Talk:Civilization III
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
|
CVG To-do:
|
||
 |
Civilization III has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Contents |
[edit] Accuracy
On the table of starting advances, it states that the Romans start with "Masonry" and "Warrior Code." This is not correct. I always play as the Romans and they start with Warrior Code and one other advance, though I'm not sure what it is (I know it's not Masonry--I always have to research it). It may be "Alphabet," but someone else may want to verify. Since these are listed as Persia's starting advances, someone may want to verify the accuracy of the others. I can do it later today if no one else checks it. —Frecklefoot 14:45, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Fan Reaction section
The new section seems a bit over the top to me. I played the game for a while and never had to wait 30 minutes for a turn, although 4 minutes are still pretty much.. There should be a section about criticism, but it shouldn't be that devastating in my opinion. --Conti|✉ 17:07, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I agree. I played the game right off the shelf and didn't need the patch for several months. I've never experienced a 30 minute turn, though turns do get longer further into the game. — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:47, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
- There, tried to NPOV it a bit. I even heaped some praise on it, but it seemed fitting given how popular the game is. The previous version sounded like it was written by a bitter use. I play the game all the time and never had his/her experience. Edit as you please. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:01, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
-
- If players are on a huge map with a slow computer (<700 Mhz, for example), turns can and will take that long. Doesn't mean that devastatingly harsh criticism is in order, but the slow reaciton time *can* happen. :) Krupo 04:05, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)
-
- I've had 30 minute turns before on standard-size maps deep in the Industrial Age. Four minutes is BELOW average for my turn length...do you automate all your stuff? I've talked to expert players that can sometimes take one to two hours in the Industrial Age, because they pay attention to every detail of their empire.
[edit] Call to Power
What exactly does Civ3 borrow from CtP?
[edit] Corruption
From the article: "Corruption is a new feature that was added to Civilization 3." This is not true, I am fairly sure that Civ II also had corruption. -- FirstPrinciples 18:11, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
- Well, be bold in editing and change it. :-) Anyone else know about the info? I think the corruption is more severe in Civ III... — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:27, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
-
- Much more severe. In civ II, your core cities produce lots of trade and the outer cities produce less trade. In civ III, your core cities produce lots of trade/production, but outer cities have almost no trade/production; they usually cannot even pay for the maintenence of their own buildings... That makes much more dificult to 'conquer' the world because conquering new cities does not rise your economic power. (or at least not by a signifiant amount) -- however conquering cities gives you to eventual resources/luxury resources in the neighbourhood.
-
-
- Even so, it's not a new feature to Civ III. (I didn't edit the article because I wasn't 100% sure.) -- FirstPrinciples 00:41, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
- OK, now I've updated the corruption section. -- FirstPrinciples 01:03, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- The current edition is wrong on this, too. Waste did exist in Civ2. --tyomitch 15:41, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
-
-
OK it states on the page and in the manual that communism spreads corruption equally amoung all cities. This is patently not true - in communism just like all other systems, as soon as you go about a screen from your capital shield production is falling off towards zero. Unlike democracy, communisms can to some extent mitigate these events using their 'special' methods of hurrying [:)] production, but they still feel lots of corruption! Anyone else noticed this too?
- With the latest patch, all cities should have the same corruption (or less with a courthouse or police station). Only in Conquests will the capital have zero corruption, before that it suffered the same corruption as the rest of the cities. TimBentley (talk) 21:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Greatest Selling edits
Added "one of" to sidestep the issue of whether or not the Sims is in the same category. Can the issue go to rest now? Krupo 03:19, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Shields
The article mentions shields: "Corruption limits the utility of both shields and gold in the city that it affects." Gold as a resource has been explained, but shields have not. Could someone please add what they are for? -- Ec5618 10:21, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
- The sheer size of this article now scares me. I remember way back when it was a tiny little stub (* sniff *). So, I'll explain it here for you and let someone else add a description in the article. Shields represent a city's production. Each city produces a different number, the bigger ones usually produce more. "Shields" are used to produce units or structures in a city. For example, a spearman may take 20 shields and a temple may require 50 (I made up these numbers).
- There can be two types of shields in a city: blue and red. The blue ones represent actual production and are the only ones that contribute to building elements (such as structures or units). Red shields represent the production lost to corruption. This is a bid problem in CivIII, a lot of people think the corruption is way too harsh. In general, the further a city is from the capital, the greater the corruption will be. It is not uncommon for far-flung cities to have red shields which far outnumber the blue. There are things that can be done to curb corruption (a little), but it's always a problem.
