Double Your Pleasure

[Pirateiam]

First I would like to thank you guys for putting this mod together. I had already shelved Civ 3 and had not played in months when by chance I came across your website with the MOD. From what I have seen I believe Firaxis should hire a few of you to do work on thier expansion package.... but that will not happen (Sid Mier use to have a good team but lately I have been questioning thier quality of work). Anyways that subject is for another thread as for the mod package.

So far most of the issues I have come across have been addressed in other posts but here are a few I have found.

Game: Regent level, Kal El's 180X1080 ver 1.5
8 AI's
Me - German

I won around 1700's majority control

1.) It seems that the AI does not build a Navy at all. Could this be a resource issue (flax) ....but they seemed to have all the resources needed.

2.) Since I used CPT real Civ placement all Civs were on the Europe/Asia/Africa/ Continent and Only I tried to colonize America ( see above as part of the problem) I think the problem is the 180x180 map is too big, maybe I just need to add more AI's. the game was more of a lets see who can colonize the most than it was a balanced game. On these same lines does anybody have a smaller world map with DYP resources available. (please do not tell me to use the Firaxis standard map because whoever did that map needs to take some Geography and historical resource classes)

3.) Tech advances, Tech advances, Tech advances!!! No new problem here same problem as the original. I had Panzer tanks by around 1400 AD with AI keeping up with me more or less. The problem is is as soon as I have built a few units like the swordsman (cool new unit) I have to upgrade them. What I want is a longer time to use some of these new units. The tech advance are just too quick so I am trying somethin after this post. I will start a new game with the scenario edit changed to minimal research time set at 8 turns instead of 3. Does anyone think this will help? Has anyone tried this? Will this only hinder me in tech advances or will it slow the AI down? I just want a game (at Regent level) that has knights and swordsman in the middle ages not tanks and bombers lol .

I started to write down some of the bugs like missing info in the CIVpedia and icons incorrect etc... but most have been addressed, but if you want the list I can post it for you. You guys have done great job so far and if you need any help with anythhing let me know ( Iam Software Engineer, mostly PLC machine type programming but I can hack a little) .

 

[Higher Game]

Despotism shouldn't be as horribly weak as it is currently implemented. There has to be SOME benefit to be a bad guy.

As it is, pop rushing is ok in Civ 3 but it is weak in DyP because growth is slower. Despots need a break here.

 

[Isak]

Originally posted by Morbius
hmmm, believe it or not, GENERAL de Gaulle is what the French call him.

Either my control of the english language is slipping away, or people are just bent on disagreeing with me today.

Now, he may be called The General, but his achievements as a soldier are still not what we primarily associate with DeGaulle. He is primarily thought of as the former President of France. It is his achievements as a political figure which has given him respect (if that is the correct word for it) outside and certainly, (as you pointed out earlier) within France. In fact, he may have earned the title of General in the military, but it was his work as a politician, which ensured that the title stuck even when he became the President.

The same goes for Lenin and Stalin - they both played key roles in the October uprising of 1917, but we still think of them as Political figures, before we think of them as soldiers.

Getting back to Civ3 - if the Finish Improvement flag was to be removed, what would the point be of having a Leader Unit anyway?? Why not just let Army Units appear from combat?

Pirateiam: The fact that you had only 8 civ's on a large map may have played an important part in getting Panzer's around 1400. I used to see this happen very often with regular Civ3, but haven't seen it with DyP yet - but we are still in the process of balancing and need your input, so thanks. OTOH, maybe you're just getting too good for Regent level

Higher Game: Despotism is the default govt. It is supposed to be weak to make sure you have the incentive to discover better forms of government.

And, IMHO a Despot who needs a break, isn't going to be a Despot for very long, cause he hasn't learned the first lesson in the Tyrant's Handbook...... "You don't wait until something is offered to you. You go out and take it yourself."

 

[RobO]

Originally posted by Isak
There is only the one flag for leaders, so the point is they wouldn't know to use them to create armies either.

First off, there is no problem gamewise with having Leaders that cannot hurry improvements. The two abilities are set separately and independently in the editor.

