Just curious, What things did everyone want with CIVIII and didn't get it

[simwiz2]

Less one-dimensional, dumbed-down gameplay. More strategy, not have every game turn out the same. More realistic air and artillery units. AI that uses artillery effectively. Realistic nukes with instant response system or whatever it's called. More editing capabilities to make scenarios that are fun, etc. It is countless small oversights that diminish the game for me.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

basically - nothing!

I never expected to have to say: a bug-free game, balanced and not missing anthing that was in Civ2 (Scenario editor). but basically I got what i wanted, and lots more!

 

[The Last Conformist]

Zouave, I don't think the AI gets free Settlers when you raze it's cities - it seems to always keep a number Settlers in reserve so it can instantly send one if an empty spot appears. Not particularly bright, but apparently not a cheat.

Also, did you see my suggestions for limiting "Settler Diarrhea" (Basically, costlier Settlers and harder Barbarians) in another thread?

 

[Crow T Robot]

Originally posted by Zouave


Yes, subs and privateers are useless as their true purpose in reality is to attack enemy trade at sea. Firaxis doesn't know that.

That "reality", at least regarding subs, vanished near the end of WW2. The some 300+ Soviet and 100+ US subs built in the cold war were not commerce raiders.

And Culture Flipping. When a town of '1' flips with NINE military units, and all those units magically vanish, you know you are dealing with braindead BULLBLEEP.

You'd rather they allied with the opposition forces instead of disbanding? Odd...

 

[Japher]

I wanted more wonders, instead I feel that I got less.

I wanted more units, instead I feel that I got less.

I wanted better trade options, instead I got about the same only different.

I wanted more involvement with the governmental issues (laws, decrees, etc.), instead I got less.

I wanted more field unit/worker options (trenches, mines, etc.), instead I got less.

I wanted them to keep the name you leader and town thing going, thanks for nothing.

I wanted beer for my citizens too, thanks for nothing.

I wanted a game that would be played without a set time limited for victory, thanks for nothing.

I wanted a game that had more resources and resource uses, thanks for something.

I wanted a game that would get me so addictive to it that I would spend my days at work wishing I were playing, my afternoons at home ignoring my wife, and my nights a sleep dreaming about it... Thanks alot Firaxis, for everything. My wife will kill me and I think my boss is coming right now to fire me. Oh well, more time for the marvoulous, fabulous, awesome game of CIV III!!!!

 

[Sinapus]

The "transform" option is sorely missed. By me, at least.

(No, I don't buy the part about it making global warming have no consequences. Having to run around a whole bunch of workers who could do other jobs to repair the damage from your mistakes is a pretty big consequence.)

 

[Baleog]

I think the transform option, while nice in civ 2, was unrealistic. Maybe it should be an option that comes with future technology 20, if at all.

On top of the lack of a basic screen showing you the arrangements of ALL the other civs, I have many problems with the various advisors.

Domestic advisor:
An option saying "Set extra citizens to ..". With the choices being scientist, tax man and entertainer. You could then base the changes you wanted around this, and the micromanagement would be severly reduced. <horror>

Just a friendly note saying "we have 30 cities". Or even let it be one of the things she says every now and again.

Trade Advisor:
A list of all the current trades you have open, including gold per turn, whatever techs were swapped and lump sums payed (so as to get an idea of what the inflation is like when you are extending the deal), along with the turns left till expirary.

Also the option of food trades between cities. Not to mention the possiblity of trading food with other civs. Along with the gold per turn option.

Military advisor:
Mostly good. As in the things that annoy me are significantly minor, ..

I once lost my great leader and when you drag your mouse over the picture, it doesn't point him out. I know, I must be some kind of idiot to lose my great leader, but it happened.

In civ 2 there was a list of all the casualties in all the wars ever fought. Having access to this list was not really important to the game, but it was good fun to have it.

When you right click over one of your units when the "unit display" is on, you can upgrade them, disband them, etc.. Why can't you do this when the "city display" is on. Maybe just a minor crime, but it annoys me.

Even more minor is having to count the amount of "slave workers" you have. I know I'm not paying money for them, but is it so hard just to tell me how much I have, in brackets, beside where it says captured units? Same for artillary or other. (I'm not sure if they appear in that box. If they do, how about having the option "captured units:". And here you'd select the unit type you wish to view.

Foreign advisor:
As stated above.

If you really want to keep the octo-structure, at least make a link available where you pick a civ and are showed a list of all the deals/wars/embargos they are involved in. Or even be able to call up a list of all the active wars in the world, all the active mutual protection pacts, etc.

Culture Advisor:

Why can't she tell me how much culture points I acquire per turn, and when I reach 100,000 points based on these points. Instead I have to count up the culture points of my 70 or so individual cities, take my current score away from 100,000, and divide my culture per turn points into the resulting figure?

Scientific Advisor:
Can't think of anything immediatly wrong with this guy.

Demoraphics Screen:
Surely the graphics can be rearranged to show me where the other civs stand, once I have an embassy of course.

I think I'll submit this to the sticky thread.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Crow T Robot


That "reality", at least regarding subs, vanished near the end of WW2. The some 300+ Soviet and 100+ US subs built in the cold war were not commerce raiders.

Not true, the Soviet ones were there to close the Atlantic (together with long range bombers) so NATO wouldn't be able to reinforce.

The US ones were there to sink Russian subs, so the Russians needed more to sink US subs... after all, the best vessel to hunt a sub is a sub (unless you have air support - and that can only stretch so far and last so long).

Then, there's bombers/boomers with nuclear missiles and their escorts......


So basically, closing the Atlantic would still be a sub thing, since the Russians knew they would never be able to send surface vessels to face the US Navy carrier groups.........

