C3C Frequently Asked Questions

[royfurr]

I wouldn't call those things "exploits". Your mostly lucking into the situations.
I don't see how one could arrange to get the GL while at the same time just meeting technically advanced civs that are beyond edu.

To me an exploit is something you actively DO which in some fashion gets around the spirit of the rules or is patently unreal. We used to call this "gaming the system" in RL.

(OR "getting off on a technicality".)

That might be described as bugs, or as unintended consequences of the rules ... which should be fixed.

 

[superslug]

@Grille: whatever the name that's exactly the action I'm inquiring about. I guess I just may have to find out when I get to that point in my current game...

 

[Grille]

So you're willing to use an exploit, just to find out!?
j/k

I *guess* the slug the super techs out of TGL (whatever the name of this action is) is still working. A change here would (or *should*) have been adressed in the readme or something.

by royfurr:
I don't see how one could arrange to get the GL while at the same time just meeting technically advanced civs that are beyond edu.

You could first get the contacts to such sophisticated civs and then (maybe 500yrs later) capture TGL. If you don't know edu yet, that is. In fact, it's pretty much easy if TGL is built in 'your' neighborhood by another civ. With the right amount of Kinghts (and possibly bombarding units) or whatever outdated attackers you use, you could even fight riflemen, if TGL is close enough (or you'd even ROP rape on top of that). This can be 'planned' to some extent (it's easier on smaller maps with pangaea shape) and you would then clearly act "explotatively".

Or:
You build TGL on an archipelago, totally conquer your more or less isolated, ocean-surrounded starting continent (best: no ai respawns elsewhere), avoid edu, don't undertake suicide galley missions and wait for 2 sophisticated civs to sail along... (or wait for just 1 opponent and trade contacts if he knows printing press). Would be more a matter of luck then.

Or: (very, very rare)
Ai "missed" to build TGL for some weird reasons: possibly every TGL constructing AI city got conquered before completion until AI civs discover edu, because it's not possible to order or to switch to (or: cascade to... in AI's case) an outdated wonder. I once had such situation in vanilla on a small map: Although it had been under construction at some point by AI, TGL was never completed and the three remaing civs already knew edu by the time - I could GL rush TGL and got some past-edu techs. Well, it was also rather more a kind of lucky break than an exploit, I think; I would not have rushed TGL if I wouldn't get past-edu techs in the process, though.

To me an exploit is something you actively DO which in some fashion gets around the spirit of the rules or is patently unreal. We used to call this "gaming the system" in RL.

Using this definition, you can surely call it an exploit.

 

[superslug]

I'm ignoring Education for now by choice and going for Military Tradition. That way I can milk ToA with all it's might as long as I care to and still have Cavalry on offense. When I'm ready to resume tech, I'll sack whatever city has TGL in it.

 

[Grille]

I guess an early SGL-rushed ToA must be the milker's dream... (possibly w/ Maya on top of that)

Anyways, if you really go for it, please post the results for clear confirmation.

side effect:
Also, if you're 1.12-patched, could you have a glance at free ToA temples culture output after 1000years? I mean those cities that you owned before ToA was completed and don't have a 'double temple'? (was still 2cpt in v1.00)

Thanks.

 

[royfurr]

Nice exposition and explanition in your earlier post (#223), Grille.

I am not a superplayer and certainly don't have the abilities of many in this forum, but it seems to me that the GL strategy, while yes it is something that you ACTIVELY DO, fails the part of the definition I suggested in that it is not clearly defeating the letter or spirit of the rules. The rules obviuosly allow conquering wonders and getting their benefits, so a strat with that in mind isn't an excess. The debatable point is the timing I guess- they have edu and you don't, so you still get the benfit provided by the wonder even though THEY have lost it. So its debatable I guess. But overall, I wouldn't call the GL startegy an exploit, which is what generated my reaction to superslugs original post.
Perhaps I should have worded my statement that "basic" GL strategy is not an exploit but getting it by conquest and deliberating delaying edu is ... debatable. Still, if one wants to extend the use of a wonder by consciously not researching a tech that will obsolete it, that doesn't strike me as an exploit. Debatable, I will admit.

