Cure for Cancer

Suggestions for Civilization 3.

Mistakes, bugs and errors of Civilization 2 and the 'cure' for them.

NETWORK SUPPORT The first suggestion for this game on connectivity era is Multi-human player support and Network connectivity (Sproket, Palma de Mallorca).

MORE... make more new techs...
and new civs...
new civs like Asryan, and make more events...
new spying options.. more levels of diffuculty
and MORE UNITS!!!!!!!

thanx.. (Pete, U.S.A.).

HOT SEAT, MORE CIVs I think it would be great if you made a hotseat option for civ 3. For up to, say about five players. And I strongly suggest that you increase the amount of civiliztions, not just cultures, also nations, so that there should be around a hundred nations to play with. I dont know, since there is very lack of information of this game, if you've already considered this, but, however the outcome, I will buy this game... (Jocke, Södertällje, sweden).

MORE PLAYERS I think civilization 3 should have a choice to play more than 7 civilizations at once. It should have much bigger maps and definately MULTIPLAYER! Up to 99 people at once with all sorts of winning conditions. (Casey).

TURK NATION I suggest to creators of civ3 to include our nation Turks and our great leader Ataturk (Metin Akgerman, Istanbul).

HDeceiver@aol.com I think the land should be divided up into countries with ever-changing borders graphics should be improved and animated different nations have different skills city improvements more individually suited to different purposes, creating more building strategy i hate realtime fighting like warcraft, but i think there should be more room for complex strategy and manuever during battles, allowing ambushes and traps etc.

Jim Schueler 1. The biggest shortcoming in the game is when I have to shuttle many units over a great distance to a remote front. Each unit must be moved manually and individually because using the "Go to..." command doesn't minimize movement cost. In a pitched battle, 90% of playing time is spent moving troops.
Easiest solution is to have Locomotive units similar to Transport Ships running on rail lines...
2. Make "Newspaper" or "Television" a city improvement. Communication channels to population is now a critical component to modern warfare.
3. Implement economic strategy to warfare.
4. Implement psychological strategy to warfare.
5. Have continuous play instead of turn-based play, and make the play more complex. It should be impossible for the player to participate in all military, economic, political administration activity at the game's pace. Perhaps 80% of this activity must be managed by artificial intelligence proxies. The player determines the personality of each proxy and the level of independence.
Each proxy's effectiveness (contribution to the player's success) is determined by the personality<->situation appropriateness and accumulating experience. Proxies can be fired and/or die off.

pete A new unit!
I made up a Nuclear Sub 10 times better than the old one! You could get it after youadvance Nuclear and Combustion this would make old subs obsolete!! Of cours you could add on to all the units!!!!!
Another idea i had was to have an option of Olympic Games! Everyone would have to sign Cease Fires or everyone would gang up on them! This would make tight rivalrys!!!! Also spies and diplomats should be able to do more!! I was thinkind power outages, assasinating World Leaders, Emperors, or Terrorism, even Ransoming Mayors! that, my friends would kick very badly!
I also think instead of "barbarians in the year 2000 they should be reffered to as terrorists. You should make a lot more civ to play against, and try to make the AIs less predictable!

ElQuapo, Denmark Like in real life, civs with democratic governments should more likely form alligences with other democrasies, and communist civs with other communist civs. And a strong civ could for eksampel make a weak apponent change his government to that of the strong civs in exchange for peace.

European Only Version All nations of Europe should be able to play at once, with shields with proper heraldry on (e.g. the 3 fleur-de-lys for France and Y Ddraig Coch for Wales), of which all or any can be human in hotseat mode. There should be more (and better) European maps supplied, such as one which covers the Peleponnese and the British Isles accurately. (Y Cymro, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).

