I can't really play IV to be honest. Maybe its just me but it doesn't seem like there's any competition involved. Like its more of a simulation rather than a game. In III I feel like I'm competing with the AI to win, and I always have to look over my shoulder to make sure no one's stabbing me in the back. I like that, its more competitive. I also like the look and feel of III a lot better. Its kind of historical painting-like, whereas in IV its like a cartoony representation of some stuff we heard about in history class.
Oh, Civ3.
- Thread starter sav
- Start date
This is one of the features I miss most from civ3. How many times haven't I looked at the last unit defending a city against an enemy, holding my breath when watching the health bar going into the red and finally stop at the last bar.That was definitely one part of what made the game so exiting.
Came from years long extensive civ4 gaming recently to revisit the seldom played civ3. I know what you are getting at, there is an element of excitement that civ4 lacks, stemming from the fact that when you are nearing the end of a pitched combat, you can do the math in your head: i have a 16% chance to win 2 combat rounds in a row now... yes... now 40%... yes!
No other installment of the series had that exact effect, civ2 and smac/x which had a similar combat system had more hitpoints and didn't show all individual combat rounds.
Even so, I still turned off combat animations completely halfway through the cavalry war in my first civ3 game
. Civ3 domination even on standard maps seems to take very very long even while i am learning to use civ3s(imho awkward) interface somewhat efficiently, and i can't abide 3-5 seconds just to watch a fight the outcome of which i can do nothing about.I just wish there was a notification message about how the fight went like in civ4, when i need to know that it's a bit clumsy to check. I guess once i play levels higher han king with presumably bigger stacks i won't care too much because it's just huge stacks and hammer for hammer kills.
Desertsnow
πr²
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- Messages
- 1,794
I usually turn off combat animations around about the late medieval to middle industrial age. It just takes too long to sit through it all when there are dozens to hundreds of visible units running around, especially when I'm at war, which is usually the case in that phase of the game.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,311
Some of my complaints with Civ4 were addressed in its expansions, or at least mods for its expansions, such as the ability to have artillery fire from a range and not suicidally attack by themselves (Dale's WWII mod provided this, for instance). But, although I did buy the complete version, I've yet to feel the urge to jump back in to Civ4 (to be fair, I haven't played that much Civ3 in the past year either, but there were spurts when I played a lot of Civ3).
Even in Beyond the Sword, some of my annoyances remain. One of the one that irks me is the "must-play-fair" type rules - namely, that you can't trade per-turn items for one-time items (you might declare war the next turn and rip off the AI), and that units are automagically removed from enemy territory if you declare war when you had a right of passage and units in their territory (no one ever betrayed a right of passage in real life). Although these can be exploited in Civ3, there is a huge black mark for doing so that lasts the rest of the game, providing a couterbalance. And the AI will occasionally pull a fast one, too. They aren't masters at betraying rights of passage (usually only swiping one city the cheap way), but it can definitely hurt when you give them Industrial Age technology for thousands of gold paid per-turn, tuning your economy with the expectation of that gold, and they turn right around and DOW you a turn or two later (I still haven't forgiven Montezuma for the last time he did that!). I think the possibility of these nefarious actions makes the game more fun and interesting. Thus I was disappointed to read that Civ5's first patch restored Civ4's automagic-eviction-upon-declaration-of-war "feature".
Perhaps if I had started with Civ1 or Civ2 it would have been different, but I've never understood why some consider Civ3 the "black sheep" of the series, beyond personal favorites and some preference for the designers of Civ2/Civ1 (again, for reasons I don't understand). There's a few technical bugs, sure, and it would be nice if Civ3 didn't have so many hardcoded limits and scaled a bit better with map sizes, but my, the gameplay! It's possible that, having played Civ3 for so long, I won't be able to understand that until I have been away from Civ3 for a long time (and there's no signs that will happen particularly soon).
Combat animations I like to leave on, redlined battles are great. There are times when it gets a bit ridiculous, though. I recall two and a half years ago I landed a few dozen Infantry (some in armies) on a desolate mountain on a hostile continent along with many artillery and a bunch of workers who quickly built a Barricade. The enemy Cavalry arrived a few turns later, and it took 12 minutes for the battles to finish the turn that most of the Cavalry arrived. Despite fairly high casualties, my infantry prevailed, and the enemy's offense was devastated. But sometimes I don't feel like waiting for many long battles.
Even in Beyond the Sword, some of my annoyances remain. One of the one that irks me is the "must-play-fair" type rules - namely, that you can't trade per-turn items for one-time items (you might declare war the next turn and rip off the AI), and that units are automagically removed from enemy territory if you declare war when you had a right of passage and units in their territory (no one ever betrayed a right of passage in real life). Although these can be exploited in Civ3, there is a huge black mark for doing so that lasts the rest of the game, providing a couterbalance. And the AI will occasionally pull a fast one, too. They aren't masters at betraying rights of passage (usually only swiping one city the cheap way), but it can definitely hurt when you give them Industrial Age technology for thousands of gold paid per-turn, tuning your economy with the expectation of that gold, and they turn right around and DOW you a turn or two later (I still haven't forgiven Montezuma for the last time he did that!). I think the possibility of these nefarious actions makes the game more fun and interesting. Thus I was disappointed to read that Civ5's first patch restored Civ4's automagic-eviction-upon-declaration-of-war "feature".
Perhaps if I had started with Civ1 or Civ2 it would have been different, but I've never understood why some consider Civ3 the "black sheep" of the series, beyond personal favorites and some preference for the designers of Civ2/Civ1 (again, for reasons I don't understand). There's a few technical bugs, sure, and it would be nice if Civ3 didn't have so many hardcoded limits and scaled a bit better with map sizes, but my, the gameplay! It's possible that, having played Civ3 for so long, I won't be able to understand that until I have been away from Civ3 for a long time (and there's no signs that will happen particularly soon).
Combat animations I like to leave on, redlined battles are great. There are times when it gets a bit ridiculous, though. I recall two and a half years ago I landed a few dozen Infantry (some in armies) on a desolate mountain on a hostile continent along with many artillery and a bunch of workers who quickly built a Barricade. The enemy Cavalry arrived a few turns later, and it took 12 minutes for the battles to finish the turn that most of the Cavalry arrived. Despite fairly high casualties, my infantry prevailed, and the enemy's offense was devastated. But sometimes I don't feel like waiting for many long battles.
ChaosArbiter
King
Oh, I remembered one other awesome thing Civ2 had that I (kind of) wish 3 had kept: the ability to hire an AI to go to war with another AI. Not an alliance - you didn't even have to be at war or go to war with the third AI - but simply paying one civ to declare war on another. IIRC, everyone knew that you were the instigator, but it would have been fun if they'd kept it in.
It's all about this. I admit my experiences with Civs 4&5 are very short but they just don't have that easy-to-play appeal for me.
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
I like both III and IV - they are very different.
IV is probably more complicated - in III, there really are "right" strategies.
What kind of amazes me is that the interface is always an issue on a new release, and it's always the same complaints - not enough information, hard to use...
why is it that Firaxis can't figure this out beforehand?
IV is probably more complicated - in III, there really are "right" strategies.
What kind of amazes me is that the interface is always an issue on a new release, and it's always the same complaints - not enough information, hard to use...
why is it that Firaxis can't figure this out beforehand?
ChaosArbiter
King
Probably they're testing the interface, and *they* don't have problems with it (usually because they've been working with it forever and know how to use it), so they don't realize/expect how difficult others will find it. And really, I've never had complaints about interface on any game I've played regardless of system, so I don't really get what people are talking about anyway.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,311
This, definitely...
This, not so much!
Agreed. If you helped make something or have been using it for a long time, it's almost second-nature to know how to use it. Whereas if you're new to it, the same interface can seem entirely nonsensical.
I rarely have complaints about interfaces when a game comes out, either, though. Sometimes I think of things that would be nice after I've played the game a long time (like telling all units to rebase at once in Civ3), or realize non-obvious UI features that are really useful only after a good amount of play, but I don't miss these things that I don't know about early on. The only times when I've had complaints about an interface are when the actual control mechanism is messed up significantly (usually in console to PC ports of racing games), or when the interface is obviously copied over from a console (such as when you have to use keys to scroll through a number of menus rather than just having a tab bar and control by mouse). The Civ series isn't at risk for either of these.
Civ3 has a kind of playfullness and 'anything goes' approach to the game that was really quite awesome.
ROP rapes, breaking deals, but also the fact that you can put together loan packages to the AI. Give them 200 gold upfront so they could uprade NOW and get GPT back over 20 turns plus a bit of interest.
That stuff was fun.
I kept saying in the Civ4 Beta they need to remember stuff like that. But the 'play fair' people won out. They didn't want those glaring 'exploits' left in.
When in fact, the worst exploit of Civ3 wasn't the ROP RAPES (having the AI not trust you again after is penalty enough) it's the code that allowed players to juggle large armies around the map by emptying out their cities and bouncing that army between the two.
They fixed that in Civ4, but someohow felt all the other stuff had to go too. I was trying to explain this to a Civ4 player and he just didn't understand. He couldn't. They think BTS is the best Civ out there (in many ways it is) but from a purely 'fun' aspect, Civ3 has a lot going for it. Pangea maps, Huge 16 Civs were amazing as far as politics went.
I don't think a Civ game has emulated it since.
ROP rapes, breaking deals, but also the fact that you can put together loan packages to the AI. Give them 200 gold upfront so they could uprade NOW and get GPT back over 20 turns plus a bit of interest.
That stuff was fun.
I kept saying in the Civ4 Beta they need to remember stuff like that. But the 'play fair' people won out. They didn't want those glaring 'exploits' left in.
When in fact, the worst exploit of Civ3 wasn't the ROP RAPES (having the AI not trust you again after is penalty enough) it's the code that allowed players to juggle large armies around the map by emptying out their cities and bouncing that army between the two.
They fixed that in Civ4, but someohow felt all the other stuff had to go too. I was trying to explain this to a Civ4 player and he just didn't understand. He couldn't. They think BTS is the best Civ out there (in many ways it is) but from a purely 'fun' aspect, Civ3 has a lot going for it. Pangea maps, Huge 16 Civs were amazing as far as politics went.
I don't think a Civ game has emulated it since.
Meteor Man
Cylindropuntia imbricata
My gosh. I find myself agreeing with EVERY aspect you just stated dexters.
I'm just kinda sad that so many people are abandoning the Civ 3 forums.
Now only a couple of regulars remain: me, vmxa, Wyrm, Goldfool, Pounder, Shiro, Kyriakos, Moff Jerjerrod, General 666 just to name a few. And I see them all the time. Quint, you too, but I don't see you as much anymore. It's just sad how many people are leaving while there's still so much modding left in Civ 3! As for me, I'll always stay a Civ 3 player, even if I try and like Civ 5.
(EDIT: don't be offended if a don't have your name up there, these were off the top of my head)
I'm just kinda sad that so many people are abandoning the Civ 3 forums.
Now only a couple of regulars remain: me, vmxa, Wyrm, Goldfool, Pounder, Shiro, Kyriakos, Moff Jerjerrod, General 666 just to name a few. And I see them all the time. Quint, you too, but I don't see you as much anymore. It's just sad how many people are leaving while there's still so much modding left in Civ 3! As for me, I'll always stay a Civ 3 player, even if I try and like Civ 5.(EDIT: don't be offended if a don't have your name up there, these were off the top of my head)
ChaosArbiter
King
... Okay, Civ3 has some good music, but there are better. The list explodes if you add console games.
The Mad Russian
Armchair Dictator
I've had CIV 3 since it's release, and if I'm not doing my chess 4 or 5 hours a day, I'm playing C3. I stayed away from CIV IV because of the reviews and comments that I heard about it and just recently D/L'd the CiV demo. I liked the look of it, but not the feel. After years of III and soooo many nights of lost sleep because of "One more turn syndrome," I'm staying with 3. I'm on the borderline of requirements for CiV, so that helps as well keeping me grounded in III. It's the only true "video game" that I play these days
I still play III. To me, it keep being the best game of the series, despite its outdated graphics.
Since IV, all the simplicity was gone. The "one more turn" thing disappeared. They really destroyed the essence of the game.
Civ III with modern graphics would be the perfect strategy game - maybe we should start a petition asking Firaxis to do it, what do you think?
Since IV, all the simplicity was gone. The "one more turn" thing disappeared. They really destroyed the essence of the game.
Civ III with modern graphics would be the perfect strategy game - maybe we should start a petition asking Firaxis to do it, what do you think?
Sparthage
Fighting Tyranny
Add modern graphics and fix the AI army and great scientist bugs, I agree.Civ III with modern graphics would be the perfect strategy game - maybe we should start a petition asking Firaxis to do it, what do you think?
Meteor Man
Cylindropuntia imbricata
Except that it wouldn't happen, because they'll just say they already did that with Civ5. 
But that would be the perfect game.
But that would be the perfect game.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,311
So true. I missed these things back when I played Civ4, and the "play fair mandate" was one of my top complaints with Civ4. It's not like the AI always played fair with these deals, either (looking at you, Montezuma), even if it could have been more cutthroat.
I'm just kinda sad that so many people are abandoning the Civ 3 forums.
(EDIT: don't be offended if a don't have your name up there, these were off the top of my head)
Not offended at all. It is true that there aren't tons of regulars, but we occasionally have newcomers too, just not as many as Civ4 or Civ5. Probably in part because Civ3's still selling fairly well, at least in digital form.
As for myself, I'm not sure if I'm here as much as I used to be, but I'm definitely not going anywhere soon. Most of my Civ time these days is work on the cross-platform editor, but I also played and submitted a couple games to the Hall of Fame for the first time ever earlier this month. Figure it's not too late to make a run at a (low-ranked) Quartermaster, especially since my first submission was an Emperor game (second was a Chieftan to get that done, and Chieftain seems a whole lot less exciting than it used to!). So a lot of non-online Civ stuff. I do keep mostly up-to-date on the main C&C forum, and occasionally read this one.
I still play III. To me, it keep being the best game of the series, despite its outdated graphics.
Since IV, all the simplicity was gone. The "one more turn" thing disappeared. They really destroyed the essence of the game.
Civ III with modern graphics would be the perfect strategy game - maybe we should start a petition asking Firaxis to do it, what do you think?
I actually much prefer Civ3's graphics to Civ4's (refined 2D versus coarse 3D IMO), but I'll give that it would be nice to be able to have larger graphics now that display resolutions are typically much higher than they were in 2001. It's amazing really how much detail some of our top graphics artists can put into such tiny models and PCX's (more than 254 colors for one PCX would also be nice). So I agree, some modernization would be nice, but personally I don't find 3D has really done much for turn-based strategy gaming (Civ in particular, M2TW wasn't bad), and it adds a ton to system requirements and, I would suspect, the amount of work necessary to produce new graphics of equal quality to what can be done with Civ3-style 2D.
Bugfixes definitely would be a big plus, and those are two of the top ones. I actually noticed the science age one in game for the first time this month, when I decided to start a science age just to see if I had the bug. Sure enough, there it was!
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
I'm a newcomer who loves Civ 3 and will never abandon this forum, the whole reason I came here is to read, comment on and, write Civ 3 stories and tales, and the release of Civ V. I have always thought there was something wrong with Civ 4, it doesn't feel right. In Civ III I feel like I see the whole picture, in Civ 4 the map seems to be zoomed in, and combat feels very random, in civ 3 it is easier to keep track of enemies in your line of sight.
O, Civ 4 you claim to be the best (at least before Civ 5) apparently it has the one more turn addiction (actually after an hour or 2 I am tired of this game), oh and it talks about better modding, how do you use python, xml, etc. Civ 3 has an easy to find CIV 3 EDIT, why can't they have a freakin' civ 4 or 5 edit thats EASY TO FIND.
Civ 5, however is a good game, while it never will be as good as 3 its still an addictingly fun game
nevertheless, now that there is a Civ V we're all old
O, Civ 4 you claim to be the best (at least before Civ 5) apparently it has the one more turn addiction (actually after an hour or 2 I am tired of this game), oh and it talks about better modding, how do you use python, xml, etc. Civ 3 has an easy to find CIV 3 EDIT, why can't they have a freakin' civ 4 or 5 edit thats EASY TO FIND.
Civ 5, however is a good game, while it never will be as good as 3 its still an addictingly fun game
nevertheless, now that there is a Civ V we're all old
ThERat
Deity
I think there are still a number of people playing civ 3 for various reasons. Each new iteration of civilization gets me to upgrade my computer and the result is an even better civ 3 experience.
Turn times get faster and the game plays smooth even on huge map settings (my favorite).
If I had a wish list for civ 3 it would be getting rid of a few bugs (e.g science GA), a map that can be zoomed in with current graphics (I still find civ 3 graphics far superior to 3d civ 4/5, though civ 5 is quite good actually). Maybe the civ 3 code for the community for the ultimate modding experience. All won't happen, but I still find my pleasure playing civ 3.
Turn times get faster and the game plays smooth even on huge map settings (my favorite).
If I had a wish list for civ 3 it would be getting rid of a few bugs (e.g science GA), a map that can be zoomed in with current graphics (I still find civ 3 graphics far superior to 3d civ 4/5, though civ 5 is quite good actually). Maybe the civ 3 code for the community for the ultimate modding experience. All won't happen, but I still find my pleasure playing civ 3.
Similar threads