Getting back to Civ3 - if the Finish Improvement flag was to be removed, what would the point be of having a Leader Unit anyway?? Why not just let Army Units appear from combat?

But it wouldn't have the same feel and I think the Leader by himself is a lot faster than an army. Could be wrong.
The whole army/leader thingy is a broken feature anyway, but it is even more broken when you add the ability to finish improvements.

 

[kingjoshi]

Damn! I had this long post and accidently closed the browser, so here I go again.

Pirateiam: Damn, you make me feel pathetic. I'm in the 1500s and only learning Education. Some others have learned Chemistry and Music Theory. People keep attacking me too. And I took some cities from the Persians but after a few turns, it reverted to them. I hate that aspect of Civ3 and think that needs to be redone.

Everyone:
Capitalism has done well over the centuries (quite an understatement and I morally hate capitalism and am close to a marxist!). People shouldn't question whether workers work faster when happy or depressed. People will work with a gun pointed to their head, but only fast enough to not get shot. And they could be sabotaging the project or rebel.

This time around, I'm not going to post about the similarities of communism and tyranny and slavery with Capitalism and Working conditions during the early 1900s with free market. As long as there are people, there will be greed. And long as there are people, you will find some smarter ones than others, and some of those smart ones will be wicked and take advantage of others, regardless of government type. By the way, a lot of sweatshops and stuff in China are run by PRIVATE enterprises. And though many uses bribery of government officials to keep from getting arrested and etc., it's private companies from international firms that outsource to them and keep them in business and make the "entrepreneur" wealthy. In my post that I lost, I went into more detail, but you guys don't want to hear me complain about that.

Back to DYP.

Despotism should get 3 units per town/city/metro as a compromise. Isak, as you pointed out, to stay in power, a despot must pay his solders and generals. That should be *inherent* to the government system. That's why the increased is valid and desparately needed.

Republic has an advantage over democracy in everything except corruption and rate cap, assuming worker rate decreases to 2. If I recall correctly, Kal-el realized that if we do use "pure Democracy" in the Greek sense, they surely can't have that kind of work rate if they keep having to vote all the time. So, to balance the two, war weariness should be swtiched so Republic is 2 and Democracy is 1. However, one could argue that both the Greeks and Romans were quite warlike.

Monarchy also gets shafted and it gets harder to balance them unless we make more changes to the other governments, or at least that what it appears to me. I mean, if we raised the free units for despotism, then Monarchy and Despotism will be very similar.

Another thing, the Hurry type for Monarchy should be Population and not Gold. Pyramids and the Great Wall were built by slaves under the order of people with Divine Right. People were not paid off, but many died to build those "wonders". If I recall correctly, in China, people used to refer the Great wall as the Million deaths or something similar.

This leads me to another point. Those wonders should only be allowed to be built under tyranny type governments. Granted, a contracter would build a Pyramid to be a tomb for a person who paid enough. But seriously, come on. Some wonders only get done when ruthless, self-serving people are at the helm.

Finally, leaders. Connecting leaders to Armies makes sense. Leaders (such as ruthless people with diving righs) also got great wonders built. Whether it makes sense to rush any building is questionable. However, since there is no way to built separate parts for a wonder and put them together, or build them in one place and send them to another (e.g., Statue of Liberty), then rushing makes some sense. Now, my understanding was that leaders rushing is a bonus for those that are of the military mind. In my current game, I just took about 20 turns, hurried a merchant and then built Leonardo's Workshop. If commercial civs get a bonus, then it makes sense that military do as well. And really, few great wonders could be built WITHOUT a leader.

well, that's enough for now. I'll return to playing and then post again later today. I guess I need sleep sometime as well...

 

[RobO]

Originally posted by kingjoshi
Despotism should get 3 units per town/city/metro as a compromise. Isak, as you pointed out, to stay in power, a despot must pay his solders and generals. That should be *inherent* to the government system. That's why the increased is valid and desparately needed.

The current limits are set to balance out the economy. Giving Despotism 3 units per city would decrease the maintenance costs too much and would have to be balanced out by other costs.

