Double Your Pleasure

[konrai]

I am haveing a problem with playing this mod admitidly i am still a newby at this but i downloaded al the bits and put them together but all i can get into is the startup screen. I have no idea what i am doing wrong i would really love to play this as i looks really neat but i need some help anyone got any idea?
Thanks

 

[RobO]

This is more Isaks line of business, but i can give it try.
Are you trying to play is as a scenario? You're suppsoed to play is as if it was the original game, not as a scenario.

 

[kingjoshi]

Hey Konrai, you can check out my ModManager program and see if that helps any. but if you copied over everything and started a new game, I can't see what the problem might be.

The thread is at: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24447

 

[Isak]

Or check out the (very short) troubleshooting guide at the bottom of the install section on the DyP Site.

If that doesn't help, just send me an email, and I'll look into it.

 

[1297ad]

Does anyone have any strategy tips for this mod? It's totally awesome, seemed to work great, but only played it a few hrs...the learning curve is steep! It's like playing a different game, altogether...w/o a manual...

 

[RobO]

1297ad, you can find some startup tips here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?threadid=23380&goto=newpost

It's not a lot, but the startup phase is probably the most difficult one to get used to, as it's very different from the original game.

 

[Higher Game]

Just finished my second game of DyP. It kinda burned out by the Industrial Ages, and I think I know why. It was the AI's production.

I played builder style to get used to the mod. The AI gets extremely weak after the middle ages, where it is at its peak. The AI apparently doesn't go crazy with the production type buildings like I did.

The issue is that the modern military units are very expensive. The AI focuses on making its army before production, but it progresses slowly because it has low production anyway.

Apparently, all of the new productive buildings are in DyP because you are now forced to irrigate grassland. However, you can't take full advantage of hills or forests until you get railroads or the 2nd sea improvement, forgot its name. This really restricts production, and you can see its impact in the middle ages.

However, I took advantage of the high trade and rushed built all of the necessary productive buildings after hitting economics. The AI doesn't do this. As a result, I went from the 3rd place civ to controlling half of the world in 2 or 3 dozen turns. They just couldn't keep up with me!

I would suggest making the productive buildings cheaper and the bonuses higher. I mean, just look at the guild hall! Or the skyscraper. Or the mill and wind mill. Or the slave market. Then the factory and coal plant. With low production, you are forced to rush this stuff, but the AI doesn't. The translates into a tremendoes late game edge.

Also, while combat is balanced early on, "super units" hurt the game a bit. I fought 1 AI with only 3 dragoons against about 20 of mine. As I said earlier, stuff is too expensive!

Tech progression is perfect in regent. You actually are in the industrial ages at about its real time. However, the increased cost of stuff makes it difficult to take advantage of it. The game plays a little more smoothly in monarch+ because the AI shares techs liberally. In regent, I was using armor and infantry before Germany discovered knights!

As for buildings, I like the idea of the obelisk and cultural buildings, although cultural victory becomes too easy to get. I do not like the idea of a maintenence free temple that requires no resources and only needs 10 production. Ahhhhh!!! The barbarian rider should be 3/3/2. An attack of 4 is too steep.

Government types are screwed up. I have to be honest. Egalitarisnism, needed for Democracy, is too important. I mean, you even get some military support and police benefits in Democracy!

Workers work far too slowly in Despotism and too quickly in Democracy. Social Democracy is ok because it comes late in the game. But I don't think some government types should be so freakishly better than others. Despotism is horrible, and the AI isn't bright enough to get out of it sometimes. The government types need re-evaluating.

Now, as for leaders.... I recently read in a thread that a Firaxis guy said that additional heroic epics (that you can get in a mod) do NOT stack benefits in making new leaders. If this is true, you should change many of the wonders you have. I think some of the leader making wonders should go obsolete and correspond to the era. Heroic Epic for ancient, and National Monument (I think) for modern. Too many leader wonders.

