My Last Game

[Golden Bear]

LOL!

I do not have to look very far in this forum to find people complaining that the game is made for "builders" to win - conquerors are discriminated against!

Here we have the opposite case. FWIW, my opinion is that since the most recent patch, the game is more prone to picking a fight in order to challenge your lead.

My current example is a game where I have gradually accumulated a tech lead and am in the process of researching every modern tech except the spaceship ones (except where necessary to achieve the others). Minding my own business, sharing luxuries with everybody for any reason (I have lots of luxuries), huge armies and substantial navies.

Quite correctly, the AI for my closest competitor, the Americans, figured out that I had a substantial lead that was growing. Bingo, they declared war on me for having a ship in their waters!

Then the piling on began. The Zulus detected my spy and declared war. Since both of my new enemies were on a different continent, I built new armies (I have to guard a border against the Romans still) and loaded them on ships. One pile of transports was sailing to meet its escort but was a square short of it - no big deal I thought! That is, until the Greeks suddenly declared war without provocation and destroyed 16 units of modern armor on transports.

And you know what? I am as happy as a pig in slime about it. I like having the AI challenge me.

Anyway, my long story boils down to this: I think that the AI now is more prone to challenging the player with a lead and that it also do that with "piling on" of countries once one has declared war. I guess another thought is that I would not blame the designers for being confused if one group wants more building and the other wants more fighting.

GB

[Raion]

One can include 1 to 5 of the 'win' conditions also.

With CivII, one had a choice, build a spaceship to win. or play a game of Conquest (Bloodlust)!

Pick the type of game you want to play.

If like CivII, only have the 'build a spaceship to get to Alpha Centauri' option to win on, and the Specific Abilities also 'Off".



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The computer should never win, and it may not, if you play this game long enough, except for the upper levels.

[SpencerH]

Is there a relationship between early game bloodlust and late game AI aggression. I usually play a builder type game and leave my enemies alone (ie allow other Ai civs to keep em under wraps) and I've never been attacked while building the spaceship (I usually play monarch and emperor).

[Coracle]

Originally posted by CCJames


Is this so unbelieveable? I think these things are quite realistic and have always been a good part for the civ games. NAtions in the real world go through different periods. In some of these periods they are very warlike and aggresive, wheras in others they are very peaceful. A good example would be Hitler's Germany and Germany nowadays. Look at the difference, and thats only in 50 or so years!

It's part of human civilisation that nations will from time to time become aggresive and pursue very aggressive policies seeking new land and new resources. This has been simulated quite well with the Frecnh and Iriquois atacking you (an obviously rich and superior nation).

Wouldn't the game be boring if no-one ever got aggresive and declared war or went on Hitler-like conquests? Well it would be very civilisation-like. That's for sure.

The REALITY is civs don't just go from Polite or Gracious for thousands of years to treacherously declaring war on you; political relations DETERIORATE over time. The stupid AI does not consider that, or personal trust, being a mere bean counter adding up units and "power", etc.

On rare occasions a real civ might have a revolt or civil war or such and quickly end up with a new crazy, aggresive leader launching a sudden war. I am hard-pressed to think of examples of this. Germany-Soviets, and U.S.-Japan, in 1941, had Icy relations at best. "Icy relations" - a good description missing from Civ III, unfortunately.

[bobbyd1947]

Realistic? LOL!!!

No, Virginia, Civilizations do not attack one another out of the sky blue just because one is about to "win". Wars occur for complex reasons--expansion of territory, need for natural resources, religious differences, lust for power, even occasionally (though not as often as the game insinuates) because of diplomatic insults. None of these applied to my situation. The A1 attacked me without warning or any kind of provocation ONLY because I was about to build the spaceship. That DOES NOT HAPPEN IN REALITY. Get a grip, guys. And thanks for ruining a great game. Thanks for nothing.

[asleepathewheel]

Re: Realistic? LOL!!!

Originally posted by bobbyd1947
No, Virginia, Civilizations do not attack one another out of the sky blue just because one is about to "win". Wars occur for complex reasons--expansion of territory, need for natural resources, religious differences, lust for power, even occasionally (though not as often as the game insinuates) because of diplomatic insults. None of these applied to my situation. The A1 attacked me without warning or any kind of provocation ONLY because I was about to build the spaceship. That DOES NOT HAPPEN IN REALITY. Get a grip, guys. And thanks for ruining a great game. Thanks for nothing.

have you played the previous civ games? If you have, then how could you say they have ruined it, since warfare has been integral to the game throughout its evolution.

[Pyrodrew]

Re: Realistic? LOL!!! <- Exactly

Originally posted by Coracle
The REALITY is civs don't just go from Polite or Gracious for thousands of years to treacherously declaring war on you; political relations DETERIORATE over time.

Originally posted by bobbyd1947
The A1 attacked me without warning or any kind of provocation ONLY because I was about to build the spaceship. That DOES NOT HAPPEN IN REALITY.

This may be a shock to you, but "in reality" there is no Alpha Centuri! "In reality", the world does not end in 2050. "In reality", America, English, Germany, & many others did not exist in 4000 BC. "In reality", Civilization3 is a competitive GAME with 1 winner at the end that players strive to obtain, not a game to make illusionary friends.

[N. Machiavelli]

Thank you bobbyd1947, your thread has inspired me in ways I never thought it could. I am actually going to reinstall Civ3 again and try to beat the game on Diety with 1 city and see if I really *can* win the Space Race without fighting an aggressive war or moving a single military unit outside my cultural boundaries. Should be painful, but interesting.

[Raion]

In the Input boxes, one can also pick "None" and not just random.

Maybe, you people need sandbox mode to play the game by yourself, with yourself, all to yourself.

Never had that option with Civ II.

Just wondering!

I use to play with only 3 civ's sometimes, just to play differently in Civ II.

Just wondering!

[notyoueither]

Re: Re: Realistic? LOL!!! <- Exactly

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
"In reality", Civilization3 is a competitive GAME with 1 winner at the end that players strive to obtain, not a game to make illusionary friends.

But what if some players only have illusionary freinds?

[steelehc]

In the Input boxes, one can also pick "None" and not just random

Can you actually play by yourself?!? That would be... interesting.

Steele

[notyoueither]

steele. Don't encourage the killing of kittens. There's enough carnage out there already.

[steelehc]

NYE: WTF? What are you talking about? Are you drunk? Kittens?

Steele

[notyoueither]

Budweiser is my friend. So are kittens.

ROTFLMOL

[notyoueither]

My apologies steele.

I take it you have not seen the pix with the caption

*Everytime you ********** God kills a kitten.*

I'll post it if I can figure out how to. I've seen it once on one computer. It's pretty funny.

Please forgive me for my irreverence.