Republic has an advantage over democracy in everything except corruption and rate cap, assuming worker rate decreases to 2.

That seems to me to be a significant difference.

Monarchy also gets shafted and it gets harder to balance them unless we make more changes to the other governments, or at least that what it appears to me. I mean, if we raised the free units for despotism, then Monarchy and Despotism will be very similar.

I don't agree. Monarchy has no war weariness, less unit maintenance than Democracy and a higher rate cap than Republic.

Another thing, the Hurry type for Monarchy should be Population and not Gold. Pyramids and the Great Wall were built by slaves under the order of people with Divine Right. People were not paid off, but many died to build those "wonders". If I recall correctly, in China, people used to refer the Great wall as the Million deaths or something similar.
This leads me to another point. Those wonders should only be allowed to be built under tyranny type governments. Granted, a contracter would build a Pyramid to be a tomb for a person who paid enough. But seriously, come on. Some wonders only get done when ruthless, self-serving people are at the helm.

There are other ways to build things, but this does raise a point. Your comparison may be unfair.

Kal-el, could you please list a few historical examples of governments that you think fall into the categories Despotism, Monarchy, Republic and Democracy? It would help immensely to focus the discussion.

 

[kingjoshi]

by Kal-el:
How does this relate to the mod. Well, I can see your point on the work rate for democracies being a bit too high, 3 is a lot for an early government and the increased rate cap and lowered corruption should be enough to distinguish it. That will be changed.

by RobO:
That seems to me to be a significant difference.

Let's say the corruption level balances with the unit advantage. Assuming worker rate are equal, then Republic has a 2 to 1 advantage on Military police. Rate cap is an advantage, but you can still change it to anything on any turn, and though it may be cheating to some degree, you can easily forget and not cheat purposely and change the rate to a level that is allowed. However, I guess the AI doesn't do that. I don't know how the AI handles these rates, so I cant comment I guess. So maybe the war weariness should be the same

by RobO:
The current limits are set to balance out the economy. Giving Despotism 3 units per city would decrease the maintenance costs too much and would have to be balanced out by other costs.

I fail to see what's balanced. It seems the intent and accomplishment is to put despotism at too low a level.

I don't agree. Monarchy has no war weariness, less unit maintenance than Democracy and a higher rate cap than Republic.

My mistake. I failed to consider unit cost.

There are other ways to build things, but this does raise a point. Your comparison may be unfair.

Kal-el, could you please list a few historical examples of governments that you think fall into the categories Despotism, Monarchy, Republic and Democracy? It would help immensely to focus the discussion.

Unfortunately, leaders only come from combat with Civ3, but there are other types (Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr.) that make strides and make wonders. And even a CEO of a company is a leader in a sense and must have a focus vision and make the company cohesive, etc. But I still think it would make sense (in terms of realism) to have certain wonders (and maybe improvments) only allowed under certain governments.

Can you really imagine hollywood in a theocracy? Maybe nothing but the 700 club and religious movies. Or Universal Suffrage under Despotism, or theocracy (given womens' rights in Arab Muslim world today).

These wonders could be few in number, but it might make the game more interesting. Or more unbalanced. But I'm assuming it'd be more realistic and interesting.

And as far as I know, most governments in history fall under the tyrannical and religious rule type. Greece and Rome are known because they are the exceptions.

There are few "civilizations" but many "kingdoms" and such. I believe the Incas, Mayans, and Aztecs were all under religious rule. The North American tribes can't be considered a civilization, I don't think, even though the Iriqous are in the game. I don't know how the chief came to be.

Northern Africa had Egypt and the pharoah and religious rule. the Nubians, who also built pyramids (good ole TLC) were of divine rule. The Zulus and the tribes in Africa were of hereditary rule.

India and that region had kings. China has had an Emperor. Japan also had an emperor. All of divine rule.

Moslem rulers have been (and most Arab Muslims states still are) of the tyrannical rule. And since their "Sultans" and "Sheiks" they also have some religious authortity I believe. Even one of the early splits in Islam was because of an argument about who should be Caliph (a religious leader of Islam after Muhammad).

