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
Ahmen Brother, I too love to win via the puppet strings. There's nothing like dancing the fine line of Support of a nation or domination of that nation.
Thoughts on the effects of the new 40 (instead of 32) turn tech cap?
I thought at first we'd see 40 turns only on, say, 10-40% science in first several turns w/ 32 turns for 50-100%. This as opposed to before w/ everything taking 32 turns and everyone setting science to 10% to get $ to buy tech. I figured this was changed to discourage setting science too low and give you a choice.
But basically it's the same situation as before, just takes 40 turns no matter what your science is at. So you're still encouraged to set science to 10%, rake in cash, and buy techs. It slowly improves from there of course, but basically it takes even longer to research--at least early. Putting science high on upper levels is still completely pointless. Just bring in the cash and buy them.
Profoundly important bit from Jeff Morris - Firaxis
If you capture a city that has not generated any culture, you will Raze that city, regardless of its size....
Wow....and something that certainly needs more discussion here on the boards!
The implications are far-reaching, and I personally very much like what it does to stop/delay the rush game and those who had gotten in the habit of following a rival civ's settler/warrior around until they built a new town. Now, all you get is a declaration of war out of the deal.
Pretty cool stuff, but it DOES make very early warfare a bit trickier....you've almost got to go for the capitol of the rival civ first, and "follow it" (ie - if you're looking to acquire more than one city from a target civ, then you must follow the capitol to ensure that the city in question has generated at least some culture. Of course, later in the game, a quick glance at the size of the borders will tell you one way or the other, but in the opening 20-30 moves (yep...that's how early I'm talking ....WAAAAY early conquest!), there's no good way to be sure, 'cept for gunning for the capitol....
-=Vel=-
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
Was thinking on the drive to Arby's today, and what it comes down to is this:
The mechanics of beating the game remain essentially unchanged from Civ1. If you want to beat the game militarily....use one or more variants of the despotic rush and clobber 'em. It works. It's effective, but after doing it a time or two it just kinna leaves you cold, you know? I mean....essentially it's the same thing over and over again. Rush, kill civ a....rush again, kill civ b....repeat x times, where x is the number of other civs in the game. End. ::stifles a yawn:: No thanks....
One thing that the rush-crowd has absolutely right though, is that in the end, it's all about controlling....dominating the world.
Blessedly, there are LOTS more interesting ways of going about that than rushing yourself to victory lane.
In my mind, military victory and/or dominance of the globe is the easiest, and also most linear path to victory. Because it IS the most linear, it's also the most effective. It reduces the game to it's barest elements and relies on superior human execution of the complex interactions that combat creates. In short, it is the simplest, surest course to victory.
Again (and please remember that all of this is just my own idle speculation on the subject), those who choose to play the game in this manner are missing out on about 3/4 of the total gaming eperience.
Besides, IMO there are better, more effective, and certainly more interesting methods of controlling the world.....
The game is all about diplomacy in one form or another. Trade is a diplomatic tool. As is force of arms. MPP's and other formalized diplomatic maneuverings are, obviously part of the package, and if you're looking for an intense, interesting gaming experience, then you must examine the various victory conditions up close and find out what each involves.
Conquer/Domination: Wipe out all rivals or control 75% of the land. Either way, you're talking about almost constant war. Fight fight fight....rush rush rush. Game. Pretty straightforward. Pretty linear. Easily accomplished, but a somewhat questionable fun-factor.
Diplomatic: Most easily accomplished by playing the Merchant game. Trade with everyone, keep everybody happy, build the UN. Game. Also pretty linear. Some chances for more interesting interactions than the conquest game, since you can selectively NOT trade with certain empires and perhaps bring about the destruction of one or more of your rivals making good use of your market dominance in various categories.
Cultural: VERY linear. Build stuff. Turtle. Wait. Game. Quite possible the most boring of the game types, though you CAN choose to mix it up in world politics to keep things interesting, but your actions or lack thereof will have no bearing on the final win. It's just killing time for you.
