Archers shoot down cruise missiles... AI hardly notices nuclear attacks...MP anybody?

[LaRusso]

imran....you should relax too yin is just to distressed by the early release of civ3.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think I'm pretty relaxed... at least I feel like it

[LaRusso]

cmon, its too late for you, i guess...already past midnight?
i was dreaming last night about civ3. the first thing in the morning was opening a EB confirmation that it is shipped. how are you getting it? youa re on east coast?

[Imran Siddiqui]

4:30 AM actually .

I'm getting it through Amazon.com, by Friday . But since I can't get to a mall, it'll have to do .

[LaRusso]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
4:30 AM actually .

I'm getting it through Amazon.com, by Friday . But since I can't get to a mall, it'll have to do .

YOu can't get to a mall? Why on Earth? I thought that was a fav American pastime

[Imran Siddiqui]

No car on campus, I'm afraid. C'est la vie .

[LaRusso]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
No car on campus, I'm afraid. C'est la vie .

if solver can buy a new monitor, you could fork out some dough for a new car. i will sacrifice my firstborn LOL

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think I can wait 2 days instead of paying for a car .

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think I can wait 2 days instead of paying for a car .

Some people are just strange

[Fiil]

In the review is say that the cruise missile stopped at an open tile. How can it do that??????

I thought missiles only 'moved' from cities/subs to attack, they can never be attacked in flight!!!!

Unless someone can give me a reason not to I think this 'reviewer' missed something (or a lot of things).

[yin26]

Since I started this thread, it's only etiquette to say that I won't be answering any more posts in it. It speaks for itself. And since it's a 99% certainty I won't be buying Civ3 (if at all) until the Gold Edition ... and only then if it has proven itself to be an exceptional game.

So as not to seem rude: Feel free to direct things my way, but I won't be answering.

[player1]

Originally posted by Fiil
In the review is say that the cruise missile stopped at an open tile. How can it do that??????

I thought missiles only 'moved' from cities/subs to attack, they can never be attacked in flight!!!!

Unless someone can give me a reason not to I think this 'reviewer' missed something (or a lot of things).

I think that missles can be moved on land (with one or several movemnt points), and that they have defense bonus of 1 or 0, so I think that some barbarian army CAN hijack one "mobile" missle silo, easily.

Now letts see, Swordsmen vs Mech. Inf.:
-Sw. attack M. Inf. 3/(18+3)=1/7 (14% hitting 1hp):

-M. Inf. attack Sw. 12/(12+3)=0.8 (80% hitting 1hp)
so once in 5 attacks you will lost one hp,

Concluson: I seames to me that maybe a Veretan or Elite Obsolete units, can hurat a modern unexpirienced unit.

Maybe that's what was happen in the review.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by yin26
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=31040

The whole sad truth is there. It's just about every horrid thing I could NOT want in Civ3.

And Korn: Sorry, bro. Not only is MAD *missing* from this game, nuclear attacks are just another form of attack.

*sigh*

So much lost time on the List and this forum. Hell.

For crying out loud, Yin, stop acting like a bozo. All I can see is you are grasping at certain weaknesses and blow them out of proportions like a drowning man grasping at straws. All that from a half-baked review, too.

Sheeh, get a grip.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


For crying out loud, Yin, stop acting like a bozo.

Too bad they didn't archive the original SMAC forums. I think you would notice a definite trend.

Anyway, there is definitely some gross exaggeration of the negative information going on here. Considering that the "reviews" so far have given Civ3 very high scores, it seems daft to play up the negatives like this. Be that as it may, I'm not one to trust most review sites anyway - I have no history with the reviewers. One exception is Bob over at cgonline, and his comments have been mostly positive so far. He's been spot on in the past with games that interest me.

I'm looking forward to playing the game tonight so I can form my own opinions.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Stuie
I'm looking forward to playing the game tonight so I can form my own opinions.

And im looking forward to your review of the game
If you could, would you mind trying to replicate the 'bad' features the reviewer meantioned, such as the missile being stuck and attacked, or mech-inf being swatted by legions. Im interested to see just how that missile was stuck in the open, whether he moved it out of its operating range, or what.

Thanks

[Solver]

I do also completely disagree with Yin. True, there might be bad points with the game, but again, I just don't trust the reviewer that much. I will only be saying anything when I have the game on my hard drive, and will be playing it myself - not before.

Yin, I think not answering this is kinda admitting you're wrong. I hope you're at least reading this thread. How can you NOT buy Civ 3? Mutliplayer... heh! Look, civ has always been about SP, and once the MP comes, there will be no reason NOT to buy the game. I think you're really making yourself lots of enjoyement denied.

