[HN Gopher] OpenCiv3: Open-source, cross-platform reimagining of...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenCiv3: Open-source, cross-platform reimagining of Civilization
       III
        
       Author : klaussilveira
       Score  : 862 points
       Date   : 2026-02-06 21:51 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (openciv3.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (openciv3.org)
        
       | bigstrat2003 wrote:
       | I love that the community is doing this, though I'm curious why
       | Civ 3 in particular. My understanding was that "classic" (for
       | lack of a better term) Civ fans tend to prefer either 2 or 4, and
       | that 3 was considered to be not as good. But perhaps I was
       | mistaken as to the community's opinions on the games.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | FreeCiv covers civ 1 and 2 more or less.
         | 
         | Personally, I didn't play much of 2 or 3, so I don't have
         | strong feelings either way.
        
           | zozbot234 wrote:
           | Freeciv's point of interest is that it's not trying to
           | exactly replicate any one of the original Civs: it has its
           | default ruleset plus others that are closer to the original
           | games, but it's very easy to make your own.
        
             | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
             | Which FreeCiv? The one you install locally, or the one you
             | play via browser on the Web?
             | 
             | https://freecivweb.com/
             | 
             | The latter has more, like Multiplayer 2.4 Dragoon, and
             | Multiplayer 2.5 Elephant(in development), which weren't
             | available locally when I last looked.
             | 
             | There is also https://github.com/longturn/freeciv21 which
             | has an acceptable local client, and finally does not slow
             | down so much when playing larger maps with many AIs, like
             | both FreeCiv and FreeCivWeb tend to do.
             | 
             | https://longturn.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
             | 
             | I tried that, recently, and _barely espcaped_ a relapse.
             | (Phew!)
        
           | culi wrote:
           | UnCiv covers civ 5 as well so I think there's a place for
           | something in between
           | 
           | especially since openciv3 aims to fix some of civ 3's
           | shortcomings
        
             | bpye wrote:
             | Til! I should give UnCiv a try, I've sunk a lot of hours
             | into 5 but didn't know about this.
        
         | warmwaffles wrote:
         | I actually preferred Civ 3 to 2 and 4. It scratched a certain
         | itch.
        
           | data-ottawa wrote:
           | 3 is still my favourite of the series. 5 was good too, but 3
           | overall feels complete and had great graphics.
        
             | warmwaffles wrote:
             | The modding community was gigantic for 3 and was simply
             | amazing being a part of it.
        
           | yxhuvud wrote:
           | 3 has a really nice feel when you manage to get the early
           | timing attacks off against the neighbours, but the later half
           | of the game is too solved - the game ends with infantry +
           | artillery stacks being the only units you need, and with the
           | 3x4 city grid bring optimal.
           | 
           | 4 in contrast had a bunch of different paths to power, and
           | those worked even on high difficulties. There were also no
           | optimal city grid the same way (though still being denser
           | than civ5).
        
         | afavour wrote:
         | > with capabilities inspired by the best of the 4X genre and
         | lessons learned from modding Civ3. Our vision is to make Civ3
         | as it could have been
         | 
         | Looks to not be a straight remake. I wonder whether 3 is a
         | preferable target because things like graphical complexity in
         | >= 4 is too much.
        
           | WildWeazel wrote:
           | Well, "capabilities" is carrying a lot of weight there. One
           | of the main objectives is to design it for unrestricted
           | modding to accommodate all of the wishlisted features, but
           | "out of the box" the default game mode will be 1:1 in
           | mechanics with some QoL improvements. The inspiration is
           | mostly for designing systems in a way that can be easily
           | reconfigured or extended to behave in other ways. We hope
           | that by the time we reach feature parity, people will have
           | already built some mods to do things that were impossible
           | with Civ3.
           | 
           | As mentioned above this was started by Civ3 modders, and we
           | all have our passionate reasons for preferring it over other
           | entries, but you're not wrong that doing this with a 3D
           | engine would be a whole `nother ballgame. There are actually
           | Civ4 and Civ5 remakes underway which have both opted for 2D
           | implementations.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | Is 3 the one with forced retirement?
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | Not sure, I only started the series with 4.
        
         | TheRealPomax wrote:
         | Civ 1 and 2 have already been done, so if you want to play
         | those, hit up freeciv.
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | I'm aware. But why rebuild 3 rather than 4, in that case?
        
             | apothegm wrote:
             | Because 4 was a travesty unless you're REALLY into
             | religion.
             | 
             | 3 was a great game for those who prefer building over war,
             | and the first one with a proper non-military victory
             | option.
        
         | packetlost wrote:
         | 3 is my favorite in the series, but maybe that's not a popular
         | take.
        
         | caminanteblanco wrote:
         | I can definitely vouch for the 2 or 4 narrative, those have
         | always been my favorites of the 'Modernish' civ games, but my
         | favorite will always be CivNet (Civ 1 with multiplayer). There
         | is some real simplicity in Civ 1 that makes it much better
         | suited to a multiplayer experience than the later entries. It
         | is a real pain to get any non-hotseat multiplayer working
         | nowawdays, but well-worth it.
        
           | dr_dshiv wrote:
           | I love civ 1 so so much.
        
           | npunt wrote:
           | Agree, wish there were quality of life improvements to Civ1
           | that kept the simplicity and aesthetics fully intact, while
           | modernizing some of the tedious mid/late game stuff like
           | managing each city in a large empire based on some
           | straightforward goals like 'more science' or 'fastest path to
           | rocketry' or whatnot.
           | 
           | Freeciv unfortunately has none of the charm of Civ1.
        
         | WildWeazel wrote:
         | Because it was born out of the Civ3 modding community which has
         | been wanting a remake for 20+ years.
         | 
         | Sounds like you've been listening to Civ4 fans. ;) 3 is just as
         | active on steam and has a very active and loyal multiplayer
         | league.
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | Fair enough, thanks!
        
         | stodor89 wrote:
         | Here's a perspective on "why civ 3" by one of the best civ 3
         | players: https://youtu.be/IOvWgfZiHGo?si=uvTWTaRQsfxE_ffN
        
           | II2II wrote:
           | Thank you for the link. It is enlightening for someone who
           | likes to play the game, but is not obsessive about a
           | particular version. (I like the idea of Civilization, and
           | will play it for that reason alone. More often than not, I
           | will choose an older version simply because it is faster to
           | load and play than for the intrinsic merits of the ruleset
           | itself.)
        
         | thrance wrote:
         | There's Freeciv [1] for _IV_ , and Unciv [2] for _V_. _I_ doesn
         | 't have many fans, _VI_ is too recent, and _VII_ , well...
         | Let's not talk about _VII_.
         | 
         | > Civ fans tend to prefer [...]
         | 
         | I'd say, each entry in the series gets love. The saying goes:
         | "Your favorite Civ game is the first one you ever played". In
         | my experience, that's pretty true (Still stuck on _V_ ).
         | 
         | [1] https://www.freeciv.org/
         | 
         | [2] https://github.com/yairm210/Unciv
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | Yeah as a Civilization: Call to Power fan I have to say the
           | "first game in the series I tried" affinity bonus is
           | overwhelming.
           | 
           | Alpha Centauri was objectively the best though.
        
             | GaryBluto wrote:
             | Interestingly enough, the Call to Power series was
             | unaffiliated with Sid Meier's Civilization and was
             | developed after Activision licensed the name from the board
             | game Civilization was unauthorizedly based upon. There was
             | a sequel called just "Call to Power II" in case you missed
             | it, which had it's source code released in 2003 in case
             | you're feeling nostalgic.
             | 
             | https://www.zdnet.com/article/civilization-ownership-
             | dispute...
        
             | spiritplumber wrote:
             | https://paeantosmac.wordpress.com/ This you may appreciate
        
           | chocochunks wrote:
           | I think the first Civ I played WAS III (maybe II at a
           | friend's house once before?) and it ain't my fav. It sits
           | below IV and V and even VI and I don't really like VI all
           | that much either...
        
         | acessoproibido wrote:
         | For me the most classic one is Civ III by a mile. 4 was way too
         | modern/ flashy for me and 2 too old school. But maybe I was
         | just born at the right time for 3.
        
