View Full Version : Civilization Three
This is a great game! It is one of my favorites. The website is here (http://www.civ3.com).
I had to say it's great, but with a caveat:
Is Civ3 a great game? Without a doubt. But my issue is that it's really only Civ 2.5. I helped out on the Apolyton forums, putting in my two bits to assist in the development. I waited for years for this release, hearing how they were going to really give it a once over, and improve it to no end.
And we basically end up with a 'super-patch' for Civ II.
Civ III.
Great? Yes.
But also a great disappointment.
I've played Civ III for literally more than 1,000 hours (pre-ordered it).
It can be really great at times, and really bad at times. I would have called it Civ 1.5, to me it seems closer to the original than to Civ 2. Ah well, maybe they'll get it right around Civ 7 or 8...
You wanna talk dropping the ball?
Let's discuss MOO3...
:mad:
Jim H. Moreno
06 Feb 04, 12:15
You wanna talk dropping the ball?
Let's discuss MOO3...
Let's not, and just make like we did. What a disaster.
I agree about Civ 3 just being just a rather large patch. I do like the looks of the game much better, but it's difficult! And I do kinda miss the constant drone of 'Plebs are needed!' Maybe that's just me, though...
Civ, MOO and Heroes are regular games for me; I get every one in the series. 'Wargame-lite' for those friends that aren't into the hardcore realm of TOAW that I inhabit.
With Civ III out (and disappointing), MOO 3 bombing to no ends, and Heroes 4 a recent new addition, what is there to look forward to on this front?
Will they even bother with a MOO 4? With Allan Emerich (sp?) being ousted as lead designer, then the team changing halfway through development, then the game getting an overhaul midstream, it's no wonder it was trash. They need to marry the MOO2 design to the 'ambiance' of the original, and then they'll have a winner.
Has anyone played Gal Civ - Divided galaxies? I must confess a certain attraction to the space 4X games, and there hasn't been a good one in ages. I used to play 8 bit (C-64) Reach for the Stars!, and when they came out with that recently, I thought I was in heaven. Except the damned game played itself! I just had to press enter a few times, and the game was over; I won... It was the best game I never played!
Scratch that, it was crap...
Any other space 4Xers out there?
Are there people who have tried to play Civ III by email. If I am not wrong it is possible with an add-on, isn't it ?
LaPalice.
Jim H. Moreno
11 Feb 04, 10:57
Shane, I played the demo for Gal Civ, and really liked it. Don't have it, and haven't found it around my town. I also like this game style; too few and far between. Homeworld comes close. Wasn't there an old Star Trek arcade game made this way? I seem to remember sitting down in one back in the good ol' days of gaming.
ER_Chaser
18 Feb 04, 10:25
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
You wanna talk dropping the ball?
Let's discuss MOO3...
:mad:
lol ... how close I feel like Mantis :D ..
Those two were also my pains .... :(
chrisvalla
19 Feb 04, 13:58
Star Trek had Birth of the Federation as Civ/MOO-type game.
Doctor Sinister
20 Feb 04, 19:05
I got bored with CivIII very quickly. I find that when I have too many units and the map is constantly flicking back and forth all over the place, the turn-based thing really becomes a drag because I forget what everybody was doing. Was that unit destined for a city, or was it supposed to be heading for a transport for loading and shipping off to the war? But that's just me. I've got into Rise of Nations recently - it's like CivIII on speed. You can go from bow and arrow to nukes in about half an hour.
As for MOO3, there is a large post-it note on my copy of MOO3 saying - "Do not play this game, you will only get annoyed ".
MOO2 was perfection - I was expecting more of the same with the sequel and I was so annoyed with what we got that I wrote to two PC magazines to ask them if they knew when the real version of MOO3 was coming out. Rather amusingly, they both printed my letter!
The main problems when I load this "game" are that I'm faced with a completely incomprehensible user interface, dodgy AI, extremely poor micro and macro-management options and possibly the worst "Diplomacy" I've ever seen between a player and CPU players in a game. It's like playing with Microsoft Excel, but without the excitement.
And this isn't even mentioning the real-time 3D space combat, which turns out to be a bunch of nearly invisible tiny dots fighting a load of other infinitesimal tiny dots, with the odd beam flashing across the screen - and the player with NO IDEA what on Earth is going on.