TO MAKE A TRUE STRATEGY GAME,... To make a true strategy game, I think that the maps should be larger, the units have a movement increase, supply to military units should be given a roll in the combat, expand the types of military units in the later stages of the game, production be increased drastically after 1900s for all civilizations that way you can have massive pitched battles of numerous uits at war at once, right now I suppose a single tank could be defined as a division or some other large group of tanks on the move, but it would be nice to have more units in combat over a larger tract of land {thus increasing the map size} The game always turns into a battle, if you dont keep the enemy weak, they will attack you, regardless of what wonders you have, Great Wall - United Nations.
The second issue is the multi-lateral pacts that occur against the human player, this gets a little absured you have four nations aligned against you at once sometimes, and usually I have five or six nations at war at once, though they usually dont join forces in the best of matters strategically or tactically {there is a difference}.
The third issue is the range of cannons, they should have a range of two spaces when they fire, thus a cannon could fire over a unit of cavalry and bombard a city from a a distance, howitzers could say fire three squares, this would make this weaponry much more realistic {again with an increase in the size of map} That way you dont have to move the artillery next to a unit where it will be destroyed on the next turn if the enemy has a good offensive unit nearby. The same could go for battleships and other long range attack units - then if a battleship moves close to the shoreline then it should be in range of artillery but out of range if it was four squares away from the land. This might be a little complicated to set-up in the program, but Im sure it could be done. The game is otherwise fantastic, though these added touches would make it more realistic. All units would have to be adjusted to compensate for these changes, time line would have to be adjusted for shorter move each turn. (Brutus, Rockville MD - kronos@ami.net).

MORE PLAYERS Here has some sugestions for CIV III
Animation on units: The units(and terrains, too) should be animated when happens some action, like a movement, a irrigation, or in "show" options.
And in Farms, should change the cultivation (Cattle, wheat, and more).
I think, with this sugestions(and more), CIV III could be better than the second version, which is exceptional.
Thanx for the consideration, (André).

Svodneek@aol.com 1. Supply lines for units. This would solve the problem of "wandering units." Those which can travel across an entire world, often being outdated by several hundred years and totally losing "contact" with your civilization.
2. Increased diplomacy options. Nations' views of each other are not based solely upon military strength and treaties that were broken five hundred years ago.
3. The ability to raze enemy cities. Armies are not forced to inhabit a city that is strategically impossible to keep. Instead of attacking they should have an option to reduce the population of that city.
4. Increased civilization advances. Speaks for itself.
5. Production of more than one unit or advancement at a time. Cities are not restricted to producing one thing, and this should be shown through the game.

jo-ann schroyer Ad strategic bombers to destroy or damage enemy factories, dams, residential centers. Tac bombers for units like tanks and missle and sdi defence. Allow more time to build and mobilize armies before they are out dated. The howitzer is a much to powerfull weapon, considering it is a defecncive weapon. It should have a strong defencive ability if entrenched and a moderate offence. How about ranged weapons,bombard cities from 2 or 3 squares away with your artillery or battle ship, kill population, damage infrastructure, and and demoralize ememy units. More civilian units- road crews, Railroad crews should be expencive so they only connect cities and mager raw material areas. Add trians to transport units (not bullet trains that can magical transport a entire army around the world in the blink of an eye) and require support. Add Cargo planes. Trade is not just revenue and science, it should be used as economic weapon to force nations into submission. Add trade aggrements. Add Borders, I hate it when my ally builds a city in the middle of my country. Much more diplomacy, especialy with allies. Allow allies to use your ifrastucture at your desecration, I hate it when they fill my country with units so I can not move. Move the space race back so modern war can have a better go at it. More Nations. More resourses. More tec. Wonders. Much More units. More everything. Great games require great sequels!

Michael Whitford The program must be able to adjust more adequately to changes in politics over time (sword moves to pen). Also a small country in the midst of big empires or many countries is more interesting and challenging when you are trying to push the limits of neutrality rather than just trying to survive. But at the same time if progress is not being made in luxuries, technology or country size, the populace starts to tend towards other small countries that are doing well. I really like the idea of break away nations and empires happening on a more regular time scale. For example european expansion and contraction (USA, Australia, Brazil, Mexico etc.). New countries still have people who long for the old country and hence they tend to act in the same manner that the original country did. And some breakaway in an aggressive manner (USA... I'm no historian (you could tell?), but I am sure that there are others). Also more civs should support you if you are the subject of naked aggression (but not everybody).

