View Full Version : Patch 1.10: do we really get a decent C3C soon?
Firaxis will be releasing a BETA patch (v1.10):
Updates BETA v1.10:
CIV III: CONQUESTS BETA v1.10
* Fixed issues with corruption [hammer]
* Fixed issues with double gold being awarded [hammer]
* Shifted minimap and unit info boxes slightly
inward to prevent problems with scrolling and
button-clicking.
* Re-enabled Intel optimizations from PTW.
* Fixed issue that caused scientific leaders to
use only the first name in the list.
* Fixed issue that caused selections on the
Foreign Advisor screen to be cleared.
* Modified combat calculations to make combat
appear less "streaky." Combat results are now
calculated multiple times before determining a
result. This should reduce spearman defeating
Tanks and other extremely frustrating combat
results. [estwing]
* Optimized main menu code.
* Cleaned up INI preferences code
* Fixed issue with the audio preferences (sound
volume).
* Greatly improved the ability of Seafaring civs
to start near the coast. It should happen most
of the time now. :)
* Fixed numerous problems with Seafaring civs
starting near the coast in hotseat games.
* Implemented Seafaring civs starting near the
coast in MP games.
* Updated the interface on the world chooser
screen so selected options were more apparent.
* Fixed upgrade all bug (for units that do not
have the upgrade ability but are part of the
upgrade chain).
* Added feminine titles for Despotism,
Feudalism, and Fascism (for English default
rules only!).
* Editor: Added Flavors to the Import dialog.
* Corrected display of silk as luxury in city
view in Rise of Rome
* Corrected Scourge of God splash screen art in
Fall of Rome
* Build road/fort animations now show for
Legionary in Fall of Rome
* Cataphract now uses Ancient Cavalry art in
Middle Ages
* Corrected Mining tech art in Age of Discovery
* Text: Several civilopedia fixes (mostly
spelling, grammar, spaces)
---------------- Features --------------------
* Implemented ability to enter a seed value on
the world setup screen. It is located in the
upper-right corner. Any character can be entered
as the seed. If the seed is 0 (the default), it
will generate the world normally. If every
character is a number, the value is interpreted
as the seed value and used to generate the
world. In all other cases, a hash table formula
is applied to the string to generate a unique
value that is used to generate the world. While
it is technically possible for two different
strings to evaluate to the same seed, it is
unlikely (i.e., SEED is not the same as DEES --
upper- and lower-case letters will yield
different results as well).
* Implemented the "Play Last World" option. This
option appears on the main menu after playing
the first SP random-map game. When chosen, the
player is taken to the world chooser with the
seed filled in and all the previous settings
selected. The player can make any changes or
keep the world exactly the same. Note that if
ANY changes are made on this screen, the map
that is generated will be different. Next the
player is taken to the player setup screen with
all the civs and settings from the previous game
selected. Again, the player can make any changes
or keep the settings the same. If ANY civs are
changed, player starting locations MAY change
(depending on the number of seafaring civs,
actually).
* Implemented support for CAPS LOCK to work as
the SHIFT key to skip unit movement animations
(so you don't have to hold shift for the AI's
turn to skip the animations).
* The MP timer values are now read from
scenarios (the default values remain unchanged).
* Editor: Added MP timer values to the Scenario
Properties. There are 3 values: Base, Per Unit,
and Per City (with defaults of 24, 1, and 3,
respectively). They represent the Base amount of
time per turn + the amount of time Per Unit +
the amount of time Per City (number of
units/cities used each turn are based on the
player with the most units and the player with
the most cities on that turn). The values can
range from 0-100. The higher the number, the
more time per turn. FOR INTENSE FAST MP GAMES
PLAY THE CONQUESTS FAST MP scenario that is
provided with the Patch.
Good news? I'd say so. :)
Shabbaman
10-12-2003, 08:19
Sounds good. Why beta? Beta means 'untested', right? Are they that desperate?
