What do you dislike about CivIII?

[Wernazuma III]

Now if you ask me, the REAL diarrhea is on the earth map the political landscape of Central and northern Asia. It's NEVER one territory but all civilizations place minor cities beside each other. That really looks like diarrhea to me... (Sorry, a bit off-topic...)

[opaque]

tank blitz is gone

This would be a good point if stacked movement was included.

no fundamentalism

What? Fundamentalism was horribly overpowered in Civ 2 because halving science didn't matter at the end after the score had been calculated and only Future Techs were left to research. Perhaps it should have been kept but unhappiness just reduced rather than completely eliminated.

You missed mine entirely- pollution

I think this micromanagement problem could have been removed completely had they taken out the annoying tile pollution aspect and just kept the global pollution aspect that causes land to change.

[Comrade Tribune]

***BUMP!***

[PGM]

Late game can really be boring. Pollution, lack of improvements and units, ...
Many times I just start a new game instead of playing in modern age, because the early game is so much better.

[Encomium]

NOTHING ANNOYS ME MORE THAN. . .

1. Those AI settlers wandering over my territory looking for a few open tiles to settle on and thus encroach on my cities and colonies.

2. Culture Flipping borders and cities - and disappearing garrisons - are NONSENSE.

3. Too much corruption.

4. Late game tedium.

5. No scenario building capability, nor cheat mode.

6. Navies are a waste, and Sid has no idea what navies are really for - attacking trade routes. And bombers cannot sink warships?!?!?

7. Stupid, stubborn AI Advisors.

8. Nothing to explore by the time we get to caravels.

9. Too much AI CHEATING.

10. No way to check the status of an alliance when then civ you are at war with comes to make peace.

Oh, the heck with this. There are twenty other things I hate about Civ III. Just read the threads all over this and the other forum.

[Akka]

1) No editor. How can we make scenario and compensate for design flaws ?

2) Stupid combat system : FP/HP was better, and allowed to customize more. Stupid reason to get rid of it.

3) Oversimplified game mechanics, probably to let the AI deal with it : Civ1-version of terrain improvements : no farmland, no highway, no terraforming, irrigation of -2500 is as effective than intensive exploitation of 1980 AD...

4) Corruption, totally insane and ridiculous. Should the rules editor not be here, I would never have finished even my first game.

5) Culture flip, great idea, utterly ridiculous effects.

6) Improvements that were in SMAC and Civ2 and disappeared ?

7) Anti-climatix and anti-rewarding endings.

8) Modern Era ? Where ? Half of the tech are just to build a spaceship, and this ship is ridiculously easy and fast to build. Civ 1 and Civ 2 had a ten times better way to deal with it.

9) Strange time gap between things that set stop points (time between galley and caravel, time between aqueduc and hospital, etc...).

10) NO STACKING MOVEMENTS ! For god sake, it existed already in MoM !

11) "mechanical" AI. I would like to see a more human one, and have the feeling to fight passion-driven leader with personnalities, not cold, insensitive and agressive cyborg.

12) Ridiculous trade system. I give you 100 gold, you give me 50. And then you're insulted by the deal.

[Solver]

I picked two options: Spaceship too early and Diplomats and Spies too little role. Generally, I do also have a third thing I dislike - Nuclear Weapons should not be balanced, they should be very strong, being hugely unbalanced, just like in real life.

However, those are actually minor. And I do terribly enjoy Civ 3, and it is certainly the best game I personally have ever played. And if I had to buy it again, I surely would - great game!

[Hagbart]

I hate the editor!

[paulmagusnet]

etc

The 'advisors' should be renamed 'paperclip personality kibbitzers', at least the microsoft paper clip has the virtue (did i just put that word in the same sentence with ms, shame on me) of being able to be shut off.

Anyone besides me notice that the 'advisor' drawings have a barny the dinosaur quality to their appearance?

I would like an option to throw darts at the game designers.

[OneInTen]

no OCC

You need to try harder ... I've played and won a OCC game, as have other people.

I can't say I see anything on the list of 16 that annoys me greatly (some of them are features, dammit). However, I'd say these are what I dislike about civ 3:
* Polution cleanup automation is pretty awful
* Length of turn on huge maps - I accept it's necessary, however I don't have to like it (posting this while playing infact)
* Space race is kinda on the shortish side
* Diplomatic victory makes no sense - it made no sense in SMAC either. The AI should never vote for you - since a human wouldn't either (I vote for some other player to win the game - top strategy!)
* And the number one thing I dislike about civ 3 is whining bastards who have to insist with every post they make that "Firaxis sold their first born to Satan and used the profits to inflict the hellspawn that is civ 3 upon humanity". Or words to that effect.

[ACooper]

Originally posted by OneInTen


........

* And the number one thing I dislike about civ 3 is whining bastards who have to insist with every post they make that "Firaxis sold their first born to Satan and used the profits to inflict the hellspawn that is civ 3 upon humanity". Or words to that effect.

Amen.

I dislike the fact that there is no screen where you can get a complete intel report on another civ at any time you want. It would be very helpfull during negotiations. In general the advisor screens should have more info.