Civ3 is AWFUL

[rangers85]

Zouave, have you ever thought that maybe because of the war, that civ's people's happiness level is pretty low?

Anyways, I think the main reason many dislike Civ3 is because Civ2 was there for so long. Many have played it for 5 years. Therefore, they've become accustomed to how it plays, etc. Therefore, they were expecting Civ3 to be exactly the same but somehow leagues above Civ2. Also, everyone seems to forget, Civ2 didn't originally have Multiplayer either, it came out later in an expansion.

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Originally posted by Zouave
Few can ever say Civ 3 is as good as it COULD have been.

Of course not, no game is ever as good as it COULD have been. Even the greatest games are found with flaws after just a few hours of playing. Look at your favorite game, and then think of what you would change. Then, ask a friend to do the same, I'll bet you don't have the same list. Therefore, how is Firaxis going to make a game that EVERY SINGLE PERSON will walk away saying that it was the best it could've been? It's just not gonna happen.

Originally posted by Zouave
Civ III is heavily stacked against the human what with a cheating, stubborn, stupid, crazy AI. The Diplomatic AI is especially bad.

If that's what you think about CivIII's AI, please tell us what you think about CivII's or even CivI's AI. Whether you like it or not, CivIII's AI is far superior to its predecessors. In CivII, on Deity, the largest amount of units ever moved towards me at once was maybe 20 - 30. I get stacks that big playing on Regent in CivIII!! Also, Diplomacy is completely improved, the attitudes actually affect relations and you can actually demand something specifically, instead of just demanding and hoping for something. Also, you don't have to have them worshipping you to get a world map. You can also just give away territory maps, so that they won't automatically know about the new island you're getting ready to settle.

Originally posted by Zouave
Hence, we get a rushed, flawed game that desn't even have a cheat mode or scenario-building. No doubt so they can sell us more scenario disks.

Does anyone remember the wait for a REAL scenario editor for CivII? As i recall, you had to by a disk, either fantastic worlds or the historical scenarios disk(i don't remember the name). Therefore, this is no different. Also, the game has a cheat mode, it's called chieftain. It's not the same, but with the AI penalties, hopefully you won't have any problems.

Originally posted by Ironikinit
The AI doesn't cheat, it just plays by different rules to give the player a challenge.

No, it cheats. It is proven that it cheats but only on the higher levels. AI's are not smart enough to provide enough competition for skilled players so they are given cheats. What bothers me is that most of the people who rant about civIII talk about the AI cheating, then they say that they only played for a few hours and put it away. That is impossible, unless they started on a higher level than regent for their first game thinking that their civII skills would save them, they never would have seen any of the cheats. If some people would actually spend some time playing the game and developing their strategy, they wouldn't find these cheats a problem.

Those are my 2 cents.

 

[SS_StuGIIIG]

I'm with you selous the game is just a re-make money spinner,progress has been slow indeed over the years and time it had a face lift and or re-construction. Good on you for havin your say,and I do think theres some kind of conspiracy towards anti-fans and so-called hatemongers.There just havin their say and I believe alot of their information and complaints are well backed up and they should recieve medals from the firaxis ppl for their very much in depth explanations for justifying their miscontentness with the game.Hopefully civ 4 will take a whole new shape and encourage some of those civ 1 and 2 players who have'nt already done so to finally upgrade;or could civ 3 have already spelt the end for sucess for any future sequels of this much loved game of so many.

 

[SuperCiver]

You are right Gonzo. Nobody can design a game that will be loved by everybody. I like several new features and I dislike others. It is also impossible to be able to personalise everything in the game options. Nevertheless I cannot accept that:

1)There were some modifications only because of reality. Reality is one thing and fun is another.

2)I doubt that there was serious examination of how the modifications would affect the game. The main purpose was just to change something in order to release a new game.

3)A huge discussion how Civ3 had to be and then the team designed the game by such a way to satisfy as more ideas as possible. Firstly various ideas are not compartible between each other and secondly many people have ideas without thinking.

