Desert beside a river

[couerdelion]

I'm a bit worried about this as a precedent. Would it mean, for example, that if my initial warrior avoids animals long enough to find a hut and then pops Iron Working, I have to go into WB and remove the tech and then add seven barbarian warriors around my lone warrior to signify the aggressive natives that I "always" manage to find.

Or perhaps when I fail to discover copper close to my capital when I complete Bronze Working, I should just put it there using WB.

[Blaupanzer]

Some of us would call the former masochistic and the latter cheating. Others would regard the latter as "enhancing the gaming experience."

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
Some of us would call the former masochistic and the latter cheating. Others would regard the latter as "enhancing the gaming experience."

The first is not a problem because I can always go back to the WB afterwards and replace all those barbarian warriors with a wounded Woodsman II, Combat I warrior of my own

[Blaupanzer]

Sounds like you may not be accepting the challenge of the game in the spirit it was offered. I stay away from the WB myself, as there are way to many temptations in there (e.g., upgrading units for free, undsoweiter).

[Willem]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
Emperor Willem, where does it say in the great book of Civ IV that "in the game all Desert rivers are supposed to have Floodplains." I think that such a pronouncement would justify intervention on your part through the WB or with a restart. But I strongly suspect that the quoted material is your understanding rather than some hard-and-fast rule being violated when no flood plain appears.

Floodplains on Desert rivers is the normal way for the game engine to deal with that terrain type. The only time it happens is in the case of a placed river, you'll never see a Desert river otherwise. So yes, Floodplains are "always" supposed to be in place, whether the manual/civiliopedia says so or not. And yes, if I see it happening, I will restart the game since I consider it a bug.

[LDiCesare]

And yes, if I see it happening, I will restart the game since I consider it a bug.

Why don't you just download a patch to correct it? There's Bhruic's patch, the latest BtS patch, and a patch I made specifically for that if you don't have BtS (although this one requires to change the map script you use since I didn't want to make a C++ patch for that).

[Willem]

Originally posted by LDiCesare

Why don't you just download a patch to correct it? There's Bhruic's patch, the latest BtS patch, and a patch I made specifically for that if you don't have BtS (although this one requires to change the map script you use since I didn't want to make a C++ patch for that).

Yes I am using Solver's patch, and Bhruic's before that. But I noticed even with that one the issue would still occassionaly occur. Not as often but I do see the odd Desert river. I haven't noticed it yet with Solver's patch, though I haven't really played much with it either. I'm into an RPG phase right now, going through Neverwinter Nights 2 again with a new character.

[Dubhghlas]

I still don't see why the fact that it occurs occasionally is a problem. There are examples right here on good old Earth of major rivers which spend part of their time going through desert terrain without creating floodplains to farm (Colorado and Nile leap to mind, not to mention the Snake). Since it doesn't happen often, it isn't something that impacts the game dramatically; indeed, one can speculate that the reason it isn't "fixed" is a realization that it occurs at about the rate one would naturally expect it to occur in "real" life.

Refusing to accept this terrain combination is an example of the playing mindset that doesn't like to deal with challenges. Might as well simply restart every game that doesn't hand you the most fortuitous terrain. Hell, one wonders what you do playing golf, refuse to play out of traps?

[LDiCesare]

I still don't see why the fact that it occurs occasionally is a problem.

Because it gives you an unfair advantage in locating other civs.

[Blaupanzer]

How does desert next to a river give anyone an "unfair" advantage? In terms of seeing other civs the visibility is the same across flood plains as it is across desert.

[Dubhghlas]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
How does desert next to a river give anyone an "unfair" advantage? In terms of seeing other civs the visibility is the same across flood plains as it is across desert.

Since it is asserted that the only way for the tile combination to happen is if there is a civ starting place nearby (see post #3 in this thread), if one sees such a tile, one can be alerted to the presence of a civ, even before seeing the actual city or units.

Now, one could conceive in an MP game that this might be an unfair advantage. However I think it's pretty miniscule; it assumes that 1) you find the area before expansion, 2) you find it with a precise approach that allows you to see the tile without seeing the city, and without being seen by the city and its units, and 3) that you can take significant advantage of this.

But in SP, I think the whole concept that this is somehow a significant advantage is laughable. Yes, maybe that perfect storm of three things will happen, and, thus, you can suddenly descend on your AI opponent and kill him off early. My response: so what? There are other "lucky" ways to discover a neighboring civ early, and I doubt seriously y'all terminate and restart the game if they happen.

[Blaupanzer]

Willem might restart in those other circumstances too. For the rest of us, this happens so seldomly as to render it meaningless. In SP, finding another civ early doesn't seem very useful, without knowing who it is. Maybe it is just me, but I play on. Such a spot might be a pretty good site to build a city as you get the fresh water health benefit without using a tile you would otherwise develop.