Civ III: Conquests Patch Fix Request

Here is a thought concerning the current resource-model and some scetching of a new one. It's probably civ4-stuff, though, but that's all the more reason to check it out - perhaps we can all together create a better resource system to the hopefully-oncoming civilization 4! :D

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=74574
 
The new aircraft relocation range is a good idea but as it is now it seems to make very little difference. On a large map, I can still relocate a bomber to the other side of the world in on turn. The limitation is meaningless (fighters take a little longer).

I believe the range is 6X operational range. Lower it to 3 or 4. Part of the game is having a defensive strategy. If you can relocate your aircraft (almost) at will it all become too easy.
 
Originally posted by Fanny Brice
The new aircraft relocation range is a good idea but as it is now it seems to make very little difference. On a large map, I can still relocate a bomber to the other side of the world in one turn. The limitation is meaningless (fighters take a little longer).

I believe the range is 6X operational range. Lower it to 3 or 4. Part of the game is having a defensive strategy. If you can relocate your aircraft (almost) at will it all become too easy.

edit: spelling

ACK!! Delete this double post
 
I don't know if this has been adressed before, but can you make the option to raze a city NOT available in the Napoleonic and WW2 scenarios, you know, when you can't build settlers?
 
Currently in the editor, to enable the AI Terraform ability, ALL the terraform actions must be checked. I want to make Combat Engineers (Att/Def >1) that could only do Fortifications, Radar Towers, maybe Airports, maybe Roads.
 
The following is a huge problem in my opinion:

If you view any game in debug mode, any map, any size, any difficulty, the first thing the AI does is set its capitol to build a settler. For some capitols this can be upwards of 22 turns, and for some it may be much less. For those that is it much less if the biggest concern, cause the Civ then sits there for many additional turns waiting for thier city to grow to size 3 to produce that settler.

This is why agricultural AI civs do so well. Most Civs will be waiting for a settler with one turn left to produce, but it still takes 7 more turns for thier city to make it to size 3 from the time they are one turn from producing a settler, but Agricultural Civs have a lower time to grow to size 3 then normal Civs, especially if they get a lucky initial placement, thus they get a big head start on expansion over other Civs.

I understand this must be hardcoded AI REX bahavior but it is so wasteful. They should be programed to build two warriors then a settler (or maybe a granary or worker then a settler) or to do something logical, not just build settler and just wait or hope thier starting location was good enough to finish building the settler at the right time.

What would be best, is if you made it so the AI had a series of If/Then statements it must use to deciede what to build first, and hell, throughout the entire game. I now suddenly have no problem playing Monarch or Emperor that I had before, my problem being that I hated for the AI to get free starting units and insane bonuses, but since they could have 3 warriors easily by the time they make thier first settler, I don't feel so bad letting them have 2 or 4 free warriors right off the bat, that is, as long as I turn off barbs so they don't get all the free techs from huts while I am actually producing my warriors that will be used to explore.

Anyway, please do what you can do fix this, it seems like it is such a huge enormous big deal that affects the entire game as the first 50 or so turns are so important and wasting god knows how long waiting on thier town to grow, or hell, building a settler first is just plain dumb, at least hardcode a different build order, one recommended by some of the best players, rather then just a settler of the bat.

Please consider this change for the final patch that is due this summer, as I can't see it being too difficult to at least change the initial build order, let alone making a few if/then statements to determine a dynamic build order instead of using a plainly bad static one.

I'm going to post this in its own thread, hopefully it will get some attention.
 
I highly appreciate what you're currently doing, and I hope that by the end of February, corruption and FP issues will be set in stone once for all.

Then I think you should try to clear several well-known bugs, like environment ones (when the program runs through production at the beginning of the game), multiplayer annoyance (in PBEM and hotseat games, for instance, we can't see other civs' moves, some pop ups don't show up, there is a little bug with culture when the capital palace gets 1000 years old...), pathfinding issues (RoP rape, trade breaks and reputation hits...). This because I play with the RBCiv rules (otherwise the game is not so much fun, all the more in MP).

I'd also like to see some enhancements in the editor, as I am now interested in doing a mod. Like this 31-civ hard-coded limit : could it be removed, at least up to 63 or something ? Along with limitations on cities and units ? Because I'd like to have 35 civs in my mod : number of trait combos if you give each civ 3 traits out of 7.

P.S. : Keep on the good work with all those stickied threads. Maybe we could have several other threads for each "family" of bugs/cheats/exploits, so as to get rid of them one by one... My 2 cents.
 