This is supposed to be fun?
There is absolutely NO feedback from the game to tell you how you are doing, all a player can do is randomly hit sliders and buttons to try and get some kind of result they can reasonably interpret. Things happen seemingly at random - I get the impression the game could play itself without any intervention from me at all if it were so inclined. What, exactly, is there for me to do in this game? Because every time I try something, three turns later the AI has overruled me. Deactivating the AI means wading through several screens of rubbish to get to where I want, and even then it's hit and miss if you get the desired result.
Frankly, I'm angry, and I'm not the only one. Quicksilver have taken a much beloved concept and perverted it beyond recognition - this "game" bears NO RELATION whatsoever to MOO1 or MOO2 and, frankly, I'm thinking of contacting the Trade Descriptions people to report Quicksilver for even daring to release this complete mess under the Master of Orion label.
So - at the time I figured it must be a joke. The REAL version of MOO3 has to be out soon - doesn't it?
I think its an all time great! its the only game that is always on my hardrive, unlike other games that I remove after playing for a while.
I'm not a fan.
I bought it, having already bought and loved Civ and Civ II, but found it to be disappointing.
So, my son plays it and I'll stick with Civ II.
I have Civ II Gold, and Civ III with both expansions, and I have to say that Civ III is much superior. The only problem I have is that outdated units like a simple warrior can defeat a modern armor...
PvtManaCoB3MD
07 Apr 04, 20:04
I love Rise of Nations, it's an absolute blast.....and it will get better when later this month, the expansion called "Thrones and Patriots" comes out! They add a ton of stuff, including new nations. They add the Americans and a couple of Native American groups, Iroquois and Cherokee, I think. There's new wonders like China's Forbidden City and new maps, which is almost always a good thing.
I almost forgot.....I must confess to being ignorant....what is MOO3?
Doctor Sinister
08 Apr 04, 15:32
Originally posted by PvtManaCoB3MD
I love Rise of Nations, it's an absolute blast.....and it will get better when later this month, the expansion called "Thrones and Patriots" comes out! They add a ton of stuff, including new nations. They add the Americans and a couple of Native American groups, Iroquois and Cherokee, I think. There's new wonders like China's Forbidden City and new maps, which is almost always a good thing.
I almost forgot.....I must confess to being ignorant....what is MOO3?
MOO3 is Master of Orion 3, a space-empire strategy thingy. I'd stick with MOO2 though, it's a bloody good game, unlike the utter trash that MOO3 was. I feel so strongly about this that I've always wanted to go around the shops with a pack of Post-it notes and stick warning labels onto any copies I see in the shops saying "Don't buy this, it's rubbish" to try and save others (yeah, out of character for me or what?!).
Also, I'm really looking forward to the RoN expansion - that's gonna be great!
Dr. S.
I occassionally still play the original MOO. Although MOO2 was technically superior, there isn't the same 'ambiance' or mood and atmosphere that the original so easily inspired.
PvtManaCoB3MD
08 Apr 04, 18:27
Dr. S,
Thanks for info! I've never played any of those, may have to give MOO2 a try then.
PS: I checked my information, and it's the Iroquois and the LAKOTA, not the Cherokee. They're also adding the Persians, who can build a second capital. They're also adding Senate buildings which let you choose one of 6 different governments (including despot for Dr. S!) They also have made some specific changes to the balancing of nation powers and such. I think I read a preview that said the Mayans and the Spanish were the ones they adjusted to make them not so overpowering...all I can say is.....I never lost to them! :horse:
Doctor Sinister
08 Apr 04, 20:18
Change of Government option in RoN sounds cool - it's got to be Despot all the way.
Talking about being nasty to people, one of my favourite games was the first Dungeon Keeper - I used to like slapping the imps around. If you went into the Chicken enclosure and slapped the chickens they would explode in a puff of feathers. Aahhh...hours of endless fun...
Dr. S.
I've bought and played Galactic Civilizations. It's a really great game with many options. A new expansion pack is coming out soon called "Alterian Prophecy." It is supposed to explain why humans and Alterians look so much alike. You can also design maps, make custom scenarios, and play 'team' game like Good civs vs. Evil civs.
