly a build-on based on the SMAC engine, with various bells and whistles

C) Would *like* to see CivIII have a remarkably good AI, a much more polished user interface (SMAC is kind of clunky in that regard), and maybe some refinements in game play.
evil_conquerer posted 06-29-99 05:48 PM ET
A. Still play it. I don't have much time because of my web site (about SMAC ) and other stuff , but I still enjoy it greatly.
B. I am a thread master. It will be revolutionary. If it won't, then I have a shotgun, plenty of ammo, and a bus ticket to Maryland.
C. See B.
walruskkkch posted 06-29-99 06:07 PM ET
1) Rarely, I'm into Railroad Tycoon II at the moment and I'm dusting off some older titles like the People's General for some fun.
2) One can only hope so but I doubt any revolutionary change can occur.
3) I hope they push the envelope, there has been numerous good ideas posted in this forum. If only a fraction get added the game could be great. I just wish there was some way of giving it more randomness to increase the variability of play. Right now strategies work too well because there are only a small number of paths to follow. If you didn't always get a certain advancement with a specific technology discovered(like a certain tech requires 4 out 6 science advancements to obtain and in each game but which four is random and unknown)might make using specific strategies less an assured success, thus increasing the difficulty of play but not making the game more complicated. Oh well, a random thought.
Your faithful and obedient servant
Valtyr posted 06-29-99 06:29 PM ET
A) Stopped playing SMAC. Usually I go for repetitiveness , but that and the sci-fi environment eventually turned me off.
B) Some "evolution", but no major "revolution".
C) I'm an evolutionist . But if they pull off a revolution successfully, then more power to them.
Rex Little posted 06-29-99 08:09 PM ET
A. I've barely started; just got the game a month ago, and it competes for playing time with HOMM3 and M&M6. At the very least, I'll play until I've beaten the AI with all 7 factions; so far one down (PK), 6 to go.
B. Civ3 will probably keep most or all of the basic gameplay elements of its ancestors.
C. Depends on the nature of the revolution. If it becomes some kind of real-time hybrid, or gets so loaded down with eye candy and feature bloat that it won't run on my P166 without 3D, I'll pass.
Darkstar posted 07-03-99 03:05 PM ET
Heave Ho! Heave Ho! Heave Ho!
-Darkstar
Freddz posted 07-05-99 09:34 AM ET
Oh, comon people! Please continue filling in the form...
To close this thread, click here (moderator or admin only).


Hop to:

Contact Us | Alpha Centauri Home

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.18
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998.

Author	Topic: Three sensitive polls
Freddz	posted 06-26-99 07:06 PM ET Okay, let's test our faith in Firaxis. A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore? Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit? B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us... C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches....
MichaeltheGreat	posted 06-26-99 07:11 PM ET A - I don't play full SP games anymore, just PBEMs, or partial test games to play with certain ideas, plus recently I started playing with aceplayer's scenarios. I quit full SP games because playing against the AI is even worse than taking candy from a baby. B - SMAC extension and eye-candy. C - revolutionizing AND with much much much better AI.
Krushala	posted 06-26-99 07:23 PM ET 1) I still play smac. 2) No I don't think it will be revolutionary 3) I would prefer an extension of smac in a civ environment. They would just mess up trying to do a new game altogether. Kind of like CTP
OldWarrior_42	posted 06-26-99 07:33 PM ET 1)..still play smac but spend more time on forums lately than playing smac 2)an extension of smac with candy ..blah blah C)Smac on earth with revolutionary new AI (yea dream on) And yes I know I posted 1..2..C
Resource Consumer	posted 06-26-99 07:35 PM ET A. Yes I do B. As with MtG and Krushala C. Completely with Krushala here. Let's build om what we know works and enhance the AI. Why reinvent the Model-T (Cryptic but see my respnse to TD's post) Resource Consumer - not consuming at the moment - - perhaps those later generations have a chance after all -
Nell_Smith	posted 06-26-99 10:20 PM ET a) I still play solo SMAC when I get the chance, but now mostly PBEM... when I do play solo I only play up to the point where I'm evidently going to win (or lose, when Miriam's infesting the Monsoon Jungle!) and then restart. No time to go further! b) The CIV and SMAC format is so successful that I don't think we'll see much fundamental change in CIV3. As they say, if it ain't broken, why fix it? (Before I get flamed here, I don't mean that SMAC is bug-free or can't be improved, but rather that it sells perfectly well and that, in the end, is a game company's measure of success, whether we diehards like it or not). c) I do like the CIV format, so I'd vote for SMAC with brighter, funkier graphics, far FAR more diplomatic options, new techs, new facilities etc (i.e. some sugar-coating) and a much smarter AI - possibly a learning AI so that the same trick by the human player wouldn't work twice. But on the whole I like the central functionality of CIV/SMAC and would like to see it improved rather than binned completely. It's got a lot of potential. Nell
Q Cubed	posted 06-26-99 11:30 PM ET a. yes. i do play smac. but right now, i'm trying to figure out ctp. damn that feckless interface! b. smac with really really good extensions and several new features. c. revolutionizing smac. which means, nothing as bizzare and corrupted as ctp. curse those idiots at activision!