           | rpiguy wrote:
           | You can turn off a lot of the Civ 4 flash and it will feel
           | more like Civ III.
           | 
           | But to each his own. Civ 4 was the first one that really,
           | really hooked me.
        
             | rmunn wrote:
             | For me it was Civ 4's modability that made it the best for
             | me. Because when I got tired of playing Civ 4's normal
             | game, I could install the Fall From Heaven mod and play a
             | completely different game. Wizards, golems, angels, demons,
             | spells, wild animals instead of barbarians (which could be
             | tamed and turned into your own units if you had units with
             | the right promotions)... it made for a completely different
             | gameplay experience.
             | 
             | If I hadn't quit computer games cold turkey (when I
             | realized I was showing all the signs of addiction) over a
             | decade ago, I would still have Civ IV installed and still
             | be playing it today. It just didn't get old, because of how
             | varied the game could become.
        
         | TheGRS wrote:
         | Can I tangent on your question here and ask what others think
         | of Civ 7 now? When I learned about it I thought it was a day 1
         | game purchase for me for sure, but I held off when I saw a
         | stream of bad reviews. I figured I'd come back when they ironed
         | the problems out (as they've done in every major Civ release to
         | my memory). Haven't taken the plunge yet.
        
           | bigstrat2003 wrote:
           | I'm holding off on 7 myself. I think they deviated too hard
           | from the formula such that it doesn't look like it's even
           | still a Civ game. And while I'm open-minded enough to try it,
           | I wasn't going to drop $70 on a game I had reason to suspect
           | I would dislike. I figured I would wait until it was on game
           | pass, or on sale for $5 someday.
           | 
           | More recently I read that they are going to update the game
           | such that you don't have to switch civs. That's a good start
           | (though I still don't think I will like the era system at
           | all), but reading the initial reviews a year ago I found out
           | that the game cuts off abruptly in the mid 20th century,
           | rather than going to the information age like normal. To me,
           | that is blatantly unfinished, so I'm not planning to get the
           | game until they fix that as well.
        
             | JojoFatsani wrote:
             | Civ is like TOS Star Trek movies: You can mostly avoid the
             | even numbered ones!
        
               | apothegm wrote:
               | With the exception of Civ2, which was excellent.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | With TOS Star Trek movies, the usual claim is that you
               | should avoid the _odd_ numbered ones.
        
               | ntnsndr wrote:
               | Except that 6 is far and away the best
        
           | wewtyflakes wrote:
           | It is _rough_. People say it has gotten better since release,
           | but if you have not played it before, and were to play it
           | fresh right now, it is not great. The UI is both dense and
           | vapid at the same time, UI glitches/bugs, jarring all-or-
           | nothing lock-step advancement of ages, etc.
        
           | JBAnderson5 wrote:
           | They built it as a railroady board game instead of a sandbox
           | video game. The rumors from their experimental workshop test
           | and latest announcement make me hopeful for a big update in
           | the spring. Until then, it doesn't feel worth playing it more
           | than a couple times through. Every game feels the same.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | Trying to streamline the series into a boardgame seems to
             | be a trend. Even Civ6 felt more like a boardgame for points
             | than a sandbox already, even though it was still rather
             | enjoyable.
        
               | bigstrat2003 wrote:
               | Perhaps not coincidentally, Ed Beach has been a board
               | game designer in the past. Which is not to say he's the
               | wrong guy for the job, he has done some great work on
               | Civ5 BNW and Civ6. But perhaps he went overboard on 7.
        
           | Marsymars wrote:
           | I was big into Civ4. Put about 100 hours into Civ5 and felt
           | that I'd entirely exhausted its strategic depth. Didn't
           | bother with Civ6. Tom Chick hasn't bothered reviewing Civ7
           | but doesn't seem to be a fan based on forum comments, so I
           | won't be bothering to play it.
        
           | JimDabell wrote:
           | I've played and loved Civ 1/4/5/6 for hundreds of hours each.
           | They have always been a bit rough around the edges on launch,
           | but 7 is the first time I've felt like they a) released a
           | half-finished game, b) reduced the game to something that is
           | just plain unenjoyable, and c) made me feel ripped off. It's
           | a massive downgrade in so many different ways and I would
           | pick any previous version over 7. I have loved playing Civ
           | for decades but 7 killed my interest in the game completely.
        
         | daotoad wrote:
         | Anecdata:
         | 
         | I'm a Civ3 hater, give me 2 or 4 any day. 3 is my least
         | favorite version of the game.
         | 
         | But, OTOH, my wife is ride or die for Civ3.
        
         | cyphar wrote:
         | I must admit that there is a certain sense of nostalgia I get
         | from playing Civ 3 that I never got from any of the other Civ
         | games, but that's probably just because it was the first Civ
         | game I played and got really hooked on as a young kid.
        
         | GaryBluto wrote:
         | I very much enjoy Civ 2 and 3 and would've played 3 more, but
         | the 3d rendered sprites make it much more of a pain to add
         | anything graphical to.
        
         | danielparsons wrote:
         | civ 5 is now the most popular among hardcore civ fans. still in
         | the top 100 games on steam. more than 2x the player count of
         | its sequel
        
           | distances wrote:
           | It is a great game, and the Vox Populi mod has given it so
           | much more life.
           | 
           | VP has hands down the best AI that the Civ series has ever
           | seen. My "wow" moment was when the enemy parachuted to my
           | hinterlands to pillage my critical resources. In comparison,
           | the official AI couldn't even pull off an amphibious attack.
        
         | sevenseacat wrote:
         | that was my first thought, I was gonna show my husband this but
         | he's a Civ 2 ride or die
        
       | tfehring wrote:
       | Civ III is still my go-to activity for long flights with no
       | internet - I've yet to find a better way to instantly time-travel
       | forward 12 hours.
       | 
       | I haven't tried OpenCiv3, but I'm glad it exists - getting
       | vanilla Civ III running on MacOS is a hassle and still has issues
       | with e.g. audio and cutscenes. I also hope it leads to a way to
       | improve worker automation. Managing your workers well is
       | important, doing it manually is tedious, and the built-in
       | Automate feature is really bad.
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | The key here is seeing this mentioned and not time traveling
         | forward until 6 AM Saturday morning.
        
           | donw wrote:
           | Yeah, that's what Factorio is for.
        
             | ssl-3 wrote:
             | Factorio is a game about bird songs.
        
             | skeltoac wrote:
             | You won't get me this time.
        
             | playa1 wrote:
             | Sleep is the bottleneck.
        
         | mikeaskew4 wrote:
         | There goes my weekend...
        
         | kilroy123 wrote:
         | How did I not ever think to do this? Such a good idea.
        
         | b3ing wrote:
         | I like Civilization games but they make 4hrs feel like 30min,
         | so I can't play them. Otherwise it would be the year 2060
         | already
        
           | mr_toad wrote:
           | I feel like my last words could be 'just one more turn'.
        
             | lossyalgo wrote:
             | Wasn't that meme initially created by players talking about
             | Civ games?
        
           | huevosabio wrote:
           | Yes, exactly I had to stop myself starting the game after 7
           | else I don't sleep
        
           | philihp wrote:
           | Can we settle for Factorio and 2028?
        
           | brobdingnagians wrote:
           | Slightly tangential but recently I've gotten into the
           | Ilwinter Game Design games Dominions 6 and Conquest of
           | Elysium 5. I was surprised how similar but how different they
           | are to Europa Universalis and Civilization respectively. Very
           | interesting studies in horizontal game design where every
           | faction has dramatically different gameplay strategies.
        
         | SilverElfin wrote:
         | > I've yet to find a better way to instantly time-travel
         | forward 12 hours
         | 
         | I find it very hard to use a computer in the cramped tables of
         | the plane. And the person in front always ends up aggressively
         | reclining only when I have a laptop out. Plus I feel bad that
         | maybe my bright light is disturbing the people sleeping next to
         | me.
        
           | hdgvhicv wrote:
           | It amazes me that high paid SV techies won't pay more to fly
           | in premium or business
        
             | SilverElfin wrote:
             | It's incredibly expensive on international flights, right?
             | A 12 hour flight sounds like something that would cost
             | thousands for business class.
        
             | stevage wrote:
             | I remember being a high paid techie getting 19 hours of
             | paid work done between Melbourne and New York, on a laptop
             | in economy (and a long layover in LAX due to a storm). It
             | was fricking glorious, most productive day of my life.
        
               | lossyalgo wrote:
               | How did you run your laptop for 19 hours in economy class
               | without a power plug? Not even M-series MacBooks last
               | that long.
        
             | cyphar wrote:
             | Business class flights from Sydney to San Francisco cost
             | A$6k, 6-10x as much as economy. Flights from Sydney to
             | Europe are more like 3-4x (A$7k vs A$2k) but still
             | ludicrously expensive. Good luck convincing your company to
             | expense that for work trips, and most of us don't have SV
             | salaries. Honestly, I still manage to get some work done on
             | long flights, the more annoying thing is flights which
             | don't have power outlets or WiFi.
             | 
             | If you are a point hacker you could spend the points on
             | upgrades (which tend to give you better rates than buying
             | base tickets) but then you're paying for a minor comfort
             | improvement that you wouldn't pay for normally -- which is
             | a textbook example of induced consumption and is playing
             | into exactly how airlines want you to use points.
        
               | bpye wrote:
               | > flights which don't have power outlets
               | 
               | Or ones which do but the outlets are so loose they are
               | practically useless.
        
             | dbetteridge wrote:
             | Not everyone on hackernews is paid SV salaries?
             | 
             | That plus flights from Australia are expensive enough in
             | economy, business class is easily 4-10x that cost.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | Aren't there any airlines traveling to and from Australia
               | that offer something midway in between sardine and
               | business class?
        
             | pintxo wrote:
             | Not everyone on here is necessarily from SV?
        
             | bpye wrote:
             | When I fly transatlantic I don't mind paying to get an exit
             | row or bulkhead seat, but even just premium economy is a
             | much more significant increase in cost over economy, at
             | least flying from Canada.
        
         | Der_Einzige wrote:
         | The total war games are like civilization but with actually
         | good combat. Especially if you get mods like DEI for Rome 2,
         | RTR for Rome 1 remastered, etc. It's regrettable that we let
         | the grimdark warhammer crowd define the series.
         | 
         | The paradox grand strategy games are like civilization but with
         | real agency and at times straight up historical accuracy.
         | 
         | Meanwhile I have to deal with Ghandi actually nuking everyone
         | (the bug is ACTUALLY REAL IN CIV 5, the best modern civ game!).
         | Not sure why Indians aren't mad as hell at the whole series.
        
           | wewtyflakes wrote:
           | I have found paradox games to have uneven game mechanics;
           | some run miles wide, some of them run deep, and many others
           | are just very superficial, and there is no reliable
           | indication which will be which when you are playing fresh.
        
             | jjmarr wrote:
             | Check out Terra Invicta.
             | 
             | It's like the modern-era Paradox game you wanted but all
             | the mechanics synergize with each other.
             | 
             | Unfortunately it's a _bit_ too complicated as a result.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | There's no better story generators than those games though,
             | even Civs don't quite compare.
        
         | ddp26 wrote:
         | How do you manage the laptop + mouse?
        
           | Gud wrote:
           | track point
        
           | tfehring wrote:
           | 13" Macbook Air, I rarely use a mouse to begin with. Trans-
           | Pacific flights usually have a few extra inches of legroom
           | compared to domestic flights, so it's not that cramped even
           | in economy (and obviously a non-issue in premium economy or
           | business).
        
         | jwilliams wrote:
         | It _used_ to be Factorio for me (I live in Australia, so long
         | flights happen a lot). The problem with Factorio the flight isn
         | 't long enough! and the game bleeds into 100+ hours post-
         | flight.
        
           | mnw21cam wrote:
           | Dwarf Fortress. That's _really_ how to suddenly say  "Oh, how
           | did it get to 4am already?"
        
             | bpye wrote:
             | I lost the best part of a week of my Christmas break to it
             | when the Steam version was released a couple years back...
        
             | lossyalgo wrote:
             | DF gets all the news (rightfully so, it's an epic game that
             | I've dumped a ton of hours into) but if you haven't
             | already, consider checking out Songs of Syx. It's like DF
             | but multiplied by 100. You can have tens of thousands of
             | citizens, doing most of the things they do in Dwarf
             | Fortress, and a lot more, including waging huge wars
             | against the neighbors. The limits of DF kinda made me sad,
             | actually, that you are limited to so few Dwarves (and don't
             | say it's because you want to know the story of all of them,
             | because after 30 or so you lose track of who is who
             | anyways, so might as well up the limit from 100 to 50K, or
             | more? ;) Songs of Syx has also routinely been getting
             | massive updates since 2020 and I have a feeling the code is
             | a bit cleaner so the solo dev can add features faster
             | (unlike DF's code base which is, according to one of the
             | new devs a nightmare to work with). It's a game that is
             | never talked about but deserves a whole lot more love from
             | gamers.
             | 
             | I don't mean to cast shade on DF, I really do love it, and
             | am happy for its existence, I just think that DF fans
             | should also look into Songs of Syx.
             | 
             | The defining difference for me are the generated stories in
             | DF, which often are a lot of random trash but still give a
             | feeling of a deeper meaning.
        
         | felixthehat wrote:
         | Yeah civ VI on my iPad with an apple pencil kills flights
        
       | JumpCrisscross wrote:
       | Any chance the AIs will be easily extensible?
        
         | WildWeazel wrote:
         | Hopefully yes, because so far none of us are AI programmers...
         | 
         | but seriously yes everything about the game will be designed
         | for customization
        
       | Joel_Mckay wrote:
       | How does this compare with https://freeciv.org for game play =3
        
         | dleslie wrote:
         | Not sure, when Civ2Civ3 is now the default ruleset in Freeciv.
         | 
         | https://freeciv.fandom.com/wiki/Civ2civ3
        
         | WildWeazel wrote:
         | Gameplay wise this is a straight remake of Civ3 as a baseline,
         | while allowing much greater customization. Freeciv is
         | definitely an inspiration, but it's kind of its own thing.
        
       | jrm4 wrote:
       | uh oh
       | 
       | yeah, that's dangerous for me, this is the ONE that got me
       | started
        
       | reconnecting wrote:
       | Interesting choice of version.
       | 
       | I just realised that the actual latest version of Die Ha...
       | Civilization is VII (2025), and for me II remains the gold
       | classic.
       | 
       | Both in Civilisation and in Die Hard.
        
       | WildWeazel wrote:
       | Hi all, OpenCiv3 founder here. Thanks for the support! Check us
       | out on Civfanatics or Discord to keep up with the project.
        
         | slazaro wrote:
         | Any interesting insights about using Godot with C#? I love C#
         | and I'm happy using it in Godot even though it's not as
         | seamless as in Unity: in Godot 4 we still can't export to Web
         | if the project is C#, and there's the whole conversion between
         | C# types and Godot types that adds inefficiencies and extra
         | allocations, etc.; it feels like it's a second-class language
         | in Godot.
         | 
         | I'm always interested in seeing what people find when
         | developing larger projects in C#.
        
           | huevosabio wrote:
           | We were building on C# Godot and I think it is a second class
           | citizen in the sense that 1) you can't export to wasm and 2)
           | they are moving the interface to be handled by gdextension.
           | 
           | That said, I think once you get the gist of it and understand
           | the landmines, it is really nice to use vanilla dotnet rather
           | than unity's fork.
        
           | WildWeazel wrote:
           | The founding developers were all software engineers with .NET
           | experience, so it was the natural choice even though at the
           | time it was Godot 3.x with Mono. I had used Unity before but
           | not Godot. The project is structured as mostly plain C# DLLs
           | with a relatively thin Godot UI layer controlling it, so the
           | Godot type system is fairly encapsulated. We haven't really
           | seen any issues with those decisions beyond just working out
           | the communication between Godot and DLL. But again we were
           | just working from what we knew so I can't really say if this
           | was the best way to go about it.
        
