[qyn]

...or does it kind of suck?

For one thing, I think it's just too slow. And I don't mean performacne-wise, I mean it just takes a really long time to do anything. It takes a long time to do research, to build buildings or units, to build roads, and as a consequence takes a few hours to just reach the middle ages. I usally get bored and start a new game by then.

Also, I think there's way more emphasis on conquest in this one (new ways to win notwithstanding). In civ 2/alpha centauri, I could usually do a lot better by manipulating my enemies than by brute force. Now it seems like the only way to win is by military might. (I say this, by the way, not having actually won yet, but having had to fight for my life in every game).

I really think they could have gone a long way with the excellent diplomacy model, and with the really cool culture idea, but in the end it seems like whoever gets the swordsman first is going to be the winner.

I'll freely admit that I'm not very good at this game. I just don't feel much desire to get better. Overall, I think that Alpha Centauri is the better game.

So, is it just me?

[schwa]

Well, I've played all the Civ variants, including CTP and Alpha Centauri, and I think Civ III is pretty damn good. Maybe the best one. I can pretty handily beat the others, but I'm getting my a$$ handed to me by the AI at Warlord level here.

Some observations:
- Yes, it's slow, but it's inherently slow. It's a turn based game. Though I wish it took advantage of my second processor under OS X
- That said, the animations outlast their welcome quickly. Turn them off and you'll notice a definite speed increase. You might want to turn off the options to view Friendly and/or Enemy movements at all, depending on how you prefer to play.
- The AI seems much more oriented, I think, *away* from war and toward diplomacy. I could usually demand whatever I wanted from other civs and beat-'n'-smash my way to get what they refused in previous iterations, but warfare is hard to manage in Civ III. There are no short wars, war weariness is more prominent, and the AI uses better tactics. They've got no qualms about cutting off your access to critical resources. Play nice. You've got to give a little to get a little.
- The AI, particularly the military civs, are more aggressive about coming after you. I rarely initate war, but those pesky Persians keep bringing it.

That said, I'm still getting my feet wet. I've only played a few games, and I haven't played any into the Modern Era yet. We'll see how this all bears out in a month or so ...

[cdhostage]

Guys, wait for the updates, then look again.

I HATED, absoluted HATED the fact that the modern age lasted four or five turns in Civ: CTP and then went on to Genetic, then immediately to Diamond. An hihg-;level units were eompletely whacked.

And I haven't played this game yet. I will in a coule months when I have the spare time and a enough money to justify paying for this.

[qyn]

So I wasn't complaining about the game being slow as such, more the gameplay being slow. Like when it takes 30 turns to research a technology, with tech spending as high as I can sustainably go (usually 70% - 80%). Or 100 turns to build a small wonder. I could play a full game of alpha centauri in a (long) evening, which was fun, but it takes me days to get through a civ3 game.

Of course, turning off the animations is a must. I also find that turning off auto-saves helps a lot too, especially later in the game.

I think that playing nice in civ3 means a lot less than it used to, because my playing style was always more about building up, researching, and trading, not fighting (when possible). But now it's impossible to do that since you'll definitely end up fighting either the persians or the aztecs. Perhaps I need to update my playing style, but that was the thing I liked about the old games...

On a related note, one really maddening feature is that when I am the first one to find a new technology, I like to shop it around to all AI players. But once I make the first trade, and go to trade it again to someone else, the first opponent has already traded it out to everyone! Still during my turn!

[Herr Newton]

Originally posted by cdhostage:
<STRONG>I HATED, absoluted HATED the fact that the modern age lasted four or five turns in Civ: CTP and then went on to Genetic, then immediately to Diamond. An hihg-;level units were eompletely whacked.</STRONG>

Get Celestial Dawn's Mod and the associated graphics. The mod fixes game play through a number of ways including: rebalancing units; adding several new units (e.g., guided missle cruiser); balancing governments and aitypes; and, perhaps most pertinent to your gripe, slightly restructuring the tech tree to create 4 differentiated ages. It's really great, the only downside being that we Mac users have to merge modified ctp_data folder with the mod'd ctp_data folder.

