View Full Version : krys's questions about Civ3
Socrates
11-03-2004, 11:53
Hi folks ! Sorry I have several questions about C3C (not only the expansion), and I might have more in the future, so I chose to start a thread for all my questions altogether, so as not to open several little topics... Please answer if you're sure only, and as of C3C 1.15b. Here it goes.
1. I have seen somewhere a page where the tourism income from wonders is clearly explained (number of coins after that number of turns/years), but can't find it anymore ; anyone knows this ? Also, how is it implemented in the gold revenue of the city/civ ?
2. In multi (online or PBEM), do human players suffer war weariness (and/or enjoy war happiness) from a state of war with another human player ? Being in Republic vs your foe in Monarchy might be really unfair... (hehehe for Skyfish)
3. Can I find somewhere (or can someone explain) how bombardment very precisely works in the game ? Like, if I use a dromon against a spearman fortified inside a 7-size city on hill ? What are my odds of taking him 1 hp ? 2 hp ? none ? (hehehe for Killer, have you seen a 7-size city in our game ??? me : nope)
More questions as they come ! [goodjob] Thanks all.
Shabbaman
11-03-2004, 12:13
1. it's in the civilopedia. Something like 2 commerce after thousand years, 3 commerce after 1500...
2. erm, "phoney war"? I don't know.
3. hm. EDIT: check this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39577) It's not about c3c though, I believe bombardment is "revamped".
Socrates
11-03-2004, 12:29
Thanks. :)
1. I don't have it in my Civilopedia in French, it just says what tourism is about and lists wonders that apply to this. And no "next" button...
2. No, not necessarily phoney war, though it's a case. Any state of war between 2 human players (or more), state of war as the game understands it (red line in F4 !). So ?
3. OK, I'll check this thread. But if bombardment has been revamped, I might lose my time... [blush2]
Now, more questions ! Ahem...
4. The Great Wall has been changed. It gives every little town on the continent a wall : OK. It is said to "double the effects of existing walls" (translating...) ; so : does it mean only pre-GW walls have a 100% defensive bonus, or all walls (built and gifted) ? If a medium city falls back to a little town size, does it get a free wall (if not already one in there) ? With 100% bonus ? Also, it doubles the strenght against barbarians : attack and defense ? Cuz level bonus against barbs only apply to attack, me thinks (tell I'm wrong if I am !).
5. Do you get reputation hit if you break a deal against a human player (and everything along with that) ?
1: If no-one else posts the Civilopedia pic by tonight I will when I get home. You go from 2 gpt at 1000 years up to 10 gpt at 2000 years IIRC, but the steps up to each next level are not linear.
2: Yes, WW is in PBEM like SP games. See my game vs DrAlimentado for a good example.
3: IIRC bombardment is essentially the same. The 'bombard' value acts like a normal attack value, and for each 'rate of fire' you get 1 free attack at using the 'bombard' strength. E.g. 'bombard' = 8, 'rate of fire' = 2 means you get 2 attacks of strength 8 when you bombard. There are set defense values for cities (pop), improvements, etc, and it uses the normal defense values against normal units.
4: The GW gives free walls in all towns (<7). Since a city has no affect from walls it is irrelevant whether they have them or not. All new towns and ones that go from 7 -> 6 will gain the walls. The +100% bonus applies to all walls (i.e. to all towns). This is kinda weird because it means a town has more defense than a city. Fuck knows about barbs, lets face it - it's not really going to change a game.
5: I believe so yes, but most people here don't break human-human deals, so it's hard to know for sure.
Socrates
11-03-2004, 15:10
1. OK, thanks to the guy who will post a pic of that. :)
2. Somehow the page for your DrA game doesn't open fully ? [confused] Might just tell what was the deal then ? So, if I stick with Republic and suffer a constant war against an evil player who stays in Monarchy, I might be forced to revolt ?
3. Thanks, that's a beginning to cope with. I'll try to search for further data later, unless someone has a better link than Shabbaman's one ?
