Geronimo Finally buys CivIII

[gunkulator]

Originally posted by Geronimo
I guess there are just two changes I have my heart set on now. Adding in 'federal republic' as a brand new government type either enabled through it's own tech or enabled with an existing telecommunications related tech is the first.

Make sure you playtest thoroughly. If the AI doesn't choose this gov't, you've only given yourself an advantage.

Personally, I dislike super-governments for the same reason I dislike super-units. The game is reduced to a race to who can get it first. There was way too much of that in civ2 and I for one and happy to see the end of it. YMMV of course.

The second is doubling the hps of all units so that the spearman kills tank nonsense is somewhat less likely to occur.

Just to dispel this one once and for all, the civ3 combat calculator gives a vet tank a 99.4% chance to win against a vet spearman out in the open. If the spearman is fortified in a metro on a hill, the odds drop to 92.5%. I think you may be solving a problem that doesn't exist.

[vmxa1]

I have only seen a tank lose to a spear once and that was soon after I got Civ3 (first day it was out).

I did come close last week in a game where my tank got to 1 hp. It is rare to run into a spear, but the Ai is always broke at sid and you can find some old units laying around, but usually it is industrial age units.

[joncnunn]

Changing the hit points is easy, except that the AI isn't particlarly good at comprohending the affects.

Changing an existing item is low risk.

Adding a new govt would probably cause a crash unless the associated text file was also modified to include it in the right format.

And in any case if you want the players of your mod to know the affects of govts in your mod, you have to edit that associated text file and be sure not to make any typos, in multiple places.

Most of the crashes should occur when trying to start the game.

Athough something like having entertainer require a tech would probably cause a crash in the middle of the game if the AI felt it needed one prior to getting the tech allowing it.

Originally posted by Geronimo
I guess it's impossible to predict in advance if a modification will be prone to causing game crashes?

I guess there are just two changes I have my heart set on now. Adding in 'federal republic' as a brand new government type either enabled through it's own tech or enabled with an existing telecommunications related tech is the first. The second is doubling the hps of all units so that the spearman kills tank nonsense is somewhat less likely to occur.

Are iether of these easy to do? I have a bd feeling the only way to double the hit points of all units is to eidt each individual unit one by one. yuck! i hope there is an easier way.

[joncnunn]

It's known that that if you give a govt "all building are free" flag, that the AI would assign an extremely high value to it. (Discovered by Firaxis during beta-testing which led to the removal of the flag from Fedualism)

The AI in 1.22 normally gives a very high priority to corruption level when chosing the peace govt type. (Correction perhaps Overcorrection for AI behavior in Fall of Rome if they stole Imperalism.) Given an equal corruption level and one a pop rush and the other a cash rush, it will usually take the cash rush for peaceful govt as well. Unit support costs don't seem to enter the equation, and neither would the WW level.

AI seems most interested in minimizing the unit support costs among the no WW govts when choosing a wartime govt.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Theseus
Civ3 seems pretty stable... I've never heard much about editor changes causing crashes.

You've obviuosly not done any modding on your own, there's all sorts of things that can crash your game. Less now with Conquests, but it's still not unusual.

[Willem]

Originally posted by joncnunn
Adding a new govt would probably cause a crash unless the associated text file was also modified to include it in the right format.

Adding governments isn't much of a problem. The only thing to watch out for is that you include names that your advisors will use. Like Lord or President for example.

[joncnunn]

I've done lots of moding exprements and have yet to have the game crash from one of my mods.

I have seen it crash on startup trying to use someone else's mod.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by gunkulator


Make sure you playtest thoroughly. If the AI doesn't choose this gov't, you've only given yourself an advantage.

Personally, I dislike super-governments for the same reason I dislike super-units. The game is reduced to a race to who can get it first. There was way too much of that in civ2 and I for one and happy to see the end of it. YMMV of course.

i don't want a super government. I'll balance it will increased war weariness or something. In any event it sounds like everybody tends to have one prefered government and stick with that as soon as they reach it. 7-8 turns of anarachy is such a high price to pay that switching governments on the fly just won't happen much anyway. (hrmm maybe it's possible to limit the number of turns of anarachy to a max of 4 using the editor?)

