I Hate this GD Game!

[Advocate]

No, I do not have a kind thing to say about it. You would figure that by now they would have patched the stinking game well enough to fix the stupid combat AI.

A dude with a club CAN NOT take out 3 musketeers! This kind of ubsurd game play is why I sincerely have grown to utterly HATE THIS GD GAME!

I am not alone. FIX THIS COMBAT CRAP! A rifle man is far more powerful than a spearman. ONE spearman can not defeat 4 riflemen! God I hate this game.

NO I WILL NOT BE BUYING THE EXPANSION PACK!! NOR WILL I BUY ANY MORE CIV GAMES! I have completely lost faith in Sid and his dwindling group of door Knob programers. Come on guys, get with the fricking program! Hell CTP2 was better than this crappy crap game!

4 Riflemen taken out by 1 GD spear chucker. Oh ya, this is the kind of game play that just makes a person wanna come back for more........

(Yes I am very mad right now. I invested 8 hours in a new game, following the installation of the new patch, and STILL, I loose 4 riflemen to 1 god damned stinking spear chucker!) After this, I am un-installing the game, and tossing it in the Good Will bin with a strong warning to the moron who buys it! Buyer be ware.

*SID's laughing all the way to the bank.* Afterall, he gives us crap and we buy it up like lake front property on the moon.

 

[Advocate]

Oh ya, I forgot to mention a couple of things that I would have figured would be shoe-ins for the new patch!

A way to exclude obsleted units from the production que so the stinking dumb assed AI won't build "Warriors" when it can build tanks.

A way to move a large number of troops at one time without having to burn up a new mouse by clicking a bajillion times.

Mass upgrade option. Upgrade all units of X type at one time by clicking only a couple of buttons.

Hell a cheap 4x game called Space Empires I just bought has more features than this pathetic game, and it was produced by ONE guy. www.shrapnelgames.com www.malfador.com

If one guy can program a game that makes Civ look cheep and out dated with no features, then imagine what Sid and his idiot programers were doing in their spare time. (I bet it involves a play boy and a lot of time in the bathroom.)

Yes I am mad as hell about the lack of COMMON SENSE features that SHOULD have been included with the orginal game, or patched in by now. Namely the lack of MP. Again, Sid is laughing his fat ass all the way to the bank.

Jesus, how fricking hard is it to incorperate BASIC game features?

 

[punkbass2000]

"A way to move a large number of troops at one time without having to burn up a new mouse by clicking a bajillion times.

Mass upgrade option. Upgrade all units of X type at one time by clicking only a couple of buttons."

Those are both in the game. 'j' and 'shift-u', respectively.

 

[Advocate]

Thanks. I know, but I have had a lot of problems getting the hot keys to work. Win2k, and Civ 3 do not like each other all that much.

 

[sabo]

DOn't blame Sid for that, I had WIn2k and couldn't run the game at all. You can blame Bill on that, I believe the problem was that he decided the operating system and not the program should have control over the refresh rate on your monitor. If you haven't had this problem yet with any other programs be patient, you will. MICROSOFT, MICROSOFT, RAH, RAH RAH... GOOOOOOOOOO MICROSOFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

 

[Alexnm]

I understand your frustration. It is hard to pay 50 bucks for a game and then get disappointed with it. But it is your disappointment. This is a forum to discuss things about Civ3. Of course you have the right to post your anger and frustration here, but you could try to be constructive. You could try to suggest how the game should handle unit combat. You could try to ask for suggestions on how to change this aspect using the editor.

But no. You chose to yell and cry and moan. As I said, you have the right to do it. But I am just tired of this. Tired, that's all.

 

[Zouave]

Listen, we know the unit values that came with the game are a farce in playablity, and historically.

We know the reason post-gunpowder units are so artificially weak is because Firaxis tried a cheap "fix" for their even crazier resource appearance rates which are MUCH too low especially for iron and coal. Firaxis wanted to "give civs without a resource a chance". They've admitted that. How about just getting it right??

So, what you have to do is go to the Completed Mods forum. Check out Plutarck's LWC mod, the one I posted, or others, that are far more historically correct and that do not result in weird illogical battles. So, EDIT or MOD, and that goes for units, resources, and some improvements.

