Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

In the end, just play the game how you like to play it, regardless of what other people think. The quickest way to stop enjoying the game is to play it like everyone else says they're playing it just because you think you should. ;)

Trust me, I've played Civ long enough to know that. I just wanted to get a general idea...I think I might try an Epic game now that I have a few BtS ones under my belt. Thanks as always, Lord Parkin.
 
I have Beyond the Sword and im wondering if its possible to create a game where you can choose a random map and only play a certain era or up to a certain era without having to actually go into industrial or modern ages as i like to play the "medievil" eras and the classical. ive looked at the options im just wondering if im missing something.
 
Random map: there are scripts that do that, like http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=236835 for example.

Limiting the game to certain eras: this can't be done with the normal game options (unless you count the starting era setting, but that won't exclude later eras), you'll have to do some modding (of the civ4erainfos.xml file, I believe) or find an already existing mod in the Creations & Customization forum that does it. It's been requested before, so I'm sure there is something, at least instructions what to do.

And welcome to CFC! :band:
 
I have two questions:

1. How do I use the diplomatic resolutions "embargo alliance" or the other new features? I built the UN but I can only choose between resolutions changing the civics and banning nukes, on free trade and the same currency.

2. My automated workers (automated for improvements) make forts, can I prevent them from doing so? It's pretty annoying and pointless, and I remember it wasn't the case in Civ 4.

I'm playing with Beyond the Sword by the way.

Thank you. :)
 
1/ trade embargo is a feature of the apostolic palace, not of the UN.

2/ Forts now have extended powers, including linking ressources. So with a road, a fort on top of a ressource give you that ressource (as long as it's inside your cultural border and linked to cities obv); as long as the ressource its not in one of your cities fat cross, you don't lose too much.
 
Ah thank you.

About the first question though, I also can't use the other resolutions linked to the UN, like "declare war on the infidels" or "return city to fightful owner", so how can I make those work?
 
Hi folks,

I was reading about some graphical mods like blue marble (it lookst realy nice and it works with the latest HoF mod). Now i was wondering if there are more mods wich changes (improves) the graphical part of the game AND work with HoF. There are so many mods out there and i could not find anything about it's compatibility with the HoF mod. I am looking for somewhat realistic mods like the Blue marble. I don't want any weird sombies or vulcanic terain.

Thnx in advance,
 
2/ Forts now have extended powers, including linking ressources. So with a road, a fort on top of a ressource give you that ressource (as long as it's inside your cultural border and linked to cities obv); as long as the ressource its not in one of your cities fat cross, you don't lose too much.

Is it possible to have a fort on top of an improvement (pasture, mine, etc)?
 
Also, what are some of the settings you all play with for normal games? More specifically: is the game "better" with Vassal States turned off, No Tech Brokering turned on, and perhaps on Epic speed instead of Normal? I know it's really a matter of personal preference (so don't give me that answer :p), but are there some options that are very popular and used among the respected players?

Thanks in advance!

How could one resist the answer 'it's a matter of personal preference'.

I don't really like the way Vassal States were introduced in this game. You'll often see a newer player ask 'How can I get rid of a vassal', fully assuming that it can be done. But the issue is, you can't and that's a bit of a forced and ugly solution to a potential exploit (conquer enemy partly, make enemy vassal, rebuild, conquer the rest).
Another issue with vassal states is that a civilisation that you're conquering can become a vassal to another civilization which automatically ends the war and puts your cities out of this civilisation's borders. In earlier versions, you'd be at war with both civilizations, now you're at peace with both and will have to redeclare war if you want to conquer more. It would have been better if you got an option once these 2 civilizations signed their vassalage treaty.
And third, the AI will never fully conquer an enemy. This means that in the rare situation where an AI is actually very successful at war, you won't get a very large AI civilisation, but a combination of a strong civilisation and several vassals. This combination is a lot weaker than a single strong civilisation would have been. Several small civilisations never work together really well.
The last negative about vassal states is related to technology trading. If you trade a technology with your vassal, then it will often just trade it on with your enemies. The AI and vassals will trade all the technologies among oneanother.
Oh, and the human player cannot become a vassal, voluntarily or forced.

It seems like vassal states were added to a diplomacy system which isn't build for it and wasn't really adjusted well to compensate for the addition.

I've played a few games with the option on, but now I usually have it off. I guess that most players will use the standard option, but it is hotly discussed and many really dislike vassal states.

The 'no tech brokering' option is often embraced by those players who dislike the fact that the tech trading between their vassals and enemy civilisations. It's also preferred among the players who like to trade away their technologies without unforeseen consequences (like the technology getting spread further to their enemies). Personally, I view this as the pro-human setting. It's really designed around limiting the technology trading of AI civilizations which is often disliked by human players. You can only trade those technologies that you research yourself. While it is a fair setting as it is equal for both human and AI, the human will be able to pick his research projects better so as to be able to trade technologies.

