 |
|
Ben Williams
|
|
Ithaca, NY
Apr 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
It's true and everybody knows it. If you're playing a normal, unmodded game, there is no way to ever create a realistic large empire. It gets worse the further you get, and horrifying if you're actually trying to conquer the world.
The model of tying corruption almost solely to distance from your capital is absurd. Until this is fixed Civ3 will not be complete.
Right now I'm playing a game with no corruption or waste and it's amazing. You can actually build things. I'm not saying there should be none at all, just that it should make sense.
Okay, I'm done.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SanPellegrino
|
|
I played civ 1,2 and AC before and I hated the corruption in Civ 3 of course. But the more I played, I get to like it! It considers careful planning and gives the Human an edge over the AI.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Antonin
|
|
Me, I think corruption is a good feature. It's another obstacle for me to overcome on my way to global domination. I wouldn't play C3/PTW without it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:24
|
|
i used to mod out corruption because it annoyed me. but since i play CFC's GotM, i've got to practise with the original unmodded version.
corruption truly can cripple you. however, it does make sence. specially the # of city-corruption is good for beating a much more powerful nation (the AI sucks in dealing with corruption in large empires).
however, i'd prefer the disctance-based corruption to be less extreme. cities more than 10 tiles away are waaaay too slow in despotism. so if you don't start in a great region full of bonus resources and lots of shields and trade, it can be quite difficult to have a powerful core.
i agree with lambiorix about the time-distance that sould count. 2000 BC an empire was the size of a modern day country like egypt (egyptians) or iraq (mesopotamians, babylonians). around year 0, it was the mediterranean region, then always bigger and bigger.
look at today: archorage, san francisco and honolulu don't have bigger corruption than washington, and they ARE very far away from the east cost...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jimboscott
|
|
Very usefull tips, I think :
If you have the chance to win a leader use it to build the Forbidden Palace, if you choose the good place, that's is very usefull. The FP come simply in one turn and all cities around have immediatly the benefit...
Do all the think possible to have a leader, like build Barracks in each city, always attack with the Elite troups when that's possible and you increase your chance to win a leader.
I hope this is helpfull...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Williams
|
|
Ithaca, NY
Apr 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
I'm not dumb, I know all about the FB and palace placement. I almost always play a commercial civ, and I build every corruption improvment available. What I'm complaining about here is the way corruption is instituted. As it has often been said, the current corruption model would make Washington (and Las Vegas, if you consider that to be the location of the FP) the least corrupt city in the country. At the same time, Alaska and Hawaii would never produce anything, and would be more corrupt than any place in the continental U.S. What I'm complaining about primarily here is what I see as the massive hole in gameplay brought about by a drastic over-simplification in the current system governing corruption and waste. Sure, you probably can manage a large empire with enough planning, but it will never be realisitic, esspecially as you enter the modern age. You cannot, for example, have one large continent and a small island, because the island will only have one production for the bulk of the game. It is almost impossaible to build remote bases.
Also, it's ridiculus that communism is the best form of government for corruption. Maybe for small governments this would work, but as Russia showed us, just because something is communal does not mean it's less corrupt.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000
time: 07:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sabrewolf
exactly, warpstorm.
a few months ago there was a thread about this.
my idea would be:
corruption system stays the same, maybe even slightly higher base corruption, BUT:
- road connection reduces corruption by 5-10%
- railroad by 10-20%
- harbor connection by 10-20%
- airport connection by 20-30%
if city A is connected to B by airport, but city C only has a road to B, then city C just gets the road reduction.
also, technologies should/could reduce corruption, not just governements. there are democracies (e.g. italy) which are more corrupt than republics and communisms. |
hi ,
a long , long , very long time ago it was asked that Firaxis would include something like state capitals , .... a courthouse and police station should also play a ( small ) role in nearby cities , ......
but we are still waiting , well if we dont give up , who knows , ...... 
have a nice day
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Fried-Psitalon
|
 |
Not just another pretty face.
