It seemed like a good idea at first....

[The Andy-Man]

When Civ3 was first released, and the feature that you cannot rush by wonders, i though 'hey, good idea!'. Then it was annouynced Great Leaders could 'Well, OK' i thought to myself.


but after playing it, i realise that it sux. You only get a GL if you fight wars, i dont want to. There is no way to fight AI production bonuses, and with AI tech trading, u never get the tech first and thus never get the wonder. And having Great leaders Able to rush build only benefits warmongeres.

And another thing, with this silly corruption, you need the FP, you need it as far away from the Palace as poss if you are on a peninsular, to get the best benefit. Basically, you need it in a city that produces 1sheild per turn. that 200 turns, HALF THE GAME!! Unless, and here is the cunning bit, you have a great leader!!!

In Civ2, rush buying was done to beat the AI to a wonder, and to get the benefits quicker, this is some how exploiting the AI. But, dont you think credit should be given to the fact a player has built such a fine infastructure, he can AFFORD to buy it? Letting people rush buy would be a great insentive to make money, and not have a breaking even buget (0 gold per turn) just to maximise science output.

[Arrian]

Well, the fact that leaders favor warmongers has been discussed, and I agree with you there. Leaders rushbuilding wonders in 1 turn makes them incredibly powerful. I have, however, gotten used to it. Also, it's probably too late to implement a different system for Civ III. It would be nice to get a leader due to great culture (although this would be tough to do right... warmongers often end up with tons of culture, due to the large numbers of cities w/temples in them. That adds up. Maybe it could be based upon culture per city. If you have 10 cities, and 20000 total culture, that's 2000 per city). They did implement two ways to trigger a golden age (military or wonders), but only one to get leaders. *shrug*

-Arrian

[The Andy-Man]

well, you cant exactly build 4 wonders in a Golden age can you?

need more then 20turns. And i just generally think leaders are stupid.

[Technoron]

In Civ2, rush buying was done to beat the AI to a wonder, and to get the benefits quicker, this is some how exploiting the AI. But, dont you think credit should be given to the fact a player has built such a fine infastructure, he can AFFORD to buy it? Letting people rush buy would be a great insentive to make money, and not have a breaking even buget (0 gold per turn) just to maximise science output.

mmmm. I'll buy into that. But only if the AI had enough understanding to rush a wonder too. Oh, if I could count the times I've robbed the AI with last-turn rushes.

I never understood why I could prevent the AI from building something on its turn just by artificially filling my production box on my turn. After all, I hadn't actually BUILT it yet.

*shrug*

[The Andy-Man]

i can understand how you could exploit caravans, and tis good they're gone.

but the AI should also be able to rush buy. but i dare say that firaxis wont put it in cos they will say the AI will get exploited or sumthing, so it becomes another option humans cant use as a way of counter acting the fact the game is war-biased and the fact the AI gets production bonuses later on (which is silly, i can see why you should give the AI bonuses to make it harder, but production is very important, and the AI should have even do's with the human on this one - surly it isnt that hard to tell the AI which sqaures in the city radius are good to boost production ie. build a mine on the mountaun - its already there for the human govounour).

[Blaupanzer]

Andy Man, we've already had this discussion once. The whole concept of racing to build Wonders is artificial as hell, so learn these rules and play the game. If you don't like getting beat, don't race. If you have a great leader, use him to get whatever's available. Don't try to use reason to "fix" a silly, unreasonable, and arbitrary set of rules.

Ditto about prior discussion related to the FP. Live with it; work your way around it; or ignore it. But sugesting it takes too long to build something with no corresponding RL fact, is utter drivel. Since no such thing ever existed on earth (the "real" FP is in Beijing, you'll note), how long it should take to build is up to the game designers. In other words, go out and kick butt to get a GL, take your 200 turns, or don't build it. But don't whine about it, we're all subject to the same rules.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man

(which is silly, i can see why you should give the AI bonuses to make it harder, but production is very important, and the AI should have even do's with the human on this one - surly it isnt that hard to tell the AI which sqaures in the city radius are good to boost production ie. build a mine on the mountaun - its already there for the human govounour).

Well, I think the default terrain improvement (like if you just hit shift+A and let your workers do their own thing) is bad. All they do is irrigate half the squares and mine the other half (plains/grassland, clearly they mine mts and hills). The problem here is that your cities will hit pop 12 and stop for a long time (until sanitation). I do a lot more mining than the AI, such that all my cities hit 12 with either zero or 1 surplus food. Maximum production. I then have to tweak things once railroads are build (they increase food output on irrigated squares) and then again once I start building hospitals (once to irrigate some squares and get the city to grow, and then one last time to change back to mines so it stops growing around size 17-18).