And there is no way the AI would be bright enough to use disbandable leaders. That simply would not work. I would just recommend leaders be for making armies only. With production tightly capped and improvements overpriced, leaders would become too much of a factor, mainly because the AI doesn't know how to use them properly.

DyP is great for half of the game, but it screws up later on. I guess that is ok, because its is then just like the real game! Modern units have too many hps and the combat is too predictable with 12/3/3 Cavalry. It is also too long. Cheaper units, buildings, wonders, would help the mod a lot. Silly units like the Dragoon and Cavalry should be looked at again. DyP really helps naval combat a lot, I like that. Overall, it was a satisfying game. Keep it up!

 

[konrai]

Thanks for the replys but I seem to be having a new problem now. I dasically gave up on figureing out what I did wrong with settign the mod up mabey i'll try again another time. Now after uninstalling everrything including the full game I resarted my computer and went to intall it again. Well it won't start It was running fine befor i tryied to enstall the dyp mod. When I try and get it to start I get a screen that says I need to put the CD in and start again well I have done that about 25 times and i have now installed and uninstaled it about the same # of times! Please help I can't even play the game i had going( And I was kicking butt !!!!! HELP!!! Also i downloaded the dil thingy that it said i was missing but still nada.

 

[Isak]

Thanks for the input Higher Game. We've never gotten a whole lot of input on the later stages of the game, so overall, you're probably (that is: Undoubtedly) right that a lot of stuff needs balancing. I'll let Our Fearless Leader go into detail (or perhaps add a few more comments later when I have more time ) but I've got a few comments.

Originally posted by Higher Game
I would suggest making the productive buildings cheaper and the bonuses higher. I mean, just look at the guild hall! Or the skyscraper. Or the mill and wind mill. Or the slave market. Then the factory and coal plant. With low production, you are forced to rush this stuff, but the AI doesn't. The translates into a tremendoes late game edge.

I'm not sure lowering cost of buildings would improve on the situation. Apparently the AI doesn't even build a lot of improvements in the regular game, so I don't think it's high costs that's detaining it. Lowering the costs would then only unbalance it even more. Perhaps lowering the cost of Units instead, would be a solution, but I think we need to do a lot more testing (and perhaps string up Soren Johnson until he reveals the inner secrets of the AI to us ... )

Tech progression is perfect in regent. You actually are in the industrial ages at about its real time. However, the increased cost of stuff makes it difficult to take advantage of it. The game plays a little more smoothly in monarch+ because the AI shares techs liberally. In regent, I was using armor and infantry before Germany discovered knights!

Don't think we'll ever lose this syndrome - some civs will always be lagging behind terribly - like in real life I guess.

As for buildings, I like the idea of the obelisk and cultural buildings, although cultural victory becomes too easy to get. I do not like the idea of a maintenence free temple that requires no resources and only needs 10 production.

Do you mean the Shrine? Actually the Shrine doesn't give any cultural bonus, and only costs 10 if you're playing as a Religious civ.

Ahhhhh!!! The barbarian rider should be 3/3/2. An attack of 4 is too steep.

Being a viking myself, I love the fact that the so-called barbarians are now a force you will have to fear for a long time, rather than the push-overs in the regular game.

Government types are screwed up. I have to be honest. Egalitarisnism, needed for Democracy, is too important. I mean, you even get some military support and police benefits in Democracy!

It is not supposed to portray modern democracy, but the democracy present in the ancient city states of Greece for example - check the civilopedia blurb. (yes, this one is in, and is correct, I think )

The government types need re-evaluating.

No doubt about that - they are the favored subject of discussion between RobO and Kal-El, while I try to just stay out of their way, while the debate rages . Don't think we've managed to release a new version yet, where governments hadn't been changed in one way or another.

Now, as for leaders.... I recently read in a thread that a Firaxis guy said that additional heroic epics (that you can get in a mod) do NOT stack benefits in making new leaders. If this is true, you should change many of the wonders you have.

