As far as I can recall then that is exactly how it works in Civ III also. Anyway, you are looking at it backwards - it is the defender who sends the best counter to the attack.
Catapults and artillery are working completely wrong. The way they are working is nearly exact the same way as a fix I did suggest for AI land-artillery in Civ 3. In my eyes this is o.k. if a modder has to fix the wrong AI behaviour of landarty with an editor, but this easy solution isn´t worthy for programmers who have the code for that program.
So it is ok if you do it in Civ III, but not when it is done in cIV?!
I do however agree that ranged attack was poorly implemented in both Civ III(AI didn't have a clue how to use or counter) and cIV(melee attacking arty is just ridiculous).
The way religions in Civ 4 are set is really boring for me. I think I have a much better setting for them in my Civ 3epic mod. Here even the christianization of South American civs on random maps is possible. Here I can only speak about the religion in Civ 4 and its expansions, not about it in mods.
Multiple leaders are a feature of Civ 3. In my Civ 3 epic mod you also have great artists (units produced by academies that have a high shield value that can´t be disbanded but can be sacrificed), great engineers (units that can complete buildings and small wonders) and great generals (units that can build armies). Great generals at present are disabled in my mod as armies in Civ 3 are broken (what is no big loss in my eyes).
Sounds like a good mod, but it isn't Multiple Leaders it is Great People (of sorts). Multiple Leaders refers to the fact that each civilization in cIV can be led by any number of different leaders - each with a different set of traits.
I don´t like these traits, at least not as part of a governement. I know here I´m a minority, but it´s my game I want to play. Let the kings be kings again.
1) The price of more complexity and enhanced possibilities is sadly often (and in this case) a reduction in ease of use and steeper learning curve.
2) see my comments regarding this further up
3) Great People in cIV can be transfered by ships and join cities for boosted output - or hurry buldings, make great works of art to instantly push borders far out, establish trade routes for a one time cash reward or boost the power of units there. Missionaries can also be transported to spread your religion(s) to foreign shores which may result in enhanced diplomatic relations.
At the risk of repeating myself then you really should give cIV a more serious chance
Contradicted yourself there - all in the same line
Maybe you need to move up a few difficulty levels if that is really how you have experienced cIV - and/or perhaps try a map script that allocates fewer resources for a true challenge.
As far as I can recall then that is exactly how it works in Civ III also. Anyway, you are looking at it backwards - it is the defender who sends the best counter to the attack.
In Civ 3 you have the stealth attack flag which allows the attacker to select the unit that is attacked. Additionally in my eyes to attack a combined stack with lots of different "pikemen-flags" is much more difficult as you mostly need the proper attacker. For me this is less fun.
This statement/question of you now is repeating several times: Allow me to answer this always repeating point here in complete: The answer always is: Yes, this is correct. I thought I have explained it in the post you are answering too. It is ok, if I can do it in Civ III and it would be o.k. if I could do it in Civ 4, too. But in Civ 4 I can´t do it, as modding with that 3d-engine gives no sense for me. I thought I have explained that my personal main point against Civ 4 is the complete loss of easy moddability. Only changing numbers or text is boring and doesn´t give satisfying results to me. If Civ 4 would have had easy modding, as it existed in Civ2 and Civ 3, I would have "moved" to Civ 4. But unfortunately it has not. The - in my eyes- completely unnecessairy and clumsy 3d-engine killed all for me.
I do however agree that ranged attack was poorly implemented in both Civ III(AI didn't have a clue how to use or counter) and cIV(melee attacking arty is just ridiculous).
You are only answering about landarty. What is with the working AI bombers and sea-arty in Civ 3? No response?
But o.k. back to landarty. The setting of landarty in Civ 4 was nearly copied from a very old suggestion I did do in some pms and in the CFC Civ 3forums for fixing the AI-use of landartys. My current setting of landartys in Civ 3 is different. I haven´t posted it here cause I thought I would only annoy civers, if I post here to much unit-settings. My current Civ 3landarty has MV 2, a movement handicap for every terrain, so it in reality can only move 1 tile, stealth attack, a high attack value, a very low defense and zero range bombardement. As it has a MV of 2 it can retreat and with stealth attack it can select the unit it attacks. The AI makes proper use of it. As it is not working as a kind of melee unit in Civ 3, I think my current setting for landarty is a little bit better than that in Civ 4.
And I only accept these -in my eyes- better settings for landarty in my Civ 3 mod cause I don´t have any chance to do it better. The Civ 3 modders at present don´t have the source code for Civ 3 and didn´t receive any support for more than 3 1/2 years. So it is somewhat unfair to compare a simple modder to programmers that have the code. If I would be able to do a proper setting for the AI by using landarty as it was projected by Firaxis for Civ 3, I would have done it at once. I stay with my statement about the setting of landarty in Civ 4: For programmers that have all possibilities to do this job it is a shame that they didn´t fix it in Civ 4.
I don´t compare my mod with mods of Civ 4 as I don´t have a lot of knowledge about Civ 4 mods. And I see no need to get a big knowledge in these mods as I can´t rebuild these mods in the way I want (because of the 3d-engine).
