The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Anyhow, here is your problem. If you spy on the Bab city Uruk (to the SW) you will see that it has the fp and Magellan's Voyage. See the (I hope) screenshot. Ham's pair beats your ace high.
Anyhow, here is your problem. If you spy on the Bab city Uruk (to the SW) you will see that it has the fp and Magellan's Voyage. See the (I hope) screenshot. Ham's pair beats your ace high.
I know Uruk has those wonders but I don't understand what Uruk has to do with anything here!
Uruk is not really close enough to be the cause of blurbas flip and in addition the cities are buffered from each other by lisk, wich is far superrior culturally compared to Uruk. It is Uruk whic should flip in my favor and not the other way around.
Besides, Uruk is not particulary strong culturally.
It has NO structures witch are producing double culture (exept from the fp and possibly the temple) and the wonders are only producing 7 culture/turn.
Compare this to blurba wich is producing 12 culture/turn just alone from the GL) and witch was producing
DOUBLE culture at the time of the flip.
What caused blurba to flip was a city just NORTH of
Uruk. (Since, Uruk appearantly still exists, it must have been UR)
My point was to show that:
1) Blurba witch was (and despite of the flip still IS)
culturally very strong,
Like a few others here, I too find the culture flip to be a real pain - at least the way it's currently implemented. But since it's highly unlikely that Firaxis is going to change things, that leaves only two options for "Flip Haters":
A) Drop Civ3 and move on (probably the option my wife would prefer....)
B) Deal with it.
OK, so culture flipping exists and you still wanna play Civ3 anyway - what are your options?
As others have pointed out, relative culture strength is THE critical factor. Thus Rule #1:
Build up your own culture so it's equal to or greater than those you oppose in war. (Also known as "pick on the weak sisters first")
A corrollary to this is Rule #2:
Don't randomly expand your civ - only wage wars of CULTURAL extermination!
That means once you start a war with the French, finish them off - take every city they own. Why? Because all those unhappy Frenchmen become compliant subjects as soon their home nation ceases to exist. This happiness provides many related benefits, not least of which is the need for smaller garrisons.
If you must go to war with a culturally superior enemy (and this WILL happen), DO NOT conquer and keep any of his cities. His day will come, but for now your goal should be to simply fend him off, and possibly improve your borders via the conquer-raze-replace process.
But what about your real goal? Even wars of extermination can be dicey so there's a few things you can do to almost completely eliminate the chance of a flip:
1) No Resistance - Stamp it out on the first turn - especially early in the war or when battling a culturally equivalent enemy. If it slows down your offensive, so be it - but plug as many troops as necessary into the conquered city on that first turn. I'm not sure what the "No Resistance" rule is, but invariably a 2-1 ratio of troops to civilians will end resistance on the first turn.
2) WLTKD - Enemy cities can NOT be allowed to fall into disorder! Where possible (the Marketplace is your friend here), put them into WLTKD as soon as the resisters are subdued.
3) The Enemy Capital - Beware the enemy's cultural heartland! This is a very dangerous place, so it's critical that you take his capital as soon as possible. If you must raze a nearby city or two in order to capture it quickly, so be it.
4) The Flip - You do everything right and the enemy city STILL flips - what's a harried conqueror to do? Well, in this case (and this one ONLY), the otherwise cheating practice of "restarting" is acceptable. Make sure you have extra units available to increase the garrison and just move in as many as it takes to keep the darn thing from changing sides. To reduce excessive replay, it's important to save at the end of EVERY turn - autosave is useless since by then the flip has already occurred.
Follow these simple rules and you too will happily discover that "City Flipping" is no longer part of your Civ3 experience!
(For those who feel otherwise, please ignore this post)
To La Fayette, as fine a gentleman as ever trod the Halls of Apolyton
From what I understand of that Civ game of yours, it's all about launching one's own spaceship before the others do. So this is no big news after all: my father just beat you all to the stars once more. - Philippe Baise
As it has been a while that a link to this thread was posted: There is an exact, confirmed formula, which gives you all the reasons why a culture flip happens in any of your games. Furher, it gives a breakdown of what you can do to prevent flipping. It is a long read, but the info is very good (if I may say so myself, some of the posts are mine).
