My town on another island has a harbor. Why isn't it connecting to the trade network?

[Scottie A]

First off, I'm running Civ3 Complete v1.22 (although the README version history says 1.29f), so I guess they mean 1.22 of Complete

This issue is driving me a little nuts. The civlopedia says that resources are shared between towns not only by connecting them with roads (which I've successfully done on the main continent) but that if you have two towns with harbors and a clear water path between them, then they can trade resources even though they're not connected by roads.

Well I have this town on a little island and it's not getting any resources from the big island even though it has a harbor and a town right across the water from it also has a harbor.

The entire water path between them is within my cultural boundary! And there's no blockade! I don't understand what's going on.

 

[island007]

You need Astronomy to cross Seas and either Navigation or the tech for Frigates to cross oceans.

 

[Norsk_Viking]

its true, you can only conduct tade after navigation and magnetism ans well as astron.

 

[Scottie A]

oh my gosh, thank you so much!

I just wish the Civlopedia had made this a little clearer. I thought once I had mapmaking and harbors in both towns I was fine. See, the Trade and Trade Routes entry in the Civlopedia says your ships need to be able to "safely traverse every square of the route", and I thought what they meant by that statement is that the route isn't blockaded or in enemy territory but what they REALLY meant is having the ability to end the turn on every square of the route without the boat sinking, and for that you need Map Making for all-coastal routes, Astronomy for routes over seas, and either Magnetism or Navigation for routes that cross an ocean.

As you can probably tell, I didn't say all that for you two awesome people who replied, since you know all this already. I added it for anyone else who has the same problem and runs a search of the forums (as I did) and looks for the answer. I'm helpful that way.

 

[Zakharov]

You can trade over sea tiles before Astronomy by owning the Great Lighthouse (or by trading with the civ that has it).

 

[Norsk_Viking]

true, that is another way, of course, as well as adding +1 to all ship movement

 

[Scottie A]

Also,

I just bought Civ3 about a week ago, but I've been reading one of the FAQs from GAMEFAQs.com. The only thing is that the FAQ was put together before Conquests came out and I bought Civ3 Complete which includes conquests. Which was okay until I tried to use a leader to rush a wonder and found out that they totally nerfed the leaders.

Apparently now only the scientific great leaders can rush wonders. I think that sucks because everybody knows the computer cheats, so I wanted to be able to use my leaders to level the playing field by rushing wonders.

And doesn't this significantly reduce the usefulness of the Militaristic strength? I mean what's the point of having a greater chance for leaders if all they can do is create armies, which can be done already at the military academy?

And nowhere can I find some explanation for why they made this change. Did everyone think leaders were a stupid feature that deserved to be lobotomized?

At this point I want some way to alter my game so that I can play single-player epic games of Civ3 Complete, but have just one class of leader which can both make armies and rush Great Wonders. Could, like, the editor allow me to do this?

 

[Turner]

Well, first off, the computer does not cheat. Period. It has been well established that the computer does not cheat. But let's put that aside for a minute.

The militaristic strength is not hindered by having MGLs only produce Armies or rush Small Wonders/Improvements. If anything, it would make it stronger because more MGLs = More armies, right? So you'd have a more powerful army running around (And the armies were nerfed too. Armies now get +1 movement, plus undocumented bonii to attack and defense.) as you can't rush wonders, so you'd either rush an improvement, or rush a small wonder. But you wouldn't do that as much, because why waste a MGL on a Factory? You'd have to have a pretty good reason to waste a MGL that way. And small wonders aren't always available.

No, the reason for the nerf is because the game is way to militaristic. This is a common complaint from newer players, that the only way to win seems to be through war. Although it is true that you can win on Deity/Sid without building any military units, it's not as common a way to win the game. By making MGLs less valueable and introducing SGLs, it was an attempt to give the user more options of playing.

As a long time Civ player (going on three years now), I appreciate this change.

As for the cheating, well, I hate to put it this way, but trust me, it doesn't cheat. It has been proven that the AI does not cheat. That is not to say that the AI doesn't have documented built in advantages. But any advantage the AI may have, such as knowing the map, knowing where units are, are well known, and can be used to the players advantage as well.

 

[DBear]

Yes, they nerfed military leaders in that they cannot produce great wonders. But now, armies rule the field. Extra movement and healing are awesome, plus the AI seems incapable of dealing with them. BTW, you need at least one victorious army to build the Academy in the first place...

