CIV IV vs CIV III

I like Civ IV more than III. The main reason is that the combat system is much better than it was. In Civ III, I lost a ton of units I knew I shouldn't. It should not take a stack of 3 or 4 units that are in the Modern Era to kill a Longbowman, even if he is fortified on his Grassland.

Another reason is that Civ III treated the player like a newbie, with all that layman's-terms crap. At least Civs I and II treated you like a leader! They assumed you knew what you were doing and if it turned out that you were inept, then tough, they still respected you as you drove their beloved nation into the dust.

Also, I hated the way that even Ghandi refused to acknowledge your borders. Let's face it: The AI in Civ III sucks. TO illustrate my point: Ghandi is in the Renaissance. I am in the late Industrial age. He infringes my borders twice (Aggressive AI's are on). Third strike, he's out. I wanted to totally own the sucker, but since I had just opened a front with Russia (yes, I play Civ like Risk, sue me for my aggression) I had to leave it to skirmishing with him.

Then, Ghandi makes the mistake of trying to sack my capital in a deep raid. How he got that far I can't remember; I still had my cities and was busy at the time, and didn't look. However, as soon as I found out, I made peace with Russia, turned around and blasted that son-of-a-gun into the Stone Age. It was fun. I win, he loses.

OK, I know it was Aggressive AI in effect, but still: If you were near an opponent with double your techs, would you declare war? NO WAY! You'd make peace, crank the science and hope the cavalry/tanks were discovered soon enough.

OK, cIV is not perfect, but it's a heckuva lot better, and I haven't even gotten into the new features of Civ IV.

CivFan91 said:

I like Civ IV more than III. The main reason is that the combat system is much better than it was.

Click to expand...

That's actually exactly what I dislike in Civ4: the combat system.

Keroro said:

Hear hear. I agree with that - but one of the problems could be that the civ III source is not the possession of a single company. But I do hope that the code can be streamlined and a proper editor program created.

Disagree with that. I find it interesting hearing about other people's opinions on this.

Click to expand...

Are you sure about the source code being in more than one set of legal hands? That would explain a lot.

As for me asking about closing all these threads, I appreciate you want to hear other people's opinions. I would totally agree if I heard people bring new ideas/views to the table in this debate. But I think there is nothing being said today that was not said 2 months ago, or 6 months ago, or 12 months ago. If people took the energy it takes to fire all these broadsides back and forth, and instead used it to better EITHER game, we would be much further ahead.

Arlborn said:

TA Jones, you sure you dont have the game?(dont need to answer, you already did. just a observation)

Click to expand...

what game are we talkin again? I still have Civ4 if thats what you mean, Its on Ebay. The guy who was suppose to pick it up stopped a penny short from my doller asking price(chepo but I should a leveled with him )

Anyway just 1 point, are you "loyalists"? And all the players that stayed playing CIV3??? Who arew then the players who kept playing CIV2 and find CIV3 really bad? Kinda strange point hehe

Click to expand...

Im not sure what your point is but you seem sorta loyal to that he he thing! I really wish you wern't. First lesson in grammer: never cap of the mondane with a 'he he'.( unless your insane)

By thew way, why so many really famous magazines/sites about games rated CIV4 as the best strategy game of the year, and even the best general game of the year? And the grades were mostly aboce the grades given for CIV3(that were already mostly high) in its time..

Click to expand...

Magazines print what you want to hear, they are also like paid posters.Paid posters are people who get something from the company. How many lucky members posted here after they were paid to test Civ4? Do you think they came out ravin right here after and before release date? Dam straight!. Do you rember how bad CIv4 was fresh from release n' unpatched. These guys knew better but they also knew when to keep their mouths shut.

Paid posters, THey don't chance losing contacts, or more opportunitys to do biz. Mags with a giant the like of Take Two corp WHy go out on a limb scolding a fan cult classicic like Civ series theres no incentive when they figure patchs will come out but their word is staying the same for the record.How new the patchs would blow? ANyways some are going to agree with what you write no matter if it sucks by the majority standard. besides...you say its Game of the year somewhere, well it also lost game of the year somewhere and it never won as many awards as CIv3 did.