I voted for Civ3 and it is very natural that the new version is better than the previous but Civ3 was a disappointment for me and I really prefer SMAC.

 

[Ironikinit]

Gonzo,

I've come to the opinion that the AI cannot cheat. (I don't usually define terms, but I think I should in this case.)

cheat Pronunciation Key (cht)
v. cheat·ed, cheat·ing, cheats
v. tr.
To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases.
To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land.
To mislead; fool: illusions that cheat the eye.
To elude; escape: cheat death.

v. intr.
To act dishonestly; practice fraud.
To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: was accused of cheating at cards.
Informal. To be sexually unfaithful: cheat on a spouse.

Thank you, www.dictionary.com.

OK, so there are several definitions. Under the definition "to deceive", yes, the AI can be programmed to attempt to deceive the player. Posters often seem indignant about the perceived cheating, so I think they are upset over a supposed swindle. Can the AI see more than the player, for example? Obviously, yes. One only has to see a barbarian horseman go after an undefended city that should be beyond its ability to see to know that the AI isn't playing by the same rules as the human. A human player has the ability to see one tile beyond a unit's position, barring that the unit is on high ground, etc. The psychic barbarian is enough evidence for me that the AI can see more of the map than I could in the same situation.

However, that isn't cheating as defined in terms of a game. Consider the various attributes of the different civilizations. If the French, for example, decide to have a revolution, they will have anarchy for 5 turns. If the Aztecs do so, they only suffer one round of anarchy. Yet no one complains that the Aztecs cheat. Of course not, they have violated no rule. The rule specifically says that the Aztecs and all civs which like them have the religious attribute will suffer only one round of anarchy when revolting.

So it is with the AI "cheats". For one thing, a computer cannot "violate rules deliberately", it can only do what it is told. What it's told (in other words, the program) are by default the rules. A computer possesses no will of its own, and thus cannot cheat. It can only follow the rules.

It's a minor point, but I'm willing to argue it. The rules the AI plays under are obviously quite different than the rules we play by, and if one insists on calling that cheating, I can't stop them from doing so. All I can do is observe that they are mistaken, and that their energy would be better spent observing than complaining. I've noticed a concerted effort by certain posters, clever ones IMO, to discover where the player and AI rules diverge. Knowing that a barbarian horseman can see your undefended city and doing something about it is much cleverer than complaining when you get sacked, again.

 

[Chieftess]

I kind of agree that it wasn't up to my expectations. It certainly was different than Civ2, but I'll get used to it..

Ok, here's some of my likes/dislikes...

dislikes-

Play Control - The game always seems to want to end your turn after you click, or move a unit (atleast the autosave for 5 turns somewhat solves this problem), which makes it frustrating when you're trying to get some workers to retreat.

Galleys - Civ3's Triremes. The computer is *STILL* sailing through open waters! I saw one do it, too! Atleast they can't attack your city/units.

AI - It still cheats... (ties into Galleys, though)

Resources - My first game (I have v.1.07f), and I covered the globe looking for coal, only to find none! Plus, resources seem to disapear when you're not making any units that use the resource (there should be a "stockpile" option).

Game Lag - I have a Pentium 4, 667Mhz, and even on the first few turns, with 8 or more civs, it takes a good 2 or so seconds for my turn again.

likes-

Diplomacy - Atleast war isn't the only way to win, and the diplomacy screens are much better (and give you more options).

Resources - (I know, it's in both categories) I like the fact that you have get a resource to make certain units, and you can use it for trading (or for "imposing sanctions" - by cuting off the trade routes). I wonder if the resources will keep poping up in new places, or vanish all together (that would be interesting..)

Espionage - Atleast diplomats/spies don't take up one unit. Plus, it's a bit more realistic. Spies aren't going to go around carrying a big banner that says "I am a spy!" like in Civ 1&2.

Culture Radius - All of the nice "boundries" from Civ1 are back! It would've been nice to see a city radius (though you can see it when you click on the city...).

Number of Civs - Just two words: 0 Civs!!!!! Great for trying stuff out. (My main use of the Civ2 cheat menu).