 

[Myartar]

I like Civ 3, but I know what you mean about Space Empires, it is pretty cool! Here is it's flaw that pisses me off something awful, the AI is STUPID. If you mine a jump point and keep it mined, the AI will keep sending ships through and keep killing itself. Also, if you use plague bombs, the AI never send creates a medical ship to cure the planet. So is this respect, Civ 3 wins since the AI in civ 3 isn't quite that dumb. Also, there is no tech tree in Space Empires, so you it's a pain the butt to figure out what techs you need to unlock others. Plantary Management is a joke in SE, it requires no real though as long as you don't over work your poplous. Combat isn't a sure thing since i once beat a Battle Crusier w/ an Escort!

It has it's upsides like customs ships, but even that doesn't work right since very few combinations are effective. My point is SE has the same about of downfalls as civ. there is no such thing as a perfect game, it just doesn't exist.

 

[Zouave]

There's no reason for some AI stupidity. Example in Civ 3: if you raze a city (which is also non-historical) the AI will instantly know about these now open tiles, give (I believe) a freebie settler to the nearest military unit, and march right for it as part of its dopey Settler Diarrhea obsession.

But the dumb thing is these settler/foot soldier combos do this even WHEN AT WAR WITH ME!! So I destroy them and get two free workers. I saw the AI do it three times in a row, not learning.

Now come on, there is no excuse for this, and no excuse for not fixing it (among other things) with a patch.

 

[Advocate]

Thanks guys for the posts. Now that I have had some time to sleep, I am not as mad as I was. I have been following the forum here since Civ3 was released, and I know the flaws as well as the trophies of the game. I guess I let my anger get the better of me when I discovered that my major gripe about the game had not been fixed. 8 hours of game play, just to watch all my men slaughtered by horsemen and spearmen. What a waste.

Does any one else find the face the Military adviser makes when you loose a city to be rather irritating after about, oh lets say, the second time you see it?

About SE, I haven't played it all that much yet, but I have learned that the AI is very aggressive and does learn. The warp point thing with the mines, the AI eventually used minesweepers. Took a few turns, but they came thru. The AI in the game, Gold edition, is what sold me on buying it. It was improved, and even if it was not improved to a record standard, there is always the MODS.

 

[Greeko]

Yeah, the AI is sooooooooo stupid. About every other turn in this game I am playing this one specific AI civ tries to walk thru my civ and every time I tell the leader to remove their people or go to war. They leave. As time went on it just got worse now they try to send about 5 settlers and their escorts thru my territory each time i tell them to leave or go to war and each time they leave. They will never walk thru my civ. Why wont they get the point and stop??

 

[LKendter]

Actually, I have very few gripes.

However, I wish they would let me SHUT OF THE DOMESTIC NAG ABOUT aqueducts / hospital - royal pain when you have 50+ cities.

 

[roadwarrior]

Civ3 has some definite reality adjustment problems, but I bet that I'm not alone when I say I absolutely can't wait for scenarios... Even with all those issues, how can you say no to a massive WWII scenario? And if it's user-made then the author will most likely understand and sympathize with our gripes and make something both more realistic and a whole lot of fun

 

[Sullla]

Civ3's far from perfect, but if you insist on absolute realism in a game, you will always come up short. How can a game possibly simulate 6000 years of history without being unrealistic? It's not possible! I also have some issue with the game, but it's realism is not one of them. Razing, for instance, is not "realistic", but you have to admit it's practically a necessity for gameplay issues. And I have the feeling that if we did NOT have an option to raze (or now abandon) cities, Zouave would be protesting about that.

 

[Myartar]

Why is razing not realistic?

 

[JFL_Dragon]

I must admit I havent really experienced any combat disasters like a spearmen defeating 4 rifleman. I would like to see that. Ive had some unusal outcomes but some of them have also been in my favour, so I cant really complain about this.

I am of the opinion that the combat system is working fine on my computer, and Im very happy with this aspect of the game.

 

[Evie]

The three musketguys matter is just pure blind luck

One of the division ran in a mudslide while trying to attack, the second fell in a series of pitfalls and the last got trapped in a specific section of the city to which the warrior set fire. All the warriors had to do was take cover and dodge the bullets.