It is true - I asked Mike B. this question and the answer was clear - they will not work. So we will change them in an upcoming patch, but we're waiting for Firaxis to release the new editor, hoping it will give us wonderful new stuff to use these wonders for - Anyway, the many leader wonders were originally added because most people complained they could play several games without ever seeing a leader, so it was hoped that having several wonders with the effect of the Heroic Epic, would increase the chance.

I think some of the leader making wonders should go obsolete and correspond to the era.

Would be nice, but unfortunately small wonders cannot become obsolete with the current editor.

And there is no way the AI would be bright enough to use disbandable leaders. That simply would not work. I would just recommend leaders be for making armies only. With production tightly capped and improvements overpriced, leaders would become too much of a factor, mainly because the AI doesn't know how to use them properly.

Exactly how many leaders do you guys get in each game?? I've played about 30-40 full games (not all DyP) and seen maybe 5-6 in total - I fail to see how the Finish Improvement flags can be so unbalancing

DyP is great for half of the game, but it screws up later on.

Don't worry, we're working hard to screw it back in place (please don't ban me for that PH76 ) and if you continue to play DyP, we'd really love to get more comments like these. Thanks.

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by konrai
When I try and get it to start I get a screen that says I need to put the CD in and start again well I have done that about 25 times and i have now installed and uninstaled it about the same # of times!

Sorry, doesn't really sound like the DyP mod is your problem. This message is the Copy protection scheme which is in the Civ3.exe file. The DyP mod doesn't overwrite this. It could either be due to a corrupt install, or a bad cd.

Also i downloaded the dil thingy that it said i was missing but still nada.

Do you remember which DLL file it was - sounds more like a Windows problem.

Still, feel free to mail me directly. I've installed (and re-installed, and re-installed, and...) Civ3 and DyP more than most people, so....

 

[IXIRandyIXI]

Great job on the mod, guys! I've played 3 games to the late Industrial Ages - early Modern Ages and have enjoyed playing the mod so far.

There's a few minor problems, though, such as certain units not upgrading to other units, so they can still be built, even when they are obveously obsolete for the time period. For example, since the Privateer does not upgrade to any other unit, I can still build it in a time period where I can build Battleships and Carriers! It would be nice to keep all of the obsolete units upgrading to more modern ones, so you won't end up with a large list of units in your build screen, that you will never even build.

Also, another small problem, is that when I went to check the information on the Communist and Fascist governments, nothing came up. After exploring around in the civ3mod.bic file, I found that one of you accidently entered 'GOVT_Communist' and 'GOVT_Fascist' in the government's civilopedia entries. All you need to do is change the 't' to an 'm' at the end of each of the government names, and it'll be fixed, though.

As for movement along roads, why only 2? This isn't very realistic, if you ask me. From what I have learned about history, I know that the Romans used roads to quickly move their legions around their empire to guard against barbarian attacks. Roads helped the legions get to where they were to guard much more quickly than they would have without roads. So, why not have the movement along roads be 3, or even 4? It's really a pain in the arse to move troops around your lands (with roads) on a huge map without railroads!

Lastly, the citizens eating 3 food instead of the normal 2 really hurts the civilizations who don't start out with very good land. I haven't tested this (because I changed it back to 2 after my first, unfinished game), but it would probably even make it so that only the cities with a large amount of food coming in (and therefore, low production) can grow out past 10. Just a small annoyance.

I've been testing the tech rate for huge maps (Regent difficulty) to try and get it so that you discover the correct technologies somewhere around the (historically) accurate time period. I just keep on raising it and raising it, but I haven't managed to slow the AI enough to stay back discovering the correct technologies during the (historically) accurate time. I think it's the Expansionist civilizations gaining technologies from the "goody huts" (especially on the World Map) that does this.