[Sounds like a good mod, but it isn't Multiple Leaders it is Great People (of sorts). Multiple Leaders refers to the fact that each civilization in cIV can be led by any number of different leaders - each with a different set of traits.
Thanks. And you are right, here I mixed up Multiple Leaders and Great People.To change the settings for civs and their leaders in Civ 3 is a work of seconds with the editor.
I never used the word "sucks". I always try to stay polite, even if this is not always easy with some special kind of Civ4 posters. With you it´s easy for me to stay polite.
Here I did another mixup. I thought of traits as a replacement for Civ 3 governements (a replacement for monarchy, republic and so on. Edited: civics). Some traits for civs in Civ 3 are completely overpowered in my eyes (especially religious and agricultural). I modded these traits.
1) The price of more complexity and enhanced possibilities is sadly often (and in this case) a reduction in ease of use and steeper learning curve.
2) see my comments regarding this further up
3) Great People in cIV can be transfered by ships and join cities for boosted output - or hurry buldings, make great works of art to instantly push borders far out, establish trade routes for a one time cash reward or boost the power of units there. Missionaries can also be transported to spread your religion(s) to foreign shores which may result in enhanced diplomatic relations.
In my mod Great people can do in most cases the same. An exception are missionaries as they can´t spread religion in Civ 3. In my mod they recruit monks for the cultural benfit of the civ that has the religion that is shared with the missionary. Additionaly in my mod there are "dark lawyers" that do evil contracts to their victims.
But this all doesn´t touch the point with the merchand marine. With the "reverse-capture-the-flag"-option you can create special units that can be changed to money if they reach certain cities. Now if these units are oil, supplies and so on you can gain a direct additional benefit from colonies. The merchand ships that normally transport only the units you listed, now get an additional direct economic function as they transport goods that are needed for your economy. The most famous mod for Civ 3 with this option is El Justo´s "Age of Imperialism (AOI)". At present one of the big Civ 3 mods we are working on, is AOI 2. Does such a mod exist for Civ 4 too?
And now to the other point of this passage: The reduction in ease of use and a steeper learning curve is not the problem, why I prefer Civ 3. It is the loss of freedom and independence as I tried to explain in the post you are answering to. For both goods there were fought wars and revolutions. The freedom and independence of easy modding for me has a high value.
I have three I can instantly think of that were changed significantly for the worse, excluding the graphics.
1) Artillery.
First of all, artillery shouldn't be able to defend against anything from up to 2 eras previous to it's level. Trebuchets would be destroyed easily by a bunch of warriors, since the people operating the trebuchet are trained to do that, not use a sword/spear/axe/whatever to fight off a squad of warriors.
Secondly, they should never have been able to kill a unit. This has finally been changed in BtS fortunately, but before then it was feasable to have an army comprised 80% of catapults, 20% assorted units to cover all bases on defense.
Thirdly, they are too strong in the context of the game. Halving both collateral and regular damage by all seige units (excluding the Machine Gun) would keep them vital for battle to weaken enemy stack, but prevent situations were you could rely on large numbers of them to win the game. This was also a problem in Civ 3, but they went the wrong way in trying to fix it.
2) The Army unit.
The AI can't use it properly, so let's remove it completely! Terrible decision on Firaxis' part, and was made worse when in Warlords they introduced the Great General, who turned units in the rather pathetic Warlord which is basically only ever used to make a Medic 3 unit and unlock West Point.
3) Lack of an editor.
Don't bother mentioning the World Builder, that thing is massive pile of crap.
What is desperately needed in Civ 4 is a Civ 3 style editor where you can edit the game (and create maps) without having to dig through pages and pages of code. As it is, Civ 4 has a couple of excellent mods which are much better than any Civ 3 mod, but there are more very good mods for Civ 3 than there are mods for Civ 4 in total because of the need to know a number of programming languages to make changes.
(1) I remember liking the ranged bombardment of Civ3, but I'm willing to set aside that minor complaint for the new game, especially because there are mods to revive just that in Civ4. I also always assumed that a trebuchet unit had a smaller contingent of guards, etc., just like I always assumed that a mechanized infantry unit had an assortment of supply vehicles, foot soldiers, etc. that you didn't see as well (as in, the unit icon only shows its primary type). Perhaps I'm just used to the old Avalon Hill style game where, although you would just see a tank on the counter, the book told you there was a squad of infantry with mixed weapons following it, etc. And if its just collateral damage, that can be adjusted as well in a mod. No big deal.
In any case, the siege units die quickly when unguarded, so the net effect is about the same. The only difference is you can't capture them.
(2) I didn't care too much for the old army units in Civ3. And if you are only using that GG to make a Medic III unit, you are missing out. Try taking a City Raider III sword and adding the GG so you can have a City Raider III/Combat III unit, or make yourself a Combat VI mounted unit (only add them to units that already have over 10 XP, preferably more, so that you can get a higher number of promotions). Both are highly effective in their specialized roles. GGs on ships (yes, you can do it in a port) are also a great way to get an upper hand on the high seas. Imagination gives many uses for the GG in Civ4.
(3) I don't have much of a problem with the editor...I build mods anyway, and XML is so easy to learn. It took me less time to figure out how to mod and add new resources into Civ4 than it did Civ3. And you can change much more in the XML than in the Civ3 editor...I'm not deducting points for that.