Monarchy in England changed with the Magna Carta in 1215. But it was still mostly Monarchy and feudalism anyway. the US revolution was big and then the French revolution. So history has little of republics and Democracy. Even though I know the technical difference, I can't think of what the difference in modern times is though (between Republic and democracy).

The US started as a Federal Republic with the Articles of Confederation but that failed miserably and that's why the Constitution gave the federal Government more powers. It seems that Social Democracy is the only form of government (among the free ones) used today.

Anyone feel free to correct me when I'm wrong. Most of the wonders don't belong to or depend upon the government type (Copernicus was prosecuted by the Church but still made discoveries). Emancipation Proclimation happened because Democracy allows slavery, did in Ancient Greece and early US. But a few do.

Greece built the Panthenon and Rome had the great Colisseum. Great works in their own right, but I don't think they're on the scale of the Pyramids in Giza or the Great Wall in China or Chichen Itza for the Mayans. The Taj Mahal in India may be comparable, I'm not sure.

I'm not sure what "The Great Buddha" is refering to. There were the two statues in Afghanistan the Taliban destroyed. But Buddhism doesn't have a god, (an Atheist religion!). There are also many large Buddhist temples around Southeast Asia. The Chinese partially adopted Buddhism and kept their Emporer, same with the Japanese. Thailand is a buddhist nation with a history of Kings I believe. So I still hold to the notion that most great monuments were built by a ruler of the non free government types.

okay, back to the game.

 

[RobO]

On balancing and unit maintenance:
Some time ago (around 0.4 IIRC) we discovered that the income level was too high. So, we increased the unit and improvement maintenance costs. One of those changes was to decrease the number of units you can have in despotism without paying maintenance. I fail to see the problem with that. Consider it bribes to the commanders if you like. Or privileges to the soldiers. I'm pretty sure it's hard to get soldiers to work without compensation for a despot, whose rule is highly dependent on military support. Also, the cost per unit is 1 in despotism and higher in most other forms of government.

 

[Pirateiam]

Originally posted by kingjoshi

Pirateiam: Damn, you make me feel pathetic. I'm in the 1500s and only learning Education. Some others have learned Chemistry and Music Theory. People keep attacking me too. And I took some cities from the Persians but after a few turns, it reverted to them. I hate that aspect of Civ3 and think that needs to be redone.

"Pyramids and the Great Wall were built by slaves under the order of people with Divine Right. People were not paid off, but many died to build those "wonders". If I recall correctly, in China, people used to refer the Great wall as the Million deaths or something similar."

Kingjoshi

1.) I think I know part of the reason why I was so far along in tech in the last game. It was what Isak said I had too few Civs (8) in that game with Kal Els huge map. So I tried a another game (I am in between work projects so i have lots of time too test this mod ) with every CIV except Rome and Babylon. I changed the minimal tech research time from 3 to 8 and I also changed the AI trade rate to 102. So far I am going at the exact tech advancement speed I want (right along the correct timeline) but..... The AI is way way behind me yet we all have comparable empires (I am GREEK). Here is what I think is happening
a.) I moved the AI trade rate too far and the AI has too actually research the tech instead of whoring it from other AI's. Since it takes a minimal 8 turns for each tech the AI starts to fall behind because it never builds the infrastructure for research quit like a human does.

2.) As for the culture flippping (reverting back to thier nation). One strategy that seems to work well for me is to first do everything you can to stop them resisting (even starve some of them if you have to) Once the resistence is over rush build either an obolesk (dyp) or a liabrary, you have to get some culture in the capured city as soon as possible. This seems to work for me most of the time.

The Pyramids were not built by slaves. This is a myth perpetuated by Hollywood. Archeological digs have proven that the Pyramids were built by thier own people ( I am not saying there were not a few slaves but not the majority) in between harvests. In fact they even had building guilds and such.