BETA means that there might be some changes to this list before they officially release it, it wont be released as BETA.
List looks real good, that RNG statement looks exciting, when they say it will calculated multiple times they dont say how they will choose the result [groucho]
Of course I heard the "fixed corruption issues" many time before [rolleyes]
How did oyu get 2 different hammer smileys Aggie ? [confused]
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
How did oyu get 2 different hammer smileys Aggie ? [confused]
Simple, just one other smiley from the list. I used a different one for the RNG fix, because I know a certain someone is very interested in that one :D
digger760
10-12-2003, 09:55
quote:Originally posted by Aggie
Firaxis will be releasing a BETA patch (v1.10):
* Modified combat calculations to make combat
appear less "streaky." Combat results are now
calculated multiple times before determining a
result. This should reduce spearman defeating
Tanks and other extremely frustrating combat
results. [estwing]
This concerns me a bit I know you can get shafted by the RNG, but to go against that would make combat more like rock-paper-sissors...No thanks! There is are unknown risks involved in combat and I belive the RNG as it is models this well.
Let's just see how the differences in RNG work out, before we get cranky.
I find it interesting that the compiled civ code is optimized for Intel processors. I wonder how big the difference is compared to AMD-cpu's..
digger760
10-12-2003, 11:13
Do the Orignal beta testers get to test the patches as well?
digger760
10-12-2003, 11:20
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
How did oyu get 2 different hammer smileys Aggie ? [confused]
I belive that second hammer is Killer with his geo-pick [estwing]
[ estwing ] if i remember rightly (i studied geology in uni a long time ago) i think the geo-pick i had was an estwing.
I just wish they also fixed the shift-d bug.
Nice one Digger indeed it looks like Killer :D
Fuck shift-D, its for losers !
Melifluous
10-12-2003, 12:22
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
Fuck shift-D, its for losers !
And how would one press "Fuck-Shift-D".
Never expose yourself to electrical equipment with the correct insulation.
Great to hear about the CAPS LOCK option. Nice little fix there.
Melifluous
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/melifluous/20031210122214_SmileNowYaBastard.jpg
1.31KB
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
Fuck shift-D, its for losers !
What shift-D bug? I use shift-D all the time!! [rant]
try using shift d when a worker/slave unit is active in c3c. Won't work.
Melifluous
10-12-2003, 12:38
quote:Originally posted by ProPain
try using shift d when a worker/slave unit is active in c3c. Won't work.
Ah so thats what it is...
I noticed that sometimes I couldn't get Shift-D to work but didn't realise what caused it...
Many thanks PP [goodjob]
Melifluous
What's Shift-D supposed to do? Can't say I ever used it..
Lt. Killer M
10-12-2003, 15:48
quote:Originally posted by Aggie
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
How did oyu get 2 different hammer smileys Aggie ? [confused]
Simple, just one other smiley from the list. I used a different one for the RNG fix, because I know a certain someone is very interested in that one :D
yes yes, you used the right one!
@Sky: I made that smiley myself so the hammer looks like the Estwing hammers us geologists insist on using!
Shabbaman
10-12-2003, 15:51
...for digging up dinosaur dung.
Shift D is used for digging up dinosaur dung ????
digger760
10-12-2003, 16:13
OK, i knew there was something suspicious about the new combat calculations and this thread seems to confirm my suspicions:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71474&perpage=20&display=&pagenumber=4
I pray that that they revert to the current combat calculation.
@Mel: You're welcome, took me a while to figure it out too!
@Plux: hot key for diplo menu, so you dont have to press the tiny little d right of the status box every time you wanna check the AI's.
Melifluous
10-12-2003, 16:24
quote:Originally posted by ProPain
@Plux: hot key for diplo menu, so you dont have to press the tiny little d right of the status box every time you wanna check the AI's.
Damn You are just on fire today...
