Developers "fixing" things that aren't "broken"

[Goober]

I am the only one that does not find huge corruption? I have constantly heard complaints from TONS of people at this site, and virtually everyone seems to think that the corruption is broken. Now, either I don't get out enough, or corruption is not bad (for me). Sure, at the beginning, with despotism, those cities a few too many tiles away have fairly significant corruption, but you build some anti-corruption city improvments, get some nice wonders, change your gov't to Democracy or Communism, and suddenly everything has less corruption. Corruption is a part of the game. Live with it. <I wasn't intending to rant, but here I go anyway> Corruption will never, ever be totally eliminated, just as it cannot be in "real" life. And the FP and SPHQ (I find people not referring to communism enough, even though it is the best gov't type) actually REDUCE corruption. Amazing, ain't it. Now, I don't have all kinds of fancy "corruption calculations", or stats, or whatnot, I just occaisonally look at my cities, and notice the corruption going up, or down, or whatever. If you find corruption annoying in those farflung cities, switch to the better type of gov't, Communism. It actually works in this game. For all those math "geeks" out there, i know you enjoy going through those calculators, and trying to find fault with a pretty good product, but in the long term, this may do more harm then good. I have not installed the patch, and I likely will not. I find the game great the way it is, and I would appreciate if we just made suggestions for Civ4, instead of wasting Firaxis's precious time on making unecessary patches for Conquests.

 

[Arizona_Steve]

It's not the corruption that's a problem. It's the fact that the Forbidden Palace does NOT act as a second palace, contradicting the civlopedia.

Like many people here, I'm hoping it's not by design.

 

[warpstorm]

They call the tournaments ladders because players occupy a 'rung' and move up and down as they play more games and their wins and losses are tallied.

The strongest player I am aware of in ladder play is Fried-Psitalon. (BTW, he is also listed as one of the game designers).

 

[Speaker]

Originally posted by RealGoober
For all those math "geeks" out there, i know you enjoy going through those calculators, and trying to find fault with a pretty good product, but in the long term, this may do more harm then good. I have not installed the patch, and I likely will not. I find the game great the way it is, and I would appreciate if we just made suggestions for Civ4, instead of wasting Firaxis's precious time on making unecessary patches for Conquests.

What are you talking about? Pre-production has barely been started on Civ4, and serious work will not begin until after Pirates has been finished. I have recently paid money for C3C and I want it to work. I'm not sure how you think the patches are unnecessary with the serious gpt bug (we'll leave the FP issues aside for now). Money is being magically conjured out of nowhere, creating multiple AI civs with tens of thousands of coins in their treasuries, artificially pushing the tech pace AND making the buying of military alliances way too easy. Imagine the MP exploit, teaming with your neighbor to build up insane treasuries. Unnecessary? I think not.

I really don't understand your attitude on these boards, RealGoober. You love to put down those so called "math-geeks," who ruin(?) the game by making it easier for the rest of us less-inclined math students to understand. But you are just a johnny-come-lately. These are players who have been vocal members of this community for years and have contributed thousands of posts, while watching the game evolve over nearly a dozen patches and two expansions. You have been here for a month with less than 200 comments, all of those of which I have read being whiny, acting like you know all about the game. If you know so much, why are you a self-professed Chieften player? Maybe because you find Communism to be the best government or similar odd assertions that show that you do not understand the game as well as many.

No, this rant is not intended merely for RealGoober. But lately I have noticed a trend of new posters believing they are the be-all-end-all of Civ3. Without patches and feedback, the game would be as unplayable as it was in its early Vanilla state. It was only through patches that the Deity level was balanced. Try playing Deity on an unpatched version of Vanilla Civ3. It's laughable. Think about all the features that have been added through patches and expansions with feedback from the community (minimap in the editor, stack movement, etc to name small things). I am grateful to Firaxis for all the patches they have put out. I wish that this one had either been a) more-well done (ie the bugs actually fixed) or b) better documented (ie new changes to the FP explained), but its obvious that it was rushed to placate a hot community around the holidays.

So I will have to disagree with you. Having been active on these boards for over a year, and a hardcore Civ3 player since it came out, it is my opinion that finding fault in, what I do agree with you is, a pretty good product, is not harmful, but necessary.

Respectfully,
Speaker (for the "Math-Geeks")

 

[tomart109]

Originally posted by warpstorm
the casual majority (if you are reading this, this is not you)
has no idea of how to get feedback to Firaxis in a way that will be seen.

warp, good point - just by being here (let alone in the beta) i'm no longer in the vast majority with no feedback channel.

But i was, for a long time. A fellow wargamer recommended civ3 to me, two years ago, and i bought it and immersed myself in it for several months, all alone. I suffered with the less-than-perfect manual and worked out what i could. It was only months later, i thought to look online for someone to help with a stubborn question... ...and found civfanatics. I'd never been to a game forum before, (let alone one this good.)