The whole point about "Actively doing" something (I was trying to imply a signifinant preplanned effort) was meant to allow exclusion from "exploit-ness" the seizing of a transient oppurtunity. That alone isn't enough of course, as the oppurtinity seized on might be something that is a wierdness or just a plain error in the rules. The true heart of my idea was that an exploit is beyond the spirit of the rules. Which is pretty nebulous. SO, on second thought, I guess I withdraw the entire definition, and throw out a Request For Papers on the idea.

(I guess I am reacting to what seems to be the tendency of any technique that the human player can come up with, that the programmers haven't antipicated and set up the ai to do, to being described as an (evil) Exploit. To be promptly patched away.)

SO JUST WHAT SHOULD *BE* the definition of an exploit?

 

[Grille]

SO JUST WHAT SHOULD *BE* the definition of an exploit?

I think I cannot answer that in general - it's really a philosophical question. Maybe everyone just judges on his own.
If someone uses a 'trick' and enjoys his game, it's fine with me.
Of course, there should be a consensus when playing a competative or MP game and some stuff is really not fair (like cycling through cities during production prompt phase and using working tiles twice in one turn or using go-to commands in MP games with the clear intention to gain a movement advantage).

For the TGL thing: IMHO it's a minor issue, I agree it's more a 'debatable' thing. I must admit that I enjoyed getting past-education techs by capturing the GL, it had some 'fashionable' touch to it. Plus, I used it rarely, often by chance. It's not like the double working tiles topic that I could use every time I wanted to gain an unfair advantage.
On the other hand, I *guesstimate* that this measure is like exploiting a game bug because it was probably not intended to work like that. - If you would not care for early universities (etc), you're better off not building it, but capturing it at the right point of time. That doesn't *feel* right.
Btw, the most 'evil' version would be to indeed build it on your own in a carefully placed city. Eventually gain some ancient techs. Just gift it away before education and retake it comparably easily (capturing guarantee: city is in your core!) when two known civs got some early industrial techs. Draining your pop in that city, avoiding tile overlap and gifting to a culturally strong civ would avoid the flip risk. Call it ultimative TGL milking or exploit.

Now in C3C, ToA gets obsolete with education, too. So why not combine two things here. Exploit or admirable strategic planing? - you decide.

 

[royfurr]

Well said, Grille.

As you say, its almost a philsophical question. It's like that tired old saw about the definition of pornography: I know it when I see it. OTHO, whats one persons porn (exploit) is another persons art (clever stratgic move).

Although we may sound in disagreement a bit, I think we are thinking a lot more in sinc then it looks.

As you say, some things just don't ... feel right. That was EXACTLY my reaction to the early on Massive Pop Rush Strat. Hence I didn't practice it. OTHO I didn't give poster who used it a hard time. Of course this is all easy for me as I am pretty much exclusively SP, so I don't have to worry about other peoples proclivity's.

And that EVIL approach to the GL use (kinda reminds me of pillaging one's own road to allow a city to be cut off from the rest of one's civ and hence to be still able to build cheap warriors) is quite the exploit ... and the idea of two for one with ToA ... shudder.

Well, take care and enjoy Civ. I hope the final version of Beta 1.12 comes soon. Here's to Civ!

 

[superslug]

Originally posted by Grille
Btw, the most 'evil' version would be to indeed build it on your own in a carefully placed city. Eventually gain some ancient techs. Just gift it away before education and retake it comparably easily.

It wasn't for lack of trying, but they beat me to the punch on TGL. I decided to stick with the game though because I did land the Pyramids and ToA, as well as four luxuries and a good map.

Originally posted by Grille
Now in C3C, ToA gets obsolete with education, too. So why not combine two things here. Exploit or admirable strategic planing? - you decide.

In my case, I consider it strategic planning. My only purpose in continuing to play this version of Civ (rather than wait for IV) is because I somehow have the ability to score high enough to make the HOF. Having said that, my only goal/fun in games is score score score.

Exploits, immoral behavior, ungentlemenlike conduct-these concepts are all foreign to me. The AI are cold emotionless computer programs, I'll act no differently (save sheer rage for the Mongols, but that's a long story going back to Civ1).

