Is there any hope for me?

[rwprice]

sboog, good to hear from you again! Yes, it feels like we've been on a journey together. The comments that you and the others have made here have been most helpful. You've given me some great ideas on new ways to look at the game and hopefully breathe new life into my playing time. I think the bottom line is that I really need to be able to set aside some solid time to play, instead of trying to break it up into the little pieces I can fit in here and there. You're right--coming back to a game after a few days have gone by is difficult to do. It takes a while to even remember what I was trying to do. Thanks for the suggestion about the succession games over at CivFanatics--I may give that a try.

I'm convinced that once I can get to the point where I think more about what I want to do and less about how to do it, I will enjoy the game a lot more. Planetfall, thanks for your suggestions--I'm going to save them and keep them handy. Thanks everyone, for some great advice!

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Solver
Planetfall - boo! The ability to play long games is one thing I love about Civ - I like if if my games take 20 and more hours. It's so complex and hard to learn... if it was short, they'd had to remove some complexity.

No you are missing the point. My point is there should be a way to play the game for both type of users: A) those who want to play 3-5 hrs a week and finish a game, and B) those who want to play a long game.

Personally, unless I am testing 10-20 year turn tactics, I am only interested in the long game. I got hooked by the "just one more turn and I can gain advantage" bait. However, even though I would not dream of giving up on the long game, I can understand the problem of people who don't want to commit a lot of time each week because of other priorities in their life. Given the high of winning a long game, if there is a choice between a long and short game design, then the long game wins hands down. But this is civ3, surely by this time there should have been flexibility in game design to allow for a lightning civ3 game. There is lightning chess and regular chess and mail chess. The three games have the same rules but the player experience is totally different because of the differences in latency and total time to finish a game.
I can't see mail civ3 ever being of interest.
But there is a group of users who would appreciate lightning civ3, or scenario civ3.

I never played civ2, but I thought scenario games were a part of civ2 and some scenario game play was going to come out with PTW.

My 3 cents.

--PF

[Solver]

I think you're mistaken in some points. There is a future for email civ 3, in every meaning of it - games that take several months to complete still are popular.

As far as short, lightning chess, games go, I can't really see how it can be done. It would need fundamental changes... like making it possible to win not by conquest in the beginning of the Industrial Age. Game length comes from the count of units, so things like Double Production don't help - they actually lead to more units and hence even more time spent playing a game.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by planetfall


No you are missing the point. My point is there should be a way to play the game for both type of users: A) those who want to play 3-5 hrs a week and finish a game, and B) those who want to play a long game.

Can't wait to end a came? Here what you do.

1: Tiny Map
2: No Respawn Players
3: Accelerated Production
4: Cheiftan Level

Just my 4 cents.

[planetfall]

Ok Solver, it would be tough to program a short civ3 game. Many the interest would not be worth the programming effort. If I were doing it, it would be something like this:

1. starting position: user
A. User sets: world types, difficulty levels, win conditions, civs playing, etc like when start a new game
B. User sets either starting year or
ERA.
C. User sets max number of turns
10|15|20|25
D. Previous civ history {all scales == 100%}
1) max science rate
2) max expansion rate
3) max military rate
4) max productability rate

2. starting position: based on user preferences computer generates a scenario
telling user:
A. civ playing
B. victory conditions
C. current civ development based user's slider preferences.


With this there could be a short Game of the Month where a scenario is posted and then different players could who could win according to victory condition such as
A. most land area increase {conquest}
B. highest culture increase {culture}
C. highest production increase {productivity}

Ok, this would be tough to program as civ3 has not been around long enough for standard offenses and defenses. There is no 3 knight game. There is no queen gambit. Closest things we have so far are: ICS, early warfare rush, peaceful baiting AI vs AI, rotating short wars vs different AI's.

You convinced me I can't think of how it could be done in a reasonable manner. Best case would be some tutorial type scenarios and that would defeat the fun of learning how to play better and better.

Back to short games: solitare, freecell.

--PF

[Thrawn05]

Planetfall, could you name a TBS, RTS comptuer game that's short? I would like know.


Freecell a SHORT game? Come on it takes me a couple of hours just to consider a move.

[rwprice]

I agree that it would be pretty tough to program a short Civ3 game, but I think Planetfall has a point in saying that it would be good to somehow cater to those of us who can't invest the kind of time necessary to really experience the game.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that this is a deficiency of Civ3 in any way. Games are designed in a particular way and that's the way they're best experienced. One reason there's been so much frustration by some people playing Civ3 is that they want the game to be something that it's not. I recognize that any game needs to be approached on its own merits, not on what we want it to be.

Having said that, scenarios would perhaps be the way to experience a "lightning" version of the game. To do this, the user would come into an already existing situation and play for the completion of a particular objective. Of course, this would in some ways make it a different game, but it was popular with Civ2 (maybe I should dust off Civ2 and explore some of those scenarios).

Civ3 is a wonderful game that I hope to fully experience one day. In the meanwhile, I'm looking for ways to enjoy it in the little time I have available.

[Solver]

Planetfall, nice to see I showed you my point . If such a thing was done, it would just plain be a different game. Civ is, by definition, a long game - changing it would be one the most radical changes - well make Civ RTS .

The only exception is that if I now fire up Civ 1 and can conquer the world in an hour .

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
Planetfall, could you name a TBS, RTS comptuer game that's short? I would like know.


Freecell a SHORT game? Come on it takes me a couple of hours just to consider a move.

You are working too hard on Freecell. I run about 80% success and play 2-3 games/hr.

How about:
Risk [1-3 hrs]
Axis & Allies [3-4 hrs]
Chess at low difficulty levels [30min-1hr]
MsHearts [30 min]


Hearts and Freecell can pass time while waiting for url's to load.

Granted have not played longer short games like Risk or A&A this year as they are not as interesting as playing a sequence in civ3. But other games are useful when looking for a short break between tasks.

-- PF

[Solver]

My favorite game, not counting civ, is Age of Empires. AoE 2 gives you games of 40-60 minutes typically, anything over two hours is a long game.

[WarpStorm]

My new favorite, not counting Civ, Moonbase Commander (don't laugh, it's good), can usually be played in half an hour.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Solver
My favorite game, not counting civ, is Age of Empires. AoE 2 gives you games of 40-60 minutes typically, anything over two hours is a long game.

Hey, thanks for the heads up. I assumed AOE was a long game. I was looking for another inbetween game for those times when I have some time but not enough to get into a civ3 sessiono.

[Solver]

Nope, AOE isn't long. Generally, the next upcoming title of the series, Age of Mythology, does even have games of 30 minutes, in 1v1.

[Juggler]

AoE 2 gives you games of 40-60 minutes typically, anything over two hours is a long game.

that just remindes me what a crappy AoE2 player I am. I managed to finish 4 campaigns in the Joan of Arc scenario but then it all stopped (enemy agression intensified).
Yet I finished the game in a record time (with the help of cheats of course).

[Solver]

LOL Juggler. Well campaigns are different... some scenarios there require you to spend a few hours.