Contradictory Info at Civ3.com

Pembleton · September 30, 2001, 21:37

Look here: first link

Then look here: second link
and click on civ-specific abilities table immediately to the right.

The first link says that Persians are Scientific/Commercial, while the second says they are Scientific/Industrious. Which is correct?

I hope the second is right because I would like to play the sci/ind combo first.

monkspider · September 30, 2001, 22:47

Presumably the civ of the week info is correct, as it is the most recent. The ability chart was something that was on the site from the very beginning, so the change may reflect tweaking and such that's going on. In fact, who knows if some of the earlier civ of the week info like Babylon and Egypt is even correct?

monkspider · September 30, 2001, 22:48

Thus, I would say that Persia is a Scientific and Commercial civ, sorry Pem!

Pembleton · September 30, 2001, 22:50

Actually, they've been changing the attributes almost every week. For example, when the Chinese abilities changed, they adjusted accordingly. The same with the Romans. The Persians were changed also, except they were changed in two different ways.

The Chinese used to be scientific/industrious (on the chart) and are now indicated correctly as militaristic/industrious on both the "civ of the week" and the chart. The Romans had their change from militaristic/industrious to militaristic/commerical indicated on both as well. The Germans used to be (militaristic/commercial?) and are now militaristic/scientific (again correctly indicated on the chart). I believe there was at least one other change but I don't remember what it was.

monkspider · September 30, 2001, 22:56

Oh really? I didn't know that...that really changes things completely then!! I figured that the chart just remained static, and they just updated them in the civ of the week sections when that civ came around.
The plot thickens!

KrazyHorse · September 30, 2001, 23:38

The chart's changed at last 4 times...

Sun Zi 36 · October 1, 2001, 01:57

ah! how stupid is that? switching attributes every week as if the attributes are all interchangeable and not really unique to each civ. They should've determined from history which attribute the civ should have AND THEN change the other stuff to fit with it. not the other way round.

JellyDonut · October 1, 2001, 06:22

I think they want us to have SOMETHING to talk about other than what color France should be.

Pembleton · October 1, 2001, 11:51

Quote:

Originally posted by JellyDonut
I think they want us to have SOMETHING to talk about other than what color France should be.

The color of France? New poll topic! New poll topic!

Steve Clark · October 1, 2001, 11:51

Stupid? Hardly. As discussed in the AI Predictability thread, they need to go even further in making such changes. I advocated that it all should be randomized (as an option) so we do NOT know what to expect from an AI civ. If you do not want the AI to be predictable, then ignore this whole business of civ attributes altogether.

Pembleton · October 1, 2001, 17:39

I'm bumping this so that maybe someone at Firaxis can correct this. But if they're really busy since it seems like crunch time right now, I understand.

Jaybe · October 1, 2001, 18:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Stupid? Hardly. As discussed in the AI Predictability thread, they need to go even further in making such changes. I advocated that it all should be randomized (as an option) so we do NOT know what to expect from an AI civ. If you do not want the AI to be predictable, then ignore this whole business of civ attributes altogether.

I'll bet that even with guidance as to a civ's attitude or potential resources (production, science, etc), there will be plenty of other variables to discover after we encounter that civ. In fact, AI "predictability" will probably be a GOOD thing, because it will probably MIS-direct us!

Steve Clark · October 1, 2001, 18:40

It is fascinating to watch the anticipation and expectation of the AI becoming better and better everyday as we get closer to the release.

Skanky Burns · October 1, 2001, 21:29

Pembleton, good news (for you anyways). They have changed the Persians so that they are both scientific and industrius

Dan must have missed updating that one, till you reminded him, or he was in the process of updating it, when you noticed... Hmmm, now im just confusing myself

Pembleton · October 1, 2001, 21:32

Thanks for noting the update, Skank. And thanks for the update, Dan.

And I am quite pleased that a sci/ind combo is back. Looks like Persians for me first game.

Urban Ranger · October 2, 2001, 02:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Stupid? Hardly. As discussed in the AI Predictability thread, they need to go even further in making such changes. I advocated that it all should be randomized (as an option) so we do NOT know what to expect from an AI civ. If you do not want the AI to be predictable, then ignore this whole business of civ attributes altogether.

I disagree. The civ-specific abilities are just that, something a civilisation developed in the long course of history. If you want a randomisation, thats fine with me. Leave the default as historically accurate as possible.

Martinus · October 2, 2001, 03:09

The thing is at first they tried to make it as accurate as possible, and then they introduced the previously uknown idea of peaceful GA trigger.

So in order to trigger GA for Chinese when they build the Great Wall (which is Industrious and Militaristic), they changed the Chinese characteristics. While I liked the previous Chinese characteristics more, all in all I think the peaceful GA trigger is a great idea so I am happy.

Adm.Naismith · October 2, 2001, 05:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Martinus
The thing is at first they tried to make it as accurate as possible, and then they introduced the previously uknown idea of peaceful GA trigger.

Sounds a good explanation, to me. They are probably tweaking the game for balancing reason, so that the Civ who Sid prefer to play with, can win every game hands down

Sun Zi 36 · October 2, 2001, 07:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Martinus
The thing is at first they tried to make it as accurate as possible, and then they introduced the previously uknown idea of peaceful GA trigger.

So in order to trigger GA for Chinese when they build the Great Wall (which is Industrious and Militaristic), they changed the Chinese characteristics. While I liked the previous Chinese characteristics more, all in all I think the peaceful GA trigger is a great idea so I am happy.

I know, thats the thing i was talking about. They shouldn't change the attributes bcos of the wonder GA trigger, they should do it the other way round, ie, change the wonder GA triggers according to the civ specific attributes.

So if they predetermined that chinese is industrious/scientific from a historical perspective, the Great Wall should be a trigger for industrious civ but not militaristic. Art of War has to be militaristic, u can't argue with that, so maybe give the chinese another wonder that is scientific, and rename the Art of War for some other militaristic civ. That's how they should do it, change the wonders for the purpose of the attributes; not change the attributes for the purpose if the wonders.

Sava · October 2, 2001, 07:58

Firaxis is playing the game 24/7 and making changes to improve gameplay. I don't really care if they change the table every other week. But I am going to download in my pants when I get the game!

<---you're going to Federal (pound me in the A$$) prison!!

Skanky Burns · October 2, 2001, 08:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Sun Zi 36 That's how they should do it, change the wonders for the purpose of the attributes; not change the attributes for the purpose if the wonders.

LOL

Just thinking how funny it would be to be building the 'Expansionistic, religious Great Wall'

I do understand what you mean, but there might be some, like in my example, that wouldnt make sense. Or there might not. I guess some mod-makers will find out once Civ 3 is released