Dec 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Coracle
"Everybody" does NOT play the game the way it is. Many Civ 1 and 2 addicts no longer play it at all and are long gone from this forum.
As for modding it, that helps a little. But his POINT was the game AS PRESENTED BY FIRAXIS is not very playable. That is the result of a rushed product and little playtesting (if any at all).
His other point was it is ABSURD to tie corruption to distance from capital, even in a Democracy. If that was so Alaska and Hawaii would be cesspools of rampant corruption. So there is no realism in Civ 3 either.  |
I would respectfully disagree- the game is quite playable as it stands. I can prove this simply by saying: lots of people play it. What you mean is *you don't like the way it plays* as Firaxis presents it. And voila, the solution is there as folks have pointed out, in the editor.
I personally think that corruption, as annoying as it is, is probably the only realistic way to stop ancient-era war from exploding to an even greater degree than it does currently! The game as it stands right now leans far too heavily in favor of the warmonger (whether or not history does in fact support the power of warmongers over builders is an interesting, but irrelevant, topic...) Honestly, as much as people complain about the power of warmongering, the case might be made for increasing corruption, particularly in conquered territories...
How would I fix the situation? I think there should be a technological decreaser, say, at Education, Navigation, Steam Power, Motorized Transportation, and then finally Rocketry, as each of these symbolize a significant increase in our ability to communicate information and ideas. There might also be a few INcreases in corruption as well - say, when The Corporation is reasearched. (American history shows a period in which the government struggled a great deal with corporate power; I apologize for my ignorance of the economic history of other nations.)
Corruption could be a lot more than simply a negative impact- it could become a very active facet of the game.
Perhaps other nations could affect your corruption as well through various means. This might be a very useful defense for "Builders" against "Warmongers." I could go further on this but now we're truly stepping into the fantasy realm of what is likely to never be.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zamphyr
|
|
First: I like warpstorms idea....
Second: Alaska and Hawaii ARE corrupt. Have you ever looked at the legislation their senators submit ?
Third: Uberkrux is right. end thread.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Coracle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zamphyr
First: I like warpstorms idea....
Second: Alaska and Hawaii ARE corrupt. Have you ever looked at the legislation their senators submit ?
|
That's pretty funny.
Unfortunately for the "logic" you present, the most corrupt state is New Jersey - just look at how Lautenburg stole the Senate election in November. New Jersey has been notorious for corruption for generations. It is a whole lot closer to the capital in Washington than Alaska or Hawaii.
So we see another Firaxis concept makes no sense at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
cronos_qc
|
 |
Québec City
Nov 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
I think to balance the game, corruption can be a factor about foreign people. More you got Foreign people in your city, more corruption you got(when you capture city from another civ). This will balanced the game for non-Warmonger people. AND you keep the same Corruption system but decreasing with time, like the idea Fried-Psitalon said before me.
" there should be a technological decreaser, say, at Education, Navigation, Steam Power, Motorized Transportation, and then finally Rocketry, as each of these symbolize a significant increase in our ability to communicate information and ideas. "
And maybe some Hapiness factor.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
petemajor
|
|
When I started playing Civ 3 I hated the corruption model too. I gradually changed the way I played, after figuring out strategies on my own and reading posts here and on http://www.civfanatics.com. Now I love the corruption system - an empire has to be planned, not just tidal-waved with troops!
"It's almost impossible to build a global empire in Civ3..." is the common argument. Uh, *news flash* - of course it is, and of course it should be! That's why it hasn't happened in real life!
I *really* dislike city flipping, but I'm learning to live with it and it hasn't happened to me for at least half a dozen games now and I assume I'll eventually like it as much as the corruption system.
BOTTOM LINE: It's easy to hate a game feature you don't understand and that stops you from winning! So stop playing the same everytime and learn how to beat it!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-01-2003 05:27
ACK!
to get the numbers right. This would be much more realistic model of corruption and still be simple enough to implement.
|