Civ3 is one big bore

[CeasarSalad]

What does everyone who complains about corruption exaggerate the problem? It dosn't help your case, when you're distorting the facts like that. I mean, %90 corruption, one city away? Who has seen that? I've played probably 100 hours of this thing so far, I've never seen that. Nothing even close to that. I havn't seen %90 corruption in any of my cities. At worst I've seen %60 corruption or possibly %70 in my most far-flung cities. Near to the capitol or forbidden palance it is NOT a problem!

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe these people actually have %90 corruption in their nearest cities, but I havn't see anything like that!

 

[Bob Hitchen]

The problem is not on nearest cities but those captured on huge maps. No point in capturing them since nothing can be sensibly built. The different nationalities are well spaced out so razing is only viable option. Makes a mockery of one set of victory conditions. 90% is an underestimate on far flung cities. The forbidden palace is just a work round for a crap design decision
that was not properly thought through. However you can only have one so most nations just have to be obliterated. The patch fixed nothing.

 

[RogueNine]

You don't like corruption? Just go into the editor and lower it. It takes less than 5 minutes, and boom, your chief complaint is gone. The editor is SUPER EASY to use too. Open it up, look for the 'city improvements' tab, and add the 'lowers corruption' tag to a few/many/all buildings. There you go, no more 90% corruption.

To be honest, yes, I feel corruption wasn't done properly. But like someone else in this thread said, why are people like you always exagerating your case? Its like you saw a problem, and now are willing to give up on the game. Hardly a loss for me, but I got news for you: At this rate you'll never enjoy a game, because the more complicated and grand games get, the more problems they're going to have. If your not willing to work a bit to make it run, or give a game a chance, you may as well sell your computer now...

 

[VoodooAce]

Originally posted by Squirrel
Why has this become the big whining forum?

Personally I love Civ III. I am never gonna play Civ or Civ II (I think Civ is the better of those to, btw) again because I think Civ III is SO much better. If you do not like Civ III, that's fine, but do you have to bother the rest of us with that?

Dude, uh, now you are whining and ruining my whole civ-forum experience

Your whining is as bad as anybody elses. Maybe you didn't notice, but I did. Or are you special in some way?

 

[LayZMan]

Originally posted by CeasarSalad
What does everyone who complains about corruption exaggerate the problem? It dosn't help your case, when you're distorting the facts like that. I mean, %90 corruption, one city away? Who has seen that? I've played probably 100 hours of this thing so far, I've never seen that. Nothing even close to that. I havn't seen %90 corruption in any of my cities. At worst I've seen %60 corruption or possibly %70 in my most far-flung cities. Near to the capitol or forbidden palance it is NOT a problem!

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe these people actually have %90 corruption in their nearest cities, but I havn't see anything like that!

You must not have had a large empire on huge map if you've never seen a city w/ ^90% corruption. Try going to war sometime, you'll get one eventually and you'll be PO'ed as the rest of us. I'm not sure which bugs me more, the sea warfare or the bullsucks corruption...I'm going w/ the corruption, at least a frigate sinking my battleship gives me a laugh.

 

[LayZMan]

Originally posted by RogueNine
You don't like corruption? Just go into the editor and lower it. It takes less than 5 minutes, and boom, your chief complaint is gone. The editor is SUPER EASY to use too. Open it up, look for the 'city improvements' tab, and add the 'lowers corruption' tag to a few/many/all buildings. There you go, no more 90% corruption.

Upping the optimal # of cities for each map works better. Can also tag the reduce corruption attribute to culture producing improvements.

