 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
alexman
|
 |
Hunt Valley, MD
Jan 1970 time: 00:31
|
|
Research in the ancient age is also encouraged by the fact that Philosophy now provides a free tech to the first one to discover it (like it used to do in earlier versions of Civ).
At higher levels you can't even rely on Map and Communication trades to catch up on tech, because these abilities are moved to the Middle Ages.
Also, scientists now give 3 beakers each, so you actually waste research potential when researching a tech with a single scientist and 0% science.
And then there is the whole scientific leader concept. These scientific guys have a chance to go to the first civ to discover a tech, which is important since military great leaders can no longer rush great wonders!
It's looking as if research in the Ancient age is back! I can't wait to receive my copy of C3C.
Last edited by alexman on 04-11-2003 at 23:39
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mimi
|
|
Where Moose are Meat
Feb 2002 time: 01:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by alexman
Every tech gives a 3% chance of a SGL to the civ that first dicovers it (5% for scientific civs).
And yes, unless they changed it at the last moment, MGL can't rush great wonders (but they can rush small wonders and other improvements) |
So what's the point of MGL now then? From over powered to useless... why would we ever play militaristic? If you can only use them to rush, say, the FP, you only need one or two for the whole game so no need to worry about elites and HE... With such a slim chance of getting a MGL why bother?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
With such a slim chance of getting a MGL why bother?
|
1. Because the FP is one of the main Wonders you want to rush with a Leader.
2. Because Armies are forces to be reckoned with now.
3. Because a slim chance is better than no chance (or lower chance, for non-Mil civs).
This is bound to be one of the more controversial changes in the game. I think it's great. Warmongering was too strong before, and there was little incentive to research before you were way ahead economically.
Mind you, there are IMO problems with the SGL concept, but in general it will be good for the game.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001 time: 00:31
|
|
With the downgrading of MGLs, clearly Militaristic took a hit. Add in the loss of 1/2 cost harbors, and it's a relatively significant hit. The increased abilities of armies do mitigate that somewhat, though.
The Palace move is the most crucial element of Ultimate Power, so MGLs primary purpose (for me) remains intact. I've just lost the ability to rampage through the middle ages hardly ever actually BUILDING a wonder.
Current game: Monarch, Continents, 8 civs, England.
Great Leaders:
1) Palace move
2) Leos
3) Army (Theseus would be proud: 2x med inf + musketman)
4) Smith
If this game had been played with Conquests (leaving aside other changes), it would have looked like this:
1) Palace move
2) Army
3) Army
4) Military Academy
I would have lost Leos. But since I actually did most of my expensive upgrading before rushing Leos, that wouldn't have been a big deal (I had already assumed I'd lose it, so I went ahead with the knight upgrades and kicked off the war that got me leaders 2-4).
That game has absolutely rocked. I got one of the best capitol locations I've ever seen (river, 3 cow on grass, many bonus grass, 3-4 hills... just awesome). My second city, though it looks like nothing special now, was amazing for the ancient age: 5 bonus grass + 1 mined hill = 13spt (12 uncorrupted) at size 6 = Pyramids. That helped me overcome otherwise uninspiring terrain (lots of jungle to my south) to become a powerhouse. Well, that and the GA I triggered the turn I got into republic (Colossus prebuild in the Pyramids city). London pounded out the Great Library with shocking speed. It was like 12 turns. The 1st leader I got was the icing. I had settled for less than optimal Palace/FP placement, but once I got the leader, that changed. The FP went in close to London, and operation "capture Delhi so I can stick my palace there" began. 
-Arrian
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
sabrewolf

|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002 time: 06:31
|
|
so summary of this thread (and other stuff) so far of what will change imho:
++ = a lot stronger ; + = strengthend ; 0 = neutral ; - = weakend ; -- = a lot weaker
(this is relatively speaking 10-2 is still better than 4+2 
°°°traits:
°scientific ++ : higher chance SGL
°commercial + : alphabet is more valuable (curragh, nearer to philosophy), but devalued because seafaring start with this too
°religious + : more governments mean more fast switching 
°expansionist + : communication and map trade later, goody huts can give you philosophy ==> another tech too
°industrial - : work speed decreased; devalued because pottery is starting trait of agricultural too
°militaristic - : no cheaper harbors, MGLs can't build wonders
°°°govs:
°communism + : secret police and other stuff, now better for towns and cities (old:T2,C4,M8 ; new:T6,C6,M6)
°republic 0 : higher unit costs, but new some free ones (T1,C3,M4)
°monarchy&democracy 0 : stay the same
°°°wonders:
°leo's ++ : upgrades are more expensive now, leo's saves 50% more than before
other stay more or less the same
°°°civs:
° celts +++ : now agricultural and GS nearly half the price 
° aztecs - : JW 50% more expensive
° spanish, english, america + : their UU may even make sence now 
° expansionistic civs + : scout&expansionist makes them good tech brokers because communication & map trading pushed to 2nd half of medieval
° industrious civs -
other depending on map. eg. losing exp. can be bad on larger but better on smaller maps.
uhm, there's a lot more, but i'm too lazy now. feel free to add/correct stuff...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Theseus is a happy Civver!
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
vulture
|
 |
Leeds, UK
Jun 2001 time: 05:31
|
|
The 50 turn to 40 turn will be a big difference in some cases, not so much in terms of your research but in terms of your ability to trade it. As we all know, the AI maxes out on science in the ancient era, and will take researching something in 39 turns at 100% science over getting it in 40 with 10% science (and a lot of cash). If you research the same tech in 40 turns, starting at the same time, then yuo get the tech one turn later, and save 40 turns of cash, but generally find you lose out by not being able to trade the tech to anyone, and so having to spend all that cash buying the techs you could have traded for (never actually checked out which is better value for money - my guess would be that having the tech is more important than the cash, unless the trading situation is bad).
Moving the upper limit from 40 to 50 turns means that techs on the edge (such as Mysticism, in most of my games (Emperor, standard or large maps)) are now definite active research jobs, and more of the 40-turn techs (Polytheism, if you are bee-lining for monarchy as a religious civ, or writing if you are commercial) will now become 'on the edge' techs where the AI might snaffle it in 47 turns and cut you out of the trade loop.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31. Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|