 |
|
dainbramaged13
|
|
Dumbass
Mar 2000
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Libertarian
Earthling, thanks for that info. What's the procedure for upgrading all units? |
when u select a unit, even if that unit itself is not in a city, and cant be upgraded, if you press 'shift+u then u can upgrade al uunits of that type that can be upgraded.. this is best for upgrading all your defensemen if u have sun tzus
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
dr.charm
|
|
On Communism and Industrialisation:
Someone makes the comparison of of East and West Germany and their rates of Industrialization.
I trust they are aware that the Soviets took every piece of industrial equipment from East Germany at the end of the Second World War, right?
One assumes that they would be interested in the rates of industrialisation of the Soviet Union and India as well... except that it doesn't look as good for the democratic country in that comparison.
Other posters have made the (accurate) point that Communism appears intentionally weakened in Civ3. Whether or not you think Communism is a good gov't system in the real world (it ain't BTW), the absence of Fascism and the weakness of Communism basically leave *no* choice in gov't style in Civ3. It's Democracy or nothing in the game .
Cheers,
Dr. Charm
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
dr.charm
|
|
I have to agree with Cyril. The strategic resources kick much butt. I *love* having to trade to get the resources I want, and having that affect my foreign policy. The luxury resources I could take it or leave it... but the strategic ones are a great layer on the game.
For example, right now, I'm playing on a large map, but the Aztecs ended up with 5 of the 6 rubber resources. There's no way I can take on the Aztecs without rubber, so I cozied up to them and went after the Persians instead (and launched a royal 'ol world war which my allies and I (Aztecs, Iroquois and myself (Romans)) pretty handily won, while the Chinese sat on the outside shaking their heads I'm sure.
Incidentally this brings me to another point. Air power. Air power is just plain different, not better, not worse, just different (well except for the whole stupid air superiority bug). I tried a different tactic which seemed to work quite well. I didn't bomb a single city of the Persians during my war. Not one. Nope, I used my bomber fleet (started at about 9 and was about 20 by the end of the war) to destroy all but one road from Persia to my border, and then worked from there toward his cities, bombing every improvement and troop that I came across. I cut his cities off from one another by destroying roads and railroads, hit his attacking troops on the way to the front so that my defenses just chewed them to pieces, and *then* I sent in my tanks and infantry. I took a few cities before 1) war weariness was shelaking me back home and 2) he got mech infantry making my assault much more difficult.
In case anyone is keeping score, this is a tried and true tactic in the real world, you might know it as World War 2 
Cheers,
Dr. Charm
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
drreross
|
|
The biggest area where I expeience the difference between Civ3 and Civ 2 is in the "feel" of the game. Civ2 came across as majestic, inspiring, uplifting with the videos, end of game scenarios, etc. It gave me a sense of participating in the evolution of civilization (no matter how many times I play it). I don't get this at all in Civ3. The Civ3 end of game screen with the warrior swinging a club to ring the bell seems so like a carnival - and VERY disappointing after hours of game play. Haven't launched a space ship yet so don't know what that's like. I've been losing in the 1600-1700s and am now playing at Warlord to see what a "win" is like. (P.S. I really like that winning or losing is recorded in the Hall of Fame)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
habitualuser
|
|
New Amsterdam, New York
Feb 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
i have yet to find a list of hotkeys in the game |
Took me a while to stumble across it in the civlipedia... it's under
Game Concepts as Hot Keys : Game Controls and Hot Keys : Unit Commands
Some nice hidden commands like auto-terraforming 'virgin' squares only and auto-building a road to a square.