[Howling Chip]

There's definitely a difference between the three commercial reviews posted to date, and the Apolyton member reviews now coming in. Such as -

1) Game stutter confirmed on a PIII system.
..........I have an Athlon 1.2 with 256 meg and 64mb video. not worried.
2) Game crash in two hours while ICQng and screen capturing while another person played 7 hours with no crash.
....... no worries.
3) The cruise missile destruction by ancient era archer (?).
....... need additional confirmation or its the cruise missile considered ground movement when not detonated.
4) Corruption and AI does not care about nukes going off.
...... Apolyton posters who now have the game report that it will take a while to get a handle on the new game system relationships. I do not think the reviewers are any better, or out of the box masters compared to Apolyton players. Because they could not manage corruption or it appeared to them that nuke war was taken lightly means little. Game has not been played enough to understand the system relationships.
5) etc, etc.

I will trust the Apolyton posters with their initial impressions both GOOD and BAD over initial impressions from commercial reviewers.

I wish Yin would reconsider the EB 10 day return thing (if there are EBs in Korea). I would value his hands on first impressions.

What the heck, I pick up my game today. Will soon post my first impressions.

[Matte979]

Originally posted by yin26

Again, where are the solid examples of this?

As for the 'expanding' and 'multiplaying': It seems clear. The SP experience will be less than what we were expecting ... and it will be up to the modders and MPers to fix it (again).

Who is we? Your defintly not speaking for me. It must be really
boring to be this pesimistic. You are not objective, you have alot points but they disappear when you just take bad things, there are a few comments in all reviews about good things and
from my own experience the gameplay is more than good.

When you played the game and give objective views you really have something to say, before that your points are worth nothing.

Just ignore him until he get the game and go play or look at those
nice screenshots..

/Mathias

[Adm.Naismith]

First thing: I haven't the game, I don't want to judge it. Still, I'd like to analyze it a bit considering hints we already have. I'm quoting Howling Chip as a helping list, nothing personal

Originally posted by Howling Chip
1) Game stutter confirmed on a PIII system.
..........I have an Athlon 1.2 with 256 meg and 64mb video. not worried.

That can sound good for you on top HW, but a software with trouble on basic scrolling on medium to high HW doesn't sound good for me. If confirmed (not only a trouble with reviewers configuration) it should require some hard work on optimization and a patch.

2) Game crash in two hours while ICQng and screen capturing while another person played 7 hours with no crash.
....... no worries.

You should! The game doesn't seem very nice with the other tasks and Windows environment: again, bad luck of one out of three or a statistic alarming warning of compatibility trouble?
How will you judge a game with a 33% rate of crashing trouble on average system?

3) The cruise missile destruction by ancient era archer (?).
....... need additional confirmation or its the cruise missile considered ground movement when not detonated.

It seems a bit strange, considered how new rules seems designed to make this air vs. ground not possible. In the worst case could be a simple bug on unit attribute. Gimme a patch or the step by step instruction on how to correct this with the editor.

4) Corruption and AI does not care about nukes going off.
...... Apolyton posters who now have the game report that it will take a while to get a handle on the new game system relationships. I do not think the reviewers are any better, or out of the box masters compared to Apolyton players. Because they could not manage corruption or it appeared to them that nuke war was taken lightly means little. Game has not been played enough to understand the system relationships.

Ok, not enough playtime to understand subtle politics, but a shower of nukes on cities seems a bit more than subtle, IMO. Is it a plot to let us approve same treatment in real world?

Corruption management, I agree, can be a main task to manage, one throwed at the players to counter ICS. I'll wait to see how good players will work around it or if a balancing is needed.

I will trust the Apolyton posters with their initial impressions both GOOD and BAD over initial impressions from commercial reviewers.

Come on, you can have many doubt with any light, not detailed, early opinion (good or bad), but if a specific point is confirmed you can't deny it!

OTOH, the whole vote of the game is more an early "overall feeling", with no more than a bunch of game under the reviewer's belt, if I understand it right (some not ever finished). Of course I'm not bashing anyone.
Let's the game pass a solid couple of week under gamers attention, then I suggest we to come back and comment with Yin in a more documented way, do you?

I pick up my game today. Will soon post my first impressions.

Good, let us know! My suggestion is to deeply investigate mentioned points, just to give us another report (and your opinion) on the same "potential weakness". My advantage is that I must wait some weeks here in Italy before the game will reach the shops, so I can use you as my free Guinea Pig! No offence intended, of course

[Lawrence of Arabia]

If yin hadn't been so quick about seeing all the bad things. he wouldn't have made such a fool out of himself.