4. Ok for the Wall, so yes, towns are then better protected than cities, which is crazy as for gameplay, but maybe it makes some sense in RL ??? [???] BTW I've always had a problem with walls disappearing above size 7, this, it makes no sense at all... Instead, I would give a defensive bonus for cities which have built walls, and no walls would mean no bonus (same for metros). Barbs aren't that important, but it was part of the GW, so I just asked. It might be interesting anyway, as sometimes some razing occurs at this time (late iron age), and barbs could reappear, threatening some cities... And for mods it could be interesting to know that too.
5. Hard to know, I agree. Anyway, human-human deals are crazy. [crazyeye]
2: Meh, can't explain that. It was one of my most fun games to lose, a real shame you can't see it. IIRC only a few PBEMs have made it all the way to nukes, and none have had someone drop out of a representative government because of WW before or since. :(
Markstar
11-03-2004, 15:40
About 2.) (not that I have a qualified opinion on that): But isn't that how it should be and/or even realistic?
War weariness takes longer if you have not started the war so it doesn't affect you THAT much (o.k., later on that doesn't make a difference anymore).
Yes, the other player forces his gameplay on you, but imho that is the risk of being a republic/democracy just as it is in real life.
Not that this helped, but I thought I throw in my 2 cents. :D
Melifluous
11-03-2004, 15:46
quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
BTW I've always had a problem with walls disappearing above size 7, this, it makes no sense at all...
Makes perfect sense to me, look inside any major city and you will find either the remains of the old city wall (which offers no protection, its IN the city) or pubs called the City Wall which would have been where the walls were when the town was smaller...
Melifluous
quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
12. Somehow the page for your DrA game doesn't open fully ? [confused] Might just tell what was the deal then ? So, if I stick with Republic and suffer a constant war against an evil player who stays in Monarchy, I might be forced to revolt ?
I tried to hit Erikk with ww in our game. He was in Republic for most of the game. I stayed in Monarchy and declared war as soon as I got there and refused to make peace.
Result - I dropped behind in tech and got splatted by cav+infantry while I only had muskets, riders and a few cavs expensively upgraded..
ww just didnt kick in as much or as early as I'd hoped. Baldrick needs a new cunning plan.
If you declare war you then have to get 60 WWP to inflict level 1 WW. That isn't trivial.
The reason I got WW inflicted on DrA was because I did 120 WWP damage in 1 turn with arty and tanks. This is IMO the biggest failing with WW - in the early game WW is much harder to inflict because losses on both sides is much smaler. In the Moern age it is much easier.
Socrates
11-03-2004, 16:17
quote:Originally posted by Melifluous
quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
BTW I've always had a problem with walls disappearing above size 7, this, it makes no sense at all...
Makes perfect sense to me, look inside any major city and you will find either the remains of the old city wall (which offers no protection, its IN the city) or pubs called the City Wall which would have been where the walls were when the town was smaller...
Melifluous
Don't agree. Well, yes, Paris is a good example of a major city :D where you can find older, smaller walls near the center. But until the 19th century, walls have always been rebuilt at the new limits. Cities of size 7-12 can be reached in the Ancient Age (like historical Rome, I believe)... And even now we have new walls in way of the "Périphérique" (kind of a motorway around the capital) !!! :D I think that walls in little towns should be free to upkeep and have a little bonus, whereas walls in medium cities should be charged 1 gpt and have a better bonus.
Metros should forget walls anyway, as historically it doesn't make sense (agree with Meli), and in the game, once you have metros (Sanitation), you already know Metallurgy which cancels the effects of the GW, the only exception being the new feature for the Theater (size 20 available before Metallurgy, well just make a requirement to know Metallurgy before completing the Theater, and you're off, baby).
Alright about WW, nuff said !!! [blush] Well, yes, I know a link that explains that pretty well (CFC academy, I think). Just being in Anarchy doesn't help, uh ? Like if I come back to Republic after 5 turns, my WW points stay the same (or worse ?) ?
