Corruption.. the bane of Utopia

Pulsatingpecs · November 7, 2002, 23:26

Does anyone have any opinions on Corruption and waste? Have they changed the flavour of Civ?

Many things have changed since Civ2, giving the game more dimensions of play, but ultimately i think the game still boils down to only two ways of winning when playing the huge map. Space Race and Cultural. Diplomatic vitory is a farce no matter what map size and my fave, Conquest is still there but it’s just not as fun. Not being able to put new cities where once stood large ones makes destruction pointless. Why wipe out the other civs nowadays? It’s not worth it… the land gain is of no use. So Conquest now is merely a side thing to do…

Corruption and waste has made the cities that far from the capital too hard to UTOPIAize, I will still go about and destroy the other civs. But now there will be huge tracts of railroaded land abound with no-one to populate it, even though my cities burst at the seams….

Some may say this is to make the game more “realistic”… nothing else is in the game is so what goes? I mean I love Civ3, as with the other Civs but man there should have been an option to turn off Corruption/Waste due to Distance… But alas this is not UTOPIA.

Cyclotron · November 8, 2002, 00:19

Well, I disagree with you on the winning route issue... I go for domination, conquest, cultural, and space race. I don't really like diplo.

Quote:

Not being able to put new cities where once stood large ones makes destruction pointless

Um, I don't recall this... is this a PTW thing?

Pulsatingpecs · November 8, 2002, 00:38

perhaps i should rephrase that, can't put any decent city.... too much corruption/waste. Have to turn to the vassal strategy to be able to work the land properly.

Cyclotron · November 8, 2002, 01:39

I never find corruption too much of a problem, at least when the city is on my landmass. Sure, it takes a lot out of the cities, but I find that rushed couthouses/police stations along with a well placed palace and FP make the larger of these cities at least somewhat feasable.

Pulsatingpecs · November 8, 2002, 01:44

will try that tonight... but what about waste? can this be handled the same way?

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 8, 2002, 01:45

The great thing about Civ3, over Civ2, is that you have so many more options in dealing with corruption. Admittedly, Civ3 doesn't have a government which eliminates corruption completely, but I thought that was completely lame anyway. In Civ3, you can have improvements and Small wonders which each reduce corruption, plus you can reduce corruption in the editor.

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

Pulsatingpecs · November 8, 2002, 01:49

But studying the corruption model posted on a thread somewhere in here, it seems once you reach a number of cities and/or distance fomr the two palaces, you will end up with 95% corruption.... courthouse and police station..... or am i reading that table wrong

Pyrodrew · November 8, 2002, 02:19

Quote:

you can reduce corruption in the editor.

Soren stated a long time ago there are 2 times of Corruption: # of City Corruption & Distance Corruption. He then listed the best way to fight each. I saved that list, but unfortunately my harddrive died since then, so now it's lost.

At any rate, the Editor ONLY allows you to change # of City Corruption... we still cannot change Distance Corruption. Someone once pumped # of City Corruption as high as possible & Distance Corruption was still powerful on Huge+ maps. Distance Corruption is so powerful it limits one's strategic options. If you're playing England you can forget about trying to put up HongKong (settler in China), Sydney (settler in Australia), & Jamestown (settler in America). Distance Corruption's fate easily kills 1 of those options & 2 if you do not sacrafice up your homeland by relocating your Palace. I was hoping by 1.29 or PtW we could adjust Distance Corruption....

Does anyone have a copy of Soren's old post detailing these 2 corruptions?

Pyrkaige · November 8, 2002, 02:21

Quote:

Some may say this is to make the game more realistic nothing else is in the game is so what goes? I mean I love Civ3, as with the other Civs but man there should have been an option to turn off Corruption/Waste due to Distance But alas this is not UTOPIA.

There is a an option to essentially "turn off" corruption, by going into the editor and changing the levels of corruption in the game. You can adjust both the basic level of corruption and the number of cities that start to increase corruption, per difficulty level. I tend to dislike the standard corruption model, so I often play on a modified Deity level that has corruption turned way down.

Of course, the AI has the same problem with corruption that players do; this is one of the few parts of the game where the computer isn't given a large boost on higher difficulty levels (apart from the fact that it needs far fewer shields to build anything in the game.) If you lower corruption dramatically, you will notice that the AI expands to cover every corner of the map, unlike high difficulty levels with standard corruption rules. If given the chance, the AI will do a good impersonation of infinity city sprawl itself.