Space Race: An actual RACE vs. the other AI's, and on higher levels of difficulty, this one can be a little heart-pounding, since you're never quite sure if some other civ is gonna pull out some mojo on you and sneak in the win. An interesting way to go, with a pretty cool movie that the others are totally lacking.
Histograph: IMO, this can either be the most useless or the most compelling. Most useless if you conquer all but one city of the other civs and just sit there till 2050 boosting your score. That's beyond BLAH! Compelling though, if you play the game all the way out, making vassals, clients, mixing it up with the other nations of the world all game long, preventing your rivals from building the space ship, preventing them from snagging a diplo victory (using diplomatic means and/or force of arms & surgical strikes if necessary), and end the game when it's retirement time on top of the heap. This methodology allows you to assume the role of puppet master, working with your allies to exert a level of control over the planet that's soooo much more intricate and involved than anything ever seen by those who favor beat-down games.
That's where the magic is.....controlling the world indirectly. Building such an Empire, and having such a profound presence on the world stage that you can, by your own actions and interactions with other civs, engineer the build up and breakdown of other empires, all over the world. And learning to do it well enough and with enough savvy that you can end the game in 2050 with ALL victory types enabled, and stop your rivals from ever achieving any of them, ending with yourself listed as the top nation on the planet.....
Now THAT, for me, is compelling game play....
-=Vel=-
PS to Arrian re: Oscillating War: Not necessarily a constant state of war, but, in the early game, when you're running Despotism anyway and suffer no ill effects from a prolonged conflict, rather than fighting an extended war with one civ, fight 3-4 small scale wars with all your neighbors. In practice, it takes about as many resources as the one big war, and slightly more time (mostly, that's the time it takes to locate your army to a different front). Once you've pruned them sufficiently, and grown your Empire to it's optimal size, the next war you fight will probably be one to protect a client state of yours, or to help him grow....
-V.
Anyway....just some random thoughts I wanted to transfer from brain to virtual paper....
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
First off, let me just say that paratroopers are my favorite unit in civ3 ever since they patched them. Heres how to use them so that they become your favorites too.
This here is a typical paratrooper assault on a typical civ in either the modern or industrial eras.
A typical civ has resources, and access to salt water.
A typical assault is against a civ which has a land border with yours
(1) Planning
First off, you need to set a goal. What do you want to accomplish? Conventionally, it could be to grab a few cities or resoruces. Unconventionally, it could be to set the whole world alight. The key to this part is to set your goals before hand.
(2) Set the Stage
Lets assume that you want win culturally, but two other civs are against you. So, the first step is to check your diplomacy screen. What is their status among others. Then check the latest intelligence you have with them. How strong are they? Step two is to contact them and have them make a mutual protection pact against another civ, say the Germans. Build up your army, navy and airforce. Build about 5-10 paratroopers. Station the navy just outside the Germans cultural borders. Bring your army to the front, also build fortresses. When your troops need to heal later on, you can bring them into those fortresses which increase their strength. Also make sure you have plenty of roads going towards the front. Build a national guard and station them close to your colonies. Block chokepoints with good defense. As you can see, when you go onto the offensive, you have to watch your back at all times.
(3) Light the fire
Declare war on Germany. The other two civs will also, meaning that they have to stop building cultural buildings. Now, move in your Paratroopers by paradrop. Target road junctions, and especially resources. Pillage, and cut Germanys infrastructre. Your navy should move in and shell the cities. Your airforce should bomb. And your army should swarm over the borders. Since your paratroopers are relativly weak. the point is to get to them and relieve them as fast as possible. Hopefully, Germany will have attacked the other two culture civs and have taken a few of their ciites. After you have crippled Germany, then ask for peace. your two 'allies' will continue fighting and hopefuly losing so that you can win.
"Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini
Great discussions on diplomacy and manipulation today. I think Oscillating War is a bit extreme, but it seems like a novel way to ensure that you dominate your continent.
