February 28, 2002, 18:48
|
#1
|
Warlord
Local Time: 16:10
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 184
|
It seems...
This game is based too much on luck and being in the right place than strategy. The reason I say that is if you look at the historical record, size of the nation and natural resources does not always equate to greatness. Look at England, for example, the country itself is dinky compared to some other nations, but yet they were able to build an impressive empire.
In Civ3, if you play with a realistic map that is made of continents, there is a good chance, you are going to end up in a shitty location. Now, that is fine with me. I love a challenge, but it seems that once a Civ gets a major head start on you, it's almost impossible to catch up.
1) Waging war to expand your territory is very tough. The odds are on the defender's side, and if you are in war too long, you fall farther behind.
2) The AI deals with you, the human, more harshly than it seems to deal with itself. If you are a pitiful little island state, with nothing to offer, it's hard to get the AI to deal with you.
3) The larger a civ is, the faster it can research new advances. It's very difficult to catch up.
I'm sure there are solutions in a gaming sense to all these problems, but when I play Civ3, I'm looking to relive history with my own world, rather than playing a game a chance.
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2002, 21:22
|
#2
|
Chieftain
Local Time: 21:10
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 32
|
Quote:
|
Look at England, for example, the country itself is dinky compared to some other nations, but yet they were able to build an impressive empire
|
guess they were either lucky, or in the right places at the right times.....
Welcome to civ3. Ruthless AI. Steep learning curve. It took me a good dozen games watching the replay to figure out how to just keep up.
__________________
something-or-other WALKS!
|
|
|
|
March 1, 2002, 13:06
|
#3
|
Emperor
Local Time: 21:10
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: of poor english grammar
Posts: 4,307
|
Stick with cheiftan level, it seems that Warlord is still to hard for you.
Just joking man, you'll get the hang of it. I use to get creamed at warlord before, but now I kick the AI's ass at monarch with my eyes closed. Like Techmoron....eeee.....Technoron said, really steep learning curve.
To Technoron:
Sry man, I just HAD to say it once.
Spec.
__________________
-Never argue with an idiot; He will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.
|
|
|
|
March 1, 2002, 16:34
|
#4
|
Emperor
Local Time: 17:10
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 3,810
|
Welcome to Firaxis' version of RL. To win you must be lucky, ruthless, and good. England was all three, eventually using sea power to secure sea supremacy and conquering less tehnically advanced civs through trade and firepower. IF the Spanish Armada had not hit that storm, IF the scots, welch, and Irish had not been so internally divided, IF Napoleon had solved the English Channel problem, we might not be saying what a great empire they were. So there definitely was a little luck there, compounded by ruthless exploitation of their island neighbors and wise enhancement of their natural defenses.
__________________
No matter where you go, there you are. - Buckaroo Banzai
"I played it [Civilization] for three months and then realised I hadn't done any work. In the end, I had to delete all the saved files and smash the CD." Iain Banks, author
|
|
|
|
March 1, 2002, 18:03
|
#5
|
Warlord
Local Time: 16:10
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 184
|
Yeah, now that you point it out, I guess the English did have some luck on their side. I'll check out the strategy forum.
|
|
|
|
Posting 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
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:10.
|
|