Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Simple Question Part 2...

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

  • Simple Question Part 2...

    Again, at work, away from my manual and searching turned up nothing. Which is a more potent source of culture, a Forbidden Palace or your real palace? I have been debating whether or not build a FPalace right near my main palace and have a city closer to my front line take the palace on. I figure by the time it's completed I will be well pas the point where it's in danger of a direct attack and it should strengthen any cities I do not raze.

    Is the forbidden palace basically an exact knock-off of the actual palace or does it provide different stats?


    edit/add: Can you run resources to a Forbidden Palace as you can with a normal palace?

  • #2
    Forbidden Palace is an exact knock-off of the normal palace, so there's not really any point to building them next to each other
    Up the Irons!
    Rogue CivIII FAQ!
    Odysseus and the March of Time
    I think holding hands can be more erotic than 'slamming it in the ass' - Pekka, thinking that he's messed up

    Comment


    • #3
      Well, I was planning on building one close to my original palace so I could then move the palace to near the front lines so it help ease corruption all around, I was just curious if one had more effect than the other. If the normal palace had more sway I could put that towards the front for the extra sway, but if they are the same, then it doesn't matter and my palace comes to no risk at all...

      Comment


      • #4
        For corruption and conversion purposes they are more or less equivalent. For trade route purposes your real palace is the one that counts. I usually build my FP in the center of my core production cities and move the palace to my ever expanding front. The FP can't be moved but your palace can. There is no real loss to losing your palace (unlike previous Civ games).
        Seemingly Benign
        Download Watercolor Terrain - New Conquests Watercolor Terrain

        Comment


        • #5
          The only hassle with building your FP where you don't NEED it is that construction costs for the Palace & FP go up as your number of cities goes up. "How much" would be an interesting project to research, but I would wager that it is based on your 'Optimal Number of Cities' setting (Editor: World Sizes tab).

          JB

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by WarpStorm
            There is no real loss to losing your palace (unlike previous Civ games).
            Do you keep the accumulated culture too? And the cultural bonus if build more than a millenium ago?
            Nym
            "Der Krieg ist die bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln." (Carl von Clausewitz, Vom Kriege)

            Comment


            • #7
              Yeah, even if you plan to move your real palace, don't place your FP too close to your real palace. When I find myself w/ a sprawling empire and a capital right in the middle, and no desire to expand much further, I will, when able to, pick two cities on either end of the empire to be capitals, one w/ the rp, the other w/ the fp, try to time the two completion dates to as close to the same as possible. worth it in the long run.

              Yep, plenty of $h1t not found in any reference source. Hint: for a look behind the curtain, go to explorer-C-program files-infogrames-civIII-scenarios and play w/ the editor. Don't worry, save whatever you change as something else, or not at all, but I think many of your questions can be answered there (and perhaps just as many new ones will make themselves apparant so you can post them on here for your apolyton buddies to help w/).
              "Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you." No they don't! They're just nerve stapled.

              i like ibble blibble

              Comment

              Working...
              X