Shining1	posted 06-26-99 11:42 PM ET A. Yes and No. I did a heavy edit of alpha, so I would enjoy the game more (less conqueror rush stuff). So I do still play SMAC, but not in the conventional form. B. Who knows? I'm not 100% sure there is a revolutionary CivIII game to be made - but you can definitely do a lot to tidy up the late game stuff, like managing 50 cities or moving 100 units around each turn. Ativision showed that attempting to revolutionise the game can lead to an inferior product. I definitely don't expect a shallow makeover of SMAC with better eye candy. Let's face it, the SMAC graphics aren't much of an improvement over CivIII - I'm not sure Firaxis considered this issue to be a priority, like Activision did. BR likes A.I, and it makes for a good point of difference over other companies who don't focus on this issue at all - look for this to be the main improvement for CivIII, I think. Moreover, CivIII is meant to linkup with SMAC. So I can't see a quantum leap ahead anywhere. C. I want the improvements in A.I, interface, micromanagement, combined with a relatively attractive graphics engine. I think SMAC is basicially sound, but is let down by some major aspects of the player interface. So there's room to extend the basic idea.
Koshko	posted 06-27-99 12:54 AM ET 1)I still play SMAC, but I just bought Might and Magic 7, so my playing time will probably decrease now (at least for a while). 2)There will be some new features and some eyecandy. 3)Maybe it could be on an fantasy planet with a chiose of races. Each race could get different bonuses. I'm kinda hoping for a next-generation Master of Magic, but that probably won't happen.
laurens	posted 06-27-99 01:16 AM ET a. I only play in PBEM (one with Michaelthe Great with five other experts and another with Gyllius), juz waiting to try out scenarios when there's time. b. Might be a SMAC extension, though of better interface and of course, steeper system requirements ... c. Any new games that would be revolutionizing would be welcome. Any SMACX would be preferred with an improved AI that thinks more about social eng. and design workshop models.
JohnIII	posted 06-27-99 09:20 AM ET A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore? I don't play SMAC anymore. Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit? The Cricket World Cup. B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us... Well, there is The List on the Firaxis forums, so hopefully just a great evolution, not a revolution. C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches.... See above. John III
Gungho	posted 06-27-99 09:49 AM ET A - I still do , just not as frequently. B - An extension, remember its supposed to tie in with SMAC somehow. C - A bit of both actually. I don't see them changing a winning formula. I would appreciate much better AI, faster (esp. mid to end game) turns. What about a few new (revolutionary?) ideas.
Freddz	posted 06-27-99 12:14 PM ET This is very interesting. My own thoughts: A/ I stopped playing SMAC quite early, picked it up again, played a few games a month ago, then layed it to rest again. The reason I didn't play it THAT much: 1/ The game's too easy, first time I played the real game on thinker I nearly won (I'm no genius) 2/ The game is Civ 2 with new interface and lots of renaming. Realizing that bored me. B/ I think they will introduce a couple of new things, but revolutionizing: no chance. They can do lots of things to make us think the game is newer / better / more revolutionizing than SMAC: for example, wow, lets make a spherical world, now no one will figure it out... C/ I want it to be revolutionizing. The people who say that Firaxis with the 'geniusis' of Sid and Brian are incapable of it may be right. May be. Why take a risk and bungling up our reputation? It is a small company. Money is survival. Still, that kind of talk just bores me. Bores me big time. Like, lets make Space Invaders 2 with some new weapons and graphics. Will they still worship us then? Or will they see through it? The customer is always stupid, a rule Firaxis have found out, will work fine here. Argue with me if you will, but I'm not sure it will help. But, I realize that I'm probably in the minority when I say I want a revolutionizing game. Sadly, I have to accept that.