 

[redruss66]

Originally posted by LayZMan


Upping the optimal # of cities for each map works better. Can also tag the reduce corruption attribute to culture producing improvements.

a little more detail here, as one who has never really bothered with an editor...on civ games anyway...the advice would really make the game more enjoyable for me and i appreciate it...but what exactly do i edit...i opened the editor, and tried to open my saved game...(NOT A VALID SCENARIO) ...okayyyy...well let me open a scenario then....it only had two...earth(huge) and earth(standard)...fine...opened earth huge and it would not allow me to edit any features...so how abou some more detailed instruction on how to use it the editor for this purpose you menti9oned, though im far from a civ newbie...i dont know much about the editor and would like to tag the attributes you mentioned to a game(map) of my choice without bhaving to build one from scratch.

any thoughts from you editor experts would be appreciated, i can handle the rest if i can just get rid of this corruption bug...

rusty

 

[Aslan]

The great thing about a game like CivIII is that, when faced with a difficult situation (like corruption problems) it provides the gamer with the oppurtunity to think the problem through. I like CivIII because it requires some thought, and can be very deep in terms of what all you are able to think about in order to overcome certain obstacles. I like other games too, like Unreal Tournament and Diablo2 and The Sims...but these games get old pretty quickly because they really don't require much planning, forethought, and don't offer situation where you have to re-vamp your strategy...because there isn't really a strategy to those games. Most games out there right now are pretty mindless shoot-em-up or hack-n-slash games. They can be cool when you're feeling like veggin' out, but I like some meat once in a while!

Aslan the Lion

 

[redtom]

I've played all variations, Civ 1, Civ 2, Civ: TOT, Civ: CTP etc.. They were all pretty good, then I met Civ III. The problems were countless:

1. Technology takes ages, the furthest I got was Fighter planes.
2. No new techs.
3. No new wonders, CTP had many more
4. Nothing more than an animated version of Civ 2.
5. No real scenario maker.
6. No alternative schemes like in Civ: Test of Time, there was normal like the original Civ 2, extended where you could play on to Alpha Centauri, Sci fi, and fantasy(which was awesome)
7. Where's mongols, spanish.
8. Iroquois are not a civilisation, there nothing more than barbarians- at least mongols constructed somethings not just destroyed
(I could go on and on about the faults but it would be a waste of time)

Infogames and Firaxis, do not have a touch on the Microprose, its commercialised junk, virtually banning people from making scenarios for no apparent reason.

I'll be interested to hear from Info***** and F**kaxis about why there is no scenario maker. I've wasted money on junk.

I have tried to adapt the game but it just crashes whenever I make a terrorist or build the statue of zeus, has anyone else such stupid problems.

A very p*ss*d off Redtom

 

[Sam_Catchem]

Originally posted by redtom
8. Iroquois are not a civilisation, there nothing more than barbarians- at least mongols constructed somethings not just destroyed

The Iroquois may not be your vision of what a civilization should be, but they were one. Trust me.

I usually refrain from attacks..but this one ticks me off. I have a suggestion for ya...learn to read.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by Sam_Catchem


The Iroquois may not be your vision of what a civilization should be, but they were one. Trust me.

I usually refrain from attacks..but this one ticks me off. I have a suggestion for ya...learn to read.

Yeah. What the hell was that guy's problem? I kind of miss the Mongols too, but why insult the Iroquois?

 

[Wolfshanze]

People should stop whining about other people whining... but doesn't that mean I'm just whining?

 

[Sam_Catchem]

Originally posted by Sam_Catchem


The Iroquois may not be your vision of what a civilization should be, but they were one. Trust me.

I usually refrain from attacks..but this one ticks me off. I have a suggestion for ya...learn to read.

You know what..I should not have used the past tense either. That is my bad. ..the ARE one still.

 

[Akka]

Originally posted by redruss66


a little more detail here, as one who has never really bothered with an editor...on civ games anyway...the advice would really make the game more enjoyable for me and i appreciate it...but what exactly do i edit...i opened the editor, and tried to open my saved game...(NOT A VALID SCENARIO) ...okayyyy...well let me open a scenario then....it only had two...earth(huge) and earth(standard)...fine...opened earth huge and it would not allow me to edit any features...so how abou some more detailed instruction on how to use it the editor for this purpose you menti9oned, though im far from a civ newbie...i dont know much about the editor and would like to tag the attributes you mentioned to a game(map) of my choice without bhaving to build one from scratch.

any thoughts from you editor experts would be appreciated, i can handle the rest if i can just get rid of this corruption bug...

rusty

Open the "civ3mod.bic" file and change the rules in it. It set the rules for all non-scenarios games.


