Civ3 vs other strategy games

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Caesar2760
I've heard remarkably little comment about what is quite likely the best RTS ever: EU II.

I constantly hear about it. Still can't figure it out, tho.

[mesut]

I enjoyed Medieval Total War very much. It has very interesting concepts in it. AND you can fight your battles on your own (if you like). Very good mixture of turn based strategy and real time battles!

I'm really looking forward to Rome Total War!

Mesut

[ErikM]

Originally posted by okblacke
I constantly hear about it. Still can't figure it out, tho.

Nothing to it

1. Play Muscovy.
2. Build cavalry.
3. Attack Novgorod in March 1420 or whenever snow melts.
4. Take all their provinces.
5. Rinse and repeat after truce expires to take Novgorod CoT (earlier if somebody annexed them in the meanwhile).
6. Steamroll everything in sight.

Muscovy is nowhere near the strongest country in the Grand Campaign, but she is very simple strategically.

[Caesar2760]

You want simple strategy? France, 1492. Sit on your ass and you make tons o'cash. Colonize and you're massive. War and you always, ALWAYS win. Really, do whatever appeals to you.

Unless, of course, you were saying that you can't figure out why people are always telling you about it. In which case I don't understand you one bit.

[Elias]

I think i can safely say that C&C the original is the best stradagy game to be invented. The best thing civ3 has to offer is repetive game play without losing intrest but it is far from the most exciteing game.

[furrykef]

Originally posted by Elias
I think i can safely say that C&C the original is the best stradagy game to be invented. The best thing civ3 has to offer is repetive game play without losing intrest but it is far from the most exciteing game.

~has aneurysm~ x.x

- Kef

[okblacke]

Originally posted by ErikM

Nothing to it

1. Play Muscovy.

I can't get through the FREAKING TUTORIAL!

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Caesar2760
You want simple strategy? France, 1492. Sit on your ass and you make tons o'cash. Colonize and you're massive. War and you always, ALWAYS win. Really, do whatever appeals to you.

And this will teach me what exactly? Seriously, I start the demo--these days I bring a book--as I try to raise troops to conquer the distant land somewhere off in the middle east. And I send ships off and wait and wait and wait.

Unless, of course, you were saying that you can't figure out why people are always telling you about it. In which case I don't understand you one bit.

I'm sure I'll like it when I can figure out. I like obscure historical games without a lot of mass appeal.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by okblacke
I can't get through the FREAKING TUTORIAL!

Try EU2 FAQ for beginners by Chema_Cagi. It does a good job at explaining some basic game mechanics.

France or any other big country is probably bad for beginners as there are too many things to do. Small countries are bad because they are tough. So imo it is best to choose a medium-sized power, strong enough to defend itself but small enough to be easily manageble. Muscovy is ideal, because she starts at only three provinces, but has good manpower (=big army), cheap troops (=good economy does not matter as much), and her neighbours are even weaker. Also, at least for first hundred years or so, you don't have to worry much about navies, colonization, trade (send 5 merchants to Novgorod and stick to it), diplomacy, and so such.

Other good beginner countries are Denmark and Venice. Portugal is THE country to learn colonization, but they are rather tough to manage economically and they are not a military power by any stretch of imagination.

[Qilue]

Medieval Total War is a good game, but the AI's actions at times don't make much sense. Many times, it feels like your dealing with a 2yo throwing a tantrum.

For those who meantioned SimAnt, I heard you can start a new game, do nothing and leave the game running. Then go to the movies, have sex or whatever and when you come back to the game, the ants have done whatever it they are supposed to have done.

[okblacke]

Originally posted by ErikM
Try EU2 FAQ for beginners by Chema_Cagi. It does a good job at explaining some basic game mechanics.

I'm on EU1. I couldn't justify buying the second one when I can't figure out the first one.

[furrykef]

Originally posted by Qilue
For those who meantioned SimAnt, I heard you can start a new game, do nothing and leave the game running. Then go to the movies, have sex or whatever and when you come back to the game, the ants have done whatever it they are supposed to have done.

I think I was the only one to mention SimAnt; I just mentioned it twice. And I was joking.

However, it's not always true, especially with the scenarios in the SNES version. The problem with leaving the game running is you lose your advantage over the Red Ants: that you have a human player who preferably knows what he's doing. Because of this lost advantage, the game could easily swing in the favor of the Reds, who could strike and take out your queen...not pretty. The AI is kind of stupid, so the presence of a human player can really change things...for instance, you could coordinate your soldiers to kill a spider that would otherwise keep picking off your ants.

Of course, SimAnt isn't really an RTS, but it had huge potential to be one. If only I had (a lot) more time, I'd make my own ant game, with more of a military focus.

- Kef

[Caesar2760]

That you're on EU 1 might be part of the problem. I never did get around to buying that one, but from what I hear EU 2 is a vastly better game, and has better (though still pretty lacking) documentation.

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Caesar2760
That you're on EU 1 might be part of the problem. I never did get around to buying that one, but from what I hear EU 2 is a vastly better game, and has better (though still pretty lacking) documentation.

Really? Except for CGW, which gave EUII editor's choice vs. a cautiously positive review for EUI, the overall consensus from other sources seems to be the EUII was only marginally better.

Anyway, I finally made it through the freakin' tutorial.



Whatever moron decided it would be a good thing to make a seven hour tutorial with the save DISABLED should be summarily shot. Er, shot summarily. Whatever.

The only thing I did differently this time was send traders instead of colonists, and only send colonists when I was ready to commit to sending enough colonists to turn the province into a city.

That kept me in the black, so that I wasn't completely crippled by the time I discovered Europe, and I could always wait a year if I needed to expand a little further.

I still don't know if I did it "right". The tutorial doesn't talk about turning colonies to cities until the end, but if I hadn't done that and kept expanding, I never would've been able to reach the Mamelukes.

I overexpanded, too. The way the tutorial is set up, you're supposed to have a few provinces in Spain so that when the time comes you can just hop over and invade the Mamelukes' provinces. If I'd explored Spain more, I might've run into them sooner. But the instructions said to explore all the way to the east end of the Mediterranean, so I did. And I ended up having to attack them there.

So, I finally won. Can't say I enjoyed it, though. Bad tutorial! Bad!