I'm getting the impression this game is not a worthy successor to civ I and II

[Fidel]

nah mark, just look at this thread and you will understand the whole mindset. they are out to get it....
allhttp://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33963

[Robert]

I'm currently playing:
- Emperor
- Huge Map
- Contignents
- English

On my home contignent I've build my palace and the forbidden palace. I moved my palace to the south party of the cont and now all about 25 / 30 cities on it have less then 10% corruption.

I colonized 3 islands, 2 are colonized for just a few turns (20 or something) but the 1st one has already cities for about 50 / 100 turns. Both cities on that island have only 50% corruption.

No problem, as you might see. 50% is quiet realistic for resource colonizations, that are there for the sake of resources.

Am I that good or are you guys that bad ?
I'll post screenshots later.

Conclusion: you can build quiet a big empire with colonies without having to worry too much about corrupion. (of course you have to do the right things to prevent it, which isn't easy, but it can be done)

But as soon as you start to conquer the world..... don't be surprised if the conquered cities will appear to have muuuuuch corruption. quiet realistic I think.

CyberGnu: Why I defend the game ?
Because 'public opinion' can harm the game.
I don't want the game to fail because everyone is crying that it's bad like happened to CtP2.

that's why there's a difference between putting up the bugs and the problems (there are bugs and problems ! I admit) and shouting out in 100 threads that the game sucks.

You can have your opinion, even if that opinion says it sucks, but I'll fight that opinion. It has some bugs, even some very important (fatal ) ones, but the game doesn't suck.

I want to have civ4 in a few years, and civ3mp in half a year, that won't be accomplished if everyone around the world thinks the game sucks and won't buy it for that reason. That would be good *if* the game would suck, but it doesn't. It's better than civ2 all the way. (and better than smac / ctp / ctp2 / tot)

CyberShy

[Venger]

Originally posted by LaRusso
nah mark, just look at this thread and you will understand the whole mindset. they are out to get it....
allhttp://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33963

Run away! Run away! The evil people are here to ruin our Civ3!

Simpleton.

Venger

[Venger]

Re: Re: Reading is fundamental

Originally posted by MarkG
one thing of the things missing: conquering half the world in 50 years and having problems or resistense from the conquered population

Resistance? Actually well done - you must garrison troops to end resistance. Very nice. However, the Moors conquered most of Iberia and ruled it for 700 years without the cities there not producing anything. Many empires managed to rule conquered cities without all the people being on strike...

it's "empire", not "nation". empire always fought big wars. but empires were not just about wars....

I'm not sure I even understand what you are saying here...

Venger

[Fidel]

Re: Re: Re: Reading is fundamental

Originally posted by Venger
Resistance? Actually well done - you must garrison troops to end resistance. Very nice. However, the Moors conquered most of Iberia and ruled it for 700 years without the cities there not producing anything. Many empires managed to rule conquered cities without all the people being on strike...

the span of that empire was about 10 squares on a civ map

[MarkG]

Re: Re: Re: Reading is fundamental

Originally posted by Venger
I'm not sure I even understand what you are saying here...

great empires became... great with wars. so yes, a civ game should have lots of lots of war
but keeping an empire great is not just about making wars....

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by CyberShy
I'm currently playing:
- Emperor
- Huge Map
- Contignents
- English
CyberShy

The English have the special advantage that curtails corruption. Have you tried anything similar playing any of the 11 civs that are not Commercial?

[Dev]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading is fundamental

Originally posted by LaRusso


the span of that empire was about 10 squares on a civ map

Mr. Logic strikes again.

Let me see you fit all the major spanish cities on that map of yours and I'll show you how 95% of them become starving dying wrecks.....

/dev

[MarkG]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Reading is fundamental

Originally posted by Dev
Mr. Logic strikes again.

Dev, your behaviour has already been one of the reasons for the closure of a thread today

let's not double the number.....

[Robert]

The English have the special advantage that curtails corruption. Have you tried anything similar playing any of the 11 civs that are not Commercial?