But I played CIV3 A LOT! Installed, untalled and installed again! But I just think that CIV4 is a better game for ME, less exploits to use, you can actually win without going to war or being the first in score,

Click to expand...

No offence Im not going to go as deep as usual for this debate its seems kinda pointless. but I will say the new Civ4 AI is all about war CIv3 you could mount a build off of with another megea civ on another continent for the culture trophy in fact it was the only way to beat a 100 city giant. If you commited to war on that scale the next biggest Civ would sneak in for the Ccultyre or space win. You havn't even played CIv3 have you? lol that call to Power thingy you bought wasn't Civ3 by the way

war got to play a smaller roll(YEAH! ) and etc(already said by me or others). But I dont have anything with you guys dont likeing CIV4 and playing CIV3, after all they came from the same base but they are Really different! Dont take me bad please. I'm OK with anything you say, it Really doesent chaange naything on my mind or annoys me, but your comments against CIV4 really look so hatefull..

Click to expand...

Again when you love a game as much as you do, anyone who repeatedly says its inferior or says needs improvment or compares a what he calls a better version but of the same interest to your favorite, it becomes easy for you to become angry and competive mybe just frustrated. You take it very deeply or so Im guessing but You don't no how to counter my arguments on specifics game examples, so saying im a hater is all your reduced to.(this is a language barrier that prevents you im sure!)
You should understand this is just a game debate mixed with splatter of opinion. Hate never enters the picture. I just have a tendency for the dramatic. Sometimes that stings you I guess. Relax no hate just bad game

But enjoy your time with CIV3 all of you while you can
I really hope CIV5 can get you guys back along with the fans of CIV4.

Click to expand...

Thats the spirt! I always said Civ4 is just a bumper sequal to adjust into some hard transition times. How do they make a awesome CIv5? they learn what not to do by making Civ4.

Psyringe said:

Btw, here is one of these "joke" polls, taken about one year ago.

Click to expand...

Hi Psyringe, this poll is somewhat very,very dubious. :thumbdown

Only 22 posters and none of them is known in the Civ 3 forums (at least by me). On the other side none of the posters alone in these thread, who at present prefer Civ 3 over Civ 4 has posted and voted in that poll.

And than this -sorry- ridicoulus poll was made long time ago, when there was more interest in Civ 4.

Of course I respect all civers who prefer Civ 4. The only sense I see in this kind of Civ 3/Civ 4-discussíon is, that I hope that sometimes these threads are read by some people of FIRAXIS, who want to know what they have to improve for the next Civ release. And than these only positive postings from Civ 4 -fans are not very helpful - even for these posters themselves (if they want to get something better). It´s good to say what you like in Civ 4 and don´t want to be changed. But in my eyes it´s much more important to say what you don´t like and what should be improved, if you want something better. When I see Civ 4 I must say: They have to improve a lot (in other postings , even in this thread, I said what points to improve). It´s interesting that El Justo listed nearly the same points, that are not acceptable in Civ4, than me.

I_batman said:

As for me asking about closing all these threads, I appreciate you want to hear other people's opinions. I would totally agree if I heard people bring new ideas/views to the table in this debate. But I think there is nothing being said today that was not said 2 months ago, or 6 months ago, or 12 months ago. If people took the energy it takes to fire all these broadsides back and forth, and instead used it to better EITHER game, we would be much further ahead.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I feel like recycling my old posts to fit these new comments/threads. Mostly I like to try and hear new arguments myself but like you said not much has changed. I do try only to comment on attacks to CIv3 but only if its going to be fun for me.
WHy show up and post something that seems like labour. If your not intrested in the discussion theres lots to see here bysides this junk.

It is popular though. seriosly man(no ill intent) why even read these if your so sick of them you want o ban them. DOn't tell me you think theyre tearing us apart. I say it unites

i've always wondered what the civ2 fan base retention was like after civ3 and then ptw came out in comparison to civ4 and warlords. i'd be willing to bet a mortgage payment that the civ3 retention rate greatly exceeds that of civ2. that in itselfs speaks volumes imo.