Quote:

Soren stated a long time ago there are 2 times of Corruption: # of City Corruption & Distance Corruption. He then listed the best way to fight each. I saved that list, but unfortunately my harddrive died since then, so now it's lost. At any rate, the Editor ONLY allows you to change # of City Corruption... we still cannot change Distance Corruption.

You can alter both forms of corruption, or at least change corruption to be so low that it's a non-issue. In the editor there is a box that lists the exact number of cities after which higher corruption kicks in (it takes less cities to hit this at higher skill levels, of course.) There is also an overall slider for corruption/waste levels; if you turn this all the way down, there is next to no corruption, even in far-flung cities. I've played full games and sprawled across the entire land-mass without building the FP, simply because it never seemed worth the turns, since corruption was already so low.

I highly recommend that anyone who dislikes the basic rules for corruption take 5 minutes and load up the editor to play around with the numbers. It can really change the way both you and the AI play the game.

Pyrodrew · November 8, 2002, 02:27

Quote:

There is a an option to essentially "turn off" corruption

True, but I would like to leave '# of cities corruption' alone (or only slightly alter it) & simply turn down 'distance corruption'.

vmxa1 · November 8, 2002, 04:18

BY the time you are grabbing large cities on another land mass, you do not need to Utopia them. Just either capture or built new and get a temple in and let them sit as way stations, giving a shield a turn or being brood colonies. This give you conrol of the RR in the area and denies other access.

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 8, 2002, 05:40

I still think that the best solution that is available is mod-related. That is, it is possible, through the editor, to construct a whole host of improvements and small wonders that can reduce corruption, at any point in the game! This, from the outset, makes Civ3 2000x more flexible than Civ2. Also, you can create dozens of new governments, each with a different level of basic corruption-again, much more flexible than Civ2!! I'm not saying that Civ3 is perfect, but it DEFINITELY leaves Civ2 for dead! Corruption exists in real life, even in democratic governments-GET USED TO IT!!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

Firebird · November 8, 2002, 05:52

You might also create new buildings in the editor that fights corruption (call it "Governors Office" or something like that).

Firebird · November 8, 2002, 05:54

Oh, you where faster Aussie Lurker

.

Pyrodrew · November 8, 2002, 06:50

Quote:

Corruption exists in real life, even in democratic governments-GET USED TO IT!!

Relax, I'm not taking away your corruption.

Anyways, of course corruption exists in real life, only Hawaii is not the evil corruption haven Civ3 likes to think it is simply because it is so far from Washington DC.

And it is obvious corruption improvements can be created in the editor, but those fight both types of corruption.

That aside, I agree mod-related solutions are the best alternative for now.

alexman · November 8, 2002, 13:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Pyrodrew
Does anyone have a copy of Soren's old post detailing these 2 corruptions?

No, but I can modestly say that I know everything you ever wanted to know about corruption.

Arrian · November 8, 2002, 15:30

You may also want to check out the "FP+Palace placement" thread... I'm too lazy to find you the link right now.

-Arrian

Tomji · November 13, 2002, 18:34

make it so you can build more then 1 FB?

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 13, 2002, 20:20

Sorry I got so irate Pyrodrew

. I just lost it for a moment there! You are right to point out that, in a modern democracy, cities don't get more corrupt just because they get further from the capital. This is part of the reason why I'd like a flag, in the editor, that you can attach to new improvements or wonders like "increases optimal number of cities".
Failing that, though, I've thought of a whole host of small wonders which, when placed in your capital, could act to reduce corruption in ALL your cities. Not only does that significantly reduce the corruption bane, but it would also make your capital far more worth defending

. After all, lose that and you have lost the administrative HEART of your empire. THe beauty of the wonders I'm considering is that, unlike the Forbidden Palace, they will work just as well irrespective of the capitals placement!!
Anyway, there you have it. Maybe when my computer is fixed, I'll be able to produce this Mod, and you guys can tell me if it does the trick!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

Cyclotron · November 13, 2002, 21:14

Yes, that would also attach more importance to the capital, of which there is currently very little.

Spiffor · November 14, 2002, 01:10

Communism doesn't suffer from distance corruption, only from # of cities corruption. IIRC, a Forbidden palace basically reduces corruption by half in a communist regime (well, maybe I didn't understand Soren well), and commercial trait reduces by 25%.
Communism allows you to poprush buildings, meaning your faraway cities can have courthouses and police stations very quickly.
Democracy isn't good in too big empires regarding corruption.

