Discussion in 'Civ3 - General Discussions' started by Hagbart, Apr 15, 2002.
You said it. I haven't played with a patch yet, and 1 +2 is all that's bothered me.
i agree, original version was very fun to play, we were able to trade with a.i, and artillery work very well. It look like if firaxis know that some player were doing tech brokering, than they modified the game to make it imposible, it look like if firaxis know that some player were using a succesfull combination of artillery and fast unit to destroy an a.i city, than they modified the game to make your artillery miss 90 % time. I think there programer are frustrated when they read our way to win the game.
i expect the next patch to do not allow the human player to set his reasearch at 0 and buy tech from a.i as it is now the only way to do not fall behind in research on higher level.
I guess I did not make myself clear enough. When you bombard a city there are three possible targets: improvements, civilians, and units. The game first determines, which of these three you are targetting and then uses their defense modifier to determine if they got hit. Watch has happened is that in every patch the defense value of buildings and/or civilians has been upped.
Consequently the number of misses against those two targets has gone up, while the number of misses against units has remained the same. The net result is that bombardment units overall are less effective, giving more misses, though in damaging units they remain the same.
And there were a fair number of threads of people complaining that when they took cities there were no improvements left. I also think Firaxis wanted to make it slightly less easier for you to depopulate a metropolis to size one.
Firaxis should write a book on a law of unintended consequences. They had an almost complete game, yet in their zeal to root out play styles the programmers didn't like, they made the game into a complete 1.17 mess. I don't actually disagree with some of their goals, after a while, tech brokering makes it so easy it's not fun. However, they shot a fly with a shotgun each time they nixed an exploit, and did a lot more damage overall than they fixed. Hopefully, this patch will clean the house, so to speak, so that the gameplay is both robust and not easily exploitable.
bombers should be able to raze any city(many bombers;not just one).
it happened to my home city in 1944.
Le Havre(my home city) was the 1st french harbour.
Germans had only destroyed the harbour;in a night there were six raids of british bombers;it literally razed the city.
No civilians left;3 buldings left;no nazis left of course.
Now, Le Havre is a 200,000 inhabitant(250,000 in its conurbation)-town;with no old city;a "concrete city";mainly made by 12 floor-towers.
that to say that when an army decides to raze a city(without invading it);it doesn't make any difference between civilians;buildings n units.
I didn't come here to speculate on what I think the new patch is going to do for Civ3.
All I have to say is that the new patch better fix Civ3 so that it's possible to enjoy playing on any level other than chieftain. I'm so sick of this game and all it's annoying litte absurdities. War is the number one reason why I never survive past the first 75 game turns. Even if you give in to all the AI's demands they will crush you because you have a small military. But if you concentrate on building up your military your culture suffers. Then guess what? The AI has no respect for you because of your low culture and declares war on you anyway and crushes you. I have yet to play a game where I make it to the point of building a spaceship. I'm usually long destroyed by war before that.
I'm tired of dealing with AI's that never ever like you no matter what you do.
I feel like this game is me vs. the whole %^&*ing world and I'm sick of it. Even my allies turn from polite to furious overnight and declare war on me for no apparent reason. Enough already! Can't I just live in peace and build up my empire through constructive methods?
Who cares about MP? I don't. I just want 100% effort put into making a patch that's gonna make Civ3 (which is a game BTW, and a game is supposed to be fun and entertaining, not frustrtating to the point that one wants to commit suicide) as much fun as SMAC/X, Civ2, Gettysburg, etc. was.
If any game even gets you thinking about suicide then throw it away imediately and get some help.
BTW, I've had a total of 2 wars in my last 5 games (all played into the modern ages) so the game can be played without wars.
Well actually Warlord is playable too Regent is much tougher.... what I find most frustrating is not being able to keep up in research with the AI, even if you put full effort in research... it's a waste of money and you can better buy your techs rather then get them yourself
I also noticed the size of the world and how number of AI players can make the game harder or easier... A few AI's on a huge world in Regent level is quite hard because the AI has plenty of space to expand their empire at a much faster rate than human players can.... but a Regent game with 5 AI's on a small map is a lot easier, because the AI can't expand that much. Just a theory though....
Also a tip is to try playing the GOTM #1 and read the spoiler thread about it. It's a Regent game on a small map... I got very frustrated with the AI on the huge maps I played on and never been able to beat them... but now it was much more playable.
I have noticed that you have pretty much posted the some complaint on many of the hot threads. You're time would be much better spent reading some of the strategy articles then repeating the same complaint. Though if you dislike the game so much consider selling it back at an EB and try something else.
Civ3 does have substantiative changes, which require you to relearn some strategies, but it is quite playable and quite fun. I find it quite easy to remain out of war and I often don't enter into my first war till the late industrial/early modern era, and about half of those I start myself just because. The key is just developing the right mix of building and city placements.
If you are having trouble with the AI being too aggressive there are 4 civ's that have low aggression settings (China, France and two others). I suggest playing a few games against them, or using the editor to knock down the aggression settings on the other civ's to give you the learning room.
Also except for one occasion where I forgot to build embassies I have never been in a me verse the world situation. Instead it is often the reverse case.
Well said Eagle!
In my current game France and China declared war on me when I requested they leave my territory.
I have the same problem as Moff Jerjerrod, though. It always seems to be me against the world and I can't stay out of war, no matter what I do. I have read the threads and I can control it somewhat, mostly by keeping a large army, grabbing as much land as possible, giving in to AI demands (which gnaws at me) and paying massively for an ally when there is war so we beat them quickly and I can try to a reasonable period of peace.
