Custom rules scenario?

I would like to propose a custom rules scenario. This type of scenario does not go as far as a modification, which would typically add or change units, civs, tech tree, or improvements/wonders. Custom rules allow the ability to change the game play experience without requiring players to add files or undergo long downloads.

For C3C the custom rules I would like to advocate are:

• Eliminate the bug where running into an invisible unit causes a war without asking if you want to attack, by turning off the invisible flag on all units which use it.
• Reduce corruption, perhaps to 70% or even 60%, so that all cities will at least have reasonable production.
• Increase the number of civs to more than the given map size normally allows.

If there is any interest in doing this, I'll volunteer to create a scenario file with the parameters we choose to use, ahead of time so we can do some play testing.

the game would be very interesting with 31 ais... even if it is a huge map

Black_Hole said:

the game would be very interesting with 31 ais... even if it is a huge map

Click to expand...

Done it before, it only allows even the newest players to kick the living crap out of the AI on Sid. It makes the game alot easier.

Also, I'm not for any type of changes in the game. Let's just plug in our options and play.

Let's just do a normal game. No mods/alterations.

2000!

The only rule change I would support is:

Eliminate the bug where running into an invisible unit causes a war without asking if you want to attack, by turning off the invisible flag on all units which use it.

Click to expand...

However, in all my games, I've only run into this once (on Sid, the ensuing war probably lost me the game), so it's not a big deal.

You'd think 31 civs (save for Rik's "Tiny with a Lot" would make it harder, but actually, it's easier. Why? Civs have less room to expand. If you made a really huge map, the city limit would be reached by about the 15th city. Only those with powerful computers would be able to play the save, too.

It appears that the Large Map is leading in the poll. If I remember correctly, a large map has 12 AI civs. That seems to be sufficient for me.

I'm disappointed there is no interest in reducing corruption. The whole point is to have fun, and this would go a very long way towards achieving that objective.

The most interesting thing you suggest Daveshack is that you trying to add more fun in the game. Well corruption model in conquests is a means to add challenge and conquentially, fun. Some people like it and some don't. In other words, it not fun for you to deal with that kind of corruption but it is fun for others.

Just wait until we get to communism with 3 types of palaces, and couthouses all over the place, then come and talk to me about reducing corruption.

Double Stack said:

The most interesting thing you suggest Daveshack is that you trying to add more fun in the game. Well corruption model in conquests is a means to add challenge and conquentially, fun. Some people like it and some don't. In other words, it not fun for you to deal with that kind of corruption but it is fun for others.

Click to expand...

I was just thinking about the people who will be elected governor of the later provinces, containing all cities which are totally corrupt even after courthouses and police stations are built. Sure, it's an elected office, but if you want to build something other than a worker your city will take an entire term to do it.

This is exactly why we need laws for extra funding to the distant colonies.
We need to pass amendmensts fitting the new C3C reality.
A trade tax for the resources and luxuries should be in place, rewarding each province on providing the nation with that resource (gold per turn or gold for succesful trade deals). And governors are de facto local cultural ministers, as they decide build queues
and that they do want to expand their own province, so Culture Consul is hardly needed. Technology and Trade Consul is already calling for libraries.

We need to balance out both the Consul and Director positions AND the governors.
Again we have fallen in the trap of creating some superior positions and some inferior positions, as well as superior core provinces and inferior peripheral ones.

Therefore, we should reassess the game structure and make amendments by adapting to it.


No taxation without representation !

Provolution,
We don't need laws. We just need the people in charge of the budget to try this out as an experiment. It doesn't make any sense until we are in a cash rush government. We also need some additional provinces.

Term 2 would probably be a good time to try the experiment as we won't be too large. So, you and I will have to discuss what positions we should run for during term 2 so we can run this experiment

MOTH

Well, I do agree, and that is why we need the right tools to do so. Asit seems we will become England (Commercial, Seafaring), we are bound to develop the system around an economic/maritime model. Sorry Cyc and congrats DZ, there will be no more one tile inland cities in this game.

The fact that I consider the Cultural Consul position rather redundant in this perspective, where the main focus will be curbing corruption and maximizing gold around coastal areas, we should look into getting the right instruments to do so.
I believe in devolution (farming out cultural politics to the governors, they know their own needs) and transferring wonder discussions to either the President or the Technology Consul, which needs to integrate the whole national development planning.
This would make Culture Consul redundant, but open room for a new office, which would be a Financial Consul. Most governments do have a strategic treasurer, and since we got the people to do a good job here, why not make this adjustment, according to England specific features.

If we were a religious Civ, culture would be more important, but as a commercial Civ, we should have a Finance/Resource Consul.