I was wondering what the hell I used to do before Shift-D and I couldn't remember that either [:p]
Melifluous
quote:Originally posted by digger760
OK, i knew there was something suspicious about the new combat calculations and this thread seems to confirm my suspicions:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71474&perpage=20&display=&pagenumber=4
I pray that that they revert to the current combat calculation.
I blame Killer. [aargh]
quote:so you dont have to press the tiny little d right of the status box every time you wanna check the AI's.
[eek] you mean did that instead of pressing F4 [lol]
Melifluous
10-12-2003, 17:07
No.
F4 doesnt immediately tell you who you are at war with.
So fuck you laughing boy [:p]
Melifluous
quote:Originally posted by Melifluous
No.
F4 doesnt immediately tell you who you are at war with.
You have a different F4 screen than I have then ;)
Meli certainly refers to games with more than 7 AIs ;)
I was in favour of shift-d, too.
Due to some training, I now usually have only 3 or 4 workers accidently going to (respectively actually auto-clearing pollution) those distant volcanos...
[lol]
quote:Originally posted by Grille
Meli certainly refers to games with more than 7 AIs ;)
Is that possible then??? Maybe I have played too many PBEM's to know [tongue]
WildFire
10-12-2003, 19:59
God that shift D bug pisses me off. I was trying to do shift D for like 5 minutes with a worker selected and was almost gonna quit. Than I just mined and it worked.
But believe me, the beta was buggier ;)
Melifluous
11-12-2003, 00:58
quote:Originally posted by Grille
Meli certainly refers to games with more than 7 AIs ;)
I did?
Erm I mean yeah course I did [:p]
Thank you for reminding me Grille...
Also I dont like following those little lines ya know? Much better to see the (At War) (ie most civs) and (At Peace) (cities I have reduced to 2 cities on far away islands). All on one page and ready for me to click on (notice I didnt say double click ;) ) In fact I would rather use the arrow keys and scroll up and down. Shame that only works on some screens [rolleyes] [rant]
Maybe I should compile some shortcut tips...
Everyone knows CTRL-SHIFT-M but how about CTRL-SHIFT-N ??
Also what's the diff between CTRL-J and CTRL-X.
Also the infinite gold bug when you hit CTRL-ALT-DEL twice ;)
Melifluous
digger760
12-12-2003, 11:26
They cut the new combat system of of the patch!!! thats great :)
looking forward to the patch now.
That indeed is superb news.
Excellent news about the combat system (for evryone but Killer)
I am sure that even Killer understands that the way they wanted to solve it stinks ;)
Quote from Tavis post at CFC:
quote:Civ III Community:
Next week, we will be releasing a BETA patch (v1.10) for
C3C that adds some new features and addresses
the corruption & gpt bugs (as well as other
fixes - see below).
QA efforts demonstrated the stability of the
code base, so we decided to release even though
the patch is not final. This was the only way to
get a patch posted prior to Christmas.
Interpretation of this leads to the preliminary conclusion that the patch will be generally available but no one can claim their money back if there are probs. Firaxis' way of circumventing Atari's rigid and prob. very bureaucratic QA processes imo. [goodjob]
Firaxis just acknowledged that our worries backed by examples (at CFC) helped in their decision to not implement the combat changes! After doing some tests themselves they decided that it would imbalance the game too much. Our remarks are actually taken into account :)
Yes - full marks to Firaxis for reading the feedback from experienced players - and acting on it.
I'm still a bit puzzled as to why they felt that the combat system was broken in the first place. So there are streaks. Thats what happens in a proper randomness. Unpredictablity is good.
quote:Originally posted by col
I'm still a bit puzzled as to why they felt that the combat system was broken in the first place.
It was CarlosMM [estwing] ([mischief])
quote:Originally posted by col
[I blame Killer. [aargh]
Lt. Killer M
12-12-2003, 14:54
combat sucks, if you double HP it becomes just fine.......
It's out now!
:)
http://www.atarisupport.com/newfaq/civilizationiiiconquests.php?browser=1&pageDisplay=DOWNLOADS
Yippee - donwloading right now.
