Summary of the IGN Preview

[joycem10]

Jeff: I agree with you on the conquistadores. imagine pillaging all resources and capturing all workers on the first turn of the war, with units that were outside enemy territory when the war beagn. no rep hit and you basically hamstring the enemy civ.

 

[Reboot]

Originally posted by croald


That's because a real SETI Great Wonder hasn't been built
yet in our world.

Er... isn't there at least a couple of radio telescopes hunting for Alien transmissions already? The one in CivIII was named after the actual SETI located somewhere in the South America... Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Sim_One]

I think there was a at least one SETI in the movie "Contact" and there was also one in "Indepedence Day". So I think they have already been built so I'm not sure what you mean by "real" SETI.

 

[Gareeth]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
SETI did that in Civ2, but in Civ3, it raises the science in it's home city by 50%.

Weakened wonders kind of annoy me, but really, what on earth has SETI done for us anyway?

Well it gives you a really cool screen saver for your computer for one.

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by S1m0ne
I think there was a at least one SETI in the movie "Contact" and there was also one in "Indepedence Day". So I think they have already been built so I'm not sure what you mean by "real" SETI.

The real SETI is an on-going world-wide program. You can participate in it if you want by having your computer analysing a share of the data when you're not using it for something else.

http://www.seti.org/
http://www.mirc.co.uk/seti.html
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/

 

[Reboot]

Originally posted by Gareeth

Weakened wonders kind of annoy me, but really, what on earth has SETI done for us anyway?

Well it gives you a really cool screen saver for your computer for one.

For another, it shows that we can pour in resources into a project that promises and delivers very little in the short-term because we want to believe.

 

[thestonesfan]

"It was the Ottomans who finally conquered Constantinople, and prior to that, conquered large tracts of the Byzantine empire, on both sides of the Bosporus. The Seljuks were crushed by the Mongols, whereas the Ottomans managed to survive and even prosper in its shadow.

I don't think the Seljuks drove off the Crusaders, more like the local emirates and Saladin (who was Kurdish) and also the Fatimids of Egypt. "

I'm not saying that the Ottomans weren't successful and influential, just that in Turkish history, they haven't been head and shoulders above everyone else, so why not call the civ the Turks?

 

[thestonesfan]

And whoever said that the Islamic world is completely Arabic, that is way off the mark. What about nearly all of Indonesia?

 

[Reboot]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
And whoever said that the Islamic world is completely Arabic, that is way off the mark. What about nearly all of Indonesia?

Yup, that too. That's why I was wondering what was meant by the "Islamic Empire". The "Arab Empire" would be a better term in CivIII context, methinks.

 

[Novaya Havoc]

Originally posted by thestonesfan

I'm not saying that the Ottomans weren't successful and influential, just that in Turkish history, they haven't been head and shoulders above everyone else, so why not call the civ the Turks?

Why the Babylonians and not the Assyrians? Why the Russians and not the Ukrainians?

Ottomans are representative of the Turkish peoples. The Ottoman Empire is a larger state than contemporary Turkey, and makes for a better historical contrast with the other historical civs: Russia, England, China, and so on. Sure, there was Muscovy and Kievian Rus, and the Whu and Zhou and Ming empires and all of that, but Russia and China are very representative of the culture and it generally.

Personally I would rather play as the Ottoman Empire rather than "the Turks." One thing about PTW that really irks me is that the new civs are more just a group of similar people rather than palpable state societies: the "Celts," "Vikings," "Arabs," and "Mongols." You can say Isabella of Spain, Osman of the Ottoman Empire, Carthage, and Korea, but you cannot do the same for the other cultures.

I was fine with the Aztecs not having a state name, but the Iroqois lack of a name always irked me. It's tough to imagine the "Celts" thriving for generations and throughout the ages to never have a culture name. Sure, you can attach contemporary titles to their cultures -- Ireland, Scandinavia, Arabia, Mongolia -- but it seems more like a stretch than an empire.

Yeah, I say I like the Ottoman Empire over "Turks."

-Ben

 

[GuangRong]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
And whoever said that the Islamic world is completely Arabic, that is way off the mark. What about nearly all of Indonesia?

Its true,
By Arabic , he don't meant the present day Middle -eastern states,but the Orignal Arab empire founded enitrely by Muslims and represent pretty mcuch the whole Islamic world while it exits..

 

[thestonesfan]

Each to his own. But if you say it bugs you if a civ doesn't have a state name, then why prefer Ottomans over Turks? Turkey is a better name than Ottomania or something.

Anyway, why can't Turks be representative over the Turkish people? It makes sense to me. There is a lot more to Turkish history than the Ottomans.

You could make a good case for having the Assyrians instead of the Babylonians, but really, you could have both. But the Russians were never known as the Ukrainians. When the Kievian Rus Kingdom splintered, three groups were formed, the Russians, Belorussians, and Ukrainians. But the Ukrainians never achieved regional dominance as the Russians did.

 

[Dio_Time2Go]

May I look into my crystal ball for just a moment?


Prediction 1: I assume that the Spanish Conquistador's ability "treats all terrain as roads" probably means "Treats all friendly and unoccupied terrain as roads"

You can't move nine spaces into enemy territory. Not unless there's acid in the Firaxis watercooler.

Prediction 2: Numidian mercenary is a 2/3/1 "spearmen that requires less resources"

This means that a) the Numidian "spearman" is not a spearman at all, just a better attacking ironless Pikeman, or b) it actually does replace the spearman but is more expensive. Probably around thirty shields or so. This is going to slow the carthinigans down in the early game for what amounts to a reverse ironless swordsman. Maybe the GA will help them build mercs faster.

Prediction 3: The berserks amphibius assault ability is going to seem a little more balanced when you consider: a) a 6/2/1 replacement for a 4/1/1 unit is going to be considerably more expensive. b) Who's amphibius assaulting from a caravel? Amphibius assalt is a weak ability when you're using boats that carry three, move three, and can't move into ocean squares. Sure, you could probably take a city, but what civ isn't going to gang rape your little bearded raiding party with their knights?

Prediction 4: A million campers extinguish their fires, search the plot for beer cans and try to be home at a decent hour so they can be up for work. Eight new civilizations, only one with a defensive UU, and most with sacrificed defensive values in order to save on cost. This is no longer a game for the meek. Campers, go home.

Prediction 5: Holy ****! Lotto numbers...


I love my crystal ball.

 

[warpstorm]

Prediction 1 - "Treat all terrain as roads" means all terrain. Explorers already use this flag and it includes enemy terrain. Expect to see 6 movement Conquistadors.

Prediction 2 - You're probably right.

Prediction 3 - A few caravels doing coastal raiding will be killer. They can attack your coastal cities with impunity using the Amphibious Assault. While caravels may be weak, they are better than the non-existent navies that most people build. The Vikings don't have to land to take the coastal cities at all. How are your knights going to do anything to them. If I played the Vikings the Great Lighthouse would be high on my list of wonders.

Prediction 4 - Yup

Predicition 5 - Please tell us the numbers.