Top 10 habits to unlearn, when transitioning from civ2 to ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

I'm far too new to civ3 to be able to say anything much, but one thing
strikes me as obvious: In civ3, the Veteran status given to military
ground uits from Barracks is much less important than in civ2. Therefore
I should try to give up my habit of always building Barracks.

Especially the sole defensive unit in each city (usually a Hoplite,
since I play the Greeks) should be built right away, because there's no
need to build a Barrack first (relative to how vulnerable you're left).

Oh, and one more thing: City walls are only useful for towns (size 6 or
less). That's another bad civ2 habit of mine.

But I'm sure there are many others... Discuss!

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:37:34 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

>
>I'm far too new to civ3 to be able to say anything much, but one thing
>strikes me as obvious: In civ3, the Veteran status given to military
>ground uits from Barracks is much less important than in civ2. Therefore
>I should try to give up my habit of always building Barracks.

If the city is only going to be producing a few defensive units, then
building a Barracks may be silly. But if that city is going to be
pumping out many offensive units, I'd much rather it pump out 20
Veteran swordsmen then 20 Regular swordsmen. Don't forget that
Barracks also heal all units in one turn. I generally place a high
priority on barracks in most of my cities. When it is time for a
military buildup, I generally have all of my cities producing units.
Might as well be Veterans, right?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

In article <2q79i1huitnf5uff964mt5qaosv1gmvt1b@4ax.com>,
Mike S. <mike@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:37:34 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
> <peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm far too new to civ3 to be able to say anything much, but one thing
> >strikes me as obvious: In civ3, the Veteran status given to military
> >ground uits from Barracks is much less important than in civ2. Therefore
> >I should try to give up my habit of always building Barracks.
>
> If the city is only going to be producing a few defensive units, then
> building a Barracks may be silly. But if that city is going to be
> pumping out many offensive units, I'd much rather it pump out 20
> Veteran swordsmen then 20 Regular swordsmen. Don't forget that
> Barracks also heal all units in one turn. I generally place a high
> priority on barracks in most of my cities. When it is time for a
> military buildup, I generally have all of my cities producing units.
> Might as well be Veterans, right?

Barracks are even more important because a veteran can become elite
sooner and an elite can produce a Great Leader.

Cliff Nelson

Dry your tears, there's more fun for your ears,
"Forward Into The Past"
2 PM to 5 PM, Sundays,
California time, at: http://www.kspc.org/
Don't be a square or a blockhead; see:
http://users.adelphia.net/~cnelson9/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:37:34 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

>
>I'm far too new to civ3 to be able to say anything much, but one thing
>strikes me as obvious: In civ3, the Veteran status given to military
>ground uits from Barracks is much less important than in civ2. Therefore
>I should try to give up my habit of always building Barracks.
>
>Especially the sole defensive unit in each city (usually a Hoplite,
>since I play the Greeks) should be built right away, because there's no
>need to build a Barrack first (relative to how vulnerable you're left).
>
>Oh, and one more thing: City walls are only useful for towns (size 6 or
>less). That's another bad civ2 habit of mine.
>
>But I'm sure there are many others... Discuss!

I don't generally build barracks until after my cities have quite a
few spearman and swordsmen. It doesn't make much sense to build them
too early. I never build walls.

You will notice the difference if you draft units. I find the
conscript units very ineffective. I only use them in desperation.

 

[daran]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Peter Knutsen (usenet)" <peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

Here are 4.

1. Don't expect to be able to use your enemy's road/rail network.
2. Don't think you can survive long without culture.
3. Don't be surprised if your enemy's units arrive in a huge stack, instead
of dribs and drabs.
4. Don't be surprised if they come at you from an unexpected direction.

--
We're Londoners, we just put the kettle on -- Avedon Carol

Daran

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:37:34 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

>
>I'm far too new to civ3 to be able to say anything much, but one thing
>strikes me as obvious: In civ3, the Veteran status given to military
>ground uits from Barracks is much less important than in civ2. Therefore
>I should try to give up my habit of always building Barracks.

I use barracks in cities which produce most of the units. Early
defense doesn't have to have it, and it is mostly city police for
garrisons (warriors work well for that) which need to be built quickly
where the veteran status doesn't matter.

Once I get enough cities running, though, I try to build all new
units in cities with barracks. The new cities no longer build their
own defenders.

You don't need barracks in every city nearly as much, but it does
come in handy. A wonder which gives free barracks is a good thing if
you can get it.

>Especially the sole defensive unit in each city (usually a Hoplite,
>since I play the Greeks) should be built right away, because there's no
>need to build a Barrack first (relative to how vulnerable you're left).
>
>Oh, and one more thing: City walls are only useful for towns (size 6 or
>less). That's another bad civ2 habit of mine.
>
>But I'm sure there are many others... Discuss!

Placing loads of cities all over can be bad, as it increases
corruption. Picking the locations and numbers of cities to build
matters more.

Talking with the AI and trading is essential. It isn't as though
you didn't talk to the AI in Civ2, but you could ignore them often
without losing out. That isn't the case in Civ3.

Happiness management with Republic and Democracy is a *lot*
different. It is easier to do short wars, and the location of units
no longer matters.

Defense lines and zones of control are a *lot* softer. You need
more units to secure a border, and more generally, you can't rely on
border defense alone to protect you. Pillaging and similar "raiding"
attack on units outside cities is pretty effective, and the AI will do
a lot of damage even if you can defend border cities.

Large forces placed into newly taken cities, still in resistance,
are at *great* risk. They are still at high risk if the city ceases
resistance due to culture flipping. A big habit to unlearn is
stacking all of your forces into newly captured cities. Losing a pile
of units because of that is "bad".


--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Jeffery S. Jones <jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote in
news:ml4ri1l0ads1sgcf83pb5r5pim9vsg8k1u@4ax.com:

snip
>
> Large forces placed into newly taken cities, still in resistance,
> are at *great* risk. They are still at high risk if the city ceases
> resistance due to culture flipping. A big habit to unlearn is
> stacking all of your forces into newly captured cities. Losing a pile
> of units because of that is "bad".
>
>

I think this is well said: I find this a real problem with Civ3. It doesn't
pay to keep units in captured cities - they can flip after many years if
you are badly behind on culture. It is best to keep units outside of the
ciry, but next to it so you can recapture it easily.

This is a fault of the game I think: OK, you might have a rebellion, but
hte rebels couldn't destroy whole armies at one stroke!!

Boris