 |
|  |
 |
|
okblacke
|
|
Greetings Apolytoners,
I'm a long-time intermittent lurker here, having first stumbled across 'poly back in (I think) 1998. Never posted, never contributed, never got involved, primarily because Civ is the kind of game that Eats Your Life.
But now, in an effort to avoid productive work, and to have my life eaten, I figured I'd introduce myself and write a few random notes.
First of all, Conquests rocks, bugs and all. A good update to Civ takes the same underlying mechanics and makes you rethink everything. I skipped PTW (perhaps I shouldn't have) so there's lots of new stuff here for me.
I am a bit miffed, however, at the developers not releasing a list of rules changes. The changes in this thing are huge and not releasing them smacks of fear that the community will find some unanticipated exploited and void the whole game.
No claims to being an expert, by the way. I play on Regent, generally. Pre-Conquests, I was recently having immense trouble with playing the Americans and switched down to level 2--and still wasn't happy with my results. And I've played plenty on level 1. (I don't any more because I have a seven year old friend who can win pretty regularly on it. And for those who argue that the leap between Monarch and Emporer is too much, he and I both agree the jump between Chieftan and Warlord is too much. )
Generally, I play all random settings at a difficulty level, and when I find that I'm beating it too easily, I push the difficulty up one. If I find a combination that "beats me", I'll restart several times to see if I can win on that start. If I can't, I'll lower the difficulty and concentrate on that combo (as with Americans, and prior to that Babylon, which I was more successful at).
In older Civs, I "turtled". In most strategy games I "boom". What I like about Civ 3 in particular is that it makes me change my playstyle. It can hurt, but it challenges and improves me.
I recently rolled a 3BYO standard map, Mongols--the antithesis of my playing style--and it was like a whole new game. I scored Temple of Artemis, which works so well with raiding Keshiks, it's scary. (I played this pre-patch, so it wiped out all my pre-built Temples--with the new patch it doesn't!) Keshiks may not be uber-troops, but they retained a fair amount of use into modern times on this mountainous map.
Fascism is weird. Attack all you want, your people don't care. Corruption was out-of-control, but it seems to be in Conquests, in general--about 1/3rd total production. I couldn't stay in Fascism, though, because Democracy made for dramatic production increase--well worth the government change.
The FP: I wish it worked the way it used to, but I'd settle for it working in some explicable fashion. I patched the above Mongol game and my corruption didn't seem to change at all, except to be redistributed in a fashion I couldn't fathom.
I'm currently playing a (randomly selected) 3B tiny sorta-island map as (randomly selected) Russians and victory seems assured (late middle-ages and I've driven the Incans and the Mayans off my continent and to tiny islands. (Hey, the Mayans started it, and after I'd wiped them out and captured Zeus, Artemis, and finished the Knights Templar, it seemed silly to stop fighting. Plus, war weariness loses a lot of its edge when you're capturing the Oracle, the Hanging Gardens, and Leo's from those snooty Incans). It's now down to whether I load up some galleys full of Cossacks to attack the Americans on their own turf, or turtle up and rush for refining so I can figure out where the oil is. Since I tend to hate naval stuff in Civ, I'll probably go into hiding for now.
Again, the cool thing here is that I'm playing entirely "against type". Civ 3 dares you to be inflexible.
Also, this is the first game I've played in quite a few months where I've turned off the "manage city moods". I'm shocked at how poor the governors are at placing workers. I really don't understand: given a square that produces 1 food and 1 shield, and another that gives 2 food, 2 shields and 2 commerce, why would the governor ever pick the former?
I do get disorder now. The only way I can think of to prevent it is to end every turn by going through each city and double-clicking on it to see if the governor puts up any extra entertainers.
Along those same lines, I read a combat-type strategy that said that using the governors to manage moods was more efficient than using the luxury slider. I think Aeson here made the point that the luxury slider encourages workers whereas entertainers produce nothing. (This is something I think should be documented: if you have one troublesome city, boosting luxuries for your whole civ might be wasteful; but at what point do entertainers become more wasteful?)
