Rules Changes

[okblacke]

Greetings Apolytoners,

I'm a long-time intermittent lurker here, having first stumbled across 'poly back in (I think) 1998. Never posted, never contributed, never got involved, primarily because Civ is the kind of game that Eats Your Life.

But now, in an effort to avoid productive work, and to have my life eaten, I figured I'd introduce myself and write a few random notes.

First of all, Conquests rocks, bugs and all. A good update to Civ takes the same underlying mechanics and makes you rethink everything. I skipped PTW (perhaps I shouldn't have) so there's lots of new stuff here for me.

I am a bit miffed, however, at the developers not releasing a list of rules changes. The changes in this thing are huge and not releasing them smacks of fear that the community will find some unanticipated exploited and void the whole game.

No claims to being an expert, by the way. I play on Regent, generally. Pre-Conquests, I was recently having immense trouble with playing the Americans and switched down to level 2--and still wasn't happy with my results. And I've played plenty on level 1. (I don't any more because I have a seven year old friend who can win pretty regularly on it. And for those who argue that the leap between Monarch and Emporer is too much, he and I both agree the jump between Chieftan and Warlord is too much. )

Generally, I play all random settings at a difficulty level, and when I find that I'm beating it too easily, I push the difficulty up one. If I find a combination that "beats me", I'll restart several times to see if I can win on that start. If I can't, I'll lower the difficulty and concentrate on that combo (as with Americans, and prior to that Babylon, which I was more successful at).

In older Civs, I "turtled". In most strategy games I "boom". What I like about Civ 3 in particular is that it makes me change my playstyle. It can hurt, but it challenges and improves me.

I recently rolled a 3BYO standard map, Mongols--the antithesis of my playing style--and it was like a whole new game. I scored Temple of Artemis, which works so well with raiding Keshiks, it's scary. (I played this pre-patch, so it wiped out all my pre-built Temples--with the new patch it doesn't!) Keshiks may not be uber-troops, but they retained a fair amount of use into modern times on this mountainous map.

Fascism is weird. Attack all you want, your people don't care. Corruption was out-of-control, but it seems to be in Conquests, in general--about 1/3rd total production. I couldn't stay in Fascism, though, because Democracy made for dramatic production increase--well worth the government change.

The FP: I wish it worked the way it used to, but I'd settle for it working in some explicable fashion. I patched the above Mongol game and my corruption didn't seem to change at all, except to be redistributed in a fashion I couldn't fathom.

I'm currently playing a (randomly selected) 3B tiny sorta-island map as (randomly selected) Russians and victory seems assured (late middle-ages and I've driven the Incans and the Mayans off my continent and to tiny islands. (Hey, the Mayans started it, and after I'd wiped them out and captured Zeus, Artemis, and finished the Knights Templar, it seemed silly to stop fighting. Plus, war weariness loses a lot of its edge when you're capturing the Oracle, the Hanging Gardens, and Leo's from those snooty Incans). It's now down to whether I load up some galleys full of Cossacks to attack the Americans on their own turf, or turtle up and rush for refining so I can figure out where the oil is. Since I tend to hate naval stuff in Civ, I'll probably go into hiding for now.

Again, the cool thing here is that I'm playing entirely "against type". Civ 3 dares you to be inflexible.

Also, this is the first game I've played in quite a few months where I've turned off the "manage city moods". I'm shocked at how poor the governors are at placing workers. I really don't understand: given a square that produces 1 food and 1 shield, and another that gives 2 food, 2 shields and 2 commerce, why would the governor ever pick the former?

I do get disorder now. The only way I can think of to prevent it is to end every turn by going through each city and double-clicking on it to see if the governor puts up any extra entertainers.

Along those same lines, I read a combat-type strategy that said that using the governors to manage moods was more efficient than using the luxury slider. I think Aeson here made the point that the luxury slider encourages workers whereas entertainers produce nothing. (This is something I think should be documented: if you have one troublesome city, boosting luxuries for your whole civ might be wasteful; but at what point do entertainers become more wasteful?)

Since there's no water on my island, I've sidestepped the issue of mining-vs-irrigation. Everything's a mine, though I suppose that will/should change after electricity.

I notice that one of the requirements for higher level play is to turn off governor/worker automation completely--something I'm not sure I'm willing to do yet--but is there some point at which the experts go for the automation? I mean, at the point where my workers had developed everything that was currently being worked on, should I have just added them back in to the city? (I tend to keep workers forever: There's nothing cooler than improving cities you've just captured.)

OK, enough rambling. Just "Hi" and what do you think?

[vmxa1]

Hi indeed.
As was mentioned in the review of Americans, they were hard hit by the C3C changes. The smaller the map the more apparent the reduction of the industry trait hurts them.

