Thread Tools
Old June 9, 2002, 10:27   #31
Sava
PolyCast Team
Emperor
 
Sava's Avatar
 
Local Time: 21:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: mmmm sweet
Posts: 3,041
What would have been better is a system like Europa Universalis where you set a balance between certain factors which would increase/decrease corruption in addition to having other effects. That would be more realistic and would be more fun because it would allow the player to have lots of other combinations of settings which would determine what your government is, rather than just choosing "Democracy, Republic, Communism, etc".
__________________
(\__/) "Sava is teh man" -Ecthy
(='.'=)
(")_(") bring me everyone
Sava is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 10:30   #32
albiedamned
Rise of Nations Multiplayer
Prince
 
Local Time: 21:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 513
Edit-> I'm referring to Barchan's post. A couple other posts got in while I was typing this!

That's actually a very interesting idea. Decoupling commerce corruption and production waste opens up a lot of possibilities. I'm not sure I would make it as easy as you described, where far-flung cities have good production immediately. I would probably reduce the effect of production waste somewhat, making it possible to reasonably build a few small improvements at first in far-flung cities(without having to suffer through 1 shield per turn). Then I would introduce some new improvements that specifically combat production waste.

So there would be a distinction between the existing courthouse and police station, which combat commerce corruption, from these new improvements (not sure what they would be called) that combat waste production. You would build these first in the far-flung cities, thus enabling you to build more expensive improvements and units.

Under this scheme, commerce corruption would of course go back to its original high level when the game was released.

Oh well, I guess I'm just dreaming since Firaxis is not likely to make this change. But I think I'll send it to them in an email anyway.
__________________
Firaxis - please make an updated version of Colonization! That game was the best, even if it was a little un-PC.
albiedamned is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 10:47   #33
Panag
MacCivilization II Democracy Game: ExodusC4BtSDG Rabbits of Caerbannog
Emperor
 
Panag's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Posts: 8,117
Quote:
Originally posted by Sava
What would have been better is a system like Europa Universalis where you set a balance between certain factors which would increase/decrease corruption in addition to having other effects. That would be more realistic and would be more fun because it would allow the player to have lots of other combinations of settings which would determine what your government is, rather than just choosing "Democracy, Republic, Communism, etc".
hi ,

not everything is possible , .....

have a nice day
Panag is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 12:56   #34
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
I build improvements in distant cities all the time.

http://www.crowncity.net/civ3/ForbiddenPalace.htm



In the real world, when England wanted to deploy troops in Africa, they imported them from England. They did not build them in Rhodesia. England did eventually build some native units in India, but that was after hundreds of years of development. Even in the Americas they deployed troops trained and outfitted in Europe. Only after America split from England, establishing a local capital, did the Americans significantly progress.

Sure, the Romans used native auxillaries, but it was Romans who died in the Teutoburg Forest, and Romans who sacked Jerusalem. When native peoples started producing their own useful military units, was when the empire started to break apart.
Zachriel is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 13:54   #35
Jon Shafer
PtWDG RoleplayPtWDG Gathering StormPtWDG Neu DemogypticaInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG LegolandPtWDG Vox ControliPtWDG Glory of WarPtWDG2 SunshineApolyton UniversityC3CDG Desolation RowApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG SarantiumApolyCon 06 ParticipantsPtWDG Lux Invicta
Firaxis Games Programmer/Designer
 
Local Time: 22:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 9,567
Yes, but the soldiers and citizens that you send out as settlers are from your own country. Do we do that today? No, not really. But what else can you do in a game like Civ?
Jon Shafer is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 15:00   #36
Panag
MacCivilization II Democracy Game: ExodusC4BtSDG Rabbits of Caerbannog
Emperor
 
Panag's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Posts: 8,117
Quote:
Originally posted by Zachriel
I build improvements in distant cities all the time.

http://www.crowncity.net/civ3/ForbiddenPalace.htm



In the real world, when England wanted to deploy troops in Africa, they imported them from England. They did not build them in Rhodesia. England did eventually build some native units in India, but that was after hundreds of years of development. Even in the Americas they deployed troops trained and outfitted in Europe. Only after America split from England, establishing a local capital, did the Americans significantly progress.