JHAMMAN@aol.com 1. make BC go SLOWER!!!!!!! not that much slower, but it is kind of silly when its like 200 AD after less than 1/2 hour of gameplay, you never really get to use the ancient troops very much.
2. make the city tiles smaller, i don't know exactly how to work that, but if you're the english or japanese, it's really stupid if you can't build more than 2 cities in your indigenous area.
3. the population is always really low! i think all the irrigated land should have population in it, because when you have 60 cities averaging a population of 13 your total population shouldn't be 40 million.
4.don't group civilizations into categories. It's really silly to never be able to have the french and germans face off against each other, because they're classic enemies.
5. on the same note MORE civilizations 7 just isn't enough, i often find myself with loads of empty land throughout the world because there aren't enough civilizations to fill it, in all actuality the number civilizations in one game should be doubled or more. It's more challenging, and more realistic.
6. get rid of the time limit where the leader of the government retires. This game shouldn't be about time limits.
7. BIGGER MAPS! 'nuf said

Steve Hasen, London, Ont. Canada I beleive that the best way to improve Civilization 3 is to make it more flexible. Land units now are either normal movement or "Alpine". Yet these latter units shouldonly have an advantage in mountain or hill terrain. We could have "Jungle" units as well where their movement advantage would be in Jungle or Forest Terrain. Perhaps "Dessert" units that would be good in Desserts(ie move at 1/2,1/4 or 1/3rd movement rates! Now with the Flag system a unit could be good in all types of terrain, while others in only specific terrain.
This flexibility should extend everywhere ie Diplomat/spy units that could only perform one type of function...such as "Investigate city" This way we could build spy satelites without there having the ability to Bribe or Sabotage or Induce Revolts.

Kaisers I think their should be more elaborate battles. The old Box unit attacks box unit is okay but I want to use more stradegy. Give Civ 3 more techs, wonders, units, civ's, multiplayer, and most important of all make the battles more like in lords of the Realm 2 or Ceasar 2.

This section is based on English-reader's participation. You may visit the Spanish version for more suggestions.