I never automate workers, if the game is at the point where I could, why not stop, you have won.

I think your plan to master or beat a given combination of settings is a good way to learn the game.

Good luck.

[Inverse Icarus]

i will sometimes set cities to have managed moods when i grow too weary to look at them. it works awesomely in conquered lands, it automatically adjusts for rebellion recalculations.

[Jeem]

And for those who argue that the leap between Monarch and Emporer is too much, he and I both agree the jump between Chieftan and Warlord is too much. )

Heh. It might well be quite a step up - I dunno as I've never tried!

Also, this is the first game I've played in quite a few months where I've turned off the "manage city moods". I'm shocked at how poor the governors are at placing workers. I really don't understand: given a square that produces 1 food and 1 shield, and another that gives 2 food, 2 shields and 2 commerce, why would the governor ever pick the former?

Never had that. Governers usually pick the most productive squares depending on your choice - food, production or commerce. They will generally default to a more balanced square rather than one that is lacking though - so a mined hill with iron on it will only be chosen if you have a decent food surplus (3+ at least) for the rest of the city. The governers will always attempt to grow the city, regardless of whether you tell them to go for production mostly. Pretty annoying, but you get to the stage where you can predict it happening.

I do get disorder now. The only way I can think of to prevent it is to end every turn by going through each city and double-clicking on it to see if the governor puts up any extra entertainers.

It's a total pain in the arse. I tried it for a few games but I've gotten too used to the happiness being sorted out for me. Managing moods is one level of micromanagement I'm not willing to go to. It's fine with small empires but with 20+ cities it begins to detract from the pace of the game.

Along those same lines, I read a combat-type strategy that said that using the governors to manage moods was more efficient than using the luxury slider. I think Aeson here made the point that the luxury slider encourages workers whereas entertainers produce nothing. (This is something I think should be documented: if you have one troublesome city, boosting luxuries for your whole civ might be wasteful; but at what point do entertainers become more wasteful?)

Well, I'm using luxuries a bit more. I figured that I should at least attempt to improve my game and this seems like the easiest way to do it. As a general rule, the more cities you have that benefit from luxuries, the better. Usually it'll only be your capital and close-by food rich cities that benefit, and those outlying one's will suffer. However, the close cities are the only ones that really matter as corruption renders outlying cities practically useless anyway (depending on level). On Regent level, it's unlikely that you should really need to use luxuries a lot.

I notice that one of the requirements for higher level play is to turn off governor/worker automation completely--something I'm not sure I'm willing to do yet--but is there some point at which the experts go for the automation? I mean, at the point where my workers had developed everything that was currently being worked on, should I have just added them back in to the city? (I tend to keep workers forever: There's nothing cooler than improving cities you've just captured.)

I only automate workers as soon as I've researched Sanitation and am starting to build hospitals everywhere. I only do it because I'm too lazy to irrigate lands I've already mined. If you do this, your cities will end up 'balanced' but lacking specialisation. You could try out the automate - this city only button to stop workers from demolishing your mines etc. As a general rule, automated workers are absolutely terrible and have no idea. The next time you start a game, watch out for a worker automating the wrong square right at the start - efficiently done, you would usually road then mine a grassland/shield square on a river first (assuming no cattle nearby). Automated workers will just start working the square they start on, unless there is a resource nearby. More often than not, they'll do the wrong thing too (automated workers will mine a cattle on a plains under a despotism (gaining nothing until monarchy/republic), whereas irrigating it will get +1 food from the square). If you want to step up a few levels, I'd recommend taking control of your workers first. In saying that, my best mate automates his workers and he plays on Emperor like me. He must just be lucky - he certainly seems to get tons of luxuries for sure.

[Kuciwalker]

But now, in an effort to avoid productive work, and to have my life eaten, I figured I'd introduce myself and write a few random notes.

Welcome to Apolyton! If this is your goal, join the OTF

[Kuciwalker]

I do get disorder now. The only way I can think of to prevent it is to end every turn by going through each city and double-clicking on it to see if the governor puts up any extra entertainers.

Right-click on a city, select "Contact Governor", and set "Manage citizen moods" to "yes" for "all cities".

[Cerbykins]

The only reason that comes to mind as to why the governor would work the wrong squares is that a tile got changed and it hasn't noticed yet. Still, the governor AI - for citizen moods - is almost beyond reproach, while the worker AI deserves to be shot for time-wasting

Still, now I have a new tile strat - or rather, mines by the gazillion

Even with hospitals comng through, I don't feel incrdeibly inclined to change all those grasslands...the extra resources have basically revolutionised my game. All the medi wonders I never even got a sniff at before now are within reach - military is bigger - everything is ready faster. It even sometimes becomes possible to have infrastructure AND military, rather than put off the harder parts of the infrastructure just to build units.

