SCENARIO: Age of Imperialism; 1895-1924, Deluxe Version 2016-10-05

ChaosArbiter said:

So we should disregard this from earlier, then? I'm not trying to be petty, but I *do* consider the complete omission of a battleship from a page specifically devoted to that particular Civ's battleships "pretty big," especially considering how big a deal you made about making sure the Civilopedia was perfect and all. I'm not saying you haven't done a lot of work. Furthermore, I'm not bughunting - any errors I'm coming across are ones I've come across while playing the game.

However, per your wish, I will make a list of any and all errors I've found and PM it to you. Would you like me to include the spelling errors I've come across?

Click to expand...

A couple of things here (again keeping in mind that the written word can suck for intent).

First, you are coming across as being very smug. I don't think you have a clue or any appreciation on the amount of time it took to put it together. We busted our butts to try to "get it right". There comes a time when deadlines kick in. If EJ had not released when he did, you were looking at January because the holidays were going to kick in a not a lot was going to get done. We also came to the realization that no matter how thorough we tried to be, there would be some errors. The only "big" error I see is the Sudwestern Military Academy situation, which is not a huge surprise considering it had a last minute revision from not being able to be built and then we had a map change on top of that. In other words, changes were made to get it fixed, but there was not an opportunity to test it before release. The US infantry and cav stuff was posted the same day EJ released, but it was too late to change that version and will be corrected in a future update. This is a hold over from the previous version where most infantry was written up this way.

The civlopedia in this game, errors and all, is one of the most advanced in all of Civ 3. There are concepts here that have never been tried (who puts in a players guide in a civlopedia?) Some concepts are relatively new (national page that shows what units a particular civ gets which we originally released in the last TCW for the first time). The added depth and resources make it a wonderful in game tool for a player to use, but the downside is the added complication means it is tougher to police for errors, etc.

Am I being a bit defensive about all this? Perhaps. I don't think anyone likes to have what they busted their butt on and spent a ton of time to make it the best they could appreciates having people apparently gleefully pointing out "you made a mistake here... ".

Secondly as far as spelling goes, there may indeed be some spelling errors, but then again, it may be spelled a particular way for a reason. There are many cases where depending on who you talk to (language wise), something could be spelled right/wrong and you talk to another person with a different background/language and the spelling is correct for them. This is particularly true with city names and even position names, so if those are on your list of spelling "errors", I would say the chance that they are actually spelled wrong is not real good.

In all honestly, we do appreciate feedback, and yes, finding civlopedia errors, etc (please PM EJ on these) so we can get the last glitches out.

Lastly, if folks are unhappy with the product, please see El Justo for a full refund of your money. I am sure he can hook you up.

Klyden said:

I don't think you have a clue or any appreciation on the amount of time it took to put it together. We busted our butts to try to "get it right".

Click to expand...

I do, contary to your belief. Do I have any experience with a project of this magnitude? Not quite, I'll admit, and nothing whatsoever pertaining to electronica. I have had experience working with and managing several projects for groups in upwards of 30 people, though, including having to cancel one of them literally two days before it was supposed to go because I'd completely fubar'd something with the business we were supposed to be going to.

If EJ had not released when he did, you were looking at January because the holidays were going to kick in a not a lot was going to get done. We also came to the realization that no matter how thorough we tried to be, there would be some errors.

Click to expand...

And you know, I would have been fine with a January release. I would have been fine with an early October release as well, bugs and incomplete 'Pedia and all. I probably wouldn't even bother with *any* of the 'Pedia goofs - and don't really know why I'm bothering, since there aren't going to be any patches or anything for v4 - except that El Justo (and just El Justo) kept making a big deal out of everything. If you wish, you may consider it 'retaliation' for all the 'pimping' v4 has received. If you're going to make extravagant claims of perfection and keep making pushbacks to the release in the name of 'perfection,' and the finished product isn't perfect, I feel I have every right to toss out "here's a mistake." Not that, exceptional though your strategy guides are and helpful as El Justo's RM strat pages might be, I would still like to have the meat and potatoes of the 'Pedia actually there and not have missing or invalid links sprinkled throughout.

