Current Status of PtW

[Verto]

I've been thinking about getting PtW now - held off when it first came out because of issues with playability online, then it got placed on the back burner and forgotten about. But, forgive me my sin against Civilization! My question is, has PtW's problems been worked out? Are the lag issues solved, etc?

[gnome]

I tried a multiplayer game on the latest patch.

I haven't tried the simultaneous or turnless game yet, because I am an old SMAC buff I went for the classic turn-based game. There were a lot of disappointments, including (STILL) lack of popups to inform when research is done, and not centering on active units that have automatic orders... or centering on important events, and not STAYING on units that are in combat so that you can see the outcome. These should at least be options if Firaxis thinks it's so much better the other way. Personally I believe turn-based MP should resemble almost exactly the single-player experience only with human opponents.

I daresay turn-based mode even synchronizes the game in real-time with your opponets... which is totally unnecessary and makes it less playable on slow connections.

On a positive note, single-player performance is superb in my opinion and has only gotten better with the patches.

[Wittlich]

I can't say much about MP internet play, but I am more than satisfied with the MP LAN playability.

Like gnome pointed out, there are irritations (lack of pop-ups, unit centering issues, etc.) in the game, but nothing that would stop the game from being played and enjoyed.

[gergi]

As long as you play with humans...

As long as you only play against human opponents, the game works well enough and is fun. Add any AI in and it becomes just as terrible as the single player. I really wish they would have fixed the AI.

[JimMac]

"I really wish they would have fixed the AI."

-Could you explain that gergi? I think the AI is pretty good, probably the best in any TBS game I have played, and I have played loads!

I think you are absolutely right gnome. I play quite a few turn based games, and would be perfectly happy to play Civ3 the way that these other games handle MP,- The player plays as if it was a single player game and then the game hands the 'game state' to the next player. Fun, and smooth as silk. (Check out HOMM3 for example).
BRING BACK THE POP_UPS AND CENTERING ON THE EVENTS, (even as options).

[gergi]

From what I can tell, most people on the forums disagree with what I think about the AI but every last person I know personally agrees with me.

First off, the "bonuses" and "weaknesses" attributed to the AI depending on difficulty level should never have been implemented. The AI should be BETTER, not get advantages, on the harder levels. Vice-versa for easier levels. I realize this has been the status quo for all Civ games since the beginning but I have always thought it was a cheap way out from developing a more sophisticated AI subsystem. I don't mind this as much as the rest of the problems as I always play on the level where they are given the fewest advantages/disadvantages (King or Regent).

At a high level, I believe the real problem with the AI is that it was designed to expand at all costs. This in turn causes most of the problems as I see it. First and foremost, is the lack of any concept involving friends/enemies. You are just territory that they wish to expand to... and they will try whenever they perceive some "weakness". Usually by ganging up on you with the other AIs.

It is pretty much a given that each and every AI will go to war with you without pretext or reason at least once a game. You can be allied with an AI for thousands of years, then one turn, they ally with another AI (even one they were just at war with), and attack you. Completely unrealistic. Even less fun.

There's also no concept of peaceful existence. You can be the most powerful civilization on earth, willing to trade and be friendly with everyone, and they will all still hate you. Sure, I understand the jealous/envy aspect but it shouldn't be as overwhelming as it is in Civ3. In the real world, the US is the most powerful nation but there are quite a few nations that are quite friendly with the USA (Iraq not-withstanding ;-)).

I could go on but I really don't think it matters. I'm in the minority in these forums but I've given up on Civ3. I'm glad you enjoy it but personally, I'm looking for a Civ replacement. Civ3 is just not fun to play.

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by JimMac
I think you are absolutely right gnome. I play quite a few turn based games, and would be perfectly happy to play Civ3 the way that these other games handle MP,- The player plays as if it was a single player game and then the game hands the 'game state' to the next player. Fun, and smooth as silk. (Check out HOMM3 for example).

I agree with this a lot.

Originally posted by JimMac BRING BACK THE POP_UPS AND CENTERING ON THE EVENTS, (even as options).

You can center on the latest event by pressing 'x'.

[CyberGnu]

I was wondering whether PTW actually fixed Civ3 or not. This thread answered my question.

Thanks gergi!

[Verto]

Does PtW have the problem of tanks being crushed by cavalry?

[WarpStorm]

Tanks should be beaten by cavalry fairly often if they are defending on open terrain. They only have an 8 defense.

[Dis]

the ai is slightly better than in civ2. A lot of that can be attributed to the fact the game is simpler than civ2 . Less decisions for ai= better ai.

[Arrian]

I've played a few multiplayer games 1-on-1 with a friend and they went reasonably smoothly. Then again, they didn't last all that long - we were just trying to get a feel for how things worked in MP.

As for the AI and other core gameplay issues, if you hated CivIII, PtW isn't going to change your mind. It's an add-on.

-Arrian

[Chemical Ollie]

Has anyone bee nable to get PtW in Sweden yet? I haven't.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Verto
Does PtW have the problem of tanks being crushed by cavalry?

First that I have heard about this, what do you mean crushed?
I do not see calv beating tanks all that often in a one on one more or less same def bonus.
If you mean a tank against a calv and the calv is in a city or forted on a mountain, no surprise.
I mean when I read your statement, I get a picture of a calv going one on one and winning 70-80% and I am not buying that. I just have not seen it.

[player1]

Originally posted by Dissident
the ai is slightly better than in civ2. A lot of that can be attributed to the fact the game is simpler than civ2 . Less decisions for ai= better ai.

Slightly better?

Is is MILES ahead.
(even when you take out cheats and play on regent)

P.S.
Comparing to wery weak Civ2 AI on cheting Deity level.