The end of civilization as we know it

[rah]

*sigh*
Yes that would be fantastic. Then when War4's connection dropped late at night, I could load my war4 ghost and continue the game. If Civ was only as straight forward as a raceing game, these types of "Ghosts"would be possible. Too many decisions in Civ. But it would be fun to program the AI to focus on certain things that a particular player likes to do. (some say that's what they did when modding CTP II) but as soon as the AI hit a speedbump, so much for that. While everyone here seems to have a master plan for winning (or two or three or more), when you're not the only one doing it, it's not as easy. The good players will judge the situation and adapt, a computer program won't.

In all actuality though, our play has influenced CIVIII, much to our dismay. Think about the corruption model, the programmers were so concerned about our abilities to steam roll the AI that they designed a system that was so harsh and boring that it (if you read all the whining) basically sucked all the fun out of the game for the less than average player. If you read the pre-release press, they hoped they had a game that couldn't be beat at deity level. They even bragged about it. But less than a month after release they know they failed. Imagine if they had made the game twice as hard. It's harder than you think, without sucking all the fun out it.

But for MP, you don't have to worry about the AI, Let's help them focus on the things that will lead to a balance. (with a little luck thrown in)

RAH

[Smash]

MP may be the only saving grace this game(3) has.
The ai is a bit of a joke.Why even bother to try and make it tough?...in order to get good ai..well...we're talking Deep Blue type stuff.
Somehow I don't think I could afford it.

yes the game can be hard..or harder..whats the word I seek?.But fun has been sacrificed big time.

I dread loading up a civ3 save game.Thats not a good sign.

[Rasputin]

fun is in the eye of the beholder , to paraphrase someone.

I am having much fun with civ 3 , the only negative so far is the slowness of the AI turns. With only 9 civs it is taking 10 minutes or more in the year 1700 on a large map.

To win at deity i have seen many strats in the civ 3 forums but not one of them lets you actually enjoy the game and build a civ.

I love civ because i can build a civ change governments becoem the largest and strongest democracy in the game.

i unlike others use monarchy and enjoy the benifits of moving from despotism. yes you can win staying in despotism but it isnt as much fun IMHO.

To get the most fun out of civ 2 or 3, i beleive you have to build the civ, build your citys, build your city improvements advance in tech and watch youre culture grow.

My .01c worth ......

[Robert Plomp]

Civ3 mp won't work for duels indeed.
Even 5- mp games might suck.

But I think 5 / 6+ will rock.
Resources will work in games like that, you just trade with civs that aren't your neighbours, OR, like in diplo games, you trade with your allies.

I hope Firaxis is indeed coming with fresh ideas for mp games to speed them up.

I think that people who complain about the resource system didn't play civ3 enough so far. (now someone is going to tell me how often he played it and how it still sucks) but I'm very used to trade resources to my neighbours, even if I have the intention to kill them later. I just need the money / techs / resources I get in return.

stacked movement would be important indeed, but be honest, we never got it in civ2 either and nobody complained.

shift-a works perfectly.
complaining about moving worker is not valid.

UU would indeed work if every civ can 'chose' their own.
But......... on the other hand, they're not that special.

just like golden age, it's a nice thing, but not unbalancing or something, it's too tiny for that.

EnigmaGod, if you're complaining about all maps being the same you really need some medication. That's so untrue.

And about graphics.........
is there really anybody that really cares ?

Anyway, everytime I'm among grannies I open up all the windows. Some fresh air will do this place good.
You guys are too used to civ2.

It's strange, I'm very used to civ2 as well........... but I like civ3 more then civ2 in anything. Open your windows, your eyes and your heart. If you want civ3mp to suck (months before it's release) then you'll find arguments for it.

(and visa versa of course )

Just don't become a stereotype of 'old' 'mature' people that don't move on to the next version of a game. I thought the civ community wasn't like that. How wrong have I been

Wow cybergeek, that post ranks right up there with your last topic about creating lists of players. If there was a point to that useless babbling you called a post, feel free to email me telling me what it was.

