Get RID of the MODERN AGE!

[prince_aki]

Or atleast give us an option to do so. I doubt that it will ever be possible to make the modern age in Civ 3 work reasonably. I assume that the people who developed the game erroneously assumed that the game could run smoothly in modern age, like its predecessers, even though the graphics and interface were enhanced significantly. They made this assumption, because they over-estimated the technological progress in the modern household personal computer. My PC is five years old(pentium 2).

Anyway, an easy solution to this problem is to allow the gamer the ability to disable all technology after the industrial age or even the middle ages. THIS WOULD NOT BE THAT DIFFICULT.

Civ 3 is a great game, up until the middle of the industrial age... Firaxis should concentrate its efforts in fixing Civ 3, however minimal they may be, on improving, these ages. **** the modern age.

[Cyclotron]

OK... why don't you just mod it? Some of us like the modern age.

[prince_aki]

"Or atleast give us an option to do so. "

[asleepathewheel]

If you removed the modern age, then it would still slow down. The slow down is occuring due to the number of units, not because its in a different era. If you removed the modern era, the units would just build up in the industrial era. instead of hundresd of tanks, you would have hundreds of cavalry, with the result that nothing would change. I can't imagine playing til 2050 with cavs.

Maybe you should talk to the guy who wants more techs and more units, I think that would make for an interesting conversation.

[Autolicus]

I could not agree more -- in fact, I started my own post on this very topic not long ago. Unfortunately, this is never going to happen -- if for no other reason, there are those who like the moder era (although I can't for the life of me understand why, given the way it is implemented in the game). And its not simply a matter of "editing" out the modern age. For Civ to truly improve as a game, it would have to be restructed to flesh out the pre-modern age, which is the strong point of the game.

Ah well, some of us can just sit back and wistfully contemplate the game that Civ could be.

[Cyclotron]

Modding IS an option. Besides, without the modern age, what UU would the Americans have? You can't take the Americans out!!!

[twistedx]

Not certain what you would hope to accomplish by taking or mod'ing out the Modern Era. If it's game performance, it won't help -- like asleepatthewheel said, it's a matter of having more units on the map and/or a larger map (try "Marla's World Map" with all the civs... It starts to slow down considerably by 0BC). Or is there something about the Modern Era you don't like that I'm missing?

Personally, I don't think there is enough on the tech tree. I'd like to see it extend in to future techs, rather than ancient and current techs. Firaxis might reason that "after 2050 is where SMAC comes in", but I there would still be conflicts and societal evolution on Earth. I'd like to see a couple more post-modern eras, futuristic units, and some future wonders.

-- twistedx

[Cyclotron]

Future tech is a whole different topic... personally, I think that Firaxis should increase tech density and variety in the ages they already have before they start creating more ages.

[Felch]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Modding IS an option. Besides, without the modern age, what UU would the Americans have? You can't take the Americans out!!!

The Americans could have the Drunken Frontiersman. He requires the strategic resource "Whiskey," the "Distilling" andvance, and is automated from the moment it's built. Has no combat power, and functions as a settler.

[Inverse Icarus]

the americans could always have the minuteman, a rifleman with soem extra D.

[prince_aki]

NOT NECESSARILY.

"A player's industrial economy can only support a certain amount of units."
There are more units in the modern age, because of the increases in efficency caused by improvements in the city infastructures and other technological benefits. Thus, the lag would stay as currently is in the industrial age.

Point proven?

Similarly, if the modern age is still included, then it would be possible to alleviate some of the lag and tedium problems by the weakening of the benefits of technology throughout the game, and an increase in unit maintenance costs.

Changing the American Unique Unit is definitely no big deal. Does anyone really use it anyway? Personally, I have never played long enough to do so.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by UberKruX
the americans could always have the minuteman, a rifleman with soem extra D.

My minuteman (I dumped the useless F-15) is a musketeer with 2 MP. BTW, I edited all post gunpowder units up, and the musketeer is now 4.6.1.

[Akron]

If the problem is that the game is slowing down too much, then play on a smaller map. It is that simple. Don't play on large and huge and then complain about amount of time it takes. I play on a tiny map with 16 civs. You only get about 3 cities so every square is that much more important. The games are short in terms of the amount of time they take, which is ideal for people who don't have that much free time. I dont get disinterested when playing on small maps, which was a problem when I hit the modern age on huge maps. Also, there is less micromanagement.

Finally, I like the late industrial-early modern age period, as this is when you get tanks and then modern tanks (domination time). The fact that the modern age holds (potentially) the most options for warfare using combined arms really makes it the best. Too bad in civ 3 the spaceship comes so soon. I really would like it much better if all the modern techs had to be discovered before the spaceship techs could be researched.

[reefer addict]

16 civs on a standard map works great, very little lag at the modern age. if the game always ran like it does on huge maps id'd toss it out the window.

[Cyclotron]

Raise the Monitor!

The American UU should definitly be the Monitor, and ironclad with an extra defense point.