           | Arwill wrote:
           | I have this principle of "5% scripting". If the high level
           | scripting on top of C++ consumes about 5% of frame time, then
           | the language of the script does not matter.
        
         | popalchemist wrote:
         | Have you considered adding LLM features for the negotiations?
         | Could be cool.
        
           | wewtyflakes wrote:
           | You are getting downvoted, but this is a cool idea. Diplomacy
           | has historically been a weak part of the series, and being
           | able to shore that up may be a lot of fun to play against.
        
             | ant6n wrote:
             | Maybe ask Ghandi for his favorite scone recipe, so that he
             | won't nuke you.
        
               | N_Lens wrote:
               | Gandhi*
        
             | chongli wrote:
             | I would say diplomacy is the most misunderstood feature of
             | the series. Players constantly _say_ they want a stronger
             | AI that 's smarter at diplomacy. But whenever they have
             | built an AI like that, their play testers complained that
             | it doesn't behave like a real world leader (too ruthless).
             | 
             | This experience led Soren Johnson (co-designer of Civ III
             | and lead designer of Civ IV) to the realization that Civ
             | AIs are supposed to "play to lose" [1].
             | 
             | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJcuQQ1eWWI
        
               | wewtyflakes wrote:
               | That makes sense, but at the end of the day, it may be
               | more fun to play around with opponents that act more
               | relatedly. This could take the form of in-game/session-
               | appropriate diplomatic responses that don't read like
               | pre-canned text, or, having explanatory text for why the
               | AI is acting perhaps in goofy ways (which comes up a
               | lot).
        
               | Der_Einzige wrote:
               | I am so tired of game designers/developers being so
               | pathetically wrong about stuff like this. Modders have to
               | CONSTANTLY fix these boneheaded, user hostile decisions
               | in nearly every game. A lot of game developers are not
               | the people actually loving/playing their games in the
               | same way that the cello maker is usually not the cello
               | player.
               | 
               | Even many popular mods fuck this up! DEI in Total War
               | Rome 2 needs _submods_ to make the AI play by the same
               | rules as the player!!! This is top of the most subscribed
               | list right now FOR A REASON!!! https://steamcommunity.com
               | /sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=36258...
               | 
               | Make the AI play by the exact same rules as the player.
               | Make a scaling AI difficulty slider which goes from "piss
               | easy" to "insane grandmaster" but without cheats. It's
               | not that hard to do this, the chess engine crowd figured
               | it out back in 2001. FEAR figured it out in 2004. Game AI
               | has straight up not improved and at many times gotten
               | worse in the ensuing two decades.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | _It 's not that hard to do this, the chess engine crowd
               | figured it out back in 2001._
               | 
               | They really didn't. No one likes playing against weaker
               | chess engines. They play perfectly like a higher-rated
               | engine and then randomly make an obvious blunder. They
               | don't play naturally like a human player of that rating.
               | 
               | The weaker AIs in Civ games do a far better job at
               | "playing to lose" than low rated chess engines. It's not
               | even close!
        
               | stevage wrote:
               | Yeah, the ability of chess engines to play like a human
               | of a given rating is a pretty recent development.
               | 
               | And it's still a constant complaint that Stockfish
               | suggests moves that no human could really play and follow
               | up correctly.
        
           | wilson090 wrote:
           | you may be interested in https://www.paxhistoria.co/
        
             | nkmnz wrote:
             | No information on the website, but a login. Suspicious.
        
               | wilson090 wrote:
               | https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/pax-historia
        
               | philipwhiuk wrote:
               | Bizarre that this got YCombinator funding. Not obvious
               | how it scales.
        
           | anthonyIPH wrote:
           | From what I've seen with projects like this, the successful
           | ones do a good job of 'sticking to the mission' of faithfully
           | recreating the original game in a modern engine (openMW,
           | daggerfall unity, all my points of reference are TES related)
           | 
           | The neat part is that they are open source, so anyone who
           | wants to take it in a different direction can fork it. The
           | multiplayer version openMW being a great example of this.
        
           | WildWeazel wrote:
           | not sure if serious...
        
             | Marsymars wrote:
             | Even if you don't want an LLM for the actual functionality
             | of negotiations, LLM-generated text would be neat. As-is,
             | the text becomes irrelevant, "Our words are backed with
             | nuclear weapons" is just "nukes = true" - letting an LLM
             | tell you the AI has nukes seems like harmless fun.
        
             | popalchemist wrote:
             | Lifelong Civ player. I have always felt the negotiations
             | part of the game is laughably bad, and a huge missed
             | opportunity. The ability to use language as a tool --
             | diplomacy, but also rhetoric, veiled threats, etc -- is
             | something I excel at, and I would love the chance to test
             | my mettle against an enemy in an imaginary nuclear war
             | context, because when else do you get to play high stakes
             | games like that with words in real life? Civ is the perfect
             | venue for it, but the game designers are extremely
             | boneheaded about how they executed that particular part of
             | the game.
        
         | ukuina wrote:
         | Would it be feasible to add an API to OpenCiv3 (or run it as an
         | SDK) so we can script up actions?
        
           | WildWeazel wrote:
           | There will certainly at least be (technically already is) a
           | Lua scripting interface for mods. We've hand-waved some talk
           | of a proper C# SDK but have no concrete plans yet.
        
         | davely wrote:
         | Oh my, this brings me back! One of my fondest gaming memories
         | involves a massive Civilization 3 PBEM match between a number
         | of Civilization fan sites, where we all had private forums and
         | ran these virtual nations against each other. This was way back
         | in 2002 or 2003!
         | 
         | I believe Civfanatics was in it (run by "Chieftess" if I
         | recall), Apolyton (which I was a member of -- elected in as
         | Minister of Public Works and had to come up with a plan to
         | clear our pesky jungles) and a number of other sites.
         | 
         | It was such an awesome time. Real diplomacy and trade
         | negotiations between the fan sites while waiting to play our
         | turns. Man, it was fun.
        
           | Brendinooo wrote:
           | I didn't do that stuff but I remember...was it Kryten? Making
           | a multi unit graphic utility, I used it to make and publish
           | some multi units. Fun times. CivFanatics was great.
        
           | WildWeazel wrote:
           | I was also there at Civfanatics watching from the sidelines.
           | Fond memories indeed, and some of those same people laid the
           | foundations for this project.
        
         | jcurbo wrote:
         | This is great stuff! Civ3 is still by far my favorite Civ. And
         | a nice use of Godot.
        
         | klaussilveira wrote:
         | Thank you for creating such a badass project.
        
       | bigcat12345678 wrote:
       | Yes CIV3 still feels to me the peak Civ experience.
       | 
       | The content is a bit lacking though, would see more diversity in
       | tech tree, and units.
        
       | tbmtbmtbmtbmtbm wrote:
       | looks super cool. I'm a lifelong civ player but my first one was
       | civ 4, so this seems like a fun chance to dip into some of the
       | earlier ones. love that they're using Godot for the engine!
        
       | d_silin wrote:
       | Another awesome game - Civ II inspired.
       | 
       | http://www.c-evo.org/
        
         | axus wrote:
         | Loved this one; from the same guy who wrote Scanner which was
         | nice before WinDirStat and WizTree. You could add AI plugins
         | which could take the role of a player, without cheating.
         | 
         | http://www.steffengerlach.de/freeware/
        
           | d_silin wrote:
           | Yep, I even wrote one and made a mod of C-Evo (long time
           | ago).
        
       | jlarocco wrote:
       | I don't know about the dedicated Civilization fans, but 3 was the
       | only version I played.
       | 
       | I didn't play it much, but when I did I'd play for 6+ hours at a
       | time. I'll check this out later tonight, and might see if I can
       | find the old CD and get the original running.
        
         | sevensor wrote:
         | Ooof, good luck. Civ3 copy protection was intense. I had to get
         | out my old Win2k disk and stand up a VM. Attempts to rip an iso
         | will be complicated by the fact that they deliberately wrote
         | bad data to the disk. All of this is surmountable, but unless
         | you enjoy a very particular kind of fun, you may prefer to
         | spend $2 on GoG.
        
