Who do you pick on? - Page 2

nato · March 9, 2002, 18:42

Quote:

Aren't you mistaking Civ3 for real life? It's just is a game, with rules, settings and traits, making decent "characters" for the civ leaders.

Aren't you mistaking my post "Glad to see plenty of people still hate us evil Americans!" for "I think Civ3 is real life, not a game" ?

I'm not sure how you leapt to that conclusion. Maybe you're one of the people who enjoys saying "its only a game" to show how mature and grounded you are. If it makes you happy, lecture away!

edit: Sir Ralph, we probably see things exactly the same way... maybe I should have put a smily after my original post. Still, I don't see why you would think I had a reality problem...

Quote:

What's wrong with that theory?

I just don't like it because I think it is very untrue and unfair. But thats another thread.

I posted it because that was the only reason I could figure for the American vote being so high. It is obvious why the Germans and Zulus are so hated, because they are the most aggressive (the only civs with 5). The Americans however I can't see much game reason to target (I think they are 3, like many others). So I figured it was out-of-game antipathy, which I've seen before.

Like a lot of people, I think the expansionistic trait is pretty weak, so I don't expect the Americans to be too strong, all else being equal. However I never play as one of the new world civs, so they usually have plenty of time to develop before I get to them. Sometimes they are ok, sometimes they get wiped out by the Iroquois. Just in my experience, of course.

Harovan · March 9, 2002, 21:56

A smiley in your post would have been helpful. It doesn't protect you from being mistaken though. The prove: I placed 3 smileys in my post and you still took it bloody serious.

PS: Ah, I forgot:

nato · March 10, 2002, 01:19

Ahh, you started it.

Actually that is like only the second time I've ever used a smiley.

I guess they are useful for conveying tone. Learn something every thread!

As to the thread, I thought about it and my answer to who I pick on really is my immediate neighbor. Somehow in Civ3 this is just even more vital than in Civ2, I think.

Ninot · March 10, 2002, 01:37

Ok, im gonna put a sub-question in here.

If you have a good reason to go to war with a civ, but that civ is on a continent atleast 4-5 turns away by sea-travel, do you go to war with them? (Presume either you have full control of your own continent, or you don't)

I myself did the trip once. I mentioned it before I believe. USA was rising fast on the score list, and they were making threats against everyone... a nice global coalition stopped that. Just about everybody was landing forces on the beaches of America.

TheDarkCavalier · March 10, 2002, 02:06

heh.. my strat would be land, and THEN go to war...

The Thinker · March 10, 2002, 05:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Ninot
Ok, im gonna put a sub-question in here.

If you have a good reason to go to war with a civ, but that civ is on a continent atleast 4-5 turns away by sea-travel, do you go to war with them? (Presume either you have full control of your own continent, or you don't)

Do I want the other Civ's land, or are they becoming a problem? If I want the land I have to go there but if it's a case of someone ticking me off I'll try and find two or three other Civs to fight for me. Properly done, before all Civs in the game see you as the clear leader, other Civs will pay to join your war.

Rik

KrazyHorse · March 10, 2002, 14:16

I usually play as Greece, so the easiest targets are often Russia and Egypt. Rome is also very near, but tends to be stronger militarily than those two (especially in early game when I get what conquering I want to do done).

Quanta · March 11, 2002, 04:22

Not much surprise here - the Zulus - but. . . but. . . they started it - ALWAYS

MonsterMan · March 11, 2002, 07:19

Persia has been my foe in many games, so now I like to take care of them ASAP >:-)

Thrawn05 · March 11, 2002, 08:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Some people pick their enemies for reasons related to the game, some for real life, I expect. Same with how people pick the civs they play... the Americans are one of the weakest civs, yet people play them quite a bit out of patriotism, I suppose.

I don't, their UU sucks.

I am considering making a change in the editor about that. Perhaps let the marine be the US UU?

Thrawn05 · March 11, 2002, 09:05

Quote:

Originally posted by The Thinker

Do I want the other Civ's land, or are they becoming a problem? If I want the land I have to go there but if it's a case of someone ticking me off I'll try and find two or three other Civs to fight for me. Properly done, before all Civs in the game see you as the clear leader, other Civs will pay to join your war.

Rik

This happened to me before. I wanted to fight the greeks that were on a contienent about 8 turns away, but there were no civs on his land (the other four civs were on mine). What I did was stock up on galleons and units. Stupid me I should have waited, since I got transports tech right before I was going to war. So, I loaded up infantry and set sail.

I didn't want to conquer the entire greek empire just yet. I went for a costal city. I landed and took control of the city. From there I made additional units and soon I was attacking the rest of his empire with tanks. I razed all but two cities, the costal city (i think it was sparta), and their capital Athens, because I need some sort of prize (since Firaxis didn't put in animation that showed alexander's head on a silver dish).