One of the issues seems to be problems with loading 1.00 files. It looks like we need to restart current C3C games. :(
I can load an SP game (our Sid SG) without problem however I see no change to corruption calculations [sad]
Have not tried loading C3C PBEM yet...
digger760
23-12-2003, 09:35
You might have to start a new game.. Tavis indicated this might be the case on CFC (see end of post):
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1457681#post1457681
Kingreno
23-12-2003, 10:52
quote:Originally posted by digger760
You might have to start a new game.. Tavis indicated this might be the case on CFC (see end of post):
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1457681#post1457681
I very much hope so that that IS the case...
However, I immediately tested things on a game started in 1.02 and continued in 1.12.
The screenies[cry]
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/2003122310423_prefp112area.jpg
148.67KB
The FP is to be completed in new Bapedi in one turn, the Palace is in London. The FP was handbuilt. New Bapedi is in general a good place to build the FP, however RCP was not taken into account whatsoever.
South of NB is the city of Tugela also seen on the screenie as a city that is mildly corrupt before the build and should be totaly uncorrupt after the construction of the FP.
The F1:
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223104450_prefp112.jpg
24.31KB
New Bapedi:
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223104534_fpcity112preb.jpg
128.86KB
And Tugela:
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223104630_tugela112pre.jpg
118.5KB
And then the FP got completed[eek]
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/2003122310472_postfp112.jpg
24.5KB
Not too bad, since normaly corrpution would INCREASE in 1.02, the effect is not negative but I cannot say it is that good either. In the F1 screen the corruption is shown, but waste is another story[cry].
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223104929_fpcity112.jpg
131.2KB
And Tugela After the FP construction...
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/2003122310508_tugela112post.jpg
122.63KB
The conclusion? beats me...I will check where and how corruption and waste is affected by the FP but needless to say that this is not good.
As digger suggested it could be that I need to start a new game in 1.12 to get the right corruption but that remains to be seen. For now, games that have NOT started in 1.12 will have serious problems.[aargh].
I have uploaded the patch to CDZ:
C3Conquests BETA Patch v1.12 (http://www.civ3duelzone.com/Downloads/Civ3ConquestsBETA112.exe)
Please can someone test existing C3C games if they have time! It's pretty important to know if this fixs corruption in our running games or if we need to start new ones.
Also, we need to know if and how this actually fixes RCP...
Whoops! Thanks for the info KingReno! It kinda matchs what some at CFC have been saying. [sad]
At least I didn't start any new PBEM's in Conquests yet. I guess it still remains to be seen what they have done to the RCP problems, and if they have indeed fixed the FP bug at all.
Shabbaman
23-12-2003, 11:29
From some firaxian on cfc:
quote:Random for MP games causes an OOS - sorry for the inconvenience but we had to release or wait until next year.
Kingreno
23-12-2003, 11:33
And a new game started in 1.12[sad]
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223113147_112fastfptest.jpg
106.74KB
Some stats: Corruption went down from 47 to 42, waste decreased a bit as it should but by feeling not enough.
worst thing still, the 25% corruption and waste IN the FP-city. In comparison, Chitzen Itza has 1 corrupted out 20+ commerce...[sad]
That was from Tavis (Jesse Smith), and I assumed that would apply to real time MP games (IIRC Out-Of-Sync is related to real time communication between players).
Shabbaman
23-12-2003, 11:35
quote:Originally posted by anarres
That was from Tavis (Jesse Smith), and I assumed that would apply to real time MP games (IIRC Out-Of-Sync is related to real time communication between players).
He also gives a nice way to operate with two different versions. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1457681#post1457681)
Does the FP work ok for games started in 1.12?
Aha, thanks Kingreno! I see it doesn't work either in a 1.12 started game.....
What a bunch of assholes at Firaxis!
Kingreno
23-12-2003, 11:59
It gets better[aargh].
