Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Civ Has Come a Long Way

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Civ Has Come a Long Way

    I just bought Conquests and got back into Civ3 after not playing for quite a while, basically since it first came out. I just wanted to say how far this game has come, both since it first came out, and especially since its predecessors (Civ2, SMAC). While the game is not without flaws, and while there are features of the game that people still complain about, I think Civ3 has really established itself as the premier TBS game. Here are some reasons why I think this:
    • The tech tree and the eras. In Civ2, the early tech tree was mostly a joke and the game really didn't even start until tanks or at least cavalry. In Civ3, every era really matters, and just about every advance gives you important new abilities. The Ancient Era is critical, and following the right path up the tech tree can make or break your game. Ancient Era wars basically never happened in Civ2, but in Civ3 they are not only common but crucial to most strategies.
    • The units. There are very few useless units in Civ3. Just about everything serves a purpose. Compare that to Civ2, with its legions and catapults and horsemen that no one ever built. There are a few relatively useless things in Civ3, such as Explorers, but for the most part every new unit you gain access to really helps in some way or other. And I won't be surprised if someone replies to this post with a really good use for Explorers which I haven't discovered! SMAC does still get an edge here though because of its unit workshop - nothing in Civ3 compares to that.
    • The AI. I'm sure I'm going to get some grief on this one because there are still many complaints about the AI. But compare it to Civ2 or SMAC, and it's night and day. Experienced players can always defeat the AI by exploiting its weaknesses, but unfortunately I don't think there are any games in existence where this is not true. However the Civ3 AI regularly gives new players a run for their money, usually for quite some time. The way it aggressively goes after your weaknesses is very impressive. Of course the AI could be improved, especially in the use of bombardment and in organizing amphibious assaults, but it's still miles beyond Civ2 and SMAC.
    • Diplomacy. I know I'm going to get grief on this one too, but the Diplomacy screen in Civ3 gives you so much more flexibility than any previous TBS game that it's not even close. Yes the AI doesn't always make the smartest deals, but still, the flexibility to define each trade individually, and to trade such varied components as maps, contacts, techs, resources, workers etc. is a major advance from previous games.
    • The combat model. I think Civ3 really got the combat model right for the first time in the TBS genre. This is one area where there seem to be almost no complaints. In Civ2, or even in SMAC, the "phalanx sunk my battleship" complaint was probably the most common. The key features that make the Civ3 model good are the use of experience towards hit points (SMAC had this too), the new bombardment model, the new air mission model, and in general the balancing of the unit strengths.
    • The new features: resources, culture, separate workers vs settlers, bombardment, unique units, civ traits, borders etc. SMAC had some of these features too, but no previous Civ game did and they all add quite a bit to the game.
    • The improvements since the game first came out. There really are no major bugs anymore, and many of our complaints from the initial release have been addressed. The balancing tweaks I think have really improved the game, especially the UU tweaks (no more useless French Musketeers) and the new units (no more un-upgradeable swordsmen), and also the vastly improved balancing and diversity of naval units. I'll even throw the Espionage screen on this list. While the Espionage model is still clumsy, the new screen is far better than the original implementation, and far far better than the Spy/Diplomat/Probe units of Civ2 and SMAC (and all their accompanying exploits).

    I'll stop gushing now. My overall point is that while the game had serious flaws when it first came out, it really has turned into a well polished product. So while everyone still is entitled to their complaints, just think about what we had before Civ3 came out.
    Firaxis - please make an updated version of Colonization! That game was the best, even if it was a little un-PC.

  • #2
    And I won't be surprised if someone replies to this post with a really good use for Explorers which I haven't discovered! SMAC does still get an edge here though because of its unit workshop - nothing in Civ3 compares to that.


    You can use them to pillage tiles in the opponents empire, IE at a bottle neck, or to pillage lux/strategic resources.
    You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

    Comment


    • #3
      An army of explorers can do an awful lot of pillaging right before they are destroyed (in C3C). Theoretically, 9 tiles in one turn.
      Seemingly Benign
      Download Watercolor Terrain - New Conquests Watercolor Terrain

      Comment


      • #4
        I didnt know explorers could pillage o_O

        As for the combat model being a good point, its certainly better than it used to be but I prefer the CTP2 system - that allows for tactical decisions (bias on defence? attack?) and also reduces the micromanagement.
        "Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender B. Rodriguez

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by WarpStorm
          An army of explorers can do an awful lot of pillaging right before they are destroyed (in C3C). Theoretically, 9 tiles in one turn.
          I use this a lot, especially when I need to cut several resorce conections so They can't build their strongest units. If I'm using the Spanish and you see a mob of conquistodores, SHIVER IN FEAR!