The only "big" error I see is the Sudwestern Military Academy situation, which is not a huge surprise considering it had a last minute revision from not being able to be built and then we had a map change on top of that. In other words, changes were made to get it fixed, but there was not an opportunity to test it before release.

Click to expand...

To be frank, though, that's not a 'Pedia error, which is what I keep harping about. To be perfectly honest, I don't consider any error in the Civilopedia major. But to be frank, when Vuldacon can post this on September 22

Seriously, the game could have been released a month ago and been Great. Because there will not be a AoI V5 and we really do not want to have to upload any Patches, AoI has been scrutinized to the best of our ability to be able to offer a Completely Finished Game that will stand on its own and Not have any real need for extra Uploaded Files.

Click to expand...

Then if I'm not going to pick through the 'Pedia with a fine-tooth comb I expect to not be surprised because I'm halfway through the game and just realized there's another kind of ship I can build.

The US infantry and cav stuff was posted the same day EJ released, but it was too late to change that version and will be corrected in a future update. This is a hold over from the previous version where most infantry was written up this way.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

The civlopedia in this game, errors and all, is one of the most advanced in all of Civ 3. There are concepts here that have never been tried (who puts in a players guide in a civlopedia?) Some concepts are relatively new (national page that shows what units a particular civ gets which we originally released in the last TCW for the first time). The added depth and resources make it a wonderful in game tool for a player to use, but the downside is the added complication means it is tougher to police for errors, etc.

Click to expand...

And again - I don't consider them "major errors" by any realistic means, but if someone's going to call "Perfection" I claim every right to call "Bull."

Am I being a bit defensive about all this? Perhaps. I don't think anyone likes to have what they busted their butt on and spent a ton of time to make it the best they could appreciates having people apparently gleefully pointing out "you made a mistake here... ".

Click to expand...

Going along with the notion above that the written word is incapable of nuanced meaning unless explicitly written, and despite my above points: Not gleefully, but matter-of-factly. There were errors, I was pointing them out. I do not, however, like being insulted, as El Justo has done.

Secondly as far as spelling goes, there may indeed be some spelling errors, but then again, it may be spelled a particular way for a reason. There are many cases where depending on who you talk to (language wise), something could be spelled right/wrong and you talk to another person with a different background/language and the spelling is correct for them. This is particularly true with city names and even position names, so if those are on your list of spelling "errors", I would say the chance that they are actually spelled wrong is not real good.

Click to expand...

Nope - there are two instances of this kind of "error," in the Flammenwerfer/Flamenwerfer and the Afrikaner/Afrikaaner notes, as the game is inconsistent on these points. The spelling errors I *am* referring to are in the second German Mountain Gun (refers to its predecessor as a "Kurpp" gun) and in the given ship names for the Magdeburg class CL, which include the names Madeburg and Strasgurg.

In all honestly, we do appreciate feedback, and yes, finding civlopedia errors, etc (please PM EJ on these) so we can get the last glitches out.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm working on it.

Hey guys, let's get back to the topic at hand please? El Justo has said that any errors in the CivP should be PMed to him, and that makes sense cause they are not game breaking. I am sure anything major that crashes the game/makes it unplayable should be posted here ASAP to quickly find a fix.

I am well into the second age, and the AI can land some seriously scary amphibious assaults. I had a total of 16 british cavalry land on Pago Pago, and I only saved the island by making peace. Previous to that, I had the british landing 10+ troops a turn for a good 5 turns on Willemstad, and I only kept that island by popping a very well timed leader.

I, for one, would much rather have an errors in the civp posted here - as long as its ok with El Justo. I'd really like to be to just read this thread and see the issue so that I can go in and fix it myself - or, again if El Justo doesn't mind - allow various users ('us') to post corrected civp files here for ppl to download so they can fully take advantage of and enjoy the massive amounts of information provided with this game.

Theryman said:

I am well into the second age, and the AI can land some seriously scary amphibious assaults. I had a total of 16 british cavalry land on Pago Pago, and I only saved the island by making peace. Previous to that, I had the british landing 10+ troops a turn for a good 5 turns on Willemstad, and I only kept that island by popping a very well timed leader.