[surfacto]

I haven't tried Civ III yet, but I played a ton of Civ II and one of my major complaints was that it went too fast, especially once I got good at it and new which technologies and wonders would allow me to dominate my enemies. It seemed like I would jump from the dark ages to future technologies in no time, and I enjoy the first parts of the game better. I'm kind of looking forward to longer, more detailed games where development in the early stages is more realistic. I just ordered it yesterday and can't wait to play.

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by qyn:
<STRONG>So I wasn't complaining about the game being slow as such, more the gameplay being slow. Like when it takes 30 turns to research a technology, with tech spending as high as I can sustainably go (usually 70% - 80%). Or 100 turns to build a small wonder. I could play a full game of alpha centauri in a (long) evening, which was fun, but it takes me days to get through a civ3 game.

[/b]
Yes Civ 3 is slower going then AC, and there are a few things I would have liked from AC but overall I am VERY happy with Civ 3, more so simple because I am running Civ natively in X.

[b]I think that playing nice in civ3 means a lot less than it used to, because my playing style was always more about building up, researching, and trading, not fighting (when possible). But now it's impossible to do that since you'll definitely end up fighting either the persians or the aztecs. Perhaps I need to update my playing style, but that was the thing I liked about the old games...
</STRONG>

I have a similar style, and it is possible. You just have to take extra care and fight when absolutely nessasary. Once you update your playing style you will start winning again. I am ALMOST done with my first game over a week into it. (hey I had classes and it was 8 player largest map. cheerios has played 3 full games in this time so smaller map for quicker game)

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
<STRONG>Yes Civ 3 is slower going then AC, and there are a few things I would have liked from AC but overall I am VERY happy with Civ 3, more so simple because I am running Civ natively in X.</STRONG>

Not to take anything away from Civ3, but I put a beta Carbon build of both SMAC and SMACX on my iDisk (boliver) public folder. It's my understanding that Aspyr will be posting it to their ftp site soon, if they haven't already. The key word here is beta as in it may never get updated again. User beware.

Brad

[NickKohn]

Is there any way in Civ. III to minimize the game or hide it? It'd be nice to put the game away for a few minutes while I do some work.

[schwa]

Here here! I was just going to email Macsoft about that, and got completely pissed off at the hoops I had to jump through to send them a message (including, among other things, giving them my system config *AND* my home phone # and birthday). So, here's hoping someone from there reads this:

Civ III DESPERATELY needs the option to play in a window. In a big game, in the later stages, it would be nice to play your round, and put it in the background while it's cycling through everyone else's turn.

That, and dual-processor support, would make me happy happy happy.

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by schwa:
<STRONG>Civ III DESPERATELY needs the option to play in a window. In a big game, in the later stages, it would be nice to play your round, and put it in the background while it's cycling through everyone else's turn.

That, and dual-processor support, would make me happy happy happy.</STRONG>

You can pause the game with Command-P. It doesn't run in a window yet - it wasn't really designed with that in mind. I'd like to add it at some point, but it's not quite a trivial change.

As for dual-processor support, it'll never happen, at least in any way that you'll notice. The times you want the game to go faster are when it's not your turn, but these are the times when the computer AI is running a turn at a time for each player. There's no way to split that up into discrete tasks since it's a very linear process.

Brad

[iamnotmad]

Originally posted by Brad Oliver:
<STRONG>

You can pause the game with Command-P. It doesn't run in a window yet - it wasn't really designed with that in mind. I'd like to add it at some point, but it's not quite a trivial change.

As for dual-processor support, it'll never happen, at least in any way that you'll notice. The times you want the game to go faster are when it's not your turn, but these are the times when the computer AI is running a turn at a time for each player. There's no way to split that up into discrete tasks since it's a very linear process.

Brad</STRONG>

Brad, thanks, it's wonderful that you read and respond to posts here. I am really enjoying playing civ3. I have a couple questions:

1) Is there any chance of improved (sped up) quartz support. It's great we have that option, but it really seems prohibitively slow.

2) Is online play coming soon, or around the same time it will come for the pc version?

Thanks much.