RCP:
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/20031223115442_area3c.jpg
84.7KB
As shown, the three cities build have exactly the same distance to the capitol...The settler will setle on the spot.
In my Golden Age (pyramids) I managed al 4 cities to produce 14 shields and 17 commerce. Guess what?
Copan wasted 1 shield and 1 commerce while the others in the ring wasted 2 shields and 3 commerce. [???]
Copan, to be noted, was the "first in the ring"...I do not know if that "is" the rule. [:o]
KR - can you confirm that all cities have different corruption , as should be? That way city rank would indeed be set on something like DB order (which should be just founding date in this example).
I would be a little concerned if only 1 city in the ring got different corruption - that would imply city rank is the same for the other cities...
Kingreno
23-12-2003, 12:41
Not sure about that. I need to test it.
That all doesn't sound good...:(
Kingreno,
*in case you've got some time on your hands and want to continue the tests*
for quicker testing in-game, maybe you could make a mod.biq with:
-"unreasonably" increased shield/commerce output from terrain tiles or much better benefit from terrain improvements like mines/roads --> that way, the shields/commerce units get a better "resolution", hence corruption percentage can be better observed in city screens
-give you every tech at game start, possibly some additional starting units like workers/settlers/GLs to speed up the test (expansion, Fp-rushing....) and some extra cash
-finally pick Egypt (rel.: only 2-turn anarchy for gov checking; ind.: improved worker speed)
These changes take only a relative short visit in the editor, but spare some time in the game itself.
That is, I hope such modding would not totally fuck all things up...
digger760
23-12-2003, 13:32
Can somebody summarise these corruption issues for me. It is something i never really paid much attention to. So far i understand the following:
In PTW 1.27;
#FP and Palace meant maybe 1 shield/commerce corruption in those cities.
#You could place a equidistant ring of cities around the Palace (and FP?, and corruption would be treated as if they were all the 2nd cities built.
In C3C 1.00
#building an equidistant ring made all the cites have the corrution of the nth city built (if there are n cities in the ring) Resulting in a overall increase in corruption compared to PTW
#The FP in C3C was to complicated a thing for me to work out all together.
maybe somebody can write increase my understanding in fewer words :(
Kingreno
23-12-2003, 13:34
On good news, RCP seems to work as intendedm with the first city found in the ring being the least corrupt and corruption generaly increasing with every city in the ring.[estwing]
I build a 4,2 ring of 8 cities and waste went from 4 out of 14 in the first city founded to 8 out of 14 in the 8th city in the ring.
So, we do not need to use RCP from now on. At least they did soemthing right!
[ponder]
but gives RCP penalty? - I mean if there was another city at distance 5 or so, would that one have a worse corruption rank (as it should)?
Also, what if the distance-5 city was build before the ring of distance-4 cities was completed?
Grille, I interpret it to mean that for cities at the same distance the database order would decide rank (which is more or less order of founding).
Well, yes, I agree that the founding order defines the rank for equidistant cities (hope this works for cities built in the same turn at same capital distance, too).
I've just become too sceptical and ask myself if ranks get (re-)calculated correctly, especially if the FP is built.
Could be an issue with city-relevant array variable dimensions and element value assignment, maybe there's not enough data stored to formulate clear if...elseif... loops.
Download Attachment: icon_paperclip.gif erik.zip (http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/ERIKK/20031224164221_erik.zip)
35.72*KB
I located a discussion on CFC about the placement of the FP in v1.12. Over there people say that
the location of the FP doesn't matter anymore because the effect is lower corruption in all your
cities around the original Palace. Well, a test with this bic file shows us that location does
matter as the cities west of Neapolis (with FP) have lower corruption than the cities east of
Rome on comparable distance (compare Hispalis and Pompeii with Pisea and Ravenna).
I really don't understand what they are talking about! Somebody else
does?
