C3C game patch mid january? beta patch?? - Page 3

DrSpike · December 10, 2003, 05:43

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
I would like to know more about the combat tweaks.

Is that all you can say?

Hehe I have to admit that apart from the biggies that needed fixing this is the only thing that caught my eye reading through. I think we have all got used to the more variable combat results, which I thought were just due to the HP system in this game (and no firepower). Are Firaxis admiting there was always a problem with the way results were calculated, or have they just tried to alter something to counteract slightly the variability that the Civ3 model introduced?

Harovan · December 10, 2003, 05:47

Guess Theseus' monitor is now safe. He said once, that he spit a mouthful of whisky over his screen in surprise over a combat result. I did similar stupid things.

I don't have a problem with combat results being less random.

sabrewolf · December 10, 2003, 05:59

incrudulous!!!

thanks for the patch!

it makes me feel, this thread gave them the idea, which makes me proud

DrSpike · December 10, 2003, 06:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Guess Theseus' monitor is now safe. He said once, that he spit a mouthful of whisky over his screen in surprise over a combat result. I did similar stupid things.

I don't have a problem with combat results being less random.

Possibly I don't either, but it seems a strange time to make the change. I made a longer post on the issues in the other patch thread.

Harovan · December 10, 2003, 06:23

We'll see how it plays. Ideally, this could be adjustable as "General Setting" in the editor, like "Combat results are the average of x runs", with x being by default ~3..5 and the possibility to set it back to 1 remaining. But even though this is a slight rule change, it is hardly game breaking. Mind you combat is mostly not an atomar operation (100% win or 100% loss), as the winner may be seriously damaged too.

I admit, that I'm sometimes frustrated about ridiculous results, like if I lose a veteran swordsman against an unfortified regular archer on grassland without inflicting any damage. If with the change I still may lose that swordsman with reduced probability, but if I lose it, the probability of him dying after at least taking down a pip or two is higher, I'm fine with the change.

sabrewolf · December 10, 2003, 06:33

the change of the random combat calculation does change a lot. the "overwhelming force" won't work and cavalry against riflemen will get a lot harder (6 vs. 6 * (1+1.1+1.25))

interesting... it makes higher level matches harder and lower level easier...

let's hope there aren't any instability bugs. but if so: we wanted beta patch, we'll have to accept that risk (or play unpatched)

Harovan · December 10, 2003, 06:42

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf
the change of the random combat calculation does change a lot. the "overwhelming force" won't work and cavalry against riflemen will get a lot harder (6 vs. 6 * (1+1.1+1.25))

Should help the AI, as massive cavalry attacks are a mostly human domain. The possible solution is, besiege the city, bombard it down with cannons and then take it. Another human domain, I know, but at least it slows us down a lot and makes warfare more interesting.

sabrewolf · December 10, 2003, 06:49

i sometimes like clearing up red-lined spearmen with my spearmen. often it worked. but now the likeliness of winning 1 vs. ~2.5 is a lot lower...

also, rushes are more difficult (except ofcourse archer vs. warrior)

Harovan · December 10, 2003, 06:57

On the other hand, massive cavalry attacks against musketmen become more powerful. Increases the need (as discussed in the AU mod threads) to prune cavalry power a bit and reinstall full power with Nationalism.

DrSpike · December 10, 2003, 07:01

This will definitely make Demigod and higher levels even trickier I think. Even on Demigod the AI often gets pikes and MI quite early.

sabrewolf · December 10, 2003, 07:02

yeah, the "light cavalry"-"cavalry" idea is more urgent now (i posted in that AU thread).
that would make the attack window very short (between your and the AI's nationalism researching)... and it makes the human want nationalism too

Stuie · December 10, 2003, 08:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Stuie
I seriously doubt we are going to see a beta patch. Atari doesn't seem to work that way.

Harovan · December 10, 2003, 09:07

Don't bash yourself too hard, Stuie. Actually I think, nobody of us seriously believed that a beta patch will be released.

Firaxis

DrSpike · December 10, 2003, 09:13

I certainly did not!

alva · December 10, 2003, 10:09

So are they officialy working for us?

Hmmm, who can I send for a cop of coffee....

on the Beta-patch

vmxa1 · December 10, 2003, 13:37

I guess this thread is moot now.

Mountain Sage · December 11, 2003, 08:01

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
I guess this thread is moot now.

except that now I have to scrap my 60+ spearmen I wanted to use against tanks...

vmxa1 · December 11, 2003, 13:53

LoL good one MS.

FrustratedPoet · December 12, 2003, 08:33

Wait ... so DrSpike is playing Civ3 now?

What's going on here? Honestly ... I leave you people alone for five minutes and the whole place goes stark raving bonkers.

A beta patch sounds rather nice, although I wonder why everybody is surprised at Firaxis releasing unfinished material...

DrSpike · December 12, 2003, 08:47

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
Wait ... so DrSpike is playing Civ3 now?

What's going on here? Honestly ... I leave you people alone for five minutes and the whole place goes stark raving bonkers.

A beta patch sounds rather nice, although I wonder why everybody is surprised at Firaxis releasing unfinished material...

You joined late..........I made many Civ3 posts upon its release up until 1.21.