[General Maximus]

now you've gone and done it, i have to agree with eyes TWICE in one thread.

[Robert Plomp]

Enigmathingy...........
what are you exactly up too ?
You dislike the fact that there's no cheatmode in civ3 and for that reason you come up with silly arguments ?

The problem with you is that you're too smart.
You burry crappy arguments among good arguments ( you have some valid points) but stuff like "the map is always the same" is really one of the worst I 've seen.

Besides that you won't / can/t handle any counter argument and if they come you come up with posts like the latter.

I'm sure there will be a civ3 community one day.
Pherhaps indeed with majority of the so called civ2mp vets.
I'm happy that I'm enjoying the game. Pherhaps I'm an optimist, I rarely hate things. When Queen came with Greatest Hits III, I was one of the few fans that liked it. Now Dream Theater is coming with Six Degrees of inner Turbulence, and I'm one of the few that like it. Civ2 TOT, nobody liked it, but I did. Same with civ3. Pherhaps I'm an optimist, pherhaps I'm too easily satisfied.

But for the matter of fact, I'm living a very happy live. I prefer to be happy with a crap thingy then to be negative about everything all the time. Civ3 has new loopholes and things you have to deal with. Deal with them, and otherwise you're getting too old for new civ games.

CyberShy

Well Cybergeek, you're not afraid to look like an idiot, I'll give you that much.

"stuff like "the map is always the same" is really one of the worst I 've seen."

Actually that's because you're an idiot. You need only load the map a few times with the different map settings to see that the map settings don't really make a difference. All the graphics blend together. Did you not notice the millions of mods that have come out to fix the graphics? Did you not notice that every game there are mass clumps of each terrain type? Or are you too ****ing stupid?

"Besides that you won't / can/t handle any counter argument and if they come you come up with posts like the latter."

No, I give posts like that when a lone moron comes along and posts something like what you posted. I guess you're just one of those fanboys that will argue how great the game his while the other 99.9% of us tell you how ****ing bad it is. Again, you're not afraid to come out and look like an idiot.

"I'm happy that I'm enjoying the game. Pherhaps I'm an optimist, I rarely hate things...Pherhaps I'm an optimist, pherhaps I'm too easily satisfied."

It's not so much that you're an optomist as it is that you are satisfied with taking it up the ass. Now the rest of us, we aren't going to settle for that.

"But for the matter of fact, I'm living a very happy live. I prefer to be happy with a crap thingy then to be negative about everything all the time."

You're such a mean nasty person eyes. I bet you're one of those guys who calls people fags? Well I've got news for you buddy, they're "homosexuals" and they are human beings like you and me. *Begins to cry* Why can't you just be nice? Why do you always have to be so mean and negative? I'm a good person!! A human being! Don't be so mean and nasty!!

Seriously cybergeek, go cry me a river somewhere else.

[Robert Plomp]

Well Cybergeek, you're not afraid to look like an idiot, I'll give you that much

translation: Well IWantToInsultYouAnyway, how dare you to counter my opinion with arguments. When I say something, everybody that disagrees is an idiot.

Actually that's because you're an idiot.

translation: everybody that disagrees with me is an idiot because I'm an all-powerful omniscient omnipotent omnipresent and omnibenevolent being. In fact I'm the missing link, the first cause and the creation of everything. Disagree with me and you're an unworthy puny idiot. I LOVE MYSELF SO MUCH

You need only load the map a few times with the different map settings to see that the map settings don't really make a difference.

translation: I tried it once, and it was the same ! Now you come and tell me you tried it 100 times and you observed something else ? Impossible.

All the graphics blend together

translation: Like in real world mountains should pop up everywhere and not blend together ! And that counts for the rest of the terrain as well

Did you not notice the millions of mods that have come out to fix the graphics?

translation: neither did I because there aren't that much and I didn't spend much time on the game since I'm an oldfashioned civ2 cheater and I won't like civ3 anyway since I won't be able to win a game.