Basically, I maximize production in a way the AI is not programmed to. That's part of the reason I beat it to Wonders most of the time. So it does need some help. The fact is that the Civ III AI, despite improvements, is still pretty dumb. That's not a knock on Soren - an AI for a game as complex as Civ that lives up to the "I" is a long, long way off.

-Arrian

-Arrian

[The Andy-Man]

but, i dont really wanna spend all day doing worker things. i just irrigate the grass, mine the mountains......

and Bluepanzer, i wasnt whining, just moaning a little cos i aint got anything to do at the moment. and this forum is here to put our points of view over to try and get a better game (not just live with it), i am sorry if you wanted a forum where everything is all peachy, but it tends to happen that then nothing gets improved.

[Salvor]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
but, i dont really wanna spend all day doing worker things. i just irrigate the grass, mine the mountains......

and Bluepanzer, i wasnt whining,

Sure sounds like a whine to me.

Sorry you couldn't find a game where everything is peachy. Maybe chieftan level is just a little to tough for you. It'd probably be too much of a hassle to go into the editor and change the build costs of all the wonders to 1.

[The Andy-Man]

i never new it wasn't alowed for people to have opinions here.

[Captain]

Is it possible to change all the large wonders into small wonders?

I've never understood why if one country builds something, another can't duplicate it? I admit that being the first to do so should have a big bonus (like a culture bump of 200 points or something), but why not being allowed to build it at all?

If they were all small wonders, then we wouldn't have to worry about humans exploiting AI stupidity. The AI wouldn't waste shields a la civ 2 style, and peaceful builders wouldn't be crippled a la civ 3 style. It doesn't remove any "strategic depth" while it does allow the AI to play better.

one more thing, since all wonders are now possible, the overall cultural victory isn't any easier since IIRC you have to have 2x the culture of your nearest rival to win.
The only question now is, can the AI handle it?

---
if you want to prevent everyone from building all the wonders, just have the benefits split amongst the number of identical wonders in the world. It would hurt the existing civ's who built it already, but once there's three already built and receiving 1/3 bonus, would you really want to build another for 1/4 of the benefits? (see, the decrease to existing civs benefits slows down .5, .33, .25, .167, .14, .125 whereas the incentive for building them decreases rapidly.) First civ to build it would still have the one-time bonus for being the first.

[nato]

And another thing, with this silly corruption, you need the FP, you need it as far away from the Palace as poss if you are on a peninsular, to get the best benefit. Basically, you need it in a city that produces 1sheild per turn. that 200 turns, HALF THE GAME!! Unless, and here is the cunning bit, you have a great leader!!!

That is the exact reason I like my idea to reduce FP cost to around 30 shields.

It can only be built once, so it can't be abused like the Palace. It lets builders set up their empire without forcing them to go to war for a leader.

I know it is radical, and seems like it is making the game too easy, but I think it is actually good for the game.

[Willem]

Re: It seemed like a good idea at first....

Originally posted by The Andy-Man

but after playing it, i realise that it sux. You only get a GL if you fight wars, i dont want to. There is no way to fight AI production bonuses, and with AI tech trading, u never get the tech first and thus never get the wonder. And having Great leaders Able to rush build only benefits warmongeres.

If it really bothers you that much, then just create some colorless units and go around whacking interlopers that wander near your territory. You can get Leaders doing that without having a full scale war, just a few border skirmishes here and there.

[The Andy-Man]

but willem, for some reason that would feel like cheating, i may aswell have every unit unmarked, and just play like that.....

[Willem]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
but willem, for some reason that would feel like cheating, i may aswell have every unit unmarked, and just play like that.....

If you do it right, it actually makes the game more interesting. It at least gives me something to do with my troops when peace breaks out. The key is to find a good balance for those units in the game. You want them to be less damaging and more expensive than your regular forces so they don't become all powerful. And there is a price to pay diplomatically as well. The minute you use them against a civ, they become hostile.

I've been playing with some in my game for quite awhile now, and I can't say they've given me that much of an advantage over the AI. I can wipe out the odd border town, and capture stray workers, but for the most part they get their ass wiped whenever they come across a decent unit, who always attack immediately. This is especially true when I'm up against the Samurai. They can wipe out a stack of them in no time, and it usually takes three of my "rebels" to take out one of them.