I must be the worst Civ3 player . . . ever

[Andrew_Jay]

Okay, I finally played one whole game of civ 3 (I had another going on a large map, but it was getting boring because of the wait time, and it was really only a learning game where I was doing everything wrong). But my second game as the Japanese, on Warlord setting was going fairly well, but to keep it short, I ended in 2050 with no victory, second (out of 5 remaining) to the Persians and with some 10 or more techs un-researched.
What did I do wrong?!
I've played civ 2 for two years and was good at it, is there something really different with civ 3 that I haven't noticed?
Feel free to mock and laugh at me

[WhiteElephants]

Re: I must be the worst Civ3 player . . . ever

Originally posted by Andrew_Jay
I've played civ 2 for two years and was good at it, is there something really different with civ 3 that I haven't noticed?

I hate to point it out to you guy, but it isn't Civ2. It's a new game with new stategies. If it was Civ2.1 why bother?

Good Luck and hang in there.

[Asharak]

I have to agree with you, Andrew. Overall, I've found Civ3 a more challenging game as well. I expect much of that is adjustment time, but I don't recall feeling quite so out of place when I switched from Civ1 to Civ2 (that was several years ago, so perhaps my memory is deceiving me, but that's beside the point).

It makes me wonder what game the reviewers who say there have been small to no changes in Civ3 are playing. But I'm getting off on a tangent here.

I also give kudos to the AI programmer Soren Johnson: even though the AI still cheats, something that annoys me but that I've resigned myself to, overall I like it's play much more than the AI of Civ2. 'Like' as in admire the skill of, then proceed to curse violently when it kicks my ass.

(See, look -- no mocking or laughing! )

[kmj]

Re: I must be the worst Civ3 player . . . ever

Originally posted by Andrew_Jay
Okay, I finally played one whole game of civ 3 (I had another going on a large map, but it was getting boring because of the wait time, and it was really only a learning game where I was doing everything wrong). But my second game as the Japanese, on Warlord setting was going fairly well, but to keep it short, I ended in 2050 with no victory, second (out of 5 remaining) to the Persians and with some 10 or more techs un-researched.
What did I do wrong?!
I've played civ 2 for two years and was good at it, is there something really different with civ 3 that I haven't noticed?
Feel free to mock and laugh at me

bah! I'm on my third game (warlord) and I'll be lucky if I finish second at the end... just keep truckin'. There's alot of differences between civ2 and this.

[dexters]

Re: Re: I must be the worst Civ3 player . . . ever

Originally posted by WhiteElephants


I hate to point it out to you guy, but it isn't Civ2. It's a new game with new stategies. If it was Civ2.1 why bother?

Good Luck and hang in there.

God White, I wish more people realizes that fact before they log on to whine about combat or this or that. And the comparisons inevitably go to Civ 2

Oh, and hang in there Andrew If all else fails, nuke em. If you're going down, might as well bring your enemy's largest cities and their score with you.

[GNGSpam]

Yeah Nuke em

oh wait

Nukes are utterly sissy in Civ3

nevermind

[shclo]

Originally posted by Asharak
I have to agree with you, Andrew. Overall, I've found Civ3 a more challenging game as well. I expect much of that is adjustment time, but I don't recall feeling quite so out of place when I switched from Civ1 to Civ2 (that was several years ago, so perhaps my memory is deceiving me, but that's beside the point).

It makes me wonder what game the reviewers who say there have been small to no changes in Civ3 are playing. But I'm getting off on a tangent here.

I also give kudos to the AI programmer Soren Johnson: even though the AI still cheats, something that annoys me but that I've resigned myself to, overall I like it's play much more than the AI of Civ2. 'Like' as in admire the skill of, then proceed to curse violently when it kicks my ass.

(See, look -- no mocking or laughing! )

You've got to be kidding about not minding the AI cheating. To me that is the mark of a sorry-ass game when the AI has to resort to cheating to be able to compete with a human opponent. That reminds me of some of the DOS games of the early 80's before good AI algorythms became more common and expected. There is no reason they couldn't have given this game a well thought out decision tree that is able to give anyone a decent game. Ideally, the hardest levels have the computer playing at its smartest with no more information than a human player would have. Then the lower levels actually has the computer "dumbing down" its tactics to the degree specified by the level. Chess games are designed such that the higher levels only allow the AI more time to plot out moves and determine their possible consequences. This game to me appears to have great appeal, great ideas, and potentially great game play, but if the AI cheats, the game will suck once its newness wears off.

[Ludwig]

A quick question, if that's OK -

In what manner does the AI cheat if you're playing on Warlord?

Although the AI has been aggressive and resourceful, I haven't seen absurd unit totals or spawning or "instant" wonders or any of the crap I saw in CTP. I haven't come across the infinite treasury bug yet, though. But what is he doing to cheat?

[playshogi]

I thought it odd that the AI planted a city at the exact right spot in 2950 BC so that iron AND coal would be within the city radius. Or planting a city on the ONLY rubber resource on that continent. That's why I don't mind the AI making cities in "my" backyard.

[dexters]

I think AI doesn't get any bonuses below prince level.

[Pyrodrew]

Originally posted by dexters
I think AI doesn't get any bonuses below prince level.

Yes, but if they say it to themselves enough times they'll believe it.

[Skanky Burns]

From what Soren said, below Regent level, the AI gets production penalties so as to make its easier for you.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by playshogi
I thought it odd that the AI planted a city at the exact right spot in 2950 BC so that iron AND coal would be within the city radius. Or planting a city on the ONLY rubber resource on that continent. That's why I don't mind the AI making cities in "my" backyard.

I wonder what the AI does about city placement. Does it choose a spot based on what resources it can see there (even though they arent discovered yet) or does it just grab land in the hope of there being resources there later on??

[Robert]

isn't it great that the first times you play civ3 you don't make a change ?
I hate those ***** games that you play for the first time and you win immediately. After that it's "Been there done that next game"

I love it to be beaten !
And when I can finally beat Deity with 2 fingers in my nose I'm sure MP will be released

GREAT

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Even when you beat deitiy, you won't be able to do it all the time (i think ) like in civ II. This will I think be rather lucky event and not something that happens all the time.