The reason you can't find it in stores is that you must order it online. You can buy the game on disk (like me) or you can pay for it with a credit card and download it (if you have something faster than dialup).
I believe that anyone who has played Civilization or a similar game will really like GalCiv.
Doctor Sinister
10 Apr 04, 18:20
Actually, you can buy GalCiv over the counter here in the UK. That's where I got my copy from, but I haven't really had the time to sit down and play a really massive game and win - I became one of three things - bored, slaughtered or confused. But I WILL try again someday.
Dr. S.
chrisvalla
10 Apr 04, 19:24
I was able to get GalCiv over the counter in the US as well a few months ago.
I just picked up WWI: The Great War using the Cossack engine... not sure when I'll get to it, but for $20 and a PCGamer thumbs up, I'll try it.
I haven't been back to Civ3 in a good 3 or 4 months now, but I'm not going to bother taking it off the hard-drive since I figure sometime this summer I'll need a Civ-fix.
Anyone able to offer an opinion on S.U. - Divided Galaxies (iirc?)
Doctor Sinister
11 Apr 04, 06:31
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
Anyone able to offer an opinion on S.U. - Divided Galaxies (iirc?)
I got a copy for my birthday last year, I think. It showed promise but the interface was a bit unwieldy - it was too clunky and amateur-looking so that put me off. I haven't touched it since but it's still on my HD as one of the many, MANY things I mean to get back to. Sorry, that's not much of a review really is it?
Whilst I'm on the subject, another game I was given at the same time was WWII Frontline Command by the Bitmap Brothers - that totally sucked. Blitzkrieg was MUCH better. WWII FC was full of bugs - eg: I loaded up an artillery piece on a transport once to take it up to the front, when it came to unload it so I could cover my advancing troops with shellfire, the bloody thing had vanished.
The main problem for me is that since I was introduced to the three Combat Mission games, they are the only things I've played, they're THAT good.
Dr. S.
British_Apostle
11 Apr 04, 14:17
I liked it but it got old fast. To much to handle and to much to manage. Warefare is like dice rolling and it wasn't fun after a couple of maps.
Ok, sounds like you guys have saved me a few $$$, then. I've got all the MOOs, and the new RFTS as well. Nothing else besides a series (1 & 2) that were linear, RT games where you started as the humans and then things started happening; you'd battle the alien invaders off, and the map would expand somewhat, revealing more alien planets. That was the idea behind the first one, at any rate.
What would you gents recommend; I'd like to get another 'Epic' space game!
One of the all time great games.
CivI and CivII, RRT, RRTII - still haven't got RRTIII, MoO and MoOII.
I got MoOIII in the discount bin for $10. I had heard what a turkey it was but though what the heck how bad can it be. On my deathbead I will still regret spending $10 on that piece of crap:mad:
Any how about the only way too improve CivIII, IMHO, is to bring back the Wonder Movies. A small video reward that I enjoyed.
Funny thing is that I play in Ancient/midevial mode 95% of the time cause the modern era seems too much like real work. So I abandon games, especially when I am winning, too avoid the modern era micromanagement.
:toast:
Doctor Sinister
21 Apr 04, 13:51
Originally posted by GoT
I got MoOIII in the discount bin for $10. I had heard what a turkey it was but though what the heck how bad can it be. On my deathbead I will still regret spending $10 on that piece of crap:mad:
We should start a Class Action law suit against the designers for a full refund of our money, plus compensation for stress and trauma. :thumb:
Dr. S.
Civ 3: It was pretty fun, I have to agree that Civ2 was much better, I never got the feel for Civ 3 down, I think I usually finished the game in the 1950s or so, and no one had even gotten to tanks yet. Whereas in Civ 2 I had tanks before the Roman Empire fell in the real world. ;)
MOO3: MOO2 was one of my favorite all time games, so of course I waited anxiously for MOO3, and bought it as soon as it came out. I had heard some warnings of it being confusing as hell but figured, it can't be that bad. I really tried to play it, I tried my hardest to play it. Eventually I just gave up. I started to get down how a lot of the economics worked and then finally realized, it wasn't worth it. I wasn't playing a game, I was working a job it seemed. I hope that's not what ruling a vast empire is really like :( (Dr. S, you'll have to let me know- and just in case maybe you should reinstall MOO3 and start practicing).