jig	posted 06-27-99 11:10 PM ET [A/ How many post in here but don't play SMAC anymore? Followup on "I don't" on this one: What was the straw that made you quit?] I do. [B/ Do you think Civ 3 will be made into a revolutionary Civ-game? Or more of an extension of SMAC with a new interface and other eye-candy tricks to do the job on us...] Evolution, not revolution. [C/ Do you want Civ 3 to be revolutionizing or do you want it to be like SMAC on earth with much better AI and a few additional good twitches.... ] The latter.
Smeagol	posted 06-28-99 01:18 AM ET A) Haven't played SMAC in over a month. I grew tired of the same repetive play and ease of victory over the AI. Don't PBEM because it just doesn't interest me, so this game has lost its appeal. Also, I picked up Imperialism II, which is much more challenging, and HOMM II, which is surprisingly more fun than SMAC even in its simplicity. B) I don't think anything revolutionary will come out of Civ 3, but if most/many of the ideas coming from the suggestions at the Apolyton forum are implemented, then I will buy the game. Since they will be using the same basic design for this game I think the only thing "revolutionary" could be the AI-- for me, that will make or break the game. C) I guess my answer is that I want better AI with SMAC-style play, but I'd also like them to consider the ideas coming from the Apolyton forum. Just by reading those I get excited about Civ 3.
Shining1	posted 06-28-99 01:28 AM ET Freddz: Well, remember that Brian isn't really in the revolutionary genius business - he's just a TBS fan with an eye to making improvements rather than wholescale new developements - or at least as far as the Civ franchise is concerned. Basicially, his last couple of projects were CivII and SMAC - each of which tried, and mostly succeeded, in improving on the earlier game in the set. As such, I think there will be further evolution in Civ A.I and some further refinment of the game environment, and, if enough voices are raised, possible a quantum improvement in interface. Remember, its Sid's job is to produce the revolutionary stuff, rather than Brian's. So, look for the brand new ideas in SMEG, rather than CivIII. I agree with your assessment of SMAC - too easy, once you adopt the intended strategy, and too similar to CivII overall to push the player's imagination much. Honestly, I would have to say there's less of a gap between CivII and SMAC than there is between Warcraft II and Starcraft.
Aredhran	posted 06-28-99 06:12 AM ET I still SMAC a lot (both SP and PBEM). My most recent game is a challenge, Morgan Transcend, Arid rocky planet, lotsa fungus and worms. I forgot to check "do or die", so Miriam got away from my early rush. I'm on an island by myself which allowed me to develop nicely, but no special terrain features . Let me tell you, I lost more units and bases to MWs than anything else. And Deirdre has jungle, Yang has crater and uranium... Tough game. No Civ3 Revolution for me, thanks, Just improve on an already successful design. Aredhran
Freddz	posted 06-28-99 07:43 AM ET First of all, I respect everyone's view in this subject. But after playing Civ, Civ 2 and SMAC I would long for something really enticing and surprising that still keeps many of the general concepts of a Civilization game. Looking back it strangely feels as though I've played the same Civilzation game over and over and over, with only interface and minor changes happening. I do realize that there will be first time buyers of Civ 3 that will be perfectly content wth a SMAC extension. But I'm thinking more of my self here. I'm really curious how low(?) minority my view really is in here though. So keep posting here please, so we get more votes...
MikeH II	posted 06-28-99 08:25 AM ET A\ No. I don't play anything but Half-Life on the internet at the moment I will go back to it when I have more time. B\ See A. C\ Revolutionary.
aceplayer	posted 06-28-99 09:09 AM ET weird that ppl who dont play SMAC - still post here - I guess that means they still like the game and will play soon - just currently distracted. I think my scenarios will appeal to some of you not playing a great deal of SMAC anymore. 1) games are short 2) you can pick your game length to suit you 3) you compete against others see MTG's comments way above... The URL to play in my contests is: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Dome/3802/
Rackam	posted 06-28-99 11:31 AM ET A/ I still play SMAC B/ SMAC extenstion with eye-candy C/ A better AI. Most of the time 'revolutionary' = 'buggy' and 'feature-rich and all useless'
threeover	posted 06-28-99 11:36 AM ET 1.) Hell yes, I play... 2.) Civ 3, will in fact be a prequel to SMAC, so I really don't know what to expect... 3.) ...
Darkstar	posted 06-28-99 01:38 PM ET 1) Occasionally. 2) I expect it will be a Civ mod pack to SMAC, since this is what I interpretted the buzz from Brian and others to mean. 3) I'd like something seriously evolutionary, but expect it to be very minor. -Darkstar
Freddz	posted 06-28-99 01:46 PM ET Thanks for the response, friends. PLEASE keep it coming. Shining: I forgot, SMEG? Um, forgive an inquiring mind. Where can I find info on this game? Or is it something unofficial?
Darkstar	posted 06-28-99 01:52 PM ET Freddz - SMEG is Shining1's shorthand for... Sid Meyer's Extra Game ... or SMEG. Its the game that is suppose to follow the Sweep of Time of Civ3 ( Starship to) SMAC. Its also called Sid3... Moo3 (although not a Sid game)... and a few other things. It's the mystery game that Sid is working on with HIS team as Brian and HIS team work Civ3. -Darkstar
googlie	posted 06-28-99 07:20 PM ET I'm still playing, but mostly Challenge stuff: All at TI blind: One City (base) Challenge (Transcendence before 2300) Forest City Challenge (beat pop size 9 using only plant/harvest forest at that base) Energy Challenge (beat 3300 energy/turn) Waterworld (Military conquest on a 384 x 256 map with 90% water) And I still haven't been able to corner the energy market at TI as Santiago. But mostly the reasons I play are to generate fodder for the fiction. googlie Putting a spin on it
trippin daily	posted 06-28-99 07:34 PM ET 1. SMAC sucks no longer play it at all 2. it is just going ot be civ 2 with eyecndy, cause that is what SMAC is 3. I want Civ 3 to be an actually seperate game from smac and civ... the source code is getting more than a lil old.. time to rewrite the whole thing Trippin Daily
Rudebw0y	posted 06-29-99 12:21 PM ET A) Still play SMAC at least a couple nights a week B) Expect CivIII to be mostly a build-on based on the SMAC engine, with various bells and whistles C) Would like to see CivIII have a remarkably good AI, a much more polished user interface (SMAC is kind of clunky in that regard), and maybe some refinements in game play.
evil_conquerer	posted 06-29-99 05:48 PM ET A. Still play it. I don't have much time because of my web site (about SMAC ) and other stuff , but I still enjoy it greatly. B. I am a thread master. It will be revolutionary. If it won't, then I have a shotgun, plenty of ammo, and a bus ticket to Maryland. C. See B.
walruskkkch	posted 06-29-99 06:07 PM ET 1) Rarely, I'm into Railroad Tycoon II at the moment and I'm dusting off some older titles like the People's General for some fun. 2) One can only hope so but I doubt any revolutionary change can occur. 3) I hope they push the envelope, there has been numerous good ideas posted in this forum. If only a fraction get added the game could be great. I just wish there was some way of giving it more randomness to increase the variability of play. Right now strategies work too well because there are only a small number of paths to follow. If you didn't always get a certain advancement with a specific technology discovered(like a certain tech requires 4 out 6 science advancements to obtain and in each game but which four is random and unknown)might make using specific strategies less an assured success, thus increasing the difficulty of play but not making the game more complicated. Oh well, a random thought. Your faithful and obedient servant
Valtyr	posted 06-29-99 06:29 PM ET A) Stopped playing SMAC. Usually I go for repetitiveness , but that and the sci-fi environment eventually turned me off. B) Some "evolution", but no major "revolution". C) I'm an evolutionist . But if they pull off a revolution successfully, then more power to them.
Rex Little	posted 06-29-99 08:09 PM ET A. I've barely started; just got the game a month ago, and it competes for playing time with HOMM3 and M&M6. At the very least, I'll play until I've beaten the AI with all 7 factions; so far one down (PK), 6 to go. B. Civ3 will probably keep most or all of the basic gameplay elements of its ancestors. C. Depends on the nature of the revolution. If it becomes some kind of real-time hybrid, or gets so loaded down with eye candy and feature bloat that it won't run on my P166 without 3D, I'll pass.
Darkstar	posted 07-03-99 03:05 PM ET Heave Ho! Heave Ho! Heave Ho! -Darkstar
Freddz	posted 07-05-99 09:34 AM ET Oh, comon people! Please continue filling in the form...