Curroption is CRAP!

[NewDestroyer]

.The way curroption works in civ 3 is so messed up .

They make it so the farther u are from ur cap the less u produce what garbage. LA is just as productive as NYC in the real world. Yet thier a continet apart. Even more so Alakska and Hawaii.That's just laziness on firaxi's part.

Over sea's expansion isn't even possible. If the way curroption is today the usa proably wouldn't even exist today becuase england would never have settled on it. People pay $40 + dollers for the game and another $20 + for the expansion. What a rip off.

 

[china444]

Clearly you LIKE other aspects of the game(war,culture,cool stuff)
Right?
Its not a waste of money!

 

[warpstorm]

You do know that you can change this is the editor, don't you?

 

[smalltalk]

Would you rather like to handle:

100 citiies without corruption

or

10 cities with severe corruption

--> you might win anyway

 

[sumthinelse]

You could also add more forbidden palace-type small wonders in the editor....

 

[Vdog]

Why do all these newbies come and complain about everything, seriously, its starting to piss me off. Half the time they dont know what they are talking about, why dont you just adjust corruption in the editor?

 

[Klasanov]

of course, and America is a democracy.

Switch to Democracy and you'll see less corruption.

 

[MadScot]

New Destroyer

CA makes a lot of stuff - how much of it is stuff that DC wants them to make, and how much is stuff they make of their own accord? Corruption isn't just 'waste', it's productive capacity devoted to doing other than what the government wants.

And much of the impetus behind imperialism was securing resources for the home country; many imperial policies acted to reduce manufacturing in the colonies, the idea being that the colony would provide a market for the goods produced at home. Britain certainly did not colonise with a view to providing competition to the cotton mills of Lancashire, but rather to secure cotton for the mills, for example, and markets for the produced clothing.

And if distance corruption is cramping your style and you don't want to mod the game, either plan your empire carefully, build the Palace and forbidden Palace in key locations and build lots of courthouses and police stations, or play as communist (planned economy) where the distance factor is removed and corruption is more general.

 

[lz14]

I think 'corruption' and 'waste' in the game also involves 'transport'. A far away colony takes ages to transport goods to the home country. The game system doesn't implement that, so they used the word 'corruption'.
It takes months to transport things from US to Britain, and it costs ships, workers etc. Not to say you damage hips on the way.
From LA to DC you'll also need a lot of trains, planes, ships etc.
Bigger land simply means you need a lot more resources to transport things around. But in the game, if there's no corruption, all these things happen instantly and with no cost at all.

 

[heikeott]

Please remember that some of us don't have an editor yet, and some people don't know how to use it. I like the game, but the waste and corruption do get rather frustrating if one has a large empire. Outlying cities are almost worthless unless they have a luxury or strategic resource.

 

[Chieftess]

Corruption in Civ3 1.07 was really bad, but it's been improved in later patches (1.29 being the latest). You could think of the Forbidden Palace being in Sacremento or SanFrancisco. Hawaii isn't exactly productive (it would be a few hills in Civ terms). Alaska would be tundra (low population) with an oil resource.

 

[Clown2TheLeft]

Actually, Chieftess, I'd say the Forbidden Palace of the US was Las Vegas. And I think that if Firaxis substituted "Cost of Living" for "corruption and waste" there'd be significantly fewer complaints about it...


Later!

--The Clown to the Left

 

[Strider]

I think corruption should work this way:

Corruption should be VERY bad at the start, but as you research certain techs it starts to drop (IE: Map Making, Navigation, Radio, Satellites.) The main part being is the corruption is from lack of commuication. As more easier ways to communicate come your corruption drops.

 

[JonathanValjean]

Originally posted by NewDestroyer
.The way curroption works in civ 3 is so messed up .

They make it so the farther u are from ur cap the less u produce what garbage. LA is just as productive as NYC in the real world. Yet thier a continet apart. Even more so Alakska and Hawaii.That's just laziness on firaxi's part.

Over sea's expansion isn't even possible. If the way curroption is today the usa proably wouldn't even exist today becuase england would never have settled on it. People pay $40 + dollers for the game and another $20 + for the expansion. What a rip off.

I agree that corruption in the Modern Era is a bit much, considering that with radio and especially the Internet, we are all so much more connected, hence the frequent usage of such words as "globalization, " "global village," etc. To be honest, your NYC and LA productivity comparison has crossed my mind several times, too. However, in all eras before the discovery of radio, I think that corruption is realistic. (I guess the best solution for me would be to have my rules modified as to allow for multiple forbidden palaces at the dawning of the Modern Era. It would be great to use a couple of great leaders for such a productivity boost.)

Concerning the example you cited regarding the USA and England. What happened in England's colony? Well, for one, the Boston Tea Party took place in 1773, after much resistence to various taxation "acts" that England levied. Of course, you know that the United States ultimately broke off from England, which, if I may add, lends further credence to Firaxis' inclusion of corruption (and to cultural flips). In fact, when you look around the world at England's imperialistic gains, how many of them are loyal to the Queen today? (Disclaimer to all who read this: these references to British Imperialism is in no way an assault on England, but used strictly in an expository manner.)

