 |
|  |
 |
|
Dimorier Maximus
|
 |
of Apolyton
May 2001 time: 05:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dominae
Yes, the no maintenance Feudalism very potent. Powerful enough that you would change your entire game strategy to exploit it to its fullest. That's not necessarily a bad thing (see SMAC's governments). I think the goal with Feudalism was to create an alternative to Monarchy/Republic in the Medieval era, not fundamentally change how the game is played.
The current version of Feudalism perhaps falls a bit short in terms of power, but IMO that's preferable to the monster it could have been.
Dominae | Well, the problem is that it is simply a joke as it is. What if it had more corruption than Monarchy and Republic and free support for units of 2 (town), 1 (city), 0 (metro) or none. Then would the free maintenance be okay? Also, who cares that the computer never leaves the government...the computer never switches out of Democracy or Republic anyways unless unhappiness forces them to do so...so how is Feudalism any different? It even has low war weariness. I don't think taking away free support for buildings was the answer. It made the government fresh and unique. They should have damaged it in other areas if it was too powerful. The government simply has no value as it is. It's better than despotism, but that is it. And anybody is gonna have Monarchy and/or Republic before they get Feudalism.
Also, I disagree that Seafaring should be nerfed. Don't touch seafaring, it is perfect. It may be overpowered on Archipelago maps (but there is no fix for that...it always will be, by nature), but it is still underpowered for a Pangea map (and again, by nature always will be no matter what you do). I think it is exactly what it needs to be on Continents, so leave it alone.
Last edited by Dimorier Maximus on 28-11-2003 at 10:52
|
|
|  |
 |
|
pawel
|
|
Making a C3C version of my scenario I discovered that the resistance and propaganda modifiers of other governments with respect to fascism and feudalism have not been set and thus default to zero, making them better than intended. This can be easily checked using the editor.
As a general comment I must also say that I am surprised how poorly the stats for Fascism reflect historic economic performance of such governments. One of the major factors in Germany losing WWII was its inability to effectivly use its industial base - something the allies excelled in.
Although I am a huge fan of the game, this fact, coupled with detalis such as that Copernicus is listed as a German scientific leader (a favorite claim of the nazis) makes one sometimes wonder how good the research has been. It would have been more accurate to call Kant a Russian philosopher...
EDIT: I have the UK version of the game with the 1.02 patch installed.
Last edited by pawel on 01-12-2003 at 03:05
|
|
|  |
 |
|
pawel
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Mad Bomber
and by then the country was being pummeled by British and American heavy bombers. |
Well, I don't think that this is the right thread to debate the details of WWII history. Let me just, as an example, compare AFV production figures of Germany and the (communist!)Soviet Union, which not only had a much smaller industrial base to begin with (steel production was only 1/3 of Germany during the war), but also lost many of important industrial centers and had to evacuate most other beyond the Urals. Compared to this strategic bombing was a nuisance (oil refineries excluded). Still, the USSR build 102,000 AFV:s, of which 79,611 were tanks. Germany produced 76,000 AFV:s, of which 25,006 were tanks. Most blatant mismanagement perhaps occured in the Reichsluftfahrtministerium, were constant struggle crippled both production and development (despite some famous jets flying at the very end, most war time projects were failures). Only during the emergency fighter programme of 1944 did production numbers rise significantly - but mainly for the cheap and by then outdated Bf109. Not very impressive considering the potential...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mad Bomber
|
 |
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 2002 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by pawel
Well, I don't think that this is the right thread to debate the details of WWII history. Let me just, as an example, compare AFV production figures of Germany and the (communist!)Soviet Union, which not only had a much smaller industrial base to begin with (steel production was only 1/3 of Germany during the war), but also lost many of important industrial centers and had to evacuate most other beyond the Urals. Compared to this strategic bombing was a nuisance (oil refineries excluded). Still, the USSR build 102,000 AFV:s, of which 79,611 were tanks. Germany produced 76,000 AFV:s, of which 25,006 were tanks. Most blatant mismanagement perhaps occured in the Reichsluftfahrtministerium, were constant struggle crippled both production and development (despite some famous jets flying at the very end, most war time projects were failures). Only during the emergency fighter programme of 1944 did production numbers rise significantly - but mainly for the cheap and by then outdated Bf109. Not very impressive considering the potential... |
I agree that this is not the place to discuss WW2 History, but let me just say that when most historians study the effects of the Bombing campaign most focus upon the production of munitions. To truly understand the effects of the bombing campaign, it is more proper to examine the entire logistical system and its effects upon frontline units. It should be said that as much as 40% of the bombing raids were not directed at production facilities but upon the transportation and logistical infrastructure that supports a modern army (Marshalling yards, POL storage, bridges ect.....) Anyone who has read reports from German units will soon note the critical shortages that these units faced in WW2, some shortages occurred as early as 1942. (A simple examination of Rommels Africa campaign will see a very large discrepancy between # of tanks on hand and # of operational tanks, this is due to lack of spare parts which were caused by attacks on the Marsailles marshalling yards as well as air and naval attacks based on Malta)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoochems
|
|
Its not a bug, but i would like to see the number of possible players in multiplayer increased.