Oh yeah, good review too 
Last edited by habitualuser on 08-11-2001 at 09:57
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999
time: 00:16
|
|
MxM
honestly in all of my playing i never came across the upgrade key till i went looking for it after writing the review, and i had looked hard before the review
most likely there were problems i encounted, like not having a special resource needed to build the unit i was upgrading to, or something of this nature
however i am only partially wrong, because there is no way to select upgrade all (ctrl-shift-u) using the mouse alone, so take that (or at least point it out to me)
the main problem is when there is a problem the game doesn't inform the player what the problem is...i can give you a save game where i have all of my war chariots in a city in the early 1900's and i would like to upgrade them, but since i don't have access to iron i can't build knights, yet the game doesn't inform me of that, i had to go back and piece it together after i wrote the review, plus there is no way to upgrade seriously out of date units directly to a more modern unit...a war chariot has to become a knight, a knight has to become cavalry, and cav doesn't upgrade
also can u tell me the logic in this list
marine (oil, rubber)
paratrooper (oil, rubber)
warrior
horseman (horses)
longbowman
mech infantry (oil, rubber)
modern armor (oil, rubber)
war chariot
ok i can see logic behind it but i don't agree with it
because of the upgrade system, warriors or swordmen will always be in the build que since a warrior upgrades to swordsmen and a swordman doesn't upgrade, that means as long as your civ has a source of horses that either horsemen or cavalry (if you have saltpeter) will be in the build que, and no matter what a longbowman will always be in the build que...this shouldn't be the case obsolete units should not be in the build que, and this is an easy fix
another warning that the game doesn't give is the four city limit on armies...if you have a great leader and only three cities it won't tell you why you can't upgrade, this is a lack of polish on the user interface, if you can't perform an action the game should tell you why
there is one thing i glossed over, and that is AI...i am still forming an opinion of it, but so far it seems greatly improved
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
OneFootInTheGrave
|
 |
Kuzelj
Nov 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
Great review Corn. 
here is my take on civ (from your review)
How can civ III redefine the genre if it was made as a conservative sequel? So I'd say that your highest bar was a bit too high, but that's just your choice.
Civ III seems to give us many new options to play, and a few new concepts. Game still seems to be one of the most playable games ever. And this is the first release, which was a bit rused, still there are no major problems, just a few minor ones.
The one you listed 16 civs on a huge map with pII 400 is not really a problem, as they were thinking to release a game with 8 civs only  if you play with less civs you'll be allright. That is just a system issue (a lot of computation) rather than a game issuse in my view. Maybe they should up the recommended configuration (not the minimal).
MP will come, and firaxis will support the game. In my view from what you wrote the game deserves an A, and I can't wait for the 16th... 
What the game doesnt have is: major gameplay flaws, instability, "idiot AI", any other major disturbance to play to what I read so far. (apart form that deity cheat win, which can be fixed in a patch, but is just a chaet afterall there is no AI that cannot be cheated, apart from chassmaster  )
All that it lacks (but needs) seems that it can be/ will be added:
MP, better scenario editor (some Firaxian mentioned scripting lang. ala Starcraft but not yet confirmed), further patches, fix for air combat can be done, and I guess resource model etc.
My only major concern for long term replayability could be the "scripting language support is not certain at this time" so that real modders can alter AI behaviour significantly, and some other gameplay features. But if the Firaxis decide to support it - I guess this is an A for the game.
All the rest seems that is/ will be done if there is a need for it.
My take form your review is:
THE BEST GAME EVER JUST GOT BETTER!
That deserves an A in my book.
Last edited by OneFootInTheGrave on 08-11-2001 at 16:37
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Antonin
|
|
Thank you Korn469 for a very thoughtful and intelligent review. I don't agree with you on multiplayer or scenarios, though. I personally don't care about multiplayer and I prefer to set my own game parameters rather than play canned scenarios.
But I appreciate it that you actually invested some time in the game before writing your review, instead of flaming away after five minutes of tinkering. You make a lot of very good points and some valid criticisms.
For me, CivIII definitely has the "just one more turn" feel, and that's very important. It installed smoothly and runs smoothly on my 400 MHz AMD K-6 with 128 MB of RAM, with no crashes so far.
I even let my dinner burn the other night while playing, which is pretty silly considering that in a turn-gased game you can stop any time you want and go turn off the stove.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-11-2001 16:34
Exactly! Just compare say. . cuba or east germany (back when there was east german) to say. . South Korea, right? Or even North Korea to South Korea? 
|