Well I am off to try another dyb game. this time I will put the AI trade slider back to default for regent and try a minimal 6 turn research. By the way has anyone tried this before and I am wasting my time? Thanks again for a great mod it brings life back into it. ( I had given up on CIV 3 months ago)

 

[IXIRandyIXI]

Pirateiam: I've been testing around with how to slow down the tech advances. Right now, on the World Map (Monarch level), I (and the other leading civs right now) have gotten Feudalism at around 500 BC. I have the minimum tech rate at 8.

It seems to have helped slow down the tech rate drastically, but I still need to bring it up a little more. I'm fairly sure that it slows not only your but the AI's technology research. The biggest problem is that the AI shares all of its technologies pretty much as soon as it gets it, and all of the civilizations are researching different technologies, so you go through the technologies pretty quickly. One way to help slow the rate at which the technologies are being discovered, of course, is to start a world war.

As for the AI not building any naval units, I haven't had any problems with this. They may not build large fleets like I sometimes do, but I've run into a couple ships here and there in the games I've played. It might just have been that the civs you selected didn't have the 'Build Naval' (is that right?) flag checked for them, so they concentrated on whatever other flag was checked for them (Air, Land). Try the World Map with all civilizations. It's fun.

My testing with slowing the tech rate down is going to be slowed for a bit. I just got Warcraft III. It has a great story, and the movies look pretty realistic.

 

[kingjoshi]

by Pirateiam:
The Pyramids were not built by slaves. This is a myth perpetuated by Hollywood. Archeological digs have proven that the Pyramids were built by thier own people ( I am not saying there were not a few slaves but not the majority) in between harvests. In fact they even had building guilds and such.

thanks for pointing that out. I pictured that mostly Nubians and own lower Egyptian slaves built it. However, I don't know how much of a choice they had in building it I mean, the pharoah wanted it built so he has to get people from somewhere likewise, I don't know if we could consider the Chinese that built it slaves, but the soldiers that got stranded in the western part of China watching out for Mongols weren't there by choice. They probably weren't soldiers by choice. And considering what people and families must go through to survive in some places around the world, I don't know how far from slavery they are.

I read a book by Upton Sinclair called "Jungle" written in 1906 that was a fictional book that described a family and their struggles that was typical of the time. It's very saddening. Though they came from another country to the US for a better life, their struggles showed that "freedom" has always been for a few. Slowly, times change.

I played on a random map with the Greeks and got stuck in the middle of nowhere (tundra all around me) so I had to move my settler for 10+ turns. I caught up with others, but even with no tech rules changed and with 16 civs, the tech advance was much slower than both Randy's and Pirateiam's games. Maybe I just suck...

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by RobO
Kal-el, could you please list a few historical examples of governments that you think fall into the categories Despotism, Monarchy, Republic and Democracy? It would help immensely to focus the discussion.

Despotism: This government includes most of your early governments, including those that had kings and queens, i.e. Egypt, Babylon, Persia, etc.

Republic: The Roman Republic is the only example that I can think of. The republic converted back to a Despotism under the Caesars.

Democarcy: Athens and the Iroquois Nation are the most notable Democracies that I can think of.

Monarchy: This represents the Divine Right of Kings type monarchy that was prevalent in Europe during the Middle Ages, this is not your earlier form of Monarchy. I am considering moving this into the Middle Ages to reduce confusion.

Theocracy: The most notable theocracy would be the Taliban or the Vatican, but there were several periods throughout history were a civilization was ruled by its religious leaders.

Communism: think USSR or Red China

Fascism: Think Italy under Mousolini, not so much Nazism.

Federal Republic: Think USA

Social Democracy: Think most of Europe today.

Originally posted by kingjoshi
Unfortunately, leaders only come from combat with Civ3, but there are other types (Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr.) that make strides and make wonders. And even a CEO of a company is a leader in a sense and must have a focus vision and make the company cohesive, etc.

Yes, please think of leaders as more than just military leaders. even though they can only come about through military conquest, that was not Sid's original intent and it is not the intent of the mod. Unfortunatley there is nothing I can do to change the way that leaders are produced. But they should be thought of as political, cultural and any other type of important leader type youi can think of. To help represent this I would like for people to submit lists of historically important people from each civilization that can be used as non-military leaders.