[Pinky]

Just came back from buying the game ...can't wait to get back home !!!
Here come the Romans

[nemanirc]

It is actually painfully slow in OS X. I just rebooted into OS 9 and it plays a little better. I think OS X has some trouble doing screen re-draws because sometimes it will sit there until I move the mouse. I have had the same problem in Word v.X. I don't know if OS X needs fixing or if the game needs optimizing.

As for the game play, I like some of the new aspects:

• No more caravans/freight; you can set up trade through normal diplomatic channels.
• Colonies to grab resources outside of your city's range.
• Right-click (actually, ctrl-click) on cities will let you change things like production without entering the city view.

I just hope MacSoft releases a patch soon, or that it gets better in the next release of OS X.

[qyn]

Since we have an actual authority figure in the thread, perhaps I should clarify my earlier comments. Civ3 isn't actually sucky . Like everyone else here, I've been playing it for hours every night.

I was merely expressing my disappointment that it wasn't everything I hoped it would be (and more).

Also, can anyone tell me how to play the "non culturally linked starting locations" way? As I mentioned in a different thread, that setting is never honored for me when I'm starting a new game. Infogrames support has been less than supportive with this issue...

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by iamnotmad:
<STRONG>1) Is there any chance of improved (sped up) quartz support. It's great we have that option, but it really seems prohibitively slow. </STRONG>

I'll see what I can find out. It seems to run acceptably on my DP/800, but I guess I need to find a much slower Mac to determine if it's a general issue or specific to some configurations. I make no promises here.

<STRONG>2) Is online play coming soon, or around the same time it will come for the pc version?</STRONG>

I'm so out of the loop on that. You guys honestly know as much fact as I do about when/how/if multiplayer is coming to Civ3, so I'm not in any position to even guess at what would happen with the Mac version.

Brad

[tie]

Originally posted by schwa:
[QB]Civ III DESPERATELY needs the option to play in a window. In a big game, in the later stages, it would be nice to play your round, and put it in the background while it's cycling through everyone else's turn.

Wow, what a great idea! I've often just stopped playing because the endgame is so tedious, but this would definitely make things easier. I'd also like easier and better automation, but this would be a start.

[cdhostage]

Originally posted by qyn:
<STRONG>
On a related note, one really maddening feature is that when I am the first one to find a new technology, I like to shop it around to all AI players. But once I make the first trade, and go to trade it again to someone else, the first opponent has already traded it out to everyone! Still during my turn! </STRONG>

Dude! So what's the point of having it be a turn-based game if the turns are annulled by the suptid game! Arg! Excelemation point!

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by cdhostage:
<STRONG>Dude! So what's the point of having it be a turn-based game if the turns are annulled by the suptid game! Arg! Excelemation point!</STRONG>

I believe this is a holdover from Alpha Centauri. In SMAC, the one thing that wasn't turn-based on inter-faction communication. in a multiplayer game, for example, your faction could communicate and trade with other factions at any time while another player was taking a turn. It seems that this has been carried over into Civ3 as well. In a single-player game, the net effect is that other Civs are doing trades during your turn. At least, that's my take on it. Firaxis may have a idfferent viewpoint.

Brad

[cheerios]

I'll see what I can find out. It seems to run acceptably on my DP/800, but I guess I need to find a much slower Mac to determine if it's a general issue or specific to some configurations. I make no promises here.

I'm playing on a 400 iMac, and so long as you turn anti-aliasing (not sure if that's the right term, but it's one of the checkboxes in the initial little screen) off, it runs beautifully. If you leave it on, it's slower than molasses in January. I've seen it run on a DP 450, and it's nothing compared to that, but it's definitely playable. It's sucked up WAY too many hours of my life!!

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Brad Oliver:
<STRONG>

Not to take anything away from Civ3, but I put a beta Carbon build of both SMAC and SMACX on my iDisk (boliver) public folder. It's my understanding that Aspyr will be posting it to their ftp site soon, if they haven't already. The key word here is beta as in it may never get updated again. User beware.

Brad</STRONG>

Could you post a link. iDisk doesn't have the public option anymore, and I don't know what the url pattern is so I can't just plug in your name.

[iSoldier]

Login to your itools account within the apple.com/itools
website(you do have an apple itools account. don't you?). There you will see the option within the idisk folder.