Click to expand...

Very true. I have seen some weak landings (by the Russians attacking Port Moresby), but nearly all the ones in the Mediterranean have been 8+ units. I'm debating whether to pick a small civ in the Caribbean area or SE Asia and go island hopping.

Of course, have to finish my A-H game first. :sigh: Germans declare on the Ottomans, who start walking through my territory, then Siam gets *Russia* to DoW me, so all of a sudden I've got ~100 Russian Infantry and Cossacks trying to make me run out of bullets, and 30+ Ottomans wandering the Balkan mountains. Only the fact that I have more Austrian Maxims than cities and have access to WWI Infantry is saving my hide ... well, that and the nearly 50 artillery pieces I've got. Still going to take a few turns to clear the Russians out, then I'm going to try to take Thessaloniki and Constantinople, as those two extra Luxuries are going to be very helpful.

Back when C3C came out (circa 2003?) I paid $39.99 IIRC for the game. Since then it it has never left my hard drive despite purchasing several computers since.

I paid that money for C3C, an expansion to a great game called Sid Meier's Civilization 3. I did not pay anyone for the multitude of scenarios I have downloaded from so many hard working and not so hard working scenario designers.

When I see minor issues with a scenario, be it a spelling mistake in a text file or a missing sound file for a unit, I take the few minutes it requires and fix the problem myself. Then I continue on my merry way and enjoy the scenario the creator was very kind to offer the community.

No stress, either on myself or the stress I could potentially place on a fellow gamer who took the time that my lazy ass couldn't to make a scenario for my enjoyment.

My two cents. Carry on...but above all at the end of the day try to have fun.

@ChaosArbiter

Do you not enjoy the mod? I mean what is with the 'retaliation for all the pimping' type statements? It sounds like misplaced anger or somethiing. It sounds like you are out to get these creators because their mod didn't live up to some kind of perfect expections.

Have you ever played any other Civ3 mod other than this one? The huge majority of mods do not have any civilopedia work done at all.

I'm sure they appreciate any info, but all they are asking is that you complile a list, so they don't have to browse through tons of posts here (I assume). I was going to list things here too, but will make a list of anything I find also now and I'll PM it instead.

The civlopedia in this game, errors and all, is one of the most advanced in all of Civ 3. There are concepts here that have never been tried (who puts in a players guide in a civlopedia?) Some concepts are relatively new (national page that shows what units a particular civ gets which we originally released in the last TCW for the first time). The added depth and resources make it a wonderful in game tool for a player to use, but the downside is the added complication means it is tougher to police for errors, etc.

Click to expand...

And again - I don't consider them "major errors" by any realistic means, but if someone's going to call "Perfection" I claim every right to call "Bull."

Click to expand...

BTW, I see no claim of perfection in that civilopedia description... in fact they even mention it's tough to police for errors (which implies it's often not possible to get every last one), so with no statement of Perfection, I guess that means you don't have any right to call Bull.

Tom

thanks for the comments all.

eventually i will post another civp file. can't say when really but not too long. i will need to review the list/s. please send them via pm as it will be easier for me to keep track of. thanks

To make one thing clear: AoI 4 in my eyes has the best civilopedia ever done for a mod or scenario for Civ 3.

El Justo said:

thanks for the comments all.

eventually i will post another civp file. can't say when really but not too long. i will need to review the list/s. please send them via pm as it will be easier for me to keep track of. thanks

Click to expand...

My Persian Cossack Brigade article is ready. It details the history and importance of the brigade and their strength at different points in their history, want it? I'll be posting it on wikipedia also.

Thanks for all the Good Comments and feedback you guys

Regarding Civilopedia adjustments... of course it is very important to us to have even minor areas corrected or adjusted to perfect anything that slipped past all of the Testing and Hard Work to make the game and release it now rather than much later.

Does anyone remember the Patches that were made for the CIV game?
Deadlines are necessary or a game could be worked on indefinitely.

