Bibor
Doomsday Machine
I think we can all agree that the best feature of Civilization 3 was that Alpha Centauri was already available 
12/3 patch balance thoughts, The good, the bad, and the ugly
- Thread starter neilkaz
- Start date
Bandobras Took
Emperor
I think we can all agree that the best feature of Civilization 3 was that Alpha Centauri was already available
Amen and hallelujah!
Bizzaro world = This world. You don't win at diplomacy by being the nice guy.
ThERat
Deity
The problem is you do win diplomatic victory by playing any style you like and simply bribe city states. This victory condition is a complete joke.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
It's always been a complete joke. In Civ3, you could bribe your rivals into voting you winner. In Civ4, it was the victory condition for lazy warmongers who didn't want to finish the job. I think city-states should be more mission-based with perhaps a few other non-gold methods to raise influence. In other words, it should be a competition for alliance, not a system where the richest get the city-states and everyone else is poor.
neilkaz
King
We aren't the only ones to speak out against diplo-victory and I go so far as to state that I'd like to see it removed from the game (off course I can turn it off if I want to).
Anyhow, no one is forcing anyone to win by this manner. However, the only time I chose to win this way was when the AI (Rammy) tried to do it first by building the UN.
Just my opinion .. neilkaz ..
Paeanblack
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 518
Hmm...perhaps having built the Manhattan Project should allowing to you keep playing after losing the UN vote. You just get permanent war from all other players and any CSs that did not vote for you.
I suggest you try out the CS Diplomacy Mod, then. It requires you to produce ambassador units to send off to win influence rather than straight gold purchases (which are still implemented at MUCH higher levels). This makes proximity to the CS far far more important.
Honestly, it completely alters Diplo victories into something a LOT more engaging.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Diplomacy mod was quite fun when I played it. Might have to go back and give it another try. I'm also considering creating something related that I'm sure would fit in well once I figure out if I suck at lua or not.
True, but there already aren't that many victory conditions. I actually like this version of the diplomatic victory provided that you're liberating civs. When it's just an economic victory, it's kinda boring. But I like it as a reverse conquest victory where I get to role-play as a liberator instead of a conqueror.
True, but there already aren't that many victory conditions. I actually like this version of the diplomatic victory provided that you're liberating civs. When it's just an economic victory, it's kinda boring. But I like it as a reverse conquest victory where I get to role-play as a liberator instead of a conqueror.
HermannLombard
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2006
- Messages
- 277
Well said, and you're completely correct that I can move on, and I know that YMMV and I'm glad you're enjoying the game. That said, just from this thread I'm not sure I'm expressing a minority opinion, and remember that the really disgruntled are long gone, having expressed their opinions by leaving.
To be fair, I am enjoying the game, just frustrated by some of the shortcomings like lousy AI, insufficient testing (but see my response to ThERat, below), and poor design decisions (defined as those with which I disagree).
I wish that game development had been farther along before release. I burn out fairly quickly on any one computer game, so if it takes months to come to maturity, I may not see it (as I never saw BTS, for example). In this case I violated my normal rule to never buy a game until it has been out at least six months, or at least until the first major patch is out. This time I pre-ordered, and I should know better.I figure that I only have another couple of games in me before I burn out, bearing in mind that a game takes me a week or two at my glacial pace. However, I may come back to Civ V as I came back to Civ II (but not to III or IV, go figure), or as I came back to games like Oblivion. Anyway, I'm sure you won't let contrary opinions interfere with your enjoyment, nor should you!
Well...personally, my impression is that ALL computer games are thrown out unfinished because the marketing folks won't give the developers time to finish (and that's "who asked 2k"). If you only read the forums (here and elsewhere), you'd get the impression that each new game was "the worst ever" and "how could they DO this?" and "I'll just take my toys and leave." As a programmer, I know why all games are released with bugs--basically all PROGRAMS are released with bugs--and the end user ends up as a beta tester.
Öjevind Lång
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2005
- Messages
- 2,371
Actually, as it is now, the game completely favours ICS and aggressive wars. That had to be addressed.
Monthar
Deity
The patch is coming very soon.