       | PlatoIsADisease wrote:
       | Wake me up when OpenCiv4, but only when there's an option for
       | smart AI rather than boosted fake AI.
       | 
       | I remember losing 6pm to 3am playing civ 4 one time. One more
       | turn...
       | 
       | (But I'm not sure what I need openCiv for... the steam game is
       | good. Maybe its just useful for the long term.)
        
         | 1980phipsi wrote:
         | I would love to see someone use modern machine learning
         | techniques to make a kick ass Civ AI.
        
           | Marsymars wrote:
           | Genuine question - would that be amenable to _fast_ AI? It 's
           | less of a problem on modern PCs running Civ4, but on
           | contemporary systems late-game large maps with many AI/units
           | could really drag during turn-processing.
        
             | lurk2 wrote:
             | You don't necessarily need it to learn during the game, it
             | would be enough for it to learn between games. If you've
             | played the game long enough there are behaviors you can
             | exploit that wouldn't work against a human player. They
             | iterated on the AI in Beyond the Sword and fixed some of
             | the more abusable mechanics in Civilization V (e.g. by
             | introducing diplomatic penalties when you camp units next
             | to an AI's borders), but it's just inevitable that once
             | you've played a game long enough you will find these kinds
             | of exploitable patterns.
             | 
             | The customization available in IV makes it basically
             | infinitely replayable, but the AI makes the trajectory of
             | each game too predictable if you understand the mechanics
             | well enough.
             | 
             | Lots of old strategy games have been revived by introducing
             | new factions that change the game's meta; imagine if this
             | process was automated by training the AI on recorded games
             | from the entire playerbase, or on games recorded locally to
             | adapt to the user's unique style of play.
        
         | JojoFatsani wrote:
         | Civ4 is super cheap on Steam BTW
        
       | syngrog66 wrote:
       | UnCiv is the best FOSS clone of Civ I've played
        
       | rl3 wrote:
       | It's really cool to see projects like this designed for dropping
       | in assets from the proprietary version. The separation in the
       | first place is unfortunate, but at least the capability exists.
       | 
       | Civ III in my opinion had some of the best art of the entire
       | series. The 3D feeling of the successor games are kind of off-
       | putting by comparison.
        
         | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
         | Isn't that pretty common for the open source remakes? Let the
         | programmers focus on the coding and outsource the art.
        
           | rl3 wrote:
           | Yeah, I just think it's cool when they achieve drop-in
           | compatibility.
        
       | caminanteblanco wrote:
       | For those like myself who have wanted this but for Civ1 (all 4 of
       | us), someone on CivFanatics has made incredible progress, and the
       | game is actually playable now: https://github.com/rajko-
       | horvat/OpenCiv1
        
         | yobert wrote:
         | I'm with you-- civ 1 is by far the best! I adore the wonky
         | graphics. None of the new ones hit the same.
        
         | culi wrote:
         | So there's
         | 
         | - OpenCiv1
         | 
         | - FreeCiv (civ 2)
         | 
         | - OpenCiv3
         | 
         | - ???
         | 
         | - UnCiv
         | 
         | I'm curious why civ 4 is the one that got skipped. I feel like
         | it's the one that is most commonly labelled as the "peak"
        
           | Qem wrote:
           | None for Alpha Centauri yet?
        
             | HiPhish wrote:
             | There is this one: https://github.com/afwbkbc/glsmac
        
           | TiredOfLife wrote:
           | Those that like civ 4 are still playing civ 4 and have no
           | time left to develop
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | I have a long history with the Civ series. I spent a massive
       | amount of time playing Civ1. My next most played was Civ4 and
       | most of that wasn't the base game. It was a mod that had a very
       | loyal fan base: Fall From Heaven 2 [1]. I have tried a couple of
       | times to get all this to work on a modern PC but I think I'm
       | played out on the game and I never quite get it off the gorund. I
       | have a ton of nostalgia for it though.
       | 
       | Civ5 started the whole hex thing, which I was never excited
       | about. Yes, Civ4 had stacks of doom but Civ5 turned into a puzzle
       | of moving units in order because you could only have one per hex.
       | 
       | Anyway, Civ2 and Civ3 never got as much play from me. I'm a
       | little surprised that people had the same enthusiasm. My memory
       | of these 2 was that they just added a bunch of tedium, like I
       | distinctly remember that tile improvement changed to turning
       | farms into supermarkets. It's been a lot of years so I might be
       | misremembering. Maybe I just dind't give them enough time. Or
       | maybe nothing could capture my initial enthusiasm for the novelty
       | that was Civ1.
       | 
       | Anyway, i'm always happy to see projects like this. Games really
       | do live forever. Like people will invent software for free to
       | keep running them (ie emulators).
       | 
       | The Civ series has kinda defied the usual trend to
       | entshittification. I'm really thinking of SimCity here. It's hard
       | to describe how much EA shit the bed with SimCity %, so much so
       | that it basically launched Cities: Skylines, which itself has had
       | issues with the CS2 launch.
       | 
       | Does Civ3 have a massive fanbase compared to Civ1, Civ2 or Civ4?
       | I really don't know.
       | 
       | [1]: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/mod-fall-from-
       | heaven-...
        
         | danielparsons wrote:
         | I love the hex system - adds a lot of tactical depth. Choice of
         | naval vs air vs land focus often comes down to who you're
         | fighting and where. Then you turn around to fight someone else
         | and realize your 20 veteran frigates are near useless despite
         | your new enemy being coastal because all of their cities are
         | tucked away in bays or behind hills...
        
       | cwillu wrote:
       | "Mac will try hard not to let you run this; it will tell you the
       | app is damaged and can't be opened and helpfully offer to trash
       | it for you. From a terminal you can xattr -cr
       | /path/to/OpenCiv3.app to enable running it."
       | 
       | How far OSX has come since the days of the "cancel or allow"
       | parody advert.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | To be fair, the threat landscape changed, too.
        
           | antiframe wrote:
           | Not terribly fair. When Windows decided running everything as
           | administrator was bad and to add a visual sudo-like prompt,
           | Apple made fun of them for it, but it was Microsoft reacting
           | to a changing threat landscape then too.
        
             | klodolph wrote:
             | Vista gets maligned but UAC is a good feature to have
             | around, and Vista introduced it.
        
               | Semaphor wrote:
               | My first thought was "But back then those prompts were
               | constant, making them almost useless", though maybe that
               | did actually help by making software vendors rely less on
               | admin rights?
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | That was the whole point.
        
               | klodolph wrote:
               | It was a big mess, because users didn't expect it,
               | developers wanted users to just have everything run as
               | admin, and the UAC user experience wasn't polished yet.
               | But that's what you expect from new security features
               | being introduced.
        
             | charcircuit wrote:
             | UAC is not a security boundary. Malware can bypass it if it
             | wants.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | It helps to actually enable having to type a password
               | instead of clicking on Yes.
               | 
               | However yes, security is much more than an UAC dialog.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Additionally, just remembered, recently there is an
               | additional option on Windows 11 that the UAC generates a
               | temporary admin user and then throws the security token
               | away.
               | 
               | https://blogs.windows.com/windowsdeveloper/2025/05/19/enh
               | anc...
        
           | Folcon wrote:
           | I mean it has, but the situation is getting ridiculous, I'm
           | at the point where I'm honestly not sure what special set of
           | magical incantations and rituals I need to do to get this
           | process to work, it seems to change between different bits of
           | software and get more complex with time as if Apple keeps
           | finding proverbial bigger fools who can get through this mess
           | without intending to and so they're solution is to keep
           | making it increasingly more Byzantine
           | 
           | The thing that really irks me is I've got a paid developer
           | account with Apple, I've already done the xcode dance,
           | notarized binaries and all that nonsense, shouldn't this have
           | activated some super special bit on my Apple account that
           | says
           | 
           | "this one needs to do random stuff now and again and after
           | saying, `Hey just checking in, doing this will do X to your
           | computer probably, and maybe set it on fire, but if you say
           | "go for it, I promise I know what I'm doing', I'm gonna trust
           | you champ`, _finger guns_ "
           | 
           | (not sure why in my head the personification of Apple would
           | do "finger guns", but here we are I guess :shrug:)
           | 
           | Hell at this point I'll take a checkbox in my settings that
           | says, "Some people are into extreme sports, I love to install
           | random binaries, just get out of my way"
        
             | imglorp wrote:
             | You shouldn't need the company's permission to run whatever
             | you want on your machine.
        