I fully realized the importance of early game war last night during an absolutely horrible game with the English. I had never played with the English before and so I set it on Regent. I figured that since I was on Regent I didn't need an early war and that I could just play a game of aggressive peaceful expansion. I cranked out settlers and because ours was a large continent I was able to secure a large empire between the Zulus to my North and the Chinese to my South. Once the land grab had finished, I started building infrastructure like mad and waited for contact with the other continent.
By the time Ocean squares became crossable, my early libraries and universities had netted me a slim tech lead and a couple of stolen cities due to culture. However, I was in the bad position of having powerful neighbors on both sides and not having any diplomatic clout when negotiating with them. (My start didn't include much in the way of luxeries and so we hadn't traded much). In any case, once coal was discovered and my neighbors didn't have any, it didn't take long for them to gang up me and wasn't nearly powerful enough to survive their combined onslaught.
On an unrelated note: I find that a crucial time of game is when the other big continent is discovered and all of a sudden there are a lot more players in the diplomatic game. Does anyone have any advice for how to handle this period. For instance:
How do you access the positions of the newly found empires?
How do you tell, who's powerful and who's friends with who?
How do you decide who to trade with?
If you're on the technically advanced continent do you trade the new found civs your tech advances or do you try to keep them in the dark?
If you're not on the technically advanced continent, how do you catch up?
I personally very much like what it does to stop/delay the rush game
Yeah, me too. Very clever of them. It'll just delay the rushers, but at least you can't immediately use a captured city against the enemy. I always wait for swordsmen to start an early war anyway. Waiting to rush until then should still work as by then most cities should have temples. My current emp w/ patch game I only recall once taking a 2 pop city and having it razed. Every 1 pop was razed.
I do not like the fact that we are being forced to play Civ 3 in a civilized way.
Well, I think they did it because Despot Rush is almost too easy on emp/deity if you get to keep every city. I'm sure you can still rush from the start, just won't be such a cakewalk. You'll have to actually build some more of your own cities.
Here here! Good stuff indeed re: paratroopers! Outstanding work!
JT: Thanks man, but it's really not soooo bad, the "raze if Culture = 0" thing....after all, most civs will eventually pop a temple in eventually, if for no other reason than to control the population and keep 'em happy....and all the scientific ones go ape over building libraries (I know...cos my catapults sure destroy a bunch of them! LOL). Mostly, it adds a little bit of a delay in...I'm guessing to give the AI a chance to actually build up a bit to maybe survive the human-player's onslaught....delaying the inevitable?
Did a bit more playing this evening, but I'm a bit worn out from a harsh monday, so I think I"m hittin' the hay, but I really like the whole "Oscillating War" approach to keeping your neighbors down....beating them all up more-or-less equally (can't play favorites after all! ) seems to really fix you up for the mid game....overpowering? Perhaps....but it was kinna cool to finish the Pyramids in 2900-something BC!
-=Vel=-
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
Ok, Emperor (post-patch) space ship launch in 1916 and score of 3176. Save game attached. No despot rush, minimal pop rushing. Normal building and expanding. Just using all the great strategy advice from this thread.
Fell behind early as French and Germans each had six cities to my three. A big disadvantage when Iroquois basically got whole southern half of continent. Didn't start my "vassalization" campaign until nearly AD times. Lots of trading, of course, but it was vassalization that got me to tech parity. The key was France and Germany had no iron and my swordmen mowed them down.
Meanwhile the russkies cleaned up their whole continent. So it was down to me, Iroquois and Russia. I thought it would be more of a challenge in industrial/modern times, but Russkies couldn't keep up w/ me in tech. Not even close. There was no space race, no one else even got started! I totally cruised in modern times despite them both ganging up on me at one point. (Oh yeah, Russia thought my army "weak". Take a look at F3 on save game, gimme a break). Russia just hit me w/ wimpy ironclad coastal bombardments and Iroquois couldn't stand against my tanks. Weariness forced me into Communism and I tried to get peace. Took forever for Iroquois to come to the table, had to take 6 of their cities. Besides that though, it was an easy win in the late game.