When the US relocates it cruise missiles from city to city, it doesn't fly to the next city. It gets sent by railroad. So an archer derailing the railroad will effectively destroy the cruise missile.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by yin26

So much lost time on the List and this forum. Hell.

So that is still your problem? Your ego really wanted to be publically rewarded for such effort? You are a fan just like me and Imran and many others, no more or less important. Whether the List would have made the game better (or more realistically, doable) is debatable.

Do yourself a favor, old friend and stop acting like the world owes you something. If you don't/won't like a game, that's fine; if you do, that's fine too; but your tired vengeance against Firaxis is really obvious.

Just my .01

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by Stuie
Too bad they didn't archive the original SMAC forums. I think you would notice a definite trend.

..and coupled that with the reason why yin lost his "job" as Moderator of this forum earlier this year. Bitterness can induce a definite trend, indeed!

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
If you don't/won't like a game, that's fine; if you do, that's fine too; but your tired vengeance against Firaxis is really obvious.

Just my .01

Steve, I don´t have an axe to grind with Firaxis -not that I know of -, but I, too, see dark clouds looming on the horizon.

See my thread on -Firaxis-confirmed- Infinite Bribing Sleaze, if you haven´t already.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...168#post568847

[Boris Godunov]

1.) Everyone I know who is playing the game now who isn't a reviewer is overwhelmingly happy with the game and thinks it's great. That includes me. I played it for 6+ hours last night, and aside from skipping music which I turned off, I found it engrossing as hell. And the AI on Chieftan wasn't that bad, either.

2.) Anyone complaining (YIN) without having played the game has a meaningless opinion and I won't listen to them.

3.) Game reviewers are supposed to find bad things--if they didn't focus on them, people would accuse them of sycophancy. People accuse them anyway, true, but when reviewing, one is always going to pick on every "bad" thing.

4.) The reviewer people are citing, as has been said, clearly had minimal previous Civ exposure. So comparing his experience to a fan is not really accurate. Also, considering the learnign curve of Civ3, I don't think he had adequate time to really understand the mechanics.

Cheers.

PS--I am jittery at work because I can't wait to go home and play more. That is so cool.

[Typo]

With regards to the issue with the nukes the reviewer never stated if it was tactical nukes or ICBM's he used. We already know that the use of tactical nukes is more tolerated than ICBMs so that might be an explanation for that.

As for the archer attacking a cruise missile, how can a missle end a turn up in the air when being moved, I didn't think this was possible with any air units????

[Capt Dizle]

There is probably a simple explanation for the cruise missle thing. Maybe it ran out of fuel next to the archer and the reviewer didn't understand what happened. Maybe he tried to "fly it over" the archer and it "attacked" and was destroyed in the process.

Since air units can no longer completely destroy a ground unit it would only make sense that cruise missles can't either so it probably left the archer unit damaged and the reviewer failed to see that.

[Faboba]

I agree he's being a bit negative but I'm worried we're getting off topic and onto more of a 'Yin bashing' thread. We should be trying to convince him to look on the bright side rather than sulk around muttering 'DOOM'.

( he is a smart guy. That list was a great piece of work, and he actually convinced me Korea should be in the XP...... )

[Haphazard]

I'm reminded of a story of two kids being taken to a zoo for the first time here:

They see a peacock for the first time.
Kid 1: It's beautiful, look at it's colours and feathers!
Kid 2: It's got ugly feet.

Nothing wrong with being a perfectionist. It just means you go through life unhappy. Anyway, by the time it gets to the UK, the first patch might be out, and it will be even better than the 90%+ game it already is!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Typo

As for the archer attacking a cruise missile, how can a missle end a turn up in the air when being moved, I didn't think this was possible with any air units????

Because they eliminated ZOCs, units now get attacks of opportunity. If you try to move a unit past an enemy unit, the enemy unit will automatically get a free attack on your unit. I think your unit also has defense penalty because it is essentially an attack on your flank/rear.

So the reviewer tried to sneak a missile past an enemy garrison, and they intercepted and destroyed it. As someone said, this may be the equivalent of an ambush of a ground convoy transporting the missile.

Cheers.

[Taliseian]

Just found this out in chat....

If you just move the missile, it's not "flying".....it's the equivalent of being transported.

You have to use a command similar to the "bombard" command for Air Strikes...that command actually "launches" the missile.



T