c#205 CIV3`S NOT SO GREAT LEAP FORWARD

[rhenric557]

Ahhh, but there is a penalty. In late era change of Gov. you are stuck in anarchy for roughly 6 turns. If you are at war those six turns can be hell. And in all do reality isn't it the democracies of the world that maintain the largest and most powerful militaries in the world. You can argue that China's military is the largest, true it is but it is also outdated and under equiped. To me the game is correct with democracies having the largest militaries, becuase it shows that while we can stand being the stroongest we also don't like having to use our power. hence in the game we get thrown into anarchy. which is a bit over done. The game should give more room for a war when the democratic country is attacked. being sent into anarchy before a good late modern era war has a chance to be faught is a little harsh. Especially since you can't sue for peace. I mean if you have an embassy youo should be able to use it especially in a time of war. Have the Democratic citizens revolt if you choose to extend a war not when you have no choice.
And to those who think not being able to use enemy roads is a farse. It really isn't. It isn't a matter of culture but a matter of control and being behind enemy lines. If you try to use roads within enemy controlled territory, in reality, you'll just get the hell shot out of you. Believe me I have years military experience behind me.

[Dinner]

Re: 1 vs 2

Originally posted by lorddread
There was a call to power 2? Where the heck was I? I would have bought that instead of this!

I believe Amazon is now selling CTP2 for around $10 so it is not to late to get in on the action. The game out of the box was rushed, just like Civ3, but CTP2 had a built in scripting language so the talented people here at Apolyton have created several "patches" and Mods which have VASTLY improved the game.

I'd even go so far as to say I like CTP2 more then Civ3 and I'm not the only one. Try stopping by the CTP2 forum here at Apolyton.

[MarkG]

actually it's ctp 1 that is sold for $9.99

ctp 2 is still sold for $19.99

[lorddread]

ctp 2

Where can I find CTP 2?

[Austin]

Originally posted by LaoTze


Why thankyou for proving my point which was why does only democracy get worker speed benefits? :-) At any rate the Russians built 30,000 tanks a year once in full swing, the US built an equivalent number. However, US industry dwarfed the Soviets in aircraft and ships. And the US didn't loose most of its Heartland to a foreign invasion if you really want to discuss production capabilities. Please explain the comment on China though.

The only reason that the Soviets had such high production numbers during the war is because they pretty much build nothing but weaponry, and the US supplied them with everything else. Trucks, locomotives, rolling stock, food, gasoline, ammunition, uniforms, boots, radios, EVERYTHING.

And the US also underwrote most of Britian's war effort, as well as it's own production of course.

Incidentally, Britian will FINALLY be paying off the balance of it's war debt to the US at the end of this year.

I'm aware its a game. I also don't think the US has to win every friggin time which is the main point of my posting to begin with. Thats where the Americanism vs. Communism comment came from.

Sorry, history's verdict is already in on that one.

Austin

[rhenric557]

Besides, Austin's point, The Soviet's were only able to get their War Industries back online after, The US and other allies got into the war, and after the Germans made the same mistakes as napolean. They weren't equiped for the weather and they could not keep their supply lines running smoothly, which in turn bogged them down to a stand still in Stalingrad/Leningrad/St.Petersburg, which ever name you wish to use for the city.
But the main problem is you have no real control over the set up of governments in the game. They need to change the Corruption level by Gov. Type to a slider bar, The War wariness, and the commerse levels also. But to give you what you want with support just change the number of free units for communism.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by rhenric557
To me the game is correct with democracies having the largest militaries, becuase it shows that while we can stand being the stroongest we also don't like having to use our power.

I don't know what has given you the impression that democracies don't like to use their power. I would suggest the opposite. The whole war against communism would be an example.

[Coracle]

Austin, I hope you remember after World War ONE in the 1920's, Britain and France reneged on their war-time debt to the U.S.

France save their asses twice from the German, once from the Reds after WW II, and let them get away with welching on their debts in the Twenties. So now they hate the U.S.
Bastards.

[Centaur]

In CIV3 I am unable to find a government that I actually enjoy playing. And I hate to bring up SMAC, but the social engineering choices in that game are much more interesting. Maybe that’s ok, that CIV III was aimed at a wider audience but not at me.

In the real world, “Democracy” and “Communism” are labels invoked to pacify the subjects.

Here in the US you can bet that no matter what the government does, they will find some pretext to invoke the hypnotic word “freedom”. Similarly, the word “revolution” has been so misused by various dictatorships that it no longer has any meaning.

It is a widely held belief that western democracy “beat” communism at the cold war. But if we really won, then where is all our loot and captured territory? The Russians simply changed governments, a familiar concept to us civ-ers.

