 |
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
Civ3 is a balance between realism and gameplay. Sid has always said that when the two clashed, he always went for better gameplay over more realism. Of course modern units are superior to ancient ones. The question is how much of an advantage do you want to give them and still make the game a decent challenge?
If you make progressively better units have dramatically better stats, you reduce the game to a race to those units. Whoever gets them first overwhelms their neighbors. Game over. Civ2 was full of this and it made winning boring since the AI never understood this as well as a human player.
Apparently a lot of that expectation is still around for civ3 players. They expect to mount a campaign and suffer little to no casualities because after all that's what you could do in civ2.
In the realism department, you are absolutely correct and noone will dispute you. However in the gameplay arena, I personally feel that large stat disparities are like giving yourself a huge advantage.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
Tanks beat Pikemen 98% of the time anyway. If that rare 2% ruins your notion of realism, I'm not sure any solution will be satisfying.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|