Should I return?

[Richelieu]

No. Stay away.

[heidlejohn]

The last patch is out. In general, Firaxis fixed some minor bugs and stopped some exploits. But it left most things unchanged.

The more I play the game, the more I am getting fed up with the unnecessary tedium in the game. You still have to go thru the 'close' nonsense in negotiations (10 more? 20? 30? 40? 400? == a colossal waste of time).
The F4 diplo screen is still unchanged. You still have to handle tile changes when pollution is cleaned up.

If you stopped playing because of annoyances like this, then I see no reason to comeback to Civ3. I still haven't broken my seven month Civ3 addiction yet, but I can see the day coming. In general, for me, Civ3 had a lot of good ideas that were poorly implemented. If you stopped playing it for a while alreadyl, you probably felt the same.

[King_Xerces]

hey Xerces. ever played SMAC?

Nope. Is it any good?

[Jaybe]

(heidlejohn, if you don't enjoy seeing how much you can get for a trade down to the last single gold/turn because of the time taken then please, don't do it!)

[The Templar]

I've developed a new form of marketing . . .

[vondrack]

Originally posted by heidlejohn
The more I play the game, the more I am getting fed up with the unnecessary tedium in the game. You still have to go thru the 'close' nonsense in negotiations (10 more? 20? 30? 40? 400? == a colossal waste of time).
The F4 diplo screen is still unchanged. You still have to handle tile changes when pollution is cleaned up.

heidlejohn,

I, too, dislike that "fine-tuning" involved in the trades... but as Jaybe correctly pointed out, we are not required to do so. We can always accept the AI's proposal...

Anyway, I wanted to point out that what we both would probably like to see is a problem very difficult to solve for Firaxians. I suppose that you would prefer having your Trade Advisor come up with the correct proposal immediately (not just commenting what you are juggling with). There is a problem with this - basically, the trades are multiple-variable, multiple-solution problems. You can throw agreements, alliances, resources, luxuries, money upfront/per turn, cities, and workers in... and there is often way more than one possible "correct price" for a given something you want from the AI civ. How could that poor Trade Advisor know what exactly you would like to put on the table? I mean... yes, there would be ways how to implement it (like fixing several variables and asking for the last one to be calculated), but probably none of them would be convenient enough to use. It may be you would find that what we are currently doing is still the quickest way to find the result we seek (even if somewhat annoying quickest way... ).

[Chronus]

You still have to handle tile changes when pollution is cleaned up.

Hmmm . . . I've found the automatic cleanup/construction keys (CTRL + A, I think . . . somebody help me out) for the workers to be very good and useful.

[Alex]

Xerces: SMAC is one of the best strategy games ever made. Insanely fun.

Even if you don't like sci-fi, it is worth to try it.

[SMIFFGIG]

Civ 3 in depth (NO) Civ 3 good game (NO)

Im sorry, anyone who says CIV3 is an in DEPTH game, really does not have a clue about strategy games. SMAC is in depth, Europa Universalis 2 (although not a great game) is in depth, but Civ 3 is definitly not in depth.

Civ 3 has been geared toward the majority audience to gain greater sales (which it has done)
In doing this has become in some aspects (all as firaxis would like to think) more user friendly and in virtualy all aspects less in depth. And in my opinion a real disapointment to the Civilization series and name.


Civ 3 is probably about as in DEPTH as Command & Conquer Red Alert 2 (and probably as realistic *sarcasim*)

SMIFFGIG

[player1]

In some parts less dept then SMAC?

Maybe.


Less depth then Civ2?

Not a chance!

[SMIFFGIG]

Well of course it has more depth than Civ 2, there isnt really to much of a comparasant between them. I didnt mention it was any more or less in depth than civ 2.

But the thing is Civ 2......... 8 YEARS AGO 1994 IF IM CORRECT.

Civ 3 is a game of now, and an un satisfactory one at that. People maybe willing to pay £35 for the game and £35 for the addon.

Edited out by Ming... Next time you promote a policy of piracy, you will be restricted. This site does not support such activity, and will not allow discussion of such illegal acts.

[Theseus]

Your reply is insulting, immoral, and either drunken or uneducated.

Don't waste my time.

[SMIFFGIG]

Cease wasting your own time Theseus and go to another thread, if you find it insulting to bare up to someone elses opinion then there is truly something wrong with you.

[Cyclotron]

SMIFFGIG, it's not so much your opinion as your insults that we find... well, insulting. Consider:

Originally posted by SMIFFGIG's
Im sorry, anyone who says CIV3 is an in DEPTH game, really does not have a clue about strategy games.

Now that's dismissive of others' opinions... Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical for you to tell Theseus off for not respecting yours?

Civ 3 has been geared toward the majority audience to gain greater sales (which it has done)
In doing this has become in some aspects (all as firaxis would like to think) more user friendly and in virtualy all aspects less in depth. And in my opinion a real disapointment to the Civilization series and name.

Good, a paragraph without insults. Use this as a model for your future posts... next time, though, use some examples.

Civ 3 is probably about as in DEPTH as Command & Conquer Red Alert 2 (and probably as realistic *sarcasim*)

Speaking of sarcasm, I'm sure that simile was very informative, and that you won a lot of people over to your point of view with sarcasm.

[Capt Dizle]

Its clear to me that some people here are out of their depth.

Firaxis has given us a hell of a game.