Civ3 is awesome!

[Harovan]

Yes, PtW 1.27 is the final version. It has only a few bugs left (like the city rank corruption bug, aka RCP), which were promised to be fixed in Conquests. This promise has been honored indeed, which could be good news, except that a large bunch of previously fixed bugs from PtW returned. The reason for this is probably, that the coding work with Conquests begun before the PtW bugs were fixed, and for the fixes in PtW an extra branch in the code base (CVS, MSS or alike) has been created, which is now dead since PtW is finished. But the bugs remained in the C3C code base. Since Firaxis has almost ceased to support Conquests (except Tavis' effort, which is appreciated, but insufficient), this probably means, that these bugs will remain forever, unless they launch a huge bug squashing effort, which is however unlikely to happen.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber


Scoring penalty (Bonus) for barb level was in CIV 2. It is not a factor in the scoring for CIV III.

interesting. I wasn't sure. I know you get a bonus in SMAC as well.

I usually play with them at roaming I believe. I think it would be too cheesy to make them lower. I don't like to make the game too easy

Plus it's nice when they harass the AI civs. Although I'm not sure how much that happens. They seem to harrass me more than the AI.

[psumbody]

It's Amazing seeing how many people think Civ 2 is better than civ 3. It took me over two years and the latest expansion conquests to finally coax me into playing Civ 3. I had bought the special edition Civ-3 the year it was release but never played it. I thought I wouldnt like the new concepts of strategic resources and Culture. Now I really love the concepts and think Civ 3 is a much better game than Civ 2 overall.

[Dis]

And I admit to liking graphics. The graphics are a big plus- esp. snoopy's graphics pak.

But as I've said before. Having armies and units supported on a nation wide basis rather than indidual cities I like.

I like the fact workers and settlers are seperate, unlike civ2.

I like the fact that the units are a bit more balanced, and with conquests, there's a wide assortment of units to choose from. Esp. in the modern age. Although I still primarily use modern armour and mech. infantry . But I sometimes use radar artillery. And of course I use jet fighters, bombers, and stealth bombers. Units such as the Civ2 howitzer was just too powerful. Yes I could refrain from using it, but it's too tempting

diplomats and spies in civ2 were too powerful. Although I admit I'm not entirely pleased with the way espionage is implemented in civ3. But it's not a big part of my game, so it never bothered me much. It may bother other people more that rely on stealing technology and other spy/diplomat actions to win.

battleships and other units completely wiping out garrisons in cities in civ2 I did not like. Navy in civ3 may seem a little weak, but I think they are in context with their usefulness in real life (although it would be hard to implement navies disrupting trade routes).

partisans- I'm glad they're gone . They were annoying.

but I do miss wonder movies. the advisors were pretty cool. And the nostalgia. It was such an amazing game back in the day. Nothing could beat it.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Dissident
partisans- I'm glad they're gone . They were annoying.

Amen.

[psumbody]

The espionage model and Zone of control are the only features that I liked in Civ 2. But I agree with Dissident, Diplomats/Spies in Civ 2 were way overpowered. I relied more in conquering the AI with diplomats/spies than with military units. Just take the enemy capitol with force and buy up the remaining cities.

In Civ 3 I dont even bother with espionage with the exception of occasionally investigating a city. After spending huge gobs of money trying to steal technology or inciting propaganda with no positive results I dont even try anymore. Even inserting a spy in a enemy city doesnt work half the time. The only espionage feature with I truely miss from civ 2 is the ability to bribe a enemy unit.

Even though CIV 3 does have ZOC feature most units dont have the ZOC trait set. But no real loss I just use a line of 3-4 units to block those pesky AI Settlers from traversing my territory.

[-Jrabbit]

Other than the suitcase nuke (which I've never used), I would say Civ2 spies and dips are more underpriced than overfeatured. My biggest issue with spies is their re-usability. The single-use dip makes some sense (esp. at the price), but the infinite-use spy (@30GP!) is quite laughable. A "no city bribe" approach puts them in decent perspective. But used as designed, they should be WAY more expensive.

[deity]

Civ 3 sux as SP and Civ2 rocks as SP or MP = a plain fact....

[deity]

then, and now

[snooppod]

need sound to not get stuck with civII

I need a copy of the "diplomusic" folder you all have under civ3\sounds otherwise i have to play civ I!! my email is luzifer666@gmx.ch

thanx

[Dis]

Originally posted by deity
Civ 3 sux as SP and Civ2 rocks as SP or MP = a plain fact....

the thing is I never played civ2 in multiplayer. My version does not have multiplayer. I think you need the gold edition or something.

good luck finding that now.

[vmxa1]

Yes yo need the gold version or Test Of Time. They are often available around here.

[deity]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
The bulk of Civ3ers played Civ2. They're just openminded for some changes and willing to trade some fun for more challenge (speaking of SP, of course), while others are not. Neither of these sides is right or wrong, and everybody should play what him pleases.

edit

I suggest you read the results of the poll

[Harovan]

Originally posted by deity
I suggest you read the results of the poll

Yes, it says that more players trashed Civ2 entirely than people still playing it regularly. Your point being?

[Maquiladora]

I suspect there are people who have never played civ2 in their life and still voted for option 1.