I think this is the worst civ style game ever.

[tgs81q]

Im really very dissapointed with it. Out of all the civ games(civ, civ2, ctp, ctp2, and alpha centauri) this is one is the worst. Ive been playing it for a week and I wonder why they did some things. First is the lack of a decent earth map. The one included is absolutely terrible. My little brother could draw a better map of the earth. And why in the world did they remove fixed civ starting locations. Or go back to the original civilizations combat system and remove hitpoints and firepower that civ2 introduced. I cant see why they would take steps backward like that. Can anyone honestly say they enjoy playing earth maps so they can be the Romans in mexico or the Americans starting in india. Or have mobs of militia overun armored tanks. How bout battleships beaten by warriors thats always fun. Then there is the culture system which is WAY over done. Capturing cities is pointless. Its much more efficient to raze the damn thing and start over. Because unless your civ is vastly more powerful in culture and military strength there is no way you can hold the cities. They inevitable revert to there original owner faster then I can develop there culture to resist it. No matter how many units i station there. No matter how fast I quell resistors it always happens.

[Altuar]

Re: I think this is the worst civ style game ever.

Originally posted by tgs81q
Im really very dissapointed with it.
...
Then there is the culture system which is WAY over done. Capturing cities is pointless. Its much more efficient to raze the damn thing and start over. Because unless your civ is vastly more powerful in culture and military strength there is no way you can hold the cities. They inevitable revert to there original owner faster then I can develop there culture to resist it. No matter how many units i station there. No matter how fast I quell resistors it always happens.

Exactly how I feel, except for the dissapointment. There IS a great game hidden under the flaws, this is a vast improvement to the actual gameplay - its not just SMAC or Civ II done right, but more.

But, yes. Combat and Culture do have some implementation problems, even though the conception is fine.

Combat: It is much more technically streamlined, and the unit design and technology pacing associated with them is much better BUT the omission of a way to make sure next-age units overcome obsolete defenders is a major problem.

Culture: I felt your exact pain. There is simply NO way to defend against a city you just captured defecting to the other side. It feels like there was no testing done at all. And even having overwhelmingly better culture does not cut it.

[kimmygibler]

I can't believe all the people mad about the earth map. You gotta assume there will be immediate mods/maps/scenarios to deal with this. Firaxis might even do something themselves. Now you'll say "I didn't buy a game so I'd have to download mods! I'm taking it back, It's too different from civ2..." Yeah I guess, but I bet earth map will the first scenario/map that is made.

As far as the combat, how the hell does a warrior beat a battleship? Is this even possible for land units to take on battleships? Well I guess if you're only using a battleship to defend your city, then I'd expect a warrior to take it out. When a ship is in the city, it should be ineffective at defending the city. How is having a boat in the harbor gonna stop people from taking over the city?

As far as a warrior beating a tank, tanks have def 10 (I think). So each round, warrior has 1/11 chance of hitting. (1/11)^3=0.00751 Is this calculation correct? I'm not sure, but according to this the odds are very small. If this happens a lot, that is very lucky. Unless firaxis really uses a secret way to calculate battles that they aren't telling us about...

The culture problem. Hasn't affected my games at all yet since I have had strong culture so far. But if you don't like the effect of culture, tone it down. I'm sure it can be done.

[Altuar]

Originally posted by kimmygibler
The culture problem. Hasn't affected my games at all yet since I have had strong culture so far. But if you don't like the effect of culture, tone it down. I'm sure it can be done.

I dont know about toning down, but as for you not having any problems with culture try capturing a developed enemy city, even one that is right next to your culturally-advanced border and you will see that holding on to that city is impossible - and whats worse, when the city does revert, all your units in that city are GONE.

[Dida]

I have not been effected by cities revolting back to their old civ. But again, I have only been attacking civ close to my own. once I get deep into hostile territory, I'm sure it will happen quite often.

[Altuar]

Originally posted by Dida
I have not been effected by cities revolting back to their old civ. But again, I have only been attacking civ close to my own. once I get deep into hostile territory, I'm sure it will happen quite often.