Originally posted by gunkulator
Just to dispel this one once and for all, the civ3 combat calculator gives a vet tank a 99.4% chance to win against a vet spearman out in the open. If the spearman is fortified in a metro on a hill, the odds drop to 92.5%. I think you may be solving a problem that doesn't exist.

maybe, but how often is the tank in the red after such an encounter?

[gunkulator]

Originally posted by Geronimo


i don't want a super government. I'll balance it will increased war weariness or something. In any event it sounds like everybody tends to have one prefered government and stick with that as soon as they reach it. 7-8 turns of anarachy is such a high price to pay that switching governments on the fly just won't happen much anyway. (hrmm maybe it's possible to limit the number of turns of anarachy to a max of 4 using the editor?)

One of my biggest complaints about civ3 is the extreme severity of anarchy. It lasts too long and you get absolutely nothing, no commerce or shields, during it. And with an editor that lets you change all sorts of other piddling details, there's no way to decrease turns in anarchy. Grrr. Unfortunately this forces everyone into picking one government and sticking to it.

I prefer civ2's model of anarchy: No trade and outlying cities completely corrupt but a few cities still produce some shields. And much short duration.

maybe, but how often is the tank in the red after such an encounter?

2.1% - 1 hp left
8.7% - 2 hps left

If you're really facing AI spearmen with tanks, you've already won anyway. The very rare occasional loss or reduced hps should not be a factor in the game.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by gunkulator


One of my biggest complaints about civ3 is the extreme severity of anarchy. It lasts too long and you get absolutely nothing, no commerce or shields, during it. And with an editor that lets you change all sorts of other piddling details, there's no way to decrease turns in anarchy. Grrr. Unfortunately this forces everyone into picking one government and sticking to it.

I prefer civ2's model of anarchy: No trade and outlying cities completely corrupt but a few cities still produce some shields. And much short duration.

Maybe I should consider editing the government type anarchy so that it is slightly less severe? or would that probably be begging for game crashes?

[joncnunn]

That should be fine, only if your thinking of corruption reducition, it's not going to be slight.

Also note that Despotism & Monarchy would also need a reduction in corruption [one level each] if Anarchy is improved to stock Despotism corruption levels.

I'd also recomend if you give Anarchy any production that the following also be done:

1. Remove all units free from Anarchy
2. Free unit support to 2/2/2. (Half despotism)
3. Add Xenophobic. (No culture in cities with more than half foreign citizens)
4. Max science slider : 50%.

Originally posted by Geronimo

Maybe I should consider editing the government type anarchy so that it is slightly less severe? or would that probably be begging for game crashes?

[joncnunn]

I'm not aware of a way to edit the length of anarchy for humans, it's adjustable for the AIs.

(I'm exculding the give every single civ Religious and the existing Religious ones a 3rd traight to compensate as an option.)

[pvzh]

I do not think Xenophobic is needed because culture is not accumulated in Anarchy (transitional government) anyway.

However, in terms of commerce and production you can not make it worse than despotism.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by pvzh
I do not think Xenophobic is needed because culture is not accumulated in Anarchy (transitional government) anyway.

However, in terms of commerce and production you can not make it worse than despotism.

sounds like I need to improve at most just one thing under anarchy, while making a few things somewhat worse so that there is no way that it can be considered a better government than despotism.

If units have a support cost under anrachy is it easy to end up ina situation where a civ goes into anarchy with low cash and comes out of it deep in debt? I haven't sen a negative treasury yet but I'm guessing that is possible in civ3.

[pvzh]

I haven't seen a negative treasury yet but I'm guessing that is possible in civ3.

No it is not possible. Once you do not have enough money, either one unit is disbanded or improvement is sold. One of these things happens randomly. However, you do not lose more than one of these per turn regardless of your deficite.