Anyway, being like you - a browser-turner-poster - good luck

Oh, and I do normally get loads of luxuries, but mainly because I beat them out of the AI

[Inverse Icarus]

if you click a city and tell the govnors to manage city moods for all cities EACH TURN, it will work the best tiles, and recalculate the needed entertainers.

it's still work, but it beats checking every city.

my only problem is that i sometimes like to micromanage key cities, and that makes it a ***** to "blanket rule" the dozens of others.

[Cerbykins]

I remain unconvinced

Checking up on the governor turnly, kinda defeats the avoidance of micromanagement. A sort-of schizophrenia (you want to avoid it, but you don't)
But then, I play on huge maps, so when I think 'checking up on cities'...it's not a nice thought

[UnityScoutChopper]

With the right tools, it's easy to avoid civil disorder without using governors. The real trouble with determining which cities will enter disorder lies in just distinguishing them, because the citizens graphics are really unclear. And solving that is as easy as going to the downloads section of this site and downloading one of the two happy-faces citizen mods that have been created -- suddenly you'll be able to accurately study a screen or two of citizens on the F1 screen per minute.

I deleted my copy of the mod when upgrading to C3C, and it's so annoying to play without it, I'm gonna go tonight and stuff it down my 56K modem one more time.

USC

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
if you click a city and tell the govnors to manage city moods for all cities EACH TURN, it will work the best tiles, and recalculate the needed entertainers.

it's still work, but it beats checking every city.

my only problem is that i sometimes like to micromanage key cities, and that makes it a ***** to "blanket rule" the dozens of others.

That's weird, doing it once worked for me.

[Cerbykins]

Of those who manage their own cities...is there any marked improvement over letting the governor do moods only? Has your game become MUCH better because of it? (not sarcasm, simple evaluation of the worth of taking over vs paranoia against AI )

[Kuciwalker]

I used to do it myself until I noticed the governor did it better

[Catt]

In PTW I frequently let the AI manage moods for most cities beyond the initial REX (when I would want to carefully micromanage citizen assignments turn to turn) with manual management in only a few cities. In C3C, I really think you give up a lot by allowing the AI to manage moods. It's not just citizen-tile allocations, it is that the AI governor does not seem to use scientists and taxmen unless the city in question is fully happy.

The new scientists and taxmen are turbo-charged, and the AI will just default to entertainers. Even for a player who doesn't make use of the entertainment slider much, the AI managing moods will give away a lot of productivity. Particularly galling is when a city has, for example, 2 happy citizens and 2 unhappy citizens -- at the next pop growth, the AI will create an entertainer when a scientist or taxman will still leave the city at 2H and 2U, i.e., not rioting -- but instead of a completely wasted citizen (entertainer), you could be generating 3 beakers or 2 gold to taxes -- scientists in particular can be huge in the early game since one single scientist could double a town's science output in the time of rampant despot corruption and a carefully managed science slider. I don't have a ready save, but in several instances I have compared late ancient age empires with manage moods on versus manual allocation of citizens -- with a science slider maxed out as much as the empire can tolerate, I've still seen research times drop precipitously just by getting rid of AI entertainers in favor of human scientists.

City management can be painful if you're not inclined to that level of management, but the rewards in C3C are so significantly strengthened that it is too painful for me (I don't relish a lot of micromanagement) to ignore the potential benefits. I occasionally lose a city to a one-turn riot because I am unwilling to check every city each turn and I might miss a pending riot on the F1 screen (even with the "smiley face" graphics mods for C3C) but even that occasional riot doesn't offset the gains to be had by sloppy manual management.

Catt

[notyoueither]

When it matters, I gain a lot by managing everything myself. This needs one of two things to go with it; either reload when a riot errupts at a very bad time in a very bad place (I used to do this) or check F1 at the end of every turn to catch the riots before they break out (I prefer this now to reloading).

Also, F1 helps catch new specialists in larger cities and get them changed to the most desirable type, sooner.

[Antrine]

I always manage everything and when a city riots I get pissed because it is my fault for my attention is usually off somewhere else expanding or fighting. I like the smoke, however more fire with screams and threats would be nice for to get my attention better.

notyoueither, thanks that for F1 tip, I used hotkeys better in Civ ll. In Civ lll the graphics are more spell-binding and I just truck on.

[Cerbykins]

Well...the only time I see specialists pop up (in the pre-hospital era) is if there's a disorder risk. Which suggests I'm messing up not by letting mood management take place, but rather by actually getting into a mess where extra entertainment has NOT yet been provided.

No, if anything, the specialists I see are taxmen and scientists. Police and civil engineers never come up. Having compared my gains from them with the gains from the usual specialists the AI picked...I can see why now!

