I like C3C, but...

Bonaparte · December 15, 2003, 00:43

...I do have a few complaints. Now I'm not writing this for everyone to use as an excuse to jump down my throat because, as I said, I do like C3C.

Some of the aesthetic things about C3C are gone as far as games that are made with the editor are concerened. The aerial view is gone, the palace is gone, and the space race menu is gone. Now these aren't necessary in order to play the game, but they did round out the game a little. They should have expounded on these features instead of eliminating them...hopefully Civ 4 will "fix" this.

Oh, the UN wonder doesn't seem to do a darn thing either in C3C games made with the editor also...wonder why?

Everything else has been done pretty good including how the AI reacts. Although there are still a few problems with it. For instance, if an AI civ already likes you and you do not involve yourself with that AI civ that eventually relations should drop to a neutral level and should not go below that neutral level unless you do something to tick that AI civ off, and the reverse should be true, if an AI civ already doesn't like you and you do not involve yourself with that AI civ that eventually relations should raise up to a neutral level. This isn't the case they usually always end up disliking you. Another thing, it's easy to tick off the AI, but difficult to get back onto there good side, and they hold grudges way to long.

Now here is a little example of what happened in my last game...I was on good terms with Spain and recently ended a war with Portugal. Spain declared war on Portugal abouth 5 turns after my war and then 5 turns after that they asked for my help in fighting Portugal. As I was on good terms with Spain I agreed and helped them. Many turns later on during the game I asked Spain for mutual protection and they said "no way - we remembered what you did to Portugal" - Now I can see that reaction if I asked another AI civ for mutual protection, but I should not have gotten it from Spain.

Basically what I am saying is that I hope Civ 4 will add back and add to some of the little things that made the game a little more fun and I hope they make the AI better than it is.

notyoueither · December 15, 2003, 03:31

The Spain-Portugal bit is understandable. You broke a deal. Them's the breaks.

For the UN bit, you mean you can't win a diplomatic victory if you mod a single item and then play? Do you know where the bug thread is?

Civ Old Timer · December 15, 2003, 13:57

I like C3C too, but...

The epic game feels different... like the values attached to things has been tinkered with... at lot.

I played the Rise of Rome 2x, didn't win either time, but had a real good time the 2nd time around.

When I tried to play a random game things started out realy well - good start locations, quick expansion through exploration and warfare against weak opponents.

Then the problems begin. I usually play as a Monarchy, but was never crippled by corruption like I am now. I get the Forbidden Palace built in a good location but I'm usually dead or dying before I can get the Capital moved. Never made it out of the middle ages... in either game. In PtW I was winning regulalry at Regent and considering trying Monarch level (again). Now, unless I learn what's new, I can't compete on Regent.

I know that the upgrade costs have changed quite a bit; it's more expensive. What I want to know is, has the corruption model changed and if so, how? Has the number of units a Monarchy can support been reduced? Have the costs for early improvements been raised? I build a few barracks, maybe in 1/3 to 1/2 of my cities, and I put temples everywhere to unify my border and keep riots down. I build marketplaces in my core, uncorrupt cities. Trade agreements are hard to come by, and after the opening few moves, no one will trade tech with me. At after starting the game at 70% tech, I'm rapidly behind.

I also notice that defenders don't seem to defend very well anymore. My early attcks succeeded too well, and once that easy civ is gone and my newly held, corrupt cities come under attack by a better opponent, I can't defend them (even with same era units). The units I do build loose more than I'm used to, and I can't even build them in numbers because I'm broke, my science output is at now only 50% and dropping like a stone.

Basically, I find myself at #7 in production and #7 literacy, in a seven civ game. The units don't attack or defend in the same way (tactics are different too but that's fine, it's combat resolution I want to know about), and I'm stumped about what I need to change in order to compete.

I haven't tried it, but a change in government to Feudalism or Republic doen't seem like the answer.

