Help! Which Civ III and How To Find?

[Mojotales]

Trying to get into playing Civ and I'm in freefall -- I have IV, but after reading and looking at the demo games on YouTube it seems to me there may be an easier route if I get a nice collection together of Civ III and sink down into it. At least that's become my plan after looking at things tonight.

I have found a series, for instance, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9S1aP1bT98&feature=PlayList&p=6919F0932BF4E01F&index=0&playnext=1 which appears to be based on Let's Play The World version (which has it's own detractors possibly because of early problems?).

I do have a real basic CIII $4 multi disk version (Half Price Books) which was unopened but I suspect is not anywhere near the Civ III Complete edition I've seen referenced (or the "Let's Play the World" for that matter).

I just want this -- something with some "heft" to it to have a great range. I don't really care much about multiplayer in this kind of game, like solo fine. What should I do? Is there a good complete version (title please?) that I can find relatively easily? My plan has become to try to get a good, full version and match it up with as similar as possible a YouTube to follow and learn more easily from, since I'm sadly clueless.

From what I can tell, I can easily find 3 versions of Civ III more complex and complete than my little one:

Civilization Gold (which mentions having "its much-improved follow-up expansion pack, Civilization III: Play the World."
Civilization Game of the Year Edition
Civilization III Complete which has a lot to say about technical adjustments, namely: "Good game at a great price. For me, the custom scenarios are pretty interesting. On the technical side, you need to add keepRes=1 in the ini files for wide-screen support. Keep in mind that the Securom version it's crippled by has a pretty upsetting issue regarding right-clicking, so I had to google for a good solution. Basically, you need to download http://www.securom.com/support/repair.zip, run it, and make C:\WINDOWS\system32\CmdLineExt.dll read-only."

I would have thought that last one would be what I'd want, but my eyes glazed over the moment technical changes in the ini files popped up.



Thanks for taking the time to let me hopefully be clear and present my situation. I am extremely eager and grateful.

Mojo

 

[Tone]

I'd advise you to go for the complete version. It is the final vesion of civ III (conquests) fully patched and ready to go.

Don't be put off by the advice about adding to the ini file. It's really a minor thing to do and advice on how to do it can be found here if you ask.

I don't know about the Secorum version but I know that there are other versions out there so that should be easy to avoid.

 

[Mojotales]

With daylight and the kind reply, I was able to get a boxed-at-the-Best-Buy version of Civ 3 Complete held for me and am on my way over to pick it up later.

Grateful for the clarification -- everybody around here knows this stuff by now, it's second nature to longtime players, but some of us are really, really ignorant and thanks for remembering those of us way back at the back of the pack!

I am also going to take advantage of the offer for help as I try and get oriented in this game and I just want to remind everywhere there are not to bright but very grateful new people out here!

See you soon

Mojo

 

[CommandoBob]

Civ III Complete comes with vanilla, Play The World and Conquests; the original (vanilla) and the two expansions. Three games, fully patched in one install.

Once installed, the default game is Conquests. You can play the other two versions, but you don't have to.

 

[Mojotales]

Exactly -- and the booklet that came with Civ III Complete (I'm still better with printed stuff sometimes!) is the answer to a major prayer. Little things like what dem little do dads written on the hex in terms of supplies mean is a major eye opener!

What I'm doing is what I mentioned in the OP -- I'm using the booklet to just goof through a game, at least the first part of one, and answer questions. It's a sandbox. Once I feel better with that and can at least get started smoothly and into the game itself, I want to watch the YouTube.com Let's Play Civ so that when fuzzy things pop up I know what they are!

In the midst of a lot of work now, so the time I spent just yesterday experimenting has made the diff and I think all. After I've thrashed around a few more days, I'll try sending in requests for answers to this or that question.

Thanks all for helping me get on the boat.

Mojo

 

[splunge the 2nd]

Welcome Mojo!
I'm a little late to put in my 2 cents, but Civ 3 Complete is the way to go and I found it on ebay for as little as $9 including shipping.

 

[Theryman]

I believe it is sold on Steam for either $5 or $10, for anyone else looking.

EDIT: Just checked, only 5 bucks for Complete.

 

[dexters]

Welcome to the Civ3 club!!

 

[SG-17]

You can get Civ3Complete from Steam for $4.99.

 

[Mojotales]

I've dabbled a bit in Civ III now that I got the complete game and have goofed around some with Civ IV.

I can see the merits of both -- Civ III seems a little more straight forward and comfortable, not too much thrown at me. IV seems to have the Religion-as-social-factor angle which seems kinda fun to me.

In other words, neither jumps out at me but may tilt a bit toward III. So, and recognizing life is made of choices for all kinds of reasons, with IV out what has kept you as dedicated as you are to III and as sold on it? Or did you give IV a shot and go back to III for some reason?

Again, please, the player is the one who decides which is the best game with which to spend their time, so there's no right or wrong answer. I'd just appreciate hearing your story.

Thanks!

Mojo

 

[Tone]

I started playing III soon after it came out so there wasn't a choice between III and IV at the time.

I did get IV when it came out and enjoyed playing it. There are aspects of the game that are far superior to III IMO and others that make the game fun to play. For example I like the way that maintenance limits expansion until you develop your towns, I like the stronger barbs and I appreciate not having to micromanage overflow of food/shields/commerce. I could go on but in my limited opinion IV gives a greater choice of strategies. It was also fun to learn a new game but somehow I always prefered the feel of III so that's what I play more often. Maybe I'm just a luddite at heart!

 

[timerover51]

I started playing III soon after it came out so there wasn't a choice between III and IV at the time.

