Key aspects with each CIV game

[MWA]

Describe breifly the main aspects/advantages of each game and name a winner of the three based on the description and arguments for each game.


I'll start:


Civ 1: Sorry, haven't played it enough.
Civ 2: Simplicity, allowed the player to play a one dimensional game (i.e. only military by capturing techs when taking cities etc.)
Civ 3: Takes away some of the simplicity, but adds many aspects. Forces players to play focus if a lot on all aspects.



My conclusion must be:

Civ 3 is the best. All though I miss the simplicity and being able to take the world by only focusing on military, I can't go back because the game is much stronger with all the new additions. After all, there's more to Civ than war.


My two cents... now I want yours!

 

[Sparrowhawk]

Believe it or not , but this has been a very popular topic for discussion in the past. Here are some previous polls if you're interested:

Civ 2 Vs Civ 3

Poll: Civ 3 is Awful

Rate Civ 3

Civ 2 vs. Civ 3

Civ 2 vs Civ 3 vs SMAC vs Colonization

SMAC vs Civ III


EDIT: oh yeah, I forgot to add my 2 cents.

Civ 1: Classic. Brilliant innovation, but gameplay flawed and graphics suck by present standards. It was my game of choice until Civ 2 came out.

Civ 2: Great refinement of the original Civ ideas. Tremendously addictive. Graphics simple, gameplay fun but simplistic.

Civ 3: The best yet! Most gameplay issues cleared up (IMHO) -> very realistic. Beautiful graphics