Yet again though, I suppose this brings up the issue of my warmongering. By doing this, I procure the lux - and so, never face a bunch of entertainers.

Without a doubt though, I can certainly agree with one thing - entertainers are almost ALWAYS a waste, and I can't think when I'd want them INSTEAD of something else...

[Catt]

Originally posted by Cerbykins
Well...the only time I see specialists pop up (in the pre-hospital era) is if there's a disorder risk.

I believe that the AI governor will only go to specialists if there is in fact a disorder risk -- otherwise it will (rightly, in the vast majority of circumstances) favor allowing a newborn working citizen to work a tile and produce food, shields, and gold. The problem, to the extent that there is a problem, is most apparent in the early game. In the example I gave above, if the fifth citizen becomes an entertainer, the town now has 2H, 1C, 1U and an entertainer. If instead it were 2H, 2U, and a scientist, the city still would not riot but would be contributing 3 extra beakers towards science. Three extra beakers towards an ancient age tech can frequently shorten research time a turn or two -- 3 extra beakers from each of 5 cities can really shorten research times. With an AI governor, you get virtually no benefit from an entertainer; without the governor, you can generate substantial benefit. There may well be times when an entertainer is needed and appropriate - but the AI governor can't distinguish those times from times where a scientist or taxman would be more advantageous.

The big question for the individual player seems to me to be -- will I have more fun with governors on, knowing I may be missing some opportunity? or will I have more fun managing citizens and feeling I'm taking advantage of opportunities presented?

Catt

[Bonaparte]

Never used the Governer before, but do so now to manage moods...it was a pain having to check manually.

I have noticed; however, that sometimes cities will still go into disorder even when the Governer is being used to manage moods, but this doesn't happen to often.

[Kuciwalker]

I think that happens at times when the Governor can't do anything - like when an enemy unit goes into the city radius.

[thorpey]

Originally posted by Bonaparte
Never used the Governer before, but do so now to manage moods...it was a pain having to check manually.

I have noticed; however, that sometimes cities will still go into disorder even when the Governer is being used to manage moods, but this doesn't happen to often.

Personally, I just don't trust the governor. This has nothing at all to
do with whether or not the governor does a good job or not.

I think I'm a micromanagement junkie. Add the new specialiests you
get in C3C and I can make significant improvements to my empire by spending a little time on it. I do a much better job than the AI because the AI is 'assuming' and I'm not.

Anyway, that's the way I like to play it, but I can see how people would get frustrated with micromanagement when there's a nice big war to fight.

[okblacke]

Originally posted by skywalker

Quote:

But now, in an effort to avoid productive work, and to have my life eaten, I figured I'd introduce myself and write a few random notes.

Welcome to Apolyton! If this is your goal, join the OTF

Assuming "OTF" stands for "off-topic forum", I think I'd be better off jumping off a cliff.



[ok]

[okblacke]

Originally posted by skywalker
Right-click on a city, select "Contact Governor", and set "Manage citizen moods" to "yes" for "all cities".

Buit then you have to turn it off when you move the workers around. I thought that was the whole point of managing your pop.

Every turn?

I feel for the Civ developers, though: If they really got good at having the AI micromanage, what game would be left?



[ok]

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by okblacke


Assuming "OTF" stands for "off-topic forum", I think I'd be better off jumping off a cliff.



[ok]

Right on both counts

[Bonaparte]

Originally posted by thorpey
Personally, I just don't trust the governor. This has nothing at all to
do with whether or not the governor does a good job or not.

I think I'm a micromanagement junkie. Add the new specialiests you
get in C3C and I can make significant improvements to my empire by spending a little time on it. I do a much better job than the AI because the AI is 'assuming' and I'm not.

I would perfer not to use the Governer; however, I play on huge maps and easily end up with 200+ cities about 75% thru the game...so it's way to time consuming. Yeah, I know that the specialist could really help a lot, because frankly it has always ticked me off to find that it will take 160 turns to make a Cathedral in some of my cities...the specialist could at least reduce that amount, but my civs are usually rich so I'll end up buying it when its down to like 140 turns to go. I think I might make a scenario that uses accelerated production, but I'll double the research times...then maybe I won't see numbers like 160 and the civs won't fly thru the tech tree to quickly, since I perfer longer games.

[Cerbykins]

I don't trust the governor either - or in fact anyone else's decisions, or even MINE - hence I make use of theis paranoia to review and RE-review everthing over and over until I'm certain everything is fine

As to the idea of the governor messing up in the early game, this isn't something I notice a lot, probably through playing too low a difficulty (if Monarch can be considered 'way too low' ) Loks like an upcoming problem, so thanks for the heads-up