1.21f is brilliant!

Hagbart · April 19, 2002, 12:48

It's very good. If you are in doubt, patch to 1.21f.

The game seems to be very near as good as it can get now.

Now it's time to improve the map/scenario-editor so it's possible to make your own map/scenarios.
(!minimap!!!

)

asleepathewheel · April 19, 2002, 12:49

I refuse to upgrade as long as there is no minimap

Non Flammable · April 19, 2002, 12:50

My sarcasm detector is currently reading abnormal patterns, captain.

Saint Marcus · April 19, 2002, 14:46

21f is great for sure. I hugely lowered AI tech trading, and the game suddenly becomes so much more interesting. (to balance things a bit, I did give them some extra production).

MyOlde · April 19, 2002, 16:52

Saint Marcus, do you mind telling me how exactly (step by step) you lowered the tech trading? I've now used the editor exactly once -- today, to reduce corruption to 0.

Appreciate any help you can give.

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 17:24

The corruption and AI tech trade modifiers make the game playable.

Dom Pedro II · April 19, 2002, 18:32

I dunno, every game I've played so far on 1.21 has been almost completely unwinnable.

In every game, the AI starts out on good terrain while I get miles of jungles (even on Arid, cold maps) and the AI jumps off to this absolutely huge tech and city lead and I'm beaten before the ADs roll around. It's absurd.

Shadowlord · April 19, 2002, 19:11

I just started a new game with 21 and wound up near miles of jungle too.

But I haven't lost, not by a long shot. I've got only half as many cities as the biggest AI, but I have double the culture of any AI. :P

And I had far fewer cities, but the AI's cities love to revolt and join my nation...

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 19:20

Just one point, to solve this problem, choose to be the second player, (after barbarians). I think this will solve a lot of problems. I always had the same in CtP with 32 players.

Fitz · April 19, 2002, 19:20

DPII, are you sure you installed the patch correctly and aren't still using 1.17? I hate to ask such an insulting question, but yer fast tech AI sounds like the old version to me.

*Fitz loves the sound of the new patch and leaves work early to go download, install and start a new game*

See y'all on Monday to give some feedback.

Dom Pedro II · April 19, 2002, 20:04

Well, its not tech trading thats the trouble this time. Its the AI's production factor thats more of the problem. They were producing Settlers were produced probably about double the speed of mine, and wonders were being produced much faster than what I could do, and like I said before, by 500 BC the Babs built the Great Library! I never had that happen before.

By the way... whats an appropriate AItoAI tech trade rate... for the Regent level the default was 130. Was that 1.17f standard?

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 20:05

I'm not sure, I never bothered with 1.17f. Ask Mike Brietzkreuntz. He's on these forums somewhere.

Coracle · April 19, 2002, 20:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Hagbart
It's very good. If you are in doubt, patch to 1.21f.

The game seems to be very near as good as it can get now. . .

Yeah, surrrre.

ROFLOL.

Cyclotron · April 19, 2002, 20:07

Coracle, your constructive addition to this conversation is refreshing.

Hywel Dda · April 19, 2002, 20:11

It's fantastic. Just as the game was finally grinding to a halt for me, along comes a patch which changes, er, virtually nothing.

Don't get me wrong, the tweaks and the editor patches are all fine. But we need something a bit more radical now, to make this game pick up again.

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 20:12

Coracle is a real pesimist at the moment. One must at least agree that 1.21f is and improvment over 1.17f.

Tuberski · April 19, 2002, 20:12

From what I can see my opinion of this gane is about halfway between Coracle and Grrr.

Of course I haven't downloaded the patch yet.

PhoenixPhlame73 · April 19, 2002, 20:12

*runs up to Non Flammable*

The detector has gone haywire sir!!!

Coracle · April 19, 2002, 21:00

I'm still in the early stages of evaluating 1.21, although I HATE the removal of the "multi.sav" cheat.

But there are scores of things that remain highly irritating and unaddressed by 1.21 from settler diarrhea, to wandering workers, to braindead unit values, no scenario-building, and tons of other stuff.

It may be more playable now. Maybe. But lots of work is needed.

It will be "perfect". . . when pigs fly.

asleepathewheel · April 19, 2002, 21:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle
I'm still in the early stages of evaluating 1.21, although I HATE the removal of the "multi.sav" cheat.

For some reason, it does not suprise me that YOU would hate the removal of the multi cheat.

Tuberski · April 19, 2002, 21:14

They did add the ability to do the: save before battle/lose/reload/win battle.

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 21:17

For which I am very thankful.

asleepathewheel · April 19, 2002, 21:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberski
They did add the ability to do the: save before battle/lose/reload/win battle.

one cheat in, one cheat out. a wash? even though the multi is more powerful, I think the reload cheat will be used more by players than the multi was. Unless some players just turned multi on at the beginning and left it on for the whole game. (which to me would make the game incredibly boring, knowing where every enemy unit was at all times)

Spock · April 19, 2002, 21:20

My first thought was that 1.21 was more for the "modders"(which I'm not)...well I played my first full game and I give it

.
What few little tweaks they gave us made the game much more tolerable...
IMHO

Spock

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 21:22

Especially the corruption modifier. It makes the game playable for ICS freaks like myself.

Tuberski · April 19, 2002, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by asleepathewheel

one cheat in, one cheat out. a wash? even though the multi is more powerful, I think the reload cheat will be used more by players than the multi was. Unless some players just turned multi on at the beginning and left it on for the whole game. (which to me would make the game incredibly boring, knowing where every enemy unit was at all times)

I agree with you there. The few times I did use the "multi" cheat was when I had a bad starting location. I would use it to see if there was anything close that was worth settling, if there was reload and play the game, if not start a new game.

The reload cheat I used a lot in Civ and Civ 2. I actually liked the fact that I couldn't do it in Civ 3. Now that I can, it may be hard to resist.

Grrr · April 19, 2002, 21:26

I only used the reload cheat for goodie huts in Civ II. Otherwise I didn't bother.

Tuberski · April 19, 2002, 21:30

That is mostly what I used it for too. And the occasional, i can't believe I left that city undefended, so the Germans could come deep into the heart of my country and take my capital for nothing!

Thrawn05 · April 19, 2002, 21:32

I loved the fatal bombard abilities, the player editor (no more will Mao pop up somewhere else as soon as I destroy him).

asleepathewheel · April 19, 2002, 21:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberski

I agree with you there. The few times I did use the "multi" cheat was when I had a bad starting location. I would use it to see if there was anything close that was worth settling, if there was reload and play the game, if not start a new game.

The reload cheat I used a lot in Civ and Civ 2. I actually liked the fact that I couldn't do it in Civ 3. Now that I can, it may be hard to resist.

exactly, which is why its great that Firaxis put the reload in as a setup option, not as an in-game preference, (really helps with the GOTMs). I may be alone here, but I am far less likely to reload the save and skip a turn in the middle of a war just to get a slightly more favorable return on a few battles the turn later, than I am if I can save before attacking with each and every unit.
(not sure that that made sense at all)

I can't handle the temptation....sometimes