I_batman said:

Are you sure about the source code being in more than one set of legal hands? That would explain a lot.

Click to expand...

I think that I heard somewhere about civ3 being written using a number of third party programs that you would need licenses for if you started to try to change the source. Can't remember the details. Also, the issues with the various parent companies (2K, Atari etc.) would complicate things.

I_batman said:

As for me asking about closing all these threads, I appreciate you want to hear other people's opinions. I would totally agree if I heard people bring new ideas/views to the table in this debate. But I think there is nothing being said today that was not said 2 months ago, or 6 months ago, or 12 months ago. If people took the energy it takes to fire all these broadsides back and forth, and instead used it to better EITHER game, we would be much further ahead.

Click to expand...

That's why I mainly read these threads rather than try to argue the other posters off the board.

Civinator said:

Hi Psyringe, this poll is somewhat very,very dubious. :thumbdown

Only 22 posters and none of them is known in the Civ 3 forums (at least by me). On the other side none of the posters alone in these thread, who at present prefer Civ 3 over Civ 4 has posted and voted in that poll.

And than this -sorry- ridicoulus poll was made long time ago, when there was more interest in Civ 4.

Click to expand...

YEss !!! :this is why I love these threads! See how far some will go to keep up their 'rep'
You think that poll is bad!!! One guy here even mischievously deleted then reworded his post after I had keenly rebutted his arrogant original reply, all to make me apear like I was talkin nonsense to myself!!. Becareful! Everything ain't always what it seems!
Hey! I wonder how many here have their own "I agree" alias?!!mischief: Well, everyone needs a lil pat on the back from time to time. Its a tough job touting CIv4 these days!

T.A JONES said:

Exactly. I feel like recycling my old posts to fit these new comments/threads. Mostly I like to try and hear new arguments myself but like you said not much has changed. I do try only to comment on attacks to CIv3 but only if its going to be fun for me. WHy show up and post something that seems like labour. If your not intrested in the discussion theres lots to see here byside this junk. It is popular though.. better though why even read these if your so sick of them you want to ban them. DOn't tell me you think theyre tearing us apart. I say it unites

Click to expand...

Hey, I know you are fighting for Civ III. But you are not going to change anybody's mind. If after one year of Civ IV, if they like it more than Civ III, well then, they like it more. And eventually, every one of these threads devolves into a flame war.

I am sure that Firaxis and Take-Two felt the sales numbers for Warlords compared to the original Civ IV release and took notice. Whether they think they have a problem or not with Civ IV, I am sure they have already made a decision. If they think they have a sales problem, then they have likely read all the posts over the last year expounding on the pros and cons of Civ IV.
If they are happy with the sales figures, well, not much they will change.

I don't think any conversation today or next day comparing Civ III to Civ IV will do a whole lot of good, since I have not seen many fresh ideas, lately.

Now that I have vented today on the futility of this thread , I go back to previously scheduled programming, namely doing leg work for El Justo for Civ III TCW huge map MP biq.

I played Call To Power Also. I liked but nothing compared to CIV3 and CIV4. I played CIV1 and CIV2(that I didnt like much by the way) for a while too

I did show some real points about why I(you know, my personal opnion if you didnt get my grammer) prefer CIV4. Anyway you said yourself, 100 cities monster, nah not for me

I didnt say anything offensive I hope? Which part you didnt understand when I said that I dont have anything against you guys playing CIV3 and hope you enjoy it? Actually the main point of that post was just to ckarify that I also played CIV3 a lot and enjoyed. Actually CIV3 was my first and I iwll never forget, still have it installed here

I hope you forgive me if you felt Im inferior only because I'm educated. I know all the nasty words in english yes, but why use them if I can keep all civilzated?

Hope you have fun, and sorry if you think I offended you. Only wanted to point out that I also played CIV3.

