I wasnt talking about the graphics engine. I was refering to the overall engine. But since Im fighting a loosing battle here, Im gonna respond to your particulars.
The AI in Civ3 cheats exactly as much as the AI in Civ2 does (plus more, because the AIs freely exchange their techs at low cost with each other, while charging you an arm and 2 legs).
I find this comment completly unfounded, for a number of reasons.
1) They simply do NOT charge you an arm and a leg for techs. Granted, quite a few times it may not be tech for tech trade, but if you think about it, many times this makes sense. Is gunpowder really worth Animal husbandary? To a military race, it isnt, and the AI takes note of that and deals witht the techs accordingly.
2) The idea that they basically give away their techs to other AIs is just a accusation. In the games of Civ3 that I have played (and that is a lot), the tech levels of the AIs is never uniform, it is always different. This in itself leads us to believe that they simply do not trade off their techs, but horde them like the user does. Again, some techs are fairly common to see, simply because they are such big important techs. But until you can prove this cheap theory to me, Im calling BS.
What engine in Civ3? The graphics engine? Fah! Graphics do not make a game. In fact, graphics are the _least_ important factor of a game. Crisp units = irrelevant. 
Couldnt agree with you more.
The political model of Civ3 is much weaker than in a fairly large number of games, actually. It is certainly not unparalleled. And a decent political model means little with rampantly cheating AI.
Give the names of the games, then we'll talk. Unparalleled may have been a fanboy exageration, but it isnt as bad as you play it out to be. Simply looking at the options availible to you shows a decent amount of thought was put into it. YES, i know thats going to annoy you because it IS almost just eye canday, but it is important to note the equations used in the engine to control the demand and dealing the the AI does depending on the worth of certain items.
The difficulty level of the AI in SE4 does _not_ cause them to cheat. The bonus does, but the difficulty level does not.
This could be me simply getting myself mixed up. Yeah, it is me getting mixxed up. The Newbies guide set me straight, on high setting it simply uses all its ministers.
This is the crucial difference between SE4 AI and Civ AI: SE4's AI can be played on high difficulty levels without any bonuses given to it. In Civ, you have to suffer with rampant AI bonuses at higher difficulty levels.
See, the same can be done in Civ3... its called Regent Difficulty (I may be wrong on the exact name.. corret me if im wrong). At that level, the AI is on full steam with no bonuses. Thats high difficulty with NO bonuses. Just what you wanted. Put it up higher, and the AI gets the bonuses as well. Its JUST LIKE SEIV ONLY WITH A DIFFERENT SETUP/NAMING.
But the AI cheating doesn't really matter. Civ and Civ2 were still very fun games with their rampant AI cheating.
Things to note:
1) More wild accusations about AI cheating
2) Accurate note of the fact that AI cheating doesnt matter BECAUSE it is ultimatly controlable by the user, AND because that said user can still beat it.
3) Fyron's got one of those word Calendars, and today's seems to be "Rampant".
Civ3 is just a poorly designed game overall, and has many inescapable flaws (which I don't care to enumerate again at the moment)
You called me on my "Good Engine" comment, im calling you on this one.
in addition to miserably failing to carry on the Civ legacy. Instead of building upon Civ2, it destroyed nearly all of the improvements that had been made in the Civ2 series (esp. the expansions).
See, i just do not agree with this comment. First off, they carry on the Civ legacy simply by making this game. Does this game suck? No. Does it go completly backward? No. Is it Warcraft 2 with nations? No. Like it or not, it DOES carry on the Civ legacy.
Yes, I would have liked to see more improvements, Yes, they could have built on some things, but you make this look to be like Battlecruiser 3000AD when it is most certainly not. Most of the imporvements are still in the game, along with some orginal ones which i very much enjoy. And before you call me out on that comment, just think Culture.
And then they have the gall to release the game in a rather early beta stage, and charge us for the rest of the game later on!
No arguement here, it was dissapointing the amounts of patches and fixes needed, and the fact the PTW was sold as a seperate item when it SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE ORGINAL.
That does anger me...
Civ3 represents the first Civ game that is all about flash over content.
Civ3 does come off like that, I do agree, but if you look deeper, i think it shows its roots and you can see that it truely is a good game.
I certainly hope that if a Civ4 is ever made, it takes nothing from the abomination that is Civ3.
I do hope the Civ4 is radically different, if only for change.
And again, more slander against Civ3.
And overall, you haven't really given any reasons as to why Civ3 is a good game. 
Anything other than crisp graphics or political structure?
You're right, I didnt, and I hope this reply gives you some pause before you run rampant over me again.
Xio
Re: Recycle Old Threads Drive Canceled!
Threaded Mode