Did you not notice that every game there are mass clumps of each terrain type? Or are you too ****ing stupid?

translation: You must be really stupid to think it's normal that with about 8 different tyles and 10000 tyles per game the terrain would clumb, besides that, like I said before, every normal person knows that terrain doesn't clumb together in real world ! You must be stupid to think otherwise.

No, I give posts like that when a lone moron comes along and posts something like what you posted.

translation: I don't know how to come up with counter arguments thus I call everybody that disagrees with me a moron.

I guess you're just one of those fanboys that will argue how great the game his while the other 99.9% of us tell you how ****ing bad it is.

translation: You like the game, thus you must be a fanboy that has a personal opinion without going with the mass !

Again, you're not afraid to come out and look like an idiot.

translation: you would look oh so much more inteligent if you would react like me, insulting, swearing and avoiding every smart argument.

It's not so much that you're an optomist as it is that you are satisfied with taking it up the ass.

translation: Since I'm a paranoid frustrated teenage boy I want to put some sex-related stuff in here. That would be cool.

Now the rest of us, we aren't going to settle for that.

translation: I just prefer to talk about things like that, for sure if I can swear much and insult as much as possible people !

I bet you're one of those guys who calls people fags? Well I've got news for you buddy, they're "homosexuals" and they are human beings like you and me

translation: Now I've sweared, insulted and I talked about sex I need to talk about homosexuals as well, eventhough it has nothing to do with the topic.

*Begins to cry* Why can't you just be nice? Why do you always have to be so mean and negative? I'm a good person!! A human being! Don't be so mean and nasty!!

translation: before CyberShy comes with a smart reaction I will impersonate him a little bit so people will think he's the idiot and not me.

oh well, eyes.................
have fun creating a new reply !
I'm sure it must be a challenge to you to top this one !
and in fact, I love it to hear teenage boys voice their opinion this way ! rock on, you're the man

Top this one? What's there to top? All you did was make "translations" of my quotes....which amounted to? You're telling me one thing and then doing it yourself. This last post had absolutely nothing in it. I rest my case. Next!

[Rasputin]

and as always without eyes on the forums our threads would be short and boring......

Keep up the good work Sean !!!!

[Robert Plomp]

Enigmaticgod, nothing to worry about.
I just noticed that it was impossible to have an inteligent conversation with you thus I decided to make some fun about you (not that you made it difficult for me to do btw)

and yeah, you're right. The translation of your post didn't add much to this thread
I must say that I'm slightly dissapointed that you didn't put some frustrated teenage stuff in it like you did so very well in your last post. Don't tell me you're growing up. Next post some more insults and gay-related talk plz ! That's exactly what we love so much about you !

Keep up the good work !

So in other words you have nothing else to come back with and you're using this as an excuse to back out of the argument. The teenage thing is getting old too.

[Robert Plomp]

c'mon, there are about 2 pherhaps 3 lines that hold some kind of an argument. the rest of it is nothing more then some blatant insulting and stuff. And since even those lines (about the worldmap) don't give any new arguments on what I said (It's just repeating of what you said before) you can't expect me to reply too serious on that.

and about the teenage thing getting old...........
I hope so do you, one day.

[War4ever]

have they confirmed a release of civ3 mp yet....or are we still speculating that it will even happen? i had heard the designers talk about it but not confirm any date yet....

somehow i don't think spring 2002 looks hopefull

All of my arguments are on the first post of this thread. Obviously you skipped that one or you wouldn't sound like such a moron. You can't help it though, it's genetics. You were simply dealt a bad hand by fate, and there's nothing you can do about it. I understand.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by EnigmaticGod
I understand.

Now that fits in rather well with a certain Tibetan philosophy that all wisdom begins with the phrase "I don't understand".

