RCP and Conquests

conmcb25 · November 7, 2003, 01:37

First of all I may not be corect here but...

1. I think RCP may still work in Conquests

2. Playing the INCA, still in Despotism.

3. 5 cities 4 or 4.5 from the Capitol

4. 4/4.5 ring only has a single lost sheild in each city.

5 cities and production

4 sheilds 1 lost
3 sheilds 1 lost
3 sheilds 1 lost
2 sheilds 1 lost
1 sheilds 1 lost

Capitol is pumping out 9 sheilds and no loss

Now maybe this isn't enough cities to test, Im not sure.

Im posting this because I heard a rumor RCP was going away in Conquests.

MrWhereItsAt · November 7, 2003, 07:37

The best way to try it is to make up a very artificial scenario.

Using the editor, make an all-grass (or anything) island large enough to set up a capital and several cities equidistant from each other. Mod the terrain to give you the max shields it can (25 IIRC). Then ensure each city has about 4 pop. Save this scenarios and play it - check the waste/corruption levels in each city. If you get the same waste/corruption at the same distance in each direction (out of 4x25 shields), then you should be able to narrow down the percentage loss to the nearest percent in all cases. If they are the same, then Bob's your uncle and RCP works, at least to within 1%. Further such testing would be needed to be sure, for example founding the cities at different times to test whether city age is a new factor in corruption/waste, but you get the idea.

But I'm probably going to have to wait for things like this, as I'm sure everyone who actually has it is far too busy to do something obsessive and anal like this.

conmcb25 · November 7, 2003, 08:12

Yes, I was planning this but the lack of corruption in those first cities was kind of interesting.

I dont know when Ill get a chance to do but I plan to.

Thanks

MWIA

statusperfect · November 7, 2003, 10:36

the anal nitpicker club strikes back

OPD · November 7, 2003, 11:12

In the chat it was stated that when 2 cities are built at the same distance, order of founding effects rank corruption.

Also of interest, although I'm not sure if it's true or not, is that rank and distance corruption are now terrain specific!!! ie. there being a load of mountains between a city and the capital increases the corruption. If it is true then it's a very nice alteration, in RL corruption was dependant on how long it takes to travel/send messages.

Like the example of the far eastern Russian cities where the governor could pretty much do what he liked, as it would take 3 months for any communications to arrive from the capital.

alexman · November 7, 2003, 11:33

Quote:

Originally posted by conmcb25
5 cities and production

4 sheilds 1 lost
3 sheilds 1 lost
3 sheilds 1 lost
2 sheilds 1 lost
1 sheilds 1 lost

Actually, just from that information, you can see that RCP is gone. The first city in your list has 20% corruption, while the last one has 50% corruption.

FrustratedPoet · November 7, 2003, 11:41

Another triumph for elementry school arithmatic!

conmcb25 · November 7, 2003, 11:47

Gee thanks guys! ACK!

My point being that even the large production city is only losing one sheild in despostism. And NO cities are losing more than one.

I just included the data because again I am unsure of the results.

Back to the drawing board.

axelman as the reigning corruption nazi are you going to take a look at this as well?

alexman · November 7, 2003, 12:02

The RCP bug means that all cities at the same distance from your palace have the same corruption, which is clearly not the case in your example.

The fact that you have less corruption than you expected is another story. I think they have increased the OCN for all map sizes, and some scenarios (like the Age of Discovery) have reduced corruption compared to the epic game.

When I get conquests (Amazon finally shows my order as shipped), I plan to do some quick tests to figure out any changes, but I don't expect to find many (besides the effect of the new police specialists).

alva · November 7, 2003, 12:08

Quote:

I think they have increased the OCN for all map sizes

they have upped the OCN and toned down corruption in general.

alexman · November 7, 2003, 12:11

I would be surprised if the comments by Firaxis that they have toned down corruption in general is anything more than an OCN increase, but we'll see...

alva · November 7, 2003, 12:25

You could be right Alex, it was the first line that threw me off, well, you can't blame me for it, can you.

Quote:

[17:38] <+Gobi> Dave is telling stories here ... corruption in general has been reduced
[17:38] <+Gobi> The optimal number of cities has been bumped up to lessen it

Cookie Monster · November 7, 2003, 12:36

In my standard game (C3C) that I started I've placed my cities in both an RCP/OCP style and haven't been plauged by vicious corruption. However I can positively recall that some of my cities that were close to my capital have slightly different corruption than other similiarly distanced cities.

Yahweh Sabaoth · November 7, 2003, 13:51

Hm. This is going to have me thinking twice about my cherished commercial trait. Especially with policemen or civil engineers or whatever they're calling coming later in the game, when my empire is typically very large and corruption is becoming a problem (especially in "the provinces"

)

bongo · November 10, 2003, 04:44

It would be very nice if we finally could do something about those über-corrupt cities...

That example isn't enough to show us how they dealt with the RCP-bug (RCP is still useful for defence pusposes though)

To eliminate the RCP-bug all they have to do is to make sure two cities never have the same rank. The easy way is to give the oldest city the best rank, the 'best' solution is to give the most productive city the best rank.

OT: Where do ARNA(Anal Retentive Nitpickers Anonymous) hold their meetings?

alexman · November 11, 2003, 14:53

Okay, my copy of the game finally arrived (never again going through Amazon).

From some initial tests it looks like RCP was fixed in a very strange way: all cities in the ring still get the same rank, only this time it's the worst rank instead of the best! So basically you have to avoid placing your cities in a ring now?

Also, the FP seems to increase OCN corruption now!
WTF?

Still testing for exact numbers...

Catt · November 11, 2003, 15:00

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Okay, my copy of the game finally arrived (never again going through Amazon).

From some initial tests it looks like RCP was fixed in a very strange way: all cities in the ring still get the same rank, only this time it's the worst rank instead of the best!

So basically you have to avoid placing your cities in a ring now?

Also, the FP seems to increase OCN corruption now!
WTF?

Still testing for exact numbers...

Please do test -- I am experiencing what I believe is much higher corruption than in PTW, even though I know they increased the OCN and theoretically lowered corruption in the game. I had assumed that I and others "inadvertantly enjoyed" limited RCP effects in prior versions and that the RCP fix accounted for my anecdotal view (from one game

) that I was experiencing much greater corruption than expected. If the RCP "fix" and / or FP bug accounts for it, well that's another kettle of fish . . .

Catt

DrSpike · November 11, 2003, 15:35

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Okay, my copy of the game finally arrived (never again going through Amazon).

From some initial tests it looks like RCP was fixed in a very strange way: all cities in the ring still get the same rank, only this time it's the worst rank instead of the best! So basically you have to avoid placing your cities in a ring now?

Also, the FP seems to increase OCN corruption now!
WTF?

Still testing for exact numbers...

Mine arrives tomorrow, at least I hope it does.

I was hoping you'd do all the hard work again fleshing out the formulae. However, it pains me to see that they may have jumped from one set of flawed rank calculations to another. Keep us posted.

alexman · November 11, 2003, 16:36

I posted my findings in the Conquests forum.
Crazy stuff!

DrSpike · November 11, 2003, 19:42

I am not so bothered that my copy isn't here now............man that is dumb.

vmxa1 · November 11, 2003, 20:40

Thanks for the work alexman, it is depressing none the less.

alva · November 12, 2003, 08:39

Great work Alex

, this took you what? a full day to discover?

You are getting slow in your old age, aren't you.