Jeffrey Miller wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>
>>>-jeffrey "playing too much Civ3" miller-
>>>
>>>
>>How do you like Civ III compared to AC?
>>
>
> No comparison for me. I really didn't like AC terribly much; I
> appreciated the games theory improvement made in the game, and liked the
> storyline attatched to game play idea, but I found, in the end, that
> since I have no space of reference to their made up future technical
> advances that I had a hard time deciding if building a creche or a
> holodeck was better, or whether I should be researching Nanotubes or
> Cryolasers. Also, I disliked the entire "munchkin your own army" idea
> contained within the Design-A-Unit section - not only did I get left in
> the dust in higher difficulty levels if I didn't optimize every last bit
> of my military units, but it was buggy and crashe prone.
>
Hmmm, just the other way around for me. I play at the highest level
in AC but haven't gotten off the ground floor in CIV III. One thing
for me is the difference between the worker and the former. I find
that the former is much more versatile and interesting, and probably
the key to playing at a higher level (hint: don't automate) Another
thing that makes AC more interesting to me is the projects are much
more interesting. The pyramids interest me as an historical object,
but bore me silly as a technological achievement.
I don't spend that much time optimizing the military units in AC,
and haven't found it necessary. But I have actually finished very
few games because I find the end game very slow and boring.
--
Doug
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zo.com/~brighto
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the
fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first
existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the
higher consideration." A. Lincoln's First Annual Message to
Congress, December 3, 1861.
