FIRAXIS: A list of EASY fixes for the next C3C patch

[Jon Miller]

also, if we added one content face to the colosseum

not only would it be better for most civs (40 cost per face)

but would come earlier

this would not be ballanced at all

Jon Miller

[RobC]

Captured artillery units are maintenance-free. Not a big deal in SP perhaps, but a possible exploit in MP

[notyoueither]

I agree that reduced shield cost for Colosseums would be the way to go.

[alexman]

Initial post updated.

[alva]

Or giving them more culture points. Of course that may lead to other (minor) changes.

[RobC]

Originally posted by korn469
alexman

adding a lethal stealth attack flag, then selecting tanks, modern armor, etc as the only units air units can stealth attack fixing the problem of air units killing infantry

This seems like a perfectly reasonable (although a bit time-consuming) workaround to me.

[korn469]

RobC

you could also use it in Mods and Scenarios, either suggestion, "lethal stealth attacks" or "immune to lethal bombard" would work, and both could give modders more options

here's a bug that needs confirmation, when running a modded government with free building upkeep, but requires unit upkeep in a deficit, only one unit per turn will disband, regardless of the deficit

[Stuie]

For the editor, I would like the "Requires xxxx in city radius" to include bonus resources, not just strategic and luxury resources.

[alexman]

Stuie, that's probably not an easy fix, because nowhere in the game engine is the trade network checked for bonus resources. Why don't you just flag the required bonus resource as strategic?

[Stuie]

Originally posted by alexman
Stuie, that's probably not an easy fix, because nowhere in the game engine is the trade network checked for bonus resources. Why don't you just flag the required bonus resource as strategic?

I don't want it to be "tradeable". You're probably right though... not an easy fix.

[Nor Me]

I disagree about removing the AI offence flag from Num. Mercenaries. They are frequently worth 50% more as an attacking unit to the AI than archers and I've not seen them built ahead of swordsmen.

[RobC]

Originally posted by korn469
RobC

you could also use it in Mods and Scenarios, either suggestion, "lethal stealth attacks" or "immune to lethal bombard" would work, and both could give modders more options

But the former (selecting which units may be stealth attacked) is already in the editor...

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Stuie
I don't want it to be "tradeable". You're probably right though... not an easy fix.

No need for concern. In PTW I had bonus res converted to strategic res so I could have them disappear. The AI wouldn't give me piddly squat for any of them.*

*Unless one was required for something and they didn't have it.

[Nor Me]

Originally posted by Jaybe

No need for concern. In PTW I had bonus res converted to strategic res so I could have them disappear. The AI wouldn't give me piddly squat for any of them.*

*Unless one was required for something and they didn't have it.

But being required to be in the city radius for an improvement is enough to give a resource value to the AI even though it's useless to trade for.

I've pointed out that the Iron Works is resposible for a third of the AI trade value of Iron in the ancient age before now.

[alexman]

The AI builds all of its available units for a certain purpose. That's why it builds some guerillas when it has access to rubber.

So once the AI gets iron, it definitely uses up some of its offensive unit build quota for mercs instead of swordsmen.