If adjustments are needed in the Civilopedia, it is best to PM El Justo so he can assess what is needed. After all is said and done, I am sure the patch will be very small.

Although the gesture is appreciated, it would absolutely Not be appropriate for anyone other than the creators to present any public patch for their game and I believe that needs no explanation to understand

Again, Thank You all for your comments and we are Happy you are Enjoying the Game

Not really a compliant, but certainly something interesting (weird) and another issue of civ's coding that we can all sit around and laugh (and cringe) at.

I've seen this also happen in v3 as well. Eventually a World War breaks out, and finally at some point there's only one or two minor nations that have yet to be swept into the conflict... so everyone buys their support..



Which in turn completely destroys the games calculations about power..

OMG! That is alot of gold! It looks like Uruguay went from having maybe 1 pixel on the histograph to taking over half of it all from the gold!

Some civ's have about 500,000 gold right now in my game (halfway through 2nd era). I never have a problem finding stuff to blow all the gold I make on... I am surprised the AI doesn't rush buy more things (I think they do when at war, because all their money disappears usually).

Tom

wolf brother... Yes, That is a Good point about the AI. That sort of thing continues to remind me of what I called the "Gold Bug" that existed in CIV III before the Patch. One could sue the AI for Peace for an Extreme amount of Per Turn Gold such as 100,000.00 and even though the CIV did not have it to be able to pay that amount, they did

Essentially, the “Power Graph” indicates too much Power for the AI due to Gold, mainly because the AI will not handle Strategic Expenditures as a Human

No longer relevant.

Holy crap. Who was it said the Russians were weak? I just spent nearly a year and a half driving them out of my territory as the Austro-Hungarians. And since for the most part I was stuck with around 20 Austrian WWI Infantry and a bit more for the Hungarian version, I couldn't work on infrastructure *and* half the cities in Hungary started starving. Then I had another 20-30 Ottoman troops running around near Bukharest because they were trying to fight the Germans ....

The kicker? In week 49 of 1906, the Russians had 30 Russian Infantry (of 143) and 6 Cossacks (of 23) in my territory. What did they have in German territory? 3 Infantry and 22 Home Guard units. They've still got nearly 150 Maxims, too ... once I take Constantinople (just took Thessaloniki ) I'm gonna take Odessa, and maybe Kiev.

About the only good news from that bloodbath is that I now have three shiny new Corps units (my first ones!). Two off of Austrian Cavalry units and one off an Austrian WWI Infantry unit (who joined his new Corps renamed as my First Landesschutzen Brigade, while the Cavalry became my First and Second Hussars).

Edit: Oh, and a question: how does the AI rate Culture? It's really weird when I've got half the actual Wonders in the game, and I talk to someone like Scandinavia and the Foreign Advisor says they have more Culture than I do.

I did. We were playing as the Germans and after an initial stiff resistance, the Russians crumbled never to regain their power.

That was v3 of AoI.

Tank_Guy#3 said:

I did. We were playing as the Germans and after an initial stiff resistance, the Russians crumbled never to regain their power.

That was v3 of AoI.

Click to expand...

me too just a few days ago

in my new game i started i saw germany declared war on russia and somehow germany have captured 3 cities in the top middle of Russia's territory. they captured noril'sk, soshowinsk, novonikolayevsk and the balcans!? captured olekminsk. these are all deep into russian territory somehow bypassing their outer cities

Narn said:

me too just a few days ago

in my new game i started i saw germany declared war on russia and somehow germany have captured 3 cities in the top middle of Russia's territory. they captured noril'sk, soshowinsk, novonikolayevsk and the balcans!? captured olekminsk. these are all deep into russian territory somehow bypassing their outer cities

Click to expand...

That seems to be one annoying aspect of the AI... it knows the defenses of cities even when it cannot see them, so it sends troops towards the cities in which it has highest chance of success.

Players can use this to keep enemy units in a limbo, causing them to constantly go back and forth and never actually do anything. Then with artillery and air you can eliminate even huge superior forces. This was a tactic often used in Rocoteh's WW2 Global against Russia when playing Germany.

Tom