 

[Grille]

Also,

I just bought Civ3 about a week ago, but I've been reading one of the FAQs from GAMEFAQs.com. The only thing is that the FAQ was put together before Conquests came out and I bought Civ3 Complete which includes conquests. Which was okay until I tried to use a leader to rush a wonder and found out that they totally nerfed the leaders.

Apparently now only the scientific great leaders can rush wonders. I think that sucks because everybody knows the computer cheats, so I wanted to be able to use my leaders to level the playing field by rushing wonders.

And doesn't this significantly reduce the usefulness of the Militaristic strength? I mean what's the point of having a greater chance for leaders if all they can do is create armies, which can be done already at the military academy?

And nowhere can I find some explanation for why they made this change. Did everyone think leaders were a stupid feature that deserved to be lobotomized?

At this point I want some way to alter my game so that I can play single-player epic games of Civ3 Complete, but have just one class of leader which can both make armies and rush Great Wonders. Could, like, the editor allow me to do this?

Actually, their ideas may have been nice for balancing reasons. Trouble is that just announcing rules changes isn't enough, one must also implement these (fully) into the game.

Oh well, at least they did not forget to put in a SGL per se and the SGL's GW-rush button is even functional!
The sci-age button however is just eye-candy. Although I might agree it's not even that, coming to think of it.
And, while a human may be able to figure out how the announced new implementations really (not) work, the AI can't in case there's no relevant lines of source code...

If you need a sedation, the AI can't cope with those fractions of new stuff. The 'build-army-button' for MGLs apparently doesn't work correctly for an AI civ. Could be it rushes a temple or so, I even suspect it rushes wealth, lol. What is more, it does not know how to deal with your army. If you happen to have an army, you usually get a great advantage over the AI (what Turner and Dbear said).

Ah, about the editor: that's the cherry on the cake. Although it does not distinguish betwenn SGLs and MGLs, you could make a 'Great Leader' with it. This one looks like a MGL and by some sort of magic, an editor-created MGL can rush a Great Wonder...


Kinda in zouavish mood today, seems I got up on the wrong side of the bed...

 

[Tomoyo]

I even suspect it rushes wealth

It's impossible to rush wealth... or anything that will finish in one turn...

 

[Renata]

C3C armies can also pillage without using up any of their movement. Given their extra movement and the unwillingness of the AIs to attack them when filled with the maximum number of units, fully healed, and not in a city, you could theoretically destroy a civ's entire infrastructure with just one wandering army while the rest of your forces sit back and pick off stray units in your own territory.

Then just wait for them all to starve down and go bankrupt. Insanely powerful, really.

Renata

 

[Scottie A]

Okay, as long as the computer doesn't cheat, I'm glad they changed the Leader functionality.

I should not have claimed "the computer cheats". It was a mistake for me to say so like I'd discovered it myself because actually I was only repeating what I read somewhere, and then thinking it was probably true because of what I knew about Civ2. In Civ2, (as I'm sure you all know)the higher the difficulty, the more the computer cheated, like their cities would get extra shields every turn, that sort of thing. So I just assumed it would be more of the same in Civ3. It's nice that I'm wrong about that.
I'm just impressed that they found ways to create higher difficulty levels without letting the computer cheat. I'm beginning to understand why Civ3 is so popular!

And I did think of the fact that if all leaders could rush wonders, then you pretty much had no choice but to get belligerent at some point. It was like they were forcing you to play a certain way, so now I'm thinking that it's a GOOD THING that they fixed that.

And yes, last night I made a couple of armies and they kicked major amounts of ass. So maybe I'll be a nice militaristic Germany or China after I finish conquering the world with my Ottomans. Oh, this game rocks.

 

[wit>trope]

in Civ3, the computer cities get extra sheilds every turn too, the higher the diffulty.

 

[Sandman2003]

in Civ3, the computer cities get extra sheilds every turn too, the higher the diffulty.

Actually, that is not true. The higher the difficulty, the bigger the discount to the AI on building stuff. So it takes less shields to build something, but they still are credited only with the correct nukber of shields.

 

[wit>trope]

Effectively, that's the same thing.

 

[garric]

So the computer does cheat?

 

[Turner]

No, it doesn't. It has documented bonii that are known and can be accounted for.

 

[Sandman2003]

Effectively, that's the same thing.

I admit the effect is very similiar, but it is not exactly the same thing, and while pointing out the difference is being a little bit pedantic, it should be stated nonetheless.

The difference comes down to the imapct of roundings. Roundings would play a part if the number of avalable shields were inflated, rather than the cost discounted. Since everything (bar curraghs and Jag warriors) cost an exact multiple of 10 shields, rounding is not an issue with discounted cost factors.