I like the idea of controlling the whole game via "puppeting". I've got to try that, only the feel the King Maker role, to choose those that will be my pets and those I will kick, to decide wether this civ or this other gets to grow while this one shrinks. I like the concept, even if it sound a little "power freak"
Although I haven't done exactly that, I find that in most of my games, I tend to fight one ancien war, and one in the early Middles Ages. Afterwards, if I was prepared enough (and by now it is quite easy to set realistic objective and devise a plan to aquire them), I'm in the lead and really can't be dislodged. I do not toy with other civs as you say you do, but I still gain enough money from commerce with them to really drain them, even without tech selling.
So what I've tried in my last game is to stay about the same size as the others on purpose. I wanna see what happens in the late industrial when I fight AIs with the same production power as they have. I don't have too much time right now (girlfriend coming back from a 3 months and a half trip to NS on friday, I have stuff to prepare...) so I chose a small map size (first time I played on such a small world). Man, it feels weird !! Anyway, I'm Japanese with Indians, Chinese and English on same continent and Zulus and Persians on other Island. No fighting so far, I'm barely in the lead (by like 10 points) over the English as we start the Middle Ages. Can't wait to see what'll happen.
On another topic, I find it right that we discover the assets of Militaristic civs only now. IMO their bonuses are a lot more practical on the higher levels of play. Heck, 20 shields barracks is a very powerful thing! I'm non fan of Walls, but when I need them, thay are easy to aquire too. But the most important thing, with mostly veteran units, thanks to those barracks, and the fact that promotions are easier to get, there is a much increased chance of getting leader. Leaders are get much more powerful as you increase the level you play in. Anyway, all that to say that I had never played Militaristic civs up to this weekend, and I've played 3 games with since! I love it!
Well, more later, can't wait to ear, er read, your next comments on your Marla something game. BTW where did you get the map?
GaH
Last edited by Gamer at heart; December 11, 2001, 10:28.
Didymus - No, actually, Bismarck had wine to spare (2 or 3 extras), which was available for trade. He wanted all of what I offered, plus a tech, which I felt was unreasonable of him.
So, I cheerfully built about 50 Modern Armor, put together a few transports and some battleships, and sailed on over to Germany. It's gone now, and I'm exporting wine to Persia and China.
Vel - I really like how you're setting up Germany as a buffer state in your French game. I assume the cities you're giving them would be uselessly corrupt were you to keep them? I don't think that oscillating war is necessarily the best way to dominate the world. "Quicker, easier... more seductive" but not more powerful than the way I'd do it. O.W. will net you early gains, and maybe some leaders (enough of which will make O.W. far more powerful than my style of play, I admit). My way involves a long, slow buildup, but once I'm ready, it will all be over in a blink of history's eye. See the brief game desciption below
Mark - Congrats on your Emperor victory. It has been my experience that, once you get going, you're gonna waste the AI in the modern age. This probably has a lot to do with manipulating the tech/tax slider, along with the AI's tendency to fight Industrial Age wars against itself (many AI civs end up communist while my people are voting on the most desirable color for the spaceship parts). The AI tends to waste time researching communism and such while I'm going for computers (and thus SETI, which further increases my tech lead).
My current game, in which I have just finished butchering the Germans, has been much easier at the end than I thought it would be. My lead in tech EXPLODED toward the end of the industrial age. The Persians got into a war with Germany and the Iroquois nation that has been going on for what seems like forever, and all three ended up going Communist. The Germans had just gotten motorized transport when I rolled over them with Modern Armor. My Spaceship sits on the launchpad, lacking only the Planetary Party Lounge. The Iroquois (German allies/2nd in power on the graph) lack rubber and have some tasty spices and stinky incense which I will be taking control of shortly. Basically, I'm more than double the size of anyone else, coming up on triple. All of my gains have occurred since I got Cavalry (excepting, of course, a couple of culture defections).