But I still think it would make sense (in terms of realism) to have certain wonders (and maybe improvments) only allowed under certain governments.

Unfortunately, if we try and limit an improvement or wonder, it can only be limited to one form of government. It is not possible to limit it to several forms of govenment or restrict it from only a few.

The US started as a Federal Republic with the Articles of Confederation but that failed miserably and that's why the Constitution gave the federal Government more powers. It seems that Social Democracy is the only form of government (among the free ones) used today.

The US is still a Federal Republic. We still have 50 independant and sovereign States, though much of the state sovereignty was lost after the Civil War, the US still retains its original federal system. Contrary to what you might think, the Constitution is a strong barrier to Federal Government intervention in State affairs. And we are a republic. The US legislative body, congress, is directly elected by the people of the various states. The two separate houses of Congress, The House of Representative and the Senate, then vote and pass individual legislation without direct input from their constituents. Congress is voted in to make what we hope are the decisions that we as the people of the United States hope that they would make.

 

[Higher Game]

Rome was still quite powerful after going back to despotism. You shouldn't be hurt so bad by staying in despotism.

The draft should be available in monarchy. When you believe your king is sent from God, you would die to serve him. Same with theocracy.

Soldiers have to be payed in a republic. There should be more disadvantages to builders. As if despots already have it bad, you need to become a republic to build the many new improvements added in DyP. Pop rushing simply cannot work. Gold is easier to get and it costs much less to rush buy improvements. Face it! Being a "good guy" is too overpowered. Greece was never a huge military power, and it was lucky to have its culture spread. It just got lucky at battles like Thermopylae, and it never had the muscle Rome did.

Despots should be slightly bad off, but monarchy should be about = to republic. Communism should be = to social democracy. The governments shouldn't be that different in the game, for both balance and usefulness to the AI.

 

[kingjoshi]

by Kal-el
Despotism: This government includes most of your early governments, including those that had kings and queens, i.e. Egypt, Babylon, Persia, etc.

Republic: The Roman Republic is the only example that I can think of. The republic converted back to a Despotism under the Caesars.

Democarcy: Athens and the Iroquois Nation are the most notable Democracies that I can think of.

Monarchy: This represents the Divine Right of Kings type monarchy that was prevalent in Europe during the Middle Ages, this is not your earlier form of Monarchy. I am considering moving this into the Middle Ages to reduce confusion.

Theocracy: The most notable theocracy would be the Taliban or the Vatican, but there were several periods throughout history were a civilization was ruled by its religious leaders.

Communism: think USSR or Red China

Fascism: Think Italy under Mousolini, not so much Nazism.

Federal Republic: Think USA

Social Democracy: Think most of Europe today.

There are so few examples of most of these types of governments, especially in terms of history, that we're forced to over-generalize. Despotism and Monarchy being the exceptions.

Isn't Monarchy and Despotism the main forms of government from the fall of Rome to the creation of the US almost all over the world?

What significance would the magna carta have in your assessment to Monarchy in the middle ages?

by Kal-el
The US is still a Federal Republic. We still have 50 independant and sovereign States, though much of the state sovereignty was lost after the Civil War, the US still retains its original federal system. Contrary to what you might think, the Constitution is a strong barrier to Federal Government intervention in State affairs. And we are a republic. The US legislative body, congress, is directly elected by the people of the various states. The two separate houses of Congress, The House of Representative and the Senate, then vote and pass individual legislation without direct input from their constituents. Congress is voted in to make what we hope are the decisions that we as the people of the United States hope that they would make.

I was comparing the Constitution to the Articles of Confederation. The difference is noticable. Granted, the 10th amendment and the power of each state. But I guess the US is viewed more as "America" than "United States". And I think that's by not just people outside of here, but also by most Americans (United Statian just doesn't sound right ). Maybe I make the bad assumption that most "democracies" are broken down into territories of some sort. Maybe they do but don't have "statehood" status or a governer. Maybe I need to learn more about foreign democracies for better comparisons. I just imagined that since the US "sort of" copied the House of Lords and House of Commons and the like, that Great Britain would be quite similar (though they have a prime minister elected by the parliament and a monarch).

by Higher Game
The draft should be available in monarchy. When you believe your king is sent from God, you would die to serve him. Same with theocracy.

