Do you ever turn off the civ-specific abilities and units?

[sboog]

I have about decided to turn off the civ specific abilities and units. There's enough in the game to learn for me now without trying to learn all these new units for each civ.

Anyone else do that? Do you find the game is just as good without being as complicated?

sboog

[Colonel Kraken]

I've never tried turning off the Civ specific abilities. To me, it makes the game more interesting to have at least some uniqueness in the game.

Cheers,

Colonel

[Cookie Monster]

I've never played a game with these options turned off. Now that you mention it though I wonder how much different a game would be?

[dojoboy]

Never! Why is this even an option?

[The Viceroy]

I also have never turned it off, but im pleased its there as an option .. I actually love configurable games .. the more the merrier, as long as the changes can easily be put back, and don't crash the flippin game

Civ3 really is in desperate need of a scenario maker .. let that and multiplayer be your next target Firaxis .. please ..

[sboog]

The manual says it is an option. You can go to the Rules when you set up the game and turn it off.

sboog

[Akka]

I never play with the UU
Civ is about rewriting history. I don't feel to only reread it

So in my mod I just get rid of the UU. Rather than 16 units seen only once in the game, I prefer to use some of them to smooth a little the upgrade tree, which advance in a too choppy way for my tastes

[dunk]

I love the civ abilities and UUs. It makes each game different.

[lockstep]

I was hoping that Firaxis would incorporate one of my favourite SMAC features (unique factions) also into Civ3, and was afraid at the same time that it wouldn't fit into the game. Happily, I was wrong.

[Sandman]

I never play with civ-specifics on.

Why?

1. Unique units are not that useful, and they clog up the production queue. I'm not a warmonger anyway.

2. I find it very, very difficult to make a decision, because there is no way I will be able to know if I am making the right choice. It's a shot in the dark. I'd rather adapt whilst playing.

3. Some traits are better than others.

4. It is my belief that the AI will perform better. No evidence though.

5. I also think that the game will run faster.

6. Civ-specifics make the starting location even more crucial. Expansionist is useless if you start on a medium sized island, conversely, if you start in the middle of a huge continent, expansionist is one of the most useful to have. Removing them levels the playing field.

[asleepathewheel]

i play with them on.

I think they're great. tailoring a game towards a civ's specific abilities. Like if I'm not religious, do I wait for republic or democracy or monarchy to change. anarchy is pretty crushing if at the wrong time. and the units. if I am iriqoius, I have to attack early to have them be of use. if germans, I can bide my time (quietly) before strking. fun

[ChaotikVisions]

Civ-specifics

I leave em on, it adds new strategys to it. And the units are quite nice also, if your not isolated on an island your bound to use them sometime. Anyway, just my opinion.

[Thrawn05]

Since seeing the overwelming number of people have the civ traits on, I wonder if that's the reason for Tank killing Spearmen.


BTW: I leave it on.

[Carver]

Turning off civ specific traits has to be an option in case anyone wants an absolutely equal playing field - and for the upcoming (we hope) multi-player.

But, I myself never turn them off. I love the notion of different civs with different charachteristics. If anything, I wish there were more personality differences between civs, ala SMAC.

[Captain]

always, always OFF

Besides my first game, I have always turned UUs off.

Why?
Start with a level-playing field. Uniqueness comes from the different PLAY styles. My civ will have strengths and attributes due to the way I run it, not because of some inherent "genetic" code. This borders on being a morally repugnant notion as well. The Germans naturally make better tanks? The French are genetically endowed with superior musket-firing abilities? So technical know-how and an industrial base, both being based on the player's playstyle, have nothing to do with how powerful tanks are? You can build barracks and train your musketmen into a more disciplined fighting force, but for some reason, they're inferior to the French, well, simply because they're not French? WTF? Those scientific Russians have cheap libraries and free advances because??? Forget about putting more taxes into research or building more improvements!.. the Russians have an edge, not because they concentrate on science more or manage science better than me, but because.... well, Firaxis needed a way to "spice up" the game.

If I have a powerful offensive civilization, it is because I concentrate on taking the initiative. If I want to run you over with tanks, I'll get the techs, build up my industrial production capacity, build the tanks, and the infrastructure to get them over to pound on you, thank you very much. I won't just pick "Germans" b/c I know my Panzers can dust your tanks in a certain era. If I have a science heavy civ, it is because I choose to concentrate on that. If I have an expansionist civ, it's because I went settler-crazy.

Uniqueness should come from the player's choices throughout the game, not from some artificially imposed constraints. The game should have the flexibility and replay value to make each game different because players choose to use different tactics based on the changing game conditions.

Resorting to these predetermined UUs seems like a cheap way to increase replay value. Personally I think it DECREASES strategic value. It limits the play style by funneling choices down the same path. Gee, you're Chinese? Well, I wonder when you're going to expand! Oh, you're Greek? I guess I'll pick another target for ancient conquest. The only choices you make are at the start up screen. Think about it.

Try playing a game with them off and see whether or not you are more free to choose your civs direction. Those AIs aren't nearly as predictable now, are they? The Aztecs won't always do a jag rush, the Persians won't typically sit back til immortals. You, the player, won't always do the same thing, resorting to the same tactics as the last time you played with this civ. Thus you will make your civ as good as it is, because you are a good player that adapts and plays well, not simply because you got samurai first and went on a ho-hum killing spree.

Alright, end of rant. I doubt I'll change any minds, most folks seem to play with it on without any qualms. That's why I'm happy Firaxis made it an option. If they ever took that away, it would probably push me to the dark side of these forums.