I've decided that I don't like the scoring system all that much. It's similar to CIV II, in that it's basically all about size (people/cultural borders). That was fine in CIV II, but CIV III is more complex, adding resources to the mix and such, and I think that should be taken into account. If you are entirely self-sufficient (local access to all strat. and lux. resources), that should be reflected in your score. In this game, that's were the real power is. Actually owning more cities does nothing to increase that power (it will decrease it, as a matter of fact, because those cities will probably produce nothing for you, but plenty for someone else who can buy your resources).
eMarkM: Congrats on a great victory! WhoooHOooooo! And, good luck on Deity!
GaH: Marla's Map rocks! I played out a bit more of my French game on it last night....awesome! I'm continuing my experimentation with the puppet master approach, carving out a new Germanic state to serve as a bulwark against the ruskies (so far, I've taken/given to Germany a total of 4 cities (I'm keeping moscow for the moment to use as a rest and resupply point for battered units). Three more, and I'll make peace with the Rus...see if Germany can hold their at that point.
Bullied the Babylonians out of the city of Kish....it's totally useless (right in the MIDDLE of the Sahara, but it did brush up against my borders, so I took the opportunity to bully it from them. They're still showing up as Polite, even after relieving them of a city.....::shrug:: just wanted to see if I could...
All the fighting with Russia has generated yet another GL (my third this game) and I've transported him to my holdings in N. Africa to rush in the FP when I capture Thebes from Egypt (if I ultimately decide to go that route....not sure....it'd be cool and all, but I'm kinna weighing my options. What do you guys think? Egypt? Indo-China? Or...hold out till we get reliable ships to cross to the New World en mass? If so....I can always burn the GL to speed build a project....I'm only 2 turns from researching Astronomy soooo....
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
It's nice to have choices like that to make, huh? I'd advise you to hit Egypt. That way, you get your FP up and running, effectively double your empire's productivity... NOW, rather than much later. Besides, they're closer, and therefore more of a threat.
I totally agree with you 'bout warfar in more modern times (say cavalry and beyond) is 100% in the hands of the human player, and over before the poor AI knows what hit it.
In truth, I suspect I'll be doing that as well this game....it's just BEGGING to be a conquest-oriented game. However, I find the early use of Oscillating Wars soooo beneficial because of the disproportionate value of a scant handful of early game attack units. That is to say, they don't cost me much to build in terms of time/shields (and, you'll be proud of me, I didn't pop-rush any of them!), but the power they give your empire is all out of proportion to what they actually cost you. (my german attack force consisted of three warriors and an archer - 50 shields worth of production, and for that, I got a GL which allowed me to speed build the pyramids in 2000-something BC, turned the Germans into a docile puppet state of France, and nabbed a nice city in a very productive spot (Berlin).
Adding another 30 shields of production to that (another warrior and another archer), the army turned toward the Romans. Victory there netted me two techs, another nice city, and assured me that my expansion into central and eastern europe would be completely unchecked (I already had a lock on the Iberian peninsula anyway).
Not bad for less than a hundred shields invested....
-=Vel=-
EDIT: Just saw your post re: the Egyptian dilemma.....very good point! That was my gut instinct as well....I'm on good terms with the Greeks (who border them, and in fact, have had a standing RoP with both Greece and Germany for much of the game). I think it'd be very easy to form up a coalition against Egypt and take them out of commission just as soon as this business with the Russians is concluded. Even if Germany does not or cannot participate on account of the Russians, I shouldn't need any help at all....it's just another opportunity to bind myself closer to my allies in the region....and, for modern times, it'll perch me like a giant, pink vulture right there next to all those middle eastern oil fields....heh....
-V.
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
) seems to really fix you up for the mid game....overpowering? Perhaps....but it was kinna cool to finish the Pyramids in 2900-something BC!
Tweet
Comment