[ 01-26-2002: Message edited by: iSoldier ]

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
<STRONG>Could you post a link. iDisk doesn't have the public option anymore, and I don't know what the url pattern is so I can't just plug in your name.</STRONG>

http://homepage.mac.com/boliver

That should do it.

Brad

[P]

Any chance two-button mouse support in Civ III?

I still have to say that SMAC is a better game - here you have to either be peaceful or go for genocide, because you can't hold on to a city; it just flips back. Raze it or eliminate the Civ you took it from are the only workable options. Since I'm always attacked, I have to be a genocidal maniac.

[iamnotmad]

Originally posted by P:
<STRONG>Any chance two-button mouse support in Civ III?

I still have to say that SMAC is a better game - here you have to either be peaceful or go for genocide, because you can't hold on to a city; it just flips back. Raze it or eliminate the Civ you took it from are the only workable options. Since I'm always attacked, I have to be a genocidal maniac.</STRONG>

This reminds me, please please! add right mouse button support! That would be great.
Thanks!

[cheerios]

It crashed!!!! I had JUST won... I built the space shuttle, watched the cool little movie that comes on, and BANG! "Civilization III has unexpectedly quit. Your other applications have not been effected." I open up the autosave file, adn win again... and BANG! again it crashes! Anyone else run into this bug? Sucks I won, but it won't record (this is like the 2nd time I've ever managed to be victorious)

[jcadam]

I can win on chieftan, but not anything higher.

Things that piss me off about this game:

Corruption is extremely exaggerated. A Global empire (Or even a British-type empire with territories all over the place) is IMPOSSIBLE.
This makes Archipelago maps freakin insane. You can have your home island, and a few close ones. If the important resources (iron, saltpeter, coal, etc) are on the other side of the world (seems to happen alot) you have NO chance.

[P]

To answer the question in the first post: No, it doesn't suck. Not really. I think the problem is that all of us expected the Civ or Civ II again - minor changes only, and a polished game from the start. Let's remember that both Civ and Civ II took forever to come to Mac, and we got versions that had already been patched several times on the Wintel side. This time we're a month or two behind, and at patchlevel 1, so to speak (the first Windows patch is included in the Mac relase).

For one thing, this game is going to get better. Corruption has already been tuned down from the original and several bugs fixed, and there are more patches coming. The rest is really that we need to adapt our strategies a bit. Just because you can get 541% on Alpha Centauri (yes, that's my high. Without Crossfire) doesn't mean that you rule this game. Start on Warlord and work your way up - it's a new game.

My old favourite - to grab one city, sue for peace, move my forces forward, force a war again, take one city etc. - won't work anymore because I'll lose the cities again to the cultural flip. I'm slowly learning that when you're at war, you either raze a few border cities, take one big city and sell it back or go ahead until the other Civ is eliminated. One chunk at a time won't work anymore.

The new gameplay leaves a few new options. One nifty thing is to switch to communism and hurry improvements in occupied cities. So what if I lose people, they're all traitors anyway, and the new people (they grow back quickly) are loyal. Resources are great. The new diplomacy table is great. My point is, if this game was called "Sid Meier's Alternate History" or something noone would complain.

A couple of useful hints that I've learned the hard way:

* Use the first leader for an army, the rest should hurry wonders.
* Small wonders are better than great wonders in most cases.
* Read up on exactly what wonder you're building - some old favourites are useless now.
* Raze small cities and build new ones on the same spot
* Extra luxeries can be sold dearly to other Civs. My main source of income!
* Monarchy sucks this time around. Go for Republic directly - you don't get war weariness if they attack, and the trade bonus is worth it anyway.
* In the end, your only options are Communism or Democracy.
* Use the Cultural flip to your advantage! If someone else has a colony close to your homeland, build all sorts of culture buildings in your nearby cities and make sure it has road access to your capital. They flip easier than you might think.

The one thing that does suck is the non-essential interface. You can't get to the Wonder view without a stupid shortcut key, the advisor screen is an interface nightmare, no newbie ever found the embassy screen without a hint etc.

