Discussion in 'Civ3 Strategy Articles' started by DaveMcW, Mar 12, 2003.
that makes mroe sense as I saw a palace jump recently not quite fitting to your formula.
Nice work! Have you considered teaming up with some of the great programmers here to create a calculator for it. A Palace Jump Calculator would be really really great!
Hi. Great Discovery.
But hey, here all shun reloading and such things.
Is the free palace jump not an EXPLOIT?
Sure, it's a game mechanic, but by all means:
This was not intended to be abused in this way...
In a recent game in civ3v1.29, I tried a palace jump, that didn't worked out the way I expected. Not the biggest city got the palace, but another smaller one.
In my case, however, i was able toggle the location of the palace by a single policing unit leaving or entering the smaller city, thus changing the happiness in the city. Therefore, I concluded, the location of the palace in a palace jump depends also on happiness. This seems to be something new in terms of the palace jump formula.
Here is the data from the game:
CITY1: size 6; 4 happy; 0 content; 2 unhappy
CITY2: size 12; 5 happy; 0 content; 5 unhappy
CITY1 gets the palace
CITY1: size 6; 3 happy; 1 content; 2 unhappy (unit left city)
CITY2: size 12; 5 happy; 0 content; 5 unhappy (identical to above)
CITY2 gets the palace!!
To test the influence of happiness on a palace jump I designed a simple scenario of two identical cities, each size 7, 5 luxuries, and 7 policing units. They had the same distance to the capital that was to be abandoned. The maximum number of military police was changed to 12. With this setting, happiness could be exactly controlled in each city.
The test scenario yielded inconclusive results, however. Cities with less unhappy citizens are more likely to get the palace. A city of 5 content citizens and 2 unhappy citizens succeeds in getting the palace against a city of 4 happy citizens and 3 unhappy citizens. This result doesn't make much sense in the light of the in-game example, where the difference of 1 happy citizen going content changes the location of the palace.
Testing keeps going on.
If anyone wants to get the save game, please feel free to pm me or post here.
The test scenario will only be available to members with a german release, otherwise you cannot use it.
So did you reload a turn and try to jump the palace again on the same turn? Note that which city gets the palace is not simply the largest city, but the formula also includes a value for the number of cities within x squares of the target city. If you tried jumping on a different turn, there may have been new cities built that would have changed which city would get it.
Its not really 'similar', but I'll add it to my trade assist.
OK - Just a question: How confident are people about the 17x17 square? The reason I ask is that everything else internally has the distances between cities calculated as per the corruption distance calculation (as posted in Alexman's thread, which I won't repeat here).
I was just wondering whether its actually a "civ" distance of 8, or perhaps even 6
I can't help with the confidence question re 17x17 - I always leave a bit of an "in case" margin, usually one more citizen than would seem to be necessary in the target city
Well, the 17x17 seems to work OK in the few trials I did...
I have added a routine to calculate the city that your palace will move to when your capital is adandoned / captured, as per Dave's formula.
It tells you the 'points' for the top-five candidates, so you can tweak those cities as required.
Link is in my sig, or here.
yes, the game example describes a reload. i had a save of the turn and went back to it later, because i was curious how i could influence the palace jump. finally, nothing was changed but the moving pikeman. the government is monarchy.
i do not quite understand the results of my test scenario. maybe, this topic is not of great importance anymore, as palce jumps became much less valuable in conquests.
I've discovered another factor affecting the jump destination and it is a beauty.
Add 1 point per military unit stationed in the city!
This factor explains the anomaly reported by bluebox - it wasn't happiness which was changing the destination, it was the pikeman.
This is going to make Palace jumping rather easy in some situations.
BTW, I'm going for a cultural 100K victory in GOTM34. I expect to do a number of Palace jumps
Whoa, good job!
I wonder if there a limit on the number of units that affect the outcome. If there isn't, then controling the destination will indeed be very easy!
That explains a lot!
In a recent C3C game on an archipelago, an AI capital jumped a bit 'strangely'...
If there's a limit it is very large.
I suspect there's a rounding issue somewhere. In a test I tried I used three cities - an original capital, a size twelve city and a size one, in a triangle. If I put 31 units (mixture of warriors and archers) into the size one city the capital jumps to the size twelve. If instead I put 32 units into it the capital jumps to the size one city.
Anyway, it seems definite that it is one point per unit. Use a couple of units more than the minimum calculated (or what the heck - just temporarily move in one's entire army as it is advancing ) to allow for rounding or truncation and for city sequence and I expect the target will be safely locked in.
So now we have another use for obsolete units (all those warriors created by a warrior+settler pump ) - use them to drag the Palace around.
Great discovery Sir Pleb. I'm sorry I don't have enough time to verify it myself, but I'll trust you and edit it in anyway.
Ahh thats a new tidbit of info, great work SirPleb.
In hindsight that now seems obvious, since if you are losing your capital it would be wise to move it to the best defended city. That is, this system was no doubt coded with the intention of moving when the player is being crushed by the AI.
Does anyone know what the definition of a "Military Unit" is for Palace Jump purposes?
I have a lot of Explorers/Settlers/Workers I could use if they count as MU's!?
I think a military unit has to have at least one attack or defence strength point. If so, workers, settlers, scouts and explorers don't count.
Separate names with a comma.