I thought of that as well (in the post that got erased) and noticed that Monarchy and Despotism do get 1 draft each, whereas Republic and Democracy do not (in the excel file). However, I would assume that as many people would fight and die for their democracy as they would their king. Though more would fight for "aggresion" under monarchy and probably more would fight for "defense" in democracy. However, I agree that despotism should be made better.

 

[beorhtwulf]

Well, since somebody on the DyP team foolishly thanked people for input....

I've played several v.7x games on huge/monarch/16 civs. I've generally stopped in the middle ages, so my comments are only on the early game. I've played some warlike games, some builder, a bunch of different civs. The tech rate seems to track history pretty well, though civs that are not in the tech loop generally fall behind.

You've said you're rebalancing things for the next release, but let me give some suggestions. Obelisks seem too expensive. They're the same price as basilicae, which provide double the culture and a smiley besides. In the early game they're prohibitively expensive for most cities, and then they're obsolete. Similarly horse archers, three times the cost of elephant riders and only marginally more effective.

I also tend to think barbarians are too strong. In the early (pre-iron) game, they seem invincible (i.e., I can't even take a hit point off them with any unit I can build). Granted it's an incentive to build walls, but if you can't clear them out at all you've basically lost the game. I set the Raider to 2/1/1 and the Rider to 3/2/2, which I think is powerful but not invincible.

I really like both the 3 food/pop and the 2x road movement. Re the roads, sea travel was faster than overland until the development of railroads. Don't change it.

As to governments -- and I'll try to avoid philosophy here -- I think the basic idea of one primitive government succeeded by three intermediate forms, one peaceful, one warlike, and one mixed, is basically good. If anything I think Monarchy comes too late. I think of Monarchy as being basically Despotism with a better bureaucracy: similar in spirit but more efficient. Realism aside, if Monarchy is a medieval tech, then you are forced to a peaceful govt in late antiquity, which penalizes warriors. If Despotism is brought up to the same overall effectiveness as Rep/Dem to compensate, then warriors are set from the start, while builders have to research a bunch of techs before they can get any momentum.

It is a good point about pop rush being less effective in DyP because of the slower growth rate. Maybe the shields/citizen rate could be increased a bit to compensate?

This advice is of course worth what you paid for it, and if you ignore it I can always just change settings myself.

Kudos again for a great mod!

Beorhtwulf

 

[Isak]

Drafting: Remember that drafting in Civ3 makes people unhappy. It is not meant to represent voluntarily agreeing to fight for "King and Country" - unless you mean, voluntarily at gun-point.

Beorhtwulf: Yes yes, more input, keep it coming

The Basilica/Obelisk/Temple costs are changed in the next version - the new costs should make a bit more sense

Horse Archer/Elephant Rider: You may have a point - lets wait for OFL's verdict.

Govt's: Some good observations. I don't think I'll get shot for revealing that there is a new early government in the works already. (Our Fearless Leader is, after all, a benevolent leader... isn't that true, Kal-El....??)

Pop Rush: I like the fact that it is painful to the ruler - it should be a last resort, not "the way we do things around here" in my opinion - that is one of my biggest gripes with Civ3. Of course, if the AI can't handle it, we may have to do something - but lets see what's in the nice patch we will surely be getting from Firaxis one of these days..

Editing the BIC yourself: If you do that, we'll send a couple of them nasty Barbarians over to your house, one of these days.....

 

[Kal-el]

Americans are known as both Americans and with the United States we are referred to as citizens of our State of residence. Most people I know are extremely proud of their states and in fact there are rivalries, sometimes heated, between the individual states. usually those rivalries are played out on the football field or the baseball diamond, but not always.

