Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was FP Corruption Bug fixed?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I think you simply need to redefine these things folks.

    Here is an excerpt from my Mod's Read Me files.
    ____________
    Forbidden Palace
    Cost - 35
    EFFECTS
    Reduces Corruption (kind of, mixes it up)
    Increases Chance of Leader Appearance
    Requires Heroic Epic
    Creates "2" Unhappy in city that builds it
    Creates "1" Unhappy all cities
    Produces Leader every 6 turns
    _________

    Now choose your 'location' carefully as you can, but oh those 'Leaders' are sure nice!!!

    Sincerely,
    Working in a Wizard's Den
    The Graveyard Keeper
    Of Creation Forum
    If I can't answer you don't worry
    I'll send you elsewhere

    Comment


    • #47
      [QUOTE] Originally posted by Fishman2
      Having tried V1.12 with a previous game and with a new game I regret to conclude that the FP / corruption issue is not fixed to my satisfaction.

      I totally agree - I played several games with the patch and corruption is still way to high.
      Lord of the World ... You just don't know it yet!!!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Antrine
        Produces Leader every 6 turns

        Comment


        • #49
          I am still hopeful and pretty sure that this fiasco with the FP will be reversed. Yes a few people don't mind it, but most people who play at higher levels and especially on larger maps won't like the change, and bluntly the change should never have been introduced( particulalrly since it was something at best a very small minority would like).
          Aggie
          The 5th President, 2nd SMC and 8th VP in the Civ3 Demogame. Also proud member of the GOW team in the PTW game. Peace through superior firepower.

          Comment


          • #50
            Antrine - that's just bizarre.

            Why can't we just return corruption to how it worked in PtW?

            Comment


            • #51
              I have no bones about it either way, in fact now that all the resources have been spent on making it (the FP) this way and that, please now just add a 'FP behavior slidder' in the game editor and I will take of it from there.

              Now as far as 'bizarre' goes here is my discourse on that -

              Yes, I am experimenting with what may be a new game concept:

              Namely;
              Large Maps, 360 by 306, very, very resource rich. An Earth set mythically 10,000 years ago replete with additional landmasses and a limited ice age impact. Warm places in the far north. Limit Eight very large empires, with names like Atlantians, Lemurians and Etruceans. A large network of roads already in place around the world. Movement rate jacked up to 5 on roads. Resource and terrain tiles all upped as well. What can keep the game feeling slow I think is ‘lack and limit’ scenarios, I have reversed this completely.

              Noting what units the AI favors I beefed them up and extended their movement range. (Warriors and Berserkers) Berserkers are the default Barbarians with everyone set at no advantage over Barbarians.

              Most Wonders are now 'Small Wonders' with no obsolesce and available for build based on other build requirements such as five coliseums, six universities etc.

              The game is a wild ride! Many buildings and wonders also produce various units every so many turns. This way the AI's have a steady stream of belligerent forces to send my way. I have been hit with stacks of 22 repeatedly. Losing armies, cities and portions of my empire (I eventually retake them though). I also tweaked the tech-tree to accommodate building larger cities earlier on (having access to hospital). As well upped the city category sizes to 9 and 15 respectively. On some turns a city will produce 'four' different units at once.

              All replete with a new government, 'Imperialism' that accommodates large force levels, low war weariness etc. I really like my 'barracks' concept;

              to wit - BARRACKS, Cost 25
              Resistant to Propaganda (establishes institutional conditioning)
              Reduces Corruption (by increasing 'power of military over family')
              Reduces War Weariness (double dido)
              Produces Longbowman every 8 turns

              Another unit adaptation is the Knight to Honor Guard and Escort. I changed police station to noble guard (house) available for building with Masonry and Imperial Government, also requires a barracks first be built.

              It is somewhat expensive, 20 and sports high culture “5” even reducing corruption, however creates “2” unhappy citizens in any city that builds it. The Noble Guard House produces an Honor Guard (read Knight) every 3 turns.

              These Honor Guard also have increased movement of 3 which is 15 spaces on the roads and also can carry (have load capacity) of one other unit. I have been experimenting with this for a while and it is really nice. You can carry a slower moving unit such as a Longbowman or a siege unit right up and through enemy infested regions almost safely. If attacked and destroyed, the loaded unit simply activated and may act according to its own characteristics. At the end of the Honor Guard movement you can manually activate the loaded unit and have it move, attack, unload fortify etc. This really extends the use variables during game play (well at least for the human for I have yet no verification that the AI has caught on to these advantages). I like loading settlers for to ‘really escort them’ to where ever I am sending them.

              I am still play testing of course the underlying concepts seem sound and are working. I especially like the coloseums producing Legionary every 3 turns. In addition, the game is always fast and fun. I am on to about version fifteen, the Conquest game editor really allows for something interesting dynamics. I also put most of bombard back to lethal. For it is very important to at least destroy an enemy cities improvements since they are so dangerous with abilities and spitting out units. Each empire starts out with 20 or so cities or settlers so that by turn 5 or 6 each empire is already 20 city or so strong.

