Do You Play Civ III ?

[rah]

The biggest problem was right after the game came out, it was like WE WANT TO HEAR ABOUT ALL YOUR GREAT STRATAGIES so they could tweek the game in patches so your stratagies won't work. It was like they were more concerned about making a game that was impossible to beat rather than a balance FUN game.

Hopefully MP (with all the AI cheats eliminated if you don't use AI's) will be more FUN.

RAH
But if not, we still have MP II

[War4ever]

but for how long with this epic game keep grabbing us.... alot of players have left civ2

[rah]

As long as it keeps evolving like it has, at least a few more years. There's still many rules tweeks to be done.
A fair accelerated start could add years to game play.

RAH

[War4ever]

agreed..but due to the fact that the game has evolved over the last year alone, i think its time to seriously start some new rule sets

[Hydey]

New rule : No ferrets

[SlowwHand]

Ok, here are what I see as facts.
Civ III suffers, only because it's not MP. I agree.
Civ III is still vastly superior to II, when regarded in only SP terms.
Once III has been fitted with MP capabilities, it will kick the dogstuff out of II in MP also.
Why? More involved options for how to conduct one's Civ, assuming all options are available.

[rah]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Once III has been fitted with MP capabilities, it will kick the dogstuff out of II in MP also.
Why? More involved options for how to conduct one's Civ, assuming all options are available.

still vaporware as far as I'm concerned.
You're an even bigger optimist than I am.

But I want some of whatever drug you're taking.

RAH

[SlowwHand]

Whatever. Leave Civ as it is; with a race to certain Wonders, Horses, etc.
Or make it more of a thinking person's game, without the cheats, failures, and glitches that are so well-documented now in II.

[markusf]

civ3 is even worse, i attack and my whole army vanishes because of some rebellion! LOL
The AI is even worse then in civ2, they just hope you don't notice because now you can attack with stacks. And you can't kill off a AI stack with one unit no more.
The resource thing in MP? I just see a lot of people quiting if they don't have what they want. The game simply has no sence of accomplishment, one year is just like the next.

[SlowwHand]

Think MP, Mark. But you illustrate my point fairly well.

Civ I was fine, until II.
SP was fine, until MP.
Civ II MP will be fine, until MP III arrives.

Which Civ would you pick? What if someone else chooses that Civ ?
They're all different. All specific strengths, be it commerce, military, religious, whatever.
Is there a weaker Civ ? Maybe.
One could make the point that Aztecs, with their puny Jaguar Warrior, is a longshot. Except the Warrior upgrades to Swordsmen.
Americans? The F15 is way into the game, but what if someone masters the U.S. play?
Different thing then.
What if you like Japan. Tooling along in the game, no iron in your land.
What then? Try and take land with iron? Try and trade ?

What is the cause for restart in II ? Techs. That's gone.
I'm really surprised that MP people don't see all that I do, especially considering I was boycotting, and had to have it practically rammed down my throat.

The prime draw on Civ, is that every game is pretty different than the last.
Civ III takes that fact to another level.

[Flatlander Fox]

I agree with most of what Sloww says...

But how can you play a game that's combat is so simplified it produces unrealistic results?

THAT'S what we are all trading and striving for anyway... The right to build the best units, in order to dominate the rest of the field...

But when those units inexplicably lose, then we are robbed of what we set out to do...

P.S. Better have a fast connection!

[DaveV]

Originally posted by Flatlander Fox
P.S. Better have a fast connection!

If they do a good job on PBEM, connection speed is irrelevant...

[OzzyKP]

As for me the boycott stands. I still have not purchased or even played Civ3.

Though I agree with Sloww, from what I've heard the game sounds neat and I think it would be cool for MP when it finally comes out. But I'm in no rush to spend my hard earned money on a new game, so I also am waiting for a 10 dollar bargin bin game. Unless MP gets rave reviews from everyone.

[rah]

It has potential only because it hasn't been released yet.
Civ II MP took a few patches before it was FIXED.
What makes you think that CIV III will be any different.

Rumors have it that it's being play tested now. (in sp mode ) yeah, that will help determine game balance.

However, I do believe that most of the problems that I found with CIV III had to do with the AI. Any MP release should resolve most of those issues since I never intend to include one in a game.

But I'm going to take the wait and see attitude. I still have CIVII MP in the meantime.

RAH
I do however think that resources and different traits will help the game, not hurt it.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Ok, here are what I see as facts.
Civ III suffers, only because it's not MP. I agree.
Civ III is still vastly superior to II, when regarded in only SP terms.
Once III has been fitted with MP capabilities, it will kick the dogstuff out of II in MP also.
Why? More involved options for how to conduct one's Civ, assuming all options are available.

As one of the few civ2MPers that has played a lot of civ3 I have to disagree with some of this. Civ3 SP has several nice features, but the fact that it is harder on the higher levels is not predominantly due to better AI but just reflects the simplified nature of the gameplay and AI bonuses. It's ironic, I have defended civ3 a lot in this forum because I have played it a bit and its fun, as long as you regard it is as civ lite. In the civ3 forums however, I find myself having to point out why the game will never be as deep or flexible as civ2.

I really hope civ3 MP works, we need more players, but I am as yet unconvinced, as are most that have played a lot of civ3 are.