Ya don't worry IBAtman I don't think Im saving the day or changing the sceane one bit. Im just having fun. We all come here and burn time why not enjoy yourslef talkin what you believe in. At the end of the day who really gives a rats bum what game is better Right? thats what always ends these threads, so I though id be the one to get to say it Its just a game man chill out maaaan

I do hope the boys at firaxis took into account more then the sales figures. I hope they understood a few of their blunders that have been widely publizied. Just because less then half the people here at CIvfanatics are critizing CIv4 on the CIv4 threads it dosn't mean that its not a higher % when going outside these walls , that same betrayal felt at a higher level you dig?

Sales like you say are telling that story

Really the you hear a guy say below 15% have prob with this game! lol WHy such nonsence? that really gets me laughing the creditablity factor of anyone, if it really matters. going down the drain, oh such a shame!

Interesting. All the old SG c3c warhorses have expressed my views to a tee. I just can't put my hands around civ4 especially for SP games or SGs. I've avoided both altogether.

The caveat is PTBS and PBEMs have been fun and I really like that aspect of civ4 however my SGs and SPs are exclusively c3c.

Whomp said:

Interesting. All the old SG c3c warhorses have expressed my views to a tee. I just can't put my hands around civ4 especially for SP games or SGs. I've avoided both altogether.

The caveat is PTBS and PBEMs have been fun and I really like that aspect of civ4 however my SGs and SPs are exclusively c3c.

Click to expand...

good to see you chime in Major General

El Justo said:

good to see you chime in Major General

Click to expand...

Hi El J. Westbrook got robbed (pro bowl) btw.

Well, I didn't say much.
My feelings were pretty well summed by you, TA Jones, Mirc, ThERat and Doc T with the pitboss caveat. The most unfortunate part for me is I really like SG'ing with the team and social aspect of it but I couldn't wait for all four of the civ4 SG's to end. I tried, I really did.

To each their own I suppose.

Arlborn said:

I played Call To Power Also. I liked but nothing compared to CIV3 and CIV4. I played CIV1 and CIV2(that I didnt like much by the way) for a while too

I did show some real points about why I(you know, my personal opnion if you didnt get my grammer) prefer CIV4. Anyway you said yourself, 100 cities monster, nah not for me

I didnt say anything offensive I hope? Which part you didnt understand when I said that I dont have anything against you guys playing CIV3 and hope you enjoy it? Actually the main point of that post was just to ckarify that I also played CIV3 a lot and enjoyed. Actually CIV3 was my first and I iwll never forget, still have it installed here

I hope you forgive me if you felt Im inferior only because I'm educated. I know all the nasty words in english yes, but why use them if I can keep all civilzated?

Hope you have fun, and sorry if you think I offended you. Only wanted to point out that I also played CIV3.

Click to expand...

Ya Im not sure where this was going from the start you looking for sympathy? for apology to make on good terms WHat do you want!!! . OK
I kid around and throw around what you say sometimes , see

, you sure you dont have the game?(dont need to answer, you already did. just a observation)

Click to expand...

so goes the call to Power thing. OK?I hard to know what you mean. no need to apoligize or get upset. Cool? IM not angry nor do you have a reason to be acting hurtful or concerned.

Back to the game ya 100 cities for an opponent was kind of a overstatement but I see it a lot in my games. Do you see my point how playing large enough maps makes for builer style games in a way CIv4 can't emulate based on it performance?

In CIv3 enabling culture victories and space race while sharing the planet with the big boys (large civs) makes for a great playing expierence
A large invasion of a one of these Big civs (60 or so citys) can be a hard decision.

The opportunity cost of such a endevour played out against a third neutral Civ whos also in mega size but peace time mod, spewing culture/beaker production improvments instead of knights n tanks in equaly venemous amounts can make for a serious buiders game or (rush to keep up)if taking on both, you got massive global conflict where alliances come in play Diplo n trade are important. Civ3 has a better grasp on both so, no mater what type of play you are you win,with no slow downs.

Whomp said:

Hi El J. Westbrook got robbed (pro bowl) btw.

Well, I didn't say much.
My feelings were pretty well summed by you, TA Jones, Mirc, ThERat and Doc T with the pitboss caveat. The most unfortunate part for me is I really like SG'ing with the team and social aspect of it but I couldn't wait for all four of the civ4 SG's to end. I tried, I really did.

