w00t
Best solution for keeping your conquered cities happy is to quickly connect them to your central luxury delivery system (should I copyright that? :P), perhaps even with workers you capture from the enemy empire.
It is not a bug, and therefore should not be patched. Firaxis has geared Civ3 towards being a true Empire building game, not just a world conquest game. The military is certainly one part of your empire, but by no means is it as important as it was in Civ2.
Thing back through history - has anyone ever conquered the world? Even those that conquered large parts of it were always eventually brought down by barbarians, corruption etc. In the modern world, no one controls the whole world or even a whole continent (ok, except Australia). Yet there are still certain civs (like America) that are superpowers and dominate the world, despite controlling only a small portion of the landmass. I believe the same thing can happen in Civ3 if you play well.
Amen! You make good points here - the only problem with Civ1 and Civ2 was indeed that the success of a civilization basically hinged on how big it was, instead of the impact it had over history. I don't want to sound egotistical, but it's really amazing (and interesting) to look at how American culture has both drawn and repelled foreign culture over the past century.
One thing that's great about Civ3 now is that you could be the Roman empire at 100AD (mid Pax period) and control a large portion of the world and the most significant amount of culture, and at that time you would have a huge score on the historigraph. Later though, your empire falls and you struggle to survive over the next 1800 years. Perhaps all the other empires also struggle so you end up having the best average historigraph score because of your earlier success! That idea of the averaged historigraph score makes SOOO many dynamic outcomes possible.![Smile](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/smile.gif)
I also have a warlord civilization on my modified standard size earth map (had to add rivers!...no rivers in Europe??!?!) and turned to perfectionism instead of expansionism. Once I had a central base of cities and better technology base than my opponents I could conquer them each in turn. The culture core of cities near my capital acted as beacons of light to the heathen masses and kept the corruption in check until I could build a FP in the center of the new captured area.
Democracy has MUCH lower corruption than Republic, but like Civ2, more war weariness - so you have to be careful...
Hope this helps somebody...it's goddamn 5:18AM and I have class later today :/
Originally posted by albiedamned
I actually did this in my game once or twice. I think right after I conquered a city which had massive corruption, a rush built a temple using forced labor. I felt bad though - I had just created an UberKrux "deathcamp". But it does work, and there didn't seem to be any lasting penalty other than the dead citizens!
I actually did this in my game once or twice. I think right after I conquered a city which had massive corruption, a rush built a temple using forced labor. I felt bad though - I had just created an UberKrux "deathcamp". But it does work, and there didn't seem to be any lasting penalty other than the dead citizens!
It is not a bug, and therefore should not be patched. Firaxis has geared Civ3 towards being a true Empire building game, not just a world conquest game. The military is certainly one part of your empire, but by no means is it as important as it was in Civ2.
Thing back through history - has anyone ever conquered the world? Even those that conquered large parts of it were always eventually brought down by barbarians, corruption etc. In the modern world, no one controls the whole world or even a whole continent (ok, except Australia). Yet there are still certain civs (like America) that are superpowers and dominate the world, despite controlling only a small portion of the landmass. I believe the same thing can happen in Civ3 if you play well.
One thing that's great about Civ3 now is that you could be the Roman empire at 100AD (mid Pax period) and control a large portion of the world and the most significant amount of culture, and at that time you would have a huge score on the historigraph. Later though, your empire falls and you struggle to survive over the next 1800 years. Perhaps all the other empires also struggle so you end up having the best average historigraph score because of your earlier success! That idea of the averaged historigraph score makes SOOO many dynamic outcomes possible.
![Smile](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/smile.gif)
I also have a warlord civilization on my modified standard size earth map (had to add rivers!...no rivers in Europe??!?!) and turned to perfectionism instead of expansionism. Once I had a central base of cities and better technology base than my opponents I could conquer them each in turn. The culture core of cities near my capital acted as beacons of light to the heathen masses and kept the corruption in check until I could build a FP in the center of the new captured area.
![Smile](https://apolyton.net/core/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Hope this helps somebody...it's goddamn 5:18AM and I have class later today :/
Comment