CFC thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72901
Kingreno
24-12-2003, 23:16
Though I cannot see the rule, the place where the FP is built matters! Try it on a small map and edit yourself some setlers and leaders. [hmm]
It looks like you get a standard waste of 1 shield in small cities around the FP and the FP city
itself gets waste too... Not sure yet.
Kingreno
25-12-2003, 09:31
My FP-cores do lose corruption but by far not in the way it did in PTW or Vanilla! FP-cities itself still suffer over 25% waste and Corruption, and the surrounding group of cities show the same effect.
So far I have never noticed just the "one" shield corrupted in any city near the FP.[ponder]
Kingreno
26-12-2003, 11:02
http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/Kingreno/2003122611248_huge map.jpg
107.89*KB
This is an example of a FP on a huge map with many cities over the OCN. Uppon construction I got an overall decrease of corruption but only a few percent.[sad]
The entire core arround this FP all had huge corruption...
However, I did notice that this has a lot to do with the age of the cities! Some old cities build by the Aztecs got less corruption, while cities (new ones) closer to the FP or the Palace still got 95% red shields! [hmm]
[eek]
I hope this is town #200 or so. The lower the rank the less corruption you get...
Kingreno
26-12-2003, 11:18
quote:Originally posted by ERIKK
[eek]
I hope this is town #200 or so. The lower the rank the less corruption you get...
Oh yes. #200+ probably. BUT is it right and should it be like this?
I rather have an army of knights then a fp like this one. Even on a huge map, the small wonder wall street gives me more cash then this one.:(
[cry]
I haven't read the CFC discussions closely yet, but I remember the statement 'FP doesn'T act as Palace'.
So what's FPs real purpose now?
Increase OCN and that's it - no matter what? Would it be ideal to build FP in a lower rank city (with lower rank cities nearby) - roughly estimated, build FP in a city that is in the 'rank range' ~OCN to ~2*OCN (resp. FP-city should be surrounded by lower rank cities)?
What's the deal with SPHQ?
edit: ok, I read it now. So FP seems to affect distance corruption in the first place(?). Ranks of FP-close cities are *apparently* not re-calculated after FP completion. If this new FP role was intended, why wasn't that announced? I would have expected a statement that the FP rules have changed - not 'corruption issues fixed' or so... (the latter read like 'we now have it working like expected' which is not true).
:(
I sincerely believe that Firaxis are a bit fed up with us decrypting their whole programme.
Since RCP was discovered and the works of Alexman, Qitai and DaviddesJ, corruption is now a math formula which we can easily control.
Take yourself back before RCP and the discovery of how the FP works in PTW for a minute : what seems obvious to you now was totally indecryptable just a few months ago. Nobody was complaining then no ?
In those days you just built your cities OCP, ICS or tight or whichever way you liked but corruption was not a controlled factor !
It took the community 2 years to decrypt corruption in PTW, I am 100% sure Firaxis wanted to go back to a system which was opaque or at least not decryptable in the 12 hours following the patch release.
People can complain about "intended or not" or "explained or not" but before we understood how the program calculates corruption nobody was complaining that we could not exactly calculate corruption !
quote:I would have expected a statement that the FP rules have changed
Maybe I am wrong but I have never seen anywhere a "rule" from Firaxis explaining how the FP *ever* worked, in vanilla, PTW or C3C ?
Lt. Killer M
27-12-2003, 18:21
Skyfish, I remember a LOT of foul language about the 'sudden, absurd drop in productivity' in cities at a certain distance before RCP was know. Then, we knew why it was so sudden........ So no, nobody was content with size 21, all building towns producing a meager 1 shield 1 Gold a turn.......
*ahem*
Cross-posted from CFC. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1466383#post1466383)
If the changes are as Alexman and others describe (FP acts as new palace with regard to distance corruption and not city rank) I think this will improve the game.
Forget the fact you have to relearn strategies and think about how the AI deals with the FP. They invariably build it close to home to help their (single) core become more productive. This will make the game harder for humans as we can't now create a second fully productive core - the FP has to be an 'extension' of the existing core.