Sure, the Romans used native auxillaries, but it was Romans who died in the Teutoburg Forest, and Romans who sacked Jerusalem. When native peoples started producing their own useful military units, was when the empire started to break apart.
hi ,

maybe this can be used as the fact that due to corruption the production overseas is so low , ...

have a nice day
Panag is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 15:47   #37
Capt Dizle
ACDG3 Gaians
King
 
Local Time: 21:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 1,657
hi , ... panag, ....

i am very happy, ..... that you, ......

are posting, ...... here at Poly, .......

so now, ........ I am no longer, ....... Public Enemy, .......

#1 !!

have a nice day

jt

when is Coracle coming back its so boring here now

ps. to post on topic, I don't miss corruption on the one hand, but I would lose any sleep if it came back. The best idea I heard so far was using the new civ leader units as mobile forbidden palaces. You could do neat things with that. Example, leader could be killed which could cause a loss of productivity, or captured and ransomed. Also, if a civ leader is lost or captured and the civ has a GL leader lying around he could be promoted to civ leader. Which could lead, in the case of a captured leader, to the captured civ leader being released to forment a possible civil war or (gasp) a rebelion (gasp-city flip).
Capt Dizle is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 15:49   #38
Artifex
Prince
 
Local Time: 02:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Kentucky USA
Posts: 388
So in a nutshell: don't bother to download 1.21f patch?

I just recently came back and still have 1.17f, from the sounds of it.. 1.21f makes the game boring.
Artifex is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 16:12   #39
player1
Emperor
 
player1's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 3,218
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmytrick
hi , ... panag, ....

i am very happy, ..... that you, ......

are posting, ...... here at Poly, .......

so now, ........ I am no longer, ....... Public Enemy, .......

#1 !!

have a nice day

jt
player1 is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 16:37   #40
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by panag


hi ,

maybe this can be used as the fact that due to corruption the production overseas is so low , ...

have a nice day
That's right. In the Munich example, London had to spend huge sums to build up the infrastructure in Munich -- thousands. So yes, you can build in so-called corrupt cities, but only at the cost of considerable gold. And of course, military units are normally produced in the homeland and brought forward.

And so to me, corruption seems to be "realistic," and a playable game element.

Last edited by Zachriel; June 9, 2002 at 16:42.
Zachriel is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 19:09   #41
Gangerolf
Prince
 
Gangerolf's Avatar
 
Local Time: 03:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: KULTUR-TERROR
Posts: 958
maybe some civs (French, Romans, Russians f.ex.) can have more corruption than others, just as in real life
Gangerolf is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 19:28   #42
Panag
MacCivilization II Democracy Game: ExodusC4BtSDG Rabbits of Caerbannog
Emperor
 
Panag's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Posts: 8,117
Quote:
Originally posted by Zachriel


That's right. In the Munich example, London had to spend huge sums to build up the infrastructure in Munich -- thousands. So yes, you can build in so-called corrupt cities, but only at the cost of considerable gold. And of course, military units are normally produced in the homeland and brought forward.

And so to me, corruption seems to be "realistic," and a playable game element.
hi ,

agreed

have a nice day
Panag is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 19:55   #43
Willem
Emperor
 
Willem's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,755
Quote:
Originally posted by Captain


Interesting ideas, I like the corruption-reducing tech ideas.

Otoh, you can mod the game. Add a second Forbidden palace.

In my mod, I increase its price 50%. Add a third FP. Increase its price another 50%. Add a fourth, increase price another 50%.
Theoretically you could keep building FPs, but the price keeps going up. There's no actual cap, just a point where it becomes not "worthwhile" or not "efficient" anymore. This would depend on geography and your particular civ's circumstance. This keeps FP placement also strategic.

