Civ III: Conquests Patch Fix Request

I would like to have the "select all" button in the Foreign Advisor screen being pre-selected. I really see no reason, why someone wouldn't like to have all information available, but maybe there is someone. For that, make it pre-selected so that it can be turned off again.
 
This probably been raised up before in the past...
Now that mongols is seperated from Chinese, is it possible to reclassify the chinese trait?
IMHO, Chinese should be scientific (afterall, they discover compass, invented paper, printing method and firearms) and either agricultural (look at the population size...) or industrious (look at great wall, numerous temples and bridges, etc etc)


edit note: corrected mis-spelling as noted by ted, ta!
 
@smphang: You seem to be confusing Industrial with Industrious :)


Ted
 
Originally posted by Gogf
Please, please, please allow us to turn of city razing in the next version. That would be so helpful, as in some scenarios, it wouldn't be realistic to raze cities, and even if the players understand this, and don't have a a reason to raze them, the AI will raze them. Or maybe to turn it off in certain eras, like if you modded to epic game to turn off razing in Moder Times, because nobody would raise a city today.

Yes, please a nonrazing feature would be wonderful for the game
 
I don't know if this has been posted before....but please, please, please try to get rid of those "out of sync" errors in multiplayer mode. I tried playing with 2 friends, we're all on dsl, and after about 150-200 rounds we get this damn error every 5 or 6 turns. I even encountered this problem on LAN games. It's starting to get on my nerves !!! I'm not flaming here, Civ has always been one of my favourite games, but this really p***es me off. I've been waiting for a Civ MP mode ever since Civ I...now its there but not really playable. Aaaargh. ;-)

OR if there already is a solution to this problem, please let me know. I have browsed this and other forums but havent found one that works.
 
Another important thing I would love to see in the next patch.

Please, please, please make it possible to get shields after you chop down jungles. I believe that this has been overlooked but if it has not, why not add it to the game? I doubt that it is hard to do after all the new features I have seen added in patches.
Is it realistic?
Yes.
Is it logical that you should get shields?
Yes.
Will it make jungles more attractive to settle by?
Absolutely!!!


Please consider this.
 
I agree with Civrules.
In principle, jungles should not only give shields, but some commerce as well, since a lot of the most precious lumbers are coming from jungles/rainforests in the real world. But this might require major works on the code, so I would be satisfied with chopped jungles giving the "normal" amount of shields, as forests do.
 
Then why not have wetlands give the bonus too?


Ted
 
Clearing wetlands doesn't really give much bonus in real life, like forest and jungle.
 
I know this has been an issue since CivIII Vanilla came out, but a couple of threads on rep hits got me thinking about it.

What about having the advisor tell you what kind of deals you would be breaking if you declared war on another civ? This would be in the same message that comes up asking if you are sure about declaring war. That way, the player at least will know when/if they are breaking any deals that might cause the rep hit. Then, they can't say that they didn't know.

I don't know how much coding that would take but I could see it just being an output of any active deals you have with the civ in question. Seems like that would not be as much work as having to revamp the whole reputation subroutine.

Just a thought.
 
Originally posted by Greyhawk1
I dont know whether this has been mentioned before but the Romans have a city in their city names list called Byzantium which is confusing considering I'm playing the Byzantines in my current game :D

This is correct.

The original name of the place was Byzantium, going back to Classic Greek times (meaning it could legitimately be on their city list, too).

Later in Roman times it was a part of the Roman Empire. After a lengthy period of civil wars between various generals who wanted to be emperor (some of whom made it, for a while), a guy named Diocletian came out on top. He reformed the Empire to divide the administration into Eastern & Western halves, each ruled by an "Augustus" and assisted by a "Caesar" (who each got 1/4 of the Empire to play with). Every 20 years, the Augusti were supposed to retire, the Caesars advance to Augusti and appoint new Caesars from the next generation. The idea was to coopt potential rebels into the administration and provide an orderly succession.

A generation later it broke down, and Contantine ("the Great") came out after another round of civil wars as sole Emperor. He rebuilt Byzantium into a capital for the reunited Empire and renamed it "New Rome" ("Nova Roma"), but everybody else called it Constantinople ("Contantinopolis" = "Constantine's City") and that name stuck.

The Eastern & Western Empires split & reunited a couple more times before splitting for good. The Western half was carved up into Kingdoms by various Germanic tribes and finally put out of its misery in 476 AD. The Eastern half lived on, but on a mostly downward trend, until the Ottoman Turks put it out of its misery in 1456 AD. During that time, since the heart of the Empire was now in Greek-speaking territory, the official language evolved from Latin to Greek. A lot of bad blood arose between the Kingdoms (and Pope) of Western Europe and the Emperors (and Patriarchs) of Constantinople, over religion & politics (and the combination thereof). In modern times, Western European classical scholars wishing to de-emphasis the Roman heritage of that Empire centered on Constantinople took to calling it the "Byzantine" Empire, after the original Greek name of Constantinople. Meanwhile, after the Ottoman Empire fell, the Turks renamed the place (yet again) to "Istanbul".

In summary, Byzantium => Nova Roma => Constantinople => Istanbul. Same spot on the map.
 
What a great first post!

Welcome to CFC Barnacle Bill! :D
 
Originally posted by Tavis
Starting this thread for a listing of things to address with the final update.

Tavis:

First off, I think it is great what you all have done with Civ3 now. I bailed out after the first patch to the original Civ3. It just was too great a step back from the modding & customization abilities we had in Civ2. I just bought Conquests, and I'm very pleased with what I see. You've even solved the old Civ2 issue of keeping the AI from trading techs you use to give different sides unique tech trees!

There are just two big things missing that we had in Civ2:

1) I'd like to be able to open a savegame file in the editor, change things or not, then save it as a scenario. Note that this doesn't have to work as a savegame editor - i.e. to let you save it back to the savegame format after making changes. I'm just talking about turning a game in progress into a scenario. I'm thinking this one should be pretty doable for a patch.

2) The event script system - OK, I don't expect that to come in a patch, but maybe another expansion product (for sure please get it into Civ4).

It would also be great if we could copy & paste things from the rules of one scenario to another.

Also, somebody suggested preventing border violations while at peace. I second that - and suggest that it apply only to land. You should get the same dialogue as when ordering an attack on a unit when you are at peace with its owner - entering a square within someones borders while at peace should cause war, and the AI should refrain from it unless launching a "sneak attack".
 
One thing that really annoys me is the inability to access the menu on the computer's turn and at the start of your turn when it cycles through cities having built stuff etc.

It's not particularly important but it wrecks my head sometimes when I have to wait through a whole turn before being able to load or save and whatnot.
 
Back
Top Bottom