- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
I'd like to see a video, because I think there's some stuff about the game I'm still not getting.
It's incredibly tedious and slow, yet addictive
It's incredibly tedious and slow, yet addictive
Anyone beat Civ III on the hardest difficulty?
- Thread starter Segata_Sanshiro
- Start date
Civ 4 > Civ 2 > Civ 5 > Civ 3
Civ 3 is the worst game in the series. Idk about Civ 1, never played it. I'm sure its dated but its the OG game so w/e.
On topic. No. Those games are masochistically hard at high levels.
There is a forum for Civ gamers and there you could learn how its done.
Edit : Oh and Alpha Centauri is better than all the Civ games put together.
Civ 3 is the worst game in the series. Idk about Civ 1, never played it. I'm sure its dated but its the OG game so w/e.
On topic. No. Those games are masochistically hard at high levels.
There is a forum for Civ gamers and there you could learn how its done.
Edit : Oh and Alpha Centauri is better than all the Civ games put together.
Last edited:
aria
Former Moderator
- Joined
- Dec 4, 1977
- Posts
- 39,546
I love them all so this one is hard:
Civ4 (only with both expansions) > Civ5 (so far, the upcoming Gods & Kings promises a lot) > Civ1 > Alpha Centauri > Civ3 > Civ2 > Either Colonization > Civ Revolutions on DS
I was surprised I ranked 2 where I did... I know Civ2 was awesome at the time (I really, really liked it), but the introduction of borders (started in Alpha Centauri and added to Civ3) made a big impact. I still enjoy occasionally playing Civ1 like it was when I was younger so that's why I ranked it above Civ2 because I'm willing to deal with the quirks of Civ1 more than Civ2. Also, Palace>Throne Room.
I really appreciate Civ5 departure from the stupid stack combat of previous Civs, the big problem is the opponent AI is a big step back from Civ4 --though I'm still playing Civ5 more. I think Gods & Kings can deliver on making Civ5 meet expectations by reintroducing religion and spycraft. I would really like them to fix the AI to stop city spamming logistically stupid locations and to make better, long-lasting diplomatic options.
As for difficulty, Prince and King are fun, but beyond that just isn't what I play; it's way too skewed. It'll be like 50 AD and Gandhi will Nuke me.
EDIT: since this is a Civ thread and this is a classic comic:
Civ4 (only with both expansions) > Civ5 (so far, the upcoming Gods & Kings promises a lot) > Civ1 > Alpha Centauri > Civ3 > Civ2 > Either Colonization > Civ Revolutions on DS
I was surprised I ranked 2 where I did... I know Civ2 was awesome at the time (I really, really liked it), but the introduction of borders (started in Alpha Centauri and added to Civ3) made a big impact. I still enjoy occasionally playing Civ1 like it was when I was younger so that's why I ranked it above Civ2 because I'm willing to deal with the quirks of Civ1 more than Civ2. Also, Palace>Throne Room.
I really appreciate Civ5 departure from the stupid stack combat of previous Civs, the big problem is the opponent AI is a big step back from Civ4 --though I'm still playing Civ5 more. I think Gods & Kings can deliver on making Civ5 meet expectations by reintroducing religion and spycraft. I would really like them to fix the AI to stop city spamming logistically stupid locations and to make better, long-lasting diplomatic options.
As for difficulty, Prince and King are fun, but beyond that just isn't what I play; it's way too skewed. It'll be like 50 AD and Gandhi will Nuke me.
EDIT: since this is a Civ thread and this is a classic comic:
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2001
- Posts
- 3,314
I skipped 2 and 3, but I don't remember 1 being impossible to beat on highest difficulty because they didn't really punish expansion back then. Alpha Centauri is the same way; Transcendence is very beatable if you expand early and build quality cities. Master of Magic is a game that REALLY didn't punish expansion... near the end of the game I remember it taking me 10-15 minutes to get through production reports at the start of turns.
I remember beating some version of Civ 4 once on Emperor setting, but without using save/restore to get around bad battle results I think any difficulty higher than Emperor would be too punishing. I think that the trophy for beating the Khan scenario in Civ 5 on the highest difficulty calls for extreme use of save/restore.
I remember beating some version of Civ 4 once on Emperor setting, but without using save/restore to get around bad battle results I think any difficulty higher than Emperor would be too punishing. I think that the trophy for beating the Khan scenario in Civ 5 on the highest difficulty calls for extreme use of save/restore.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
aria
Former Moderator
- Joined
- Dec 4, 1977
- Posts
- 39,546
I swore I had the correct numbers there earlier, but I had been doing some tweaking as I wrote it out so ...meh, who knows. Fixed it.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
Well that's a shame about revolutions. Keep us up to date on 5!
Ahh, I concur with your > list.
Especially noting that Civ 4 wasnt all that and a bag of chips without the expansions.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
It looks like there are three expansions for IV. Beyond the Sword, Warlords, and Colonizations.
aria
Former Moderator
- Joined
- Dec 4, 1977
- Posts
- 39,546
Actually, and this is a silly thing on their part, Colonization isn't an expansion, despite the name. They use the same engine, but they don't operate together and are separate games. It's actually a remake of the second "civ" game by Sid Meier, which was called Colonization (back then we thought it was the default Civ2). Some marketing jackass thought they should call it "Civilization IV: Colonization", ugh.
aria
Former Moderator
- Joined
- Dec 4, 1977
- Posts
- 39,546
So I wanted to add this link to the developing Gods & Kings expansion for Civ5 because it looks promising, this page has done a great job of collecting info:
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/civ5_expansion.html
I love that destroyers are now melee units; that means you can take a city with a destroyer instead of just dinking around and waiting for reinforcements. Finally someone answered the thing that goes through every Civ player's mind: Why can't the damn crew go in and just take this size 1 town I just leveled? Don't they have guns on this ship???
Some of those new wonders are cool ideas.
They haven't announced the 9th additional civ player, but I'm hoping they bring back the Zulu.
SHAKA 2012
http://well-of-souls.com/civ/civ5_expansion.html
I love that destroyers are now melee units; that means you can take a city with a destroyer instead of just dinking around and waiting for reinforcements. Finally someone answered the thing that goes through every Civ player's mind: Why can't the damn crew go in and just take this size 1 town I just leveled? Don't they have guns on this ship???
Some of those new wonders are cool ideas.
They haven't announced the 9th additional civ player, but I'm hoping they bring back the Zulu.
SHAKA 2012
Thanks for posting civ5 expansion info.
Since I pirated and promptly deleted Civ5 for sucking, I have periodically checked google to see if there were any full-on expansions coming out for it that would return the game to something more like expanded Civ4.
I agree with you that the octagonal movement and non-stack armies are a marked improvement, but without the civics, religions, and espionage Civ 5 seemed super shallow.
Just dont end up jacking it in San Diego
Since I pirated and promptly deleted Civ5 for sucking, I have periodically checked google to see if there were any full-on expansions coming out for it that would return the game to something more like expanded Civ4.
I agree with you that the octagonal movement and non-stack armies are a marked improvement, but without the civics, religions, and espionage Civ 5 seemed super shallow.
Just dont end up jacking it in San Diego
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2004
- Posts
- 2,948
Where the fuck are the victory point locations? It never says, or shows you what they look like.