Intresting - my experience is often otherwise. I'm playing on monarch, and my civ is culturally advanced, yet I still lose cities that I capture. The game should at least suspend checks for cultural revertion for 20 turns or so for newly captured cities. Cultural assimilation is a slow process in history, and while I understand that cities reverting back is an abstraction, it should not get in the way of gameplay.

[Zanteogo]

As for taking a step backwards.. the deplomancy in AC is much better. Only neat thing about CIV3 is the trading.. but even that is way one sided towards the AI.

As for cities reverting.. the thing I don't get is how your units go with the city. These are loyal units of YOUR empire.. they have no loyalty towards the peoples homeland.

My biggest problem of all are the long waiting times between turns on the larger maps. There is no reason why it should take so long on a modern computer.

[player1]

HISTORY NOTE:
In ancient & medivial times cities have been razaed as much (or even more) then captured. Why, just because the same reason as in civ3.
Corruprion, ressistance, cultural domitation. There were many revolts. Didn't there?

So, no more Blizkreig in Ancient are. It is a good thing & it's relistic.

---HINT------HINT------HINT------HINT---
Note to those poor civers: Keep many garrisoned units in conquered cities, at least until your culture goes up & resistence lowers (like in real world), not make those cities almost empty (1 or 2 units).
Remember these cities are OCUPATED, deal with them that way
---HINT------HINT------HINT------HINT---

Still razing cities in Modern era? I little to strange, I think razing should be limited to cities lower than 12 size (or at lest make it slower like 20 to 12, 12 to 6, 6 to 0)

[MarkG]

Originally posted by kimmygibler
Yeah I guess, but I bet earth map will the first scenario/map that is made.

there is already a converted civ2 world map
check the files forum

[Altuar]

Originally posted by player1
HISTORY NOTE:
---HINT------HINT------HINT------HINT---
Note to those poor civers: Keep many garrisoned units in conquered cities, at least until your culture goes up & resistence lowers (like in real world), not make those cities almost empty (1 or 2 units).
Remember these cities are OCUPATED, deal with them that way
---HINT------HINT------HINT------HINT---

Thank your player1. You can go back to Pacman now. Or whatever. Thats a joke on your nick.

Now, please understand that those OCUPATED cities, when they revert back, take your occupation units with them. And it does not matter how many units you have in there. So, deal with this.

[player1]

Just to note:
Reverting of cities DEPENDS of NUMBER of YOUR units in that city.
(of culture, ressistance, etc...)
Just we don't know exact numbers.
We'll just need to test this out or wait some new stratgety guide.

[Altuar]

Ok, I didnt notice you were from Belgrade, so it was not too nice of me to make fun of your spelling.

Anyway, the number if military units do not make a difference when cultural defection is checked. At least according to my experience, manual and civopedia. Note that while the last two do not explicitly state so, they do give a list of factors that affect cultural defection and no. of military units are not mentioned.

[yin26]

Soren also told us that the relative distances between your two capitals plays an important part above and beyond differences in culture points. Once you understand that part of it, you can appreaciate that it actually makes the game better, IMO.

However, some kind of warning instead of the Instant Unit Death thing would be VERY good. Somebody else suggested that if your units are to die, at the very least, half that city's pop should drop or something of that nature.

[yin26]

The number DOES make a difference. Look at the bottom of the occupied city and you'll see a garrisoned unit icon making a citizen not rebellious.

[TechWins]

My biggest problem of all are the long waiting times between turns on the larger maps. There is no reason why it should take so long on a modern computer.

Have you ever done any programming at all? You would know that the more complex the program is the longer it takes for it to execute it's commands. More commands = more time to execute commands. Since Civ3 is far more complex than Civ2 it takes far more amount of time for it to execute the program. Therefore, if you want to have a more complex (better) game than you will have to have longer waiting periods for the AI to finish it's turn. Although, yes a "modern" computer will speed up the process of a program, but the computer can't do it to a point where the program takes no (very minimal) time at all for the program to execute it's commands.

The only big problem I have with Civ3 now is the lack of infastructure the AI produces. How many 1 pop size cities does the AI really need? A little less expansion and a little more infastructure producing by the AI would be great.