RoN: Such a great game, I can't wait for the expansion. I loved having borders and attrition damage in a RTS! My only complaint about the game was the naval combat. I got rather tired of having my subs taken out by fire rafts... :crazy:
GalCiv: I've heard lots of good things, maybe I should finally pick that up some day. I love that style of game (space empire type stuff). Especially ones like MoO2 that allow me to blow up planets. Speaking of, did anyone else play MoO2 like I did? I never actually took over an alien race, I obliterated it. Every planet they ever held, as soon as I defeated the guarding fleet, I blew up. Hmm... maybe this is a sign of something?
Doctor Sinister
26 Apr 04, 14:45
Originally posted by Overseer
Civ 3: It was pretty fun, I have to agree that Civ2 was much better, I never got the feel for Civ 3 down, I think I usually finished the game in the 1950s or so, and no one had even gotten to tanks yet. Whereas in Civ 2 I had tanks before the Roman Empire fell in the real world. ;)
MOO3: MOO2 was one of my favorite all time games, so of course I waited anxiously for MOO3, and bought it as soon as it came out. I had heard some warnings of it being confusing as hell but figured, it can't be that bad. I really tried to play it, I tried my hardest to play it. Eventually I just gave up. I started to get down how a lot of the economics worked and then finally realized, it wasn't worth it. I wasn't playing a game, I was working a job it seemed. I hope that's not what ruling a vast empire is really like :( (Dr. S, you'll have to let me know- and just in case maybe you should reinstall MOO3 and start practicing).
RoN: Such a great game, I can't wait for the expansion. I loved having borders and attrition damage in a RTS! My only complaint about the game was the naval combat. I got rather tired of having my subs taken out by fire rafts... :crazy:
GalCiv: I've heard lots of good things, maybe I should finally pick that up some day. I love that style of game (space empire type stuff). Especially ones like MoO2 that allow me to blow up planets. Speaking of, did anyone else play MoO2 like I did? I never actually took over an alien race, I obliterated it. Every planet they ever held, as soon as I defeated the guarding fleet, I blew up. Hmm... maybe this is a sign of something?
I would always play MOO2 differently, depending on certain paramaters I would set myself at the start. Sort of "right then, we are NOT going to destroy any planets today!!". So sometimes I'd just load up with Doom Stars and go planet-hunting to burn my enemies out of space (VERY satisfying when THEY declared war on you totally unprovoked and you ignore all their pleas to stop) and sometimes I'd make an effort to keep my fleets supplied with troop transports and invade every time (sometimes with a softening up orbital bombardment, sometimes deliverately not).
It's also really satisfying when you are effectively a galactic Superpower and you can conquer your way across the galaxy by just rolling up and demanding planets from people or you will thump them!
Used to love designing ships as well - in my fleets I'd have a general mix of carriers (defensive weapons only, lots of fighters and bombers), missile ships (rack upon rack of missile launchers, with all the equipment to double the rates of fire etc.), Gunships (beam weapons only) ands support vessels (shield enhancers, warp interdictors and other bits and bobs the fleet would need to survive). Naming ships was fun too - eg: "Dominator" Class Battleships, "Exterminator" class Titans, "Invincible" class Destroyers.
The game is still on my drive - that's good going!
However running an Empire CANNOT be as hard as it is portrayed in MOO3 - if it is, I might have to destroy everything...!
Dr. S.
daemonofdecay
03 May 04, 22:57
For me, it was worse. I had just finished a bout of MOO2 playing with my best buddy, and was one of the first to purchase MOO3.
I had NO preperation for what was in store. Nadda. Nothing.
I WAS EXPECTING GOLD!!!
And instead, I got more useless and confusing information then EVER before!
Not only that, but when your fleet gets attacked by a rival nation, you expect a state of war to be declared, dont you? Or how about the AI suddenly declaring war on you for NO reason WHATSOEVER! I mean none! We were at 96% approval rating or whatever between us, then he dclared war!
*sigh*:(
Doctor Sinister
04 May 04, 06:45
Yes, the MOO3 AI is very unpredictable. Dangerously so.
Dr. S.
I've got an idea for a Sinister weapon. We take all the MOO3 discs we can find, and put them in a railgun the superheats them with a magnetron from a microwave before sending them speeding toward the MOO3 development team. Sound good?