"Efficient" empires are still possible, but making them "efficient" is a time-dependent process (unless you have leaders) representing your govt's longterm struggle to stamp out corruption. Warmongers not building infrastructure will find their empire's fringes weak. Builder-imperialists will be able to make their fringe cities more valuable and productive, though it will take time.

Without the extra FPs, after the first major expansion, any further expansion isn't worthwhile (except to deny the land to someone else).
Another thing you can do is make an FP that's gov specific. As soon as you switch, you'd no longer get the benefit of it's anti-corruption abilities.
Willem is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 19:58   #44
Panag
MacCivilization II Democracy Game: ExodusC4BtSDG Rabbits of Caerbannog
Emperor
 
Panag's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Posts: 8,117
Quote:
Originally posted by Gangerolf
maybe some civs (French, Romans, Russians f.ex.) can have more corruption than others, just as in real life
hi ,

hmmm , sounds good , that should be in the editor , ...

but you can control this somewhat true the civ spicific abilities , ....

have a nice day
Panag is offline  
Old June 9, 2002, 20:26   #45
kimmygibler
Warlord
 
Local Time: 19:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 236
Barchan has a really good idea i think. If only this were possible to edit...
kimmygibler is offline  
Old June 14, 2002, 09:30   #46
Barchan
Warlord
 
Barchan's Avatar
 
Local Time: 02:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: drifting across the sands of time....
Posts: 242
Quote:
Originally posted by Trip
But Barchan, you're missing the point of corruption and waste. Yes, your points make perfect sense, I'm sure most of us will agree. However, corruption and waste were included to tone down on using warfare to expand, and just plain to expand period. Reducing waste would still make it possible for larger empires to be much more powerful than a smaller one. It's designed so that at a certain point, a new city can do NOTHING because the corruption and waste is so high that it's not worth having. That's the point. And changing things would render the system useless.

I still say the problem is massive empires that grow without limits. And I still say the solution is not 'corruption' and 'waste'. It needs to be more historical: the farther away a city/province was from the capital, the more rebellious and independent it became. Rebellions and revolts become more common, requiring a larger military, which is more expensive. Eventually the costs of maintaining a large empire outstrip the benefits of having one. That's how it should be.
I hope it didn't sound as though I was suggesting that waste would be eliminated if decoupled from corruption, because that wasn't my intent at all. Surely, there would still be waste in cities, and the rate of waste would increase based on the size of the empire and the distance from the capital. However, the rate of increase would have been (had I designed it...) smaller than the rate for corruption. Additionally, wastage would have been capped at a more palatable maximum, say 75%, rather than all the way down to one shield.

You've made a good point about the relative power of empires in relation to their size, but it's also simply a fact that, all other things being equal, a larger empire is more powerful than a smaller one. The key is "all other things being equal", though. If a smaller empire can maintain a steady technological and economic edge, it may be able to keep relative parity with a large, less advanced empire.

I agree that empire sprawl is a problem, but I’m not sure that increasing waste rates is necessarily the key to combating it. Keep in mind, it takes gold to maintain an army, so even if you could build one thanks to increased production rates, you might not be able to support it if corruption is siphoning away nearly all of your provincial treasure.

Anyway, the point’s kind of moot since the game’s pretty well defined at this point and such a drastic change would be tough to implement. Still, though, it would have been interesting to see....
Barchan is offline  
Old June 14, 2002, 10:54   #47
player1
Emperor
 
player1's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:06
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 3,218
What about INCREASING corrution, while DECREASING waste?
player1 is offline  
Old June 14, 2002, 13:30   #48
Willem
Emperor
 
Willem's Avatar
 
Local Time: 19:06
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,755
Quote:
Originally posted by Barchan

Anyway, the point’s kind of moot since the game’s pretty well defined at this point and such a drastic change would be tough to implement. Still, though, it would have been interesting to see....
Finally someone else who realizes that! The way a lot of people around here carry on about "This needs to be done, and that needs to be changed.", you'd think the game was just in the development stage. Unfortunately, it's to late for any major changes at this point, just a few tweaks here and there is about all we can expect from here on.

Though there's always Civ IV.
Willem is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:06.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team