Announcement

**ACooper** · March 25, 2002, 21:37

Methinks you exagerate just a little.

**Coracle** · March 25, 2002, 22:21

Methinks the verdict has been in for a long time: Civ III is a disappointment and a beta product rushed to market for the Holiday buying season.

Some people paid fifty bucks for a beta game! At least I got it for $45.

**Scipio Africanu** · March 26, 2002, 00:13

I agree, partially, to your comments on trading with other civs.

**bigvic** · March 26, 2002, 00:23

Yep

Kenjura:
Amen brother to about 95% at least of what you said. Her's my thoughts on the topic, for the third time on this forum.

25-03-2002 18:39

Whining

This was origionally posted on another thread, but obviously belongs here more. I feel much better now that I see so many w/ the same problem. My suggestion is get rid of this latest irritation (the patch) and wait for the next pain in the butt patch to come out, praying they don't succeed in messing up more than they fix.

What follows is a frustrated rant tapped out at 3:00 AM last night. As such, its nasty and foul, but even now, with time and perspective, I still stand by what I said. 25-03-2002 08:01

Whining

I guess I'm in a foul mood. The second patch was installed on friday, caused a crash on saturday. I play a heavily modified game that works fine w/o any patches (both have caused probs). What is the deal about mods and patches again?
Foul mood that I'm in, I noticed that the next patch that will probably cause the program to crash will fix the "can't sink a ship w/ a plane" idiocy. Just thinking about that started irritating me. For generally such a great game it sure feels like I'm playing a beta test version, or something programed by the fine folks at Microsoft that bring us windows. Anyway, the more I play this game, the more lamebrained garbage keeps popping up. How is it possible that they tested this thing? I swear, sometimes it seems like not at all, or worse, testing was done, problems noted, and shoddy product knowingly released.
I read some comments about spearmen killing tanks. Never seen it yet, though can imagine it would be irritating. You gotta rationalize things like that, though. I mean what does a spearman unit in the modern age represent anyway, a bunch of spear toting primitives, or a small, poorly organized second line group of AK-47 toting thugs? At least thats how I see it. What I find more irritating is that the AI seems to cheat more at higher levels instead of play a better game. How many times have I run a thorough spy sweep, found nothing, attacked, then been faced with 30 - 40 primo attack units the next, issueing out of one of his frontline cities? How many games have I been forced to hard charge toward the Great Library because apparantly the AI loves tech trading fairly with itself, but not me?
Yeah, I know, whine whine, boo hoo. But am I the only one here noticing these things? What about the inability of the AI to form coalitions? This bugs me far more than the spearman vs. tank thing. You know, that part of the game where ally 1 declares war on ally 2, who is at war with enemy one, who allies with ally 1, and so on, ad nauseum. Sure its a game, but its supposed to be simulation something, and what, I don't know. I know my history pretty well, and despite some pretty cutthroat periods in early modern Europe, what precedent is there, for large, major powers behaving like this? None, above the level of petty feudal squabbles, and even most of those had more logic than the chaotic, irrational world dogfight cage matches that one witnesses in Civ III. It seems they could have taken a few clues from the nearly flawless and much quicker diplomatic situation of SMAC. At least there you could win a cooperative victory, ask someone to "call off your vendetta against my friend", and do so much quicker. And don't even get me started on that pathetic excuse for a "scenario editor".
I know, stop flaming, but jeez! A few more months of evaluation and playtesting might have made what is, I admit, a remarkable game, a true masterpiece instead of the cobbled together-promising-yet-dissapointing-product-of-lazy-genius that it is.

PS: I personally hope they really fix this obsession of mine.

**Thrawn05** · March 26, 2002, 08:57

I agree the AI likes to gather as much of the same resource for itself to begin with, but that's because that somtimes resources are used up. So the AI wants to secure some other scource of that resource.

Even though I edited the game so that no resource can be used up or another one appear, the AI still does it. It must be coded in the EXE and not responding to edit rules.

**Zachriel** · March 26, 2002, 09:27

It depends on the position and your previous actions. I have often sold techs for large sums of gold. I have often bought techs for next to nothing. Same with resources and luxuries. The market varies, but if they don't like you, they will certainly demand more.

If you don't like the price, don't pay it. For me, the global markets are an important aspect of the game.