               | klodolph wrote:
               | ...you don't, just like you don't need the bank's
               | permission to withdraw funds... but they will still try
               | and stop you pulling out $10,000 so you can buy iTunes
               | gift cards to pay off your taxes.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | It's not an issue of permission, it's an issue of trying
               | to make a computer that's safe for grandma to use.
               | Criminals can and will convince grandma to navigate a
               | byzantine labyrinth of prompts and technical measures in
               | order to drain her bank account. That's the threat model
               | we're dealing with here.
        
               | lokar wrote:
               | I think a time-lock feature to enable "I know what I'm
               | doing mode" for a year, after a 48h delay would be ok.
               | 
               | Or something like that
        
               | miki123211 wrote:
               | I like Chrome OS's approach where you essentially choose
               | your security level at initial setup, and need to wipe
               | your machine if you wish to change it.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | But what if a scammer walks grandma through backing
               | everything up, unlocking the machine, installing a
               | rootkit, and then restoring from backup? /s
               | 
               | (Joke is on you. You thought you'd be given access to app
               | data to back it up? That's against the security model.)
        
               | Gud wrote:
               | No, that would still suck.
        
               | nkrisc wrote:
               | At a certain point you have to let adults be adults and
               | make adult mistakes.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | Tried that. Didn't go great.
        
               | bigstrat2003 wrote:
               | It went just fine. But more importantly, it's completely
               | immoral to treat adults as if they were children.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Any inmutable distro with Flatpak will solve this
               | forever. No need to restrict anything.
        
               | wtetzner wrote:
               | Is that really true though? It kinda just feels like a
               | way to force people to have to pay $100 per year, own
               | Apple hardware, etc.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | How else are you going to have the ability to revoke
               | malware's signing keys to get it to stop running on every
               | machine immediately?
        
               | NewsaHackO wrote:
               | >make a computer that's safe for grandma to use
               | 
               | People also forget that it makes it safe for people who
               | aren't grandmas. The reason why you think it's just
               | grandmas is because, for you to get a virus or your
               | computer hacked now, it requires so many user gaffes for
               | something like that to happen. In addition, it almost
               | always involves typing in or telling someone your
               | password when you shouldn't. In the early 2000s, I still
               | remember there was some ad affiliate for the cyanide and
               | happiness webcomic website that, if you let it's ad load,
               | instantly infected your computer with adware just from
               | visiting the site. That's unheard of now because of
               | increasingly protective/restrictive policies set by
               | technology companies. It's one of those situations where
               | if a system is working correctly, you won't even know
               | it's working at all.
        
               | miki123211 wrote:
               | And you don't. THIs is not iOS, gatekeeper can be
               | bypassed if you know how.
        
             | spockz wrote:
             | IIRC everything you compile on macOS yourself, possibly
             | only when using Apple's llvm toolchain, already gets the
             | proper bits set to execute just fine. This also seems to
             | work for rust and go binaries. I'm not sure whether that is
             | because they replicated the macOS llvm toolchain behaviour
             | for the flag or whether another mechanism is at play.
        
               | wtetzner wrote:
               | I don't know about Go, but I think Rust uses the system
               | linker by default.
        
             | foldr wrote:
             | The command line incantation is just a convenience. You can
             | unblock the app that you just tried to run by going to
             | Privacy and Security in system settings and clicking around
             | a bit.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | You used to be able to, but not anymore.
        
             | BirAdam wrote:
             | You used to be able to boot into the rescue mode and
             | disable their security system. Is that not a thing anymore?
        
           | SomeHacker44 wrote:
           | Yes. The threats are now from Apple and other vendors who
           | increasingly want, build and enforce lock in.
        
         | tclancy wrote:
         | What is going on with this? I tried that and the alias I have
         | built in for this problem, `make_safe() { xattr -d -r
         | com.apple.quarantine $1 }`
         | 
         | The application cannot be opened for an unexpected reason,
         | error=Error Domain=RBSRequestErrorDomain Code=5 "Launch
         | failed." UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Launch failed.,
         | NSUnderlyingError=0xae1038720 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain
         | Code=163 "Unknown error: 163"
         | UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Launchd job spawn failed}}}
        
           | tclancy wrote:
           | And it inspired me to buy it for $0.99 and that doesn't work
           | on Mac either. The [your least favorite tribe] really are
           | revolting.
        
           | freakynit wrote:
           | The situation is actually worse than it looks.
           | 
           | This error exists because Apple has effectively made app
           | notarization mandatory, otherwise, users see this warning. In
           | theory, notarization is straightforward: upload your DMG via
           | their API, and within minutes you get a notarized/stamped app
           | back.
           | 
           | ...until you hit the infamous "Team is not yet configured for
           | notarization" error.
           | 
           | Once that happens, you can be completely blocked from
           | notarizing your app for months. Apple has confirmed via email
           | that this is a bug on their end. It affects many developers,
           | has been known for years, and Apple still hasn't fixed it. It
           | completely elimiates any chances of you being able to
           | notarize your app, thus, getting rid of this error/warning.
           | 
           | Have a loot at how many people are suffering from this for
           | years with no resolution yet:
           | https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/118465
        
             | bornfreddy wrote:
             | Yikes. Why anyone would willingly develop for Apple
             | platforms is beyond me. But then I also don't understand
             | why some some people like using the crap^WmacOS. To each
             | their own I guess. Hardware does look nice though, too bad
             | about their software.
        
               | rjh29 wrote:
               | Because they "have" to have the nice display or good
               | battery life I guess. Everyone has different priorities.
               | Personally for me it's Linux or nothing.
        
               | freakynit wrote:
               | Well, gotta sell wherever the customers are,
               | unfortunately.
        
               | dmitrygr wrote:
               | Because that is where the users with the money are.
        
               | spacedcowboy wrote:
               | Well, mainly because it's a better unix than Linux for
               | the desktop, and I'd rather pull my eyes out of their
               | sockets with a rusty screwdriver than use Windows.
               | 
               | Other than developing my own (without using any other
               | OS...) which is a ... significant ... task, there's not
               | much other option. YMMV.
        
               | pimeys wrote:
               | Better is subjective.
        
               | pastage wrote:
               | MacOS is a better desktop in the sense that the desktop
               | is locked down. GNOME trie to be the same as MacOS but
               | being the default desktop for nerds and build for people
               | who lives the Apple way makes it a bit schizofrenic.
               | 
               | As a Linux lifer I agree that the hard diamond surface of
               | the Mac desktop has a solid feeling to it. The Linux way
               | is harder and also more brittle. Windows and Linux are
               | both better than MacOS even as a desktop as long as you
               | do not look at the in the wrong way. The thing is I have
               | only minor problems doing that on either Linux or
               | Windows, but the walled garden of the Mac, Android and
               | iOS is a joke.
               | 
               | MacOS is designed to be a somewhat stable desktop, that
               | is good. It is not a better Unix, it is a political
               | stance that means hacking will forever die.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | I don't know anything about "hard/brittle" analogies for
               | operating systems. What I do know is that Linux
               | distributions don't seem to have a coherent strategy for
               | building an operating system with sensible defaults and a
               | consistent design that makes it easy to use for non-
               | technical users.
               | 
               | Linux developers seem to almost-universally believe that
               | if the user doesn't like it or it doesn't make sense then
               | the user will fix it themselves either via configuration
               | files or patching the source code. That model works fine
               | for users with a lot of knowledge and time on their
               | hands. In other words, it's an operating system for
               | hobbyists.
               | 
               | MacOS, for all its faults, is still pretty easy to use
               | (though not even close to the ease of use of Classic Mac
               | OS 9 and earlier).
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | Apple developers seem to almost-universally believe that
               | if the user doesn't like it or it doesn't make sense then
               | the user will... just have to learn to live with it.
        
