Civilisation players, check in!

[lazarus]

I've been finally kicking butt on Civ2's Emperor level. Just had a game with 6 cities trading Uranium!

I'm about to move to Deity level to get my ego in check.

Anybody else having a problem moving to CivIII? I just can't get into it at all.

[Skinner]

1. Love all the civ games.

I love CivIII. Thought it was better than CivII. But I pretty much had to stop cold-turkey because they are too addictive.

Your post reminds me...

(Mouse cursor hovers over "CivIII" icon, Skinner tries to muster the willpower...)

[lazarus]

2. What am I missing, then?

I just can't get into CivIII at all.

I get most of the new features, as they're just stolen from Alpha Centauri. I absolutely don't understand the trade stuff.

And I don't like the graphics at all. I dunno, maybe it's me.

[Skinner]

3. I can't help you, unfortunately.

Its been a long time since I played, and I've forgotten most of the details. I wasn't very good at it.

I think Elad was a power-player at one point. After CivIII came out, I didn't hear from him for weeks. :D

[lazarus]

4. Get him in here, then

I spent all this money on it, I may as well figure it out.

OTOH, Civ2 is still a blast.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

12. Laz, What Parts Do You Dislike?

The graphics, you can install some mods that might make them more palatable to you (they have different styles available, created by users, for terrain, roads, irrigation, mines, etc.).

The trade stuff, I can walk you through. Strategy and tactics, too.

DTH

[lazarus]

13. I"m a builder

I love having just 12-20 cities with full railroads and farmland and all city improvements. I'm also big on tech.

I hate conquest.

I'll have to look for some graphics mods over on the CivFanatics boards.

Actually, the Civ2 I play is Test of Time. I just play the original version, so I just have nice updated graphics.

Trade, I can't get at all. I dislike the split between workers and settlers (my least favourite bit of Alpha Centauri).

And I'm not a big fan of so many ways to win. I'm still old school. I play it the same way I played Magic and virtually all my other games; defense, defense, defense, then win. So I just focus on spaceship construction.

And I don't have a clue on the trade. I like the old caravan/freight concept.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

19. I'm With You on Building

Based on what you're saying, I recommend shutting off diplomatic victory, wonder victory (which is usually shut off anyway), and culture victory at game start, that way you are left with domination, conquest and spaceship, just like Civ2.

I look at the worker/settler split a little differently, I actually enjoy paying less (1 pop and 10 shields is really cheap, and even new settlements can start pumping them out in 5 turns if you do it right) for workers, with settlers becoming special-purpose units that you only build when needed (or predicting a need). The rule of thumb is to have at least one worker for each population center you own, although I personally like to up that number a bit.

Trade is a bit tricky. Things like technology and workers and gold and cities (these typically never get traded unless demanded or offered by you in the course of suing for peace) can be traded any time (stick workers on your capital to make them available for trade, although I seldom if ever offer my own people up, I only ever offer captured workers).

For the rest, you first have to have a road pathway, even if circuitous, from your capital to theirs. That is the prerequisite. Alternatively, you can use one of your harbors to one of theirs, but you need to be able to trace a line through explored water squares that your vessels are currently able to cross safely (i.e. early on, you're only going to be able to use coastal squares, then sea squares at Astronomy, and finally ocean squares at Navigation).

Once you have a road or harbor pathway, you can start trading excess resources. These are great not only to obtain extra luxuries that you don't have access to yourself, but also to offer for gold and technology. Much of the value proposition is a little trial-and-error but you can really benefit your empire if you engage in it.

Once you have a deal, it continues for 20 turns, then you renegotiate (make sure the "always renegotiate deals" option is turned on). Be careful, if you declare war on someone while you have an active deal with them, you are branded as treacherous and the AI is much less likely to deal with you (or deal with you favorably).

Maps can be traded once you obtain a higher-level tech. It used to be relatively easy at Map Making (which certainly seemed intuitive to me), but they made it harder now, I can't remember which tech it is, but Navigation is what rings a bell.

I recommend trying the Celts in Conquests, they're a really fun Civ to play, the combo of Agricultural and Religious is very powerful (early 30 point temples combined with rush building when you're 20 away at size 2 gives you great culture, and it also pops your city radius quickly so you can exploit all of your tiles), and they have one of the best Unique Units in the game, the 3-2-2 Celtic Swordsman (and it's also one of the coolest graphics). Make sure your start position has lots of fresh water nearby, because in order to get the bonus food in the center square, you need to be on a river or lake (ESPECIALLY for your first city).

This fresh water requirement goes away after you leave Despotism, but the key to Agricultural is to leverage it to a fast start. You will outgrow your neighbors quickly, if you do it right. I like having a sprawling empire big enough to intimidate my neighbors so that they don't declare war on me as often, and I'm also able to have most of the resources I need (especially iron, and later coal) already within my empire's borders, without needing to attack others as much.

One neat research trick is to race to Philosophy to get a free tech, and I either take Literature, or if I already start with Alphabet or if I can grab a lead on my opponents, I will take a brief detour to research Code of Laws so that when I get Philosophy, I can take the ultra-expensive Republic as my free bonus tech. Then a quick revolution (if you're Religious), and you're out of Despotism as early as 1500 BC or so.

Hope this helps!

DTH

[DoveTurnedHawk]

11. Civ3 Rocks, Especially the Free Rise and Rule Modpack for Conquests

I have the Conquests add-on pack, and it's great, but even better is the Rise and Rule expansion module for it. It was just rated one of the top user-designed modules ever, and it adds tons of advances, wonders, improvements and all the rest.

If you don't have Conquests, you can get it really cheap these days, and the Rise and Rule modpack is available here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=2296604#post2296604

DTH, Encouraging Wasted Hours Since 1970!

[lazarus]

14. I bought the complete version

3 discs, with Conquests and PTW. Haven't heard of Rise and Rule.

I do like: spheres of influence; expanded diplomacy concepts; differences in tribes.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

20. Rise and Rule Is the BEST!

Once you've got the hang of the basic Conquests, you should try it out. It's like a completely different game, and IMO it's actually better. It's all user-designed, and free, and the design team has done a simply amazing job.

Imagine Civ3 on crack. That's what R&R is. Collectively, there are hundreds of new units, techs, improvements and wonders. It takes a game or two under your belt to get the hang of it, and it can be a little overwhelming at first, but it is really a better game, IMO.

The page where you can get it (and discuss it) is here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=2296604#post2296604

DTH

[Modem Butterfly]

17. We love CIV III - my partner plays it all the time

In fact, he's been playing since 5 AM. It's good to have multiple computers.

[ralps]

5. I've been playing Civ3 since it came out.

I usually play on the huge Pangea map with 3 other opponents as the Persian leader chieftain level and kick every one's ass. I usually win culturally. As far as trading goes it really helps keep your citizens happy.
:hi:

[CrownPrinceBandar]

6. Sid Meier sells crack!...................................

I wanna get Civ III complete but shudder at the amount of time it will eat up. As I have said before, I have had PROBLEMS managing my time during my Alpha C jags.

[Enraged_Ape]

7. I still play Civ II regularly

I'm such a terrible player that I don't think I've ever made it past Warrior mode. But it's still educational and fun.

I tried Civ III, but gave up in boredom and frustration. I think the worst thing about adding realism to this type of game is that it so often increases micromanagement. I get enough of that in my daily life; I don't look for it in computer games.

[leftofthedial]

8. I'm a Civ III addict

It took me about three marathon sessions with it to convert me from Civ II, but now it's a serious addiction.

I'm not the greatest. I'm more of a builder than a warmonger and I really like the ancient-era part of the game better than the modern part. Same was true on Civ and Civ II.

[Tweed]

9. Yeah, I agree with you

I like to build up everything to the max, then I'll go out and fight. So often, I'll just protect myself until the 20th century and then I'll start picking everyone off because you have to to win the game.

Never had the time to play Civ III. I became addicted to a game called Europa Universalis & FIFA 2004

[leftofthedial]

10. never heard of those

I'm a Mac person, so my choices are more limited

[AZCat]

15. The Original Civ was my first obsession

My uncle had a computer back when I was young. This was a big deal because not only did my family not have a computer, we didn't have a TV. When my brother and I stayed at my uncle's place overnight he introduced us to Civ and I ended up playing for ~ten hours while he and my brother did something else (don't remember what). I have been in love with "builder" games ever since, both RTS, turn-based, and city builders.

I think is humerous in games when the strategy for winning a game conflicts with my personal ethics (e.g. using nukes in Civ). I struggle with it every time - over the fate of fake people and events! I just can't see GW doing that - he strikes me as the type that would use cheat codes to access nukes or speed up tech research.

[Mojambo]

16. Had to give it up.

I'm going to need a new version of it before I can play again. Not that it isn't a great game, but I just lost interest.

Too many games I guess.

[NewHampshireDem]

18. Heh ... I fired up Civ III a couple weekends ago ...

There is something so damn addicting about revealling that map ... I get excited when my warrior or scout encounters mountains so I can see more terrain. Then, its a race to get that first neighboring city to join your civ ...


Anyway, upon further review, I think Civ I and Civ III are superior to Civ II. To each his own, I guess. :shrug:

I notice that no one has mentioned Call to Power ... :evilgrin:

[Chovexani]

21. I'm a Civ addict from back in the day

And I'm with you on Civ3. I just can't get into it at all. I think the enforced time limit is my main problem with it, I feel so rushed that I can't enjoy myself.

It kinda feels like an imposter Civ to me, like it's got the trappings and everything but doesn't really feel like Civ. Which is weird, because I'm one of the few people I know that enjoyed Call to Power. :crazy:

Civ2 is like crack to me though. I hacked the game (which is SO easy to do, even I could do it), and made all the countries kingdoms from the Belgariad/Malloreon Eddings novels. :D I like to simulate the Alorn Council by playing as Belgarion of Riva and allying with Algaria/Drasnia/Cherek and then kicking some Angarak ass (except I leave the Nadraks alone, I always liked them hehe).

[paulk]

22. I started with Civ 1 on an Amiga 2000 a long time ago

it's my favorite game, right up through Civ 2 and 3.

I haven't played in a awhile though - I have to make a conscious effort to say away or else I wouldn't get anything done at all.

I found Civ 3 a lot harder - I could win with civ 2 on emperor pretty consistantly. I really like the Conquests module - I'm into ancients a lot more than modern.

Give Civ 3 another shot.

[comradebillyboy]

23. civ 2 was great, but civ-the conquests is very good

there are several really excellent scenarios in the conquests, incl:\rise of rome, fall of rome, mesoamerica, age of discovery, fuedal japan, the napolenic wars and ww2.

its much more complex than civ 2. stand alone civ 3 is not so wonderful, but the version in the conquests package is much better

[Terran]

24. I'm a huge Civ addict

I've been playing since the first one came out. I really like Civ3 better than 2 in most ways, although I miss the Wonder movies a lot--they are 'wonder'-ful! I don't quite understand how some folks are saying they find Civ3 boring. I think the graphics alone are so beautiful, coupled with the ambient sounds; exploring the map is a big part of the fun.

I admit that for a long time I was finding the end-game boring, but I recently moved the difficulty up a notch to the third level (I forget what it's called in 3), and my games have been *much* more exciting.

I also just recently learned of the vast amount of customization you can find on-line, so now I've been playing with custom graphics and it adds a lot to the gaming experience. I've even seen graphics that simulate Mars, and one set that makes your world look like a map from a Tolkein novel.

Right now I'm playing a weird kind of game. I wanted something with minimal conflict, because basically I prefer to win by outbuilding my opponents, not conquering them. So I'm playing Spain on a huge map with just two opponents, and currently have probably 120+ cities. I'm rebuilding my Palace for the second time in an attempt to improve the cities on a secondary continent (some of which used to belong to the Egyptians; ok, I had a little war, but I didn't start it).

It's about 1920 and I'm researching superconductor.

[Forkboy]

25. I hate Civ3's faster expansion

It's the biggest drawback I have with the game.The masterful pacing of Civ2 is long gone :-(

Civ3 is still a damn good game,but I'll take Civ2 over it anyday.

Of course,I suck at both games anyways :)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

26. Bro, Play Rise and Rule

I think you'll really like it. Expansion (in terms of cities) is generally slower across-the-board, and there are TONS more techs to churn through (although the 4-turn minimum has been eliminated, so it's technically possible to get techs in 1-3 turns, if you have enough science output).

The link is elsewhere in the thread.

DTH

[Forkboy]

27. Is that something I'll have to PAY for?

Just kidding...I'll check it out sometime soon.Have to get a new NHL game first though...priorities,and the NHL strike is starting to kill me! :)