On the resource issue I think people may be ignoring the point that, while strategic resources are vitally important they are also editable (One of the few successes of the partially functional editor ).
There's no reason why MP games/players couldn't get used to pre-made maps with (neutrally) edited (ie: more distributed) strategic resources.
Or even generate a random map on the spot and have the resources editted by a non-player.
The site could host a library of a multitude of them, with pre-defined starting and resource locs - the often despised rts genre has used such maps successfully for years - no reason why civers couldn't do the same thing - a la civfanatics gotm.

This is all under the assumption that there is no in-game option to do the same come the release of MP Gold in any case ...

[Smash]

The idea of pre made anything has not been real popular in civ2 mp.Yes,they are used,but I'd bet dollars to donuts a poll would go majority for all random.

I can't see it being real popular for civ3 mp.I spose if there were no other way.....nah...if you get short changed on terrain or whatever,its up to you to make it better.Lots of civ2 mp games have been "won" by players that started on dirt and rocks.

[rah]

Gotta agree with the smashman. I'm looking forward to resource wars in CIVIII. Early trade specials already play a big role in CIVII and people have dealt with that for years. Yes it would be nice if the land would be more equal, but what the hey, you have to deal with the hand you're dealt.

In civII huts is what usually had more impact in the early game. If we play CivIII MP at deity, the huts suck (except for expansionists) which will do two things. Even the start out a little and make expansionist worth something. Getting a half dozen extra techs or a settler will be big in MP. Especially with no AIs to do early tech trading with. This evens the extra abilities out a little, and as long as everyone can pick whatever combo of characteristics, we should see more variety in play style. There will be definate differences for militaristic and builder strats.


RAH

[War4ever]

you need to disable leaders too.... no one will attack if the opposition has a chance of a leader if the attacks fail, and lets be honest, elite or no elite, many attacks fail.

with all the tweaking this game will need it won't be civ3 were playing , it will be smac on earth

[Ming]

I really don't care if Civ III MP is ANYTHING like the current Civ III.

I just want a MP game that is "reasonable" fair, and FUN!. It should move along QUICKLY in the early years, and support different strategies to success. However they want to do it... I don't care, as long as we have a game worth playing when they are all done with it

[rah]

Actually, I'm just screwing with this thread to see if this post disappears when they move back to the other server. But as long as I'm here.

WAR4.
"you need to disable leaders too.... no one will attack if the opposition has a chance of a leader if the attacks fail, and lets be honest, elite or no elite, many attacks fail. "

I think the oposite will occur. The leader concept will replace the huts as the extra luck that will seperate you from your oponents.
At deity, if you're not expansionist, huts just plain suck. So instead of maximizing hut opportunities like in CIVII, you will try to maximize leader opportunities in CIVIII. This can only be accomplished by attacking or defending. Against the AI, defending can be a profitable option. You can set up a situation that is favorable to you where you know the AI will attack. THAT IS LESS LIKELY AGAINST A REAL PLAYER. Putting elite units together in a place is not likely to encourage a real player to attack you. So while there is a chance to get a leader on defense, I think it will happen less and when it does, it's more likely that no defender will survive and and the leader will never used by you.

So that leaves ATTACKING. The person choosing the battle time, place and conditions, usually has the advantage. (if he didn't, why the heck is he attacking) Committing 20 troops on an attack and lossing most of them will be profitable as long as..
1. the defensive position is destroyed. (and as long as you have a enough troops, the civ III combat model makes it inevitable.)
2. every now and then you get a leader.

We'll see, but unless drastic changes are made prior to MP realease, I still believe that more aggressive play will be the norm.

RAH
OF COURSE WITHOUT MP BEING OUT< PURE SPECULATION>

[Smash]

I totally agree with that.It works in solo play.Aggressive war mongering is the best(and funnest) way to play this incarnation.
There won't be anymore peacenik caravan civs defended by 6 phalanx players.It won't work..even if isolated..tech caps are a killer to isolated perfectionist.

