14-05-2002 12:27									#1
	My beef with CivIII Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What really annoys me the most about CivIII is how static the Civilisations are. Everyone starts off at 4000BC and basically its a matter of killing off who you see until the end.

In CivI (I never really played CivII much) new opponents would pop up throughout the game, especially after you have killed off someone else. I thought this was a fundamental feature in keeping the game somewhat realistic if not more interesting (not that it ever was overly realistic). Also, from time to time, one nation would split into two... perhaps as a result of the capital being destroyed, or even if approval was just down.

Who cares if the new opponent is weak, it just gives the militant gamer some new territory to annex.

I've been playing CivIII for a few weeks now and I've never seen any of these things happen

Barbarians arn't nearly potent enough. In the real world "barbarians" managed to destroy most ancient and classical societies (Babylon, Rome, China, Aztecs to name a few). In this game I manage to defend a city from a barbarian onslaught of 20 horsemen or so with three or four Pikemen. I think they can do a bit better than flint axe warriors and horsemen too. It's a bit of a joke when a barbarian with an axe attacks a town garrisoned with riflemen.

Also I think it would be a good feature to have barbarian encampments turn into new civilisations if not destroyed in 10 turns. Tell me that a camp of barbarians sitting around for 50 years isnt going to eventually settle down and start farming/building. And I liked it when barbarians would take control of your city if you left it undefended. Just wandering in and taking a few bob from the town treasury doesnt really bake the cake in my mind.

I have many more issues with this game, but they have already been bought up in this forum. Maybe these issues have been bought up too, I havnt seen them.

	14-05-2002 12:37									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Hi AH.

Edit: Apologies to the innocent, if there are any.

Last edited by notyoueither on 14-05-2002 at 13:00

	14-05-2002 13:05									#3
	Suffering from ads?

What I hate is the way barbs never develop. Geez, they got that right in civ freakin II

	14-05-2002 13:10									#4
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse What I hate is the way barbs never develop. Geez, they got that right in civ freakin II

I know man, they had it even in Civ I... and that was ten years ago.

	14-05-2002 13:13									#5
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It kind of insults your intelligence - like the latest Star Wars movies.

	14-05-2002 14:23									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Hi AH. Edit: Apologies to the innocent, if there are any.

Is Alexander's Horse that fond of talking to himself or is he just a traditional target for such accusations?

I personally would like the splitting that occured in Civ II. I don't thinks its viable in Civ III however. It wasn't good for the civ in Civ II either but it did make the game a bit more variable.

If barbarians could become full fledged civs people would probably start screaming about them taking over all the open space.

	14-05-2002 14:57									#7
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I could have sworn that powerpleb was him. Maybe it's just a cultural thing. One talks to oneself a great deal in the out back I would imagine.

	14-05-2002 15:42									#8
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

um, the new patch allows "restart elinminated players". mmmhhhkay?

	14-05-2002 15:52									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That was allready in the game. Now you can turn it off. Prior to 1.21f it wasn't an option.

In Civ II if a civ was eliminated a DIFFERENT civ tooks it place. In Civ III the same civ respawns. This irked some players enormously so its now an option. If you turn it off there is no respawn and no replacement.

	14-05-2002 16:21									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I agree with the sentiment about barbarians. They should develop, like they did in Civ II.

But the new civs popping up... I don't really like that concept. Once the player of that colour is gone... I want them to be dead AND buried. Even if the Egyptians were to mutate into the Zulu (since both use yellow), it still doesn't appeal to my style of play.

If there was to be that kind of option, like in Civ II, I'd definitely leave it turned off. Just like I already have "restart elinminated players" from the 1.21 patch permanently off.

	14-05-2002 16:56									#11
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Never did understand why barbarians don't develop in Civ3.

Then again they usually don't last long enough to make it to the renaissance ages anyway.

	14-05-2002 17:12									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Well that's to be expected since cultural boundaries take up all the open land. Thus leaving nothing for the barbarians to gather at.

Oh I remember Civ II, where many unchartered islands I went to were swarming with barbarian musketeers, cannons, riflemen, artillery, fanatics and partisans ALL SIMULTANEOUSLY!!!

Since the AI are more seaworthy than before (their magic galleys with the power of teleportation) even the islands don't provide enough land for the barbarians to take root.

	21-05-2002 17:16									#13
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by LordAzreal Oh I remember Civ II, where many unchartered islands I went to were swarming with barbarian musketeers, cannons, riflemen, artillery, fanatics and partisans ALL SIMULTANEOUSLY!!! Since the AI are more seaworthy than before (their magic galleys with the power of teleportation) even the islands don't provide enough land for the barbarians to take root.

That's a good point but consider this. Do you think that there was more usable land in civ2 than there is in civ3? I used to find that even in the 1900's there was still plenty of unsettled land in civ2. This rarely happens in civ3. Just a thought.

	21-05-2002 17:27									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

There was about as much usable land in Civ II as there was in Civ III. But in Civ III, expansion is much more important than it was in Civ II IMHO.

