The Manual: In-depth Review

[Comrade Tribune]

7.5/10

This review covers the manual only. I expect it to be the general consensus after everybody has read the book.

+ The manual is neat, well-written and entertaining. A nice touch are the great leader quotes at the beginning of each chapter. A collector´s item!

+ One chapter is dedicated entirely to Newbies, explaining the basic concepts really well. Good!

+/- The rules of the game are covered extensively, but not so rarely a bit vague. 1/2 point off.

+ Good, extensive explanation of the interface. A few small inaccuracies do not really matter.

-/- Accurate charts and tables have gone to Mingapulco for an extended vacation. City improvements are not listed. Nor are techs. Units are listed, but horribly inaccurate.

This should be self-evident: One needs to compare the costs/benefits of all items at a glance to play the game well. To look them up one at a time in the Civilopedia does not count. Not including reliable charts and tables is setting a really bad standard. 2 points off.

To sum it up: This would have been an excellent manual, if the stats hadn´t gone MIA. As is, it´s only so-so. Perhaps next time.

[Ralf]

The manual could have provided us with a SMAC-style table of city-improvements, with 1-2 lines of the game-effects for this or that city-improvement. The author just bypassed it completely. By the way; have anyone here seen a thread of what each city-improvent contributes with?

[Jeje2]

The manual referred to Civ II a few times, but I didn't notice it ever referring to SMAC. This I find somewhat strange.

Yes, many important lists/charts were missing (techtree, city improvments)

The writing was quite fluent and easy read, thaks to the writer for that. But I was lacking the big picture - well you learn it by playing.

Also I would have loved to see more equations on how different things are calculated. Now the manual only vaugly refers to these so critical systems, com on we need them.

I would recommend the manual for someone who hasn't palyed Civ before - if you have some experience I think Chapter 15 + appendix is what counts. And that's my second exra plus to the manual writer I like chapter 15.

So I would have liked to have more actual info in the manual, but on the whole I also think 7.5/10 to be a good judgement.

[KoalaBear33]

The manual does not provide anything technical or detailed explanations. The manual is VERY GOOD for newbies (like me ). But it leaves a lot to be desired.

KoalaBear33

[JZ Temple]

Here's something that might help...

If you go to the Text folder in your Civ3 installation you will find the "Civilopedia.txt" fill which contains all the text found in the Civilopedia. You can do searches in that file to look up info from outside of the game. Maybe some enterprising person will reformat it and break out the City Improvements text.

[Kautilya]

You are right CT. The lack of enough basic tables in the manual is one of about 8-10 features where Civ3 has regressed from the standards set by SMAC.

The SMAC manual did an excellent job in systematically listing all the useful tables.

I guess getting the game out was more important than finishing these extra features which can make the difference for so many of us

However this is one problem which should be fixed pretty quickly by fans.

[Comrade Tribune]

Bringing this up again...

[Comrade Tribune]

I am just now reading the manual for the 2nd time, and still agreeing with this review.

Markos, please post this shorttake on the game manual at your reviews page; thanks!