               | pastage wrote:
               | You are encouraged to play with footguns on Linux, I do
               | not do it and none of my family do it works fine for us.
               | On "Linux desktop" one of the things you are not
               | encouraged to play with is installation of programs. The
               | Linux way is preferable that is why Apple and all the
               | other are walking down the same path.
               | 
               | Not being able to install things sucks, but when you do
               | you will easily destroy your nice shiny brittle desktop.
               | The pebkac is strong here, but making the users enemies
               | is a bad solution, this is why Google, Apple and MS are
               | all bad desktops.
               | 
               | As I said I have been a Linux user my whole life. I know
               | it works as a desktop but it works best with either
               | people who do not care about instaling stuff, or thise
               | who care enough to get it working.
        
               | sersi wrote:
               | It was a better linux for the desktop back during the
               | snow leopard day but it's slowly gotten worse at the same
               | time that linux became better. Now the only advantages
               | they have is the hardware. The os is buggy doesn't
               | respect apple's own human interface guidelines and is
               | increasingly locked down. Gone are the days of simbl
               | extensions, customizability and a clean nice coherent
               | stable os with few bugs.
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | It might be "better unix" (whatever that means), but it
               | sure as hell is not better. Locked down, buggy, and
               | difficult / impossible to navigate by keyboard. And I
               | need to install (and trust) a 3rd party app to get a
               | multi value clipboard? Yeah right, better. I'd prefer
               | Windows, and I'm not fan of the ad-OS either.
        
               | philipallstar wrote:
               | The advantage is you can just develop it once and
               | publish, rather than pushing things through multiple
               | different packaging processes, and a MacOS person might
               | be more likely to spend money.
        
             | Wowfunhappy wrote:
             | Can't you (as in the user) still just type `sudo spctl
             | --master-disable` to get rid of the nonsense?
        
             | consp wrote:
             | > It affects many developers, has been known for years, and
             | Apple still hasn't fixed it.
             | 
             | Not a feature they care about. Same for deleting apps not
             | released yet. Haven't looked in a while but for over a
             | decade it has been impossible to delete ios apps submitted
             | and not released. So either you have to release the app,
             | make it "apple approved" and then immediately kill it or
             | have an app always present (I think you can hide it but
             | I've not checked that in quite a while.
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | This is the reason I dropped macOS as a platform target. Apple
         | will make users think you're a hacker trying to trick them,
         | because macOS acts as if your app is radioactive if you don't
         | pay the Apple tax, and refuses to let users run the apps they
         | want.
         | 
         | Maybe 1 out of 1,000 users will know the magic ritual required
         | to run what they want on their machine, and for every one of
         | those, 10,000 are gaslit into thinking you were trying to harm
         | them by macOS' scary warnings and refusal to do what they want.
        
           | llm_nerd wrote:
           | > Apple will make users think you're a hacker trying to trick
           | them
           | 
           | Apple will make users know that there are loads of hackers
           | trying to trick them. The threat is _extremely_ real.
           | 
           | > 10,000 are gaslit into thinking you were trying to harm
           | them
           | 
           | Gaslit? Again, many are absolutely trying to harm users.
           | Pretending this is some fake threat is perverse.
           | 
           | As much as people like to complain about downloaded software
           | having restrictions, or encouraging the developer to be
           | verified by Apple, we had already entered a world where users
           | were told to never, ever run any software not by one of the
           | bigs. I mean, I've told relatives that, for good reason after
           | they installed malware and other nonsense repeatedly. It
           | sucks having to get an Apple account and sign your
           | executable, but for any normal user outside of the foolish,
           | that was the only way they were ever going to run your app.
           | 
           | And honestly, for the case given this should be a web app.
           | People shouldn't be trusting some random executable by some
           | random group.
        
             | wtetzner wrote:
             | How does paying $100 per year to sign your binary ensure
             | it's not malicious?
        
               | llm_nerd wrote:
               | It doesn't ensure anything. But it does force an identity
               | trail (you have to prove your identity), and more
               | importantly allows Apple to have a rapid kill switch: If
               | a developer uses their account to distribute malware,
               | Apple revokes the cert and those apps will no longer run
               | on user devices (as soon as the revocation hits).
               | 
               | Should it be $100 per year? No, that is ridiculous and
               | usurious.
        
           | xpe wrote:
           | Taking a legitimate concern (which of course does factor into
           | the overall trade-offs) but exaggerating it into a tirade is
           | uninteresting. Trade-offs are complex. There is more than one
           | sensible mix depending on one's values and position.
           | 
           | Only seeing the worst potential explanations of other parties
           | whom make different trade-offs than you is uncharitable. It
           | can also look like what I would call counterfactual
           | hypocrisy, by which I mean, if you were in those shoes, would
           | you actually behave differently?
           | 
           | E.g.: If you were in Apple's shoes (think about what this
           | entails), what actions would be compatible with a business's
           | MO from that point of view? From various ethical points of
           | view?
           | 
           | If you say you would've behaved differently, is it even
           | possible that you would've ended up in their shoes in the
           | first place?
           | 
           | A common response here is early mistakes compound. Or actors
           | have poor character which leads to an inevitable fall. That's
           | the stuff of Greek tragedies. I'm more of a system thinker.
           | If you look at the patterns, it is pretty easy to see that
           | the leverage points are human systems rather than human
           | nature itself.
           | 
           | If you don't like the environmental conditions that led to
           | the decision space, then think about changing the system
           | rather than blaming parts of it.
           | 
           | Casting blame on individual parts of the system arguably
           | plays into maintaining the status quo. The most effective
           | changemakers understand how things work and how they got that
           | way without alluding to convenient oversimplifications. Rant
           | now concluded.
        
         | WildWeazel wrote:
         | Mac support is the bane of my existence. It doesn't help that
         | none of us core contributors have one, so if anyone is willing
         | to be a lab monkey...
        
           | darthcircuit wrote:
           | You can run macOS in a docker container. There's no hardware
           | acceleration for gpu, but works well enough.
           | 
           | You can also try macinabox if you have unraid:
           | 
           | https://hub.docker.com/r/spaceinvaderone/macinabox
           | 
           | It's probably the easiest way of setting up a Mac VM if you
           | have unraid. I know there are similar options for qemu and
           | kvm based hypervisors. If you have an amd gpu you should be
           | able to pass it through.
        
             | mherrmann wrote:
             | quickemu [1] is good at running macOS VMs.
             | 
             | 1: https://github.com/quickemu-project/quickemu
        
             | WildWeazel wrote:
             | My only experience with docker is headless in CI. I do have
             | AMD. I'll have to look into this. Thanks
        
             | Cloudef wrote:
             | Emulating mac or using mac SDKs on non apple devices is
             | against apple's bullshit license though.
        
               | freakynit wrote:
               | BS needs to be countered with rejection.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | If Apple finds out they'll ban your developer
               | certificates and then all installed copies of your app
               | will stop working.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | Has this ever happened? Not revoking certificates, which
               | they've certainly done for malware or e.g. iOS "signing
               | services", but because a developer used non-Apple
               | hardware.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | I don't know the answer to that but a quick search shows
               | lots of examples of people complaining that their
               | developer certificate has been revoked, demonstrating a
               | willingness by Apple to revoke certificates if they
               | believe the developer violated their terms of service. I
               | doubt Apple would go out of their way to include language
               | in the agreement that binds developers to their own
               | sanctioned platform if they didn't intend to enforce it.
        
               | admax88qqq wrote:
               | I would wager all of those are distributing malware.
        
               | chongli wrote:
               | I would take that wager. I highly doubt Apple's
               | revocation team has a 0% false positive rate.
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | I agree, but I think a better wager (and what GP probably
               | meant) would be that all of these developers had their
               | certificates revoked because Apple thought they were
               | distributing malware. That's what the system is for.
        