Please don't say "try a game on chieftain." The learning curve probably isn't that deep. I just can't seem to find documentation about the new models involved.

Tall Stranger · December 15, 2003, 14:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Civ Old Timer

Then the problems begin. I usually play as a Monarchy, but was never crippled by corruption like I am now. I get the Forbidden Palace built in a good location but I'm usually dead or dying before I can get the Capital moved. Never made it out of the middle ages... in either game. In PtW I was winning regulalry at Regent and considering trying Monarch level (again). Now, unless I learn what's new, I can't compete on Regent.

No, the problem is not with you, but rather with a major corruption bug in C3C. It has to do with how the game ranks cities for corruption purposes, and makes FP's, in most cases, actually increase corruption throughout your empire. Firaxis is aware of this bug (as well as one in which gold per turn deals generate 2x as much gold as they're supposed to) and is developing a fix. Don't quote me on this, but I thought it was supposed to be out around Wednesday.

Hope that helps.

Wittlich · December 15, 2003, 14:56

I concur - Until a patch is released that addresses the rampant corruption DO NOT build the Forbidden Palace - it will only increase your civilization's corruption rate.

vmxa1 · December 15, 2003, 16:02

The gpt bug can be a big boost to the AI. If you are not trading much you will have less cash than they do and they can afford to research more and or buy structures and units. Add in the corruption bug and that can account for some the the trouble you are experiencing.

chequita guevara · December 15, 2003, 16:52

The FP didn't increse corruption in my game, but that's because it's an archipelago game.

Sarxis · December 15, 2003, 17:12

I had a smallish civ going on a single, small continent, and the FP also didn't increase my corruption overall, but also wasn't much of a help either.

Until I changed to Communism.. wow!

Killed that idea quick.

Civ Old Timer · December 15, 2003, 18:36

Thanks guys.

It's nice to know it's not just me....!

The patch that's coming... is this a beta or the real thing? I hear rumours of a beta patch floating around that does *not* address the corruption problem.

Btw, if I fire up PTW, will that get around the problem for the time beiong?

Kloreep · December 15, 2003, 19:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Civ Old Timer
The patch that's coming... is this a beta or the real thing? I hear rumours of a beta patch floating around that does *not* address the corruption problem.

It's only a beta, but it will fix FP corruption.

Quote:

Originally posted by Civ Old Timer
Btw, if I fire up PTW, will that get around the problem for the time beiong?

Yep.

Bonaparte · December 16, 2003, 00:48

Well at least the patch will fix the corruption...I always managed to have a decent amount of money, but now it's hard to come by.

Now maybe it's just me, but war wearyness sets in awfully fast when you have a Democratic gov't...a lot faster than it used to. My civ went into anarchy for about 10 turns and when that was over I switched to a Republic because I wasn't done beating up the English. Still in order to keep the people happy I had to starve my cities for a lot longer than I ever had to before.

Oh, and ignore my comment about the UN...it seems to be working now, but it wasn't before and I didn't do anything to the game so who knows why it works now.

CerberusIV · December 16, 2003, 06:03

I have only played one epic game right through. I could only get 8-10 worthwhile cities and the FP made things worse so I have given up on the epic game until the patch. Some of the scenarios are not badly affected so I have been sticking to them.

Upgrades are 50% more expensive so Leo's is even more important.

I didn't have a problem with WW in democracy, even though the Vikings attacked me and it took around 40 turns to wipe them out. I did have 5 luxs hooked up which makes a considerable difference. As far a defending units go I was playing the Dutch with Swiss Mercs. Nothing more to say on that point

.

I haven't found any harder than PTW at monarch level, apart from the gpt and FP bugs. It is different but suits my play style more if anything. I do think the AI's are quicker to make alliances and stick to them better so getting everyone else allied against the civ you are at war with is more important than ever.

bongo · December 16, 2003, 08:32

In my only game so far, the FP seems to work fairly well. I suspect it is because neither of my cores are big enough to get punished by the 'flawed' corruption model in c3c. Oh, I intentionally avoided 'ring city placement' around my capitol BTW.