Direct cultural pressure is not a reason in the sense that if you have a culturally high city opposed to lesser cities, your city is safe from flipping. What can be a reason is that you lack some tiles in your city view (the 21 tile city radius) to the enemy, or some of your citizens are not of your nationality. Without any of these two, flipping will not happen. This is than adjusted to a number of factors, culturally, happiness, or military related.
DeepO: Thanks for the link - together with Fitz, you produced a fine piece of scholarly research. It was gratifying to get confirmation that many of my core strategic assumptions (developed purely through "trial and error" gameplay) are underpinned by solid mathematical formulas.
On that note, has anyone ever determined the formula for "eliminating resisters in one turn"? I always assumed that it was totally based on garrison size, but now I'm not so sure.
To La Fayette, as fine a gentleman as ever trod the Halls of Apolyton
From what I understand of that Civ game of yours, it's all about launching one's own spaceship before the others do. So this is no big news after all: my father just beat you all to the stars once more. - Philippe Baise
With all I have to do in the world I am now supposed to take a great deal of time plowing through an arcane, arbitrary, and almost byzantine "formula" devised by Soren regarding some entirely artificial and unrealistic concept.
I have a better solution - get rid of it, the formula and the CF. I don't have time for "scholarly research" on an artificial concept that makes no sense to begin with.
The entire idea of CF is thoroughly flawed and false.
I have a much better idea for Soren. I will happily read a brief treatise from him on how he got the brainstorm to concoct this Culture Flipping stuff in the first place, and why any of it is in a game that pretends to be an historical simulation. I'm quite serious; I'd really be interested.
For now, all I want is a WARNING on CF status for towns/cities ranging from "no danger" to "imminent". I also want to be able to totally turn CF off in "historical" scenarios. . . before in a WW II scenario half the American tank force disappears when just-conquered Dresden flips back to Germany.
Originally posted by Coracle
RE: Culture Flipping formula.
With all I have to do in the world I am now supposed to take a great deal of time plowing through an arcane, arbitrary, and almost byzantine "formula" devised by Soren regarding some entirely artificial and unrealistic concept.
Actually no. A brief read reveals several factors that you can weave into a successful warfighting strategy. There's no need for a calculator - a rough understanding of the underlying mechanics will suffice (the need for cultural parity with the enemy, use of WLTKD, importance of luxuries, etc).
I have a better solution - get rid of it, the formula and the CF. I don't have time for "scholarly research" on an artificial concept that makes no sense to begin with.
The entire idea of CF is thoroughly flawed and false.
Again, not true. It's clear that you have a deep personal dislike of this concept, and that's fine. It does NOT however mean the concept is "flawed and false".
For example, let's consider the Mongols. A highly militaristic people with a culture level approximating zero successfully conquered the vast nation of China which was militarily weak yet culturally supreme. And what happened? Ultimately the whole country effectively "flipped" back to China - and the same thing happened to Mongol conquests in India and Persia. And what of Alexander? Greek/Macedonian armies conquered right up to the gates of India, and yet the whole thing collapsed quickly - FROM WITHIN. The history of the world is full of similar happenings, so let's not issue a blanket condemnation of the power of culture. It's a real force, and I'm happy to see it represented here.
Now could we quibble over the specifics of the implementation in Civ3? Absolutely! But personally I prefer to focus on dealing with the "as-is" rather than raging against it. Until Soren gives us the keys to the car (don't hold your breath!), the only REAL alternative is to operate within the constraints of the model (and search for ways to modify it).
I also want to be able to totally turn CF off in "historical" scenarios. . . before in a WW II scenario half the American tank force disappears when just-conquered Dresden flips back to Germany.
At last, my favorite subject! Believe me, there's LOTS to gripe about with Civ3 and it's Scenario-unfriendliness, but this specific example isn't one of them. There's probably many ways to prevent a "Dresden-flip":
- Set all Civs to the same ultra-low culture level.