May be wrong forum, but what I R E A L L Y miss about the editor is the lack of paste and copy. Exspecially for MP maps it would be nice to be able to draw a starting position and than simply copy and paste it for other civs too. So it would be nicely easy to develope maps with equal starting positions and fair competions in PBEM or MP maps.
 
Re: My Combat Engineer post earlier

Forgot to mention - would like to see workers DENIED the ability to build airfields at least - probably all the other terraform options of a military nature also......

When i invade a separate continent/archipelago/island i either bring a worker along or just wait till i capture one (better) - Then plop down an airfield and airlift in a SOD. A lot cheaper than rushing an airport...............

Too much cheaper. Perhaps this has been covered in another thread. Technically it's not an exploit but it's just too darn easy and i feel guilty every time i do it, and i do it every time i can.

That's why i would like to be able to choose just some terraform options in the editor and still have the terraform flag available to the AI.

Now that i think about it has the AI EVER built an airfield?
Or a Fortification?

How would the AI use something like a true Combat Engineer?
 
What I would really like to se is a right click option to show path.
What I mean is an option to see where the units you have sent somewhere with automatic moves are heading.

I feel this would be very helpful, especiially when you've really started sending out settlers (maybe 10 at a time).

Skodkim
 
@HorseSoldier:

Yes, the AI does build fortifications, but only from time to time. And if it does so, it is almost every time on a ressource (horse, iron, whatever). For sure, there is no strategy-based building the fortifications.
 
Originally posted by Commander Bello
@HorseSoldier:

Yes, the AI does build fortifications, but only from time to time. And if it does so, it is almost every time on a ressource (horse, iron, whatever). For sure, there is no strategy-based building the fortifications.

It builds them on chokepoints too (like when one tile is connecting two land masses).
 
Have a few ideas, these have probably been mentioned, but I didn't have time to read this whole thread

Bug Fixes

infinite bombard range fix
the bug where g then b allows infinite bombard range

disappearing civ fix
am unable to add civs in editor without replacing a current civ. Poland is added with all features and saved, but when played or reopenned Poland has mysteriously disappeared. Is this a bug or is there an undocumented limit to the number of civs?

Improvements--Some of these may be more appropriate under civ4 requests, but one can hope...

Ability to edit the ai. This could be accomplished in the editor or through text files of ai strategy as in age of kings. The ai in civ3 is about the worst player you could imagine, and I would prefer to have the ai get smarter as levels went up rather than the ai getting more bonus units. There are some strategy posts here that would make challenging ai if they could be encoded. This would also allow a variety of ai strategies to be traded here so we could have different flavors of ai for different civs/scenarios.

early PTW had a bug where armies could be unloaded that was quickly corrected--I would still like this back to upgrade units and swap in more powerful units

would like the ability to add worker jobs in the editor so I can have farms, etc.

trading of units

offshore strategic resources (specifically oil) available with offshore platform or the like

Small map versions of the conquests would be nice. I have a job and a family and cannot play huge map games with lots of cities.
 
Solution to hidden CE shields.

Since some people dislike the way the shields Civil Engineers produce are handled (and I think it is a little klunky), how about coloring the shields that they produce a different color?

Since I'm not familiar with the graphic interface, I don't know if this is a 15sec fix or a 15hr fix, but I figured I'd ask anyways.
 
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.
 
Originally posted by Wladislaw
The ai in civ3 is about the worst player you could imagine

Tee hee -- you haven't played, or don't remember, Civ I, Civ II, or SMAC?? :lol:
 
What really annoys me, and shouldn't be a problem to be patched, is that when starting a game and going to choose for the opponents, "random" is just the last option way down the scroll line. "None" is the first, what makes sense. Anyway, the selection should go "None - Random - Civs".
 
Originally posted by Colonel Kraken

This has been talked about before, but I'll bring it up again. It would be nice if Colonies built on the coast had some kind of port that would connect it to the rest of your nation --cities that have ports and are connected by road. This would make colonies much more valuable.

CK [/B]

I second this idea! in fact, this will further enhance the strategic game play...

How often do we find a massive continent spanning its way between two oceans, with perhaps a narraw strip of land mass somewhere in the middle? If the colony also has the port function, it can serve as a transition point to allow your naval force to quickly transfer from ocean A to B without the need to circumferate the entire continent! Think something like Suez canal!
But in order for this to work, the colony needs to remain even within your cultural border though.... hmmn...
 
Back
Top Bottom