What game should Civ3 have been?

[lockstep]

CtP2's stacked combat and a counterpart of SMAC's social engineering should have been included in Civ3. Still, it's a great game IMO.

[Atahualpa]

bah I like it the way it is!
Great Job Firaxis!

[Atahualpa]

Okay lets say the bombard thing has to be addressed
but overall its a damn nice game

[KoenigMkII]

Civ III should have been:

Civ III + LWC Mod + Facist Patch Mod + Blitz! Mod

With stacked movement. :-)

Oh and a prefferance to turn resource depletion OFF.

IMHO of course :-)

[MrWhereItsAt]

Civ 3 should have had elements from CTP and CTP2?!?!?!

/shudder/

Thank God it doesn't! What a mess CTP was... And I know everyone says CTP2 is oh-so-good, but until I see it I refuse to believe they could pull themselves that far up from the first. And until it drops below the current US$30 here or the video store gets it in, I won't see it either. The new patch seems to have silenced much of the criticism and I quite agree - Civ3 is now almost the game it should have been anyway - thus my answer - Civ3 should have been Civ3 v1.17f or later.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Civ 3 should have had elements from CTP and CTP2?!?!?!

Stacking doesn't appeal to you?

[MrWhereItsAt]

I see it's uses, but call me stubbornly old-school Civ.
It's perhaps the only thing CTP did right (first time, at least), but I never built that many units to worry about it. This is very different in Civ2 and 3, as well as in SMAC. CTP units were always just a way of reminding myself how stellar my tech was compared to the AIs. Neve needed more than one Space Fighter, War Walker etc. for showing off.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Neve needed more than one Space Fighter, War Walker etc. for showing off.

Never haven't won before getting to the future.

[MrWhereItsAt]

I prob'ly could have won but I wanted to see the future units badly. Naturally SMAC (released about the same time, IIRC) blew me away! I play to explore and have fun - winning comes second!

[Martinus Magnificus]

Civ 3 should have been a combination of all the good features of Civ 1, Civ 2 and SMAC, PLUS some extra's and better graphics.
Civ 3 isn't like that at all. For instance, what's this stupid bombardment feature? I like the idea, but the way it is implemented now, it's useless. Why build costly catapults or bombers when all they do is level a few buildings or killing some citizens of a city you want to capture a turn later??? In real ife, (level) bombers are very usefull for destroying the factories and plants of a city (thus paralizing its war industries), where you are not in the position of capturing the city with ground troops (UK-Germany, 1944)
Speaking of which, air units are totally useless anyway. Again, the idea of city fixed airunits and bombing and recon missions is great, but the way it is implemented s#cks (for example, one can rebase an air unit all across a vast ocean in one turn, while it would take 20 turns for a ship to do the same).

In sum, civ 3 is not as good as it could have been.

[kittenOFchaos]

A first person perspective: imagine the scene...

[Roman senate with emperor kittenOFchaos on big chair with cushion ]

-the player is the Emperor and sees out of the Emperor's eyes like a FPS

And from this perspective the emperor bosses people around...goes to "The Games" and orgies etc and sometimes on military campaigns lasting years.

[ACooper]

This poll is invalid. It ignores to option of Civ 3 being exactly what it is: A valid succesor in the line of Civ games. Civ 3 is a game which has relatively simple rules yet addictive at the same time. It is not a successor to SMAC, CtP, or CtP. It is not even a sucessor to Civ2. It seems to have gone back to Civ 1 and taken a different route then Civ2. That's where so many people get it wrong about this game. Those who think SMAC was the best game ever will not enjoy Civ3 as much because it is a different game. CtP and CtP2 were jokes of games and the only reason they survive is because of a small group of hardcore gamers with too much time on their hands. Now it seems this group wants to take over the Civ3 game and forums, but this isn't their game and never will be.

Civ3 is Civ3. Civ3 should not be what just a few people want, but what the majority of game buyers (not just us here) want and need.

It's a good game made by good people. Enjoy it, if you find a bug report it, just quit saying it should be more like (insert game here).

Return this forum to a CIV 3 forum!

[Libertarian]

What on earth does that mean, Coop? Is it a Civ3 forum only if all the posts are shiny happy people holding hands and worshipping the game? What do you want, stuff like this:

yea i luv this game ....!!!!!! it good !!!

[ACooper]

First off, I hated SMAC. I thought CtP 1&2 were a big waste of time and money.

What I am saying here is that Civ 3 is a game unto itself. It does not need to stack up against those jokes of gaming history. This constant comparing of the games without even an option to say "Civ 3 is better" is tiring. And undeserved.

If you have complaints, or suggestions for Civ 3 please post them. Saying that the game should be like a different game and leaving it at that is no help to anyone or anything and really is just .

[Tarquelne]

I see that ACooper has dropped the unreasonably inflamatory "Return..." plea and we're left with only the reasonably inflamatory stuff.

The poll doesn't have a "Civ3 is fine" option, ACooper, because I wasn't curious about the number of people who think that. Quite a few people seem to desire Civ3 to have been something else... I just curious about what it is they wanted. Personally, I'm enjoying Civ3, but if the game in the Civ3 box had resembled SMAC 2 more than anything else I wouldn't have been disappointed.