I still feel a bit like one of the vast unconnected civ3 majority, and that's why i've argued with such passion for that viewpoint - (and because they're not here to do it.)

Especially to not mess with corruption (or upgrade costs!) because of some tiny minority's ""exploit""!

 

[The Last Conformist]

IMHO, anyone who suffers perceptibly from the upgrade cost hike was using the exploit.

 

[Goober]

Ok, I did not mean that rant of mine above to come out quite that way. I do apoligize to anyone I offended. Re-reading it, it was quite . . . hasty? I still find that the corruptions works as it should, and that the FP and SPHQ also eliminate corruption in their respective cities. (Pre-1.12, I am still on 1.00) I suppose I am wondering what all the complaints about corruption are all about? Maybe if someone could show me a screenshot of a FP city with corruption, and not in communism.

And yes, I have tried the harder levels, and failed miserably on them.

(First time on a forum like this, btw)

 

[tomart109]

Originally posted by The Last Conformist
IMHO, anyone who suffers perceptibly from the upgrade cost hike was using the exploit.

I quite simply do not understand the above statement.

I think I (and lots of other casual players) use upgrade for its intended, useful purpose, and do not abuse it in any way. I feel that it's WE who are being penalized (unnecessarily, imho) for some unknown exploit, by pricing them too high.

What is the ""exploit"", anyway, just so i know what we're talking about?

 

[Akka]

Hey, I have to show my support to the thread starter. I'm, also, stuffed with "fixes" that just make it worse.

Because of some people using some exploits, we have had uncountable "fixes", that resulted most of the time in simply removing, or breaking, the feature (trading cities, anyone ?).

I'm constantly amazed at how Firaxis is able to, on a systematic basis, make the cure worst than the disease, or at least as bad.

Rather than keeping a perfectly working combat system (from Civ2), they wanted to "fix" it because it was "too complicated".
The combat doesn't go really good, and their actual "fix" (to fix this previous design decision, that was a fix of a sort) made it so worse than before that they canceled it...

Rather than going for a simple formula (distance + number of cities) for corruption, they made it absurdly and needlessy overcomplicated, resulting in a cascade of bugs, that plagued the game from day one, and that they are still unable to fix.
And they still continue to stick with this idiotic corruption system, rather than to switch to a simpler one, and prefer to patch symptoms when they appear rather than the cause of the problems, and each time end up making things even more absurd...

Rather than putting a cap on how fast you can plant a forest, they made it so that you can only reap the ressource bonus of razing a forest once, so that if you did it in 3900 BC, you'll still be unable to use this wood in 1975...

I could go on forever. But I guess you understood the point

 

[PorthosdPirate]

If the end result is different than what the designer intended then it needs to be "fixed".
If you did not notice that anything was broke before a "fix" was made and now YOUR game play is messed up it is called a "feature".
If you do not like the way a "fix" was done make a suggestion.
Those who scream the loudest and longest (not saying that anyone has done that) or just call something to attention tend to have "thier" issue looked at and corrected.

I may be new to posting but I've read these forums for a few years now. There are those on this board who have been providing feed back to Firaxis for years on game play, suggestions, and yes getting things fixed. To those, my hat is off to you and I thank you for helping Firaxis make a better and cleaner game. There are several issues I would not have know what the cause was if I did not read the forums. My day time job is testing software, making fixes and all the bloody decesions that go with the job. When I go home in the evening I don't want to have to do sit down and do the same thing with CIV. I just want to play.

My 2 pence....

 

[AngryGerbil]

I'd like to chime in and say that I too agree with the original poster for the most part. I do not see Civ as a puzzle to be solved. I see it as a game where I get to conquer the world.

I've been playing Civ since it's original inception back when units were tiles. I've never been anywhere near as good as some of the people here. But I do know this, these people DO squeak the most, and they DO get the most grease. And that's fine.

But the issue here is, in my opinion, corruption was not broken in PTW as far as Jor Schmo Civ Player was concerned. (me). It most certainly was broken in factory C3C however. This patch has made C3C playable again and I appreciate that and enjoy it. Maybe it has also fixed the RCP problem, I wouldn't know. (Ignorance can be bliss, I know what RCP is but I choose not to think about it or even attempt it, I choose to remain ignorant about RCP.) If it has, well then by golly I think we got ourselves a winner.

If they can fix the RCP "exploit" without making it to where someone must first know what an RCP is to even compete in the game, then that's great. They should work towards that goal, if it is even possible.

 

[ltcoljt]

I seldom say good things about Firaxis but I'll say this. They stick to their philosophy. Basically, in designing Civ3, the idea was to create a system whereby the AI is able to be competitive. This was largely done by making the game very simple and one dimensional.

Throughout the history of patching and expansions, whenever someone has identified a way to steal a march on the AI, they have went out of their way to correct it. And of course they have often suffered from the law of unintended consequences.