Socrates
05-02-2005, 19:05
Might as well bump an old thread of mine... ;)
You'll see the reasons in my spoiler (to be updated later), but in my game versus Stapel, I declared war on him in the early game. I have questions about it.
1- I guess Stapel is now enjoying war happiness (1 happy citizen for 4 citizens), is that right ?
2- If we stay at war for some time and no great battles are fought (meaning : not many war weariness points are added to anyone), will he lose some war happiness points through time ? I assume no, since I was on the other side versus Beam for the entire game, and kept my happiness for a very long time.
3- Of course in Despotism you don't get war weariness, but you can still increase it in points. If I revolt to Republic someday, do I get instant war weariness if enough points have been gained ?
4- If Stapel and I sign peace soon, I suppose that his war happiness stops ?
5- If we then go to war again, will he always get back his war happiness again ? Even if he declares war this time ? Even if it's 5000 years later ?
6- In the previous case, will I get war happiness too ?
7- Finally, what do you think of the trick consisting in having your opponent declare war on you, just to get some war happiness ? By "having your opponent declare war on you", I mean "blackmailing him with military units, so that he's close to having no choice at all but anticipating an attack from you" (he can't know what you're gonna do). Please don't take this last question as me ranting at anyone, I just want opinions. I suppose the program can't deal with it, so it's a matter of human behaviour. I had no choice because Stapel could have struck some targets before I had the chance to acknowledge his attack (ie. entering enemy territory and inflict damage in one turn).
quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
Might as well bump an old thread of mine... ;)
You'll see the reasons in my spoiler (to be updated later), but in my game versus Stapel, I declared war on him in the early game. I have questions about it.
1- I guess Stapel is now enjoying war happiness (1 happy citizen for 4 citizens), is that right ?
2- If we stay at war for some time and no great battles are fought (meaning : not many war weariness points are added to anyone), will he lose some war happiness points through time ? I assume no, since I was on the other side versus Beam for the entire game, and kept my happiness for a very long time.
3- Of course in Despotism you don't get war weariness, but you can still increase it in points. If I revolt to Republic someday, do I get instant war weariness if enough points have been gained ?
4- If Stapel and I sign peace soon, I suppose that his war happiness stops ?
5- If we then go to war again, will he always get back his war happiness again ? Even if he declares war this time ? Even if it's 5000 years later ?
6- In the previous case, will I get war happiness too ?
7- Finally, what do you think of the trick consisting in having your opponent declare war on you, just to get some war happiness ? By "having your opponent declare war on you", I mean "blackmailing him with military units, so that he's close to having no choice at all but anticipating an attack from you" (he can't know what you're gonna do). Please don't take this last question as me ranting at anyone, I just want opinions. I suppose the program can't deal with it, so it's a matter of human behaviour. I had no choice because Stapel could have struck some targets before I had the chance to acknowledge his attack (ie. entering enemy territory and inflict damage in one turn).
1 - Correct.
2 - Your assumption is correct, I did it because you had not found China and I needed to make sure you did not contact them to protect tech trading.
3 - Not sure how this works. In our game I did not have any WW when I went to Rep.
4 - It stops, but if I were stapel I would not sign peace!
5 - The one being declared gets the war happiness. Citizens will remember they were at war however for some time. 20 turns iirc.
6 - See 5.
7 - Nice trick.
Somewhere on CFC there is an excellent topic about WW. It explains in detail how it works, including the thresholds, i.e. levels.
Ginger_Ale
05-02-2005, 21:00
Thinking of http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=61628, Beam?
You'll keep your war weariness until you do stuff that starts to take away 'points' (negative points are good, positive is bad). Read the thread for the stuff that is 'bad' for war weariness.
Socrates
05-02-2005, 22:43
Thanks Beam for answering in details. Unfortunately, a few points still aren't clear.
