New Civ3 Preview & Interview @ GameSpot UK

[Thunderfall]

<img src="http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3images/gal_civ3_2_screen001t.jpg" align=right border=1><a href="http://www.gamespot.co.uk" target=link>GameSpot UK</a> has posted a new preview of Civilization III earlier today. The preview covers a wide range of topics, such as the new combat model, unique units, resource monopoly, and the new culture system. They also posted an interview with Jeff Briggs, president of Firaxis, about the latest developments in Civilization III. Below is an excerpt from the preview about the controversial addition of Civ-specific units in Civ3:
<UL>

<font color=brown>Nearly all the military units from Civ II will be making a comeback, plus a small selection of new ones have been promised. Most of these will be unique to certain civilizations. The Americans, for example, will be able to build F15 fighter planes and the Germans' Panzer tanks.

With special combat skills, these unique units ensure that there's more to playing different civilizations than just alternative city names. Just pity the poor Zulus. While the Yanks and Bosch get to play around with modern high-tech equipment, they've been lumbered with the Impi as their special unit. A 20-tonne tank against a spearman just doesn't seem fair to us. </font>[/list]


Do you think Civ-specific units is a good idea?

>> <a href="http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/previews/0,2160,2086175,00.html" target=link>Read the Preview</a>
>> <a href="http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/interviews/0,2160,2086185,00.html" target=link>Read the Interview</a>

[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited May 14, 2001).]

 

[Flatlander Fox]

Thanks T-Fall for posting this stuff.

Most of my fears have been quelled by this latest interview and preview. This game sounds really great!!! But...

Unique units are no good. Gamespot made a reference to it with the Zulus, and I totally agree. The last thing I want to see in Civ is a Civilization that is better than the others. THAT IS MY JOB TO ENSURE NOT THE CREATORS OF THE GAME!!!

I can play Age of Empires already. I don't need the individualism of separate Civs (Unless it's something abstract).

I really like the sound of trade and resources in this game. In fact I think that this sounds like a real world type mold. I am pretty excited about winning a game without building a huge army and maybe choking off the other Civs by not giving them any coal.

I always thought that it was SOOOOO cool when I would go to war over resources, just cause I got greedy. This is gonna be quite a game...

But if anyone is listening up there

, please don't make specialized units for individual Civs.



------------------
It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at THAT man.

 

[Magnus]

Or at least the option to play with or without them?

 

[BlueMonday]

Dagnabit! I told them not to put civ specific units into the game. What in God's name are they thinking?

****! WHAT A ******* Dum**** idea!

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">You move like I want to, and sing like your eyes do.</FONT c>

 

[BorderPatrol]

From the Interview:

GSUK: How will Civ III satisfy our multiplayer Civ cravings?
Right now we're looking at doing some unique things with the multiplayer, but we're not ready to start talking about it yet. The challenge in the past for turn-based games has been to make it really fun and we're looking at new ways of approaching that. We have two big online features, which I can't really say any more about. It's just not there yet and we're not comfortable talking about it. But both of these features are something that you have never seen before and will be a big part of the game.

Aarggghhh!!!!!!! Just tell us already!!

!!

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

 

[Thunderfall]

I don't think unique units would unbalance the game too much. Better units usually cost more shields, i.e. build 2 crappy MIG fighters for the same price as one F16 fighters. Power lies in numbers.

Also, having unique units in Civ3 could make it much easier for scenario designers to give specific units to a particular civiliztaion.

Don't get me wrong... I also don't think unique units idea is essential, but it could make the game more interesting if it's properly balanced.

 

[BorderPatrol]

About civ specific units...

I think this could work really well with the new resource system. All of the resources are going to be more clumped than spread out all over like in civ II. Everyone will need a specific resource to make their special unit. For instance, Rome needs iron to build the Roman Legion. If you monopolize all the iron then they can't build it! As long as it's well balanced then everthing's cool.

I do agree however, that it would be nice to have an easy way to turn the special units off so that all the civs make the same boring units they did before because some people don't want to try anything new! As for me and the new units... BRING IT ON BABY!

It will only serve to make the game more realistic, because in real history different regions of the world have had different military units.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>If you cross the border, you better have your green card!<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

 

[andycapp]

Tantalising!!! Every bit of new info on Civ3 increases my expectation and impatience - take a deep breath and slowly exhaaaaale - doesn't help!!

Some interesting points to come out of the preview and interview:

1. in the interview with Jeff Briggs, he reveals that special resources in the terrain(such as iron) won't be revealed until you have the appropriate technology - I like this, apart from being more realistic, it will be better for game play. This will complement one of the strengths of the existing game - curiousity ( eg.exploration, what's out their?). You start in what looks like a fairly ordinary location, but lo and behold, you're sitting on the richest uranium deposits this side of Kakadu (the clumping of resources is a great idea), all you've got to do is survive long enough to corner everything nuclear!

2. I must admit to now being a bit concerned about the idea of Civ specific units - I know I've supported the concept in other threads - but the idea that the Germans get Panzers, the Americans get F-15s and the Zulus get Impis (albeit at different periods in the game presumably) does seem unbalanced - I just keep reminding myself that Sid is at the helm and it will be OK.

3. I like the idea of Leader units although I do have a few concerns. The first is admittedly a minor one, but I hope the leader units aren't stacked with Americans - nothing against 'Stonewall' and Patton but history has produced a few non-Americans that qualify as great military leaders. My major concern is the random way these leaders will be allocated to a Civ - don't get me wrong - random events per se are not necessarily bad for game play, I just don't want it to be 'set-up' like a Scenario.