As for Civ III, I really enjoyed that game. I've recently found the big manual that came with the original release (before they switched to the smaller boxes). Once I'm allowed to play games again, I'm going to reinstall it and play the heck out of it.
What do you think is the best tribe to play as (besides the Americans)?
chrisvalla
05 May 04, 21:18
I go with Greeks (Scientific, Commercial) for early defense with phalanx over spearmen or Russians/Ottomans (I think) with Coassacks/(whatever the cav replacements is) when I feel being offensive.
For MOO3, send them to your enemies and tell them there's an Easter Egg special in it they reach turn 250...:laugh:
Doctor Sinister
06 May 04, 15:49
Originally posted by chrisvalla
For MOO3, send them to your enemies and tell them there's an Easter Egg special in it they reach turn 250...:laugh:
You are an evil, evil man.
Please accept a promotion. :D
Dr. S.
I go with the Carthaginians. The French are the same (commercial/industrious), and perhaps even a little better, as I don't like the added expense to build the Numidean Merc over the spearman for a quick defence. The French special unit is from a later era, as well; I just can't stand being represented by a chick, and have never bothered to see if it's easy to replace the file!
:banana:
I already have PTW; what will the newest expansion pack that Civ 3 has out offer me?
chrisvalla
07 May 04, 08:16
Civ3: Conquests adds some more races/nations/tribes/whatever as well as some more land improvements, game-play options, and lots of scenarios. I love feudal Japan myself and my Roman empire never did beat Carthage, but it did span from the Med to the Baltic and Spain to Romania without those pesky barbarian Celts or Goths.
Hmmm. I can live without a few extra tribes, but the scenarios especially tweak my interest. Is Conquests the 'latest' edition of the Editor, such that any scenarios created with Conquests will only be playable by someone with conquests?
chrisvalla
07 May 04, 17:31
I'll have to bow to someone else who actually read the scenario builder rules... I don't have the time to devote to make my own, so I just use whatever the developers put out and if it's sucks, go on the the next game (or back to another classic still onthe hard-drive). I would imagine you need the same update versions, but that may only be required for multiplayer.
Wow, I disappear, and this stays on the first page...
Anyway, I have a Civ3 forum at http://gogf.tk.
Anyway, I'm back now (sort of).
Originally posted by chrisvalla
Civ3: Conquests adds some more races/nations/tribes/whatever as well as some more land improvements, game-play options, and lots of scenarios. I love feudal Japan myself and my Roman empire never did beat Carthage, but it did span from the Med to the Baltic and Spain to Romania without those pesky barbarian Celts or Goths.
Unfortunately, you need Conquests to play scenario created in conquests, because previous versions don't incorporate things like enslavement, unit producing wonders, etc.
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
I go with the Carthaginians. The French are the same (commercial/industrious), and perhaps even a little better, as I don't like the added expense to build the Numidean Merc over the spearman for a quick defence. The French special unit is from a later era, as well; I just can't stand being represented by a chick, and have never bothered to see if it's easy to replace the file!
:banana:
It's very easy to edit it. You just change the name when you start the game, and click "masculine" in the next pop-up. Of course, the leader is harder to change.
I've been playing Civilization since the early 90's. Been through PC after PC all these years. Three years with... two years without. But no matter what, Civilization has always been in my heart. The best game of all time. Now in my advanced age, I own Civ3...Conquests 1.22. This can only be the next stage in Civ evolution. You have to love the genre to enjoy it. First person shooters are for the simple. :crazy: Civ is three-dimensional... plus! Strategy games like this don't come around often. War, peace, trade, science, exploration, diplomacy... These are what make for a detailed and complex game. Not games that have you looking down the barrel of a gun. Most anyone (in America) can buy a gun and go to a target range. When was the last time you bought a country and ruled it for thousands of years? Sid Meiers is a genius... thats the straight scoop. Civilization 3 should be in the top 5 (if not #1) pc games of all time.
Forgive my opinions on FPS games, please. I am a big fan of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon for Xbox.
By the way... I have recently settled on either the Greeks or the Koreans. Science and Commerce are the keys for a long and healthy civilization. If you can mix religious with commerce that works as well. Remember, commerce is the KEY!:terms:
Not sure if you have Conquests, or just PTW (for Koreans, in both expansions), but have you tried the new Iroquois? They are agricultural, and commercial :D.