For me, there are only two kinds of player tactics and exploitation has nothing to do with it. There is only the legal, and the illegal. Since TGL exploit is legal for the HOF (if it's still in C3C), then I shall use it in conjunction with ToA.

The flip side is, if by some small unlikely chance my using the combo produces a score considered unfair where a ruling is made banning such action and my game is removed, then so be it.

Originally posted by Grille
Also, if you're 1.12-patched, could you have a glance at free ToA temples culture output after 1000years?

Can't help you there I'm afraid. I didn't build any before ToA, and even if I had I would have sold them much as I do the few granaries I build before getting the Pyramids.

 

[Grille]

I mean exactly those free temples - if you didn't build any temple before ToA, that's perfectly fine.

In v1.00 these gave still 2cpt if ToA was 1000 years old (logically, the free temples are then also 1000years old in cities that have been plopped/captured befor ToA was completed). I just wonder if they can give 4cpt in v1.12.

 

[superslug]

Misread you, my bad! I'll let you know...

 

[col]

Anyone know if a GA is triggered by an army containing UUs?
How about a mixed army with a UU and other units?

Its not a situation I've ever come across before. I dont want to trigger my GA yet. Can I load my UU into an army and kick a** that way?

 

[wilsonchose]

Can I play with one of the new civs in C3C in just a regular epic game like I could play before I got the new game? I like the Conquests, but I wanted to try the new tribes from scratch without playing the Conquests...

 

[kring]

Originally posted by col
Anyone know if a GA is triggered by an army containing UUs?
How about a mixed army with a UU and other units?

Its not a situation I've ever come across before. I dont want to trigger my GA yet. Can I load my UU into an army and kick a** that way?

In my quick test, UU's trigger GA's if part of an Army.

Originally posted by wilsonchose
Can I play with one of the new civs in C3C in just a regular epic game like I could play before I got the new game? I like the Conquests, but I wanted to try the new tribes from scratch without playing the Conquests...

You can play any of the seven additional civs (Hittites, Portugal, Netherlands, Sumeria, Byzantine, Inca, or Maya) in the Epic Game.

 

[metalhead]

Originally posted by Wardog
A technical question: I haven't bought Conquests yet, but I would like to know if the game is even a little bit faster when playing on huge maps with 16 civs, or Firaxis hasn't touched it?

My games seem to be running noticeably slower in Conquests than they did in PTW. It's still pretty fast on my box, but turns seem to take 15-20 seconds when they used to take about 10.

 

[Raggamuffin]

Does anyobody know if tampering with the editor still makes the hall of fame malfunction as it did in PtW?

 

[Eyeoftiger]

Originally posted by Raggamuffin
Does anyobody know if tampering with the editor still makes the hall of fame malfunction as it did in PtW?

Not really, since if you mod the base rules, you no longer will receive any place in the Hall of Fame (except for the Conquests).

 

[Raggamuffin]

Originally posted by Eyeoftiger


Not really, since if you mod the base rules, you no longer will receive any place in the Hall of Fame (except for the Conquests).

So let's say I edit or add a unit will my scores still be recorded in the HOF?

 

[amtrick]

Folks:

Playing Dutch with Beta 1.12 patch. Have noticed two things and I am wondering if they are bugs or features:

1. I have saltpeter, but don't get the unit option to build Musketeers. Noticed that Swiss Mercs (Dutch UU) upgrade directly to Riflemen. Does this mean Dutch can't build Musketeers?

2. I built the Knights Templar wonder and started cranking out Crusaders. Noticed that Crusaders can build Fortresses/Fortifications, just like Workers. Bug or Feature?

 

[lbhhh]

Originally posted by amtrick

1. I have saltpeter, but don't get the unit option to build Musketeers. Noticed that Swiss Mercs (Dutch UU) upgrade directly to Riflemen. Does this mean Dutch can't build Musketeers?

2. I built the Knights Templar wonder and started cranking out Crusaders. Noticed that Crusaders can build Fortresses/Fortifications, just like Workers. Bug or Feature?

Welcome to CFC

1. You're right, you can't build musketeers, which in my view is fine since the UU has same defense and costs a lot less.

2. This is a feature ( sometimes quite handy)