NETWORK SUPPORT	The first suggestion for this game on connectivity era is Multi-human player support and Network connectivity (Sproket, Palma de Mallorca).
MORE...	make more new techs... and new civs... new civs like Asryan, and make more events... new spying options.. more levels of diffuculty and MORE UNITS!!!!!!! thanx.. (Pete, U.S.A.).
HOT SEAT, MORE CIVs	I think it would be great if you made a hotseat option for civ 3. For up to, say about five players. And I strongly suggest that you increase the amount of civiliztions, not just cultures, also nations, so that there should be around a hundred nations to play with. I dont know, since there is very lack of information of this game, if you've already considered this, but, however the outcome, I will buy this game... (Jocke, Södertällje, sweden).
MORE PLAYERS	I think civilization 3 should have a choice to play more than 7 civilizations at once. It should have much bigger maps and definately MULTIPLAYER! Up to 99 people at once with all sorts of winning conditions. (Casey).
TURK NATION	I suggest to creators of civ3 to include our nation Turks and our great leader Ataturk (Metin Akgerman, Istanbul).
HDeceiver@aol.com	I think the land should be divided up into countries with ever-changing borders graphics should be improved and animated different nations have different skills city improvements more individually suited to different purposes, creating more building strategy i hate realtime fighting like warcraft, but i think there should be more room for complex strategy and manuever during battles, allowing ambushes and traps etc.
Jim Schueler	1. The biggest shortcoming in the game is when I have to shuttle many units over a great distance to a remote front. Each unit must be moved manually and individually because using the "Go to..." command doesn't minimize movement cost. In a pitched battle, 90% of playing time is spent moving troops. Easiest solution is to have Locomotive units similar to Transport Ships running on rail lines... 2. Make "Newspaper" or "Television" a city improvement. Communication channels to population is now a critical component to modern warfare. 3. Implement economic strategy to warfare. 4. Implement psychological strategy to warfare. 5. Have continuous play instead of turn-based play, and make the play more complex. It should be impossible for the player to participate in all military, economic, political administration activity at the game's pace. Perhaps 80% of this activity must be managed by artificial intelligence proxies. The player determines the personality of each proxy and the level of independence. Each proxy's effectiveness (contribution to the player's success) is determined by the personality<->situation appropriateness and accumulating experience. Proxies can be fired and/or die off.
pete	A new unit! I made up a Nuclear Sub 10 times better than the old one! You could get it after youadvance Nuclear and Combustion this would make old subs obsolete!! Of cours you could add on to all the units!!!!! Another idea i had was to have an option of Olympic Games! Everyone would have to sign Cease Fires or everyone would gang up on them! This would make tight rivalrys!!!! Also spies and diplomats should be able to do more!! I was thinkind power outages, assasinating World Leaders, Emperors, or Terrorism, even Ransoming Mayors! that, my friends would kick very badly! I also think instead of "barbarians in the year 2000 they should be reffered to as terrorists. You should make a lot more civ to play against, and try to make the AIs less predictable!
ElQuapo, Denmark	Like in real life, civs with democratic governments should more likely form alligences with other democrasies, and communist civs with other communist civs. And a strong civ could for eksampel make a weak apponent change his government to that of the strong civs in exchange for peace.
European Only Version	All nations of Europe should be able to play at once, with shields with proper heraldry on (e.g. the 3 fleur-de-lys for France and Y Ddraig Coch for Wales), of which all or any can be human in hotseat mode. There should be more (and better) European maps supplied, such as one which covers the Peleponnese and the British Isles accurately. (Y Cymro, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).
TO MAKE A TRUE STRATEGY GAME,...	To make a true strategy game, I think that the maps should be larger, the units have a movement increase, supply to military units should be given a roll in the combat, expand the types of military units in the later stages of the game, production be increased drastically after 1900s for all civilizations that way you can have massive pitched battles of numerous uits at war at once, right now I suppose a single tank could be defined as a division or some other large group of tanks on the move, but it would be nice to have more units in combat over a larger tract of land {thus increasing the map size} The game always turns into a battle, if you dont keep the enemy weak, they will attack you, regardless of what wonders you have, Great Wall - United Nations. The second issue is the multi-lateral pacts that occur against the human player, this gets a little absured you have four nations aligned against you at once sometimes, and usually I have five or six nations at war at once, though they usually dont join forces in the best of matters strategically or tactically {there is a difference}. The third issue is the range of cannons, they should have a range of two spaces when they fire, thus a cannon could fire over a unit of cavalry and bombard a city from a a distance, howitzers could say fire three squares, this would make this weaponry much more realistic {again with an increase in the size of map} That way you dont have to move the artillery next to a unit where it will be destroyed on the next turn if the enemy has a good offensive unit nearby. The same could go for battleships and other long range attack units - then if a battleship moves close to the shoreline then it should be in range of artillery but out of range if it was four squares away from the land. This might be a little complicated to set-up in the program, but Im sure it could be done. The game is otherwise fantastic, though these added touches would make it more realistic. All units would have to be adjusted to compensate for these changes, time line would have to be adjusted for shorter move each turn. (Brutus, Rockville MD - kronos@ami.net).