I did get IV when it came out and enjoyed playing it. There are aspects of the game that are far superior to III IMO and others that make the game fun to play. For example I like the way that maintenance limits expansion until you develop your towns, I like the stronger barbs and I appreciate not having to micromanage overflow of food/shields/commerce. I could go on but in my limited opinion IV gives a greater choice of strategies. It was also fun to learn a new game but somehow I always prefered the feel of III so that's what I play more often. Maybe I'm just a luddite at heart!

If you like stronger barbarians, you can edit them in the editor's general setting to use different, more capable units. I normally have them set to Swordsman/Cossack/Privateer, instead of Warrior/Horseman/Galley.

 

[Tone]

If you like stronger barbarians, you can edit them in the editor's general setting to use different, more capable units. I normally have them set to Swordsman/Cossack/Privateer, instead of Warrior/Horseman/Galley.

True. I was being a bit lazy in my explanation though. I like the fact that the barbs develop (warriors then archers then swords and axes, etc) as the game progresses rather than always having a set unit type.

Having a stack of 30 barbarian cossacks rampaging through your territory in late AA/early MA must be pretty scary. Do you just open up a town for pillage and accept the losses from your treasury rather than lose a stack of swords/horses/spears?

 

[timerover51]

True. I was being a bit lazy in my explanation though. I like the fact that the barbs develop (warriors then archers then swords and axes, etc) as the game progresses rather than always having a set unit type.

Having a stack of 30 barbarian cossacks rampaging through your territory in late AA/early MA must be pretty scary. Do you just open up a town for pillage and accept the losses from your treasury rather than lose a stack of swords/horses/spears?

Since I play on either archipelago or continent maps that I generate in the editor and then do some tweaking of, I avoid that for the most part. Plus I build The Great Wall to increase my combat effectiveness against barbarians. However, since I am on water maps, the privateers do give me fits, and any exploration of new areas tends to be interesting to say the least.

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

In other words, neither jumps out at me but may tilt a bit toward III. So, and recognizing life is made of choices for all kinds of reasons, with IV out what has kept you as dedicated as you are to III and as sold on it? Or did you give IV a shot and go back to III for some reason?

Mojo

I started with CivII and could still be easily enjoying it. Civ3 had just enough improvements to graphics and audio to make it that much more addictive. Just considering gameplay I really can't say one is better than the other. Tried the demo for CivIV and just saw another upgrade to graphics and was uninterested in chasing another version. For me its upgrade-itus. Consider the real possibility of Civ5 coming out soon, so it doesn't really matter where you jump in. I really believe that Civ3 will be around for a long time, a lot of folks are very involved in the modding aspects.

For me its about time invested, so Civ5 will have to have a galaxy to conquer to draw me away from Civ3.

 

[CommandoBob]

...In other words, neither jumps out at me but may tilt a bit toward III. So, and recognizing life is made of choices for all kinds of reasons, with IV out what has kept you as dedicated as you are to III and as sold on it? Or did you give IV a shot and go back to III for some reason?

Again, please, the player is the one who decides which is the best game with which to spend their time, so there's no right or wrong answer. I'd just appreciate hearing your story.

I dabbled in Civ and CivII but most stayed at Chieftain.

With Civ III I found this website, with plenty of helps and the Sucession Games. I like SGs. I think they are the best way for someone new to the game to learn how play at a medium difficulty level.

I have stayed in Civ III due to the Hall of Fame. I got this crazy idea to submit a game to the HOF just to see if it was good enough to be selected, and it was. It wasn't a great conquest victory (Monarch, Huge, Pangea and India); the only reason it was accepted as the 6th best game for Monarch/Huge/Conquest was because that particular combination had only 5 of 10 possible games! So I thought I would try some other victory conditions, too. And I have.

I also play civ4/BtS. I like how overflow is managed and the Unique Buildings. Other things, such as city health, the increase in the number of resources (and the associated tech restrictions), the way Open Borders is handled, playing as a Leader and not a Civ (Abe or FDR, not just America); these are things that initially I think are overdone and confusing but my experience (one won game on the Baby-level) is against me.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I haven't really lost interest in Civ 3 for more than a 6 month stretch since I got Conquests. I think it is my idea of a perfect game and still has plenty of challenges.

 

[Aabraxan]

. . . . In other words, neither jumps out at me but may tilt a bit toward III. So, and recognizing life is made of choices for all kinds of reasons, with IV out what has kept you as dedicated as you are to III and as sold on it? Or did you give IV a shot and go back to III for some reason?

Again, please, the player is the one who decides which is the best game with which to spend their time, so there's no right or wrong answer. I'd just appreciate hearing your story.

Thanks!

Mojo

I missed Civ 1 and 2, and didn't get 3 until 2006, IIRC. At the time, either Civ 4 wasn't out yet, or my computer wouldn't run it. Don't remember which. Either way, C4 wasn't really an option for me. Eventually, I might get around to playing it, but I have yet to tire of C3C. Once I find a game that I like, I pretty much beat it to death. I got MOO2 in ~1998, and the only games to distract me from that one for very long have been SMAC (bought in ~2004) and C3C.

 

[bob rulz]

I am a long-time Civ III addict and I could just never get into IV. I played it for a little bit and it wasn't a bad game by any means, I just didn't like a lot of aspects of it. I don't like how they focused so much on bringing the scale of the game down - one of the things I like about Civ III is how you actually feel like you're building a huge, sprawling empire across the world. I don't get that feeling in Civ IV. Also, I think they butchered combat in IV - waging war just wasn't as much fun. The Civ III combat system has its issues but I prefer its more straightforward style.

In some areas Civ IV was better, but I just have a lot more fun with III than IV.

Although I might get the Beyond the Sword expansion and give it a shot - I'm intrigued by a lot of the things that they introduced with the expansions.