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by Randy24242424
It would be nice to keep all of the obsolete units upgrading to more modern ones, so you won't end up with a large list of units in your build screen, that you will never even build.

True, that has been bothering me a bit too - I'll see if I can convince Our Fearless Leader. His idea was to make it historically correct so that once you develop modern ships, your ol Privateers and Galleons would be useless and would have to be scrapped. But we don't really need more things cluttering up the build list IMHO.

Also, another small problem, is that when I went to check the information on the Communist and Fascist governments, nothing came up.

Thanks, it will be fixed along with the rest of the missing civilopedia entries ..soon, I promise...

As for movement along roads, why only 2? This isn't very realistic, if you ask me. From what I have learned about history, I know that the Romans used roads to quickly move their legions around their empire to guard against barbarian attacks. Roads helped the legions get to where they were to guard much more quickly than they would have without roads.

Don't think this will ever be historically correct, whichever system we choose. Personally I would like to slow down railroads too, but that is not possible at the moment. The Legionaires still move twice as fast on roads as they would have if not on roads. I don't really think anyone would be able to move 3 times as fast just because he was using a road - I know for sure, I am not able to, anyway

Lastly, the citizens eating 3 food instead of the normal 2 really hurts the civilizations who don't start out with very good land. I haven't tested this (because I changed it back to 2 after my first, unfinished game)

ooooh, don't tell me you changed it - no offense, but it isn't really Double Your Pleasure then - this is a cornerstone of the mod and everything else is (or will be) balanced carefully around this. It is supposed to make early growth harder, but the situation gets to normal (well, almost normal) once you discover Crop Rotation.

I've been testing the tech rate for huge maps (Regent difficulty) to try and get it so that you discover the correct technologies somewhere around the (historically) accurate time period. I just keep on raising it and raising it, but I haven't managed to slow the AI enough to stay back discovering the correct technologies during the (historically) accurate time. I think it's the Expansionist civilizations gaining technologies from the "goody huts" (especially on the World Map) that does this.

Well it's a bit hard to know for sure since the AI hasn't been hindered by the 3 Food Consumption thingie, but the AI to AI trade levels might still be adjusted a bit, I guess. In the games I've played, I've usually followed an almost correct historical timeline tech-wise, and this appears to be what most people experience ... but, give us more feedback, it's the only way we'll ever know (since we hardly have time to play the thing ourselves )

Thanks for the input - keep it coming.

 

[IXIRandyIXI]

True, that has been bothering me a bit too - I'll see if I can convince Our Fearless Leader. His idea was to make it historically correct so that once you develop modern ships, your ol Privateers and Galleons would be useless and would have to be scrapped. But we don't really need more things cluttering up the build list IMHO.

Well, I'd rather have it that way, too. But is there really any other way (right now) to make it so that you can't build a unit once you've discovered a certain technology, without having it upgrade to some other unit?

Don't think this will ever be historically correct, whichever system we choose. Personally I would like to slow down railroads too, but that is not possible at the moment. The Legionaires still move twice as fast on roads as they would have if not on roads. I don't really think anyone would be able to move 3 times as fast just because he was using a road - I know for sure, I am not able to, anyway

Well, just imagine walking into a forest without roads or anything to help you find your way through. Then imagine having a road help guide you through. See what I mean?

ooooh, don't tell me you changed it - no offense, but it isn't really Double Your Pleasure then - this is a cornerstone of the mod and everything else is (or will be) balanced carefully around this. It is supposed to make early growth harder, but the situation gets to normal (well, almost normal) once you discover Crop Rotation.

Ah-hah...I see. I'll set that back, then. Maybe that will also help slow the rate at which the AI will be discovering technologies. Oh boy, now I have to restart a game I've been playing for a couple few hours now!

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by Randy24242424
Well, I'd rather have it that way, too. But is there really any other way (right now) to make it so that you can't build a unit once you've discovered a certain technology, without having it upgrade to some other unit?

