Where are the infantry and marines

soctt Muller · April 27, 2002, 12:24

After installing the latest patch, after gaining the required advances and resources, I do not have an option to build marines or rifleman. What gives? And now an open letter :
I understand building a game is hard-extremely hard. But the fact that Civ is now closer to the game promised almost 8 months ago for which I shelled out 50 bucks or so (yes I was a sucker and bought the tin) is ridiclulus. Now, as an anology, Cars are hard to build too. I understand cars have recall notices and the like, but for the most part what you see is what you get. If its really deficient, you can even sue. But who would buy a car, then 2 months later get wheels (like a patch) and then 2 months later get the front fender (like a patch) and then still get news from the dealer that the car you purchased is still 'buggy' but they promise to send more parts sometime. What Infogrames did was fraud as far as I am concerned. One last thing

PUT THE F*CKING CIVS IN THE RIGHT PLACE
And who drew the original map of the world? How bad was that? Was it an after thought? Thank god for the mod community with out you guys I would be using my disk as a coaster and the tin, well, I still may just have to crush it anyway-every time I see it I think "This is my limited edition tin?" Well, a fool and his money..............

zulu9812 · April 27, 2002, 15:51

To be honest, the original game (1.07f) was really quite good. Sure, the unit and resource icons were hard-coded and it took 3 patches to fix it, but most developers don't support mods. This goes to show that Firaxis are as much fans of the game as we are. There was nothing fundamentally 'buggy' with the original game, it's just that these patches made it even better, so much so that 1.07f looks stone-age in comparison. Still, we should be thankful that Firaxis care enough to provide this continuing support.

soctt Muller · April 27, 2002, 16:45

I have to respectfully disagree. When the game came out, many individuals could not even run it due to bugs. If you look at the list of changes in the patch readme's, the word bugs is used frequently. Firaxis put out a rough product. I agree that they are obvious fans and that they put a ton of work into thier product. I can not imagine the amount of intelligence and programing skill it takes to create a game as versital and replayable as Civ3. But we were promised things that were not delivered.
I believe they support the mod community because:
1.they are fans
2. It is in thier best interest to do so. It keeps returns low, it keeps the game selling "as it gets better" and the list goes on. I am not a conspiracy freak, but I just think that thier interest is not all altruism.
Thanks for your reply to my post

zulu9812 · April 27, 2002, 19:08

I do agree that there are some things lacking in the game, namely:

1. Mini-map in editor: it's virtually impossible to create an accurate map from a frame of reference (such as world map) - even most RTS map editors have this feature (such as Final Alert), but not CivEdit. Ho hum.
2. Scenario editor: CTP2 (the most recent civ-type game) had scenarios, but not civ3. Seems a step backwards to me.
3. Correct civ placements: actually, even better would be an option at game set-up to choose yourself where the civs start.

A lot of the 'bugs' fixed in the patches were fixes for new stuff introduced in previous patches (such as stacked movement) or civlopedia typos. I still don't have a real problem with 1.07f and will quite happily play it. Obviously, given the choice, I'd plump for 1.21f every time.

True, there were quite a few gameplay bugs, but these hardly spoiled one's enjoyment of the game. When I first got civ3, I thought it was brilliant. I thought the AI was a bit on the harsh side, but I certainly didn't regard it as a waste of money.

As far as your infantry/marines problem; double check that you have access to oil. You might be able to see it on the map, and it might seem connected by roads/rr, but check to see if it's there in the city manager.

Skanky Burns · April 28, 2002, 04:08

Civ 3 is one of the more stable pieces of software that has been released recently.
As to your problem:

Quote:

I do not have an option to build marines or rifleman.

Are you sure you can't build riflemen? If so, and you have discovered the necessary advance, then theres a problem with your version of civ as riflemen do not require resources.

If its infantry, are you sure you have both oil and rubber in the city in question?

soctt Muller · April 28, 2002, 10:49

Thanks for the reply(s). I can build rifleman, I have all of the advances and resources. I have not fiddled with the editor to not allow me to build these things. This sounds like my problem-I must have done something to screw it up.

I never said it was not stable, if buggy implies instability what I should of said is unfinished or rough. Not as promised. The game we all should of purchased is almost here now. Obviously I like civ3 or I would not be talking about it. I just think that the whole multiple patch till we get it right is not the way to go. I would rather wait and get a finished product. We were all promised a lot of things which have yet to be delivered.

zulu9812 · April 28, 2002, 11:21

Quote:

Originally posted by soctt Muller
I never said it was not stable, if buggy implies instability what I should of said is unfinished or rough. Not as promised. The game we all should of purchased is almost here now. Obviously I like civ3 or I would not be talking about it. I just think that the whole multiple patch till we get it right is not the way to go. I would rather wait and get a finished product. We were all promised a lot of things which have yet to be delivered.

Now this I would agree with. There are still things missing after 3 patches!