          Comment


          • #6
            An explorer has two moves but treats all terrain as if it had roads. An act of pillage counts as one move and that means you can pillage the tile you’re on and then move three tiles or traverse three tiles and pillage one of them. If you move them with an army they can pillage and come to rest under the protection of the army at the end of their two moves and the AI does not attack healthy armies. I have found that an army traveling with four or five explorers can lay waste an enemy land in short order. Enjoy.
            Attached Files
            The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

            Anatole France

            Comment


            • #7
              Well, ilbiedamned - that's a good strategy for explorers! (sorry I couldn't resist! )

              Actually a good thread. It helps put perspective on the number of features added and improved in the game. It is a good game. I'm still enjoying it.
              Haven't been here for ages....

              Comment


              • #8
                Just in case Drachen's post causes any confusion, an army loaded with explorers will get the extra move (bringing total movement to 9, since it will treat all terrain as roads), and gets the army "automatic pillage" feature, which means it can pillage at a movement cost of zero. That's how the explorer army could pillage nine squares per turn... if explorers could be loaded into armies.

                A conquistador army, OTOH, can do just that.
                Solomwi is very wise. - Imran Siddiqui

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Solomwi
                  Just in case Drachen's post causes any confusion, an army loaded with explorers will get the extra move (bringing total movement to 9, since it will treat all terrain as roads), and gets the army "automatic pillage" feature, which means it can pillage at a movement cost of zero. That's how the explorer army could pillage nine squares per turn... if explorers could be loaded into armies.

                  A conquistador army, OTOH, can do just that.
                  Yes they can and a conquistador army can be a game changer. I didn't really understand conquistadors until the AI blew by my defenses one day and took a lightly defended town five tiles deep. Units that treat all terrain as roads are to be respected if you know what's good for you.
                  The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

                  Anatole France

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My Explorers don't pillage, but they DO airlift (I used the Editor)!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The combat model. I think Civ3 really got the combat model right for the first time in the TBS genre. This is one area where there seem to be almost no complaints. In Civ2, or even in SMAC, the "phalanx sunk my battleship" complaint was probably the most common. The key features that make the Civ3 model good are the use of experience towards hit points (SMAC had this too), the new bombardment model, the new air mission model, and in general the balancing of the unit strengths.

                      While I personally like the CivIII combat model, surely you must have heard a few of the zillion-odd complaints about "that AI spearman killed my tank!"?


                      There really are no major bugs anymore

                      Sub bug. AI failure to build Armies. Barbarian behaviour.
                      Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

                      It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
                      The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Yes C3C is a major improvement, but there are still some glaring weaknesses and there is much which could be done to further improve it. Roll on Civ4.

                        In gameplay terms I still don't think it matches SMAC.
                        Diderot was right!
                        Our weapons are backed with UNCLEAR WORDS!
                        Please don't go, the drones need you.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Oh yeah, and the old spearman vs tank thing is always going to happen. Even a regular spear, unfortified in open country has a finite chance to (attack and) kill an elite modern armour - but it's about 1 in 1,000, maybe worse.

                          By comparison if the spear is in a reasonable-sized city, fortified, on a hill, it has a "relatively" high chance of winning. Sometimes the spearman will get lucky.
                          Diderot was right!
                          Our weapons are backed with UNCLEAR WORDS!
                          Please don't go, the drones need you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I seem to recall that they added in an additional bonus for when units from more modern eras fight against units from older eras. Was that in one of the patches? Anyway, yes a fortified spearmen in a metropolis on a hill across a river etc. etc. could beat a tank on rare occassion. My point is just that the complaints about the combat system in Civ3 are few and far between, considering that the combat system was one of the chief complaints in Civ2.

                            The sub bug I don't consider to be a major bug. It's a pain to be sure, but it doesn't come into play often enough to be a major bug. Nevertheless they should fix it! The AI inadequacies regarding armies, bombardment, and amphibious assault aren't really bugs, they're just weaknesses in the AI (it's not a bug, it's a feature!). And you have to agree that even despite these weaknesses, the Civ3 AI is well beyond the SMAC and Civ2 AI.

                            Last Conformist, what is wrong with barbarian behavior? Like I said I've been away for a while so I've probably missed those threads. I've definitely noticed that it's changed from the initial release. Before the barbs would just attack whatever unit or city they saw. Now they seem to be a little smarter; they seem to avoid attacks that are almost certain losses.
                            Firaxis - please make an updated version of Colonization! That game was the best, even if it was a little un-PC.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I have a stack of 25 barb horsemen in my current game which instead of approaching me are just sitting in their camp.

                              As for the explorers, in some situations they wont need military backup - they can pillage improvements and back away a number of squares to avoid the counter. Rinse, repeat.
                              "Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender B. Rodriguez

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X