«

[laiocfar]

Originally posted by Anubis+Mar 6 2006, 05:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Anubis @ Mar 6 2006, 05:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-laiocfar@Mar 5 2006, 08:45 PM
Sid and co lost the path in civ3 but i will check it anyway

Just an opionion, or you have something to feed that argument with? [/b][/quote]
The game has lost the magic. I think that it has something about the graphics and the game speed. Civ II is simple and i think that it need some add-ons to be perfect. The mistakes of Civ II are tolerated cuz its a simple game without many asspirations. Civ III is too complex, it cann´t be edit by users like the other and each single mistake doesnt looks like a lacking of something that need to be added on, a mistake is a mistake and when more in the bases of the game worst. Some of the new things in civ III rocks but they also make many mistakes like the mines vs irrigation issue or the the fact that the AI its still too stupid. Personally i prefer Civ II to Civ III, but i like both. The point its that from Civ I to Civ II, there was a small change for better. And from Civ II to Civ III there were many changes but i not sure that all of they were right plus the fact that 500 MB more of the civ III dont are translate to 500 imporvements.

[Kon-Tiki]

I can't really see how Civ 2's a simple game. It's very, very powerful and allows plenty different styles of playing. The strategies you can use're near endless, plus it takes very complicated algorithms to get the AI as right as in Civ 2.

Civ 3's just as simple as Civ 2, meaning not at all, but both play and feel very intuitive (which's probably what you meant with simple. Correct me if I'm wrong there) They just made changes to some of the fundamental concepts. It did result in a game that was inferior to its predecessor, and had its share of bugs, probably due to production rush to get it shipped within a deadline.

Civ 4 fixes it, as it takes the good parts of the concept changes from Civ 3 and merges them with Civ 2, plus the game shows they had time to work on it, and took that time to take out all flaws and bugs, overall improving on both Civ 2 and Civ 3. Now if only they'd've put in the throne room/palace development and made wonder movies like in Civ 2, it'd be the perfect Civilization game

[Fruit Pie Jones]

Originally posted by BeefontheBone+Mar 6 2006, 03:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BeefontheBone @ Mar 6 2006, 03:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Anyone up for a succession game? I believe I posted about it in the MP section back in the day but nobody else had the game yet.[/b]

If you don't care that I R TEH SUXORZ and will probably singlehandedly ensure that our civilization never advances beyond the Poking Each Other With Sticks Age, I'm in! My wife might even support this endeavor when I tell her I'll be able to get my Civ fix in short, 10-turn bursts rather than eight-hour marathons!

<!--QuoteBegin-laiocfar
Civ III is too complex, it cann´t be edit by users like the other[/quote]
You should really check out Civ 4; it was redone from the ground up and is heavily moddable.

[velik_m]

Originally posted by Fruit Pie Jones+Mar 7 2006, 05:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Fruit Pie Jones @ Mar 7 2006, 05:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-laiocfar
Civ III is too complex, it cann´t be edit by users like the other

[/b][/quote]
:blink: civ 3 even has an editor for easier modification

[The Niles]

I finished a game with my brother a few nights ago. 16 hours of total play time over about six weeks of playing. It was the first game of Civ4 I enjoyed.
To tell the thruth I'm a bit disappointed by Civ4. Huge requirements for a game such as this and a sprinkling of innovation over the old game. I do appreciate the lowering of the number of units you usually have, making the game faster.

[Tulac]

This game is no fun with my 256 MB RAM, I only like to play epic huge maps, and those just work too slow, so I deinstalled the game...

I heard that patch optimizes things, is it even worth trying the patch though?

[BeefontheBone]

1.52 did help a lot with optimisation, but the hugest maps probably still need at least 512MB. My gig of RAM handles them pretty well, but it's quite system-dependant; some people with what ought to be better systems than mine are still complaining it's unplayable. It seems the page file's quite important too.

With one or two more people we could get an SG going, that'd be neat. Hopefully I'd be able to help you get beyond the pokey-stick stage too - I tend to manage at least rubbing-the-sticks-together-to-make-fire

[Fruit Pie Jones]

So, when is this succession game going to start, and how will we be transferring the savegame files? Are they small enough to be attached to posts here (in the forums that allow that, of course)? Sorry if I'm jumping the gun; I'm just looking forward to getting this started.

[BeefontheBone]

They're a few hundred kilobytes uncompressed, so emailing them might be a better idea. I'll go dig out the thread in the multiplayer section...

EDIT: here it is. Turns out it was just in Swiss' thread.

[laiocfar]

DAMM, my pc doesnt fit Civ IV.

About the lack of editing in Civ III, i am NOT talking about the editor, the problem is that there isn´t any Rules.txt to change the game tech tree and unit abilities like in the old Civ II. Call me old but i prefer Civ II to Civ III for no talk of Civ Ctp.