This was on regent BTW, I'll try monarch next game(my preferred level from PTW)

Spaced Cowboy · December 16, 2003, 14:01

I've managed to deal with the game as it is. Can't fight my wars in demo, so I switch govs often, so Religious is a must.

Take advantage of the GPT bug, the AI will. An the AI has the same problemo with corruption as I do. I'm currently building the secret police for my 2nd FP so I can switch back to demo and KA.

Dis · December 16, 2003, 17:54

I find war weariness very tough. I can't compare to PTW as I really didn't play that game much. I'm comparing to plain ole civ3.

MrWhereItsAt · December 16, 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Bonaparte
... the palace is gone...

Just wanted to ask specifically about this - is this true? I haven't noticed it as such.

Quote:

...The aerial view is gone...

But it isn't. You just don't see the new Wonders.

Or am I REALLY confused?

Bonaparte · December 17, 2003, 01:08

I mean that in games made with the editer the palace and aerial view are gone as is the space race menu. They aren't gone in a standard unmodified game. Not sure about the scenarios, only played one so far, and I forget if they worked.

Oh. and in case I didn't mention it why must I, again, for games made with the editer (got the picture I always play edited games), have to enter in my final score manually...that's annoying.

CyberChrist · December 17, 2003, 02:42

Aerial view is still there.

Palace is still there.

Building Space Ship is still there (or am I missing your point?).

UN wonders still allows you to hold elections(and win).

Maybe some or all of these features have been disabled in some scenarios, but they are still all present in the epic game.

vmxa1 · December 17, 2003, 03:37

Yes you missed his point. You are correct they still exist in the "epic" game, sans the new wonders.
It is the conquest and user created scenarios that the aerial and such was omitted.
I really don't miss it.

Shogun Gunner · December 17, 2003, 08:09

I wish they had put those pics in... I know its small in the scale of items that make Civ...but I liked it.

Bonaparte · December 18, 2003, 04:35

I realize that some of what I am talking about isn't important as far as game play is concerned, but still it did make the game a little more fun.

As far as the AI (although much better than it was), having to enter in your scores manually for user created games, and the rampant corruption is concerned, well, I hope that is fixed in civ 4 or at least patched.

Has anyone fooled around with the terrain bonuses...I have and it just wasn't right. I had to lay it all out in Excel just to see what the heck was happening. Anyone else notice that it was weird? It's kind of hard to explain what's going on, but I will if I must or I could just send you the Excel sheet if your really curious.

Dis · December 18, 2003, 05:24

yes it would be nice to have them in. It makes for a more "professinoal" expansion. Sure gameplay is our number 1 concern, but the little touches make the game.

I still kind of miss the advisors from civ2.

MrWhereItsAt · December 19, 2003, 01:28

Thanks for clearing things up. With a modified game or scenario it is not unreasonable to expect modified units, Wonders and/or improvements. With only the Epic game Spaceship parts, Wonders and Improvements having images for the city and spaceship views there, imagine the graphics glitches!

Disabling these in altered games seems a perfectly fair decision, in the absence of the sort of amazing customisation that somehow would allow you to input your own graphics for these view screens.

One question though - how can you tell how close you are to building the spaceship without the view screen?

Bonaparte · December 19, 2003, 18:11

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
One question though - how can you tell how close you are to building the spaceship without the view screen?

I recently played a game in which I won a space race victory and there was no way of knowing how much was completed...when the last piece was built "poof" you win a space race victory. To make it worse, in that game, I needed to build 4 extra thusters and 4 extra fuel cells.

vmxa1 · December 19, 2003, 19:55

Is the F10 space ship screen not working in scenarios? I have not played any, so I don't know.

Dis · December 20, 2003, 03:53

nope

look at the civilpedia entry for spaceship in the WW2 Pacific scenario