The 10th Amendment is HUGE! It is one of the most important clauses in the Constitution. The United States Federal Governemnt is a governemnt of enumerated powers. that means if its not inthe Constitution it doens't have the authority to do it. The 10th Amendment, which almost didn't make it into the constitution because the founding fathers thought it was self evident, re-emphasizes this fact, by restating that all powers not specifically granted the federal government are reserved to the States themselves.

The distinction between a federal system and other forms of government is that a federal system is a government of a union of states in which sovereignty is divided between a central authority and component state authorities. Substantial power over matters affecting the people as a whole, such as external affairs, commerce, coinage, and the maintenance of military forces, are usually granted to the central government. Varieties of federation include the Swiss, where the federative principle is carried into the executive branch of government; the Australian, which closely reflects American states' rights and judicial doctrines; and the Canadian, which reverses common federative practice and allots residuary rights to the dominion government. Other examples of federal governments are the German Empire of 1871 and the present state of Germany, modern Russia, Mexico, South Africa, and India.

beorhtwulf,
the horse archer will be lowered to 90 shields. It is an alternative to the knight. Knight: 6/3/2 cost 90. Horse Archer: 4/2/3 3/1/1 cost 90.

Monarchy will stay in the Ancient Age, but that whole era's tech tree will be reworked to incorporate the new government. (Isak, can I see you for a moment ... )

As for barbarians I am reluctant to change them right now. I personally haven't found them to be prohibitively dangerous.

Don't worry about the food and the roads. They will stay like that for as long as I am in charge. (hope there's no revolution, better keep my people appeased.)

Obelisks do not become obsolete.

 

[beorhtwulf]

Isak: get the icon numbers right, and I won't edit the BIC. Those arctic olive groves were kinda weird.

Kal-el: By 'obsolete' I meant "no longer worth building 'cuz for 50 shields I could have a Basilica instead" rather than "no longer available" -- sorry. But Isak says it's already addressed, so never mind.

 

[kingjoshi]

by Kal-el
Americans are known as both Americans and with the United States we are referred to as citizens of our State of residence. Most people I know are extremely proud of their states and in fact there are rivalries, sometimes heated, between the individual states. usually those rivalries are played out on the football field or the baseball diamond, but not always.

First, thanks for some new information. However, as to the point above, there are different states and regions etc, and sometimes cultures differ. People in NY, Cali and Texas seem to be the biggest in terms of being "proud" of their state. As a Buckeye fan and always hating the "Damn state up North", I have some first hand knowledge of this. But it's so small. It's one thing to call a game the Civil War "Oregon vs Oregon State in College Football" and other rivalries, but we have to keep that in perspective. Off the field, to most people in the country, it's not much. Granted, people have their affinities, but the pride in city, state or region is so minute compared to National Pride (and sometimes arrogance). Maybe it's because I've lived near college campuses my whole life and met so many out of staters who came from elsewhere and then plan to go somewhere else (not home state).

Most amendments to the Consitution, and clauses of the constitution are huge And as you've stated, states rights took a beating during the civil war. I mean, if you have independant states, one would assume that if many decided to leave a federation, they should have the right. That is more evident with a vote in Quebec I guess. As I mentioned before, I assumed that France, UK and most other European countries were similar. I always hear of UK being Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and England, and so I probably made a bad assumption...

 

[Tiefling]

kingjoshi: The UK is moving in the direction of a Federal system, with a recent government white paper announcing the intention for Regional Assemblies in the various parts of England, to parallel the existing Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish assemblies. I'm not sure that this is mirrored in other European states - if anything, the EU is moving slowly in the direction of becoming a single federal republic. I've not heard of any serious devolution movement in France, for example. (Although I'm sure there's someone on these boards who knows the answer better.)

Perhaps Civ3/DyP should have a Constitutional Monarchy government type, to reflect countries like the UK, Sweden, etc? I'm not sure what precise characteristics such a government should have. I'd tentatively suggest medium war-weariness, efficient workers, rushing by payment, excellent resistance to propaganda. I'm not sure about the military side of things, though.

Thoughts from a DyP fan and former lurker.