Is Civ Knowledge Transferrable?

rwprice · January 20, 2002, 02:01

As I continue to struggle to grasp the nuances of Civ3, I've been wondering...does expertise in one Civ game help in the others? For instance, would it help to become expert at say, Alpha Centauri and then switch back to Civ3? The reason I'm wondering is that there's a wealth of centralized knowledge available in Vel's strategy guides. So, if I used that, along with Prima's guide, and learned my way around SMAC thoroughly, would I be in a better position to understand Civ3 and other similar games?

Marquis de Sodaq · January 20, 2002, 11:20

You might gain some, but get hurt in other ways. It's been clear that many people who moved on from CivII were frustrated with Civ3 - they were trying to play CivII on the new game, and it just didn't work out very well. I get the feeling it might be far more helpful to just play Civ3, as many of its elements are done differently than in the other games of the genre.

Willem · January 20, 2002, 12:06

Quote:

Originally posted by rwprice
As I continue to struggle to grasp the nuances of Civ3, I've been wondering...does expertise in one Civ game help in the others? For instance, would it help to become expert at say, Alpha Centauri and then switch back to Civ3? The reason I'm wondering is that there's a wealth of centralized knowledge available in Vel's strategy guides. So, if I used that, along with Prima's guide, and learned my way around SMAC thoroughly, would I be in a better position to understand Civ3 and other similar games?

I've played all of them, many, many times and I had to change my approach quite a bit after I first started playing Civ III, since they changed a number of the old rules. There are some areas where having played past versions has helped, but in a number of important aspects it's a whole new ballgame. So I wouldn't bother to much with previous games, though you might be able to pick up a few tricks, just figure this one out.

MonsterMan · January 20, 2002, 16:36

I'd say that some small, basic things I learned from earlier Civs still holds true. Always explore with warriors, not actual Explorers. Warriors have a chance of surviving booby trapped goody huts, but more importantly if you discover a nearby civilization, the warriors can converge on it and nip it in the bud. In one game I defeated the russians in like 3500 BC by using warriors instead of anything else.

Protecting offensive infantry with defensive units have always been a sound idea. And on the plus side you have an immediate detachment to stay in newly-conquered cities.

But for anything more advanced, I don't think past experience helps much.

Skanky Burns · January 21, 2002, 05:13

Quote:

Originally posted by rwprice
The reason I'm wondering is that there's a wealth of centralized knowledge available in Vel's strategy guides.

Have you checked the strategy forums yet??
The reason I ask is because there's a wealth of centralized knowledge available in Vel's strategy guides... all relating to Civ 3!! Three threads so far, and the forth on its way, chock full of great strategies, ideas, and knowledge to help you be a better Civ 3er.

rwprice · January 22, 2002, 01:15

Skanky,
Thanks for the tip. Yes, I have checked out those forums. In fact, when I have time, I go there and cut and paste much of that into a Word doc that I can read off-line. So far, I've got about 130 pages or so!

The main reason I was asking is that the knowledge about Civ3 is still evolving, while Vel's stuff for SMAC has pretty much been proven. My thought was that I could use it as a sort of virtual tour guide to help me understand the game and then move back to Civ3. I do see everyone's point, though, that Civ3 is a different enough beast that I should take it on its own. I think I'll do that.

Thanks everyone for your responses.