I had another scary thought....
[b]Maybe this is how the FP was meant to work all along!!!!
Think about it - the rank calculations were always bugged, from the very first version of Civ3, PTW and then Conquests. Maybe the FP was intended to only affect distance corruption, but the code was never right. A crazy thought, but you have to admit - it's certainly a possibility.
Ultimately I think this may actually be a good change (if it was intended to work like this) - it will make it much harder to walk over the AI with a second seperate, productive core (which the AI never gets).
Guys, I may be crazy but I think I may prefer this FP behaviour. Much more playing is required, but I was never happy with the ability to rush a far away FP with a leader - it was always unbalancing and a killer to strategy (i.e. always do it if you can, which the AI can never do).
Started a new game and created an FP in conquered aztec city, definitely not no 200, maybe I have 40 towns or so, I get only 1 shield!!! Will post pic later.
I dont like this. It limits gameplay to small empires even more than it used too, if I dont get a second core why bother to expand. Just raze.
I agree with anarrres that now depency on a leader is less, but strategy will become less diverse also, just build that FP in your capital.
I hope they change it back to how it was, and I can hardly believe it was meant to act like this. They didnt change FP behaviour during 2 years of civ and PTW. Also C3C beta was with 'normal' FP I read at CFC. I think they messed up (again)
PP - you misunderstand what the FP now does. It acts as a second palace with respect to distance calculation, but not with respect to rank. It also increases the OCN by 10% (20% for Communism).
This means you should build it relatively close to your palace (so the rank isn't too bad), but not in it!
Thanks anarres I totally agree with you ! :)
So that will result in an ecliptical cores imo. I recall having seen that in many pbem game descriptions, so that should not really imply to much of a change in strategy. Unless it means building within 10 tiles or so on a standard map.
Well I have only seen my own game and some screenshots here, but the way I think it works now it acts as a second palace with regard to distance calculation from the orginal palace and not from the FP itself.
Because if the FP location would count in d calculation, why do I get 5 wasted shields out of 6?
quote:Originally posted by Skyfish
I sincerely believe that Firaxis are a bit fed up with us decrypting their whole programme.
Since RCP was discovered and the works of Alexman, Qitai and DaviddesJ, corruption is now a math formula which we can easily control.
Take yourself back before RCP and the discovery of how the FP works in PTW for a minute : what seems obvious to you now was totally indecryptable just a few months ago. Nobody was complaining then no ?
In those days you just built your cities OCP, ICS or tight or whichever way you liked but corruption was not a controlled factor !
It took the community 2 years to decrypt corruption in PTW, I am 100% sure Firaxis wanted to go back to a system which was opaque or at least not decryptable in the 12 hours following the patch release.
People can complain about "intended or not" or "explained or not" but before we understood how the program calculates corruption nobody was complaining that we could not exactly calculate corruption !
quote:I would have expected a statement that the FP rules have changed
Maybe I am wrong but I have never seen anywhere a "rule" from Firaxis explaining how the FP *ever* worked, in vanilla, PTW or C3C ?
No, there wasn't such explanation. But from the poor info in the pedia, you'd get the impression that the FP is basically a second Palace - thus you'd expect a respective kind of behaviour. But in fact, you could waste a GL for FP rush in the wrong place if you'd stick to that expectation.
So just spreading very vague info makes me guess that the original intention about FP mechanics have nothing (?) to do with the software realisation.
When I read 'corruption is fixed' I roughly *thought* of this (may have been just wishes...):
-two seperate 'rank lists' exist when FP is built: FP rank- and Palace rank-list
-a certain city's distance to FP or Palace defines to which rank list it refers to: closer to FP -> city belongs to FP rank list etc; this means: no OCN-corruption benefit from FP for cities belonging to the Palace rank system (="FP doubles OCN" in another interpretation...;))
tie breaker need for cities with same distance to FP and Palace
-cities belonging to the same rank list cannot have the same rank; 2 cities belonging to different rank lists can have the same rank
-a rank of a city is defined by # of cities being closer to Palace (resp FP); tie-breaker needed for equidistant cities to avoid RCP
-commie corruption: no distance corruption, but every city gets kind of an avaraged rank for the OCN corruption part (every city has same corruption %).
