 |
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Well, Civ3 - Conquests is finally out, and now that most of us have tinkered with it a bit, it's about time for the first C3C AU course. In a thread found here, it was decided that the topic of the next course would be "The Power of Seafaring", and that we would be playing the awesome Byzantines. The scenario is now ready, but there's a slight problem.
Many players have noticed some pretty major problems with C3C (see these threads: C3C Corruption: Whoa!!!, Conquests Bug Thread, A list of EASY fixes for the next C3C patch). In particular, Corruption and the FP are acting really weirdly, and there's a bug that grants double Gold from gpt deals. These things affect gameplay significantly, and will surely be addressed in the next patch.
As evidenced by this thread, there is some reticence in starting an AU course while the game is in such a "broken" state. On one hand, the game is still playable and fun, so an AU course should still be worth the effort despite the bugs. On the other, the learning aspect of AU will be severely undermined by the whacky gameplay. Another thing to consider is that we do not know how long it will be before the first patch is released.
Thanks for voting for either option 1 or 2. 
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
The Great Banana is currently in hiding (at least, in this poll).
Theseus, are you suggesting we not do The Power of Seafaring AU, in liew of a "limited concept" course? What do you have in mind for one of those?
If only Firaxis/Breakaway gave us a list of patch release dates in advance!
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote: Originally posted by nbarclay
My preference would be to have an "unofficial" AU game, maybe called "Experiments in Conquests," so we can play around and compare notes on the game as it is now. The Netherlands might be a perfect civ for that since they have both new civ traits (Agricultural and Seafaring).
|
The reason we chose not to play the Dutch is that that civ has both new traits, and therefore it's more difficult to focus on one of them for the uninitiated. If you guys are worried about the potential scholastic value of playing with a confused game, playing with both new traits will surely confuse the experiment even more.
I thought the whole point of AU was as an experiement anyway (like experiments in physics or chemistry courses). Why is everyone afraid of an "official" course? This is not a competition!
If the worry is about posterity, we can always go back, update the scenario rules for C3C v1.01 after the patch is released, and put that as the "official" course in the AU History thread.
Other than the annoyance of playing with a slightly buggy game, we lose very little by starting this before the patch, IMO (I lose nothing, because I'll not even be playing!).
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002 time: 21:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dominae
I thought the whole point of AU was as an experiement anyway (like experiments in physics or chemistry courses). Why is everyone afraid of an "official" course? This is not a competition! |
It's not a competition, but its an opportunity to learn and teach and have fun. Experiments in physics or chemistry entail exploring against an immutable series of laws / rules -- whatever learnings arise, so long as properly understood, are applicable to additional experiements and inform against past learnings that might then be seen in a new light. The rules of Civ 3 change in ways from version to version by design of the developer, but this particular version was not by design. AU has provided a lot of fun in experimenting against both "basic game functions" and against certain of these changes from version to version that come about by design of the developers. But we're talking about experimenting against a backdrop of design changes unintended and soon to disappear forever (hopefully!).
It's not being "afraid" of an official course, it's a question of benefit / harm by promoting a game under the AU umbrella. Presumably there is something different between an AU game and an ordinary comparison game posted for others to play and compare. If so what is it? Would playing under the AU umbrella have the potential to do harm and the potential to do good? I won't rehash why I think the risk of harm is present (nor will I repeat the solid, IMHO, arguments others have made), even if I might be persuaded that the risk of harm, or the level of harm likely, is somewhat low.
quote: Other than the annoyance of playing with a slightly buggy game, we lose very little by starting this before the patch, IMO (I lose nothing, because I'll not even be playing!). |
But what do we gain? Is there something tangible to be gained by playing under the AU umbrella versus posting a start with a seafaring civ and inviting others to play and compare? If so, how does it offset any potential loss by playing under the AU?
Despite my repeated postings on this subject, I really don't feel worked up about this -- AU is voluntary and those who don't want to play simply won't -- I am just still struggling to understand, because I haven't a reason why yet, we should be launching an AU game now, in these circumstances -- all I've heard, in one form or another, is that it would be fun to compare games.
Catt 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Catt
Experiments in physics or chemistry entail exploring against an immutable series of laws / rules -- whatever learnings arise, so long as properly understood, are applicable to additional experiements and inform against past learnings that might then be seen in a new light. The rules of Civ 3 change in ways from version to version by design of the developer, but this particular version was not by design.
|
Gosh it would be cool to do science experiments if the laws of physics we're constantly being revised!
quote:
Despite my repeated postings on this subject, I really don't feel worked up about this -- AU is voluntary and those who don't want to play simply won't -- I am just still struggling to understand, because I haven't a reason why yet, we should be launching an AU game now, in these circumstances -- all I've heard, in one form or another, is that it would be fun to compare games.
|
1. Conquests just came out, and many people are excited about Civ3.
2. By extension (and through good publicity), many people are excited about AU.
3. The game is still fun it if you let it be.
Like you, I do not feel worked up about this. It's just that I have this scenario taking up space on my hard drive, and I want to upload it ASAP.

Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Some good discussion here. I guess it will be the results of the poll and (ultimately) Nuclear Master to decide whether this is a go.
The map I chose for "The Power of Seafaring" is not sadistic. Here, see for yourself:
Attachment: seafaring au - start.jpg
This has been downloaded 188 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002 time: 21:32
|
|
Okay - last comment, and then I will stop being a wet blanket (except to respond to responses, of course).
Doesn't instituting a house rule against GPT deals potentially affect the seafaring trait more than others (save, perhaps, commercial)? Doesn't it further push the proposed AU game into a one-off result rather than a lesson to be applied elsewhere, not even taking into account thethings we don't know about how te bugs are affecting gameplay, particularly the AI?
Seafaring gets a variety of bonuses, among them +1 gold in city center on coast, +1 ship movement, reduced sinking chances, etc. The +1 gold in the city center adds to the incentive to both: (i) settle on the coast; and (ii) build commerce-strengthening improvements in the coastal cities (time-consuming due to lack of shields). Playing with the Byzantines, who pair seafaring to scientific, offers the opportunity to build early scientific leadership through powerful scientific coastal cities (cheap science improvements). One important way of exploiting a scientific leadership position might be to sell techs for GPT. With a house rule in place to deal with this known bug, one potentially powerful approach to exploiting the civ's inherent advantages (due to traits), whether you like the approach or not, is . It might or might not be an interesting approach to the specific game at hand, but should it be off the table from the getgo? 
Catt 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jkelly
|
 |
Cambridge, MA
Apr 2002 time: 00:32
|
|
Hi,
I've never played an AU game, but I am hoping to start doing so.
I voted for "after" because the 'gpt bug' has had such a profound effect on my enjoyment of the C3C games that I've been playing. I find myself wondering, whenever I get to a point in the game where the seems to be unearthly amounts of cash floating around (and therefore super-fast research and even more aburd alliances), whether it's the bug or not, and whether I should be adjusting my playing strategy. If we're going to be 'studying' some aspect of C3C, I'd prefer to do it when the conditions allow for, um, isolating variables.
If it goes up, though, there's a good chance I'll play regardless of the above.
Do we have any idea at all when a patch might come out? Has there been an official announcement that we should expect one?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
That's the solution that was proposed in the other thread, Nathan. It runs into the problem that, as long as you can offer stuff to the AI, you'll still get double gpt, because after you complete a trade for X/2 gpt, the AI still has X/2 gpt left over for you to play with.
Apart from throwing away Gold, there's no good way of avoiding this bug and still trade for gpt with the AI. And there's the fact that the AIs are benefitting from it behind the scenes.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|