               | rayboy1995 wrote:
               | I am the dev of Pocket Squadron (https://play.google.com/
               | store/apps/details?id=com.bombsight....) and a few years
               | ago I tried to make a build for iOS due to many player
               | requests. I did not have a mac so I setup a mac VM and a
               | dev account to start making builds and see how big of a
               | lift it would be. My account was banned unfortunately.
               | Still no iOS build to this day, I'm probably missing out
               | on a good bit of money.
        
               | sagarm wrote:
               | Best way to reject it is to ignore macOS.
        
             | hellzbellz123 wrote:
             | But you can't distribute whatever you build legally as far
             | as im aware. The apple sdks prevent you from shipping
             | legally.
             | 
             | The only way atm is installing homebrew and using a gnu
             | tool chain if I understand the license of the official sdks
             | correctly?
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | Tangible thing versus conceptual thing. License never
               | stood a chance.
        
           | AceJohnny2 wrote:
           | Apple has been slowly tightening the screws on app
           | notarization (code signing) requirements for running apps on
           | macOS. To do it properly you need to be a registered
           | developer ($100/year), and they're certainly not making it
           | easy if you don't have access to a Mac.
           | 
           | https://support.apple.com/guide/security/app-code-signing-
           | pr...
           | 
           | > _On devices with macOS 10.15, all apps distributed outside
           | the App Store must be signed by the developer using an Apple-
           | issued Developer ID certificate (combined with a private key)
           | and notarized by Apple to run under the default Gatekeeper
           | settings._
           | 
           | Re: Developer ID Certificates: https://developer.apple.com/he
           | lp/account/certificates/create...
           | 
           | I suspect the friction that users are facing are due to
           | dodging the above requirements.
        
             | hellzbellz123 wrote:
             | The whole sdk has a restriction that you can't use it off
             | platform. The code signing thing is just a tax on ios devs
        
               | eptcyka wrote:
               | You need an apple ID. You cannot create one without using
               | an apple device.
        
           | sssilver wrote:
           | I have a Macbook Pro M4 Max, an Apple Developer account, a
           | bit of time, and some enthusiasm. Would love to help!
        
             | als0 wrote:
             | Notarize it.
        
           | fullstackwife wrote:
           | Why not build it as a web app and play via browser?
        
           | tclancy wrote:
           | I volunteer.
        
           | Catagris wrote:
           | I have a MacBook m4 Pro, m3, mac Mini m3, an apple developer
           | account and willing to help.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | https://github.com/fragmede/civ-iii/releases/tag/v0.3-mac-
           | si...
        
         | DeathArrow wrote:
         | I got a Mac only because of the excellent battery life. But I
         | dread Os X. Not only it is dumbed down and it is harder to
         | accomplish what is trivial in other operating system, but I
         | have to actively fight against it if I want to run software
         | that is not downloaded from the app store or I want to open
         | files with apps I downloaded from elsewhere. And the UI is
         | broken.
        
         | miki123211 wrote:
         | "cancel or allow" (which Microsoft still does) makes no sense,
         | it just trains user to click "allow" every time. Users don't
         | know what they should allow or not.
         | 
         | It makes a bit more sense on accounts that have a password set,
         | as it requires you to confirm identity when introducing
         | significant changes to the system (and this is something that
         | Apple also does).
         | 
         | Gatekeeper is a different thing, it basically makes sure that
         | the software you're trying to run has been pre-scanned for
         | malware by a trusted party, similar to Windows's "smart screen"
         | and Defender or APt's GPG keyring integration. It's a mechanism
         | that is completely invisible to 99+% of users. If you see a
         | Gatekeeper pop-up and the app in question is not mlaware, the
         | developer is doing something very wrong.
        
           | bpye wrote:
           | > If you see a Gatekeeper pop-up and the app in question is
           | not mlaware, the developer is doing something very wrong.
           | 
           | Refusing to pay $100 for notarization is not "doing something
           | very wrong".
        
         | ghgr wrote:
         | > How far OSX has come since the days of the "cancel or allow"
         | parody advert.
         | 
         | In case you're wondering like me, this is the advert in
         | question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CwoluNRSSc&t=0
        
         | neocron wrote:
         | And yet people still support it by finding ways around it
         | instead if just leaving mac in the dust, simply not supporting
         | it. Worked for Internet Explorer, will work the same dor mac
        
         | rpdillon wrote:
         | The lockdown has been slow and steady. Slow enough that at
         | every juncture, apologists point out that it is still
         | _possible_ to run software you choose. I think we enjoy freedom
         | that people do not appreciate because they never had to earn
         | it. Gaining it back will require extraordinary effort.
        
       | glimshe wrote:
       | I once had 10 civil war-tech troops with rifles lined up against
       | a fort with ONE bow and arrow troop. I lost every single one of
       | my troops and that's the last time I've played Civ 3 in my life.
       | Hopefully they addressed this issue...
       | 
       | (PS: once a friend lost a battleship to a stone age militia in
       | the original Civ)
        
         | daotoad wrote:
         | I lost a nuke to a phalanx in Civ 1. Still salty about that
         | _decades_ later.
        
           | yread wrote:
           | It was a dud
        
         | supertrope wrote:
         | Civ III battles are best thought of as dice rolls like the
         | board game Risk. If you have more modern units you get to roll
         | more dice but there's still a small chance archers defeat
         | musketmen.
        
         | WildWeazel wrote:
         | tbh that's a civ rite of passage
        
         | nasretdinov wrote:
         | Civ V definitely solved the issue by separating unit strength
         | and their HP. Not sure about Civ 4, but I think it applies
         | there too.
        
       | rkagerer wrote:
       | Neat! Civ 3 was always my favorite version.
        
       | SPascareli13 wrote:
       | Freeciv was what brought me too the civ world, I'm sure this
       | project will be the same for many children of this generation.
        
       | tdrz wrote:
       | Really cool, I want something like that for Railroad Tycoon 2.
        
         | craftkiller wrote:
         | https://github.com/Trilarion/freerails
        
       | mfld wrote:
       | This looks great! Shout out to FreeCol, a reimagined
       | Colonization, that has the same isometric look and is a lot of
       | fun.
        
       | mcfedr wrote:
       | wow, look at me stuck in the world of freeciv (civ 2)
        
       | closetkantian wrote:
       | Really wish someone would do this for Alpha Centauri, my favorite
       | game of all time
        
         | nebalee wrote:
         | There's https://github.com/afwbkbc/glsmac but that still has a
         | lot of work to be put into.
        
       | miki123211 wrote:
       | This feels like the perfect game to add (screen reader)
       | accessibility to.
       | 
       | Sadly, I don't think it can be done by us screen reader users, as
       | the Godot editor UI is not really accessible (though they're
       | apparently changing that in the latest version).
        
       | isomorphic- wrote:
       | I encourage people to try Unciv. It is the best open-source Civ
       | clone for desktop/mobile.
       | 
       | https://github.com/yairm210/Unciv
        
         | miclill wrote:
         | Cool. It seems Unciv is basically Civ V while openciv3 is Civ
         | III, if anyone else is wondering...
        
       | ubixar wrote:
       | been following OpenCiv3 with interest. curious if you've been
       | using any AI coding assistants to speed things up, or if it's
       | been mostly vanilla dev? the codebase looks pretty clean
        
       | p0w3n3d wrote:
       | FreeCol / Colonization team FTW
        
       | dnautics wrote:
       | I'm one of the weird ones that really wants an open source
       | Civ:CTP. Especially if you can still edit the .ini file to have
       | 255 civilizations on the map.
        
       | marcd35 wrote:
       | ive never played before. i moved my guys around the map for 6
       | turns then they just disappeared. also cant figure out how to
       | increase the scaling of the screen
        
       | einpoklum wrote:
       | I'm old enough to have played Civ I when I was a child, but have
       | not played since then. So, why didn't this project choose to
       | create a Civ 7 or Civ 6 play-alike, nor a Civ 1 play-alike, but
       | rather Civ 3? What's special about it?
       | 
       | More generally - if someone remind us of the major differences
       | between the different versions of Civilization, in a nutshell, we
       | would be in your debt.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-02-07 23:00 UTC)