Doctor Sinister
14 May 04, 14:15
Originally posted by Stemen73
I've been playing Civilization since the early 90's. Been through PC after PC all these years. Three years with... two years without. But no matter what, Civilization has always been in my heart. The best game of all time. Now in my advanced age, I own Civ3...Conquests 1.22. This can only be the next stage in Civ evolution. You have to love the genre to enjoy it. First person shooters are for the simple. :crazy: Civ is three-dimensional... plus! Strategy games like this don't come around often. War, peace, trade, science, exploration, diplomacy... These are what make for a detailed and complex game. Not games that have you looking down the barrel of a gun. Most anyone (in America) can buy a gun and go to a target range. When was the last time you bought a country and ruled it for thousands of years? Sid Meiers is a genius... thats the straight scoop. Civilization 3 should be in the top 5 (if not #1) pc games of all time.
Forgive my opinions on FPS games, please. I am a big fan of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon for Xbox.
I got rid of my copy of Civ3 - but your post has almost inspired me to go out and buy another...
Dr. S.
Originally posted by Doctor Sinister
I got rid of my copy of Civ3 - but your post has almost inspired me to go out and buy another...
Dr. S.
Excellent tool for planning your take over. :thumb:
chrisvalla
14 May 04, 16:56
Yes, and I'll make sure the rubber and saltpeter you need is heavily guarded by another to stop your evilness.... MUHAHAHAHA... oh wait... I mean available for your use when the need arises.:whistle:
I definetly wasn't out to inspire anybody... Actually thought I might upset a few people with my opinions. But if one person were to pull out an old copy of Civ or purchase a new release of Civ, I've accomplished much more than anticipated.
Of course it doesn't have to be the same old game you've been playing for years. There are so many mods and special downloads available. Gamespy facilitates online player matching, which boosts the gaming experience. Myleague.com has organized a league for Civ players. This is not your father's Civilization!:thumb:
I bought Civ3 when it came out, and skipped PTW. Now I can only get PTW in the Civ3 Gold Edition, and I don't want to drop the extra money on multiplayer stuff I would never use. I am thinking of picking up Conquests, though. If you get Conquests, do you get the races, technology, Wonders, etc., from PTW?
By the way, I have never gotten a Leader unit before. How the heck do I get one? Does it have to be a specific difficulty level?
And have any of you ever built the Small Wonder Iron Works? I haven't.
You do not need PTW to install Conquests. PTW is included with Conquests. And now that you mention it, I haven't built the Iron Works. Good call... I'll have to work on that.:thumb:
And as for leaders... If you are the first civilization to discover any technology there is such a chance you'll get a leader. It is very random and happens infrequently. You can use this leader to a: complete a wonder in your city or b: increase scientific output in a city. The leader can move around and has no attack or defense abilities.
I have never used a leader to boost scientific output. It so nice to fortify him in your capital and wait for a very important wonder. Then BAM... complete overnight!:banana:
Ok, everything in PTW is in Conquests. Whew! Good to know.
The Iron Works can only be built if a city has both Coal and Iron in its city radius, according to the Civilopedia. The Iron Works increases production 100% in that city.
As for Leaders, I have never heard of increasing scientific output. I thought that when you got one, you could instantly complete a Wonder, or create an Army. An Army is a unit containing three units of the same type that will battle together. Having Armies allows you to built certain Small Wonders. For instance, having an Army allows you to build the Military Academy, which lets you create Armies in that city without a Leader. Having a victorious Army gives you the Heroic Epic, increasing the chances of a Leader appearing after a battle. Having three Armies in the field lets you build the Pentagon, which increases the unit limit of Armies from three to four.
Has anyone been able to do this?
chrisvalla
17 May 04, 08:49
Yeah the IW pretty much guarantees pollution in that city. I had to station 3 engineers who did clean up duty just for it. I don't bother with it anymore if I'm lucky enough to get the right resource combo.
I use leaders for Wonder-builds mostly. I'll try to field one, maybe two armies at most and use the rest for one-turn-wonders. I've got a friend who said he fielded 8 armies at one... that's just sick!
http://www.civfanatics.com has some good mods, and scenarios, BTW.
