 |
| |
|
|
thinkingamer
|
|
I've played SMAC for about 2 years (my best game is diplomatic in 180 turns), and i've played civ3 only 2 times(warlord and regent), and i'll give a simple comparison:
Civ3's ai is much better than SMAC's AI?
not really, the only improvent is that ai has improved in expansion, and knows how to attack in mass and thats about it. Oh, and i FELT like the ai had about 20% production, tech, growth, advantage in regent (SMAC had that much advantage in the 2nd hardest level) level.
And finally in Civ3's AI r uselessly ruthless. In SMAC even Hive would give an reasonable answer (if im as powerful as him) when i refuse his offer, but in Civ3 the ai gets mad without any reason (in SMAC at least u know why ur enemy faction got mad : u did not choose their social ruling preference) because i did not accept their unfair deal. Afterward they join together (i NEVER start a war) to gang up against me.
There was much more ways to win in SMAC and hardly no single methods was better way to win than the other. In Civ3 u have to start aggresive in the beggining in order to survive. If u dont follow what i just stated above u will be likely to lose. Strangely in Civ3 the units have 3-5 hits: the result is a unit with 2 defence has a good chance to win against a attacker with 4 attack......something which was fixed back at Civ2.......
In Smac there was stuff that were very original (unit design, social engi, using psi units, artillery units [i hoped archer was like that  ]).
Yes, there was flaws in SMAC (such as redesigning all units every 3 techs) but compared to Civ 3 its nothing: culture, while an interesting concept, it can be quite weird sometimes: my units conquered a city, but after only 1 turn they becomes cityzens of the conquered nation because of its advanced culture........what a joke........(note that is so unrealistic), with luck some of ur elite units can be promoted to a GL......u just got a free wonder!
Believe me folks, Aok has more strategy than this...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Garth Vader
|
 |
Saskatoon, SK, CA
Oct 1999
time: 22:17
|
|
I think SMAC is WAY better than CIV3. I only played 3 games of Civ3, I have already played 2 SMAC games since stopping playing Civ3.
Civ3 has better AI and a cool trading system. But that's it from what I liked about it.
SMAC is a faster game. My first game of Civ took 8 days of heavy playing. I can finish a game of SMAC on a large map in 2 days of heavy playing. The mid-late game tedium of Civ3 was unbearable.
SMAC is more replayable. Social Engineering. Radically different factions. A wider tech tree at the bottom, plus the design workshop makes early game interaction between the factions interesting. Civ3 tried to address this, but didn't go far enough. Plus making you start next to the same races all the time killed much of the improvement.
Multiplayer. Once you got bored of SP, MP opened up a new world of SMAC.
Overall design. Civ3 introduced new features like resources and culture borders, but they seemed unbalanced and weak, same with the combat. SMAC had a LOT of bugs that are really annoying especially in MP. But SMAC came across, at least to me, as having more flavor. I felt if the bugs were fixed SMAC would be an almost ideal game, especially with MP. A big part of this was because SMAC was new. Civ3 is basically the same as Civ and Civ2. I got bored of building the Colossus and the Pyramids a long time ago, but have not yet gotten bored of building the Weather Paradigm.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2002 12:34
And Civ3 is...what exactly? A smart game with top notch graphics... 
|