- Remove "Culture-growth" from all but one city improvement (to keep culture from growing too rapidly)
- Change all the citizens of every city to a 3rd nationality (preferably from an extinct culture, or one with a zero culture level)
These are just three examples of ways to deal with Culture in a WW2 scenario, and that's certainly just scratching the surface. The point is, don't underestimate the ingenuity of serious Scenario Designers. Guys like Captain Nemo, Bebro, Jesus Balsinde, & Tecumseh (to name but a few of Civ2's finest) will find ways to eliminate the ahistorical effects of culture and can even be counted on to twist it into an as-yet-undreamed-of enhancement. Bet on it!
To La Fayette, as fine a gentleman as ever trod the Halls of Apolyton
From what I understand of that Civ game of yours, it's all about launching one's own spaceship before the others do. So this is no big news after all: my father just beat you all to the stars once more. - Philippe Baise
If it is easy enough to do, I don't see why they can't add an editor option to disable flipping. Seems like an easy way to appease everyone (except those who complain for complaining's sake, who will no doubt find other things to complain about...).
I personally don't mind it in the game, as it adds an extra challenge with which I must contend.
Originally posted by Coracle
I will happily read a brief treatise from him on how he got the brainstorm to concoct this Culture Flipping stuff in the first place, and why any of it is in a game that pretends to be an historical simulation. ....
I think you're right overall to say that it's not historically realistic, but then Civ never was was very realistic was it? Let's see...
1. No supply lines: phalanx / spearman on top of a mountain for ever.
2. Civ 1/2 trade : Sail one ship full of dyes across the world and get a huge income for ever.
3. Build 4 chariots and take over most of the world (Civ 1)
4. Civ 1/2 :enemy settlers plopping cities 2 squares from your capital and eating all your food until you declare war.
etc etc
At least they can't do (4) in Civ 3 - if they tried the city would, er flip to you.
Can't do (3) either. Just building military and rushing every civ imbalanced the game, so they decided to limit the power of unit-only gameplay, and give some power to the builder. It's now required to build some culture before taking over the world. Is that so bad?
It's not mean't to be a historical simulation - it's a game. If all you wanna do is build units and rush, I strongly recommend playing a different game - one without culture flipping. If I was Mr Firaxis I'd happily buy you a wargame of your choice to placate you for your disatisfaction.
Thanks Kull, both for the compliment and the answer to Coracle. It is hard to keep giving answers to his arguments or (personal) attacks. I agree in full with the things you wrote, we now know that it was not Soren, but Jeff's idea to include culture and culture flipping. Coracle knows this too, as it was in a response to one of his posts that Firaxis has posted this, but that doesn't keep him from argueing otherwise.
About the resistors: I'm fairly certain that there is more to it than purely the number of garrisoning troops (even if this is how you will get rid of resistors), I can only guess that it has again to do with happiness and culture. No formula is known AFAIK, but I'd be glad to participate in finding one.
Originally posted by DeepO
About the resistors: I'm fairly certain that there is more to it than purely the number of garrisoning troops (even if this is how you will get rid of resistors), I can only guess that it has again to do with happiness and culture. No formula is known AFAIK, but I'd be glad to participate in finding one.
DeepO
One thing I have observed in my last game: even if the number of garrison troops need not be the only thing affecting the end of resistance, it is certainly a prerequisite. I have conquered one of the last Egyptian cities on my continent, leaving no garrison troops in it, rushing for the very last Cleo's city that was close to this one. After exterminating Egyptians altogether, I felt no need to station any garrison in the city.... It kept being in resistance until I moved a randomly chosen unit there about 20 turns (!) later, after which it ended immediately (I think). Imagine that. The pathetic Egyptian (there was just one citizen in the city I am talking about) kept resisting 20 turns after his civ was wiped out!
Originally posted by vondrack
. The pathetic Egyptian (there was just one citizen in the city I am talking about) kept resisting 20 turns after his civ was wiped out!
Perhaps he had big dreams of being the next Pharoah.
Vondrack, I've seen the same happening once too. I was trying to word it, however, that it is not simply something like: there are 5 resistors, use 5 troops and they will all be gone in 2 turns... there definately is more to it. If you have a very happy (through lux+diverted commerce) city, it will stop resisting faster then when your city is unhappy. And I think culture has something to do with it as well, but this is quite hard to test.
Comment