How do you usually like to win? Conquer everyone? Diplomatic victory? Spaceship?
Doctor Sinister
19 May 04, 06:48
Originally posted by Bariman
How do you usually like to win? Conquer everyone? Diplomatic victory? Spaceship?
When I played, it was conquer everything. But I'd get bogged down in shipping armies to the front lines - and in this respect the turn-based aspect got annoying - for me anyway, because I'd lose track of what was doing what.
Impatience more than any flaw in the game.
Dr. S.
Originally posted by Gogf
It's very easy to edit it. You just change the name when you start the game, and click "masculine" in the next pop-up. Of course, the leader is harder to change.
Oh, that's not a problem, I customize the names/titles, etc. But I'd like to change the picture to something a little more 'me' than Joan, sweetie though she may be...
Originally posted by Stemen73
Forgive my opinions on FPS games, please. I am a big fan of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon for Xbox.
Goldeneye, N64. More recently, Nightfire, Xbox. :thumb:
Originally posted by Stemen73
By the way... I have recently settled on either the Greeks or the Koreans. Science and Commerce are the keys for a long and healthy civilization. If you can mix religious with commerce that works as well. Remember, commerce is the KEY!:terms:
Although I agree with you on commercial, I think industrious is better than scientific. Being able to improve your terrain tiles twice as fast allows you to build faster, grow faster, and also increases your trade, which is value-added when you're already commercial. The bonuses you get for being scientific pale compared to the bonuses you get all 'round for Industrious. I get 'science' bonuses as well, in that since my city will produce shields faster than yours (since I can improve terrain faster), I get the 'bonus' to all things I build; military, scientific, and religious.
Originally posted by Stemen73
And as for leaders... If you are the first civilization to discover any technology there is such a chance you'll get a leader.
I don't think you have that quite correct...
Leaders are gained when an elite unit gains another level of experience due to successful combat. I have never had one come from anything else.
My favorite method is to find a sweet chokepoint between me and a computer player, and then build a city in it. Sometimes fortresses are required to stop the AI from simply bypassing the city, but once you've got it setup right, the computer will repeatedly slam it's head into the city, over and over and...
I run 2 workers together in "teams". These teams tend to do the job fast enough for me. And I am quit aware of combat leaders coming out of battle victories... that's a given. Therefore I was refering to Scientific leaders in which you unfortunetly have never encountered.:toast:
Terry Patterson
29 May 04, 01:14
i dont get exactly what the game wants from me.no matter how i win,peacefully,or militarily,history always remembers me as a putz!ive tried everything to get a good ranking in history.whats the secret?
chrisvalla
29 May 04, 10:26
I've gotten one of the science leaders before; you can't make an army out of them. I don't remember how I got them though..:quest:
As I stated earlier in this thread; Each time yours is the first tribe to discover a new tech there is a chance you will receive a scientific leader. It is very random! Scientific leaders can not be used to build an army; combat leaders do that. You can use the scientific leader to rush a wonder or boost scientific research in a city of your choice.
Originally posted by Stemen73
By the way... I have recently settled on either the Greeks or the Koreans. Science and Commerce are the keys for a long and healthy civilization. If you can mix religious with commerce that works as well. Remember, commerce is the KEY!:terms:
Hey! I only played Civ III once (then went back to Civ II and handed III off to my son). I didn't know Koreans were in there...are they?
JS
Originally posted by Janos
Hey! I only played Civ III once (then went back to Civ II and handed III off to my son). I didn't know Koreans were in there...are they?
JS
Civ III has two expansion packs out ("Play the World" and "Conquests"), which give you many new civs. I think someone mentioned on this thread that everything in "Play the World" is in "Conquests".
Originally posted by Bariman
Civ III has two expansion packs out ("Play the World" and "Conquests"), which give you many new civs. I think someone mentioned on this thread that everything in "Play the World" is in "Conquests".
Thanks!
JS
Originally posted by Stemen73
As I stated earlier in this thread; Each time yours is the first tribe to discover a new tech there is a chance you will receive a scientific leader. It is very random! Scientific leaders can not be used to build an army; combat leaders do that. You can use the scientific leader to rush a wonder or boost scientific research in a city of your choice.
Maybe that's something that's only in the new expansion pack? I have PTW, and that's never happened.