MORE PLAYERS	Here has some sugestions for CIV III Animation on units: The units(and terrains, too) should be animated when happens some action, like a movement, a irrigation, or in "show" options. And in Farms, should change the cultivation (Cattle, wheat, and more). I think, with this sugestions(and more), CIV III could be better than the second version, which is exceptional. Thanx for the consideration, (André).
Svodneek@aol.com	1. Supply lines for units. This would solve the problem of "wandering units." Those which can travel across an entire world, often being outdated by several hundred years and totally losing "contact" with your civilization. 2. Increased diplomacy options. Nations' views of each other are not based solely upon military strength and treaties that were broken five hundred years ago. 3. The ability to raze enemy cities. Armies are not forced to inhabit a city that is strategically impossible to keep. Instead of attacking they should have an option to reduce the population of that city. 4. Increased civilization advances. Speaks for itself. 5. Production of more than one unit or advancement at a time. Cities are not restricted to producing one thing, and this should be shown through the game.
jo-ann schroyer	Ad strategic bombers to destroy or damage enemy factories, dams, residential centers. Tac bombers for units like tanks and missle and sdi defence. Allow more time to build and mobilize armies before they are out dated. The howitzer is a much to powerfull weapon, considering it is a defecncive weapon. It should have a strong defencive ability if entrenched and a moderate offence. How about ranged weapons,bombard cities from 2 or 3 squares away with your artillery or battle ship, kill population, damage infrastructure, and and demoralize ememy units. More civilian units- road crews, Railroad crews should be expencive so they only connect cities and mager raw material areas. Add trians to transport units (not bullet trains that can magical transport a entire army around the world in the blink of an eye) and require support. Add Cargo planes. Trade is not just revenue and science, it should be used as economic weapon to force nations into submission. Add trade aggrements. Add Borders, I hate it when my ally builds a city in the middle of my country. Much more diplomacy, especialy with allies. Allow allies to use your ifrastucture at your desecration, I hate it when they fill my country with units so I can not move. Move the space race back so modern war can have a better go at it. More Nations. More resourses. More tec. Wonders. Much More units. More everything. Great games require great sequels!
Michael Whitford	The program must be able to adjust more adequately to changes in politics over time (sword moves to pen). Also a small country in the midst of big empires or many countries is more interesting and challenging when you are trying to push the limits of neutrality rather than just trying to survive. But at the same time if progress is not being made in luxuries, technology or country size, the populace starts to tend towards other small countries that are doing well. I really like the idea of break away nations and empires happening on a more regular time scale. For example european expansion and contraction (USA, Australia, Brazil, Mexico etc.). New countries still have people who long for the old country and hence they tend to act in the same manner that the original country did. And some breakaway in an aggressive manner (USA... I'm no historian (you could tell?), but I am sure that there are others). Also more civs should support you if you are the subject of naked aggression (but not everybody).
JHAMMAN@aol.com	1. make BC go SLOWER!!!!!!! not that much slower, but it is kind of silly when its like 200 AD after less than 1/2 hour of gameplay, you never really get to use the ancient troops very much. 2. make the city tiles smaller, i don't know exactly how to work that, but if you're the english or japanese, it's really stupid if you can't build more than 2 cities in your indigenous area. 3. the population is always really low! i think all the irrigated land should have population in it, because when you have 60 cities averaging a population of 13 your total population shouldn't be 40 million. 4.don't group civilizations into categories. It's really silly to never be able to have the french and germans face off against each other, because they're classic enemies. 5. on the same note MORE civilizations 7 just isn't enough, i often find myself with loads of empty land throughout the world because there aren't enough civilizations to fill it, in all actuality the number civilizations in one game should be doubled or more. It's more challenging, and more realistic. 6. get rid of the time limit where the leader of the government retires. This game shouldn't be about time limits. 7. BIGGER MAPS! 'nuf said
Steve Hasen, London, Ont. Canada	I beleive that the best way to improve Civilization 3 is to make it more flexible. Land units now are either normal movement or "Alpine". Yet these latter units shouldonly have an advantage in mountain or hill terrain. We could have "Jungle" units as well where their movement advantage would be in Jungle or Forest Terrain. Perhaps "Dessert" units that would be good in Desserts(ie move at 1/2,1/4 or 1/3rd movement rates! Now with the Flag system a unit could be good in all types of terrain, while others in only specific terrain. This flexibility should extend everywhere ie Diplomat/spy units that could only perform one type of function...such as "Investigate city" This way we could build spy satelites without there having the ability to Bribe or Sabotage or Induce Revolts.
Kaisers	I think their should be more elaborate battles. The old Box unit attacks box unit is okay but I want to use more stradegy. Give Civ 3 more techs, wonders, units, civ's, multiplayer, and most important of all make the battles more like in lords of the Realm 2 or Ceasar 2.