The randomness of goddy huts

[The Rusty Gamer]

Will goody huts be optional this time does anyone know?

I think it should be. Perhaps even a number of options such as: None, few, several, a lot, random.

Also, what about the randomness of goody huts? Do you think the value should be pretermined at the start so that you can't effectively "cheat" by loading a saved game and walking into the hut again if you didn't like the result the first time.

The same thing could be said concerning battles etc.

[TechWins]

I like your idea of having the option of selecting "None, few, several, a lot, random.". This would really help out MP a lot. So that obviously tells my choice, selectable at the beginning while being predertimened what the hut will consist of inside (e.g. military unit(this will change as the times change), settler, money).

It hasn't been mentioned whether or not they will be optional, this has been talked about before (then again what hasn't?).

[Urban Ranger]

Seems like it should be selectable, though I can't tell if the game would let you turn it off. Turning goodie huts off totally screws up the "expansionistic" ability.

[Alex 14]

yeah it does, they will proberly keep them.

[Adm.Naismith]

Sigh, I was accustomed to the guess of proper "mini-civ" substituting goodie huts, then I supposed that barbarians encampments would take the place of huts, now...

No clear info, but the note about special civ ability for exploring useful huts doesn't seems very good for me...

MarkG / DanQ, where is a smile with a little tear, when you really need one?

[Urban Ranger]

Regretably there don't seem to be any minor civs, however barbarian encampments are still in, no? Don't they capture cities and turn them into bases?

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
however barbarian encampments are still in, no? Don't they capture cities and turn them into bases?

May be (I didn't noticed on new screenshots, but may be I missed them). My point is I supposed they where the substitute of huts: you must invade a encampment to gain a fight or a bonus. Not so, it seems

[Laszlo]

In the One City Challenge (OCC) rules it says that you have to reload the game if your exploration leads you to aquire an 'advanced tribe'. I think there should be some option; either to turn off preselection, select what goodies you get, or to turn off the huts, although losing the huts would hurt their times...

[TechWins]

Barbarian encampments will act like one pop. size cities (when all units in city are killed the encampment will disapear). They won't have anything be building there just the Barbarian units will stay there. When your culture expands it will continue to push encampments farther out disabling encampments to have the ability to stay in your borders. It's just a more refined way of having barbarians. Instead of having random appearances of barbarians out of nowhere there will be random appearances of barbarian encampments which will contain barbarians. [Factual info]

[Buck Birdseed]

I occasionally wonder where you get your "factual info" from, TechWins. FYI, The "size 1" info is completely made up. The only reference to Barbarians so far is the following snippet from Gamespot UK:

Barbarians now work in a totally different way. In this game barbarians have cities, like all the other civs. And they originate from these cities and make raids. Sometimes building roads can be really hard because there are barbarians out there that constantly attack you. Each time you destroy a barbarian town, it will respawn itself in an area of the map that you can't currently see. So what you have to try to do is set up a situation where you can see as much of the map as possible so that you can keep pushing them back.

http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/in...086185,00.html

[The Rusty Gamer]

Originally posted by www.gamespot.co.uk
Each time you destroy a barbarian town, it will respawn itself in an area of the map that you can't currently see. So what you have to try to do is set up a situation where you can see as much of the map as possible so that you can keep pushing them back.

I love this idea! A new incentive to expand. The more you expand, the less barbarians. Yes!

[The Rusty Gamer]

Ok, who's the wise guy who voted for "What the hell are you on about?"? You realise, of course, that if you don't understand this simple poll then you're even less capable of comprehending the complexities of a game like Civ3.

Makes me wonder what you're doing in these forums in the first place!

[Ecthy]

I voted for the first option...now I realize it allows even more cheating ,because people will just walk around huts... well, if they do it like in Master of Magic, there will be a reward connected with EVERY hut, and just the barbarian resistance will be differently strong or just not there

[SerapisIV]

Sorry, mouse slipped

[Ecthy]

oh sorry, same here

[Brent]

I reallyreally love huts. If they are optional, which wouldn't bother me, I might always put them in anyway. A pregame option should be whether they are determined in the beginning of the game or when you enter them. You should also be able to set how often they give you good things, anywhere from 0% to 100%, although I will always choose 100%. Computer players should never enter huts, or at least that should be an option. Maybe you can also specifically set what kinds of huts will be in the game. You also should be able to set whether the game decides what you get in your favor, to your detriment, or neutrally, and whether the current situation should be considered by the computer, either positively or negatively. You should be able to set the frequency of huts from none to one in every 9 spaces. There should be some never before seen categories of hut results. There should be sea hut equivalents which do things like tidal waves or abandoned ships, or these effects should be otherwise random. Siome huts should be sacred burial grounds like in Colonization. Maybe let huts give you just about any sort of unit. Maybe they can be alien spacecraft, or those can be otherwise discovered randomly. Maybe have huts look different from eachother, giving you a vague notion of what's in them.

[rah]

I like predetermined. If people want to cheat and bypass them, that's their decision and if it's an SP game, who cares. But if they later brag about how great they are and I see a saved file with unopened huts, I'll know they did it. As it is now, it's harder to tell.

RAH
And if they aren't predetermined it's easier to take advantage of it. If they are, you don't get a chance for something good, you must ignore it. Or wait to open them with tanks later in the game.