It could be argued that the Russians won the cold war just as legitimately as we did -- because western governments shifted closer to communism during the cold war. More and more of the US “private sector” is so heavily regulated that I roll my eyes when people call it “capitalism”. Government and big business are so intertwined that they look like a single monster. Who has not heard of Microsoft’s partial success at destroying the free enterprise system?

Many think that Russian Communism failed because it removed natural incentives for worker productivity. I’m sure that’s a factor, but the bigger problem was and is -- drum roll please -- massive corruption.

Russia’s political mentality comes from trying to maintain a vast empire with sparse population, impossible weather, and bad roads. Russian history is riddled with “law and order” problems that stem directly from her challenged geography.

The scale of Russia naturally encourages rebellion in isolated regions. In the old days this meant civil war. Rulers maintained order with an iron fist, relying on vast networks of spies to identify trouble spots. The advent of the railroad eventually allowed Russian rulers to prevent full-scale rebellion, but was unable to prevent corruption from saturating every level of government.

With its history of revolution, partisan activities, and tight-lipped citizens with divergent ethnic backgrounds, Russia is therefore a country in which organized crime naturally flourishes. Regardless of their political experiments….

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Coracle
Austin, I hope you remember after World War ONE in the 1920's, Britain and France reneged on their war-time debt to the U.S.

France save their asses twice from the German, once from the Reds after WW II, and let them get away with welching on their debts in the Twenties. So now they hate the U.S.
Bastards.

Are you sure you want start a flame war USA vs Europe (or USA vs Rest of the World)? I hope not!

Let me suggest there are many historical and economics arguments that should be mentioned about this matter, many more than this thread should host in OT, anyway.

Things surely aren't so simple as you mentioned, and while I'm not French (and may be I have some hate & love points against and for them ) I think that calling them "bastard" isn't fair, nor true.

[Coracle]

Okay, I'll call them ingrates instead.

[Simpleton]

It's a different game thus different strategies are needed. Stuff you could do in Civ2 you can't do in Civ3. Face it or play Civ2. Firaxis sure ain't going to retool Civ3 so that all your old strategies work with Civ3. On the bright side, there are a ton more things added you can do in Civ3 compared to what they removed from Civ2.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Coracle
Okay, I'll call them ingrates instead.

That sounds better, for sure!

On a short note, BTW: I haven't good sources (books/web links) available right now, but I remember some old studies about a lot of trade pacts that USA signed with its WWII alley (mostly France and England), where USA accepted to help with military effort in exchange of access to former reserved market, as Great Britain's colonies or French colonies.

USA gained a great commercial advantage and gained a good share on technical studies and projects where Americans weren't as strong as English, at that moments. Early RADAR, Rolls Royce Merlin fighter engine and strategic info on cryptographics techniques bring to my mind just as some example.

They got their (very large) piece of cake when alley capture German scientist (you know that the whole USA - as URSS and many others - rocket/missile program had a main part provided by former german scientists) and their projects.

Don't mentioning the use of lots of military bases in others territories, very useful to have some "iron fists" ready just in case diplomacy didn't worked

To keep it in short this OT, USA soldiers suffered many war casualties and surely helped to keep at bay some nasty government, but that wasn't without some economic returns.

Don't wonder if some people seems "ingrate". May be they already payed - with interests - only with different coins.

Please forgive me if I reduced this complex topic to just some lines: I only want to suggest to you Coracle that some things are deeper than they appear.

[Jawn Henry]

One thing this game dosen't do...

...is inspire much indifference, as evidenced by this thread.

I was dissapointed, myself. I didn't like the thing about "locked" battle results. I'm sure some people used the previous method to cheat: tough on them. But When i attack a warrior with a catapult on open terrain and lose, that's bad luck. But when the same warrior attacks my musketeers in a town on the following turn, and wins? That isn't any in the realm of reality, and to me the combined results are absoulutely unacceptable. Verdict: RELOAD. That's not my only "gripe" with it, but it is the sorest point for me - no wait: lack of a scenario genreator/creator. Anyhow, these, and other little things conspired together to bring me to not appreciate the game as much as Civ2.

Don't get me wrong: It's a good game: i very much recomend it to anyone for their first experience with Civilization games. But to a friend who has and likes Civ2, all i can say is:"I didn't like it much. Other love it. "

I did like the notion of borders, though, and the trade model, though the AI should be more equitable with its deals. All i did was buy their goodwill with disadvantageous deal - not really what trade is about.

I hope Civ 4 will be a mix of 2 and 3

JH

[Centaur]

Re: One thing this game dosen't do...

Originally posted by Jawn Henry
I hope Civ 4 will be a mix of 2 and 3
JH

I'm still hoping for an Alpha Centauri II ....under the theory that the CIV product line is for general audiences while Alpha Centauri is for us connoisseurs.