you put your white civ in, you put your white civ out...

debeest · September 21, 2000, 23:38

A while ago there was a discussion of the replacement of eliminated civs, and whether the original civ would ever rotate back into the mix if the other two of the same color were also eliminated. Well, right now I'm trying out the no-city challenge, only i forgot to set the rules to "no re-start" (can you say "utter dolt?"). So I wiped out Rome, and what happened? !!!! The Roman settler was instantaneously possessed by a Celtic spirit!! Right! The Roman settler didn't disappear, and a new Celtic settler spring up elsewhere; no, the settler stayed right where it was but suddenly became a Celt! So, on the same turn, I killed that one too. And what happened? A Russian settler turned up -- immediately adjacent to one of my other units! So, on the same turn, I killed that one too. And what happened then? I got the message "Russian civilization destroyed by barbarians." Hmph! I can tell when I've been insulted. And to top off the oddity, the Russians were immediately replaced by the Romans. I rotated the Romans back in ALL IN ONE TURN!

That was fun. Maybe I'm glad I'm an utter dolt.

Mercantile · September 22, 2000, 03:42

LOL thats funny ! I have never rotated them back quite like that, but i have seen that barb message before and thats what i find so funny. I had the same reaction you did, actually i think i was a little pissed off

Builder · September 22, 2000, 14:03

yep, that also happened to me few times, but I never managed to rotate in one turn.

------------------
That was another post in my long journey to PRINCE.
From now on -- > BuilderR = Builder

bpayne1 · September 22, 2000, 18:36

Iv'e gotten the barbarians message a couple times also. So I used the cheat menu to find out what was going on. To my surprise I found two Roman settles on different continents. I traded maps with one of them as soon as I could get to it. To find out if they know about each other, they did.

Dr.Oogkloot · September 22, 2000, 18:55

Are you sure the Roman settler turned into a Celt, instead of the Roman settler dying and a new Celt settler being generated in the same place?

Hueij · September 23, 2000, 19:48

Which brings us to the question: why turn off "restarting civs" ? AFAIK this will only hamper your game.

SCG · September 25, 2000, 10:04

quote:

Originally posted by Hueij on 09-23-2000 07:48 PM
Which brings us to the question: why turn off "restarting civs" ? AFAIK this will only hamper your game.

Two reasons i can think of are

1) playing a bloodlust game, since if those AI settlers die before they found a new city, the new civ never registers as having been destroyed (they never lost their last city)

2) every time a civ restarts, there is a 50% chance that they will have any tech that has been discovered. So, if you are playing on having a big tech advantage, killing off a civ could give the AI some of your prized techs.

------------------
Sleep is a luxury and I don't have Shakespeare's Theatre in my back yard.

Hueij · September 25, 2000, 15:32

SCG, you're right of course. It must be because I have been playing only OCC lately where it is important to have as many civs as possible.

debeest · September 25, 2000, 20:08

No, of course I can't be sure that the original Roman settler didn't die and get replaced by a new Celt in exactly the same square. But I am sure that the AI is SUPPOSED to look for an uninhabited area to restart the eliminated civ.

Actually, SCG, the AI settlers WERE eliminated before founding a city. Two of them in one turn, even. It still registered as elimination of the civilization.

In fact, the first time I tried no-city, when the AI eliminated both of my settlers, it considered my civilization eliminated, even though I had several NON units that could have captured AI cities.

Mercantile · September 26, 2000, 03:41

debeest, you are correct. I have noticed the same trend, if you do not have a city build with your origional none settlers, and lose both your none settlers, the game is over, unless you have captured a city

What does AFAIK mean for we who are not smart

Laertes · September 26, 2000, 04:20

AFAIK - as far as I know

Happy to oblige on the acronym front, have required the same favour many times!

SCG · September 26, 2000, 09:27

The human player has a slightly different set of rules than the AI does. Yes, if a human loses both his settlers without founding a city, he loses. The problem comes in when the AI loses any settlers it has before it founds a city. The AI is eliminated, and doesn't play on, but the counter of AI civs still in play doesn't necesarily get decremented. So for bloodlust games, even if there are no AI settlers, or AI cities around, the computer still thinks that there are AI civs out there and doesn't declare you the winner because its #of AI's counter is still >0

Its a bug that has been discussed a fair amount in these forums. I don't usually play Civ bloodlust so I'm not sure of the conditions for it to occur, but I would venture to guess that it is related to the bug that says an AI is destroyed by barbarians when you actually destroy them and the bug that asks if you want to declare war on the barbarians.

------------------
Sleep is a luxury and I don't have Shakespeare's Theatre in my back yard.