Do you continue to play CIV3 after 2050 retirement?

[kring]

Sometimes, it depends on my mood and the game itself. Some games get so intense that I want to finish it out, even if it means that I go past 2050 AD. The score is not relevant to me. It's the challenge, or the thrill of finishing some goal(s) that I was striving to accomplish.

[Alex]

I rarely do it, only when I cannot accomplish my goals before 2050.

I read somehwere on these boards that the game is bound to crashes if you try to play it long after 2050...

[Panag]

hi ,

yes , why not , you have spend 6050 years and then all of a sudden you give up , ......

have a nice day

[Andropov]

Sometimes I play after 2050 if it has been a tough game. I enjoy being able to use radar artillery, stealth bombers, etc. on the enemy. To me, the modern era warfare is the most fun, and the score is irrelevant...so occasionally I'll venture past the cut off date.

[Paulypav]

I have occasionally played past 2050, but only a few years and then I become bored. One of these days I might go further if I'm really enjoying the game, but I doubt it.

[Naiveplayer]

All the time, in fact - I almost never throw away games after 2050.

My colllection of still-running games :

[Naiveplayer]

Of course by this you can tell how skilled I am. (not very skilled)

In the 2559 Greek game, the tech pace was so slow. I have a note that says to sabotage London in 2200 because that was the turn before they were about to build the U.N.

And...I think the two Bismarck games are the same game...but were in different folders...

The 2223 French game was the ultimate game - I had to keep on disabling victory conditions: cultural, histographic, domination, diplomatic, spaceship. I used C3MT to uncheck the conditions and in 2049 extended the retirement date.

[asleepathewheel]

No

I like to see my scores on the high score list. I am vain. I don't care so much after that. If I haven't won by 2050, I consider that to be a loss

[Daz]

only if the game was very challenging until the very end....
Not if I'm the sole superpower.

[MoonWolf]

Maybe my memory mix this with the other peaceful victories, but I continue only a few times, and that's to go totally warmongering with nukes

[Alex]

If I'm playing in a map with plenty of opportunities for a good tactical war, then I try to play the game past 2050, just for the fun of it. As someone said, war is much more interesting with modern era units, so I may extend the game a little more just to use them (and sometimes to make use of nukes too )

[Aramis]

Rarely, and by that I mean only once. That was the only game that got that far. My other games are usually over in the mid 1700s. In the one game where 2050 retirement came I continued to play to find out what the other advances and units were like.
Would I play past 2050 again? I don't know. If it ever comes up again, I'll know.

[bobbo008]

i edit all of the games i play, usually trying something new. i like on huge maps having workers and settlers have two movement points and you can move over 5 "roaded" squares in a turn. i also make techs cheaper. this was in my current game, although the AI doesnt seem to be doing too well. on regent, on my own good-sized island. the map is 300x300 or more. i'm at combustion and the AI is at education. i have all the wonders. wonder what i did wrong...

[pedrojedi]

Never... My games almost never get that far, and I think it is kinda sad to work a lot to not see it in the scores.

[HazieDaVampire]

i keep on going untill i own the world, and i usualy nuke it untill its all desert too. MUHAHAHAHA