Since there's no water on my island, I've sidestepped the issue of mining-vs-irrigation. Everything's a mine, though I suppose that will/should change after electricity.
I notice that one of the requirements for higher level play is to turn off governor/worker automation completely--something I'm not sure I'm willing to do yet--but is there some point at which the experts go for the automation? I mean, at the point where my workers had developed everything that was currently being worked on, should I have just added them back in to the city? (I tend to keep workers forever: There's nothing cooler than improving cities you've just captured.)
OK, enough rambling. Just "Hi" and what do you think?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jeem
|
|
Ayrshire, Scotland
Sep 2001 time: 05:32
|
|
quote: And for those who argue that the leap between Monarch and Emporer is too much, he and I both agree the jump between Chieftan and Warlord is too much. ) |
Heh. It might well be quite a step up - I dunno as I've never tried!
quote: Also, this is the first game I've played in quite a few months where I've turned off the "manage city moods". I'm shocked at how poor the governors are at placing workers. I really don't understand: given a square that produces 1 food and 1 shield, and another that gives 2 food, 2 shields and 2 commerce, why would the governor ever pick the former? |
Never had that. Governers usually pick the most productive squares depending on your choice - food, production or commerce. They will generally default to a more balanced square rather than one that is lacking though - so a mined hill with iron on it will only be chosen if you have a decent food surplus (3+ at least) for the rest of the city. The governers will always attempt to grow the city, regardless of whether you tell them to go for production mostly. Pretty annoying, but you get to the stage where you can predict it happening.
quote:
I do get disorder now. The only way I can think of to prevent it is to end every turn by going through each city and double-clicking on it to see if the governor puts up any extra entertainers. |
It's a total pain in the arse. I tried it for a few games but I've gotten too used to the happiness being sorted out for me. Managing moods is one level of micromanagement I'm not willing to go to. It's fine with small empires but with 20+ cities it begins to detract from the pace of the game.
quote:
Along those same lines, I read a combat-type strategy that said that using the governors to manage moods was more efficient than using the luxury slider. I think Aeson here made the point that the luxury slider encourages workers whereas entertainers produce nothing. (This is something I think should be documented: if you have one troublesome city, boosting luxuries for your whole civ might be wasteful; but at what point do entertainers become more wasteful?) |
Well, I'm using luxuries a bit more. I figured that I should at least attempt to improve my game and this seems like the easiest way to do it. As a general rule, the more cities you have that benefit from luxuries, the better. Usually it'll only be your capital and close-by food rich cities that benefit, and those outlying one's will suffer. However, the close cities are the only ones that really matter as corruption renders outlying cities practically useless anyway (depending on level). On Regent level, it's unlikely that you should really need to use luxuries a lot.
quote:
I notice that one of the requirements for higher level play is to turn off governor/worker automation completely--something I'm not sure I'm willing to do yet--but is there some point at which the experts go for the automation? I mean, at the point where my workers had developed everything that was currently being worked on, should I have just added them back in to the city? (I tend to keep workers forever: There's nothing cooler than improving cities you've just captured.) |
I only automate workers as soon as I've researched Sanitation and am starting to build hospitals everywhere. I only do it because I'm too lazy to irrigate lands I've already mined. If you do this, your cities will end up 'balanced' but lacking specialisation. You could try out the automate - this city only button to stop workers from demolishing your mines etc. As a general rule, automated workers are absolutely terrible and have no idea. The next time you start a game, watch out for a worker automating the wrong square right at the start - efficiently done, you would usually road then mine a grassland/shield square on a river first (assuming no cattle nearby). Automated workers will just start working the square they start on, unless there is a resource nearby. More often than not, they'll do the wrong thing too (automated workers will mine a cattle on a plains under a despotism (gaining nothing until monarchy/republic), whereas irrigating it will get +1 food from the square). If you want to step up a few levels, I'd recommend taking control of your workers first. In saying that, my best mate automates his workers and he plays on Emperor like me. He must just be lucky - he certainly seems to get tons of luxuries for sure.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002 time: 21:32
|
|
In PTW I frequently let the AI manage moods for most cities beyond the initial REX (when I would want to carefully micromanage citizen assignments turn to turn) with manual management in only a few cities. In C3C, I really think you give up a lot by allowing the AI to manage moods. It's not just citizen-tile allocations, it is that the AI governor does not seem to use scientists and taxmen unless the city in question is fully happy.