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 14, 2002, 01:38

What I suggest, though, is that you have a Small Wonder, like Federal Police, which can be built by Democracy and Republic, and acts as a Police Station in every city in your civ-thus avoiding the need for rushed buildings! If you have that, and say a parliament and senate-all reducing corruption civ wide (and War Weariness)-as well as giving continental happiness and culture-and linked to the presence of your palace, then you suddenly see how important the Capital becomes, particularly in larger Civs. You would certainly suffer terribly if you lost it, and would go to greater lengths to defend it!
Anyway, thats how I see it. I confess that I don't know how the current editor works in relation to civ-wide War Weariness and corruption modifiers, anyone care to enlighten me

.

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

aahz_capone · November 14, 2002, 08:33

I created extra buildings to counter corruption: With the advent of the Radio you get Media Station (costs as mush as a library and to build it you need to have a News Agency which you get with Printing Press).

I found it necessary to kill corruption and fill up the holes in the tech tree. I like the Federal Police, I will do that too.

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 18, 2002, 01:21

Bump!!

The_Aussie_Lurker

Mad Bomber · November 18, 2002, 07:57

The Key to reducing corruption (without modding) is to move the palace. Place your FP close to your core cities, and then gradually move your palace to the center of your empire. I play bloodlust games, on huge maps, and I usually move the palace 3-5 times per game. Remember to build courthouses and police stations in all of your cities. Also WLTK reduced corruption, so keep your people happy.

In the editor you can reduce the distance corruption, and OCN. I usually play with a mod, in regent, at 80% of default for distance and at 40 OCN.

A side note: changing corruption, even a little bit,will change gameplay dramatically. In games that I play w/o the mod, I hit the Industrial age around 1200AD or so. Playing the mod in regent, and I will usually hit the modern ages before 600AD. (against 16 civs)

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 18, 2002, 18:14

You are right, Mad Bomber, but I can see what all these other people are complaining about regarding corruption. After all, Washington DC is on the East Coast of the USA, yet you don't see LA gripped by massive corru....oh, wait, bad example

A better example is that Silicon Valley is a hub of commerce and production, yet is at the very edge of the West Coast. If this situation were replicated in Civ3, FP or not, areas like this would not be able to produce a granary, let alone microchips!!! This would be very bad for scenarios

. This is why the mod approace-in respect to both government types and new Small Wonders and improvements, is probably the best way to go!

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

Mad Bomber · November 18, 2002, 19:06

AUssie:

But people fail to realize that US Americans have the FP out west, not to mention that LA does have a courthouse and police station, which reduces corruption and waste. In CIV 3 terms the US would not be large enough to have a relocation of the Palace, a FP out west is good enough. Palace moving is necessary when your empire becomes very large and you do not wish to go commie.

The_Aussie_Lurker · November 18, 2002, 20:23

Hang on, Mad Bomber, I thought that with all the government funded subsidies, recieved by American farmers and manufacturers, that the country was Commie!?

Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.

P.S: Sorry, I couldn't help but have a dig at the "Free Trade" policies of the US, given how they so often effect Australia!!

Mad Bomber · November 18, 2002, 20:56

You mean the money we give farmers to NOT grow crops, so that the farmers can actually subsist and not flood the world with produce so cheap that it would take the world into another great depression? Those subsidies? Hardly a country going commie if you ask me, if we could get a medical system where all citizens were covered then I would start to worry. Just look at our trade deficit, the US should have more trade restrictions IMO, and those would hurt Austrailians more than the free trade policies currently favored by the State Department.

ducki · November 18, 2002, 23:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Pyrodrew

Relax, I'm not taking away your corruption.

Anyways, of course corruption exists in real life, only Hawaii is not the evil corruption haven Civ3 likes to think it is simply because it is so far from Washington DC.

And it is obvious corruption improvements can be created in the editor, but those fight both types of corruption.

That aside, I agree mod-related solutions are the best alternative for now.

Instead of making all new buildings to fight corruption, you could do what a friend of mine does - mod every improvement already in the game so that it has the Fights Corruptions flag.

On Waste: I'm pretty sure WLT*D reduces or eliminates shield loss due to waste, so you could just work really hard to get your corrupt cities into WLT*D. Of course, this may not help as much as rushed temples and courthouses or a nearby palace, but it's better than nothing, I'd think.

I don't have the time to play on Huge maps, so I don't see this problem on Normal and Large maps as much as some people do.

If I played Huge maps, I'd probably mod a few more buildings to fight corruption. If you think about it, Temples and Cathedrals probably should help, since most major religions are anti-theft, but then again, maybe not.