- Shields are incredibly pliable. A city may take 20 or more turns to produce a Wonder requiring 2000 shields, and at the last minute can change it into something else. For example, a city may spend 200 years building the Colossus. One turn before it is completed, they can change it into the Great Library instead. Nothing this pliable occurs in the real world, in my experience. :-)
- Anyway, I hope that helped. This description applies to all versions of Civilization, not just CivIII. — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:59, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Reorganization and rewrite
I am planning on making some major expansions to the article and to completely re-organize the article. I want to bring this article to one of the best standards for any computer game article on Wikipedia. If you have any objections to what I do, you can tell me on my talk page. I also can't do this huge re-write on my own. My main goal is to make it so it doesn't focus around what's new or changed from Civilization II. The article leaves out the majority of what was still around in Civilization II, and only really talks about what's new. I want to change that, and also make it a very authoritative source of information on the game. Any objections? bob rulz 03:56, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Removed Review
"Magazines, reviewers, and strategy game fans consistently hail Civilization III as one of the best strategy games ever made. Rich in accurate historical, diplomatic, military and socioeconomic elements, Civilization III is as educational as it is entertaining. It features an in-game encyclopedia (the 'Civilopedia'), and is often utilized as a supplemental learning tool in high school and college history classes. The entire Civilization series (including the first two versions) is one of the best-selling strategy game series of all time" I removed this part of the "Reception" section because a lot of it doesn't seem relevant to how Civilization 3 was recieved, and it seemed to have a bias in favour of the game (For example, not all strategy game fans hail Civilization 3). Some of the information can be integrated, but I'm not sure how to go about this, so I'll leave it to someone more capable. 67.161.208.117 04:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Other civs
On ceartain scenarios the game offers they have additional civilizations,(Hungarians,Israelites,etc.) Should these be added. 12.220.47.145 19:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- No, they shouldn't. They're not playable in an average game, so somebody just skimming the article may be misled into thinking that they are able to play those civilizations. And by certain scenarios do you mean player-made scenarios or the Conquests in the expansion? I assume you mean the Conquests. In that case, they may be added to the Civilization III Conquests page when it has more content. bob rulz 03:02, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)
- No I mean Civ. III Play the World. The game comes with Scenarios which include other civs, not ones that I've created. 12.220.47.145 28 June 2005 16:31 (UTC)
[edit] Elvis putnam
Should we add something about Elvis Putnam, if anybody has info about it or who he is?
- Also: Conquests' Elvis
[edit] Technology List
I see than an anon has gone in and is constructing a comprehensive technology list for Civilization III. That's great and all, but it will completely clutter the page, plus it might be considered fancruft by some. If we're going to create this list, perhaps transfer it to List of technologies in Civilization III or List of Civilization III technologies? Putting all of that into this article would be ridiculous, and perhaps cut down on the length of each one too, and maybe even organize it into a more compact list somehow? bob rulz 01:28, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
- You are correct, the list needs to be moved. Maybe the technologies should just be listed in a table with the units and other improvements you gain by the technology? The current wordy explanations are nice and such but do not really bring any extra value that couldn't be read from the main article (such as pottery or masonry). --ZeroOne 09:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
- I went ahead and started List of Technologies in Civilization III by copying what we had in the Civ3 article and adding an introduction. Once it's satisfactory, we could go ahead and delete it from the main article and replace it with the link. I very much agree that the explanations sort of defeat the purpose of the main articles, but they could be made useful by briefly summarizing the impact on the game (e.g. "Researching Satellites allows the production of ICBMs, the most destructive unit in the game.")
[edit] You say you want a Revolution
How about we add how the question 'you say you want a revolution' and its two choices 'no, you can count me out' and 'yes, its going to be alright' are all a reference to the Beatles song 'revolution'? -- Theycallmemorty 18:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
It could be, and probably is, there are a lot of cultural refrences in all the Civilization Games (often to Elvis). So while it may be a refrence to the Beatles it can't be completly comfirmed and isn't the exactly the most important piece of information. but nice observation :) Thrawst 20:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Austria?
Could someone elaborate on why this is listed? Was it some promotional bonus that only certain people got with their game? Or is it just a reference to the Austria civ in the Napoleonic Europe conquest? If that is the case then it should be removed, because there were many other conquest-unique civs - the Magyars, the Burgundians, the Kingdom of Naples, the Goths, etc. 22:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
RESPONSE: Well, just as the Incans and Arabs are obvious to spot in Civ II programming, the Austrians are fully playable in Civ III, just hidden in the programming and having a current civ be replaced by them ala the two aformentioned ones-not just a promotion or civ in the Napoleonic Europe scenario. Since civilizations get a lot more differences and aspects than city names or color, though, I've added in them in to the table anyways.
[edit] Civilopedia and College
Does anyone actually have proof that real schools were using the civopedia in courses? It wouldn't surprise me if some students may have tried to use it in lieu of real research. Anyone have any problems if I delete that little blurb? Voyager3 03:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