Antilogic, for your first sentence you are risking a ban. Why must some people who speak for Civ 4 always start such .... statements?
For the rest of your post:
I think about ICS and pollution I have posted enough in my last post. If you want to get more detailed information about the fix of pollution in Civ 3 you can get it. All this fixings can be done easily with the Civ 3 editor.
The combat system of Civ 4 in my eyes is very unrealistic for an epic game. It´s better suited for a RPG. The return of the "Civ 2-pikeman-flag" is a good feature in Civ 4 but to to use it in that extension as it was done in Civ 4 is bad, as it is a huge advantage for the defender if you always must attack the best defender in a stack. Catapults and artillery are working completely wrong. The way they are working is nearly exact the same way as a fix I did suggest for AI land-artillery in Civ 3. In my eyes this is o.k. if a modder has to fix the wrong AI behaviour of landarty with an editor, but this easy solution isn´t worthy for programmers who have the code for that program.
The way religions in Civ 4 are set is really boring for me. I think I have a much better setting for them in my Civ 3epic mod. Here even the christianization of South American civs on random maps is possible. Here I can only speak about the religion in Civ 4 and its expansions, not about it in mods.
Multiple leaders are a feature of Civ 3. In my Civ 3 epic mod you also have great artists (units produced by academies that have a high shield value that can´t be disbanded but can be sacrificed), great engineers (units that can complete buildings and small wonders) and great generals (units that can build armies). Great generals at present are disabled in my mod as armies in Civ 3 are broken (what is no big loss in my eyes).
I don´t like these traits, at least not as part of a governement. I know here I´m a minority, but it´s my game I want to play. Let the kings be kings again.
And now to some features that are cut out in Civ 4:
Easy modding was cut out. There is no editor in Civ 4. With that in my eyes completely unnecessairy 3d-engine, Civ 4 became a modding-utopia. I need a modding reality. SDK in Civ 4 is nice but it has no use for me, when I can´t do the graphics I need for my mod/scenario. If I need a special building for a Civ 3 scenario I can go to the internet, take one of mostly hundreds of pictures that suit the 128x128 and 32x32 format and have exactly that building for my scenario or mod without big problems. The same with other graphics. With Civ 4 I have lost my freedom of modding and can only hope what others are doing. The loss of freedom and independence is a lot in my eyes.
True bombardement was cut out. In Civ 3 the AI for landarty was spoiled. But seaartillery and bombers did work well. There is much more fun with these units in Civ 3 as in Civ 4, so for landarty I have to use a fix that is similar to the setting in Civ 4 (what in my eyes is o.k. for a simple modder, but a shame for programmers). War in my eyes is handled better in Civ 3.
In Civ 4 you don´t have a working merchand marine. Transport ships only exist to carry troops. There is no use for them to carry tradegoods to their homecities. In Civ 3 this is possible with the "revers-capture-the-flag- setting" in the editor.
The next point is very subjective: Tons of existing nice Civ 3 graphics were cut out and I got only a handful of -in my eyes- mostly not very well looking Civ 4 units.
Civ 4 looks much more cartoonish as Civ 3, so the start of this in my eyes bad feature was in Civ 3.
These are only some points while trying to give you a spontaneous answer.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm just saying I want a list of points to reference, and couldn't find a clear and concise one without people attacking each other. You might have noticed that I haven't posted in this thread before, and then try to imply that Civ4 players in general from a new person to the thread. Whatever. But I'll still respond to your points:
The combat system gives you a reason to build multiple types of units and balance your army instead of simply hitting the Cavalry button over and over and over again. Even if it isn't perfect, I'd say its an improvement.
The implementation is fine in Civ4. If your complaint is that they all provide the same benefits...well, it's produced by a company trying to stay politically correct. Again, since you seem adept for modding games, you could mod them to have different bonuses, or simply download a mod that has more variated religions.
You didn't seem to understand what I meant about multiple leaders. Not multiple types of great people, but multiple leaders with different traits per civilization. As in, you can play Washington or Lincoln for the United States, and they have different gameplay characteristics.
I don't understand what you mean by traits as part of the government. There are leader traits, which give different bonuses to leaders for the civilizations, and then there are Civics, which are different choices for government. Could you be more clear as to which system you are referring to?
I don't have a problem with the modding in Civ4 at all... I guess it's based on what you want to do...but I have enough material to do what I want to do with the game. And it didn't take me nearly as long to learn what I had to do to add new stuff to the game or change systems if I wanted to.
Having a "working merchant marine" would strike as unnecessarily tedious. I hated that feature of Civ2, and was glad to see that replaced by automatic trade routes. It would be nice if they showed up on the map as faint lines, as the original BtS release was going to do (to show you where you could blockade for maximum effect), but I'd rather have complexity in Civics, Religion, etc. than in making trade caravans and sending them back and forth between cities.
The only thing I'm disappointed about with Civ4 graphics is that they were not consistent with the vanilla graphics and the BtS graphics (especially the unit graphics). Just compare some of the new units, like the spy unit icon, with the older vanilla icons. Inconsistency is, in my eyes, a greater flaw than having more cartoonish graphics. Yes, the leaders may look a little like caricatures, but I still enjoy the game nonetheless.
