Status of Vel's Strat Guide

[Nostromo]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Morning guys!

Here would be my take on it (the REX, ICS thing):

REX, by its definition, is all about rapid expansion in the early game. For REX to be fundamentally different from ICS though, it implies that the early game represents the window of opportunity for expansion to get yourself on par with the AI, and use it to blow past the AI in all the meaningful measures of productivity.

The problem lies in the fact that if I build an endless stream of cities, I'm taking up land that the AI could be using to build cities of its own. So I'll do it, well beyond the early game, simply to deny the AI access to land it could otherwise use.

True, it's not *quite* the same as Civ2-style, cities in every other tile ICS, but it amounts to pretty much the same thing. I can spew out an endless stream of cities, space them a bit further apart, thanks to culture and border bumping, deny the AI access to all the land, give myself more production centers, and crank out some cheap-o unit (either through classic production, or through conscription, which is the biggest Civ3 ICS exploit, as it relies completely on food (unaffected by corruption) to churn out troops.

They've partially buried ICS by means of their various fixes, but IMO, it's still alive and well. Pop rush (or cash-rush) a granary in a new little city, and it doesn't much matter if its production sucks. Ten conscripted soldiers (not to worry about the population....it'll grow back more rapidly in Civ3 anyway) will trounce pretty much anything the AI has, even if you're behind in tech. This, because the AI is still not so good at defending itself.

Of course, as with the earlier iterations of the game, and has been clearly demonstrated, there's no need to conscript/rush your way to dominance, but if you want a surefire way to win the game, then ICS works here just as well as the earlier iterations of the game. Its function and methodology may have changed (expected, in the face of changing rules on support and such), but the concepts and principles remain largely the same IMO.

-=Vel=-

Good points. You convinced me. I guess that ICS is here to stay. Unless, of course, you remove the expansion part of the game. A good map with all the cities already in place should do the trick. Can't wait for the Apolyton mod BTW.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Velociryx
What can I say? With an endorsement like that, how can I refuse?

Sometimes it pays to use this old trick...

Keep up the good work!

[Solver]

Vel, some of your points are the best critic of Civ 3 I've seen! Not whines, nice, constructive critics.

By the way, these are also the reasons I still have my CtP 2 CD somewhere near me.

[Velociryx]

Thanks guys! Nahhh, no need to whine....nothing to be done about it....just gotta try and make the best of what we've got, is all...

And to that end, I've been sneaking in a bit of writing time here at work....don't know how long till I get something in finished form, but as soon as I do, there'll be a new strategy thread up....

-=Vel=-

[Solver]

Yay! I'm in need of one, as I'm on my way to perfectizing my Civ 3 skills.

[dawidge]

Of course if you *really* want Vel to write a Civ3 strat guide, you'd buy his book(s).

[sboog]

I'm not a very good player yet, Vel. So I was so glad to hear you are starting a new strategy thread.

Please include your thoughts on which victory path to take. And size map and which civ to play.

I think I just don't know how to best use the first 30 minutes of game play, either. I end up moving units but don't seem to have a plan. Just have warriors moving around and exploring.

Thanks for any help you will give us.

sboog

[vondrack]

Originally posted by sboog
I think I just don't know how to best use the first 30 minutes of game play, either. I end up moving units but don't seem to have a plan. Just have warriors moving around and exploring.

Well, I guess moving your warriors around a bit, exploring, looking for good city sites, is a pretty good plan... most people do that. Me too.

More plans come in with what the exploring warriors find out...

[Proserpine]

Originally posted by Velociryx


What can I say? With an endorsement like that, how can I refuse?

I will take what I've got currently, add to it, and create a new strat thread here, at the very least, to further discussion on it. If it turns out that we get enough material for a published version, and if there's interest in seeing something like that, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it....

-=Vel=-

Excellent news! Like many here, I look forward to your (and others) words of wisdom!

[Austin]

Originally posted by Velociryx

2) There are things about the game that simply aren't FUN. Things about the game that are there to take up my effort, attention, and time, but do not add so much as a single ounce of fun to the game. I'm talking about things like:

a) The need to constantly babysit my workers. The AI just can't get the job done correctly, which means I gotta do it myself. That means moving tens, and eventually scores of workers all around the terrain optomizing. This speaks to both having the AI do silly bits of terraforming if automated, and also blithely wandering right into harm's way if an enemy army approaches.
b) There is no THOUGHT required when making terraforming choices. Mine the hills, mine the bonus grassland, irrigate when you need to, railroad and road everything. End.
c) even when you finish terraforming, you can't afford to disband your workers....Pollution. Sadly, although pollution is a fact of life here in the real world, the method of modelling pollution in the game adds exactly zero to the fun factor. It's busy work. Sure, the solution is to simply automate it away, but at that point, why include it at all?
d) Rails make the game completely un-fun. Worse, they really muck up the landscape, but...you gotta have them, and you gotta have them everywhere to stay competitive and keep pace.

One thing I'm experimenting with is to simply have the terrain start out with the levels of food and shields as it it has already been improved, and taking away the improvement level bonus.

So hills, instead of being one food, one shield to start out with and then one food, three shields with a mine the hill is worth one food, three shields, and mining does nothing.

I really, REALLY want to take away the trade bonus for roads and railroads, but I think if you do that you can't build them at all.

Austin

[sboog]

I am not meaning to push Vel. But I just want him to know how much his updated strategy guide would be welcomed by us.

Hope he includes a bit for players who are not so good. (me)

Any word from him lately regarding this?

sboog

[Velociryx]

Hey guys, and my apologies for the delay in responding...been hitting the Candle'Bre project REALLY hard lately....as to the strat guide for Civ3...YES! Progress is being made on that front, thanks to a generous offer of editorial assistance! I have been expanding the guide-in-process during odd bits of time throughout the day, but it's been slow goings....still, it's inching closer...

-=Vel=-

[Theseus]

Need help?

[Velociryx]

It would be much appreciated, bud! Mail me and we'll chew the fat on it for a while!

-=Vel=-
(WebMaster@velociryx.every1.net)

[Solver]

Yes, Vel, am looking forward . Though I haven't gotten myself around playing Civ 3 for almost a month now...