No, don't think so. It would be so nice to make units, improvements etc disappear from the build list based on the Age, or at least the discovery of a certain tech (if anyone from Firaxis is reading this...it is a hint )

Well, just imagine walking into a forest without roads or anything to help you find your way through. Then imagine having a road help guide you through. See what I mean?

Sure, for Forests, Jungles and Mountains it would make sense, perhaps, but not for Plains, Grassland and Hills, IMHO. So the effects even out, in the long run..

 

[RobO]

Higher Game and Randy24242424

This is outstanding

AFAIK we havent had so much constructive feedback in such a short time before.

Keep it up

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by Higher Game
Just finished my second game of DyP.

First let me say, Thank you. Thank you for playing the mod and thank you for the great feedback!

It kinda burned out by the Industrial Ages, ... .

We'll see what we can do to fix that.

... and I think I know why. It was the AI's production
I played builder style to get used to the mod. The AI gets extremely weak after the middle ages, where it is at its peak. The AI apparently doesn't go crazy with the production type buildings like I did.

We wil try and address this in the next patch. But as Isak said, the AI seems to place a premium on building its military. I will have to take a look at the AI governors and see what I can come up with. I think the problem may be that only the Industrious civs are flagged to build production buildings often. We will try it with everybody having that flag and see what happens.

The issue is that the modern military units are very expensive. The AI focuses on making its army before production, but it progresses slowly because it has low production anyway.
...
I would suggest making the productive buildings cheaper and the bonuses higher. I mean, just look at the guild hall! Or the skyscraper. Or the mill and wind mill. Or the slave market. Then the factory and coal plant. With low production, you are forced to rush this stuff, but the AI doesn't. The translates into a tremendoes late game edge.

I agree with Isak, that lowering the cost would only increase the players advantage over the AI. But we are actually working on adjusting the costs of the earlier imporvements down, so this may help in the earlier stages.

Also, while combat is balanced early on, "super units" hurt the game a bit. I fought 1 AI with only 3 dragoons against about 20 of mine. As I said earlier, stuff is too expensive!

Please clarify "Super Units".

Tech progression is perfect in regent. You actually are in the industrial ages at about its real time. However, the increased cost of stuff makes it difficult to take advantage of it. The game plays a little more smoothly in monarch+ because the AI shares techs liberally. In regent, I was using armor and infantry before Germany discovered knights!

Hmmm, this sounds a lot like recent U.S. military actions. High Tech army versus stone age civilization. Seriously though, if the AI is still trading techs as liberally as before, as I know they are, they should not be too far behind you if at all in the tech race.

Ahhhhh!!! The barbarian rider should be 3/3/2. An attack of 4 is too steep.

Barbarians were a problem for civilized nations until the advent of useful gunpowder weapons. Even the most powerful empires feared the raging barbarian hoardes. The next patch will make the Great Wall a bit more potent, so if you are really having problems with the old Barbs you may want to put a higher priority on this one.

Government types are screwed up. I have to be honest. Egalitarisnism, needed for Democracy, is too important. I mean, you even get some military support and police benefits in Democracy!

I am not sure I understand you correctly, are you saying that leaving despotism behind for a higher form of government is too important?

Workers work far too slowly in Despotism and too quickly in Democracy. Social Democracy is ok because it comes late in the game. But I don't think some government types should be so freakishly better than others. Despotism is horrible, and the AI isn't bright enough to get out of it sometimes. The government types need re-evaluating.

Despotism IS horrible. You are right. But I will look into doing something about getting them to switch out of it as soon as they can. Which governments do you think are freakishly better than others. I tried to balance them against the other forms that are available at or around that same time. i.e. republic, democracy, monarchy and theocracy are supposed to balance against each other. Communism, fascism, federal republic and social democracy are meant to balance against each other, and anarchy and despotism are supposed to be avoided if at all possible. You may be pleased to know, and you may want to adjust in your own bic, that Federal Republic and Social Democracy will both have High War Weariness in the next release.