Interestingly, you call the inclusion of corruption "laziness" on Firaxis' part. Do you really believe that? The reality is that it would take an appreciably greater amount of programming to implement corruption, with its myriad determining factors, than it would to have 0% corruption across the board.

In response to your statement about the $40 and $20 price tags that you paid for Civ 3 and PTW: many people here paid $50 and $30, respectively, and I am one of them. Personally, I have derived so much enjoyment out of this game, i would be willing to pay double or triple the cost. To be honest, it isn't exactly the best idea to call Civ 3 and PTW a rip off here. The web site is not "CivBashers.com," but "CivFanatics.com." Please post accordingly.

Despite my rebuttal, I want to say welcome to CFC.

Madscot, you make some excellent points.

 

[Mojotronica]

I really like corruption the way it is, in terms of gameplay. I think that people who don't like it are typically vast-empire conquerer types, who just don't want to deal with the inconvenience.

It's a challenge to be overcome -- you may as well complain that the game Chess only lets you move one piece per turn. If you don't like it, change the rules, but there's no sense complaining about it.

 

[Mojotronica]

May as well dust off this idea while I have a semi-on-topic opportunity. It's my personal crusade to see if I can get the designers to implement it in Civ 4.

I think that the Forbidden Palace should be an expensive city improvement instead of a Sm Wonder. Call it Regional Palace, perhaps.

As a caveat, I think that the city in which each such Regional Palace built should have a small percentage chance to rebel -- either joining a rival civ or spawning a NEW civ... The percentage chance increases the further away the Regional Palace is from the Palace city.

It could take some nearby cities with it for added negative impact.

Units in the rebel city could either be lost, as happens when a city is culture flipped (and the new civ is given a single defender) or converted to the rival civ, OR returned to the Palace city of the jilted civ (which is what happens when a city is traded away.) Whichever is most balanced.

Another variant -- a captured capital city automatically contains a Regional Palace, which can be retained or sold at the pleasure of it's conquerers. Keeping it increases the chance that the city will flip to it's former civ though...

 

[Hygro]

Yeah look at Great Britain, and see how well their colonies fared. They revolted, one way or another (violence, in America, nonviolence in India), and similiar expamples. Also, America has courhouses/police stations in every city, is a Democracoy, and has a forbidden palace on the west coast (thats a guess more then anything else).

 

[jeannie]

Originally posted by Mojotronica

I think that the Forbidden Palace should be an expensive city improvement instead of a Sm Wonder. Call it Regional Palace, perhaps.

I like your idea! It would really help on larger maps!

But maybe it should still have the limitation that you can't rush it - there have been lots of games where I've been cash rich, and I think being able to rush a Regional Palace would give me an unfair advantage - and, of course, I'd be mad as hell if one of my enemy civs did that!

 

[wilbill]

Originally posted by Vdog
Why do all these newbies come and complain about everything, seriously, its starting to piss me off. Half the time they dont know what they are talking about...

"Half the time" might be generous. But I'll stay more-or-less on topic and address what I think may be the root cause of a lot of the dissatisfaction with Civ 3 that's expressed by newbies and some not-so-newbies.
Civ 3 requires something from the player that Civ 1 and 2 did not - patience. In earlier Civ games you could spend a few turns building your core cities, outresearch the AI's, start building one or two specific weapons in large quantities (remember the killer catapault in Civ 1?) and rampage across the map destroying and capturing cities until you won.
In standard, unmodded Civ3/PTW you can't do it quite that easily. Corruption slows you down. The threat of culture flipping slows you down. The AI's advantages at higher levels - faster research, cheaper trading of advances and bonus units - slow you down.
A good human player can still win via the military domination route, but has to pay at least a little attention to culture, trade, diplomacy, and all the other game elements that "all these newbies come and complain about".

Edit: Removed an ungracious comment or two.

 

[Thunderfall]

What do you guys think about this proposal I posted several months ago (in another forum)?

Check out the screenshot below from the game I am playing... The city of Trondheim has shield production of 32 shields per turn, but 30 of those shields are lost to corruptions (94% loss!). This is under a DEMOCRACY government. I know the city is pretty far away from the capital and doesn't have courthouse and police station yet, but losing 30 out of 32 shields (and 44 out of 47 commerce) to corruption under the most advanced gov't type available is too much and frustrating.

To ensure a city is at least usable w/o courthouses and police stations, I recommend introducing a cap to limit the amount of corruptions under each gov't type.

Example:

Gov't Type | Max Corruption Percentage
---------------------------------------
Anarchy 100%
Despotism 90%
Monarchy 80%
Republic 70%
Communism 60%
Democracy 50%

With these max percentage caps, we'll have the following minimum productions at Trondheim under each gov't type:

Despotism: 32 - (32 * 90%) = 3.2 shields
Monarchy: 32 - (32 * 80%) = 6.4 shields
Republic: 32 - (32 * 70%) = 9.6 shields
Communism: 32 - (32 * 60%) = 12.8 shields
Democracy: 32 - (32 * 50%) = 16 shields

The effect of courthouses, police stations, and Forbidden Palace can remain the same. We can use the same caps for commerce and science.

IMO these max corruption percentage caps will make the game more realitstic and reduce frustration caused by those 1 shield production cities. We also won't need to always use money to rush courthouses and temples in newly captured or distant cities...