Nostalgic for the old civ 2 forums and fed up with Civ 3

[Rushton]

When I think of the fun I had with Civ 2 and the Civ 2 forums I get all nostalgic.

A fantastic game, never crashed for me. The gameplay was marvellous and the banter on the forums great. For example I found out that if you sent 2 diplomats instead of one they coudn´t be expelled. Then I was able to win on Deity! Best of all I liked the guy who told us that if you "investigate city" you can change the name (to for example, THE ZULUS STINK). Marvellous!

But Civ 3 isn´t like that I wonder why? Many of the threads are about complaints about the game. Having installed all the various patches and played for months I can say this I really enjoy playing the game BUT IT ISN`T A QUESTION OF IF YOU GET FED UP BUTWHEN!

I don´t like complaining too much but by compairing this to civ 2 and the way I loved that I feel justified in doing so. In summary:

1) Original version. Flawed in numerous ways. Adversely effected gameplay. Late game turns take over 10 minutes on huge worlds!

2) 1.16 best version but still flawed. Had one crash problem.

3) 1.17 ****ed up the trade system making the game unplayable.

4) 1.21. Crashed for me and I can´t complete a game.

I know I am now sounding like Zouave but I don´t remember anyone complaining like this over civ 2.

I feel better for having got this off my chest so I wont declare Civ 3 a lemon......yet

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Rushton, I feel with you! But I think one of the major problems is that Civ3 is far more complex than 2.

Keep going, try some modding, and you WILL love Civ3, too. On the other hand, I still play Civ2, too.

 

[Rushton]

You are right Killer. It just annoys me when I play a whole week and then the game crashes because I am playing with a new patch that should make the game better

I just loved that "change name" thing in civ 2[dance]

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Rushton
You are right Killer. It just annoys me when I play a whole week and then the game crashes because I am playing with a new patch that should make the game better

I just loved that "change name" thing in civ 2[dance]

I'd go through the roof! But see it this way: i have to go to the office to play, because the game will not run on my PC at home - any version, and OS I install on it, any patch for the OS...... Win95, 98, XP, they all don't do it

And it WAS funny to rename

 

[dunk]

Did you have to investigate the city to rename it? I seem to remember being able to do it from the outside. Right click?

 

[Maple]

I enjoyed naming the cities to "ALEX ROOLZ" and "ALEX ROOLZ2." I didn't know we could right click and do it, I think it we had to use investigate city.

 

[marshal zhukov]

Please, Civ2 is nothing compared to Civ3
Civ2 AIs were so horrible that I had never lost a war to them.

In Civ2, there were no real borders
The interface was horrible
You could destroy an entire AI in one single turn
No resources
Civ2 will be seen as nothing more than an evolutionary step. So will CIV3 when it time comes.

No nostalgia for me , in reality I regret all the time that devoted for Civ2 .

 

[Propaganda]

Civ II was good, but I liked Alpha Centauri better.

It contained more features, and played much better than Civ II. The futuristic setting was a bit of a turn off to me, however, as I was looking for a historically-based game, like Civ II.

I'm still hoping someone will release an Earth WWII scenario for AC.

That would make my day!

 

[Portuguese]

CIV3 will become better. Till then: mod and get fun of it
(don't over do it in your favour...)

 

[Zouave]

Nostalgic for the old civ 2 forums and fed up with Civ 3
When I think of the fun I had with Civ 2 and the Civ 2 forums I get all nostalgic.

A fantastic game, never crashed for me.

I was posting many months ago that Civ 2 had legs (still does) for well over five years. Civ 3's legs will start to go before the end of 2002. If not sooner.

I never got that much into SMAC as it obviously was not historical.

Thank heavens Civ 2 and all the scenarios are still on this PC waiting.

 

[Cade Foster]

civ 3 rules if you want to keep lving in the past playing old games fine by me but quit crying about how civ 3 is so flawed and crappy. if u dont like civ 3 u can suck it too

 

[Dynamic Cow]

ahhh, the memories... i almost reconsider clicking the button above civIII one of these days. but not after ive done some serious tweaking to the unit stats just to see what happens. (hmm, 24-1 war elephants, 1-1 warriors...)

 

[Higher Game]

Alpha Centauri owns all. You are playing a game for the wrong reason if you want it to be historic. AC had better game balance, and a true need for combined arms. The factions all had a unique differenent feel. Playing Rome in Civ 3 feels the same as playing China. It just isn't as cool as Alpha Centauri. However...

The Double your Pleasure mod for Civ 3 is really fun. I would highly recommend it. Civ 3 with some mods can actually stand up to AC, but only to the people that hate sci fi. I love sci fi and I still think AC is the best, but Civ 3 with some good mods will be great.

As for Civ 2...

The AI was stupid.
You made wonders with caravans.
There are no resources.
You must put 90% effort into science.
Multiplayer sucked.
There are no borders.
You can use your opponent's railroads to rush the capitol and its wonders.

Multipayer in Civ 3 will at least be balanced. Civ 3 truly is a step above Civ 2, but AC had cooler options (like the government options. You can create and customize your own unique government.)

Overall, Civ 3 will be remembered as the next great Civ. But certainly not the greatest turn based game ever.

 

[Portuguese]

Originally posted by Higher Game
As for Civ 2...

The AI was stupid.
You made wonders with caravans.
There are no resources.
You must put 90% effort into science.
Multiplayer sucked.
There are no borders.
You can use your opponent's railroads to rush the capitol and its wonders.

Multipayer in Civ 3 will at least be balanced. Civ 3 truly is a step above Civ 2, but AC had cooler options (like the government options. You can create and customize your own unique government.)

Overall, Civ 3 will be remembered as the next great Civ. But certainly not the greatest turn based game ever.

People are forgetting the bugs in CIV2... lack of memory!!!

-In CIV2, reputation didn't stop all the AIs to make pacts against you (not MPPs... they were AGAINST you, no matter you never atack anyone!)
-Wonders were easy to build in a single city, by a single civ, just with camels
-Some were too good to be real (Michael Angelo's chappel in Fundamentalism, SETI program in ALL cities, Leonardo's Workshop,...)
-Fundamentalism made deighty easy as warlord
-you could build the newest armies wherever you want
-you couldn't draft
-There were no resources to make people happy
-Engineers became veterans against late units
-Warriors sunk Battleships (!)
-There were no borders, so cities could be builded inside your territory by AIs
-Units could only become veterans...
-Armies were not possible
-Negotiations were primitive
-Global warmth caused pop to reduce from 100 millions to 1 million
-ICBMs didn't exist
-Your advisors were dump
-you could only win military
-...

CIV2 is the worst of them: try CIV1, or mod CIV3 to have the lattest game experience!