Now, as for leaders.... I recently read in a thread that a Firaxis guy said that additional heroic epics (that you can get in a mod) do NOT stack benefits in making new leaders. If this is true, you should change many of the wonders you have.

You don't know how disappointed I was when I read that. Ask RobO, he can attest. But we pick ourselves up and we move on. I have come up with a, IMHO, beautiful solution to that problem and an even better use for those wonders. Hopefully we don't run into a similar problem.

I think some of the leader making wonders should go obsolete and correspond to the era. Heroic Epic for ancient, and National Monument (I think) for modern. Too many leader wonders.

I have been lobbying for the ability to make improvements and small wonders obsolete since the inception of this mod. Hasn't happened yet. Keep your fingers crossed.

DyP is great for half of the game, but it screws up later on. I guess that is ok, because its is then just like the real game!

shoot I was hoping to make it better than the original.

Modern units have too many hps and the combat is too predictable with 12/3/3 Cavalry.

Too predicatble! First people are complaing about spearmen killing tanks and now its too predictable! Ah me! Ok, I'll take a look at it. You know you should stack some defensive units with those Dragoons. There are clear offensive units and then there are units that need to go along with them so that 3 dragoons can't wipe out 20 dragoons. Won't see that happen if there are some musketmen stacked with them.

It is also too long.

Thats what she said. bu dum bum.
But seriously folks, are you talking about the combat or the mod.

Cheaper units, buildings, wonders, would help the mod a lot. Silly units like the Dragoon and Cavalry should be looked at again.

Why are the Dragoon and the Cavalry silly? Do they make you laugh? Are they some painted face clown there to amuse you? Sorry, why do you think they are silly?

DyP really helps naval combat a lot, I like that.

Cool, that was one definitely one of the things we were aiming for.

Overall, it was a satisfying game. Keep it up!

We aim to please. Thanks again for the response.

Randy, I will get to your comments later.

 

[Higher Game]

Sorry for not clarifying. Combat lasts too long. Have a 10 hp unit attack another 10 hp unit. Repeat 20x. Also, I think there might be a defence factor in attacking. In a scenario when my cavalry attacked an infantry.

12/3/3 cavalry (I think, not checking)
8/10 infantry

Cavalry injures infantry. Infantry injures cavalry. And so on. The 12 attack is a little too steep, but not much. It should be 10/5/3. Infantry is perfect as it is.

The tank has a little too much defence. It should be a little more vulnerable, but not much. As for "super units." The Crusader is available early on, and has a lot of power for its time. 8 attack against a pikeman's 4 defence is very steep. The AI isn't bright enough to figure out how weak it is on the defence. So it should be a little weaker. And the AI can't afford the high cost of the super units, so that is why it only had 3. I think there should be more emphasis on the whole war, instead of a few battles that could deside the whole thing. In total, almost all of the units should be slightly weakened but reduced in cost.

The barbs are ok at regent. However, it is just silly to allow them to sack your cities. This is actually more efficient than fighting back. Please tell me there is some way you could make them better. In my current game, I leave science as high as possible because gold doesn't last long.

I like the idea of mining forests. This is how I got production, although not much until I made railroads. The workers only make enough food to feed themselves, and you need a surplus to set some on hills/forest! To solve this problem, why not make crop rotation take 3x as long to finish but give +2 food? It would allow more production. Industrial civs should get faster workers, but not much faster. 2x speed is too much, so they should work at 1.5x speed.

As for governments, despotism is horrible. But if it really is that bad, why are there so many in this world? Military support should be higher in despotism. I think 2 per town, 6 per city, and 12 for metro should be fine. There should be a huge military advantage for going this route, although monarchy should be slightly better. Democracy's workers are too fast, especially because democracy is available so early. The Greek democracy wasn't nearly as powerful as the democracy here.