Such rules would have been at least logical with regards to the corruption mechanics studies made so far on the one hand and fixing the contained glitches (RCP & FP/P rank bug) on the other hand.
Of course, for us human players, this would still lead to creating two seperate cores - the ai might not be capable to do this.
So...
quote:[i]Originally posted by anarres
Guys, I may be crazy but I think I may prefer this FP behaviour.
Don't know if I exactly prefer this behaviour, but I could live with it. I rarely built FP at all in the C3C (v1.00) games I've played so far and still enjoyed playing, so if there's is some FP effect now - that's fine.
What's getting on my nerves, however, is the vague description of the mechanics.
Tried to test fp in capital vs FP on little distance from capital. Apparently you cant build an FP in your capital! Cant find a way to override this in the editor so I guess this is hardcoded. Dont feel like making a new test so that will be tomorrow.
quote:Originally posted by anarres
PP - you misunderstand what the FP now does. It acts as a second palace with respect to distance calculation, but not with respect to rank. It also increases the OCN by 10% (20% for Communism).
This means you should build it relatively close to your palace (so the rank isn't too bad), but not in it!
Imagine the advantage of an early city from a hut far away from your capital. If you build the forbidden palace there - that's the only way of getting a true second core.
By the way, I always thought it didn't matter what rank a city has. Just that there is a rank, but that that rank is determined by the distance to the capital. (When you build a city between two other cities, the corruption in the city farther away increases.) Was I incorrect about this?
quote:Originally posted by ProPain
Tried to test fp in capital vs FP on little distance from capital. Apparently you cant build an FP in your capital! Cant find a way to override this in the editor so I guess this is hardcoded. Dont feel like making a new test so that will be tomorrow.
For such a city, make sure to first get the FP in, then the Palace...;)
Palace jump is probably the best/easiest way for testing purposes.
Thanks for the tip GRille, I'll adjust my scenario to start with 2 leaders, So I can test
1) only palace.
2) FP close to Palace
3) Palace &FP in one city
Will post results later
Still, check this one: it differs from the other tests. Maybe it is
the low rank of the cities?
Load the scenario and rush the FP in the center of the 2nd core in
turn 2 and watch the results! (Take Rome as civ!)
Download Attachment: icon_paperclip.gif erik2.zip (http://www.civ3duelzone.com/forum/uploaded/ERIKK/20031228125810_erik2.zip)
15.66*KB
Rome and Cumae get 2 shields while the other 3 get one shield. It must
be the rank! Corruption in the other core stays the same.
smalltalk
28-12-2003, 14:24
quote:Originally posted by Grille
For such a city, make sure to first get the FP in, then the Palace...;)
Oops. I really would have expected the FP to simply vanish in that case.
Melifluous
28-12-2003, 17:39
Minor gripe here...
Fuckin Worker bug is still not fixed, do I really still need to wake a fortified warrior to use SHIFT-D diplomacy?
Arseholes.
Melifluous
it's not a bug apparently. shift-d is now clear Damage for workers (clear pollution but named damage in case of volcano). Still works as diplo fot other units. Dunno why the idiots changed this because shift-d and shift-p worked fine and I don' t think anybody needed and extra cleaning hotkey.
From now on diplo is: crtl-shft-D
Personally I feel they could have used the effort to change shft-d much better for debugging time :D
Kingreno
28-12-2003, 19:25
quote:Originally posted by Melifluous
Minor gripe here...
Fuckin Worker bug is still not fixed, do I really still need to wake a fortified warrior to use SHIFT-D diplomacy?
Arseholes.
Melifluous
yeah...and AI still paid me totaling 1000+ gpt for obsolete Music theory...
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.