I have not really used it yet (for a full game). Most of my games have used the normal technology trading rules. Note that technologies are often used to bribe civilisations, so this setting has an effect on diplomacy.

I'm now playing my first game without technology trading. It will also have some effects on diplomacy. I won't get demands for a technology and I can't trade technologies at all. Since I play at fairly high levels, this setting should make the game harder as I can't use technology trading to compensate for the AI bonuses. I wonder how the game will turn out.

According to polls, epic game speed is the most used setting (on this forum) which is remarkable as it's not the standard setting. What it actually does, is turn the game into more individual decision moments which each are a little less important than the decision moments in a normal game. You have more turns, but during a lower percentage of those turns, you will actually discover a technology or build a structure. Almost everything is scaled on the other than normal game speeds. You will have 50% more turns on epic, but building projects, research times, worker actions times and GPP's needed are also increased by 50%.

One of the very few things which aren't completely scaled is the movement rate. Units move at the same speed. This means that there is more movement during an epic game and this makes war a bit easier. A conquest victory is easier on epic than on normal.
It's often a good idea to play the bigger maps on a slower game speed. This way, you'll compensate the longer distances by more movement.

BTW, I agree with Lord Parkin that you should play at the settings that you enjoy most.
 
Ah thank you.

About the first question though, I also can't use the other resolutions linked to the UN, like "declare war on the infidels" or "return city to fightful owner", so how can I make those work?

The infidels one is also AP, it relies on some civs being members and some not, while everyone's a member of the UN (not big on the whole infidels thing in the UN, are they?). The return city one might be possible with the UN, it's definitely possible with the AP, but it's situational.

SexyDude76 said:
Is it possible to have a fort on top of an improvement (pasture, mine, etc)?

The fort would replace (= destroy) the previous improvement. That would only really matter if it's inside a city's BFC though, and workers don't build forts there. If it's outside, you get the resource either way.

madmenno said:
I was reading about some graphical mods like blue marble (it lookst realy nice and it works with the latest HoF mod). Now i was wondering if there are more mods wich changes (improves) the graphical part of the game AND work with HoF. There are so many mods out there and i could not find anything about it's compatibility with the HoF mod. I am looking for somewhat realistic mods like the Blue marble. I don't want any weird sombies or vulcanic terain.

Try asking in the HOF forum, like in this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=261639
 
If I use in-game tags/ labels (such as "build Wall Street here" or "settle generals here") in a pbem, will these show up for my opponents? Thanks. :)
 
If I use in-game tags/ labels (such as "build Wall Street here" or "settle generals here") in a pbem, will these show up for my opponents? Thanks. :)
No, 'tags' or 'labels' or 'signs' (whatever you want to call them) are never visible to your opponents in any form of multiplayer game, including PBEM. This is quite a handy feature, as you can imagine - it would have been a pain if your opponents could see your signs (and you theirs). ;)
 
Another issue with vassal states is that a civilisation that you're conquering can become a vassal to another civilization which automatically ends the war and puts your cities out of this civilisation's borders. In earlier versions, you'd be at war with both civilizations, now you're at peace with both and will have to redeclare war if you want to conquer more.

This leads me to another question: when was this change implemented? In v3.13? Bhuric's unofficial patch? In my last game (just with v3.13) I'm pretty sure I had it happen that a civilization I was at war with became a vassal to someone else, putting me at war with both of them, not ending the war.

I'm just starting my first game with the unofficial patch now, but I couldn't really tell from the list of changes in the readme whether this issue was fixed.
 
I'm just getting into Civ III and Civ IV and I want to try Rhye's mods. I've been reading through the threads and saw that the mod runs pretty fast except after installing BTS. Is there a way to run Civ IV with the Warlords patch but not the BTS one and also play with Rhye's mod?

Also, I want to get a new computer and want to make sure it's totally compatible and can run Civ III/IV at blazing speeds... I hate the wait time in between turns and the load time towards the end of the game. What should I go really high end on? Just memory and processor or should I also do a high end video card?

If I can get a local shop to build it for me, I was thinking 3Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo E6850, 4G Ram, and a GeForce 8800GT 512MB. Should that be fine for both Civ III and Civ IV?

TIA! :)
 
Has anyone gotten this to work? Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I want to turn off Autosave completely so I know I have to set it to 0 in the ini file. So I open the ini file, find the line that says "Specify the number of turns between autoSaves" and I set it to "0".

I save the file and re-open it to make sure the setting stuck and it did.

Then I start up Civ... and it still autosaves! And I go back into the ini file and it's set itself back to 1.

From reading the threads it looks like I'm doing it right and it's working for other people. Has anyone else experienced a stubborn ini too and if so did you figure out how to bend it to do your will? :confused:

Thanks!
-Teri
 
Top Bottom