@azzaman333:
You might want to try visiting the Creation and Customization part of the Forum. There is an entire section there for MapScripts alone - and to name one then SmartMap has lots of options regarding resource availability.
@Civinator:
You keep referring to what you have done in your mod - which is great - but you could easily do the same (and a LOT more) in cIV. And some of the stuff you mention is already there and functioning(I repeat - give it a more serious try )
Now, you also keep using the 3D engine as an argument for not modding in cIV, but it is an invalid argument since it requires no 3D skills at all to modify game mechanics in cIV(all the things you are talking about you have in your Civ III mod). 3D skills are ONLY required if you want to make NEW units/buildings yourself (for displying on screen in the animated world), but you can easily make the icons, leaderheads, civilization flags and wonder splash screens/movies with the same skills you used for Civ III (you do need a plug in/converter for the .dds format though).
Ok, so you miss a full fledged editor covering everything, but changing/setting functionality and texts only require you to gain the most basic of XML insight(there are HowTo's posted in the C&C section). Of course if you want to make more advanced stuff like scripting a little more effort getting into Python is required(again - check HowTo's), but then you can't do anything remotely like what Python offers in Civ III either - since Civ III has no scripting support at all.
One thing that strikes me as very odd is your argument that you loose 'Freedom' if you move from Civ III to cIV modding. Considering the fairly high amount of hardcoded limits in Civ III vs the 'close-to-none' in cIV, I would have thought that making the move would only increase the level of 'Freedom'?.
@azzaman333:
You might want to try visiting the Creation and Customization part of the Forum. There is an entire section there for MapScripts alone - and to name one then SmartMap has lots of options regarding resource availability.
I prefer to play my Civ Games to be HoF compatible, otherwise they tend to end up in the Renaissance without direction and I get bored with them. Also, I used SmartMap occasionally when playing Warlords and Vanilla, but it just didn't feel... right in my opinion mostly because of the random assortments of different tiles in small areas.
Now, you also keep using the 3D engine as an argument for not modding in cIV, but it is an invalid argument since it requires no 3D skills at all to modify game mechanics in cIV(all the things you are talking about you have in your Civ III mod). 3D skills are ONLY required if you want to make NEW units/buildings yourself (for displying on screen in the animated world), but you can easily make the icons, leaderheads, civilization flags and wonder splash screens/movies with the same skills you used for Civ III (you do need a plug in/converter for the .dds format though). One thing that strikes me as very odd is your argument that
you loose 'Freedom' if you move from Civ III to cIV modding.
Doing buildings (and if needed units) that are needed for a mod or scenario I want to do, is just the point I was speaking about. As it seems this wasn´t noticed in my two long posts, here is a repeat:
If I need a special building for a Civ 3 scenario I can go to the internet, take one of mostly hundreds of pictures that suit the 128x128 and 32x32 format and have exactly that building for my scenario or mod without big problems. The same with other graphics. With Civ 4 I have lost my freedom of modding and can only hope what others are doing. The loss of freedom and independence is a lot in my eyes.
It´s the independence that I don´t need the graphical stuff of others for a mod or scenario I want to do. For example if I want to do a space mod, containing Startrek, Battlestar Galactica, Star Wars, the Kilrathi, and lot of other famous SF-stuff I can do this myself and very easily. And this independence gives me the freedom to do what I want.
BTW.: I have the dds-converter. It´s not possible to do these things with it.
What´s about the cut out sea-artillery and bombers, that the AI uses well in Civ 3?
@ Antilogic,
you are right, I mixed up traits with civics. I cleared this in my last post after a hint by CyberChrist.
No doubt, that the combat promotions in Civ 4 are working. But in my eyes this system is wrong for a game with an epic scale.
Caravans in civ 2 was a feature I liked a lot. It seems Firaxis always did cut out the features I like. The merchand marine is different from Civ 2 caravans. They are caravans that boost your economics without giving a permanent trade route and they give the merchand ships a really reason for their existence and not only to move troops or other dubious units to enemy territory. (This also can be done abstract as it was practiced in Imperialism by SSI , the same for railtransport capacity). The transported supply goods only give that boost if they are transported to your own territory.
@ Common: Please don´t forget that this thread is not about convincing anyone to move to Civ 3. It´s a thread, why civers don´t move to Civ 4.
@Civinator:
I had a whole new massive post ready when it struck me "Why DO I bother? These die-hards aren't really 'listening' anyway". I got better things to do (like mod and play cIV) - so I wont bother.
A pity you don't want to share your modding abilities/ideas with a broader audience in cIV, but there we are. Have fun with your 'Freedom' in Civ III
@Civinator:
I had a whole new massive post ready when it struck me "Why DO I bother? These die-hards aren't really 'listening' anyway". I got better things to do (like mod and play cIV) - so I wont bother.
A pity you don't want to share your modding abilities/ideas with a broader audience in cIV, but there we are. Have fun with your 'Freedom' in Civ III
I know to my last post something can be said, as the pictures from the internet are also the work of others. I made this post between two and three o´clock in the night.