Iffies -

ZOC - This is iffy. I guess I'm used to the Civ 1 and 2 strategy of blocking units, but I guess when you look at it, you're talking about hundreds of square miles per tile.

Pollution - There doesn't seem to be a "cure all" like in Civ2, and even cities with no production can still cause pollution (all those cars, I guess...).

Civ Rules - It isn't in a single text file like Civ2, instead, it's for each city. Unless I haven't noticed a text file, it does make it tedious changing each map. But, it's also good if you want to experiment on one map, though!

Tech Tree - It's got an awkward feel to it, since you don't need to gain every tech. Then again, some techs realistically, aren't needed. It does put a dent in trying to get to one tech before everyone else.

Graphics - I know graphics aren't everything, but it does get confusing when units look so similar! I've mistakenly took my worker into battle sometimes, thinking it was a spearman, or something, only to be surprised at seeing it captured!

 

[gonzo_for_civ]

Great post chieftness If more people would post their likes/dislikes like you did, one of these threads could actually start some intelligent debate. I doubt it though.....

 

[Salvor]

Chieftess,

I liked your post, and thought I'd pass along a tidbit or two:

Play control: You can go into preferences and select "Always wait at end of turn". It's not the default setting, but I always turn it on so I can take a final look around before I end my turn.

Game lag: I agree this can be bad on huge maps towards the end of the game, but 2 seconds isn't really worth complaining about.

Galleys: They might be sending several out hoping one or two gets through without sinking. I've done this sometimes. It's hard to prove, one way or the other.

Espionage: I'm a bit surprised to see this under your "likes". You must be the only one out there who actually likes it! I personally only use it for seeing the enemy's total troop strength. Anything else is too expensive and too chancy.

Pollution: I think that pollution is determined before deductions are made for waste. So a city producing 100 shields with rampant corruption still produces tons of pollution. This makes sense to me.

Tech tree: I think it just takes some getting used to. So "iffies" is the appropriate place for it.

Graphics: I don't find them so confusing. I think I was more confused in Civ2, especially the settlers (but this was probably because they were so different from Civ1 settlers).

Apart from that, I pretty much agree. And like gonzo says, I hope this leads to intelligent debate. None of this is criticism, just expressing opinions, sometimes similar, sometimes different from your own.

 

[Ironikinit]

Also, after a certain tech, I think navigation, galleys may venture onto ocean tiles.

That's what I've read, anyway, and the only times I've seen AI galleys on ocean was later in the game. I haven't experimented to check it out.

 

[Mr Spice]

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Also, after a certain tech, I think navigation, galleys may venture onto ocean tiles.

Yep, you are correct. With the discovery of either navigation or magnetism all your ships are able to end their turn in ocean squares without sinking. Even galleys. This goes for the AI as well as the human player.

But I guess that the myth about "the unsinkable AI galley" will live on no matter how often we repeat the explanation.

 

[Anglophile]

I agree with all the clarifying comments re unsinkable galleys. There is one additional factor; the 'sink' rate is never 100%. It was 50% (I think) in Civ 1/2 and I suspect it is in Civ3 as well. My personal record is 6 turns on the ocean - without ever finding land - before that heroic and very old crew finally sank beneath the waves. At 50% a pop, that works out to about a 1.5% chance to survive until the 6th turn. Of course, most of my galleys sink immediately but then I normally cheat and reload. I wonder if that is what the AI does?

 

[Mr Spice]

I do not think that the AI lets its galleys end the turn in sea/ocean before proper technologies are discovered. The reason why I say this is that when I buy maps from my opponents there is nothing indicating "suicide runs" by their galleys.

Also, when AI civs are on different continets separated with at least 3-4 tiles of ocean, they do not make contact with each other until late in the game. Unless one of them possesses the Lighthouse, that is.

Edit: Spelling mistakes

 

[Ironikinit]

I agree with spice. Trading maps with the AI shows no evidence of kamakazi exploration missions with galleys, that I've seen anyway.