	21-05-2002 18:41									#15
	Re: My beef with CivIII Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by powerpleb 1) ...In CivI (I never really played CivII much) new opponents would pop up throughout the game, especially after you have killed off someone else. 2) ... Also, from time to time, one nation would split into two... perhaps as a result of the capital being destroyed, or even if approval was just down. 3)...Barbarians arn't nearly potent enough. ...It's a bit of a joke when a barbarian with an axe attacks a town garrisoned with riflemen. 4)...And I liked it when barbarians would take control of your city if you left it undefended. Just wandering in and taking a few bob from the town treasury doesnt really bake the cake in my mind. 5)...Also I think it would be a good feature to have barbarian encampments turn into new civilisations if not destroyed in 10 turns.

Hmmmm, lets see...

1 and 2 - New civs evolving...
3,4, and 5 - Evolving Barbarians and Barbarians contolled cities/civs...

Sounds like Modded CTP2 to me!!

	22-05-2002 20:30									#16
	Re: Re: My beef with CivIII Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by hexagonian Hmmmm, lets see... 1 and 2 - New civs evolving... 3,4, and 5 - Evolving Barbarians and Barbarians contolled cities/civs... Sounds like Modded CTP2 to me!!

It sounds like Civ II aswell, and not Civ III which is the problem. The evolving barb's made sense as did the taking over of the cities. Sometimes the barb's killing your production can sting, but after the first 10-15 turns you're probably churning out military units to defend cities and more than likely unless you get an uprising(at least they kept that) a crappy 1.1 warrior could stop most if all barb activity directed at a city.

I did like the restarting of new Civ's in CivII....in CivIII do the Civ's you wipe out, when they pop back up, do they still hate you or is it with a clean slate?

	22-05-2002 20:35									#17
	Re: Re: Re: My beef with CivIII Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by grapedog I did like the restarting of new Civ's in CivII....in CivIII do the Civ's you wipe out, when they pop back up, do they still hate you or is it with a clean slate?

No, they still hate you. They remember everything, so if you were at war with them you'll still be at war with them.

	22-05-2002 20:40									#18
	Re: Re: Re: Re: My beef with CivIII Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by zulu9812 No, they still hate you. They remember everything, so if you were at war with them you'll still be at war with them.

Then what the hell is the point? You kill the father but the son grows up hating you...thats no good. Definately need the different Civ's on a clean slate.

	22-05-2002 22:06									#19
	Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: My beef with CivIII Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by grapedog Then what the hell is the point? You kill the father but the son grows up hating you...thats no good. Definately need the different Civ's on a clean slate.

Well, it's realistic, isn't it?

	22-05-2002 22:25									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I hate the respawning altogether - having new civs spring up to replace old ones is cool.But fighting a several-hundred year long war just to have to trapse half way across the continent to finish them off (again) isn't. What really pisses me off is that they estart with all the advantages they had at the start of the game; extras settler, loads of military units, more gold, etc.

	22-05-2002 22:36									#21
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Ugh, we need a whining/complain forum for Civ3. So I never have to see another post labeled "What Civ3 lacks, could have had, did wrong, is doing wrong, etc.." C'mon mods, make a forum for it. *hopes*

	23-05-2002 02:59									#22
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by zulu9812 I hate the respawning altogether

So turn it off. I like it that it can be turned off now. I leave it on myself but I am early builder not an early warmonger so I have only had to deal with this once or twice myself.

quote: - having new civs spring up to replace old ones is cool.But fighting a several-hundred year long war just to have to trapse half way across the continent to finish them off (again) isn't. What really pisses me off is that they estart with all the advantages they had at the start of the game; extras settler, loads of military units, more gold, etc.

Consider it a inducement to not engage in rush tactics. I did prefer the way it worked in Civ II. I think the present method may very well be intended as a balance to the early rush but I still prefer the Civ II version. It simply gave more variation to each game.

	23-05-2002 03:35									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

yeah, I agree with pretty much all of that....

Barbarians should definetly evolve based on what I think they represent. I think that they represent the people discontented with your government. Now, if I were to become a rebel rilght now, I think I would by a gun, not grab an axe and start scalping people (sounds fun though ).

Of course, there should be ways that new civilizations can form, it makes absolutely no sense for this not to be possible !!!

CTP2 had all this..............

	23-05-2002 05:31									#24
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ethelred Is Alexander's Horse that fond of talking to himself or is he just a traditional target for such accusations? I personally would like the splitting that occured in Civ II. I don't thinks its viable in Civ III however. It wasn't good for the civ in Civ II either but it did make the game a bit more variable. . .

That's true,

What I've noticed most about Civ 3 is that, unlike Civ 2, there are often tremendously long periods of tedium when nothing happens, and when it does it is usually something stupid and predictable by the dumb AI.

	23-05-2002 06:01									#25
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Gimme a break.

This is a GAME. Poker and blackjack can be boring too... if you follow the optimum strategy for each, you generally do nothing until you have outstanding tactical advantage. Balancing "optimum" with fun is why casinos make a LOT of money, and why strategy AI's are imperfect.