 |
| |
|
|
Faeelin
|
|
Tau Ceti
Oct 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
Now, before anyone says it, Yes, EE is RTS and Civ3 is Turn based. however, if given a choice between the two, i'd buy empire earth. Why you ask?
Scenario editors:
Civ3-lacks one.
Empire earth- has one, and actually lets you use the government's online elevation maps to make maps. Therefore, you don't have to spend hours making them geographically precise.
Civilization creation-
Civ3- see above.
Empire Earth- The ability to give your civilization bonuses, something AC had but Civ3 lacks. Ccan give special units from a vast array of units normally not available.
Gameplay:
Civ3- ridiculous technological problems, endgame monotony.
EE-It has that same disbalance,but only to a point. IF you upgrade units, they'll mop the floor with anything from the same era, nevermind a different one. Endgame has hundreds of units, nuclear bombers, cruise missile launching subs (which can DESTROY units). Airpower here can destroy units, but planes are very expensive and ack ack will shoot them down.
Graphics
Civ3- this isn't even fair
EE- great.
Technology
Civ3- lots of ones with little real effect.
EE- obvious bonuses. In addition, It goes to nanotech, so we get the giant mechs I was led to believe civ3 had.
Overall: Empire Earth is far superior to Civ3. Sorry Firaxis, but it appears that you're no longer the best game company I know of.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GodSpawn
|
 |
Scotland
Oct 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Now, before anyone says it, Yes, EE is RTS and Civ3 is Turn based. however, if given a choice between the two, i'd buy empire earth. |
Now, before anyone says it, Yes, Baldurs Gate is RPG and Civ3 is a wargame. however, if given a choice between the two, i'd buy Baldur's Gate.
[And so on for anybody else's preferred game. See what I'm getting at?]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
General Ludd
|
 |
Minion of the Dominion
Aug 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zealot
There's really no strategy involved, it's all about who makes the biggest borders the quickest.  |
Size of the country doesn't matter if you play your cards right in civ3. I can often repel attackers many times my size, you just need to have some strategy. in RTS games, the strategy is minimal and it's always the person with the biggest army that wins.
For example: You have a couple spearmen vs a dozen horsemen. In Civ3, you can take to the mountains and fortify, giving you a chance of survival. In a RTS, the spearmen die and there is nothing you can do about it, There is no hope of them out running the horsemen - even in rugged terrain, and there is no hope of defeating them in combat.
A couple other things I don't like: there is no peace time or diplomacy, and the scale is all out of whack.
Is it supposed to be a battlefield?, then why are you building a city in the middle of a battlefield? 
Is it supposed to be a vast region representing entire countries and empires?, then why is it on such a small scale, and why can't you use diplomacy with the other nations?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Urban Ranger
|
|
Apolyton Duke of Off-Topic
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiker
For those who don't like RTS games, do you realize that the world you live in is real time, not turn based? TBS games lack realism, for exampole, in Civ you can have battles that last dozens of turns and each turn is like 50 years in real time, and how is this possible in real life? Nowadays, more and more people look for realism when they play games, you can tell this just by looking at the number of RTS games out there versus the number TBS ones. |
Realism?  You must be jesting.
If you think TBS'es are unrealistic, you can forget about RTS. In real life time taken to build structures is measured in years, not months, let alone days. You don't "build" units, you must recruit them from the population and train them. People have minds of their own and they are not mere drones/peons/whatever.
In the real world, you have subordinates to take care of minor businesses for you.
Also even though time is continuous on the macrosopic level events are discrete.
If you want realism don't play computer games 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiker
|
 |
Planet Earth
Dec 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
In real life time taken to build structures is measured in years, not months, let alone days. You don't "build" units, you must recruit them from the population and train them. People have minds of their own and they are not mere drones/peons/whatever. |
Not all RTS requires you to build units or structures, i.e. Sudden Strike, Mech Commander, etc... Moreover, structures don't take years to build, armies in battle can build fortifications in matter of hours. And I don't see how units in TBS'es have minds of their own. In RTS's, units can attack/act of thier own accord, while unites in TBS games strictly follow orders. So who looks more like drones here?
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-11-2001 23:05
|