should i update to 1.17f?

senor_paul · April 9, 2002, 07:18

Just a quick question really: I'm currently using 1.16 but was going to update to 1.17. As keen as I am to do this, I do realise that there seems to be almost as many problems with the new version (such as A.I tech trading) as with the old. So basically, should i change?

- Paulw

kailhun · April 9, 2002, 08:57

It's possible that switching to 1.17 makes for a subtlely new game. So switching for that reason might be interesting.
I have gotten so used to the 'j' command that I don't think I will switch back to 1.16.

But I've only played one game under 1.17, so changes I've experienced could simply be due to landmass, chosen ai-civs, chosen civ and the way the game happened to develop now.

Should you switch? Might as well, I suppose.

Robert

PatLasch · April 9, 2002, 09:15

If I were you, I'd almost wait for the next patch. It should be out sometime soon, if the past is any indication.

dojoboy · April 9, 2002, 09:31

I recommend waiting for the next patch. It will include all the things worth keeping from 1.17. I've stayed w/ 1.16 myself. Of course, if you want to play any GOTM (Civfanatics) or tourneys (Apolyton), you need to upgrade. I believe.

AJ Corp. The FAIR · April 9, 2002, 10:57

Do you care about playing the official version?
Do you care about being able to fully understand the posts concerning the official version (most are)?

Then you should upgrade.

Always.

It might not be flawless, but it's the right path to walk ...

AJ

notyoueither · April 9, 2002, 12:46

I do not see the tech trading as a problem. Aggressive tech trading is an excellent strategy for the human to follow. I did it all the time. I am not complaining that the AI now does it.

I have not seen the AI being unwilling to sell me tech. Sorry. Some others think they are being persecuted from time to time. I have not yet had that feeling.

The AI trading tech during your turn in 1.16f. Now that's a problem!

Overall I give 1.17f

ixnay · April 9, 2002, 12:54

I'd reccomend getting 1.17. Agressive tech trading isn't that big a deal for me, so I think it fixes more problems than it creates.

Spiffor · April 9, 2002, 13:27

I think you should upgrade :
AI tech trading makes the game more challenging (although you might sometimes feel duped when you're the only one not having a certain tech)
Stacking movement is a pleasure
Good automated workers is really worth it if you play on any map larger than standard.
Slightly reduced corruption and a way to completely avoid cultural reversion fix some former flaws

PerpetualNewbie · April 9, 2002, 14:01

Why not? The only "downside" I know is that buying tech is generally better than researching it at Monarch (and higher). That just means you have to leave the mindset of science until later. And if for some reason you don't feel like buying it, or they won't sell, by being the last one to research it, it is pretty easy to get in 4 turns.

AJ points out how important it is to be talking apples and apples on the board. Discussing particulars of strategy and tactics is pretty meaningless if you are running an outdated or heavily modded game...

DrSpike · April 9, 2002, 17:57

Yeah, 1.17f all the way. It's nearly always best to buy techs for most of the game at the higher levels, which reduces strategic depth, but overall it's better.

Shadowlord · April 9, 2002, 19:09

I also concur that upgrading to 1.17 is the way to go.

Coracle · April 9, 2002, 19:18

Of course I Edited the dumb mod, especially unit values and resource allocation. After that I would try each version.

1.17 is fine if you like dealing with other civs whose leaders are extortionate psychos and a "Human vs the World" game.

I went back to 1.16 which I prefered even without stack movement - but it crashed.

I've stopped playing Civ III as I wait for a decent playable mod - the kind that SHOULD have come with the game in Niovember, especially at fifty dollars a pop.