Stop trying to imagine it as the warrior "defeating" the musketguys and try to see it as the warriors "Surviving longer" than the musketguys. It makes things far easier to accept, generaly. Freak stuff happen IRL - submarines lost at sea at peace, ships running aground (the USN once lost a destroyer division in peacetime that way), etc.

Civ has no representation of those events, so I guess we might as well treat those "strikes of luck" of a weak units beating stronger one as the weak unit benefitting from such freak events.

 

[Zouave]

BTW, before people start draging out this old chestnut, the Ethiopians in 1934-1935 did NOT "defeat Italian tanks with spears".

The Ethiopian Army in the 1930's was armed with somewhat obsolescent World War One era weapons, which included rifles, and some machine guns and a little artillery. The reason the Italians won was Mussolini ordered massive use of MUSTARD GAS, and the Ethiopians had no defense for that as even gas masks won't help much since it also burns your skin.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by Myartar
Why is razing not realistic?

Why does Firaxis allow War Elephants to have airlift capability - but not leaders??

Both are so basic and rudimentary in terms of illogic that I hesitate to go over this even very briefly.

RAZING.

1. Cities did NOT historical "Culture Flip" civ to civ. Sometimes the may have surrendered in terror to an overwhleming military force, but that option doesn't exist in the game.

2. To prevent the absurdity of Culture Flipping and garrisons that vanish into thin air without even being able to knock off a population point or put the city in disorder, we have the option of "razing".

3. Razing means mass slaughter, genocide, and Ethnic Cleanisng on a scale surpassing Hitler and the Nazis. A terrible option, and one that is, ironically, the antithesis of this Culture stuff. If even an army of MONGOLS could not totally and permanently raze a city, such as Baghdad, in the 13th century (they tried) , razing is NOT a realistic option.

4. Razing did not happen in reality except in the most rare instances, and didn't happen at all after the Ancient period, in the real world.

5. The concept that a single unit, even a damaged one, can instantly make a city of millions disappear, turn all the buildings into grassland ready for irrigation, and process all the corpses so efficiently they don't even leave a pollution tile, is ridiculous.

 

[Evie]

Here come the reality whiner.

1-Culture Flips : It can be argued that in-game this represent the city of your empire rebelling massively (I agree the garrisons should count for somewhat more in the equation) and then requering the protection of another nation which has encouraged/influenced/inspired their rebellion against a counterattack on your part.

Which is historically quite accurate. And since we can't start adding twenty "one players nation with MPP", them joining you is pretty good.

2-City razing : Remember how long a turn of the game is supposed to be. It makes sense to me that if you order the citizens to leave a newly conquered town after 20 years little but ruins (which are not visible in-game) would be left of it. Especially if they left it after terrible figthing in the city.

Seriously though, the acadian deportation of 1755 or so is quite close to a "razing", Civ-style. All the old inhabitants of recently acquired acadia were shipped out to areas everywhere in the world, and the land was left free for new citizens to settle in.

3-Airlift : Actually, while airlifting elephants is somewhat silly, there's a question of game balance involved - if you make that one single unit (or all non-infantry units, as I heard you suggesting), you seriously twist the balance of the game.

Besides which, modern airlifters (C-141, C-5, C-17 Globemaster III) can easily carry armors (a few armors each, but you have a number of planes doing the airlifting when you order an airlift mission) and the like, which are the foremost available military units at the time airlifting become available. Now if there was a tech which would open up "improved airlifting", I could agree to that, but as it is airlifting's pretty good.

5-Remind me how long a turn is up to the 20th century? Two years at one point, five years, twenty years, fifty years, depending on when you are? I think they'd have the time to set up a slaughter system of relative efficiency in two-twenty years, and destroy much of the town (especially since fighting would hardly have made it harder to break apart). (then again, the movement values are irrealistic for the timeset, but there's a question of game balance and boredom there - God know moving a 180 move point unit around would get boring fast).

Of course that should still leave ruins, but then you add a whole new set of complexity about the old "visible wonders" can of worm we all heard about.

Frankly, you seem determined to look out for every little tiny weeny problem you see, and ***** about it. Instead of instantly going ballistic about it, you should try to explain it away with the concept of "larger picture" - and overall the larger picture and gameplay balance are really not as bad as you make them out to be.