I only just saw the influence of government type today, though, so I'll add that in the mix. I typically go directly to Monarchy because I'm always at war. Don't mind war but not the whole game.
Playing the game without a war is probably the most challenging way of playing. It is very multi-dimensional. For example, you said that they declared war because you asked them to leave. Well, that was a bad move by you. Better would have been, perhaps, to figure out a way to block them from entering your territory without provoking war.
They also declare war because of: resources, think you're too weak, think you're too strong, are agressive by nature. Overcoming all these obstacles is hard, I am not suprised you are having trouble doing it (I do too...).
i dont understand this one, do you think when the allies walk on berlin in 1944 they expect to find a brand new cathedral, a brand new factory, or even a brand new airport
I think they expected to find more than one person. And without excessive bombing, it should be possible to capture a city with its marketplace, harbor, and some other non-cultural improvements intact. Your Berlin analogy is invalid because Berlin was bombed extremely heavily in WW2. Perhaps Rome or Paris would be better examples. There was some, but not so excessive bombing of these cities before the Nazis pulled out, and much of the infrastructure and improvements in those cities remained intact.
FYI, in 1944 the only allies walking into Berlin were POWs.
So you are happy that when you use your stealth bomber on a city it miss 90 % of the time, so why building those units, why building artillery? You can easily defeat ennemy troup outside there city with fast unit. it make no sense in my opinion that you expect to find a brand new harbor or anything into an ennemy city after bombing.and why you want an ennemy city? build your own one. when i am in war i destroy, i dont want to manage a guerrila warfare while im on attack.
fyi paris were not bombed, panzer walk in as piece of cake.
Wow, maybe they will fix more than they screw up this time. I can hardly wait. I wanna play this game some more. LOL. Lets keep our fingers crossed. I really really do hope its good this time.
Playing without war on higher levels is tough, but not hard to do. What you have to do is have limited wars, not long drawn out ones.
My current game, playing China (my new favorite Civ) on Regent level, I've only had 3 wars. I play very aggresive early, expanding like mad, meeting every AI civ I can and trade like crazy. The other Civ's like you more if you a) trade with them often (even just maps) and b) you don't kick them out of your territory all the time. If you keep kicking them out, they *will* get pissed and declare war.
Anyway, large map, 8 civs including myself. On my continent there was me in the middle, Japan and India to the south and south east, Persian way far north past a lot of jungle so they weren't in the mix. I expanded as much as I could, kept following up settlers with defenders and building a horeseman here and there to get my military up there. Me and India were pretty tight, but relations with Japan were strained. Japan finally declared war when I kicked them out too many times. I wasn't quite ready and new they would wipe the floor with me if I didn't act fast. I contacted old India and gave them some tech to join me against Japan. The agreed and we slowly carved up Japan, me taking a little more then half. By the end of the war I got my rider UU and went into a Golden Age just as the war ended. This allowed me to get a few wonders.
Later on we all met the Zulu and for some reason they declared war on me pretty much right away. I got everyone to go in with me against them. They were on a big island quite a ways away. They never invaded and neither did I. We declared peace soon after. They still hated me. In the meantime I was first to find everyone else and made quick friends. The Germans didn't really care for me (suprise) but I kept them happy by trading luxeries. Zulus declared war on me again and this time I got the whole world to go against them. I loaded up 30 calvary (knowing a strong army is a must in this game), went over and took 4 cities on the edge of their island, getting another saltpeter in the process. I really didn't want to fight anymore and declared peace.
Rest of the game, when I got nothing else to build, I build an infranty or tank and have really built up my overseas military. I have at least 2 big defended cities on every continent. Just recently the French and English went to war leaving a wasteland in between their empires. Lots of good resources like coal and rubber in there. I need extra. Knowing it's good to keep a couple settlers laying around just for this occasion, I moved 3 settlers in with infranty and founded 3 new cities and now controled a lot of extra resources.
France, a good friend, just declared war on me for what appeared to be no reason. Why? Because my new cities control the rubber and coal they used to have until the English razed their cities. They have no other source of it. They *have* to attack me. Since they are the #1 civ and I am #2, let's dance! I am now pumping over my tanks and got all civs but the Zulu's to join with me to wipe out the French. The Zulu's know better to attack me because I have 30 tanks on their island just waiting to attack them.
So, the moral of the story is you *have* to have a strong military and be as large as the AI civs to keep them off your back. Strong culture is a must as well. Once you get it figured out, it's actually quite easy to balance the three, IMHO.
Not brand new, but useable. As was the case.
Keep in mind that despite the massive bombing campaign over Germany. War production in the Third Reich INCREASED each year of the war including the first half of 1945.
Trade Leader - Civ3 Democracy Game
This really comes down to what you feel is correct. Firaxis and many players thought otherwise and that is why things were changed. If you are worried about the stealth bombers having such a high miss rate, then just up its bombard value. I currently take a nice stack of artillery and bombers on all my invasions and am quite happy with the results. At times I do get a string of annoying misses, but I also get nice long streaks of utter devastation just as often (have just nicely depopulated the Persion metropolis).
Fear not folks, I've calmed down since this morning. I won't give up on Civ3. Just take a little break until the next patch comes out.
Thanks for the kick in the butt to shake me out of my drunken anger!
Separate names with a comma.