Democracy Game. What Version Of Civ?

[CornMaster]

This poll is to figure what version of Civ we will play. Civ 2 or Civ 3.

Please only vote in this poll if you are signed up, or thinking about signing up for the Democracy Game.

Pros of Civ 2
-----------------
More players have it than Civ 3..
Players have a better grasp of the game and concepts.

Pros of Civ 3
-----------------
More features than Civ 2.
Better and more rich gameplay features.

These are just my opinion of course.

 

[andycapp]

I don't have Civ3 so my vote is obvious.

 

[allan]

One disadvantage of CivIII: lots of bugs (like corruption) still need to be worked out. I personally don't plan to buy CivIII until it is refined more--that is pretty much my approach to buying ANY new game, I wait until at least the second version. I hate being a "guinea pig" and spending the money for a shaky first version....

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I voted for Civ3. Cos I have forgotten how the Civ2 game runs ..... after playing Civ3 for quite some time.

allan, personally I don't think the high level of corruption is such a problem in Civ3. Cos now every road will bring you trade, even those running thru mountains and forests. And if you got a river, wow, extra trade on both sides of the river. The high lvls of corruption only appears to be significant when you got cities very far away or too many cities.

You just need to learn how to place your cities better. Plus there's the second capital. Just no more productive global empires (which I wasn't fond of anyway).

I guess ppl who have played Civ3 will never be able to get used to Civ2 ever again.

 

[The Balrog]

Civ3 all the way

 

[adamsj]

I think that Civ2 for the fact more people would have Civ2! and so would get the all the features and concepts!

 

[knowltok]

I'm for Civ3. The patch will be out soon and I would think that most people would have the game by xmas if they were going to get it. They can always join later when they get it.

I also favor 3 because the richer environment will lend itself to the roleplaying aspect, which, IMHO, is what will make this concept really fun.

 

[CornMaster]

Although I voted for Civ 2....it looks like we are going to be playing Civ 3. But here is a sticky point. People that play the Democracy game don't have to know how to play Civ 3, or even have the game, as the concepts are identical to Civ 2. Plus people be placing screenshots on the forum to illistrate possibilities, and situations as they arise. The only thing is that the President and Vice President must have Civ 3 (otherwise the game can't be played. ) The department heads don't have to have it but it will make their task much harder if they have to relay screenshots from another source. (Information Officer.)

So...If we play Civ 2, how many people will leave?
And if we play Civ 3, how many people will leave?
I guess that's the real question.

Anyone else can post pro's and con's too and possible solutions to these problems.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

ill stay for both versions(bet u all got upset now, huh?)

allthough i voted for civ3 i can do civ2 aswell, but isnt there a patch for civ3 being realeased soon that we can use?

 

[animepornstar]

i think we all now civ2 too well.

 

[duke o' york]

Surely that's a good thing?

What about Civ 1?

 

[The Balrog]

I dont think that, many people's go that around!

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

The only thing is that the President and Vice President must have Civ 3.

That is why i voted for civII.I have CivIII ,but i'm not sure the president's after me will have it.

i think we all know civ2 too well.

That would have been one of the primary reason's why i would have vote'd civIII.

 

[animepornstar]

have about civ2 multiplayer with two civs?

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

have about civ2 multiplayer with two civs?

It would be cool but it's something for later ,when we have more experience in this sort of game's an some more player.
But indeed it would be cool to play for ex. a WWII scenario's with player gouverment's for Russians/german's and allies.
Considering it would be very cool for espionage (Mr. President ,whe have a spy in the Allies millitary department ) ,and would take diplomacy and trade to an other level to.

 

[duke o' york]

That would be pointless because the members of one government could just read the posts of the others and know everything about their opponents. What they were building where, what defensive units they have and where and which techs they are researching, etc. Ultimately, it would be reduced to a contest between the random numbers used to generate the outcome of combat because nothing else would be a mystery.

 

[TheDuckOfFlanders]

That would be pointless because the members of one government could just read the posts of the others and know everything about their opponents.

Not if restriction's are placed of wich player can read wich topic's/thread's.We would need a whole system for that but if we ever come to such a game i think it must possible to implement.

 

[MCdread]

I don't have civ3 yet, but I voted for it. Like CornMaster said, it will provide more rich and interesting situations, and it will be a very good way to know the game better for people in my situation. Being a voter, I hope to be able to provide better advices as I get inside the game. Anyway, I'm planning to get civ3 next month.

 

[spycatcher34]

Civ3 gets my vote. Would stay for civ2 aswell.

 

[goodyhut]

I don't see why there can't be one for civ2 as well, but I am totally into the new game and can't see myself getting too interested in a civ 2 game at this point.

Also Civ3 is much better suited for this type of thing since there are a lot more diplomacy options and the addition of culture.