does the game work with generic civs?

[lord of the mark]

Back when the game was under development i was part of the unique vs generic civs debate. For a variety of reasons which i wont rehash here i preferred generic civs. I was told not to worry, there would be an option to turn civ-specific attributes and unique units off. I was concerned that this would mean A. a lesser game, with one of its main features gone. B. Inability to take part in strategy discussions, etc.

I have not purchased the game for a variety of reasons, which i also will not go into here.

The game has been out long enough to gather some anwers to the following questions:

1. Do many people play without civ specific abilities and unique units?
2. Is it still a good game when you do so?
3. Do those who play that way still find useful strategy discussions here?

[Jamski]

1. I don't, and I never have, and I doubt I ever will play with generic civs.
2.
3. I have seen some very good generic strat threads, but without the civ traits and the UUs the game is pretty dull, and I'd miss them.

-Jam

[Kuciwalker]

I haven't encountered anyone who regrets the civ traits.

[bongo]

The civ-specific traits adds to the game in a positive way. I like them and would miss them if they dissappeared.

OTH I would like to try a game with a generic civ against AI with traits on, just for the challenge.

[Catt]

1. I don't, and other than some brief experiments, never have. I don't know of anyone who regularly plays with the civ-specific abilities turned off.

2. From reading others' posts now and again, it appears that the game works fine (with an exception) with the abilities turned off. The exception relates to wonders and golden ages. A golden age lasts for twenty turns and provides your civilization with a boost in productivity. With civ-specific abilities turned on, golden ages are triggered by the first to occur of: (1) winning a battle with your civ-specific UU; and (2) building a great wonder, if, after the build, you possess one of more great wonders with civ traits that correspond to your civ's two traits. With civ-specific abilities turned off, it appears that building any wonder will automatically trigger your golden age -- this means that strategies regarding the optimal timing of your golden age are often moot.

3. Although I don't play with the abilities turned off, I would think that many of the strategy discussions would still be very worthwhile -- there are plenty of discussions on generic game challenges and features. You would of course have little to contribute or gain in the way of trait-related and UU-related strategy discussions.

One final opinion - the civ-specific abilities greatly increase the game's replay value for me. Without civ-specific abilities, I might well have stopped playing (or reduced my playing time considerably) by now -- but starting random games with random civs provides the level of interest and challenge I enjoy by forcing me to set a strategy to maximize the inate abilities of my civ and its surrounding terrain, opponents, etc.

Catt

[Louis XXIV]

The good news is any Civ has its advantages, so you could play with any of them, and still be fine (UUs add to the game, but don't terribly un-balance them)

I never play with them off (has anybody played Civ2 with simplified combat?)

If you don't play with Civ specific abilities the game won't change much. With them on, it adds a bit of flavor to each civ (but won't change the over-all game)

If you do keep them off, the over-all strategy will stay the same. You won't get discussions like "Which UU is the best?" or "which trait is the best?" or "which Civ is the best?" These questions are pointless anyway because there is no "best" civ

If you do plan to purchase the game, I would suggest starting with unique Civs. Since you prefer generic, don't pick a civ because of its abilities (pick whoever you would pick if it was generic). If you don't like the advantages, play generic.

[TheArsenal]

Civ specific abilities are the game, as far as I am concerned. Because not only does it affect how I manage my civ, but how I choose to deal with others and they with me. I don't play with cultural linking on, so even if I always played the same civ over and over, changing neighbors with variable traits would still be enough to make it infinitely replayable.


edited for clarity

[Cruddy]

I went through a phase of playing generic Civs. My idea was that it would be easier, making the playing field more even and letting my human advantages beat the AI easier.

What I discovered was that it made the game MUCH harder. If you play a specific Civ then your game gets shaped by playing to that Civs strengths. I also found out that I wasn't nearly as good as I thought I was!

Needless to say, but I've switched them back on now. When I get good enough to win without them I'll try my idea again.

The game is more boring without the UUs. Without doubt. And maybe 98% of playing well has nothing to do with UUs, so yes, the advice forums are still valid.

[Jaybe]

AI behavior is also modified by the civ traits. Their building priorities (both improvements and unit types) in addition to their aggressiveness towards others.

[nbarclay]

I've only played one game with civ-specific traits turned off, but that's enough to convince me that a dislike for civ-specific traits should not get in the way of your buying the game. It plays fine without them, but the special traits add a lot of flavor.

Personally, I absolutely love how civ-specific traits are implemented in Civ 3. They influence playing style a good bit without actually telling you you're "supposed" to play a particular civ a particular way. That adds strategic dimensions that cannot exist when every civ is the same, yet it still leaves you ultimately in charge of deciding what you want your civ to be like. I was deeply concerned myself over whether I'd like the special traits aspect before I bought the game, but the design won me over very quickly.

A lot of the discussions in the strategy forum center around how to use specific traits and unique units, and with how to deal with specific AIs with their traits and unique units. But there is plenty of good general material as well.

I would recommend buying the game and giving the civ-specific abilities a chance before you dismiss them as a bad thing. If you don't like them and end up always playing with them turned off, you'll still get your money's worth.

Nathan

[Louis XXIV]

But, please don't let the so-called "best Civ" influence who you play

I know someone who thinks the English are the best Civ

And the UU has no disadvantages, so you can use them like the regular unit if you want to

[pedrojedi]

That's right. I, personally, think the "best civ" are the egyptians. Best for me, of course, because of my playing style. But I also love the Babylobians, the Carthagians, the Chinese (of course), and I am in my current game playing as the Japanese, which are another lovely civ to play with.

I don't like expansionist civs very much, but I remember fondly of a lost game that I played as the Vikings.

[bobbo008]

my problem has always been that they arent diverse enough...

[PrinceBimz]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Back when the game was under development i was part of the unique vs generic civs debate. For a variety of reasons which i wont rehash here i preferred generic civs. I was told not to worry, there would be an option to turn civ-specific attributes and unique units off. I was concerned that this would mean A. a lesser game, with one of its main features gone. B. Inability to take part in strategy discussions, etc.

I have not purchased the game for a variety of reasons, which i also will not go into here.

The game has been out long enough to gather some anwers to the following questions:

1. Do many people play without civ specific abilities and unique units?
2. Is it still a good game when you do so?
3. Do those who play that way still find useful strategy discussions here?

Wait a minute, let me get this clear...you have not purchased CIV3 yet? Or you may be referring to PTW?Man look I hope you are not referring to CIV3 itself. If so I will tell you right now it is hands down the best of the series and you are truely missing out. I thought I was bad for not having PTW yet, but someone not having CIV3... I am breathless

[statusperfect]

works? - YES
is fun? - NO

[bobbo008]

how about unique units/buildings for culturally-linked civs? i want things that the "other guy" cant have and vice versa. not "uh-oh the dreaded hoplite with one more defense point". also, so many of the unique units are the same... even with traits 2 out of 6 isnt very unique.

[Louis XXIV]

Originally posted by PrinceBimz


Wait a minute, let me get this clear...you have not purchased CIV3 yet? Or you may be referring to PTW?Man look I hope you are not referring to CIV3 itself. If so I will tell you right now it is hands down the best of the series and you are truely missing out. I thought I was bad for not having PTW yet, but someone not having CIV3... I am breathless

Nah, you don't need to get into that

I didn't get Civ3 until Christmas (I want PTW for my birthday at the end of the month *Hint, Hint*)

[TheArsenal]

What would be interesting, as short term novelty because, as I said, I like civ uniqute traits, is a generic game that allowed access to every type of UU.

[Louis XXIV]

I've thought about it

It would add a ton of variety (would you build a Numidian Mercenary, or a Hoplite?)

A Legionary or Immortal?

It adds a TON of possibilities