Originally posted by Janos
Hey! I only played Civ III once (then went back to Civ II and handed III off to my son). I didn't know Koreans were in there...are they?
JS
Why? Granted, it really is only Civ 2.5, but it is the best Civ. (My only complaint is it wasn't a big enough step forward. It should have been a damned patch to 2, or something - not a whole new game).
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
Why? Granted, it really is only Civ 2.5, but it is the best Civ. (My only complaint is it wasn't a big enough step forward. It should have been a damned patch to 2, or something - not a whole new game).
Well, there are a couple of good changes:
1. National borders.
2. Nation-unique units.
I don't like the map, I don't like the unit symbols (which are harder to tell apart than they were in I or II), I don't like that the map goes dark after my forces pass through. I don't like anything at all about the cities -- how they are managed is completely different and I don't like a bit of it.
Bottom line: I will never play it again. The boy loves it, and he can have it.
JS
Originally posted by Janos
Well, there are a couple of good changes:
1. National borders.
2. Nation-unique units.
Agreed!
I don't like the map, I don't like the unit symbols (which are harder to tell apart than they were in I or II),
Well, I hate the roads. The map is a little different, but I didn't think it was ugly or anything. I can respect the pref for the map in II, tho.
I don't like that the map goes dark after my forces pass through.
You don't like the Fog of War? I thought that was a fairly standard expectation, especially from this crowd. Only in Civ, or do you dislike it in all games?
I don't like anything at all about the cities -- how they are managed is completely different and I don't like a bit of it.
How so? The build queue is a good thing (I frequently have over 100 cities), the improvements are still listed, it's all run on shields, food and trade. It's a slightly different look, but there wasn't really any reading or learning required; familiarity with II made it possible to just play III.
Bottom line: I will never play it again. The boy loves it, and he can have it.
JS
To each his own! Perhaps the atmosphere of it was different for you than in II? I can understand that. There are games, that while 'technically' improved, seem to lose the ambiance of the original, and are therefore to be shunned.
Is this one of them for you?
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
Well, I hate the roads. The map is a little different, but I didn't think it was ugly or anything. I can respect the pref for the map in II, tho.
My pref is for the Civ II map.
You don't like the Fog of War? I thought that was a fairly standard expectation, especially from this crowd. Only in Civ, or do you dislike it in all games?
No prob with the fog of war. You may recall, tho', that in Civ II, once you have been somewhere, it stays on your map. In Civ III, it goes away when you leave and the map goes black. I don't like that.
How so? The build queue is a good thing (I frequently have over 100 cities), the improvements are still listed, it's all run on shields, food and trade. It's a slightly different look, but there wasn't really any reading or learning required; familiarity with II made it possible to just play III.
To be honest, it's been too long since I played to tell you in detail why I dislike the new cities, other than to say they suck.
To each his own! Perhaps the atmosphere of it was different for you than in II? I can understand that. There are games, that while 'technically' improved, seem to lose the ambiance of the original, and are therefore to be shunned.
Yup. That's hitting the nail on the old cabeza.
JS
Originally posted by Janos
No prob with the fog of war. You may recall, tho', that in Civ II, once you have been somewhere, it stays on your map. In Civ III, it goes away when you leave and the map goes black. I don't like that.
No it doesn't! It stays on your screen, you just can't tell if there's anyone standing there, or get any updates on new terrain improvements, etc. Once you know a place, you can always see it on your map.
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
No it doesn't! It stays on your screen, you just can't tell if there's anyone standing there, or get any updates on new terrain improvements, etc. Once you know a place, you can always see it on your map.
Hmmm. I'm pretty sure I remember it going away, but will check again when I get home.
JS
It used to do this on my screen also.:mad:Then I got a new monitor and it turns out that it should have just been graying out. :halo:
Well, something odd's certainly going on when you guys play the game!
Originally posted by Shane Sohnle
Well, something odd's certainly going on when you guys play the game!
Roger. I don't like odd.
JS
Originally posted by Stemen73
I run 2 workers together in "teams". These teams tend to do the job fast enough for me. And I am quit aware of combat leaders coming out of battle victories... that's a given. Therefore I was refering to Scientific leaders in which you unfortunetly have never encountered.:toast:
I usually have "stacks" of four to six workers.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.