I'm not your friend. I never said normal frame rates under 10 FPS, I said scenarios. Like I said, I've been doing this for about 15 years.
Further, what technical data do you have on a system I owned over 3 years ago and have long since pieced out and given away? NONE. Simple isn't it? You are questioning something you have zero personal knowledge of. So you have no facts based on experimentation and observation on a system you never owned. Good luck on posting those facts you do not have. 
Well, I'm not going to be all insulting and say that I posted specifications of a system in this particular thread that was more capable than what you say you ran AHII on and it barely did the job.
But, I did, in fact, post those specs.

I guess what it comes down to on what one sees as playability.. For you, your K6III may have been fine for you... Why? I have no clue.. Maybe you didn't see what this game looked or ran like on better systems.. Maybe you just didn't care.. Maybe you had budget restraints.. Don't know...
For me, I do not consider something playable under what most would consider a horrible frame rate.. I would just as soon not play due to the disappointment factor..
And I can't justify paying a measly 15 bucks to play something that looks and runs like hell.. But that's just me...
Also, the capability of one's system will also have issues with latency(I think that's where all this started).. I'm talking stuff like very early Pentium 4's and below.. And when there is a shortage of RAM as well, latency will be even worse.. All that NETWORKING,graphics, physics, etc takes resources.. Have something less than capable, lag will happen..