Redtom : I agree with most of your points. Though, considering the Iroquois as barbarians is plain stupid. Iroquois were in fact quite civilized in their own ways. They were a nation, with a lots of villages, with ethic rules, with their own artistry, language, philosophy... It's not because they don't fall in the "by the book" way to be a civilization in western standard that they were not one.

 

[sumociv]

Civ 2 was addictive but unchallenging. I would play it for hours to own every possible piece of land and get a 1059% rating, but it was really not very realistic. Countries historically din not control areas half-way aroung the world without massive problems until the British Empire, which ultimatly proved too expensive to maintain.
I like Civ 3, despite its difficulty, (I haven't made it out of the ancient age yet since I keep starting over in a vain attempt to buil the perfect civ.) because it feels historically accurate. The game faces you with difficult choices that are filled with consequences. You can get access to that resource filled Island across the ocean but it will take a massive effort to sustain a city nearby. Change your civs government? Well ya think you want a revolution well ya know......... You want to conquer the world, ok but your people will eventually get tired of you sending their sons over there.....
Sure there are still inaccuracies, but I feel that Civ 3 captures the challenge in building an empire to dominate the world. Historically a rarity, and always doomed to eventual collapse.

 

[redtom]

I apologise for my attack on the Iroquois but:

1)In the grand scheme of things, akkadians, norsemen, scythians mongols, spanish etc. made a bigger effect on the world.

2)Most of you come from the US, learning a very isolated and insular history of the world i.e. the world started 500 or so years ago when colombus found the Americas. I on the over hand have studied history from "prehistory" to the modern day, so i tend to think one pifling little tribe done nothing more than piss of a bunch of american frontiermen.

3)I believe due to political correctness they have added an american barbarians to please a minority.

Another point-
Wheres the great african civilisations? Benin is far greater a civ than the barbarian zulu.

ps. maybe i was grown up on euro-centric classical history, but what greater history to be grown up on.

 

[Galen Dietenger]

Iroquois are not a civilization no matter what loose standard one applies. If civ3 properly placed civs in there relative world positions, one could say the Iroquois were only put in to 'fill' North America. Since thats not the case, includeing them amoung real civs is a bit curious to say the least. Im sure at some point well have the ability to edit them out or replace them with a real Culture\civ. But then again, it just could be politcal correctness and histroical revisionism run amok at Firaxiss

/Shrug

Civ3 is still a Big Bore....

 

[Venge]

I usually do not tie into what I look at as 'fired up threads', but I am going to this time.
Everywhere it is talking about this civ should of been used and that one should not have.
It is such a moot point as far as I am concerned. They needed 16 civs, so they took 16 titles of historical civs and added them to the game.
But by picking these civs out of the many available is not their attempt to validate which civs are most important and in what order.
My 'civ' was not included in the game, but that is fine
I am almost waiting to hear the other side of the coin in some complaint.
"I wish they did not use 'such and such' civ, I do not like to see my civ get beat, even in a game ...."
LOL
But anyway, it is just a game, and the civs they used are just used because they needed 16 civ names with attributes that are different.

 

[Akka]

Ok, well then just a question : what IS a civilization for you ?

 

[Sam_Catchem]

Originally posted by redtom


1)In the grand scheme of things, akkadians, norsemen, scythians mongols, spanish etc. made a bigger effect on the world.

I agree some big civs were left out.

2)Most of you come from the US, learning a very isolated and insular history of the world i.e. the world started 500 or so years ago when colombus found the Americas. I on the over hand have studied history from "prehistory" to the modern day, so i tend to think one pifling little tribe done nothing more than piss of a bunch of american frontiermen.

I still do not believe you can read. Now, you insult Americans and the Iroqouis..nice. Go to the bank..get all you money..and buy a clue.

3)I believe due to political correctness they have added an american barbarians to please a minority.

Why did you apologize earlier about the Iroqouis again?

Another point-
Wheres the great african civilisations? Benin is far greater a civ than the barbarian zulu.

What is with you? You really need to read a book.

ps. maybe i was grown up on euro-centric classical history, but what greater history to be grown up on.

Ahh..now I get it. Nothing is better than your History. Grow up.