Ozymandous read this.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Heliodorus
Jeez, Ozy, just when I got to thinking that I would stop reading anything you wrote (based on the Stacked Move thread from the other day) you become civil and address the topic at hand... Guess I'll just get a feel for your mood and go from there.

Well.....

I am normally civil but responded as I did because I didn't think Libertarian was correct in how he responded. IMHO, the last thing we need is to *demand* attention from the people we want to put out the patch as then the patch takes longer, you piss them off, etc. The reality of the situation is that Firaxis doesn't *owe* us anything other than a patch or two that fixes any fatal errors or MAJOR balance issues that happen to be in the game. Their last patch seems to have fixed any major bugs and I don't see any fatal errors or balance issues.

Everything else that people would *like* to have is strictly a request not a demand. Hence all the posts from me to other folks who don't understand that we're the people asking "hat in hand" for other stuff to be done FOR FREE. Stuff that would be nice but is NOT required from the developers.

*shrug*

For the record that other thread was concerned with Jeff Morris responding and then evolved into a thread on not the fact that he DID respond but in how people felt his response was, appropriate or not. Hence all of my posts there were, IMHO, on topic.

I'm going to reduce myself down to Standard sized maps and see how it goes.

Yeah, once you get railroad you seem to need less workers, at least I do, and the less workers seems to work well with the increased need for military units (in my games anyway). Seems that I end up moving roughly the same amount of people/units around anyhow.

If you think large maps are bad, try HUGE maps, it takes about 3 minutes per turn in the late game and that's on a P-3 ! GHZ system with no moves shown at all... *sigh*

Still a great game tho, and the time in between turns does give me a chance to plan strategy a little better.

my Large map game with about 25 strong cities, every turn I'm dealing with 2-5 new pollution squares, and having to control about 50-100 workers to contain it, build new improvements, or disband them.

Wow, you do know that it doesn't matter if you clean pollution up in the same turn or not, that the effects have still been added to the global warming issue? I know in previous Civ games, if you managed to clean pollution up in one round then it didn't add as much to global warming, but now whether or not you clean it in one round or 4 (typical cleanup time time for me in democracy after RP and with non-industrious workers), the effects still add in.

It's too much, and I quit that game last night (based on the military aspect of having to spend too much time bombarding enemy cities with my cannons).

I had something similar in my last game. I was able to move all my artillery from my cities (1 per) and mass then to bombard an enemy. Nothing like having to cycle through 35-40 units bombarding.. lol...

I'll keep going with a standard sized map, though, which should help some. I'm fearful that with a smaller map, though, that I won't have as much fun in that I won't be able to do as much in terms of building wonders and cultural achievements. We'll see.

With smaller maps you seem to have less to work with as far as the numbers of cities, but it's much easier to conquer other groups and easier to manage workers because you have less overall territory, even though you control larger area in each game, at least IMHO.

But for the record, Jen, I read a LOT of reader reviews that were cricital of the combat system, the diplomacy screen, and the distractions of strategic resources, and I originally decided not to buy it. On a whim, I returned one game and bought Civ3 instead, and I'm SO glad I did. I really enjoy Civ3. It's unfortunate they didn't steal the greatest parts of CTP2 and simply implement Civ3 diplomacy and Civ3 AI (those are THE strengths of Civ3 IMO).

Yes, that has been a major problem, namely a few squeaky wheels, who expected SMAC 2 or Civ2 in better graphics (still same flaws in both games, but people want what they know how to beat).

I base my satisfaction on a game first on whether it's fun to play, and Civ3 is fun to play (up to that point of diminishing returns based on unit density). Then I factor in how much I paid for it and how many hours I got out of it. I have to get 50 hours out of a game for me to consider it a worthwhile purchase, and Civ3 is going to give my 50 hours sometime over my Christmas vacation (if my X-Box doesn't suck up all my time). So you have a tough decision to make. What else would you buy instead of Civ3, though? Consider that, too.

Heh, I know I have gotten more than 50 hours worth of time from this game, and since the $50 is only about 2.5 hours of my work time, I think I got a pretty good deal.