Civ 3

[Maquiladora]

50% of which is spent on using/waiting for workers.

[d=me]

Originally posted by Solver
The arguments are pretty laughable though, aren't they? You say that the game sucks just because it has infantry and tanks. Uhh, fine. Why don't you share any idea of how should the game be different?

Also, you manage to accuse bloodmoon of being weak without saying anything at all about it.

The game should have over 500 units or perferably total different units for every nation like starcraft. There are 10 types of one type of unit like archers, and at least 10 kind of fighters in each age. The nations should get at least 1 unique unit per age. There should be hundred of techs with unique techs for every nation and again at least 1 per age for every nation. The bace facilities should be extremely interesting like the space elevator to allow units to travel to different bases or something like that. And again at least 1 unique facility per nation per age. There should be future ages. The nations should have a set of unique techonlogies depends on what you value at the begging of the game as one of your options. The sets are like extreme trancedent tech sets or culture sets. The wonders should be unique for each nation and so are the secret projects. I can't stand watching the chinese getting bach's cathedral. The nations should a bit more extreme on their ethical views and there shouldn't be two factors that goes against each other for one nation like the babylons. Scientific and religious; that's just weird. The AI should be a lot better with no loopholes like the one I saw on the stragety guide. It would be nice if you can choose the leader of a nation like george washington and each leader have it's own advantages.And the nations should be more culturally enriched during the game that make you feel that it is the sterotypical france or russia known to people through the time.

[Plotinus]

[d=me] Well, I wish I also had a Cray II supercomputer to play computer games on, as you clearly do. I wonder if you hated Citizen Kane for being in black and white too.

What's weird about being scientific and religious anyway? Newton managed it pretty well...

[Aeson]

Who pays for 2 expansions for a game they think sucks? You should have just designed it yourself and saved the $80.

[Skanky Burns]

I am wondering why he didn't realise his own feelings for the game early on, like when he first started playing it. Unless he just bought the game and the expansion packs at the same time. Still, he is crazy, he could have read these forums to realise that the game had infantry and tanks.

[Mr. President]

The game could quite obviously have been a lot better. But it's not the worst game out there. In some ways I do prefer Alpha Centauri, but Civ3 doesn't have nothing going for it.

[Switch]

Originally posted by d=me

The game should have over 500 units or perferably total different units for every nation like starcraft. There are 10 types of one type of unit like archers, and at least 10 kind of fighters in each age. The nations should get at least 1 unique unit per age. There should be hundred of techs with unique techs for every nation and again at least 1 per age for every nation. The bace facilities should be extremely interesting like the space elevator to allow units to travel to different bases or something like that. And again at least 1 unique facility per nation per age. There should be future ages. The nations should have a set of unique techonlogies depends on what you value at the begging of the game as one of your options. The sets are like extreme trancedent tech sets or culture sets. The wonders should be unique for each nation and so are the secret projects. I can't stand watching the chinese getting bach's cathedral. The nations should a bit more extreme on their ethical views and there shouldn't be two factors that goes against each other for one nation like the babylons. Scientific and religious; that's just weird. The AI should be a lot better with no loopholes like the one I saw on the stragety guide. It would be nice if you can choose the leader of a nation like george washington and each leader have it's own advantages.And the nations should be more culturally enriched during the game that make you feel that it is the sterotypical france or russia known to people through the time.

I'm glad they didn't do that. Too many units, bogs down the game and your mind, having to keep track of so many different items. And I would also like Civ4 to be released in my lifetime, as it would take them forever to actually design indvidual units, etc for EVERY nation a la Starcraft...If I remember correctly, Starcraft had 3 species? Civ has...16 ,then 24, and now 31 tribes.
And also stereotypicalizing and individualing techs, wonders, etc would also take away one of Sid's ideas for the game...too be able to make your own history. Who can't say that the Chinese didn't have a great musician named Chow Win Bach, and Confucianists used Cathedrals? Sure, maybe not in our world, but our world also isn't generated by a seed value and parameters.

BTW, What are you talking about with Bloodmoon not having much detail? I never really played it, but reading the Elder Scrolls fora most people REALLY liked it.

[Solver]

Having many unique things to each civilization would make them pretty much unequal, which isn't supposed to happen in civ.

However, you should play Alpha Centauri maybe. The factions there are very different, and there's no limit to how many units you can build, as you design the unit configurations yourself. Also, the space elevator and other nifty things are in there.

[Dis]

civ3 does not suck. well not until you've played it a few hundred times. Then it tends to be repititave.

[DrSpike]

There are 2 votes for yes so someone agrees.

[d=me]

I do play alpha centauri and it's my favourate game. Bloodmoon have a horrible story and it got me kind of depressed when playing for hours in the dark scen and blue music. The story just ruined everything in the morrowind world, the wlohe value scale and everything else. Tribunal kind of did too, but it is a bit better. And the fans on the forums, they are just superficial(my opinion). And for the game balance, I don't really care about it as long as the game have the things I mentioned. Only if it's extremely unbalanced to an unplayable point. And I bought the game with the expansion but I didn't realize that it would have this kind of units. And I did not vote.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by DrSpike
There are 2 votes for yes so someone agrees.

Three now.

[Paddy]

well like most things, it can come down to what you are willing to make of it...

Civ is a good game, regardless of the programmers

ahh it is all good

then leave their cities in ruins

[d=me]

Is civ 2 and call to power all like civ with tanks?

[Solver]

Something I wrote just yesterday, a pretty long comparison of CtP2 and Civ 3:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112597