I've played Iraqoius as well.
Got some more problems with corruption indeed, but after managing far away cities for a number of time very well (rush building some buildings etc.) I got them to have less then 97% corruption as well (30% production or something)

but again, that was 'only' at King level
Next game I'll start at Deity.
Huge map, 10 civs or something. Must be cool !
(anybody already beated the AI in that way ?)

2nd, well, play commercial civ.......
next game I'll play commercial and religious. (is there any ?)

[Dev]

So calling someones BS is an offence ?

Please.

On 2nd thoughts that's pretty cool, I can bully people just by threatening to post in their threads

/dev

[Dev]

Cybershy, india is what you're looking for.

Good non resource UU too

/dev

[Robert]

Next game I'll be India.
I'll open a thread later today with some screenshots from my current Emperor game.

I hear much people whining about civ3, and just a little post their gaming experiences. That's a pitty

I think my screenshots show in how much big problems I am with all those huge empires around me.
Germans have started theri 3rd row of cities.
(1row = Berlin, Bremen etc.
2nd row = New Berlin, New Bremen,
3rd row = Berlin 2, Bremen 2 )

are that much cities or not ?
Well, Germans, Russians, Romans, Greek, Egyptians, Chinese..... they all have that much cities

poor me............
But I'll stand the test of time.
I have colonized oil, coal and I appeared to have 2 resources of Alluminium

The game rocks !
Iraqoius are going to be toast, the only civ that's even worse then me

CyberShy

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


Let's list the things people did not expect and you can tell me if they are valid issues:

1) I expected MP. This feature was planned on and dropped at the last possible minute. Don't believe me? Check out your Civ3 root directory.

Valid issue? Maybe in the fact that they didn't tell everyone it wasn't in the game til two weeks before the game came out, but they DID tell people before the game hit the stores, so...

NO, not a valid issue when you knew before you bought the game it didn't have MP (or should have known).

2) I expected a functional scenario editor to be included with my purchase, not the POS they have in there now.

Valid issue, but one that will (supposedly) be fixed. How many other games have you ever bought that came with some "feature" missing or broken besides Civ3? LOL, I can name at least three games in the last 6-9 months that I have seen or played that came this way. Doesn't mean it's less of an issue, but... *shrug*

(Psst, I don't like it either, but since I typically only play random games this isn't a big issue for me.)

3) I most certainly did not expect corruption to be so crippling. Why should I go into the editor to fix something that should not have been messed up to begin with?

Well, no one expected corruption to be so bad, mainly because no other Civ game, including SMAC, has ever had a "somewhat real" view of how distance from city capital works.

For the record, I also think it's a little far reached, but if you look at real world history you often see examples of cities having rampant corruption when placed far distances from their capital. Only in the "modern world" do we see less of a correlation in this.

Hmm, maybe if someone developed 5 additional government types, "modern monarchy, modern democracy, modern repiblic", etc, that greatly reduced corruption this would be less of an issue.

There are mod's already that allow police stations to reduce corruption as well, you could always load those, or change it yourself in the editor.

3) I also did not expect that nukes would be so pitiful.

More to come....

Yeah, nukes suck, but again, I believe you can edit those with the editor...

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Ozy: And I think they who insists that people who are complaining do so because they can't figure out new strategies are compensating for their fantastically small penis size.

CyberGnu: And I think those who like to flame first then complain about others not offering constructive arguments are valliantly trying to prove they have a penis.

Shall we try going back to constructive arguments?

I have offered constructive arguments. I have also posted on how some people seem to complain mainly because "their" strategies for Civ2 don't work 100% in this game either.

I never said the game was perfect, but I DID say that people who don't want the game to be more than Civ2/SMAC with different graphics should realize this is NOT the same game and to adjust.

See the difference?

Velociryx et al., I agree completely. Civ is an Empire building game. I wouldn't mind at all if large scale warfare was abolished completely after the invention of the nuke. Let's trade each other out of existance instead...

Heh, oh gee, your bitterness shows through in your sacrastic remarks to myself and others... Hmm, what happened yo your "constructive arguments"?

You sure you are in the fight forum? "Mrfixitonline.com" and "Heavengames.com" both have very good sections on RTS games, maybe you should look there instead?