Thank you for your wishes. I also wish you and all Civ 4 players much fun with Civ 4. May be we share ideas and modding in a Civ 5, if there should be place for that kind of freedom I tried to describe.
you are right, I mixed up traits with civics. I cleared this in my last post after a hint by CyberChrist.
No doubt, that the combat promotions in Civ 4 are working. But in my eyes this system is wrong for a game with an epic scale.
Caravans in civ 2 was a feature I liked a lot. It seems Firaxis always did cut out the features I like. The merchand marine is different from Civ 2 caravans. They are caravans that boost your economics without giving a permanent trade route and they give the merchand ships a really reason for their existence and not only to move troops or other dubious units to enemy territory. (This also can be done abstract as it was practiced in Imperialism by SSI , the same for railtransport capacity). The transported supply goods only give that boost if they are transported to your own territory.
I always saw caravans as an annoyance. In my opinion, a good design for a strategy game like Civ is one where I can avoid messing with a number of small, tedious tasks and instead focus on the big picture and the gameplay. Caravans were one of those annoyance factors, as was not having production roll over, so I felt obligated in Civ3 to check all my cities every turn to eek every last bit of production out of them, and then cut the production down to the bare minimum so that I don't waste any shields...and then there was messing around with the science slider right before I would discover any techs so that I wouldn't waste commerce. The implementation of the roll-over production was a great addition--now, I just focus on ways to boost my production or commerce, not worry about checking it every last turn for minute adjustments. And yes, there are still players who do that because they have to optimize their production every last turn. However, in Civ4, you at least get everything you have produced, even if it wasn't optimized. In Civ3, you lost what you didn't optimize.
One of the benchmarks for pure strategy games was Master of Orion (the original), which gave roll-over production for everything: ships, bases, planetary shields, everything. And if you couldn't produce any more factories or boost your population growth, the extra would be thrown into your planetary reserve, which you could then transfer to another project. That allows the player to focus exclusively on his overall strategy for the game, instead of messing around with checking to make sure you get every last beaker or every last point every round. Or the ability to skip a turn for a unit and then go back and change the order later, which is implemented well in Civ4, and not so well in earlier Civs. Or the ability to move a stack of workers at once instead of moving 50-some workers, one by one, across a continent to clean up some orange goo. I'm playing a game of epic diplomacy and war, but I tend to spend over half my time each turn ordering workers to clean up orange goo. To quote the cat:
In this regard, Civ4 has excelled where previous incarnations of Civ could never dream. And I have moved on to create mods for Civ4 just like Civ3, which enhance the experience even more.
Thank you for your wishes. I also wish you and all Civ 4 players much fun with Civ 4. May be we share ideas and modding in a Civ 5, if there should be place for that kind of freedom I tried to describe.
Sorry pal, sad to see an enthusiast go like that. To be honest, I am not quite sure I can share your hopes regarding Civ V modding, as I see 3d graphics beeing even more sophisticated and thus harder to mod there. Recently I stumbeled upon a guide to the Civ IV worldbuilder, link here:
The introduction of that guide rather impressed me, just have a look, maybe it'll give you some answers to your frustration. If not, all the best to you also - and see you in another thread.
Less is more
This is an extremely important concept that should be considered first and foremost before embarking on any scenario design. The Less is More concept means that the less scenarios the more fun they will be.
Essentially the concept works on the basis that there are a finite amount of people interested in creating scenarios. These people include designers, modifiers, programmers and artists. If these people are spread over a large number of scenarios then the quality will be less than if they were concentrated on a small number of scenarios.
For example there are 20 people interested in creating scenarios. These people are spread between 20 scenario designs. The quality of these scenarios will be very low, as it is simple human nature that no one person will know how to do everything in a project. However, if the 20 people were spread between only 4 scenario projects that means that 5 people are working on each scenario. The quality of each scenario will be much higher than if they worked independently, or even in smaller groups.
So keep in mind and decide if an existing scenario project would benefit more from your help than if you started a new scenario.
You were advertising Rhye's mod here. So I thought his work and his opinions were of importance to you to you. But then again, he also got blinded by the stunning but unbearable 3ds of Civ IV and totally overlook the game mechanics. What a moron...
Sorry Rhye - should you ever read this, really no offence intended.
NO Dude. I was providing a light moment by mock advertising a simple graphics upgrade to enhance the look of civ 3. I was waiting to see what entertaining new assumptions you would come up with based on the FACT of your Extreme lack of knowledge within the civ3's '1000's of units' modding sector .PROOF OF FACT :
gps said:
thousands of Civ III Clones with preset map and three new units
Hey lets just say you you never failed to disapoint. Even in jest we can't get better a statement to justify true example of a "Morons" kind of statement in a CIv3 vs Civ4 arguement
gps said:
P.S.: Facts? Really don't want to lecture you, but I guess some quotes are necessary again, this time taken from Wikipedia:
"Generally, a fact is something that is the case, something that actually exists, or something that can be verified according to an established standard of evaluation."
"An opinion is a person's ideas and thoughts towards something. It is an assessment, judgment or evaluation of something. An opinion is not a fact, because opinions are either not falsifiable, or the opinion has not been proven or verified."
