Reply With QuoteDoes civ3 stop after 1000 turns or does it stop counting your score? To be honest, is there anything you can't accomplish in 1000 turns. If there is, then thats what the scenario editor is for.
Hello,
I can't seem to find this information about Civ 4 anywhere. I know there are different game length settings like "epic" that effect how long things take, but what I really want to know is: does anyone know if you can play the game for an arbitrarily long time? I hate how Civ 3 ends after 1000 turns.
Does civ3 stop after 1000 turns or does it stop counting your score? To be honest, is there anything you can't accomplish in 1000 turns. If there is, then thats what the scenario editor is for.
Civ3 stops counting score after 540 turns, I never made it to 1000 turns. But I can't imagine how you can manage to NOT win or lose the game in 1000 turns. And since the AI doesn't show any signs of intelligence I wonder what you're doing the remaining 460 turns?
Making pretty pictures out of terraforming on the landscape?
1000 turns?
Sometimes I delay the victory, just to play a little more AND keep the score counting. But I never go to the turm #540...
I usually win the game 100 turns before that. Well, it's just Monarch level, but I'm trying my first serious Emperor just now...
Don't get me wrong, I love epic games just like the next guy. The problem is, the game just becomes more and more boring when you're far away in techs, money, land and military.
However, I'm sure I'll be kicked soon at Emperor level...
The reason the game takes so long is because I play with another person and 6 computers, with the only victory option being "eliminate everyone." So I have to eliminate 7 people. Also, the map is huge and people are on different continents. I've elimated 2 computers so far, but its turn 410 already. This seems like the definition of an "epic" game (huge world, possibility of huge empires, must take on many enemies and destroy them all, etc.) but the game seems to be structured so that it isn't possible to actually do it. I was wondering if the next one would be like that to. From the responses I have received so far, I guess so since nobody seems to want to play that kind of game.
alot of great info here KenCamann
http://civilization4.net/3/114/134/
in a nut shell : its up to the modders
anti steam and proud of it
CDO ....its OCD in alpha order like it should be
ah okay, I never bothered with huge maps...Originally posted by KenCamann
The reason the game takes so long is because I play with another person and 6 computers, with the only victory option being "eliminate everyone." So I have to eliminate 7 people. Also, the map is huge and people are on different continents. I've elimated 2 computers so far, but its turn 410 already. This seems like the definition of an "epic" game (huge world, possibility of huge empires, must take on many enemies and destroy them all, etc.) but the game seems to be structured so that it isn't possible to actually do it. I was wondering if the next one would be like that to. From the responses I have received so far, I guess so since nobody seems to want to play that kind of game.
I think those games are the most fun, huge map, lots of civ... I'm looking forward to Civ4 games at Epic pace on a huge map with at least 15 AIs.
Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man
Start a PBEM the day cIV is released with the maximum allowed human players in combination with the maximum allowed civs in a game. I bet the game will still run by the time CiV comes out.
Solver, to what extent do you micromanage and how tolerant are you of increasing the amount of micromanagement you are to do?
While I hate micromanagement I perform it to the most exacting best of my ability because it wins games and winning games gives me pleasure as long as I accomplish my learning objectives.
Huge maps are anathema to me because I end up creating a huge workload for myself which has me sitting on the same turn for ten mins or more.
Originally posted by GeoModder
Start a PBEM the day cIV is released with the maximum allowed human players in combination with the maximum allowed civs in a game. I bet the game will still run by the time CiV comes out.
Don't forget to patch...
Same here -- and processing speed during gameplay should be less of a problem for me, than it was with Civ 3 as I will have a new laptop with excellent upgrades put in at time of purchase.Originally posted by Solver
I think those games are the most fun, huge map, lots of civ... I'm looking forward to Civ4 games at Epic pace on a huge map with at least 15 AIs.
This is where an awesome Mark Twain quote would be, but Apolyton says it would be too many lines. :(
10 minutes is a long turn to you?Originally posted by Senethro
Huge maps are anathema to me because I end up creating a huge workload for myself which has me sitting on the same turn for ten mins or more.
Originally posted by H Tower
Originally posted by Senethro
Huge maps are anathema to me because I end up creating a huge workload for myself which has me sitting on the same turn for ten mins or more.
10 minutes is a long turn to you?
Let me see. I'm on modern age, huge map, at war with four other civs, moving 150 ~ 350 units each turn (and the AI doing the same)...
Nope, 10 minutes isn't even time enough to micromanage my >100 cities.
Everybody here knows how a single turn can be looooong and tedious. In late game, I barely find time to play one miserable turn...