**ACooper** · March 26, 2002, 09:28

Re: Yep

Originally posted by bigvic
Kenjura:
Amen brother to about 95% at least of what you said. Her's my thoughts on the topic, for the third time on this forum.
.....

PS: I personally hope they really fix this obsession of mine.

(emphasis mine)

bigvic, for heaven's sake, please quit posting the exact same thing in every thread you can. This forum has rules.

As for tech trading, the AI seems to trade based on your relative strength. The stronger you are the better deals you are offered.

**Zachriel** · March 26, 2002, 09:31

Re: New and different complaints. ^_^

Originally posted by Kenjura

The AI does not know how to fight. The only way they can score even minor victories over me is through their unpredictable idiocy, and my carelessness. They will declare wars over stupid demands like "give us three modern techs so we can upgrade our spearmen", then you won't see them for another 20 turns. The unit AI cares only for the moment. . . . The division of AI into unit, city, and overlord is at fault here. Their communication is minimal.

Sounds like a lament about humanity in general.

**Zachriel** · March 26, 2002, 09:41

Re: New and different complaints. ^_^

Originally posted by Kenjura
What is the point of being able to threaten? It doesn't matter if I have 25 ICBMs and I've used them before, and the enemy has only spearmen, and I'm only demanding 3 gold. They won't give in, ever.

In the latest GOTM, my adversary offered me 2/3 of his cities for peace. Not a bad tribute.

In a different game, I was playing Zulus. My enemy offered me 4 out of his five cities. His capital was blocked by an impi on a penisula of tundra. I lived up to the bargain and let him live for the rest of the game.

**bigvic** · March 26, 2002, 09:42

You're right

acooper

Yeah, should have said LAST time.

**Zachriel** · March 26, 2002, 09:45

Re: Yep

Originally posted by bigvic
A few more months of evaluation and playtesting might have made what is, I admit, a remarkable game, a true masterpiece instead of the cobbled together-promising-yet-dissapointing-product-of-lazy-genius that it is.

I would much rather have the game in its present form and available for gameplay. If you would rather, just don't play it until next year. Then pretend it was just released.

**bigvic** · March 26, 2002, 10:16

Re: Re: Yep

Originally posted by Zachriel

I would much rather have the game in its present form and available for gameplay. If you would rather, just don't play it until next year. Then pretend it was just released.

Actually, if I weren't so addicted to it, I might follow your advice. Just wish I had not blown the $50 (I'm a real cheapo). But understand, this is a thread dedicated to complaints. Believe me, I have more, but then constructive criticism for firaxis would be better. My hope is that the guys at firaxis will run across this stuff, not get too offended at the rantings of frustrated customers, and do better next time. I'm kind of giving up on these patches. That said, what we have is basically a beta version and I suppose we're the test group who pay for that priviledge. At least its not as bad as CTP2. As far as that is concerned, I guess I just expect more from something that has Sid's name on it. I'm also confident that these guys will fix the screw ups sooner or later (later, my guess) and I will be happy all the time then. Just wish theyed give some kind of discount to purchasers of the origional.

**Tarquelne** · March 26, 2002, 10:26

Re: New and different complaints. ^_^

Firaxis TO DO list for Mar 26, 2002:

Originally posted by Kenjura
It shouldn't take two luxuries, a resource, and two techs to get ONE luxury from an AI for 20 turns.

Make all trades 1 for 1, regardless of relative civ strengths, relationship, or the value of the items being traded.

The AI does not listen to each other. Every single AI asks me in turns for my map,

Make the computer players less likely to trade with human, more likely to trade with each other. Re-impliment trading during human turn.

...and they only offer their crappy map in return....

The AI calculates value for itself, not for me.

Have the AI never offer the human a deal that doesn't favor the human.

But it's 1500 AD! I'm halfway to FLIGHT for god's sake. Why would I ever pay 10000 gold and three techs for a useless ancient tech? Maybe the AI would, but I wouldn't.

Even if their demand is 10000 gold, you're lucky to get them down to 9990.

Call back CDs with pre-release code on them.

The AI does not know how to fight.

Create PC "civ" type game AI 10-times better than any ever written before.

**SpencerH** · March 26, 2002, 10:38

Re: Re: New and different complaints. ^_^

Originally posted by Tarquelne
Firaxis TO DO list for Mar 26, 2002:

Call back CDs with pre-release code on them.

What does that mean?

Announcement

New and different complaints. ^_^

New and different complaints. ^_^

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment