[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Were you around Shrapnel when Civ III came out? If not, try searching for threads about it. I don't even remember what was wrong in the initial release anymore, cause I stopped playing the game after a short while. Even now, with all these patches, it still has many major problems.[/QB]

I don't see any problems. It's an expanded and much improved Version ov Civ I, which is looking really dated now. Expanding on what I said, absolutely nobody out of a half dozen people I know who bought the game and didn't patch it right away had no problems whatsoever.

Edit: I've read the "DO NOT BUY Civ 3" thread, and basically, it comes down to Atrocities complaining that he only got a month's worth of play out of a game. If you get a month out of any game before getting tired of it, then I would think it's up there as one of the best of all time.

Then you have people copmplaining about micromanagement. Well, that's what automating your workers is for. They are perfectly capable of handling any and all improvements by themselves.

Further, aside from the crashes which only a minority of people reported, the only real bugs were with precision bombing and air superiority, neither of which were game breakers.

The complaint of the AI producing masses of weak units comes from not realizing that the AI never gets rid of its ancient units that guard its cities, so when trouble comes, you get plenty of warriors and spearmen that have been sitting around for a few milennia.

It's also certainly not infeasible for militarily trained soldiers without firearms to defeat modern armour, especially in a large city, because while they may not have guns, they aren't bronze age people. Unless of course, you think that they have somehow survived for 6000 years.

[ January 26, 2003, 04:28: Message edited by: Graeme Dice ]