I've played SMAC for about 2 years (my best game is diplomatic in 180 turns), and i've played civ3 only 2 times(warlord and regent), and i'll give a simple comparison:
Civ3's ai is much better than SMAC's AI?
not really, the only improvent is that ai has improved in expansion, and knows how to attack in mass and thats about it. Oh, and i FELT like the ai had about 20% production, tech, growth, advantage in regent (SMAC had that much advantage in the 2nd hardest level) level.
And finally in Civ3's AI r uselessly ruthless. In SMAC even Hive would give an reasonable answer (if im as powerful as him) when i refuse his offer, but in Civ3 the ai gets mad without any reason (in SMAC at least u know why ur enemy faction got mad : u did not choose their social ruling preference) because i did not accept their unfair deal. Afterward they join together (i NEVER start a war) to gang up against me.
There was much more ways to win in SMAC and hardly no single methods was better way to win than the other. In Civ3 u have to start aggresive in the beggining in order to survive. If u dont follow what i just stated above u will be likely to lose. Strangely in Civ3 the units have 3-5 hits: the result is a unit with 2 defence has a good chance to win against a attacker with 4 attack......something which was fixed back at Civ2.......
In Smac there was stuff that were very original (unit design, social engi, using psi units, artillery units [i hoped archer was like that
]).
Yes, there was flaws in SMAC (such as redesigning all units every 3 techs) but compared to Civ 3 its nothing: culture, while an interesting concept, it can be quite weird sometimes: my units conquered a city, but after only 1 turn they becomes cityzens of the conquered nation because of its advanced culture........what a joke........(note that is so unrealistic), with luck some of ur elite units can be promoted to a GL......u just got a free wonder!
Believe me folks, Aok has more strategy than this...
Civ3's ai is much better than SMAC's AI?
not really, the only improvent is that ai has improved in expansion, and knows how to attack in mass and thats about it. Oh, and i FELT like the ai had about 20% production, tech, growth, advantage in regent (SMAC had that much advantage in the 2nd hardest level) level.
And finally in Civ3's AI r uselessly ruthless. In SMAC even Hive would give an reasonable answer (if im as powerful as him) when i refuse his offer, but in Civ3 the ai gets mad without any reason (in SMAC at least u know why ur enemy faction got mad : u did not choose their social ruling preference) because i did not accept their unfair deal. Afterward they join together (i NEVER start a war) to gang up against me.
There was much more ways to win in SMAC and hardly no single methods was better way to win than the other. In Civ3 u have to start aggresive in the beggining in order to survive. If u dont follow what i just stated above u will be likely to lose. Strangely in Civ3 the units have 3-5 hits: the result is a unit with 2 defence has a good chance to win against a attacker with 4 attack......something which was fixed back at Civ2.......
In Smac there was stuff that were very original (unit design, social engi, using psi units, artillery units [i hoped archer was like that

Yes, there was flaws in SMAC (such as redesigning all units every 3 techs) but compared to Civ 3 its nothing: culture, while an interesting concept, it can be quite weird sometimes: my units conquered a city, but after only 1 turn they becomes cityzens of the conquered nation because of its advanced culture........what a joke........(note that is so unrealistic), with luck some of ur elite units can be promoted to a GL......u just got a free wonder!
Believe me folks, Aok has more strategy than this...
Comment