The wonders are ok, but the ones that influence the whole empire needs to be checked again. Sun Tzu's barracks are ok. But Big Ben's clock towers? I think this goes a little overboard. For the cost of making 3 towers normally, you get towers in every one of your cities without maintenence. That's huge.

And leaders are too powerful because they were never designed to rush a 2000 shield wonder in a single turn. They are more common than you think, especially in huge maps. They should be army leaders because that is what they really are for.

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by Higher Game
Sorry for not clarifying. Combat lasts too long. Have a 10 hp unit attack another 10 hp unit. Repeat 20x.

Do you mean the actual process of a battle takes too long to watch.. - hmm. Well if that's it, I guess unchecking "Animate Battles" in the preferences would solve that problem. Not to say you might not have a point about the units, however.

The barbs are ok at regent. However, it is just silly to allow them to sack your cities. This is actually more efficient than fighting back.

That's what people used to do ... hide outside the city or in dungeons and let the barbarians raid the town. Actually I think it provides the incentive to build Walls - something I never did in original Civ3, but actually consider doing everytime I settle on the edge of civilization now. And like Kal-El said, the Great Wall will soon be very important if you're overrun by the Barbs.

As for governments, despotism is horrible. But if it really is that bad, why are there so many in this world?

A wild guess: Because it's great for the Despot

The wonders are ok, but the ones that influence the whole empire needs to be checked again. Sun Tzu's barracks are ok. But Big Ben's clock towers? I think this goes a little overboard. For the cost of making 3 towers normally, you get towers in every one of your cities without maintenence. That's huge.

I may lean a bit towards agreeing with you here, but I'm gonna conduct a thorough analysis of the Buildings one of these days, and I really don't want to make any final statements before that (of course, by that time Kal-El and RobO have probably changed everything around... )

And leaders are too powerful because they were never designed to rush a 2000 shield wonder in a single turn. They are more common than you think, especially in huge maps. They should be army leaders because that is what they really are for.

I agree that there may be a problem when used on the later wonders, but what do you mean when you say: "that is what they really are for" ? - They have the ability to rush improvements in the original too, and some of the leader names (which I threw at RobO in a similar discussion a few days ago) are: George Washington, Lenin, Stalin, Charles DeGaulle....I don't associate these people with Military leadership. That said, we can of course make them act as we want to in the mod, but I personally would not like the Hurry Improvement ability removed - it sort of spoils the point of leaders, if I don't get to choose what to use them for, IMO.

 

[kingjoshi]

Originally posted by Higher Game
As for governments, despotism is horrible. But if it really is that bad, why are there so many in this world? Military support should be higher in despotism. I think 2 per town, 6 per city, and 12 for metro should be fine. There should be a huge military advantage for going this route, although monarchy should be slightly better. Democracy's workers are too fast, especially because democracy is available so early. The Greek democracy wasn't nearly as powerful as the democracy here.

I agree that Despotism is undervalued in this mod. One of my major problems with Civ3 and the mod as well is the governments system. It's probably because I'm an idealist and tend to make things political and philosophical. This game is supposed to blend real history with a "What could've happened' type of thing.

The fact is, Dictatorship and totalitarianism is the MOST EFFECTIVE type of government. That's why all militaries work that way. However, their drawback in government is when people are not happy, then revolutions should be MUCH more likely and violent. However, if there was a benevolent ruler who took care of this people, they would not complain and I dare say, that government would be more effective than this crap in the US. Granted, the US is better than most countries and has made long strides, but compared to idealism , it leaves a lot to be desired.