Currently its stuck at 8, and although i don't even have 8 people i know to play with, i like to have a few human and a bunch of computer AI civs.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoochems
|
|
When playing on a larger than usual map, the AI never spreads out its cities. They still cramp all there cities up on one part of the map. There could be a 100 tile radius until the next civ, yet they just bunch up there cities, as if they were running out of room to build.
This means cities never use a full 20 squares for resources etc, as most cities will share tiles.
ALso, there may be lots of luxury/strategic resources aroung the map, yet the AI never builds cities out to it. Even on emperor, i kick AI arse with out even trying on such size maps.
..... or are my maps TOO big for the AI to handle.... i usually have a 256x256 HUGE map with 12-16 players. Is this just too big for the AI?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
pauli
|
|
herndon, va, usa
Jan 2000 time: 00:32
|
|
you could increase the optimal city number, but the game *will* turn into a logistical nightmare.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoochems
|
|
I have increased the optimal number of cities.
Is that what is giving me the trouble?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
snoochems
|
|
WHen you've made your own map, there is no way of playing that map in multiplayer in anything but Regent difficulty.
I have made a cool map for 8 players (2 human, 6 AI). I set the 'default AI difficulty' to emperor, and then went to play the game.
By about 1000AD, i noticed that the AI were really pathetic... later, when we loaded the game we noticed that that load screen you get just after loading, said the difficulty was set to Regent. Hmmm...
In the set up screen when starting a MP game, the difficulty is set to custom, as i loaded a map/scenario.
WE're very pissed off now, as we've spent the last 3 days playing only to find out the AI civs are PATHETIC.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Azaelus
|
|
Only one bug to report, but there are some things that just don't make sense, or things that appear to have slipped through the net... such as:
* Rise of Rome scenario - the Bacchanalia should require wine, surely?
* All artillery units, tanks, Panzers, modern armour, and mech infantry - shouldn't they have the Wheeled flag, so they can't move through jungles and mountains unless there is a road?
* Stealth fighter, stealth bomber - is there any reason why they don't have stealth attack? After all, the (technologically inferior) F-15 does. And the name is a clue.
* Why do slave workers construct things slower than regular workers? Is this a design decision, because you would expect slaves to work quicker, right? They are slaves, after all.
Some ideas:
* Coal and nuclear plants - shouldn't these cease to function if your coal or uranium supply ever runs out? You should no longer get the pollution or the production bonus, but you still have to pay for it's upkeep until you get a new coal/uranium supply.
* If your only supply of a resource runs out when you are in the process of building something that requires it (ex. if you run out of uranium when you are building a nuclear missile), production should be halted.
And for the interface:
* Domestic advisor (F1) - some colour coding (as with cities in disorder) for cities that are: (a) starving, (b) in resistance, (c) celebrating "We love the ??? day." Civ 2 had colour coding for celebrating cities, IIRC. And starvation happens pretty often in large cities as a result of pollution... even when workers clear the pollution, no citizen is assigned back to the empty tile, so it goes unworked indefinitely. Ditto for large cities growing via Longevity... if you get to a point where this is one population unit too many, everyone starves.
* Cultural advisor (F5) - if you build the Internet, research labs don't appear in the culture advisor's city lists, and it isn't shown whether or not the culture value of the research lab is added to the city. It may be a hidden bonus, but I'd have to check. If it isn't, it's a bug. If it is, it should be shown on the F5 screen.
* Wonder list (F7) - some text to mention which wonders are now obsolete.
-- Azaelus
|
|
|  |
 |
|
RobC
|
|
I know that there were other threads about this, but I don't think we mentioned it here -- it would be nice if stealth attack (selecting target unit from a stack) would be enabled for air units also.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|