[Osirisis]

Originally posted by Brad Oliver:
<STRONG>

http://homepage.mac.com/boliver

That should do it.

Brad</STRONG>

Sweet I'm going to have to check this out tonight. Any chance of the expansion pack getting an X App, or was it not popular enough? I still play this game. It kicks ass The classic app behaves itself pretty well in X. Only problem I have ever seen is related to switching apps while playing. It corrupts the graphics temporarily, but cleans itself up after a while. I'll be sure to put the X app through it's paces when I find a spare moment.

Thanks again

[P]

Originally posted by Osirisis:
<STRONG>

Any chance of the expansion pack getting an X App, or was it not popular enough? </STRONG>

It (SMACX) is right there, in the same download. Everything seems to work, but I get a few random crashes, especially when starting the game. Brad, do you want crash reports or something?

[Osirisis]

Originally posted by P:
<STRONG>

It (SMACX) is right there, in the same download. Everything seems to work, but I get a few random crashes, especially when starting the game. Brad, do you want crash reports or something?</STRONG>

Sweet. Forgot to check this last night, but I'm looking forward to testing this. I'm also curious as to whether or not you want us to test this and give feedback. I'd be more than happy to assist as best as I can with both the SMAC and SMACX. BTW, are the old saves compatible with the X app? More a curiousity thing than anything else

And if I haven't mentioned it enough already. Thanks again Brad. You're a class act for the Macintosh gaming community Your work is appreciated.

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by Osirisis:
<STRONG>I'm also curious as to whether or not you want us to test this and give feedback. I'd be more than happy to assist as best as I can with both the SMAC and SMACX. BTW, are the old saves compatible with the X app?</STRONG>

Yes, please send me feedback at [email protected]. Crash logs from the console in 10 are very helpful. The save files should be compatible - I didn't change anything there since the last classic patch.

Brad

[Osirisis]

Originally posted by Brad Oliver:
<STRONG>

Yes, please send me feedback at [email protected]. Crash logs from the console in 10 are very helpful. The save files should be compatible - I didn't change anything there since the last classic patch.

Brad</STRONG>

I went and played last night, SMACX that is. Seemed to run smoothly without any problems. Not sure if this is normal, but there was no way to tab out of the application, and there was no access to the auto hiding dock. Only other thing I noticed is that the 800*600 on my Cinema Display was not stretched. I think I remember the classic version taking up the whole screen. I might be incorrect though. Small complaint. Didn't stop my play at all. I gather from what you are saying that any crash logs will be spit out into the console? BTW, I do like how the app uses the OSX interface for loading and saving games. Nice touch

I'll be sure to keep an eye out for any real bugs and forward them to the address supplied.

What's that you want to mess. Here, play with this singularity planet buster. Oh no, your island has become a lake. That might make you think twice Civ games are fun; perhaps I should consider Civ 3

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Osirisis ]

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by Osirisis:
<STRONG> went and played last night, SMACX that is. Seemed to run smoothly without any problems. Not sure if this is normal, but there was no way to tab out of the application, and there was no access to the auto hiding dock. Only other thing I noticed is that the 800*600 on my Cinema Display was not stretched. I think I remember the classic version taking up the whole screen. I might be incorrect though. Small complaint. Didn't stop my play at all. I gather from what you are saying that any crash logs will be spit out into the console? BTW, I do like how the app uses the OSX interface for loading and saving games.</STRONG>

For starters, you can only switch the app out if you are running in a window (hold down command or option when you start it up to toggle this).

On OSX, DrawSprocket always picks the non-stretched modes. On 8/9, it always picks the stretched ones.

Crash logs will only be spit out if you enable them in the preferences of the Console.app.

The OSX file save/load dialogs are just the standard Nav Services ones - you'll continue to see the platinum dialogs under 8/9.

Brad

[Pinky]

Ok, Back to Civ III (somewhat)...
If I have the Mac version of the game, is it still possible to install it on a PC (something ala Quake III, but the other way around)...(forgot to check if CD was hybrid)?
I have both PC & Macs at home, but for some weird reason, I tend to buy Mac (even if it means waiting a bit more and being a bit slower sometimes). All computers are networked, so it wouldn't be a problem to get the files onto the PC. Would simply having a PC build of the app work ?? And if so, is there any way to get it ?