The new scientists and taxmen are turbo-charged, and the AI will just default to entertainers. Even for a player who doesn't make use of the entertainment slider much, the AI managing moods will give away a lot of productivity. Particularly galling is when a city has, for example, 2 happy citizens and 2 unhappy citizens -- at the next pop growth, the AI will create an entertainer when a scientist or taxman will still leave the city at 2H and 2U, i.e., not rioting -- but instead of a completely wasted citizen (entertainer), you could be generating 3 beakers or 2 gold to taxes -- scientists in particular can be huge in the early game since one single scientist could double a town's science output in the time of rampant despot corruption and a carefully managed science slider. I don't have a ready save, but in several instances I have compared late ancient age empires with manage moods on versus manual allocation of citizens -- with a science slider maxed out as much as the empire can tolerate, I've still seen research times drop precipitously just by getting rid of AI entertainers in favor of human scientists.
City management can be painful if you're not inclined to that level of management, but the rewards in C3C are so significantly strengthened that it is too painful for me (I don't relish a lot of micromanagement) to ignore the potential benefits. I occasionally lose a city to a one-turn riot because I am unwilling to check every city each turn and I might miss a pending riot on the F1 screen (even with the "smiley face" graphics mods for C3C) but even that occasional riot doesn't offset the gains to be had by sloppy manual management.
Catt 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Antrine
|
|
I always manage everything and when a city riots I get pissed because it is my fault for my attention is usually off somewhere else expanding or fighting. I like the smoke, however more fire with screams and threats would be nice for to get my attention better.
notyoueither, thanks that for F1 tip, I used hotkeys better in Civ ll. In Civ lll the graphics are more spell-binding and I just truck on.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002 time: 21:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Cerbykins
Well...the only time I see specialists pop up (in the pre-hospital era) is if there's a disorder risk. |
I believe that the AI governor will only go to specialists if there is in fact a disorder risk -- otherwise it will (rightly, in the vast majority of circumstances) favor allowing a newborn working citizen to work a tile and produce food, shields, and gold. The problem, to the extent that there is a problem, is most apparent in the early game. In the example I gave above, if the fifth citizen becomes an entertainer, the town now has 2H, 1C, 1U and an entertainer. If instead it were 2H, 2U, and a scientist, the city still would not riot but would be contributing 3 extra beakers towards science. Three extra beakers towards an ancient age tech can frequently shorten research time a turn or two -- 3 extra beakers from each of 5 cities can really shorten research times. With an AI governor, you get virtually no benefit from an entertainer; without the governor, you can generate substantial benefit. There may well be times when an entertainer is needed and appropriate - but the AI governor can't distinguish those times from times where a scientist or taxman would be more advantageous.
The big question for the individual player seems to me to be -- will I have more fun with governors on, knowing I may be missing some opportunity? or will I have more fun managing citizens and feeling I'm taking advantage of opportunities presented?
Catt 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
thorpey
|
|
England
Jan 2002 time: 05:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Bonaparte
Never used the Governer before, but do so now to manage moods...it was a pain having to check manually.
I have noticed; however, that sometimes cities will still go into disorder even when the Governer is being used to manage moods, but this doesn't happen to often. |
Personally, I just don't trust the governor. This has nothing at all to
do with whether or not the governor does a good job or not.
I think I'm a micromanagement junkie. Add the new specialiests you
get in C3C and I can make significant improvements to my empire by spending a little time on it. I do a much better job than the AI because the AI is 'assuming' and I'm not.
Anyway, that's the way I like to play it, but I can see how people would get frustrated with micromanagement when there's a nice big war to fight.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|