- OK, if w're at war again and HE declares, I get some war happiness. But what about him ? Does he get his war happiness from now back ? Stapel assumes so... and that's the whole point of his aggression. [sad]
- I know that citizens who rioted against war will remember they were at war for some time, and that this decreases through time, but do citizens also progressively forget that they were at war and that it was good (war happiness) ? Same formula ?
- Thanks Ginger_Ale. In fact I read the article in the war academy that tells about the same as that thread. But I find it difficult to understand, it's not very clear IMHO. And it seems that in PBEMs, human-human wars are different from the rest regarding this issue. I have my experience with my PBEM vs Skyfish : I was in Republic (he was in Monarchy, ready to roll over me), and I lost a lot of units on my soil, got many cities razed... I never suffered any war weariness until Sky captured my last city. I WONDER WHY ?
- Nice trick ? I beg to disagree, but it's my opinion. You might think that I rant against something that is happening against me. That is true in fact, but not true in concept. For a start, I've already thought of sending units to my opponent in the early game, and maybe I'll do it, or more often. But it never occurred to me that you could blackmail someone and get war happiness for a great part of the game. I'm not against the concept of blackmailing with military units, nor against the concept of enjoying a compensation for being declared (Stapel getting war happiness because I declared. I'm against the fact that this war happiness is insanely huge for the cost (one horseman lost ?), and that's exactly what Stapel was after. IMHO this is once again a flaw in the gameplay, and also in historical accuracy (if the obscure points I mentionned are in favour of Stapel here).
Sorry for the long post, I know many dislike it, but hey, if I can't shorten it...
It might be a good idea to start at locked war with a human opponent in 1x1 game even with AI involved.
It seems to be GA although if I remember well there is a thread / article somewhere with even more detail about the stuff.
Socrates
05-02-2005, 23:26
quote:Originally posted by akots
It might be a good idea to start at locked war with a human opponent in 1x1 game even with AI involved.
Because when you play a game where you're locked at war with someone (like in RoR), you never get war weariness nor happiness ? It could be worth it, though there would be no more deal ever between humans in this kind of games. Anyway in Civ3 you wouldn't lose much... [mischief]
We could add this to "no UN victory" in PBEMs... Input, comment...?
Post is not that long krys. What you call blackmailing is part of the PBEM toolkit imo. And everybody has his/her own toolkit. There are micromanagers, blackmailers, sneakers, negotiaters etc. and combinations of those. If it is within common CDZ practice and the specific ruleset you agreed there isn't an issue.
War happiness is a well known feature in Civ and to an extend balancing war vs. peace decisions. But aren't we all looking to use these features to our advantage? This is a big part of gaming imo. No matter what ruleset you make, in-game or out-game.
My recommendation is to think creative how to handle the situation in your game with Stapel and also think how to avoid being caught with your pants down in the future.
Socrates
06-02-2005, 00:43
You raise valid points, Beam. However that is not exactly what I'm ranting at. Just like when I ranted at what craters or man-o-wars (okay... and dromons, but less ;) ) were in our PBEM, I was not ranting at you Beam using this strategy to beat me.
Stapel has all rights to send a horsie to my land, to blackmail me with it as a threat (though I replied it wasn't a real threat, and it got killed ;) ), etc... And he has all rights to get a war happiness when I declare war on him. I agreed to that, or should I say, I never complained about it (because I had not encountered this situation so far, probably).
Now I'm experiencing something new, and I'm trying to evaluate it. Sending a single unit to get war happiness for the rest of the game (though Stapel immediately offered me peace, I guess he knows what he's doing) ??? [eek] It's a bit like if a country provocked another one by initiating an incident at some lost border, and the other country retaliated by nuke !! [blush2] Ever heard of "proportionate retaliation" ? Well that's what I'm speaking of : you lose almost nothing, but get much, very much. Forget the Republic slingshot or the ToE trick, this is more powerful. The game must have limitations (corruption, pollution, etc...), but there's something missing here obviously.