Thanks all !

[Osirisis]

Originally posted by Brad Oliver:
<STRONG>

For starters, you can only switch the app out if you are running in a window (hold down command or option when you start it up to toggle this).

On OSX, DrawSprocket always picks the non-stretched modes. On 8/9, it always picks the stretched ones.

Crash logs will only be spit out if you enable them in the preferences of the Console.app.

The OSX file save/load dialogs are just the standard Nav Services ones - you'll continue to see the platinum dialogs under 8/9.

Brad</STRONG>

Thanks for the help. Educational for us non-programmers out here I'll go setup the console.app when I get home tonight. I gather the drawsprocket problem is something for me to hassle Apple about. Thanks for all the useful info.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Osirisis ]

[schwa]

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>Ok, Back to Civ III (somewhat)...
If I have the Mac version of the game, is it still possible to install it on a PC (something ala Quake III, but the other way around)...(forgot to check if CD was hybrid)?
I have both PC & Macs at home, but for some weird reason, I tend to buy Mac (even if it means waiting a bit more and being a bit slower sometimes). All computers are networked, so it wouldn't be a problem to get the files onto the PC. Would simply having a PC build of the app work ?? And if so, is there any way to get it ?

Thanks all !</STRONG>

Well, the short answer to this is: No.
The long answer is: You should be buying multiple copies of the game anyway. A copy of the game licenses you to have *one* copy installed. Given how rough the game industry is (for everyone, not just Mac developers), you should be supporting it however you can. If you want to fudge the rules, hey, that's your business. But please don't come asking for help.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by schwa:
<STRONG>

Well, the short answer to this is: No.
The long answer is: You should be buying multiple copies of the game anyway. A copy of the game licenses you to have *one* copy installed. Given how rough the game industry is (for everyone, not just Mac developers), you should be supporting it however you can. If you want to fudge the rules, hey, that's your business. But please don't come asking for help.</STRONG>

Is it so bad for me to play on a Mac sometimes and on a PC the rest of the time ? If I have 2 Macs, you really think I am going to go buy two copies because sometimes I want to play on one instead of the other ? I am currently playing on a Ti500, and it's not always available to me , so yeah, I'd love to install the game on one of the PCs and play there. You know, if I really wanted to fudge the rules, I wouldn't have bothered asking here, and I'd have spent a little more time on the net. I for one decided to support all involved in Civ III, so if you want to pick at people, please do so with those who rip the game for others...

[Edit]
When you think about it, what I am asking is the same as playing the game from OSX or OS9...playing the same game on 2 different OS.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Pinky ]

[Caledwvech]

Well I just have to say that I really really love CTP. I have been playing Civ varients since they first came out and CTP is the best one that I have encountered yet. I found that, yes it is slow, but when you play turn based games with a long technology tree, you have to learn to accept that things do take a while. The smaller the world is, the shorter the game is as well.

[schwa]

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>

Is it so bad for me to play on a Mac sometimes and on a PC the rest of the time ? If I have 2 Macs, you really think I am going to go buy two copies because sometimes I want to play on one instead of the other ? I am currently playing on a Ti500, and it's not always available to me , so yeah, I'd love to install the game on one of the PCs and play there. You know, if I really wanted to fudge the rules, I wouldn't have bothered asking here, and I'd have spent a little more time on the net. I for one decided to support all involved in Civ III, so if you want to pick at people, please do so with those who rip the game for others...
</STRONG>

First off, I'm not noting this out of any personal vendetta. It's a legal issue, pure and simple. By the letter of the contract, you and the person who makes copies of the game for friends are the same. Live with it.

Second, your question was about installing a Mac-bought version on a PC, not installing on your second Mac so you can travel with it (which, though still breaking the letter of the contract, isn't such a big deal). If you're going to make an argument, stick to your terms.

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>
When you think about it, what I am asking is the same as playing the game from OSX or OS9...playing the same game on 2 different OS.

