Civ3 Conquests, should this have been the orginal Civ3?

[Dis]

you know bugs in the opening screen? unless you count setting up the game as playing.

I've been playing the WW2 scenario- had to try that one first.

I started as the U.S. The pearl harbour attack by the Japanese ai was pretty weak. I lost no battleships, and only one was damaged. Air bombardment is still very weak in this game. .

But I lost many of my green battleships battling the japanese navy. They have a formidable navy.

And I am impressed they too the Philappines so easily (and almost on time as well)

Though they razed Manila . It'll be kind of hard to return to a city that doesn't exist .

Though I'm still not sure how the victory points are attained. Anyone know? I sure hope Manila doesn't give victory points, because that city no longer exists. They also razed another city in the Philappines.

[dexters]

I think you want to have a weak air bombardment given air bombardment has lethal land.

I already see an avenue of cheap human play where you just move stacks of bombers around blowing up cities and the move in with land forces afterwards. airbobmard is fine.

I certainly wished the effect of the pearl harbour bombing was more pronounced, but not at the expense of the larger gameplay balance.

[General Ludd]

I don't think conquests is any better then the original Civ3, really. It's still fundementally flawed in my opinion - too much number crunching and nonsensical micromangaing, not enough civilization building. (ie. too much 'powergaming', not enough 'roleplaying')

Not to mention that the huge map still takes forever to process turns on...

[duxup]

I think the first release of Civ 3 was plenty for a full game. My only complaint about that release would be:

The version of the game that came in the tin case was not worth its price.

The ending techs felt (and still feel) incomplete.

Still, it was plenty of game for release on its own.

No I don't think Civ3 with the other expansions should have been the first release.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by Osweld
I don't think conquests is any better then the original Civ3, really. It's still fundementally flawed in my opinion - too much number crunching and nonsensical micromangaing, not enough civilization building. (ie. too much 'powergaming', not enough 'roleplaying')

Not to mention that the huge map still takes forever to process turns on...

Micromanagement and number crunching is a matter of play style. I have no time or patience for the level crunching that some players here do, and I probably send my workers into automation far earlier than them as well. Yet I still manage to enjoy the game a great deal and play more to both win and enjoy, than to work the internal mechanization of the game to maximize a win.

To me, the ability to manage as little or as much as you choose, is one of the game's strengths.

[Dis]

there are many automated features so you don't have to number crunch.

Of course you won't be able to play at the higher levels unless you micromanage everything.

But all civ games have been about micromanagement. Including civ2.

[Alexander I]

Well, as an example, Civ2 had the perfect amount of micromangement. Enough to take care of business, but not so much that it became boring (i.e. CTP). Civ3 has followed Civ2's legacy.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

In answer to your question, yes this is Civilization III as was originally promised. You just had to pay $100 for it in three installments.

Editor still buggy as is the game and some of the scenarios still crash, but hey, its a FixAxis product.

Definitely worth the money though.

[Alexander I]

Yes, despite its weaknesses, it is definitely worth it!

[Myrddin]

Civ3 as originally promised?????

Can you find that promise anywhere?


Civ3 was published on time (well slightly early ), had few critical bugs and was never promised with multiplayer

2 years on it is still popular - what more do you want?

[Alexander's Horse]

They always promise more than they deliver.

[Peter Triggs]

They always promise more than they deliver.

Sig material, AH.

[Antrine]

Actually, if you waited as I did until two weeks ago to buy anything CIVIII, the whole thing was 70 bucks and that with the bonus CD. I read the forums and with all the negativity I patiently waited, ah such patience a true reward! And now in contrast to CIVII this baby is beautiful!!!

Antrine

[Myrddin]

But what have you been doing for the last 2 years?

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Antrine
Actually, if you waited as I did until two weeks ago to buy anything CIVIII, the whole thing was 70 bucks and that with the bonus CD. I read the forums and with all the negativity I patiently waited, ah such patience a true reward! And now in contrast to CIVII this baby is beautiful!!!

Antrine

Well, good for you! In the meantime we have played some wonderful games, including multiplayer (or just PBEM in my case) and democracy games and we helped with our comments and suggestions the developers to make the beautiful baby you enjoy so much