New Civ3 preview @ pc.ign

[korn469]

pc.ign has updated their civ3 preview as promised

check it out at

http://pc.ign.com/previews/12062.html

here are a few highlights...

Rather than paying a production upkeep for your units, you will pay gold instead. This frees up shields for production but puts a slightly higher strain on your economy. The solution to this lies in the game's new government, Nationalism...I should mention that Fundamentalism has been removed from the game entirely

According to Jeff Briggs, "It's not that we're discouraging conquest" but there are still two or three options that are just as viable

Before the discovery of Nationalism, you can have one army for every four cities you control

There will also be "robust editor support" for players who want to design their own maps and scenarios.

so Ralf, this means that civ3 will use civ2 governments instead of SMAC SE

korn469

[MrFun]

Only one army for every four cities you control!?

All these new, interesting features will force players to change their strategies for sure!

[korn469]

Only one army for every four cities you control!?

before any confusion gets started here...one army as in one group of units...not as in one military unit

korn469

[MrFun]

I knew what you meant -- only one stack for every four cities you control.

That is still quite limited -- enough to force players to use other interesting strategies.

[Henrik]

Lots of great info in this preview.

[Buck Birdseed]

Writing up news item now.

[Eli]

Before the discovery of Nationalism, you can have one army for every four cities you control

I thought they want to weaken ICS.

[Ralf]

Well, there are certain conclusions that on can draw from this preview-update, some new & some already known:

Civ III will also add resource prerequisites for units. [...] Each unit is tied to a resource so you're available forces will be dictated by your own resource supply.

I interpret it that each and every single unit-type in Civ-3 have these resource prerequisites. More or less.

But the map is set up to provide two or three resources in abundance in any given area. This ensures you'll have to trade with the other players for the rest.

Although these special resources are unevenly distributed, every chunk of landmass have at least 2-3 special resources available - so you are never completely stranded. You have always at least 2-3 resources to trade with.

It's now no longer just about protecting the city square itself. Now you've got to keep your enemies off of your resources squares and off of the roads connecting the trading cities.

I guess, these fortress tile-upgrades now becomes much more needed and important, then it ever was in Civ-2.

The benefit of Nationalism is that you can mobilize your economy for war or peace.

So this feature is only available under nationalism. Not under any other modern government-type? Or have I misunderstood it - perhaps its a tech-advance? No this preview says government.

According to Jeff Briggs, "It's not that we're discouraging conquest" but there are still two or three options that are just as viable.

In Civ-2 we had two options: conquer-the-world and space-travelling. In Civ-3 there are apparently at least 1-2 extra alternatives. Hmm! What could it be??

While many of these are the same as they were in the previous game, each of the game's sixteen civilizations will have a unique unit that fits in a particular era.

Obs! "...will have a unique unit" (singularis). Its not that each Civ have its own complete setup of unique unit-types here. Only ONE unique type per Civ - and ONLY connected to this or that era. And its checkbox-optional, anyway. Well, thats certainly puts things into perspective.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Eli
[q]I thought they want to weaken ICS.

They have weakened ICS by requiring population cost of two rather than just one. That is their main feature that weakens ICS.

[Yog-Sothoth]

I get a "page not found" when I try the link Tried the link on pc.ign.com, with the same result.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth
I get a "page not found" when I try the link Tried the link on pc.ign.com, with the same result.

That happened to me also. Try again, or come back later. I finally connected after about 6-7 failures.

[Stefu]

I also tried to connect and failed - luckily, Google has that memory option or whatever. Interesting article, to say the least. I'm a bit sad that SE has gone away, but maybe it's for the best. At least they could have given us goverment change and economical system change!

