RAH rules VI: No Spamming!

[DrSpike]

It's not the rules............the underlying gameplay was simplified so the SP AI would be better. As such there is little rules changes can do to make it good for MP.

[Rasputin]

dont agree it was simplified , changed yes, as many civ2 people had to totlaly change their style of play..

Wha ti lvoe about civ 3 is the culture and the borders...

i think it would make a good MP if it wasnt jsut too damn slow in modern ages

[DrSpike]

I've played more Civ3 than most Civ2ers, and I don't think it's a bad SP game. However, many elements of the game were indisputably simplified to level the playing field a little when playing the AI. This is understandable, but it contributes to making Civ3 bad for MP.

Trading and espionage are suppressed compared with Civ2. Other factors such as the tech research cap, whilst understandable for SP make no sense for MP. And the improvements in Civ3 like special resources, whilst good for SP, were always going to be bones of contention in MP.

Ultimately Civ3 lacks the depth and versatilty required to make a good MP game, which is why you would struggle to find a game even though PTW isn't that old.

[rah]

I actually thought the way they set it would be good for MP. Most of things I didn't like all involved the AI and once there is no AI, most of those things dissapeared. But I could never get into it. As Spike said, how the techs worked wasn't good. Monarchy wasn't worth researching. The overall flow, just didn't grab you. I can actually say that I probably didn't play enough MP games to give it a fair assessment. But it didn't get boring, it just wasn't any fun to start with.

[Rasputin]

i think the whole idea of resources is a brilliant idea and makes it special, the need to go to war to get a resource you require made it all worthwhile. als othe trade system is better i hate the way some civ 2 games turn into a trade frenzy with people building hundreds of caravans and making a mint of money and then just using that to rush buy what they want. But each to his own. For SP i defiantly prefer Civ3 , but for MP civ 2 (as long as it diplo) is the best.

[rah]

Yeah, I like the resource system too and had hopes for it. I liked the stack combat too. It's too bad the rest of the game didn't keep the feel.

[Ljube]

When it comes to single player, there's no doubt civ 3 is superior, because civ 2 AI is so stupid and exploitable you can easily win every game at deity.
Civ 3 AI is also stupid, but at least AI players cheat heavily and openly in civ 3 so it's difficult to exploit their many stupidities. As a result, you may not be in a position to win every game.

Multiplayer would be interesting because I like both ideas (stack combat and strategic resources), but I never bought the MP version (Play the World) because the single player version had been so damn slow I thought it would have been waste of time to try MP with it.

By the way Rah, do you know why panag lost 1500 posts?

Edit: Rephrased the sentence above and removed the insult

[rah]

I was not involved in that, and am insulted that you would even insinuate it. Next time, make an attempt to get some facts before throwing around accusations like that.

[Ljube]

I wasn’t serious with my accusations, of course.

I'm sorry I have offended you. I didn’t mean to.
Let's make up.

This was just a way to get to the bottom of panag's post count reduction (he's down by about 1500). I was thinking who might be the one who could have all info on that and whom I could provoke into telling me that without a big fuss. You were the obvious candidate. It turned out to be a mistake.

About getting the facts, would it be OK if I started a thread on the issue in Apolyton community forum? Or is it an off-topic topic.

[rah]

A winking smiley would have been fine, but the finger waving one didn't make it look like you were joking. Apology accepted. If you're looking for facts, just ask panag. I wouldn't recommmend starting a thread about it.

[DrSpike]

I don't think PCR's will ever become publicly debatable. Can you imagine the amount of threads that would get posted every single time?

If you or Panag have any problems take them up with Mark or Dan.

Edit: or, as Rah crossposted ask Panag for info! When you do post back surreptitiously here.

[Ben Kenobi]

ljcvetco:

Just send me a PM on Panag and I'll reply. Probably prefereable than airing the whole issue on Ming's home turf.

[Rasputin]

Originally posted by rah
Yeah, I like the resource system too and had hopes for it. I liked the stack combat too. It's too bad the rest of the game didn't keep the feel.

Speaking of stacked combat, i jsut stuffed up big time in latest game of civ2 HOTW4 Diplo. Having not played civ2 for nearly 2 years and solely palying civ3, I damn forgot civ2 doesnt do the same stack rules. I forgot that if one unit dies they all die.

Damn bad way to lose 3 crusaders that were on there way to crush your enemy

[rah]

HAHAHAHA. that was actually pretty funny, but I can see how you you did it. I guess they didn't have a great leader.

[Rasputin]

just never netered my mind, i tohught woohoo, i'll park this stack outside his city and take it next turn. if he attaks i will only lose one so no big deal. But Wammo , one attack all gone ..


Needless to say i had to sue for peace very quickly before they realsised that was the majority of my army