Why did the passage of time change from Civ1-Civ3?

stwils

Emperor
Joined
Apr 5, 2001
Messages
1,151
Location
Georgia, USA
This is interesting. I found SirPleb's post in Civ3 Creation and Customization forum "How many turns from 4000BC until 2050 AD?" (Answer 540)

His chart for example shows:
4000BC to 2750BC - 50 years/turn for 25 turns

In Civ1 the time passage is different:
4000BC to 1000AD - 20 years/turn for 250 turns

(You can find both complete charts on Civ1 forum under "How many turns in a game?")

In total there are 550 turns in Civ1 (give or take a bit depending on your difficulty level.)

So both Civ1 and Civ3 have approximately 550 turns a game.

My question is this. The early game in Civ1 goes for 250 turns at 20 years per turn whereas the early game in Civ3 starts right out moving turns at 50 years each. Why? Why the slower beginning in Civ1?

stwils
 
my guess (and it's a pure guess) is that the change is meant to reflect that things happen more slowly in ancient times.

Also, have longer time periods early changes the way that culture is accumulated, as well.
 
But why would time (turns) pass more slowly in ancient times in Civ 1 than in Civ3? Lots and lots of turns at 20 years each (Civ1) as opposed to Civ3's passage of turns at 50 years each. Why would ancient times pass more rapidly in Civ3?

Just wondering.:confused:

stwils
 
The years are really irrelevant in civ and civ2. They are mostly irrelevant for Civ3 except for the 1000 year doubling rule for cultural improvements.

Except for the "feel" of it, having a year instead of turn number doesn't really matter. After all, we have gunpowder in the BC s and spaceships in 900AD. It's fun to think you can control history's outcome and make it much different than what really occured and having a year instead of a turn number adds to the atmosphere of the epic. Have fun!
 
Marsden said:
Except for the "feel" of it, having a year instead of turn number doesn't really matter. After all, we have gunpowder in the BC s and spaceships in 900AD.
DaveMcW launched a spaceship in 540 AD (or was it 570 AD?)...

I have no answer to the question. But I think the beggining is too fast in Civ3, and I don't like the idea of having to wait 500 years for a warrior. I modded most of my games and there are shorter turns at the beggining.

Also, I would hate to have turns instead of years, it's so much more fun with years!
 
Marsden said:
The years are really irrelevant in civ and civ2. They are mostly irrelevant for Civ3 except for the 1000 year doubling rule for cultural improvements.
The plague also counts the years not the turns... and i think there was another thing ... :hmm:
 
Really? I thought it counts turns. This means that in a game where you mod the years you can get a score a lot bigger than in a normal game?
 
IIRC Civ2 time passage in the ancient era was based on difficulty level. Higher difficulty = faster time passage. Overall, there were fewer total turns in a Deity game than in a Chieftain game. In Civ2, there was no such thing as a points or score victory. You had to build the spaceship or conquer the world before 2020 to win. Running out of time constituted a draw.
 
How does the tourist attraction work? When do you start getting what bonuses?

never mind. It's in the civilopedia.

in case anyone wants to know and doesn't have the civilopedia up:

after 1000 years, you start getting bonus commerce:

1000 - 2
1501 - 4
1751 - 6
1876 - 8
2001 - 10
2251 - 12
2501 - 14
 
Back
Top Bottom