Me liking Civ IV better than Civ III or you prefering Civ III over Civ IV are OPINIONS. Neiter is a FACT.
I based my opinion on fact derived from key facets of information that are all in relation to the games key charteristics in the modding feild
. THe question posed was "Why do we stay with civ3" so What better way to explain my reasons for staying then by demonstrating which game in FACT was the leader in what makes up longivity of this series, the modding sector!
My statement 'CIv3 has more user created resources to supplement Empire sized historical epics IS A FACT
Therefor your attempt to debate the definition of Fact as if I was not presenting it legit was another BS wasteof your time and weak deveation tacic that has been exposed..Good Job!!
Further since you wanted to argue Giglimesh instead of CIv4 in comparison to this fact in raw numbers, I contend that When I said I stand "unrefuted" This was a reasonable assumption aswell
Yes I summized CIv4 can't contend with civ3 in its greater historical depth made possable through wide array of graphical representions.
I based CIv4's lack of user creations on raw numbers like tech restrictions/complaints or complicated design therefor equaling less modding material
I even posted FACT on the ratio being 2.5-1 in favour of civ4 for total tech complaints here at civ fan. THis accomplished in less then half the time!!!
I gave links to popular CIv4' mods plagued with tech complaints, hinting in a carryover pattern of the same ratio from 'gen complaints' to the C+C forums. I said this gives some evidence of tainted total C+C numbers for the civ4 side, a side that are already suffers almost 2000000 less posts then the more stable civ3.
SO where are the the facts eh? GO back and Look at my opinions and you'll see the facts surrond them
I shed light on the fact Civ3 still shows higher interest numbers over its predesssor, the 6 years newer and still company supported Civ4.
I said this is the same as civ4 beating CIv5 3 monthes after its 2nd Xpak is released!! Think about that. IT atleast gives creedence to the idea civ3 has garnished the strong staying power in this category because of a weaker alternative that was presented as the 'next step' in civving .
Consumers revolted and choose to tune in to the upgrade of what worked in smooth playing empire sized strategy instead of move on to 'slow crawl ' 6 city empire' slumber fest'
You see Thats the differnce with are opinions . I backed mine up with evidence in support and You try to debunk based on deviation tactics like this:
Go out on the streets and ask people if they are worried or upset by Firaxis changing the history making and art genre defining but slightly outdated Civ III 2d graphics to up-to-date but totally unbearable 3d graphics (thus ruining the greatest historic epic of the new millenia - sacrilege!!!
I try to play along, atleast in the confines of PC users on the street knowing of the civ series not Plumbers or hotdog venders or god knows what you meant.
SO I post FACT in sales figures not including Xpaks for the two civ games being compared in this thread. Is that not " an established standard of evaluation."" as wiki would say?
You know I was disapointed I took the time to talk fact in refutation to such idle deviation but in light of you recent accusations of' lack of fact' It seems well worth the laugh in the long run
Again: Top Alltime PC sales not counting X pak sales ( Civ3 leads CIv4, mute point but worth mentioning here )
Spoiler:
This is an incomplete list of PC games (including Microsoft Windows, Macintosh, Linux) that have sold one million copies or more. Please note that the sales figures for expansion packs are not used in calculation of the sales figure for the original game.
The Sims (16 million shipped)[105]
The Sims 2 (13 million)[106]
The Sims 2: Pets [expansion pack] (5.6 million)[107]
The Sims 2: Seasons [expansion pack] (1 million)[107]
StarCraft (9.5 million)[108]
World of Warcraft (9.3 million subscribers)[109]
World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade [expansion pack] (3.5 million)[110]
Half-Life (8 million)[111]
Myst (6 million)[112]
RollerCoaster Tycoon (4 million in North America)[113]
Diablo II (4 million)[114]
Diablo II: Lord of Destruction [expansion pack] (1 million)[114]
Half-Life 2 (4 million)[115]
Populous (4 million)[116]
Cossacks: European Wars (4 million)[117]
Guild Wars (includes Factions and Nightfall) (4 million)[118]
Frogger (4 million)[119]
Doom 3 (3.5 million)[120]
EverQuest (3.5 million)[121]
Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (3 million)[122]
Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne [expansion pack] (1 million)[123]
Command & Conquer: Red Alert (3 million)[124]
Age of Empires (3 million)[125]
Age of Empires: The Rise of Rome [expansion pack] (1 million)[125]
Cossacks 2: Napoleonic Wars (2.5 million)[126]
Anno 1602 (2.5 million)[127]
Diablo (2.5 million)[114]
Battlefield 1942 (2.44 million)[128]
Battlefield 2 (2.09 million)[128]
Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness (2 million)[129]
Civilization III (2 million)[29]
Ragnarok Online (2 million North American subscribers)[130]
Riven (2 million)[112]
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn (2 million)[131]
Baldur's Gate (2 million)[131]
Neverwinter Nights (2 million)[132]
Doom II: Hell on Earth (2 million)[133]
Black & White (2 million)[14]
Mafia (2 million)[134]
Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings (2 million shipped)[135]
Quake (1.7 million)[136]
Civilization IV (1.7 million)[82]
Duke Nukem 3D (about 1.6 million)[137]
Age of Empires III (1.5 million)[138]
Star Wars Galaxies (1.5 million)[139]
Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun (1.5 million)[140]
Battlefield Vietnam (1.34 million)[128]
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (1.3 million in US)[141]
SimCity 3000 Unlimited (1.1 million in US)[141]
Zoo Tycoon (1.1 million in US)[141]
Age of Mythology (1 million)[142]
Quake II (1 million)[143]
Unreal Tournament (1 million)[144]
Unreal (1 million)[144]
American McGee's Alice (1 million)[145]
Command & Conquer: Tiberium Wars (1 million)[146]
Empire Earth (1 million)[147]
Imperivm III: Great Battles of Rome (1 million, distributed only in Italy and Spain)[148]
Patrician III: L'Impero Dei Mari (1 million, distributed only in Italy and Spain)[149]
The Legend of Sword and Fairy 3 (1 million)[150]
Return to Zork (1 million)[151]
Runaway: A Road Adventure (1 million)[152]
Blade Runner (1 million)[153]
Return to Castle Wolfenstein (1 million shipped
If that were true would you have bothering to try and carve up a member who meerly relays his apreciation of what he calls our " depth of experience of the game and contributions to this site "?
Example here :
gps said:
someone posted you'd be a great asset regarding Civ V. Do you guys really think, Firaxis will make a 180 degree turn, throw out all the 'b*llsh*t' they invented for Civ IV and give you the Über-Civ III you missed out on Civ IV? Because they finally realize reading all your entertaining posts, T.A. Jones was right and they were wrong??? Yeah? Incredible...
My god! Really?, an outside poster's comment has you that swore just cuz he cut short the effect of your 'sales speel' with a loud slam of the door? Youve sent your arguement to the streets for support or into Sumeria's Giglamesh for some 'god know what, kind of retort, but this is the most bizzare behaviour set forth by you yet
Look, IM not tryin o change the course of Civ evolution by myself. IM voicing my opinion among a sea of others like KIng who want a real strategy exp for the money they forked out.
This member you mock Had all his posts in Civ4 and was like many here, wondering whether to stay with civ4 or head for the door. Heres how he put it 8 monthes ago
marciv said:
I still can't make my mind up about either version. Call me simple but I still like the graphics in Civ 3 but like some of the additions in Civ 4. I've spent hours on both games and still enjoy them both. Ok, so there are enhancements to civ 4 like religion, try founding four or even five religions and see the reaction of the AI, hope you are man enough to fight 'em off!
So in response to his comments: Im glad he benifited from the info I provided during are debate. Mybe the facts I presented were good because I didn't try to overinflate well spoken arguements out of context? (sound familiar)
Why do you over exadurate everyones message?. Mybe thats why no one supports your way? Well I tried to find support but couldn't sorry buddy. You know under that thin disguise of sarcasim I think You might be taking this a lil to seriously. lol
gps said:
]P.S.: Another quick though regarding large empires. I often hear that complaint that Civ IV does not allow large empires. I also hear the complaint Civ IV to be a backstep in reality. Both do not go together. Earths history proves that no Civilization EVER was able to achive a domination victory. It's possible and sometimes rather easy to achive domination in Civ IV on SMALLER maps representing limited areas like the mediterranen. That's fun and gives you lots of points. On huge multinationed globes it's hard, nearly impossible. Anyone see the big picture? No??? I give you a hint: Realism!!!
OK let me get this straight, Your trying to tell us the existance of the Famous saying: The Sun never set on the English Empire" is a lie!! or should not be part of the Civ Series! based on "Realism!!!" You go on to say its to hard to beat many large nations!. Awe boo hoo! Thats Why we compete in science races or cultural crowns jacked up higher to refelct faster point accumilation. Your "small map is better" needs better back up then that! lol
Like you say IN our history so far, do all the nations become conquered in the end? Empire size is realism and attrition and logitics are facts is a real world warfare hmm?
Mybe you should have rufuted directly what 'some of us' said
Spoiler:
T.A JONES said:
B]See no mater what you do on a civ4 mod the end result will always be the same in relation to tech problems. ITs like the gameboard is flawed so the flexable instructions must still be set to operate within these confinments [/B]
I just cant see the AI being given a hundred new things to process or a bunch new extras to track and still deliver the same performance as bare bones civ4 on a huge map or mega civ epic would.
Heck Someone call me on this! POst a stinkin youtube for godsakes. We hear so many people say Huge deluxe civ4 can't get out the factory door. Its to fat and weighed down to run! Heck I know the 'Double yer Pleasure' model for Civ4 got the best of my computer. Its about time this myth is dispelled.
Here look its simple took me 2 minutes plus 5 to upload: My proof Civ3 plays mods with over 800 units, custum soundtraks, extra resouces that get distributed at the same time as the rest.(making for more trade etc), added wonders and improvements that equal more equations for the computer to run. blah blah and so on. Here it is
Notice no time deley. Only AI vs AI war reports you choose to play for enemy casulaty assesment or recon on a nation's new unit development or operational performance ..basic strategy resources obtainable only through civ3 graphics model
Sorry drifted there. But you see wIth CIv3 its possable to make a model that say, eases corruption through a number of extra improvents like prisons, interpol, townhalls etc that balance intoe with a relience on higher maintence costs for the specified gov infrasture. One artist even designed Vassels to do the job. BOOM! Just like that Oversea colinization is in effect!!! In the end the thing will play on the huge map it was designed for. NOw if a CIv4 mod set out to accomplish the same result ,(glorified expansion)Can we say at this stage it will be equally succesful? NO cuz chances are the game won't run so why bother?
