09-06-2002 19:27									#31
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

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".

	09-06-2002 19:30									#32
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

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.

	09-06-2002 19:47									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

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

	09-06-2002 21:56									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

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.

	09-06-2002 22:54									#35
	Increase Your PM Length

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?

	10-06-2002 00:00									#36
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

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

	10-06-2002 00:47									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

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).

	10-06-2002 00:49									#38
	Got spare money?

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.

	10-06-2002 01:12									#39
	Get a bigger avatar today!

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

	10-06-2002 01:37									#40
	Inflate your Upload Space

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.

	10-06-2002 04:09									#41
	Increase Your PM Length

maybe some civs (French, Romans, Russians f.ex.) can have more corruption than others, just as in real life

	10-06-2002 04:28									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

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

	10-06-2002 04:55									#43
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

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.

	10-06-2002 04:58									#44
	Get a bigger avatar today!

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

	10-06-2002 05:26									#45
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Barchan has a really good idea i think. If only this were possible to edit...

	14-06-2002 18:30									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

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....

	14-06-2002 19:54									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

What about INCREASING corrution, while DECREASING waste?

	14-06-2002 22:30									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

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.