3. I like the importance being placed on 'culture' in Civ3 and in particular the idea that the strength of your culture or lack of, will influence the absorption of catured cities into your Civ.

4. finally, I note that Jeff Briggs has said that they are looking at a new Wonder called 'Internet' but don't have a clue as to how it will work - now there's an opening for some bright young boys (and girls) - suggest we start a new thread in Civ3 Ideas forum on this ASAP!

 

[Leowind]

Update the Civ III site AND a great preview/interview in the same day?!? I don't think I can stand it. I'm getting more excited the more I see. I'm also not sure about the civ-specific units, but could be fun IF they are well-balanced. All in all, sounds like it will be great. But I will repeat again: I NEED SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS!!!!

 

[Thunderfall]

Leowind, what's your system specs? If you computer is better than 300 MHZ+ and 64 MB RAM, I would say you are safe. If not, just go and grab a new system at http://www.egghead.com.

 

[Spartacus]

It doesn't make that much sense to me why certain civs get certain units. Like the Roman Legion for example. They were built since the Romans had such access to iron. So how about the civ in the game with the most iron could build the Legions. Because essentially aren't we all starting off with blank civs just with different names? So I think the civilization that most closely resembles the Germans when the Panzers came along should be able to build them. Why should American get to make F-15s if say they're the last to discover modern flight? They shouldn't let real life conditions play a role into the game.

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

I think civ-specific units would be okay as long as EVERY civ had particular special units for each period in its history. Maybe even going as far as an offensive *and* a defensive unit for each age.

Who knows what the Americans would have come up with in the middle ages if they'd been around then, or the Aztecs in the 20th century? It's not fair to give the Zulus an advantage only in the early game, as no one will ever want to play them.

This concept--as well as naming the military leaders--is fine for historical recreation, but what happens when I want to customize my own civ? Will I get stuck with Stonewall Jackson leading my Atlantean F-15 squadrons?

And as for the internet wonder: I've said before elsewhere that it should replace SETI. THink about it: requires computers, and counts as a resaerch lab in every city (ie. increased science)? Sounds natural.

 

[animepornstar]

i real dislike the unique unit idea, cause i´ve played age of empires 2. in aoe2 the turkish special unit was allmost unstoppable while the franks had a worthless unit and how fun was that? it´s not fair.

i think armies are a good and bad thing. it will be fun to have them, but when will you not have them? all gold will go to the army and you will stay in the stone age for the whole game. no, wait, i forgot. the techs will be stolen, right?

------------------
hang the dj

[This message has been edited by animepornstar (edited May 14, 2001).]

 

[Thunderfall]

<img src="http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3images/imp.gif" align=right border=1>I really feel sorry for the Zulus. Their speical unit is called the "Impi". It SOUNDS like a pathetic unit. <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/biggrin.gif" border=0> One of the lowest creature in Heroes of Might and Magic III is the imps (see the image at the right).

Zulus' impi unit probably would look like the imps... <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/biggrin.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by Thunderfall (edited May 15, 2001).]

 

[Mongol Horde]

Sorry for short post but I have to dash

link to preview: good

specialised units: abhorrent

 

[Big_Time_Charlie]

<FONT face="Times New Roman">

All sounds rather nice, my main worry is that having so many ways of dominating the game although good might make the game too easy.

For instance in CivII you can research techs in such a way to easily beat the AI, and these weakness in AI may be multiplied in Civ III when you can win through War,trade, culture,techs etc. Its just a thought anyway

The idea of specific units is crap, the game is not meant to reflect real life but what could have happened, the developers should not dictate how your civ emerges. Thats the point of researching techs to get an advantage I always thought.

</FONT f>

 

[EdBigHead]

I've been following this talk and I had to give my two cents so I registered.

I think the unique units will be a bust in Civ III. The idea is cool, the different races need unique aspects, but modifying the units is a bad idea for 2 reasons.

1. Because the idea of a unique unit is based on the placement of resorces, and the history of its nation. I always enjoed the idea of civ games becasue the user controlled the history, and the placement of resorces will be random, so why should the game tell us waht we can and cannot build?

2. This idea of adding 7 unique units is good, but wouldnt it be better if these were available to all the tribes? So instead of 1 unit for each race there were 7 additional ones. I think this is a better idea, becasue especially in Civ II the battles soon turned into tanks and howitzers fighting mech infantry with bombers fighting the fighters, with only a few other factors.

 

[Mongol Horde]

Welcome Ed <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/yeah.gif" border=0>

We are both from Worcester, quite a distance away from each other though, what state is MA anyway? Is it Maine?

You have an interesting point on civ-specific unit. For example if the Russians special unit was the Mig29 the that would just be plain silly because in the real world there are others countries that have Mig29s. Let's face it civ-specific units are bad, more unit variety maybe.

[This message has been edited by Mongol Horde (edited May 15, 2001).]

 

[Magnus]

MASSACHUSETTS!!! howdy neighbor!

I think civ-specific units and leader units are great for scenarios but for the basic game, I am a bit sceptical.

However, I think the resource scarcity thingy is awesome! Finally a historical reason to go to war! (or ummm do some heavy duty diplomacy too...)

 

[O-V Kuusinen]

The idea (at least I and many others think so) for unique units is bad.
I don't want to reconstruct the history just like it has been, by choosing a specific civ. If it's going to be done, how about this: Englih civ is always a monarchy (no way to change it), German civ is always forced to change covernmet type to fascism (or fundamentalism) around year 1933...

Okay, poor joke but still an example of a boring, predestinated game.

------------------
"Working men of all countries, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!" -C. Marx