I think I admire their determination and stick-to-it-ness.

Of course I still hold that their entire design philosophy is self defeating. It guarantees a poor game experience, or at the least certainly eliminates any possibility of any real fun getting into the gameplay.

Putting it in SMAC terms, the Firaxis team are drones, but they are good examples of what drones ought to be, uh, if perchance anyone wanted to be a drone.

 

[ltcoljt]

One more thing about the Firaxis philosophy. Taken to its logical conclusion the game that Firaxis seems to want to evolve to would be tic-tac-toe. Balanced, no exploits, boring and unwinable. (Assuming Soren's AI programing skills can get up to that level).

I really don't see why they want to go in that direction but heck, I only play games. What do I know.

 

[joycem10]

agree with the original statement make the game functional and playable for the majority of players. i could give a rat's for the scoring in tournaments etc... if they're worried about this crap for MP games implement it for MPs only.

bring back my olf FP & quit tinkering with the game engine.

 

[Frimlin]

Originally posted by Kubla84
I did not even know what RCP was till I found this forum and know it sort of bothers me to know that I am being penalized if I happen to put 2 cities equally distant from my capital

I too was unaware some players were having problems with "RCP." If this is the "ring city placement" I think it is, then perhaps it concerns me too because I've tried to adhere to some "ring city placement" idea I once read in the War Academy here. I guess I'm going to have to do more research into what exactly the issue was, because I was playing and enjoying the game unaware.

I completely agree with some of the comments that most of us, the silent majority perhaps, had no idea there was a big issue like this *prior* to C3C.

But I can also see clearly that only those who made a big deal of it were seen by Firaxis, and hey, that's how things work sometimes. But it does seem the final result hasn't been the best for all involved -- I too would rather it was how it was in 1.27f. I was happily deluded, perhaps -- a serenity I'd gladly choose again if I could.

I'm just glad my first FP in the BETA patched C3C had a positive effect -- it raised my GPT by 30 and definitely didn't subtract from anything. But that's just me, and that's just from one game.

Anyhow, I'll await the full patch before further comment. But I do not, for one moment, envy Firaxis' position. I hope they'll try and strike a workable balance, but it doesn't seem the ideal fix is staring us in the face -- unless I just haven't read it yet, or unless the BETA patch really has delivered it.

*twiddles thumbs -- whilst still enjoying C3C*

 

[Harrier]

I think something a lot of posters are forgeting is this:

Atari/Firaxis are trying to fix a lot of exploits because they effect multiplayer games. It is unfair on the new multiplayer who plays against veteran players who know about all the exploits ( i.e. RPC).

I do not play online - because my dial-up 56K connection would slow down the game to much and also I am not a very good player so would probally lose anyway.


But the point is this to fix exploits in MP games they also need to change the basic SP (Single player) game engine.

Now who are going to complain alot about gameplay??

The SP - rarely unless the game is really very bad.
The MP - yes, because they are on-line anyway - and my be losing because of the exploits other players are using.

Civ3 is a SP game.
PtW is a MP game.
C3C is a MP game with enough new features (conquests and other additions) to keep the SP gamer happy (when the few bugs have been ironed out).

Do not forget the last (not next) update is currently scheduled in end of Quarter 2 (6 months away).

Now I am not trying to stop discussion here - just make a point.

By all means keep mentioning new bugs/game play issues etc as you find them. In fact the more the merrier. If Atari see repeated bug posts - (with details) from different posters the more likely they are to try to correct them.

But lets not get bogged down in repeating again and again the same points - without introducing new information. A topic that gets to long and repetitive may be ignored.

O.K. - I have now taken my sedative and finished my ranting. But I will post it anyway.

 

[HellboundHeathcliff]

Originally posted by Harrier
I think something a lot of posters are forgeting is this:

Civ3 is a SP game.
PtW is a MP game.
C3C is a MP game with enough new features (conquests and other additions) to keep the SP gamer happy (when the few bugs have been ironed out).

PTW and C3C are SP games with MP capability.

I recommend to everyone i know to use PTW for SP because it has a much better interface and plays better than Civ3. Once the bugs are out of C3C, i will recommend they get and use that.

Hee... you think amazon had C3C for $10 USD because they couldn't keep it on the shelves? They shipped a broken game because they were trying to fix something else and never tested the fix. I've always wondered how much understanding of thier own code they have.

 

[warpstorm]

Actually, C3C was very much geared for MP play. MP balance and closing of exploits was a primary concern.

 

[HellboundHeathcliff]

Originally posted by warpstorm
Actually, C3C was very much geared for MP play. MP balance and closing of exploits was a primary concern.

Perhaps to the developers, but it is still basically a SP game w/ MP capabilities. The additions will make it an even better SP game once it is fixed.

edit: (that shrine must be a long way away)

 

[warpstorm]

It's not that it's so far as that I have yet to get there.