</STRONG>

Not true. You're playing the same installation of the game from the same computer.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by schwa:
<STRONG>

Not true. You're playing the same installation of the game from the same computer.</STRONG>

One can play with details like that for a long time. Consider this then :
I will remove the installation I have on my Ti500 and put it on my network account. I will play the game from 1 installation from OSX & OS9. I would also like to play it from a PC. Same installation. Now how does that differ from OSX & OS9 users ?
You seem to think everything is black & white. On that, I disagree. Your missing the point on the spirit of the law that was put in place (IMHO)...a single game a single user...that's how I see it, but to be honest, I never really read the "I Agree" part. Mb I should look into it and see what it says. I simply assumed that as long as I was the one using the game, everything was fine...

[schwa]

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>

One can play with details like that for a long time. Consider this then :
I will remove the installation I have on my Ti500 and put it on my network account. I will play the game from 1 installation from OSX & OS9. I would also like to play it from a PC. Same installation. Now how does that differ from OSX & OS9 users ?</STRONG>

As long as you only use one computer to access it, nothing. If you put it on a network for multiple computers to run, it's breaking the license agreement.

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>
You seem to think everything is black & white. On that, I disagree. Your missing the point on the spirit of the law that was put in place (IMHO)...a single game a single user...that's how I see it, but to be honest, I never really read the "I Agree" part. Mb I should look into it and see what it says. I simply assumed that as long as I was the one using the game, everything was fine...</STRONG>

Honestly, neither the game companies nor a court of law cares what you think, or how you view "the spirit of the law". When dealing with contracts (which is what a license agreement is), the only thing that counts is the words on the page. As for you not reading the license agreement, well, that's your problem and not an excuse to violate it.

Now, let me frame this by saying that I don't agree with a lot of what license agreements say, and that you *should* be able to "space-shift" your software (which is, I believe, the terminology that covers your ability to make a tape recording of an album to listen to in your walkman), but you can't. I'm just pointing out what's in place.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by schwa:
<STRONG>

Honestly, neither the game companies nor a court of law cares what you think, or how you view "the spirit of the law". When dealing with contracts (which is what a license agreement is), the only thing that counts is the words on the page. As for you not reading the license agreement, well, that's your problem and not an excuse to violate it.

Now, let me frame this by saying that I don't agree with a lot of what license agreements say, and that you *should* be able to "space-shift" your software (which is, I believe, the terminology that covers your ability to make a tape recording of an album to listen to in your walkman), but you can't. I'm just pointing out what's in place.</STRONG>

Alrigthy then. I'll have to look up that agreement and see what it says. But I could still phrase it in such a way that it doesn't break it (assuming you're right) :
- I *really* like VPC, and I'd like to try it from there, to see if I can run the game 3 times from the same CPU on 3 different OS...How cool would that be !!! (jk ). My question now becomes a simple computer curiosity .
- I will delete the mac install everytime I put it on the PC, thus allways having only 1 copy installed on 1 computer at any given time. I will of course keep my saved games. If they are not compatible, I will simply run 2 games in parallel, depending on which computer I use.

Is that any better ?

PS. How do you quote only parts of a reply, then another (I just hit the reply button over your text)? Thx !

[P]

Originally posted by Caledwvech:
<STRONG>Well I just have to say that I really really love CTP. I have been playing Civ varients since they first came out and CTP is the best one that I have encountered yet. I found that, yes it is slow, but when you play turn based games with a long technology tree, you have to learn to accept that things do take a while. The smaller the world is, the shorter the game is as well.</STRONG>

In that case, coudl you please explain why? I've played all Civ-like games out there, and CTP is the only one I can't stand. Nothing ever happens, instead of getting all events directly on the screen I have to search for them and miss half, everything takes forever to build, those non-combat units (slavers, corporate branch and whatever the name is) completely destroy what little game there is. I'm not trying to flame you, I just wonder why; maybe I missed something

[P]

Originally posted by Pinky:
<STRONG>

PS. How do you quote only parts of a reply, then another (I just hit the reply button over your text)? Thx !</STRONG>

You copy and paste. Command-click every message you want to reply to and copy the text, including UBB, between the windows.

[jcadam]

dude, I was playing as the Greeks and made nice w/ everybody.