To each their own I suppose.

Click to expand...

we do pbem's for civ3 too. but i'm afraid that a pbem for civ4, at least in the same vein as the one we do for civ3 (the cold war), just isn't possible for civ4. so on that note, the limitations of civ4 really hit home. it's a shame really...

no sweat on westbrook ~ he did get named as an alternate though ~ should be fun on x-mas night ~ just hope 81 doesn't spit in anyone's face

T.A JONES said:

Ya Im not sure where this was going from the start you looking for sympathy? for apology to make on good terms WHat do you want!!! . OK
I kid around and throw around what you say sometimes , see

so goes the call to Power thing. OK?I hard to know what you mean. no need to apoligize or get upset. Cool? IM not angry nor do you have a reason to be acting hurtful or concerned.

Back to the game ya 100 cities for an opponent was kind of a overstatement but I see it a lot in my games. Do you see my point how playing large enough maps makes for builer style games in a way CIv4 can't emulate based on it performance?

In CIv3 enabling culture victories and space race while sharing the planet with the big boys (large civs) makes for a great playing expierence
A large invasion of a one of these Big civs (60 or so citys) can be a hard decision.

The opportunity cost of such a endevour played out against a third neutral Civ whos also in mega size but peace time mod, spewing culture/beaker production improvments instead of knights n tanks in equaly venemous amounts can make for a serious buiders game or (rush to keep up)if taking on both, you got massive global conflict where alliances come in play Diplo n trade are important. Civ3 has a better grasp on both so, no mater what type of play you are you win,with no slow downs.

Click to expand...

Its np, I wont argue much with you, I said all and you said all I guess. Im hey, I believe in you( somethings you are overdoing but OK), I played CIV3 for about 6 months, stopped, played again later for about 3 months, stopped and again some months before CIV4 was released just because CIV4 was oging to be released

If you think CIV3 is way better, who am I to say its not? I wont talk about CIV4 with you anymore, necause I have the impression you dont listen anyway and because it was not my intention in the first place, but man, you are stubborn


Let's do like that, you go play your CIV3 and I go play my CIV4 OK?

Hope its all fine.

Ps: No I'm not trying to look nice, I just like to argue in a educated way because then I wont be blamed for being rude or so

Cheers man. Im going watch House and then go play some CIV4 before sleep ^^

By the way, my keyboard skills are really bad, I bet that is from where most of your problems with my texts came from.

Psyringe said:

Although it actually helps to debunk T.A.Jones' theory the Civ4 had "killed the fanbase".

I'll try to search this thread you mentioned, I'm always interested in statistics about game reception.

Click to expand...

Whoa whoa there ,Im reading over this thing and missed a few shots. Heres where the confusion lies between us my friend. I thought you believed or claimed that 85 percent of the Civving population thought CIv4 was a better product then Civ3.

You seem to think Im under the impression Civ4 killed the total fan base of the entire franchise?.......

No NO my list wrang off the differant types of Civ players who make up this so called 15%(% that prefered Civ4 to Civ3!)

I was proving my case the number of unsatified, CIv3 preffered players is much higher once your factor all into account. Civ4 was a big let down not a 15% let down.
But So what! many came back to CIv3. Look at what Mirc posted or that thread he linked you Civ4 sucking out made Civ3 come alive and thrive!,

Never would I say one lousy chapter would kill the CIv series. Civ3,2 and 1 built the loyal player base to strong for it to topple with one lousy addition

T.A JONES said:

But So what! many came back to CIv3. Look at what Mirc posted or that thread he linked you Civ4 sucking out made Civ3 come alive and thrive!,

Click to expand...

The same was true when civ3 came out. Many was greatly disappointed with civ3 so they went back playing civ2. It took two expansion to win some civ2 fans over to civ3. I didn't play civ3 hardly any until Conquest. What would doom civ if they only tried to please the hardcore fans and not to draw in new consumers.

I'm predict when civ5 come out them will be those who believe civ4 is the best of the series as well. For me I'm glad civ4 is different than civ3 and hope civ5 will play different.