It's not what government system you have by name, it's how it really works that matters. (I still don't understand why the word democracy has taken the meaning it has since there was already a word for it, Republic!). China is the most populated nation in the world with a messed up one party system. It definitely isn't communistic (far from it) and though it's considered a republic (The People's Republic of China), who do you really get to choose from? So, regardless of the fact you elect people, very few consider it "democratic". Unfortunately, The US is not much better with only being able to select from two parties (realistically). It's definitely corrupted with Gore, Bush, Clinton, where they get their money, who sponsors them, etc. So it's not as though the American public gets a whole bunch of good options either. India is the largest "democracy" in some sense, but their bereaucracy is MUCH worse than the US and their level of corruption is magnitudes worse. I barely want to touch on the only Hindu Kingdom in the world, my native land, where there is a civil war with the Maoists fighting to bring down the King and the current political system, even though Half the legislatures are Communists!

Regardless of the "name" or "form" of government, what matters more is how the people respond to that government and what actually happens. How the government deals with their people, how they protect them, encourage them and help them succeed. I didn't major in history or politics (Computer Science actually), but I can see that a lot of people who did and then spread their "knowledge" don't know what they're talking about.

And though the programmers of Civ3 would like to be realistic or somewhat so, their main goal is to make the game enjoyable, regardless of realism. They also program with their biases of governments, so that must also be factored.

Seriously, is the level of corruption in India so much lower than the Soviets because of the style of government? Is the corruption is Russia so much lower because of their form of government has changed (granted, some improvements have been made, but there have been drawbacks as well). Is the war weariness of the US so much lower than if we had been a monarchy? Take Isreal for example. Their war weariness is not low, and for good reason.

The programmers also decided to make "Republic" the classic definition, but not the same for "Democracy". Even in the stupid "Pledge of Allegiance," which should drop "Under God," it says this nation is a republic. sighs...

Sorry for the rant, but just had to get that off my chest...

Since we have to deal with this system for governments, I'll actually post "constructive criticism" in a later post on governments. Mostly, I've just played and tried not to think about it

Originally posted by Higher Game
And leaders are too powerful because they were never designed to rush a 2000 shield wonder in a single turn. They are more common than you think, especially in huge maps. They should be army leaders because that is what they really are for.

I never seem to get many throughout the course of a game, even when I play with Militaristic civs. Obviously, since it's random, some players will get better "luck" than others.

I think that leaders should keep their ability to do both, keep the caravans, merchants, etc, and also add a unit that only builds armies. just a thought.

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by kingjoshi
The fact is, Dictatorship and totalitarianism is the MOST EFFECTIVE type of government. That's why all militaries work that way. However, their drawback in government is when people are not happy, then revolutions should be MUCH more likely and violent. However, if there was a benevolent ruler who took care of this people, they would not complain and I dare say, that government would be more effective than this crap in the US.

ooooh, I think you boys should lay off on the Machiavelli for a while and read some nice stories instead....

Problem with Despotism is, especially if you're a benevolent ruler, you won't be able to make everybody happy all the time, and people (especially subjects) are very demanding, so it is inevitable some sort of negative reaction will come, whichever road you choose. If you're not a benevolent ruler you will of course just kill all opposition, but that doesn't really help growth and production all that much, and of course it also affects happiness in a negative direction furthermore. Actually the Despot's greatest enemy is: his subjects. Which is why Tyranny only works for relatively small countries. The more subjects you have, the more soldiers you will need to contain riots, stop mass-migrations etc. And the more soldiers you amass, the harder it will be to retain power, as all your lieutenants and captains will of course want to sit on the throne themselves. That is why dictators are apparently most often shot by fellow countrymen under the guise of a so-called revolution.

(I still don't understand why the word democracy has taken the meaning it has since there was already a word for it, Republic!).

I'm not a major in History or Politics either but I do have a copy of the Oxford Dictionary and the subtle difference according to this is: The President. Democracies have no President, or any other kind of semi-leader figure. In other words, to paraphrase good old George Orwell, no one is "more equal than others".

The programmers also decided to make "Republic" the classic definition, but not the same for "Democracy". Even in the stupid "Pledge of Allegiance," which should drop "Under God," it says this nation is a republic. sighs...

And indeed it is - see above . The R.U.S.A