Stand up for your beliefs? Hey what where they? All you said was we are all a bunch of "geeks" playin a "sad lil video" game .Was that the beliefs you stood up for? Well then You should be proud. You sure showed us . Go on playin 'this stupid game' to your hearts content just stay clear from calling down others 'beliefs'.
Whether their interpretation is closer to what you might call 'immersive' real empire size strategy on a deeper historical scale or a Simple modders delight done 'civ light' with mini-me strategy run autopilot and graphics ala Civ-Seasame. , let them be the judge of whats wrong or right
New Photo evidence Just in! : Sprawling from west to East glorifing expansion of a dynasty! "The Sun Never Sets on T.A JONES 'orange' Empire!!
ok im lost are we talking about modding or civ 3 and civ 4.
T.A Jones- i wouldnt trust those sites. one site even says he's not sure he's just listing games. civ 4 has almost 7 million units sold civ 3 probubly does not have half of that.
Source for this number? Because if it's true, that means Civ 4 has sold almost as many copies as Half Life (8 million, source) and Starcraft (9.5 million, source). I find it hard to believe.
ok im lost are we talking about modding or civ 3 and civ 4.
T.A Jones- i wouldnt trust those sites. one site even says he's not sure he's just listing games. civ 4 has almost 7 million units sold civ 3 probubly does not have half of that.
HI chuchill I hear you'/ 'ITs not proof its just a webpage' is sound logic at times . But I went to the same source as my friend in debate here that being Wiki of course
Curious? Wheres you evidence to back up your claims? Me, Ive got the citiation beside the readout to show from where the number came and what the number consisted/included ( just vannila civ3 n civ4, not xpaks sales were accounted)
Your boast of CIv4 not being below civ3 by 300 000 ike wiki states, but instead is ahead and not only that, but by twice as much!! is a big ass lie. Yes a lie. Is it ok I brought that up?....opps to late
ABout that 2nd link, I thought I'd slap it in for further refrence. Ya its a higher number. I wonder where he got his numbers. Are you sayin he lies for all games or just Civ3 You must think he is a civ3 fan and has an ajenda to lie just like some others here might do the same for their choice of game
MAkes me wonder if your friend REALLY is enjoying Civ4 on a mini map as we speak or if hes this happy Gold fan instead (or he's one of the lucky guys on the other 16 threads+ of the same nature regarding 'Fools Gold)
Heres some more undisputable facts to civ3's longevity. Or undisputable evidence of atleast 100000 in sales of civ3 paks ..in one single purchase that is! . Turns out Canada has bought 100000 copies of civ3
I guess CIv4 wasn't reliable enough to run on are 3rd world schools computers ....even 3 years into its civ4's life cycle (what I mean is its not like Civ4 was new at the time when the decision for what format would work best was decided)
THe maker of several high-profile serious games for the U.S. military and the U.S. Department of Justice, has many years of experience developing military models and operational PC-based warfare simulations for the military
The United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, the Office of the Secretary of Defense Net Assessment (OSD), the Army War College, the Navy War College, the National Defense University, the Joint Forces Command Joint Experimentation Directorate and many other governmental and military organizations have also used BreakAway-developed software.
Of course these guys were not rehired to make Civ4. Strange how after Fireaxis was bought by TAketwo they stopped working with this esteemed company. It wonder if cost cuttin came into effect. ANyway, its nice that they were paid by the big G8 nation to reunite with civ3 and develop a mod that teaches Canada's history in civ3 modding format (no corruption here ether)
100 000 copies of civ3 were given out to a young generation and this infact was a great boost for the Civ franchise as a whole. The basis for the first ever Gov's approved History lesson was to be run on CIv3's smooth and indepth engine + greater easy link-to system pedia design. To me this says alot about the way civ3 works to intrigue history apprecation and not so much arcade 'awe'ness like the 'zoom zoom' to outer space or fasinating lil bananas that fall so neatly into baskets.
Meh... I like both really, though I've only played the BTS version of Civ4, so I can't judge the earlier versions. The biggest reason [in a general sense] that I enjoy Civ4 is that there is variety in gameplay. Just about every Conquests game I had ended up following the same basic script: domination by hordes of cavalry. I've finished 3 Civ4 games so far and have ended up with vastly different game paths, even more so if you count the initial adjustment phase of Civ4 gaming where I made some unrecoverable blunders and thus learned more about the game mechanics. My point is that, generally speaking, games are more varied without too much effort on my part.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Let the kings be kings again.
Think about that. IT atleast gives creedence to the idea civ3 has garnished the strong staying power in this category because of a weaker alternative that was presented as the 'next step' in civving . 
. Go on playin 'this stupid game' to your hearts content just stay clear from calling down others 'beliefs'.