I'm slightly concerned about this one. It means that luxury resources, Social Policies, Wonder buildings, and Natural Wonders will be even more important for increasing happiness. Consider this: Each city produces 2
+ 1 per pop. If you're limited to 1 per pop max then it leaves 2 each city is incapable of balancing by itself (except for India). Currently each city can at least balance ALL of its unhappy faces with happy ones. This will no longer be possible once the limit is placed. Even a moderate expansion will require more careful thought because you can't just rush buy/build a happy building to solve the problem UNLESS you still have cities not utilizing their full happiness cap. To me this change limits local happiness and expands global happiness by forcing you to acquire new luxuries, build happy producing Wonders in your cities, select Social Policies, and seek out new Natural Wonders to balance Empire unhappiness. All of those sources of happiness are definitely more global than local.
Another thing to consider is whether or not Wonders will add more happiness after a city has reached its
per pop cap from normal happy buildings. Imagine a 6 pop city. I have Wonders that produce a total of 8 happiness combined. Since Wonders are excluded from the cap I will have a 6 pop city producing 8 happiness. Would it be pointless to build any normal happy buildings in that city? What if the same 6 pop city started with normal buildings that produce a total of 6 happiness and I build a happy Wonder there? I'm not sure if I am considering all the ramifications of this change here, so please chime in and give your thoughts on this one.I am sure it will work like this:
City A has 6 unhappiness - 4 pop.
It builds a colosseum and a theater.
City A is now producing 6 and 4 . (2 to empire bucket).
City B has 14 unhappiness - 12 pop.
It builds a colosseum, theater, and notre dame.
City B is now producing 14 and 13 . (1 to empire bucket)
City C has 10 unhappiness - 8 pop.
It builds a colosseum, theater and hanging gardens.
City C is now producing 10 and 11 . (1 extra to empire)
The civ now adopts Theocracy (25% less per pop)
City A is now at 1
City B is now at 2
City C is now at 3
At least that is my guess
Basically, each city can easily go happiness positive with global happiness mods: luxuries, nat wonders, wonders and more importantly, social policies. Every branch has a way to help the happy bucket, and these changes will more or less demand you pick up at least one or two.
City A has 6 unhappiness - 4 pop.
It builds a colosseum and a theater.
City A is now producing 6
and 4 . (2 to empire bucket).City B has 14 unhappiness - 12 pop.
It builds a colosseum, theater, and notre dame.
City B is now producing 14
and 13 . (1 to empire bucket)City C has 10 unhappiness - 8 pop.
It builds a colosseum, theater and hanging gardens.
City C is now producing 10
and 11 . (1 extra to empire)The civ now adopts Theocracy (25% less
per pop)City A is now at 1
City B is now at 2
City C is now at 3
At least that is my guess
Basically, each city can easily go happiness positive with global happiness mods: luxuries, nat wonders, wonders and more importantly, social policies. Every branch has a way to help the happy bucket, and these changes will more or less demand you pick up at least one or two.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Why, it makes sense from a logical perspective (if you have 3 people in the city, how can the total happiness be 5?). It also makes sense from a gameplay perspective because it helps weaken ICS. Finally, it makes happiness wonders more important, because people have a habit of skipping them right now.
Civ5 added a global happiness system. There is also unhappiness added for each new city which makes sense to hamper ICS, but otherwise I don't get. But what is the point of global happiness if there is a limit per city? Doesn't that seem counter-productive to the entire concept? Why does building 1 wonder increase my global happiness more than 10 theatres? (It's a wonder, yes, but honestly?)
If I made a mod (which I might some day) I wouldn't cap city happiness, increase unhappiness per city (to combat ICS) and slightly increase starting happiness (to counteract the effect for small empires). That seems more graceful of a way to combat ICS if we were to go about it using happiness as our tool.
Personally I'd just make city hexes less valuable and improve yields on the normal terrain.
edit: Specifically to this:
When you have just your capital with pop 1 what is your starting happiness at?
I think we can all agree that the best feature of Civilization 3 was that Alpha Centauri was already available
No, the best feature about Civ3 was that people were still making great Civ2 scenarios.
Similar threads
