r/evolution

[tishco]

hte people who say civIII will be the same as civII will be ok
the people who think not enuff has changed will be ok

the difference between civ I and II was a new diplomacy thng and graphics, and changes for units and tech

civ II and SMAC: smac had 5 winning conditions, unit shop, 3d terrain bonus, bombarding, and being on Planet ( daft name ) but it was lacking that civ feeling, we needed all that and more...
enter stage left..
civIII!
It doenst bring alot more (even left stuff behind) from SMAC so thats ok, but it has that civ feeling again so its a huge differ from civII

and caravans are gon!!

thats my theory but its badly ritten, i know

[Solver]

Only DLs spell so bad . Got no time for checking, though.

[lockstep]

I have to admit that I would even spend some money for a Civ 2.25 (that is, Civ2 plus borders, build-queues and an AI that doesn´t back-stab two times out of three).

Originally posted by solver
Only DLs spell so bad .

In that case, thousands of DL´s would be lurking in the forums.

[tniem]

Originally posted by lockstep
In that case, thousands of DL´s would be lurking in the forums.

You would be suprised.

[tishco]

DLs?
me know know wot U mean bout bad spelin