[korn469]

i don't think that one army per 4 cities would be such a disadvantage that it would force players to change strategies because you sacrifice a little flexability for more firepower...i also think this will encourage ICS (though 2 pop settlers will hinder that some, but it still sounds ICS is the way to go...maybe if for like every 6 population points u get an army or something would be a better idea)

for one thing it seems that the bigger your army is the better
does anyone know if army sizes have a maximum unit cap? if not then a ten unit army could probably roll over any civ with ease (and a 20 unit juggernaught would just be bye bye AI)

also at one unit per city that means with 8 cities you could have two size four armies...since as far as i know civ isn't going to introduce supply lines once a human gets armies its going to be all over for the AI

i have a question...when an army takes a city do all damaged units get healed or just one or how exactly does that work?

korn469

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Stefu
I'm a bit sad that SE has gone away, but maybe it's for the best. At least they could have given us goverment change and economical system change!

What do you mean? Every damn part of this old gem has been given a MAJOR overhaul to the better - at least so it seems so far. One of the biggest changes evolves around trade & economy. With one exception (which later turned out to be storm in a waterglass: unique civs), I havent read one single gamesite preview or Firaxis comment yet, that didnt to a high degree fulfilled my expectations of a very substantial and worthwhile game-upgrade.

At the same time, many things like city-improvements, wonders, units, terrain-tiles in princip stays recognizable & familar - although tweaked and added to: so that crucially important "homey CivI-II feeling" still is present.

In TOT they just took the excisting Civ-2 and stuffed it out here and there, with superficial changes - mostly changed graphics (not to the better) + some Scifi & fantasy-additions.
With CTP they basically throwed every concept from Civ-2 out the window. They changed virtually everything, including the most basic "tested and approved" framework solution that Civ1 & II ever had - regarless, if such total replacements really was needed or not.
By comparison SMAC was basically a good game, but I had always problem with feeling attached to my AC-factions. I simply couldnt relate to all these made-up SciFi-techs and base-upgrades. Dark & gloomy graphics didnt help either. I also felt hindred with all those faction-unique S.E style pluses and minuses that was hardcoded to each faction from the very start.

My only remaing worry with Civ-3 is the engine that drives it all - the AI, together with all the tricks and shortcuts that perhaps can help the programmers to achieve something noticeably better than the AI in Civ-2 & SMAC. At least in areas of overal AI strategies, logistics and land-exploitation, and when it comes to better 1-tile-away AI-unit tactical decisions.

[Sirotnikov]

This sounds nice, korn, only I think that each govt. should have less ordinances. For instance edspotism has 4 despotic plus a few global ones (which aren't available from the start but get available as your tech advances) and can choose only three.

The most advanced govt. (probably democracy) has 12 such ordinances and can choose 8 (including the global ones)

[manofthehour]

I am not sure if you remember but I recent;y got an e-mail from Apolyton and one of the suggstions this writer had was to be able to communicate attacks with your allies using armyies. I hope they add that.

[manofthehour]

One of the things that I noticed that is a big change is that units already made cost you gold instead of production. That is a change, also it says you can only stack 1 army per 4 cities. Does that mean if I have 6 unites on one tile they can all be destroyed just by the defeat of one unit?

[MrFun]

I'm anxiously waiting for Firaxis to inform us about the map, and map creation tools and interface.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Don't hold your breath .

Firaxis informs us when they feel like it .

[MrFun]

Imran, you're stalking all of my posts today, aren't you.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, you are just lucky that someone actually reads what you write .

Very nice preview (just read it all). I do think he might have messed up on describing Nationalism. How can it be called a governement? No one ever said we govern through Nationalism, have they? Maybe it is just an advance and when you research it you get the nationalism stuff? But still, some of the things it states would only go with a new government (such as mobalization for peace/war). Perhaps it should be renamed 'Fascism'?

[Henrik]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Very nice preview (just read it all). I do think he might have messed up on describing Nationalism. How can it be called a governement? No one ever said we govern through Nationalism, have they? Maybe it is just an advance and when you research it you get the nationalism stuff? But still, some of the things it states would only go with a new government (such as mobalization for peace/war). Perhaps it should be renamed 'Fascism'?

I don't see why SE cannot be in, infact I think nationalism os a choise in the SE this would make a lot more sence...
The mention of fundie, which is the only thing I can see that states that SE wouldn't be there, could simply mean that the author asked about it and they answered something like:
"No we havent got anything like that in this game."
The author simply missnamed this stuff "governments".