OT - Civ 3 anybody? - Page 2

Cyrien · #11 November 9th, 2001, 05:24 PM

I tend to like it. I havn't played SE4 for a couple of days either.

My biggest gripes are smaller things. The way nukes (as far as I have noticed with the tacticals I used) don't seem to harm units at all. Though they do massive damage to the surrounding tiles.

The way smaller units still seem to have little enough trouble taking out obviously better units. I have had nuclear subs taken out by frigates and ironclads... That just isn't realistic at all.

The AI is the games strongest point. In my first game I wound up being responsible for WWI because of several failed spy operations on a neighboring empire (the aztecs).

To give a bit of a feel for the game I will do a small story of how it went.

See the attachement. It got too large.

The way air units and cruise missiles work is also much better. As is the way that nukes are used and the level of customizability when making your world in the game.

I would say it's a good buy if you liked Civ2.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 09 November 2001).]

Correction to statement above about nukes. They don't suck as much as I thought. I checked a saved game just before I launched the nuke again and about 9 out of the 20 cavalry where killed, while the rest seem to have taken some damage. Hard to tell since the least damaged goes to the top of the stack and he didn't take any damage it seems.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 09 November 2001).]

Phoenix-D · #12 November 9th, 2001, 10:26 PM

"They don't suck as much as I thought. I checked a saved game just before I launched the nuke again and about 9 out of the 20 cavalry where killed, while the rest seem to have taken some damage."

Please tell me that wasn't horse-mounted calvary.

Phoenix-D

Cyrien · #13 November 9th, 2001, 10:50 PM

I would like to not tell you... but it was. :P Pre-industrial age. Better yet... they were killing my tanks.

I can understand some tank killing... but they did it consistently. I had a few that killed a tank without taking any damage at all.

Ok... so a quick run down on some negatives...

Armies are overrated. Stack 3 or 4 units together. They get 2 movement even if before they were all tanks with 3 movement... no special abilities. So an army of nothing but tanks doesn't get the blitz ability (multiple attacks per turn) It just makes the armies less usefull for anything but having lots of em for offense or having a few for defense.

Nukes piss me off. Submarines piss me off. They are both way too weak. A Battleship has a movement of 5. A normal sub has movement of 3. A nuclear sub has movement of 3.

The lower level units still easily defeat things they shouldn't. If I capture a city it destroys ALL or close to all city improvements. Took me a while to notice this since normally I massively bombarded first anyways and that destroyed tons of improvements... but after awhile I noticed that I wasn't bombing anymore and just taking with lotsa tanks and it still came to me with nothing but what my wonders created in all cities.

The customizability all seems to be through the editor they made for it. No easy to change text files or anything. This is good in a way. BUT it isn't at all as versatile as I had hoped. Lots of built in limits and problems and bugs with it. Hopefully some of that is fixed in patches. Even then though it still won't have anything close to the level of customization of SE4.
Maybe I am just spoiled.

Resources. Cool idea. But why don't tanks take iron to build? I know you use steel but iron is a part of steel. Come on. Too many resources in the end game require just a few resources. Some of them at least should continue on. Certainly saltpeter and horses I can see going out of fashion. But iron? The mined resource? I don't see us even today having gotten away from iron.

That was a big edit... I don't like multiple Posts I guess.

Still a good game. Just not the God Game that some have been making it out as. They just got carried away with it being CIV3!!!! FROM SID MEIER!!!!! And others don't like it because they felt let down by the same. OR just don't like that type of game. Like some of the reviews of other strategy games.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 09 November 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 09 November 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 09 November 2001).]

chewy027 · #14 November 10th, 2001, 06:16 AM

I agree with cyrien. Some units should not be beating other units. It's just not plausible. I also agree that iron should remain important til the end, but hey no game is perfect. And your right it is not the greatest game of all time as some have said it will be, but it's still loads of fun to play.

Sinapus · #15 November 10th, 2001, 06:48 AM

quote:
Originally posted by chewy027:
I agree with cyrien. Some units should not be beating other units. It's just not plausible. I also agree that iron should remain important til the end, but hey no game is perfect. And your right it is not the greatest game of all time as some have said it will be, but it's still loads of fun to play.

I tend to look at it as someone smuggled in some anti-tank weapons.

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"