I reckon I enjoyed a good war happiness in our game too, Beam. I can agree it shouldn't last so much time (in fact I must have kept it until we were really at war, or did I keep it until the end ? [hmm] ). But I feel better about it : I was only scouting the sea and meeting friends in our game, whereas Stapel threatened my cities, workers and improved tiles. Quite a difference.
Here's hoping Civ4 will act differently here again. And I'm willing to try akots's idea for my next games. I'll look at how many trades I have done in my PBEMs so far, but we must surely not lose much. [goodjob] In Civ4 I hope to trade more with the human opponent too. What if the AIs are so strong that we have to ally against them to survive ? It could be nice to have an AI actually winning a PBEM (not the case in Civ3). Or we could imagine a situation where no direct action between humans are possible (stalemate) unless massive destruction, and so the humans have to compete for something else (space race, cultural race, etc...), and so both believe they get the advantage in a particular trade (leading to intense trading between humans, so as to get the best of it).
I'm dreaming... And a few points still obscure to my taste (see other posts).
Are you fucking kidding me, ONE horse? [rotfl]
Socrates
06-02-2005, 01:44
quote:Originally posted by Beam
Are you fucking kidding me, ONE horse? [rotfl]
Not kidding you, so what ? [hmm] This is the beginning of the game, how do you think we can send dozens of panzers to each other ? [hmm] And in my book, one horsie is enough to do damage, which I don't want. All the more when the said horsie was a free unit we got on turn 0, and when we know we're gonna use hundreds of units in the game (Kingreno's mod). So cost = nearly zero, result = huge.
If you think that I could have let him attack me, then what would have happened if he captured my nearest city ? I've been unlucky when I killed his horsie (I lost one too), and could have been unlucky in an attack against my city. All the more as we have an average military (ie. very few units). I don't want to play with my cities. And what could have happened if he had sent not one, but three or four of them ? [hmm]
The rest is still in question for me. [tongue]
quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
... Because when you play a game where you're locked at war with someone (like in RoR), you never get war weariness nor happiness ? It could be worth it, though there would be no more deal ever between humans in this kind of games. ...
War happiness you don't get but war weariness aplenty. [lol]
And why would you want to deal with humans in 1x1 game? They are cruel and sneaky and want to kick your ass asap before you kick theirs. Trade techs with them so that they can kill you faster? [confused]
Socrates
06-02-2005, 03:16
quote:Originally posted by akots
War happiness you don't get but war weariness aplenty. [lol]
Hmmm, that's because in RoR you don't have governments affected by war weariness... [ponder] Well, then it would still be nice to test once. I'll try it in my next game.
quote:And why would you want to deal with humans in 1x1 game? They are cruel and sneaky and want to kick your ass asap before you kick theirs. Trade techs with them so that they can kill you faster? [confused]
Maybe because I'd think that a deal with my human opponent would benefit me more than him. There are plenty of reasons... Or you can ask the question the other way : why would the opponent trade with me ? So that I can kill him faster ? There is a problem of symetry here... :D
Some points still obscure... [punch]
Hi ppl!! I'm the new ambassador of C3B here... as I've inscribed myself at the forum, I'll try to participate here!
Krys, the war weariness between human players is calculated like a AI-human play. Nothing changes. Don't try to make a war against a human foe in Democracy!!! =P
And people... hehehe, on a game at Demi-God or Sid difficult, will be better to trade techs with human civs too... or the AI will raze you! =P
With no more empty words... Cmota! =)
Socrates
27-07-2005, 21:47
[bump]
I've just found an odd option in the editor, it is called "increase army's strength" (or close to that, this is a translation of mine), and it can be found at the bottom right of the 'improvements & wonders' page. It is toggled on for the Military Academy only, and basically it says that armies' attack and defense values are increased by 25%. [eek] Is this true ?
Is it also true that, to compute the armies' attack and defense real values, you add every attack and defense values of the units inside (respectively of course), divide the total by 6, and add the results to the average attack and defense values ? Do both values get down once the army is redlined ?
grahamiam
27-07-2005, 22:05
army attack strength = unit strength + (sum of unit strength's/Z)
where Z = 6 normally, but becomes 4 once the Mil Academy is built.