 

[john heidle]

My biggest disappointment is the amount of TEDIUM in the game.
Remember Civ2 when they told you that a new tech was discoverd? The only way to find that out now is to tediously go thru each civ's diplo screen. The information is there, but the player has to tediously go thru click after click after click ad nauseum to find the information. Also try to find out what city stopped it's WLTKD after the popup disappears. Or try to find the city in civil disorder.

In general, the F4 diplomacy screen is a disaster. It was poorly thought out when Civ3 had a limit of 8, but when the limit was set to 16 the screen was not redesigned. A table format would be much better to see who has more or fewer techs, who has more gold, whether a country has an MPP, etc. And the F2 trade screen should tell you what you can export as well as import.

I also hate NO ZoC (zone of control) paired with no stacking limits.
The idea of monster stacks roaming around is absurd. How could they ever be supplied in anything approaching reality? I play WW2 games like Kharkov43 (HPS Panzer Campaign series) and even EU has a better combat system. This combat model makes no sense to me.

 

[Agamemnus]

A lot of interesting mini-topics here, like the blockade and the horrible AI cheat.

My initial dissapointments with CivIII:

1) Not enough Technology. Nothing after Modern ages, and they've even taken out dozens of units / techs / improvements.

2) No real Council. My CivII CD is so old and worn that half the words are jumbled and the movies of the Council members run like a broken-down CD, so I was hoping for that.

3) No more wonder movies.

4) Not enough unique city pics.

5) Eats up too much RAM and takes too long to load/save. I have the recommended 64megs (I think it's 64) and that's not even close to enough to have music/sound on and play the game, OR even to play the game w/out sound!

6) The 'We Love The King Day' and 'Civil Disorder' messages (and the ends of both) are nice, but I'd like to have an option to disable that so I can concentrate on my war with the German Empire..

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Crow T Robot


That "reality", at least regarding subs, vanished near the end of WW2. The some 300+ Soviet and 100+ US subs built in the cold war were not commerce raiders.

The nuclear submarine is a completely different weapon than submarines from previous eras. Traditional submarines breathe and hunt on the surface. Nuclear submarines lurk on the bottom.

 

[Zachriel]

-

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Crow T Robot


That "reality", at least regarding subs, vanished near the end of WW2. The some 300+ Soviet and 100+ US subs built in the cold war were not commerce raiders.

You're right. The nuclear submarine is a completely different weapon than submarines from previous eras. Traditional submarines breathe and hunt on the surface. Nuclear submarines lurk on the bottom and attack the land.

 

[Kilroy]

Originally posted by Zachriel


You're right. The nuclear submarine is a completely different weapon than submarines from previous eras. Traditional submarines breathe and hunt on the surface. Nuclear submarines lurk on the bottom and attack the land.

Hit "edit" instead of reply. Or hitting back and changing the post, whichever you did.

 

[chiefpaco]

One thing I was disappointed about since my very first game is the game having a sense of itself. I mean, we are playing a game simulating our history. Couldn't things be a bit more dramatic? A bit more important?

I'd like a record of all my major actions. A history book. Perhaps some replays of major events like the last turn, conquering my enemies' capital, finishing the Pyramids.

I'd like to see some more faces of my citizens. Maybe some personalities (cheering, rioting). I'd like to name my navy ships like the Bismark or the Red Baron. I'd like to feel proud of my achievements - some recognition for doing well, perhaps a medal for a well planned campaign.

I'd like some sort of interaction with my people. Perhaps my military advisor could suggest an attack plan (though imagine how tough it would be for it to be a good one). Maybe my Trade advisor could let me know when I can easily trade for some excess Furs the Babylonians have. Perhaps there is a reason they are upset at me...

I know I get carried away with the fancy candy features and I would argue that it is second to gameplay. However, can a game be too bare bones strategic? Is there a compelling reason to keep playing over and over and finish all the games?

 

[Venger]

Originally posted by Crow T Robot


That "reality", at least regarding subs, vanished near the end of WW2. The some 300+ Soviet and 100+ US subs built in the cold war were not commerce raiders.

This is astonishingly incorrect. Soviet Naval doctrine involved the use of it's relatively weak Navy SOLELY to harass and limit the abliity of the United States to project power and war material into the European and mid-Asian theatre. As much as I hate to disagree with someone with an MST3K name...

You'd rather they allied with the opposition forces instead of disbanding? Odd...

Why are those the only options? I'd rather my loyal garrisons put down the rebellion. Why is my only option to have them vanish into thin air or take up arms against me? That's foolish.

Venger

 

[Venger]

As far as the topic at hand...

I think my biggest disappointment with Civ3 was that it was (and in many ways still is) far less than the sum of it's parts. Too many generals, too many chefs, you pick the analogy. It felt like it had been thrown together but not actually PLAYTESTED extensively. Which is why, after numerous pathces, it's only starting to reach a level I feel looks like Release Candidate material.

That said, many things have far, far to go.

Venger

 

[simwiz2]

Originally posted by john heidle
In general, the F4 diplomacy screen is a disaster. It was poorly thought out when Civ3 had a limit of 8, but when the limit was set to 16 the screen was not redesigned. A table format would be much better to see who has more or fewer techs, who has more gold, whether a country has an MPP, etc.

Yes, your idea would be better and less tedious. Hopefully it will be in PTW, at least for MP, to make diplomacy between people less boring and repetitive.

...But then they couldn't show off their super-awesome 3-d animated leader faces

 

[damunzy]

MP....in this day and age how could they figure "We'll add it in later." Money, cold hard green ones, that is how. This will most likely be the last product I buy blindly from Firaxis.

 

[hzm]

Everything from Alpha Centauri.