If you look at the game,there really isn't that much to do except hit the warpath.Tech broker won't work in MP ..there may be some trading of resources should games actually go that far.But you are not going to rake in like you do against ai.Humans will actually want something decent in return

I think it be "windows of opportunity" type warfare.Not unlike civ2 with knights,or crusaders,catapults etc.
Swords.Horses.Knights.Maybe some early archer rushes.

I got iron.You don't.Thats a shame.Here comes some swordsmen...

[rah]

Smash, while I agree that "window of opp" will always be part of the game, with the new/old combat system, quantity can beat quality, so even a warrior rush might be able to get the job done. This should keep things interesting in the early game. They'll be a fine balance between what you hold in reserve for defense and what you can amass for offense. A developed road system will be the key to defense. But without zoc, it might be a better chess type game.

I really do hope they remove the click on enemy stack and see the entire makeup. It will be more exciting if three stacks are moving towards your cities and you don't know with are the diversions and which one is the real attack force. AND STACK MOVEMENT IS A CRITICAL NEED.

Rich
It will be more of a war game.

[Smash]

hehehe..after playing some civ3 last night I was just coming tp post that.
You are right.Because of the screwy combat system,sheer numbers is the way to go.You are gonna lose with knight #2 to that spearman no matter what.So,take the loss and get it with the next unit.

I may be missing something,but I can't tell if boats are empty or full just by looking at them.I can see some very nervous mp moments with this.

Something I do when I get "stalemated" by defenders is to start pillaging roads to resources and that connect cities.This actually does something.Its very effective.I can see alot of this and/or bombarding of said resources.

I ain't the greatest civ3 player but I see no other alternative than war.There is a limit on how much can be done by yourself.

I think maybe games will be "over" earlier than civ2 mp.If you fall behind,there is really nothing you can do to catch up.No one is gonna trade tech and let you back in...war,war,war.It will be the way.

[Alexander's Horse]

I'm on my third game of civ III now. So far I've won at Chieftain and lost at warlord

They really need to fix a few things before this game will be viable for MP. The main thing is stacked movement. Otherwise turns will last forever.

[Frank Johnson]

Interesting. But say you are playing in a game with 5 or 6 players....eventually the corruption model just makes it near impossible to get descent production out of a territory....often times I find myself razing the second half of a civilization just because building there won't help me much......I guess that could be countered with a despotism pop rush strat, but still in a game with serveral players, even if I have a window of oppertunity, or a larger number of units..........It may not be worth it to attack, and leave my position open, just to gain some highly corrupted ground.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Frank Johnson
It may not be worth it to attack, and leave my position open, just to gain some highly corrupted ground.

But there are many reasons why such an attack will be worth it even if all you are going to do is raze cities, or keep many cities that will never produce squat (forbidden palace aside)

1) In an MP game, you are looking to beat the other players... destroying their ability to win the game is a good thing

2) Removing somebody from your land mass is also a must. While you gain nothing in terms of viable cities, you limit what somebody can do to you

3) If they have the resources you need... enough said

Yes, you may "leave your position open"... but that's a risk you may have to take. With the combat system the way it is, you are never safe from attack any way. Before railroads... no position is safe from a wave attack. And if you have all your defensive units in a singe position to stop such an attack, the attacker can just go around it and take out other targets

[DaveV]

Originally posted by Ming
Before railroads... no position is safe from a wave attack. And if you have all your defensive units in a singe position to stop such an attack, the attacker can just go around it and take out other targets

Actually, if someone could follow your earlier advice and control an entire landmass, there's an easy solution: line the shoreline with troops, shoulder to shoulder. Ships/planes/artillery can't kill them, and you're safe until the bad guys have marines.

[Ming]

Originally posted by DaveV
Actually, if someone could follow your earlier advice and control an entire landmass, there's an easy solution: line the shoreline with troops, shoulder to shoulder. Ships/planes/artillery can't kill them, and you're safe until the bad guys have marines.

True enough... but just think of the cost for unit support to do this