Well, is too late for a wish list, but I would love having the epic sensation of an endless flow of history without all that late game boredom...
Fine, now heres the follow up.
If your game takes more than ten minutes to play a turn because your empire is huge (and believe me, I make myself miserable with >150 formers with an ICS Hive) what reward do you get from playing the game? Either you have won and don't need to play any longer or its going to turn into a Technology/Scientific victory if there are opponents as large and capable as you.
The devs said a number of times that they are trying to streamline the game play more, by making the initial turns longer and the end turns shorter than in previous Civ iterations.
One way of doing it seems to be putting some restrictions on expansion, making it more viable strategy to have few large specialized cities than a big number of smaller ones.
Also, since you won't need to build roads/railroads on each tile any more, the end game tedium coming after invention of RR won't be there any more.
Edit: Can't spell.
The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
- Frank Herbert
Let me see. Modern age, standard or large continental map, at war with a couple of other civs, at peace with other two, moving 200 something units... I used to spend about 20 minutes each turn.Originally posted by Aro
Let me see. I'm on modern age, huge map, at war with four other civs, moving 150 ~ 350 units each turn (and the AI doing the same)...
Nope, 10 minutes isn't even time enough to micromanage my >100 cities.
I know, I'm a slow thinker. A kind of snail thinker. Actually I started thinking about this post yesterday.
Everybody here is a slow-thinker. That's why we love turn based games...
Speak for yourself, I play more than a little Enemy territory, Counterstrike and street fighter when I can get it.
Originally posted by Senethro
Speak for yourself, I play more than a little Enemy territory, Counterstrike and street fighter when I can get it.Shame on me.
Senethro, you don’t have sense of humor, but you certainly have a point. The whole world IS about fast thinking and clickfests, metaphorically speaking.
And you read fast, too. You even miss some smileys, eventually...
I hate tedious micromanagement, and that must be the reason why I was never a great Civ3 player, not rising above Monarch. I found micromanaging Workers to be the most mind-numbingly boring thing in the game... and 10 minutes a turn isn't bad, yet 10 minutes spent only on moving Workers is very bad.Originally posted by Senethro
Solver, to what extent do you micromanage and how tolerant are you of increasing the amount of micromanagement you are to do?
While I hate micromanagement I perform it to the most exacting best of my ability because it wins games and winning games gives me pleasure as long as I accomplish my learning objectives.
Huge maps are anathema to me because I end up creating a huge workload for myself which has me sitting on the same turn for ten mins or more.
As such, I'm very pleased that there is reduced need for MM in Civ4. I don't mind doing some, but the game starts rapidly losing fun once there is a lot of repetitive MM to do.
Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man
I never did build roads or railroads on every tile.Originally posted by Martinus
Also, since you won't need to build roads/railroads on each tile any more, the end game tedium coming after invention of RR won't be there any more.
This is where an awesome Mark Twain quote would be, but Apolyton says it would be too many lines. :(
My apologies, I think I had disengaged my sense of humour when writing that post.Originally posted by Aro
Senethro, you don’t have sense of humor, but you certainly have a point. The whole world IS about fast thinking and clickfests, metaphorically speaking.
And you read fast, too. You even miss some smileys, eventually...
I would also like to say though that my ability to click is not the greatest asset that I bring to those games, nor is it one exalted above all others at high level of play in them.
I'm in the same boat!Originally posted by Adm.Naismith
... I used to spend about 20 minutes each turn.
I know, I'm a slow thinker. A kind of snail thinker. Actually I started thinking about this post yesterday.
enemy territory
i think a system like smac where it does not go past 100 turns for all practical purposes as far as comptetiveness goes. the MP games i am in are not worker clickfests and the 'fast' speed allows much more strategy imho,whereas civ3 you just have a blob effect where you unstopably get strongergame length?
if you want to stop terrorism; stop participating in it
''Oh,Commissar,if we could put the potatoes in one pile,they would reach the foot of God''.But,replied the commissar,''This is the Soviet Union.There is no God''.''Thats all right'' said the worker,''There are no potatoes''
Originally posted by Solver
I hate tedious micromanagement, and that must be the reason why I was never a great Civ3 player, not rising above Monarch. I found micromanaging Workers to be the most mind-numbingly boring thing in the game... and 10 minutes a turn isn't bad, yet 10 minutes spent only on moving Workers is very bad.
As such, I'm very pleased that there is reduced need for MM in Civ4. I don't mind doing some, but the game starts rapidly losing fun once there is a lot of repetitive MM to do.
Could not agree with it more than I can
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks