Roleplaying Civ3

[EQandcivfanatic]

I've noticed that everyone always talks about how best to beat the AI, how ways are better than others, but does anyone actually roleplay the game? As a perfect example, once you get to the Industrial Age do you rush to Replacable Parts? Or do you research what REALLY came first? I find it kind of dumb and boring to rush to a tech to win. Why not play the game with at least a ounce of roleplay. LEt's see how many of your civ3 players actually enjoy the game.

 

[effb]

The problem is, if you roleplay, you lose. And losing isn't fun.

 

[DaveMcW]

Civ3 is marketed as a strategy game, not a roleplaying game. If you enjoy being historically correct go ahead, but it's certainly not the only way to enjoy the game.

Why are you asking this in the strategy forum anyway?

 

[Bismarck]

I roleplay -- to a limited extent. I don't use "strategies" such as ping-pong or ROP rape (since a real-life leader would never permit even the staunchest ally to march its troops through his territory for no obvious purpose). I build navies even though they're not very useful. I fortify troops on my border even when there's no AI threat and the presence of RR's makes it unnecessary. And so forth.

However, I play on Emperor and in some case it's just not viable to roleplay (and still hope to win). So I'll use my "prescience" freely (e.g., wait for Tanks before beginning wars of conquest; consciously aim for the Nationalism slingshot; etc.).

Much of the "roleplaying" is done inside my head, however. I'll imagine/visualize the events in the sweep of history as they unravel during the game.

 

[Moonsinger]

I usually view the AIs and my citizens as they are people in real life. Therefore, it's very easy to predict their behaviors. I think there is always a little bit of role play in all my game.

 

[Hellfire]

Interesting thread.

I'm with Bismarck, the roleplaying is in my head. When I play, I tend to imagine myself there and I am immersed in the game, but I can't NOT be affected by the fact that I know so much about what's going to happen that I can't get too far into it. Some problems I have are waiting a turn or two for a killer unit so that I can make it before starting a war, starting shields for a palace so that I can build a wonder in about ten turns or so but don't have the tech yet (or some variant of that), and the ever popular free tech selection and tech rushing.

It would be fine an dandy to try to pretend you didn't know this, but when the results of knowing this improve your changes 1000% percent and the game is designed in a way that you play like YOU KNOW then it becomes completely unviable. You could roleplay on regent that nationalism came before replaceable parts, but its too damn tempting not to do it on deity when the computer is kicking your ass 5 out of 6 games.

And I do take exception to the idea that in order to enjoy the game you have to "roleplay" it. This isn't Everquest where a 13 year old goes and kills 35 people for the joy of pissing them off and ruining other people's entertainment. This is civ3, and some of us still play single player which is at home, in my underwear, where I'm not hurting anyone but the 1's and 0's being conquered on my hard drive. I can play this how I like, enjoy it how I like and roleplay it how I like.

However, more roleplaying elements are a good suggestion. I'd like the game to be designed around a feature where you can disable the tech picker and still do reasonably well, like in Alpha Centauri.

 

[anonymous4401]

I roleplay, trying to keep all my tech branches at the same level. Also, I find ways to use old units, and build "useless" units when the easy alternative is available. For instance, I've used my legionaries from the ancient age all the way to the end of medieval. Or building Longbowmen and Medieval Infantry even though Knights are readily available. Or using Infantry + Artillery tactics even when you have tanks. However, the whole point of Civ III is to remake history, not mimic it.

 

[anarres]

I haven't really roleplayed before. I don't use exploits at all, and I consider anything that the AI can't do or is not in the spirit of the game an exploit.

Having said this, I am tempted to start playing more realisticly and not assming tec paths, etc. One thing I thought of for techs is rolling a die to choose which one...

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I 'role-play' a bit, sort of, in my PBEM game(s), as the leader of a nation, esp in dealings with other human nations. But only a little...

 

[greenie]

Civ3 isn't meant to be real for a very good reason.

Take real life for example. DO all cities in the world have an active army occupying it?

There's no Mech Inf where I live, just some riflemen and Infantry if I'm lucky. The Navy consist of 3 minesweepers and light cruisers, and our Airforce is a couple of Orions used mainly in humanitarian missions. The only real kind of troops we have are 20 SAS Elite special services troops.....for the entire country.

I have no jet fighters on Air superiority ready to shoot everything down. My country can't build Nuclear weapons. Nor can many countries around the world.

Plus the world I live in, we haven't discovered the Cure for Cancer yet

I guess the point I'm making is that the path to technology and units is how you want to play it in the game.... but the game is no way meant to relfect real life fully. Maybe just a little

 

[donderwolkje]

I do roleplay alot.

But maybe not in the way you meant (rushing for replacable parts). But e.g. if i am playing the Egyptians, how can i be their true leader without building the pyramids. It's just unthinkable.

I really do identify with my people, i feel their pain when they are unhappy, i never rush build in despostim (well maybe i do, but then only in cities where the people weren't very nice to me. i also never raze or bomb down enemy cities! there are human beings living there! You can't kill them! it's wrong
snif snif

for that matter i never wage war (regent level), i even changed my playing style from: you-attack-me-i-wipe-you-out to you-attack-me-i-take-a-few-cities-untill-you're-ready-for peace.

but then everyone plays the way he enjoys civ the most. i really do get very angry if i lose one of my cities or a glorious knight that won a lot of battles for and was cowardly struck down when it was wounded
snif snif

"remake history, not mimic it"

 

[Zachriel]

Role-playing the Leader of a Civilization, as in "I, Queen of the Nile, demand that Xerxes remove his troops."

Role-playing as a Nation, "England will triumph over the Mongol Hordes, even if we have to fight them on the Plains of London."

Role-playing as a military unit, "Rumm. Rumm. Blam! Blam!"

Role-playing as a Civ accountant, "I count 22 Shields, but if I put that Entertainer back to work, and increase Luxuries by 10%, and trade the Dye, then I can increase that to 23 Shields. That's an increase of more than 4.5%! The Emperor will be so pleased."

Someone who claims they don't role-play, "That Spearman beat my Tank! That's not possible."

Civ3 can be played on many levels, and all are valid. If you want to pretend your Fighter is real and go "Drat you, Red Baron!" Who's to say otherwise? If you prefer, to count every Shield and adjust every Citizen manually, treating the game as a giant mathematical puzzle, who's to say that it's wrong? And if somebody wants to role-play in his underwear, well, nevermind.

 

[col]

Different strokes for different folks ...

... but it is fun to play a little differently sometimes otherwise it can just be like playing the same game over and over. I roleplay especially in PBEM communications. Its more fun if all players play a little bit in role.

 

[Chieftess]

It depends on how you define roleplaying. (don't even think about the Civ3 Demogame RPG. ). The Civ3 Demogame is (or was anyway...) a roleplaying experience. It's not just:

"The Indians have declared war on us! Their war elephants took a few cities and we'll take it to the forums!".

It's more like interacting with the cities, and where you "live" in the demogame. When India invaded, we had this thing like "100g for every tusk from a War Elephant!". Even in strategies, there's role playing.

 

[Dr. Dr. Doktor]

I usually go after wonder(s) which were actually built by the civ played - if applicable.

The same with the strategy to victory sought after.

With the French, Greeks, Babylonians and Egyptians I try for cultural victory

With Germans, Americans and Russians it is space race

The Romans and Mongols and English total conquest and so on.

This makes the game more difficult and more fun I think.

 

[dguichar]

Just 4 words

You can't roleplay alone...

if so you're delusing.

It requires interaction between characters... played by real persons. Computers have only adventure (roleplay-like) games.

Keep civilized

David

 

[Illustrious]

Originally posted by dguichar
Just 4 words

You can't roleplay alone...

if so you're delusing.

It requires interaction between characters... played by real persons. Computers have only adventure (roleplay-like) games.

Keep civilized

David

Of course you can roleplay alone. Have you never seen a one-person play at the theatre? Roleplaying is sometimes about interacting with other characters, but it's often about interacting with the world, and with your emotional response to the world.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by dguichar
Just 4 words

You can't roleplay alone...

if so you're delusing.

May I remind you of the name of this site, Civ Fanatics. You join a forum of fanatics, then note that they are delusional. Perhaps you meant to post your comments on the Psychology Forum?

(Just kidding. )

 

[Pembroke]

I don't seek historical accuracy, because I simply don't see civ as a replay of history.

I do interpret the game as a story in my mind, though. If that counts as roleplaying, then yes, which is also how I voted.

I know it's just a mindless computer executing code and giving you a faked appearance of some intelligence, but while the game lasts there's a fictional world inhabited by the German, Japanese, American and other tribes who live, build, fight, and die there.

If Bismarck tries to blackmail me I will remember it and it certainly will affect my later decisions as the ruler of a nation. Afterall, we have been insulted. As a game my reaction doesn't make any sense. Bismarck the computer object doesn't care about how I feel or what will happen to "him" or about anything else for that matter and a wish to get even can make winning more difficult for me. However, if you think of it as a story about a fictional world then these kind of things are very appropriate.

I try to play "in character". Whether I "win" or not.

 

[cromagnon]

I don't.

But for some fun, check out Aeson's GOTM15 Early submission; it's hilarious!

I'd provide a link, but I don't want to be Crackered down upon.