[Slax]

The best Goody hut gifts should be awarded after defeating some defending unit(s). I suppose the unit(s) would carry the gift with them if they move.

[Warm Beer]

There is one more reference to barbarian villages: under the benefits for being an "Expansionist" Civ, "Better stuff from barbarian villages" is listed. What ever that means...

I voted for Random, but the more I think about it predetermined seems like a lot better choice... I am too eager to vote in polls, shoulda read the posts first.

[The Rusty Gamer]

Perhaps a way to stop players avoiding huts is to have all or at least some of them hidden so you stumble upon them unexpectedly.
Hmmm...I may have to set up a new poll.

[star mouse]

Originally posted by Snapcase
Barbarians now work in a totally different way. In this game barbarians have cities, like all the other civs. And they originate from these cities and make raids. Sometimes building roads can be really hard because there are barbarians out there that constantly attack you. Each time you destroy a barbarian town, it will respawn itself in an area of the map that you can't currently see. So what you have to try to do is set up a situation where you can see as much of the map as possible so that you can keep pushing them back.

Originally posted by Russell
I love this idea! A new incentive to expand. The more you expand, the less barbarians. Yes!

Expanding to reduce barbarians also worked in CIV2 and CTP/CTP2. As my sig suggests, I like to play with lots of barbarians. I have discovered that barbarians never spawn in an area of the map that's within a city radius. Thus, barbarians spawn less frequently as the map becomes covered in cities. I've seen barbarians spawn in the only land square for miles around that's not in a city radius.

Barbarians may be evil, but they can be a good rort, too. If you have a diplomat and some cash, you can bribe a barbarian. This can be a good way of getting troop types you haven't researched yet, tho I don't remember for sure if this workd in CIV2/CTP/CTP2. Don't forget the gold you get for capturing the leader, too!

[tniem]

Originally posted by star mouse
If you have a diplomat and some cash, you can bribe a barbarian. This can be a good way of getting troop types you haven't researched yet,

When have you ever allowed the Barbarians to be more advanced than you?

[The Rusty Gamer]

I'm not sure but I had the impression that the AI civs don't get goody huts in Civ1, Civ2, Alpha Centauri, or even Colonization (lost cities), though they do in CTP2. Or is it my imigination?

[Tiberius]

I'm not sure but I had the impression that the AI civs don't get goody huts in Civ1, Civ2

Oh, they did. I saw not once when an AI unit appeared near a hut (before I get there ) and the very next turn he was surrounded by barbarians. This made me so happy

[korn469]

Warm Beer is right, in the developer update section of civ3.com on the civ specific abilities found here it says better stuff from barbarian villages...so will they spawn barbarian units on a regular basis is the first question that comes to mind for me, or will they just act like goodie huts in civ2?

and in SMAC the ai does explore pods...just not as actively as a human though

[star mouse]

Originally posted by tniem

When have you ever allowed the Barbarians to be more advanced than you?

It's not unusual for barbarians in CIV2 to have units you don't have yet. I've seen them with archers before I have researched archers, knights before I have researched knights, cannon before I have researched cannon. However, it seems that barbarians never have troop types that you can't research.

And yes, bribing barbarians in CIV2 is possible. Cheap, too.

[JellyDonut]

I voted for the second option. Why? Because having the contents of a hut at the beginning of a game does not relieve the problem of cheating. If you get something bad from a hut, reload and don't enter the hut. An AI civ gets whatever bad thing was in there, or else nobody does. Secondly, it disrupts OCC. If you get an advanced tribe (if they even have them), you can't get anything from the hut. And if the player wants to reload and get something better, so be it. That player will *know* he cheated, and that should be enough to know that s/he is not good enough to play without petty cheating. Seriously, how bad is a barbarian archer. They suck at fighting and even if they win a battle, the next unit to come along will usually kill it. Of course, this whole poll assumes that goody huts will work like they do in Civ 2. I suspect they contain different things than Civ 2 huts. Maybe barbarians don't come out of goody huts, only encampments? Or maybe you can turn down an advanced tribe (like you can turn down a city that's revolted from another civ ).

[El hidalgo]

I hate goody huts, so optional works for me. I'd turn them off if I could or I would restrict what can be in them. I really hate it when the computer gets an advanced tribe/free city way far away from all its other cities -- especially if it's in an area I wanted to expand into. I also hate it when I get a stupid advanced tribe. I can place my own cities, thank you. At least don't let huts contain advanced tribes, or allow them to be disabled. In Civ 3 that could really screw up your civ borders, I would imagine. And what if you find an advanced tribe inside another civ's borders? Building a city inside another civ's borders is an act of war, so I suppose you'd automatically be at war because of a stupid goody hut. Just say no to advanced tribes!

[Grumbold]

I'd like to see the goody hut system overhauled. CtP2 had preset goody huts and they never bothered me. I'd certainly be in favour of a system which prevented any player deriving too many advantages from hut exploration. Getting dozens of tech upgrades through the huts rather puts the scientific bonus to shame. The use of gold support will hopefully already stop the discovery of unsupported armies with no home city. On the opposite side, revealing Ghengis Khan and his 8 unit army was always a bit too much of a penalty

[Cookie Monster]

I think the huts should be made optional. I really don't care to use them as I enjoy the challenge of trying to play catch up with the other civs.

Goody huts give you a random chance to catch up or pull away from other civs.


Just my humble opinion though.......