Comparing Rise of Nations' civs to Civ 3's

[monkspider]

- argh Apolyton's formatting has ruined my post. So I will have to attach my comparison chart as a notepad file. See my next post please.

RON has made a few interesting civ choices that include civs that aren't even included in PTW. Some of them I applaud (Inca, Maya), others I find highly questionable (Bantu, Nubians). However, I find that Civ 3+PTW, or even just plain vanilla Civ 3 has the stronger civ roster. I have always maintained that Civ 3's original 16 was the ideal 16 civs that could have possibly included. RoN's initial lineup is missing quite a few notables (India, Persia, Babylon, a north american native civ, just to name a few but India is especially unforgiveable). Hopefully these omissions will be addressed in the XP.

[monkspider]

Chart comparing Civ's Civs and RON's

[HuangShang]

wo gives a sh*t about civ3, the game s*cked

[WarpStorm]

I do, for one. It's my current favorite game. I know that Monkspider (the thread starter) does.

I don't think you have to hate Civ3 to like RoN.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
I do, for one. It's my current favorite game. I know that Monkspider (the thread starter) does.

I don't think you have to hate Civ3 to like RoN.

Well Stated Warp.
For the record, it's probably my favorite game too. It has been receiving some tough competition from EU II and HOI though.

[HalfLotus]

Which civs are included is about as important to me as the color of the box they ship it in. Just thought I'd throw that in.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by HalfLotus
Which civs are included is about as important to me as the color of the box they ship it in. Just thought I'd throw that in.

That's cool Lotus, on the other hand some of us here are history buffs and obsess over this sort of thing.

[MarkG]

Civ3+PTW		Rise of Nations

Aztecs			Aztecs	
China			China
Greeks			Greeks
Germans			Germans
France			France
Japan				Japan	
Korea				Korea
England			England
Egyptians			Egyptians
Romans			Romans
Russia			Russia
Spain				Spain
Mongols			Mongols
Ottomans			Turks
----------------------------------
Arabs
				Maya
Celts				
				Inca
Babylonians		
Persia	
				Bantu
				Nubians
Carthage
India
Zulus
Iroqouis
America
Vikings

[Alex]

Thanks, Markos, the txt file was all messed up when I opened it.

And Civ3 vs. RoN... apples and oranges here. I like Civ3, but even if I didn't I wouldn't consider RoN to be the game to end all games. Well, I still have to play it, so it could be it.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by HuangShang
wo gives a sh*t about civ3, the game s*cked

Normally, I wouldn't feel it necessary to quote something like this, since it is enough to say it once per thread. But Civ3 was just THAT BAD, that I feel the need to reiterate through quotation.

As far as the lineup, it looks good to me. Perhaps a little lacking in some of the more looked for civs (Japanese). But hey, you got to leave something for an XP.

[WarpStorm]

double post

[WarpStorm]

Then it's a shame that RoN is being designed by some of the same people.

[Locutus]

I think they're pretty much evenly matched. RoN really only misses India and maybe Babylon, but at least they got Africa right (which had a much richer history than most people realize, and I still maintain that the Zulu are NOT a civ). I think 3 pre-Columbian American civs more than compensate for the lack of Sioux/Iroquois, though I agree some North American civ would have been nice.

Other than that I don't think the comparison with PTW is entirely fair, we should compare it with vanilla Civ3. IMHO we can only compare with PTW after the first X-pack for RoN comes out. With <30 civs, more is under almost any circumstance better (and with unique civs ike Civ3 and RoN, any game with X-pack bound to have more civs than any game without one).

If you look at it that way (comparing it to vanilla Civ3), I think substituting the Indians, Babylonians and Persians for the Spanish, Mongols and Maya is not a very bad decision. I'm sure India and Babylon will be in a future RoN X-pack too (after which we can make a comparison which does both games full justice )...

[WarpStorm]

That's a good point Locutus. Civ3 only came with 16 civilizations, the other 8 were added later.

[tniem]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Then it's a shame that RoN is being designed by some of the same people.

I'm pretty sure that the RoN teamed left Firaxis well before most of the Civ 3 stuff was complete. I would find it hard to believe that the RoN team had much of an impact on Civ III.

As for the civs, would like to see the Arabs and Indians in the game. They are more important in terms of civilization (early) than anything out of Europe. Yes the Germans, French, and English are all important in the last three hundred years but before then they were wastelands compared to the Indian and Arab civilizations.