 |
|
player1
|
 |
Belgrade, YU
Sep 2001 time: 06:24
|
|
Still MP is pretty OK, if you hose rule BAN of Diplo units.
Man, they are more powerful then nukes.
Last edited by player1 on 26-01-2003 at 02:42
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ellie
|
|
I still play civ2. Its a great game, although diplomacy is tooo predictable.
Im pretty hoked on alpha centauri as well atm.
I got civ3, and i was amazed it managed to slow down my husbands high spec pc!!.
I was also disgusted the first time a samurai cut my tanks to pieces.
Personally i think with civ3 presentation and general graphics got precedence over more important issues.
Ellie
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
Overall I like Civ III better:
Civ III AI is better. AI plans invasions, protects attackers with infantry and masses units for attack.
Civ III gets rid of the unbalancing Diplo/Spy units.
Trade and diplomacy are better and more realistic. For instance, you can't establish trade with a civ you are at war with. In fact, all trade is lost with an enemy civ.
Strategic resources add a new twist to the game. You have to trade for or conquer any resource you don't have.
Newly captured cities resist your invasion for several turns instead of rolling over in one turn.
Wonders are scaled down. With CivII, once you got Mike's Chapel or SOL or Sun Tzu, you pretty much knew you were going to win.
IMHO, combat is better. My biggest complaint with CivII is that combat is just way too predictable. Once you have that killer unit (Crusader, Dragoon, Cavalry, Howitzer), it just rolls over the AI. In fact, most AI civs can be completely mopped up in 10 turns or less. CivIII makes you plan out your invasion very carefully. You need an overwhelming number of units to succeed.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ColdWizard
|
|
i heard that in civ2, MP actually works
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ColdWizard
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Fatwreck
do you mean in civ or in the real world? |
both
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
CivPatriot
|
 |
NE. Georgia, USA
Dec 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Fatwreck the biggest problem I have with civ3 is their combat system, some say that the combat system in civ2 is predictable but I think that is better than losing a tank to a frikkin´ spearman... predictable is better than totally random, at least you know that a tank will beat a phalanx ... |
that was and still is my biggest problem with Civ3. My first game, i was having a great time, when my tank was attacked by a longbowmen, and was killed. I thought ok, this is just an unusual occurance, lol, i was wrong, happened two or three times later, plus the times that my tanks had to withdraw from a pikemen's depleted uranium antitank pike.
fix the combat system, and its a great game, better than civ2, but with it as it is, no way is it the equal of civ2.
and for those of us with macs, well, the MP thing for civ3 isn't a major deal, since we don't have it yet!!! at least with civ2 i can customize the game easiley, and with out having to wait a year to get a editor. 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|