PDA

View Full Version : Civ 3



E-FORCE
03-31-2002, 09:19 PM
I been playing this game a lot lately, especially during Spring Break. A lot of improvements changing much of the gameplay from what it was in Civ 2. The only thing that is a drawback is the cheating done by the computer in order to screw you over such as say you destroy a civ early in the game, they end up coming back with one or two cities far away from you. Otherwise great game.

Daarkseid
03-31-2002, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by E-FORCE
I been playing this game a lot lately, especially during Spring Break. A lot of improvements changing much of the gameplay from what it was in Civ 2. The only thing that is a drawback is the cheating done by the computer in order to screw you over such as say you destroy a civ early in the game, they end up coming back with one or two cities far away from you. Otherwise great game.

I have this game, and would gladly play it, if it weren't for the fact my monitor(a plug and play) isn't properly installed(needs drivers anyway), and whenever I try to run Civ3, the screen goes blank. Last time I got to play it was when I switched this monitor for the other one, that apparently doesn't need anything more than to be plugged in for Civ3 to run properly.

The coolest part of this game is the better diplomacy and the new trade system. Strategic resources, and their importance, can actually shape your policy in dealing with other civs, let me tell you. I tried going against an enemy civ early on, with only Horses in my strategic resources box, and my enemy had Iron and Horses. I only managed to get the jump on them early with a larger more well trained army, plus the fact I was playing a militaristic civilization. Didn't matter. Their swordsmen began to show up in larger numbers and started destroying all my armies, and getting closer to my borders...

Flash Man
03-31-2002, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by E-FORCE
The only thing that is a drawback is the cheating done by the computer in order to screw you over such as say you destroy a civ early in the game, they end up coming back with one or two cities far away from you.
So what, I obliterated them as well as their allies(the other 11 civs on the map). I destroyed everyone.

slothman
03-31-2002, 10:08 PM
I play it too! I always try to get as much culture as possible and fight wars near the middle of the game.

Starkist
04-01-2002, 02:33 AM
I have that game. Something that's rather fun to do is to concentrate on technology above all, then sell it to all the computers. For certain techs you can get loads of cash, tribute deals, resources, even cities occasionally.

slothman
04-01-2002, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by Starkist
I have that game. Something that's rather fun to do is to concentrate on technology above all, then sell it to all the computers. For certain techs you can get loads of cash, tribute deals, resources, even cities occasionally.

Some people have said that that doesn;t work with the 1.17f patch as well.

Starkist
04-01-2002, 02:04 PM
Eh, I haven't gotten the latest patch yet so I wouldn't know. Civ3 really taxes my poor system so I don't play it too much anymore. A new computer would be nice.

Axel
04-02-2002, 05:02 PM
havent tried it, I like Civ 2 though, its turn based still, right?

Starkist
04-02-2002, 05:29 PM
Yes, it's still turn based. However there are now national borders based on how much culture each city has, a fine-tuned trading system, etc.

E-FORCE
04-03-2002, 01:41 AM
A few things they should have kept, or would have been nice to use are that if you took over a rival civ city and they have a tech that you don't, you'll be able to take it from them. Another would be the cheat menu, even though it would say you cheated when you beat the game, it was still very fun just to crush the other civs when you felt like bending the rules. One more would be the ease of having it shrink, which would allow you to do other things like using the internet without killing the frame rate in the game.

Daarkseid
04-03-2002, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by E-FORCE
A few things they should have kept, or would have been nice to use are that if you took over a rival civ city and they have a tech that you don't, you'll be able to take it from them.

Yeah, I think this should be brought back, but only if the city you take is quite large, and has a certain set of improvements. It didn't make sense in Civ II to raid a 1 population city that had no improvements or units and then come away with years worth of technological development.

In ancient times, certain technology could be found in large cities, and no trace of it would be found in mere colonies and settlements, such as plumbing systems, which could be found in Constantinople and Rome, but nowhere else.

So perhaps at a certain epoch, any enemy city could possibly yield a technological advance since communication within countries becomes more sophisticated, while in the earlier civs small cities would have little or no chance of yielding tech.

Better yet, have it a random thing, where each certain size of a city has a different chance of yielding technology when captured. The differences in rates would be most pronounced between small and large cities in the ancient era, with the largest possible city size yielding a technology 99% of the time, and as epochs change, the differences between city rates will grow smaller, until the modern era when only small cities have a chance of not yielding technology.

Thats how I think it should be done. Also, improvements within these cities can raise that cities chance of yielding tech to invaders. A city with a population of 3 with two improvements would have a higher rate than a city with 3 and no improvements.