MOD: Patch suggestion MOD

[kettyo]

especialy since you don't need Carriers to use them

Though it's recommended for air defense.

[player1]

Originally posted by kettyo
So is 'city bombing bug' eliminated with this patch? (every improvement/unit/pop hit handled as a miss when there's no imps/units/pop remain)
That would be really nice ! (won't make size 1 cities just for bombard defense for units)

Not sure about that.
Since it never came to that, that sity stayed at 1pop or was with 0 buildings.
I always conquered it before that happens.

[alexman]

Continuing the discussion from the corruption FAQ thread:

Originally posted by player1
Original: 100% (chief), 95%, 90% (regent), 85%, 80%, 70% (deity)
Proposed: 200% (chief), 150%, 100% (regent), 90%, 80%, 70% (deity)

The only thing I would change would be to leave Monarch at 85%. OTOH you're the mod god, you decide!

[player1]

Originally posted by alexman
The only thing I would change would be to leave Monarch at 85%. OTOH you're the mod god, you decide!

It's more a flavor thing.
Having increments of 10% between diffculties.

90% vs 85% won't make any REAL difference.

[player1]

Of course this need to be tested.

We need to verify, will AI use standard regent value at every difficulty level (otwervise lower corruption of chief. would actulay benefit AI).


P.S.
For those who don't know what alex & me are talking, it's about optimal % value in diffculty screen in editor (different values for various diffculties).

[alexman]

It's a pain to test, but it might not be necessary. I think the AI has the Regent OCN%.

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
Just to clairfy once more... if you play on Prince or lower, the AI receives no gameplay bonuses whatsoever. No growth bonus, no production bonus, no science bonus, no combat bonus, no support bonus, no goodie hut bonus, no bonus against barbarians, no wonder-building bons, no corruption bonus, no waste bonus.

[he means Regent]

The fact that he mentions corruption means that under higher difficulty levels, the AI gets corruption bonuses, but on Regent it does not. The percentage of OCN is the only place where corruption is affected by difficulty level.

So the AI can't be always using 100% (otherwise it would be a bonus at Regent), and it can't be using the value that the human player uses (otherwise he would not be mentioning corruption in the list of AI bonuses).

[lockstep]

Originally posted by player1
Original: 100% (chief), 95%, 90% (regent), 85%, 80%, 70% (deity)
Proposed: 200% (chief), 150%, 100% (regent), 90%, 80%, 70% (deity)

200% on chieftain makes the game too easy IMO. Even a novice player should run into corruption due to no. of cities at SOME point, and I seriously doubt that a lot of people like to build empires with 32+ cities on chieftain. What about 150% for chieftain, 125% for warlord?

I agree with the rest of your proposal, especially with the 100% for regent. (Firaxis, what were you thinking?)

[player1]

Originally posted by lockstep
200% on chieftain makes the game too easy IMO. Even a novice player should run into corruption due to no. of cities at SOME point, and I seriously doubt that a lot of people like to build empires with 32+ cities on chieftain. What about 150% for chieftain, 125% for warlord?

I agree with the rest of your proposal, especially with the 100% for regent. (Firaxis, what were you thinking?)

Don't forget that 200% ONC on standard map is not same as normal ONC on huge map (huge map has ONC doubled).
Since bigger maps have lower distance corruption (depends form map size).

And that these setting don't change distance corruption in any way.

[player1]

And novice players would probably like to win conquest or domination victory without too much corruption annoyance.
(still it's not like 0% corruption, they'll need those corthouses and FP at some point)

[player1]

Hmm,
Since my propsed % are simialar to AI Cost factor (200 on chief, 100 on regent), maybe warlord should be 120 (just like AI cost factor).

In that case leap form 200 to 120 would be a big step for novice who mastered chief diffculty.

So maybe it should be: 150%,120(warlord),100,90,80,70(deity)

[lockstep]

Originally posted by player1
Don't forget that 200% ONC on standard map is not same as normal ONC on huge map (huge map has ONC doubled).

Sorry, I was referring to a standard map.

And novice players would probably like to win conquest or domination victory without too much corruption annoyance.

I agree, but they should still ask themselves at some point if yet another city is really worthwile. (To get that vanilla Civ3 flavour. )

maybe it should be: 150%,120(warlord),100,90,80,70(deity)

[lockstep]

While we're at tweaking corruption: IMO, the optimal numbers of cities are badly distorted with regard to mapsizes since Civ3 v1.16.

• Originally (that is, in v1.07), the nos. were 8/12/16/24/32 for tiny/small/standard/large/huge maps.
• After a lot of complaints about unmanagable corruption on tiny maps, Firaxis changed it to 12/14/16/24/32 in v1.16. (IMO, the nos. should have been increased for all map sizes or - if they really wanted to keep the '16 cities' for a standard map - decreased for large and huge maps.)
• In v1.21, Firaxis actually reduced the size of large and huge maps, but didn't change the nos. of optimal cities accordingly, making the distortion between tiny/standard and standard/huge even worse.

IMO, there are two ways to smooth out the numbers (always in combination with the changes suggested to the no.-of-cities-percentages for difficulty levels):

• Add 4 to the nos. used in v1.07, so that the new scale is 12/16/20/28/32. On Regent, this would result in a reduction of corruption (due to no. of cities) for all map sizes, but more noticable on standard/large/huge maps.
• If you want to keep the '16 cities' for a standard map (so that the Forbidden Palace is available with your 8th city): Use a scale of 10/13/16/22/28. On Regent, this would result in an increase in corruption for tiny and huge maps, no noticeable change for small and large maps and a decrease for standard maps.

Comments?

[player1]

Comments?

Maybe it's best to leave it as it is.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by player1
Maybe it's best to leave it as it is.

Well, at least it's not as obviously flawed as 90% OCN on Regent.

[alexman]

Originally posted by lockstep

Well, at least it's not as obviously flawed as 90% OCN on Regent.

Why is 90% flawed? It's just a number. The AI uses that same Regent number...