What exactly is Play the World

[Jon Shafer]

*Skips reading over Coracle's post because they all say the same thing*

I will laugh at you all when the patch is released in 2 or 3 weeks (yes, in two or three weeks. They're doing it right this time instead of like Civ 3 was).

[Sabre2th]

Originally posted by Trip
*Skips reading over Coracle's post because they all say the same thing*

I will laugh at you all when the patch is released in 2 or 3 weeks (yes, in two or three weeks. They're doing it right this time instead of like Civ 3 was).

Finally someone who isn't a complete pessimist

[JtheJackal]

It's absolutely baffleing that someone could not like Civ 3 and like other games simliar to it. I wonder how you guys got a deffective copy?

[dunk]

Originally posted by Trip
*Skips reading over Coracle's post because they all say the same thing*

I will laugh at you all when the patch is released in 2 or 3 weeks (yes, in two or three weeks. They're doing it right this time instead of like Civ 3 was).

Coracle makes me laugh. He bought the strategy guide.

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by JtheJackal It's absolutely baffleing that someone could not like Civ 3 and like other games simliar to it. I wonder how you guys got a deffective copy?

I think the main thing people don't like, at least me, is how a Persian Immortal can kill a Rifleman. Have you ever tried that? It works. I win about 50% of the time. What's the use in advanced units with odds like that? Although, I must admit, I used to hate the game, but I'm beginning to like it more and more now.

[JohnM2433]

If I recall correctly, a rifleman has a defense of 6 and an Immortal has an attack of 4, so an Immortal should only beat a rifleman of equal rank some 2/5 of the time. Actually, I think the actual odds may be more complicated than that, since each fight goes on for several "rounds," but the odds should never be over 50%, and I think may even be somewhat lower than 40%.

[zulu9812]

Personally, i think Firaxis should bring out a military-themed XP called FTW...

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by zulu9812
Personally, i think Firaxis should bring out a military-themed XP called FTW...

nice

[Taso_84]

they better fix up diplomacy so that you can give and receive units from other players (without getting the tech)

[Dimorier Maximus]

Originally posted by JohnM2433 If I recall correctly, a rifleman has a defense of 6 and an Immortal has an attack of 4, so an Immortal should only beat a rifleman of equal rank some 2/5 of the time. Actually, I think the actual odds may be more complicated than that, since each fight goes on for several "rounds," but the odds should never be over 50%, and I think may even be somewhat lower than 40%.

If you think about it, what chance do some dudes with swords have against an army of men equipped with rifles? Is it 40%? Is it 20%? No, I'd say it's more like 1%.

That is what I don't like. I mean, against muskets, sure...the sword army might have a chance due to inaccuracy and slow load times. But rifles? Give me a break. They can't defend or attack an army of riflemen and have a shot either way.

[thinkingamer]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Didn´t they promise 'a full scenario editor' last time already?

For me it´s 'once bitten, twice shy'.

I find CivIII so boring, compared to its predecessors, I haven´t played a game in months.

I couldn´t even bring myself to download the latest patch; I simply do not bother about CivIII any more at all.

So one thing I promise is: I promise not to buy PtW. At least not before it´s down to less than $10.

Which may be soon enough, otoh.

I will not buy the expansion, except, if....... anyone (rich) who really enjoyed civ2 and smac (and totally hated civ3) recommends it, because the expansion is AT LEAST good as civ2 and SMAC. Oh, i also want an ACCESIBLE and DETAILED senario editor. Thank you.

[JohnM2433]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
If you think about it, what chance do some dudes with swords have against an army of men equipped with rifles? Is it 40%? Is it 20%? No, I'd say it's more like 1%.

That is what I don't like. I mean, against muskets, sure...the sword army might have a chance due to inaccuracy and slow load times. But rifles? Give me a break. They can't defend or attack an army of riflemen and have a shot either way.

Well, I'm not so sure about that. If the dudes with swords had metal armor or sheilds, that could protect them against rifle fire, I think. However, since the Immortals did *not* have these things, your point is well taken. In order to better reflect combat between units from different eras, the ratios of the attack and defense values of the more modern units to the more ancient ones would have to be even higher than they actually are in the game.

Now, the folks at Civ III might say that you can imagine these primative soldiers having more advanced technology in later eras, and thus being better at dealing with modern threats. And this would be fine if the units did not look exactly the same as they did in the ancient era, unlike settlers and workers. I mean, it seems absurd that a nation with nuclear power would ever use longbowmen for anything, even martial law.