Another weird thing about armies is the way that Civ determines the attacking unit. IIRC, if you put a tank in a 3 unit cav army (after Pentagon is built), and the tank will always be the attacking unit until the army is down below 4hp's. Makes those seemingly obsolete Army's quite useful for a long time. Arathorn wrote something about this @ CFC, I'll see if I can find it.
meanwhile, here's Theoden's article -> http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=99688
Socrates
27-07-2005, 23:41
Thanks. A worthy read, where you get to know that a 4-cav army with the Pentagon and the Military Academy built is a 16hp unit with attack 12 and defense 6 !!! [eek] And armies can be rushed... [crazyeye] Doh.
Sid, it's not enough. Empower those beasties even more please ! [lol]
classical_hero
14-08-2005, 09:47
I have a question about a happiness issue. Do you have a period of grace WRT to revolt? I was wondering if a city immediately revolts once there are more unhappy citizens than happy citizens. I need to know this because I am the DP for Team MIA aver at the CFC MTDG. I have always assumed that the effect of revolt is immediate.
Socrates
14-08-2005, 11:43
In SP or MP, a city revolts because of unhappiness only on the following turn. So, for instance, if you set the lux slider on turn 'n' so that a city becomes unhappy, it will revolt on turn 'n+1' (during the IT, really). Can't remember if you get the food, shields and gold during this IT, but it seems not, because at the opposite, I'm pretty sure you get them on the IT when a city stops revolting.
No they don't revolt immediately : if you have more unhappy citizens than happy ones, your cities will go into Disorder (on the next turn!!) and will stop all productions (sciences beakers, food, shields..) You should check each city every turn to see if you have more unhappy than happy since they only go into disorder on the next turn, you can always avoid problems with careful attention.
There are a few exceptions to this. The whole thing in PBEM is complicated and probably somewhat broken. The happiness/disorder/WLTKD check runs apparently when the city growth and production is computed and certainly after the growth is computed. And the apparent grace period is just apparent, it does not exist. The city goes into disorder the very same turn but only during the interturn. Good thing that during the turn, a player can try to adjust slider or regulate the unhappiness by some other means.
There is little that can be done regarding the unhappiness during the turn on the following circumstances (or so it seems):
1) When you lose luxury due to actions of other player (AI) or expired treaty in a particular city or all cities. This happens if a luxury resource is disconnected. Treaties though expire after the production phase is finished and usually a player receives a warning about that (We lose our supply of ...).
2) When war weariness accumulates due to the action of other player or your own since war weariness is computed during production phase as well (apparently).
3) When your city grows and this growth results in failing through happiness check. This means that growth is first and happiness check is second event.
4) When you have "rounding" effects. Since luxury rate is calculated in increments of percentage of 10%, rounding effects can result easily in loss of 1-2 happy faces. I'm not sure this is the case though. Also, if you build new cities, thus increasing the rank of some of the other cities, these cities might also lose happy faces because of the rounding due to corruption.
5) Loss of military police unit.
I'm not sure that all these points are valid 100%. But in all these cases, there is no "grace" period. The only way to prevent disorder in all cities is to scroll through after you are able to zoom into a lower rank city (capital, second, third, etc. cities) and scroll forward to assign entertainers. So, in PBEM it is a good idea when one of the above events is expected to happen in the interturn, make sure that at least one of the lower rank cities will have some excess happiness and will be able to finish some build. You then can scroll forward and double check the happiness. Also, make sure every turn that you adjust the luxury slider. Just move it back and forward and even if it returned to the same state it was before you adjust it. Otherwise, the happy faces in the city screen are not adjusted to reflect the changes in happiness. It should be done at the end of the turn after the micromanagement phase. If some citizens were assigned different tiles during this scrolling, it is a good idea to check everything again at least through F1 screen.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.