Suddenly, the Iroqouis launch a sneak attack on me and because of mutual protection pacts, etc. we've got a world war going on.

All the civs are more or less evenly matched, so this war drags on and on. I'm a Democracy, and the war weariness gets SO bad I HAVE to give the countries I'm at war with literally WHATEVER they want for peace (I had the tech and industry to fight on, but not with every city in civil disorder w/ 10 unhappy citizens each). I also had to violate a mutual protection pact by seeking peace early.

After I finished letting my enemies bend my civ over, the people are happy again. I guess people in a Democracy want to be humiliated so they riot until you find a way to make it happen? dunno.....

[schwa]

If you're going to have an extended war, you pretty much have to revert to Monarchy or Communism (or Despotism if you're feeling petty and cruel). Otherwise, you pretty much have to sacrifice technological progress (or money if you happen to be really rich, but you tend to need it in war) to pump up your civ happiness. It totally makes sense if you think about it- people won't stand for being at war for a long time. In later stages, police stations help.

I read somewhere that war weariness is lessened if you're the one who gets attacked first, but haven't found this to be the case- anyone care to comment?

[qyn]

Originally posted by schwa:
<STRONG>I read somewhere that war weariness is lessened if you're the one who gets attacked first, but haven't found this to be the case- anyone care to comment?</STRONG>

I've found that to be true. When I get ahead enough in the tech race, others civs start demanding I give them tech. I always tell them to stuff it, so they decalre war. Thus I've eventually got half the world at war with me, but people don't care at all. Especially if no troops ever show up in my country. Then, 20 turns later, my enemies ask for peace, I give it to them, no harm done.

On the other hand, let me tell you about the time I launched a massive invasion to take a Japanese city because I wanted their oil supply (isn't it always about oil?). Massive riots in all my cities, my rather far-flung ones succumbed to corruption and starved down to size 1, destroyed granries and cathedrals, and then the Japanese walked all over me. Yikes!

After playing for a while, I've really started to like the whole resources thing. Except for oil, which is frequently so scarce that very few civs get to have a modern army.

[schwa]

Originally posted by qyn:
<STRONG>
After playing for a while, I've really started to like the whole resources thing. Except for oil, which is frequently so scarce that very few civs get to have a modern army.</STRONG>

I agree, it's the best improvement in the game. Every time I've played so far, I've been first to get the gunpowder tech, but I've never been able to get saltpeter without trading or fighting for it. Makes for a great dynamic. Sending in raiding parties to cut off an enemy's supply of a strategic resource is a great tactic, although I wish doing so affected units-in-progress.

[Pinky]

Hey all...
I've been playing the game for a while now, and I must say it's GREAT . As mentioned above, one of the neat features is the new ressource management (+ having them appear as you find new technologies). As the Romans, I have the chance of using Iron to create Legionaries and go teach a lesson to other civs. Unlike most, I don't find corruption to be so annoying. It is much more present than in CIV I & II, but not to the point where it's annoying (IMHO)...

Schwa, I also took the opportunity to look at the license agreement, and here is the part of interest :
----
LIMITED LICENSE
1. License. The software accompanying this license (the �Software�) and the
related documentation are licensed to you by us and are subject to this
license. If the Software is configured for loading onto a hard drive, you
may so load the Software only onto the hard drive of a single computer and
run the Software off only that hard drive. You may not delete the copyright
notices or any other proprietary legends on the original copy of the
Software. If there is an editor incorporated into the Software, this license
is also subject to Section 8 below. You agree that the Software will not be
shipped, transferred or exported into any country in violation of the U.S.
Export Administration Act (or any other law governing such matters) by you
or anyone at your direction and that will not utilize and will not authorize
anyone to utilize, in any other manner, the Software in violation of any
applicable law. The Software may not be downloaded or otherwise exported or
reexported into (or to a national or resident of) any country to which the
U.S. has embargoed goods or to anyone or into any country who/which are
prohibited by applicable law, from receiving such property.
----

From what I read, I can install it on 1 hard drive of 1 computer (a server for example), and run it ONLY from THAT hard drive. So my network idea wouldn't be illegal would it ?
What do you think...?

Have fun all , & watch out for the Romans !