              Rock and Roll and field 50 units in a blink of eye… and get them to a ‘front’ (there are usually four fronts at any one time) well maybe in ten turns.

              For more dynamic balance equations, some improvements and wonders reverse culture and produce unhappy citizens. You just have to juggle priorities accordantly. I have a lot more ideas; it just takes time (play testing them).

              Sincerely,
              Adroit working out the ‘bizarre’
              The Graveyard Keeper
              Of Creation Forum
              If I can't answer you don't worry
              I'll send you elsewhere

              Comment


              • #52
                My God Antrine!!! You do have a lot of spare time on your hands to think these things up (not that there's anything wrong with that)!
                ____________________________
                "One day if I do go to heaven, I'm going to do what every San Franciscan does who goes to heaven - I'll look around and say, 'It ain't bad, but it ain't San Francisco.'" - Herb Caen, 1996
                "If God, as they say, is homophobic, I wouldn't worship that God." - Archbishop Desmond Tutu
                ____________________________

                Comment


                • #53
                  I have a suggestion for a fix.

                  Lower corruption accross the board to compensate for the loss of the second core. Currently, corruption is just TOO high.

                  I'm not peeved so much at the loss of my second core, but that i have really fewer useful cities now than I had before.

                  This will mean all changes made to fix rcp and the changed made to fix the fix (ie: rankings) can remain, but corruption will simply be lower .

                  agree?
                  AI:C3C Debug Game Report (Part1) :C3C Debug Game Report (Part2)
                  Strategy:The Machiavellian Doctrine
                  Visit my WebsiteMonkey Dew

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I'm on my second game with the patch and, now that I know what to expect, I think I like the change. It surely favors builders vs warmongers and democracy over other governments. If you build the FP with "reasonable" expectations in mind and as part of a corruption reduction plan, it does help materially.

                    I don't by any means think I really understand how the FP will now enter into strategy in all situations yet, but exploring that looks like it will be fun.
                    Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Yes the FP problems are fixed and it now works better than in 1.0

                      The effect of the FP hasn't changed with the beta patch it is just implemented in a less screwy way. In conquests 1.0 it had little effect on overall rank corruption only really helping distance corruption.

                      1.12 seems to be doing the same thing except without all the screwy redistribution of ranks which were often causing increases in corruption.

                      The FP is fixed and works as it was intended to, only reducing distance corruption.


                      The fact that the FP now has a reduced effect is a different matter, it is certainly not a bug. Whether it is a good change or not is yet to be seen.
                      On the surface of things I think it may be quite good as I said when conquests first came out. The FP is no longer the huge double your output, be all and end all wonder that it was in PTW and so good FP placement is no longer critical to the game. PBEM's could be won and lost with forbiden palaces, where as now not building it, for whatever reason, will not loose you the game and building it ridiculously early will not make you a superpower.

                      In general change is not always bad, the FP is in no way worse than in 1.0 it is the same except w/o the screwyness.
                      Are we having fun yet?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I think it really sucks, it makes the game more difficult and there are already extra difficulty levels added.
                        In my current emperor game I possess 30 percent of the world's suface and pop and my palace and FP are both well placed, with PTW in this case I should have easily be able to get a huge tech lead and now I'm struggling.
                        With PTW I was considering to move up to deity, but I think I'm gonna stuck with emperor for awhile now.
                        My point: The extra difficulty levels already give the option to the die hards for an even harder game and they shouldn't be making the other things more difficult.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Why can't we just return corruption to how it worked in PtW?
                          There's a lot of this sentiment, myself included.

                          The problem, as I see it, is it's awfully late in C3's lifecycle to go "fixing" something of this magnitude. If it really was a bug, why wasn't it patched in one of the many other patches to Vanilla or PtW?

                          That's really my main gripe. If you let it go this long, so as to become a "feature", it's a bit too late to "fix" it and call it a "bug".

                          Had it been changed before PtW, I doubt anyone would have had a problem, but how old is C3? Isn't that a bit long to wait for this sort of fix?
                          "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            It's because of the fact that the AI just can't compete with the Human. But If you only play against humans, should it really be a matter.

                            If it wasn't for the Plethera of C3DG's that I'm in, I would take a break from this game for a while and let them fix it. But, I really just can't do that now...

                            E_T
                            Come and see me at WePlayCiv
                            Worship the Comic here!
                            Term IV DFM for Trade, Term V CP & Term VI DM, Term VII SMC of Apolytonia - SPDGI, Minister of the Interior of the PTW InterSite Demo Game

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I realize it's because the AI can't compete.
                              That still doesn't mean that a couple of years after release is a good time to nerf part of the game because the AI isn't using the improvement as well as a human.

                              Things like the irrigation vs. mining fix that Soren put in the PtW patch - good, even if a couple of years late.

                              Things like RCP(don't even get me started) and FP fixes this late - bad, especially after it's been reported that C4 is in the works.
                              "Just once, do me a favor, don't play Gray, don't even play Dark... I want to see Center-of-a-Black-Hole Side!!! " - Theseus nee rpodos

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                The *******s at Firaxis could at least tell the community how it is now designed to work. Assuming some of them have finally learned to communicate in English.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X