TheLastOne36
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 14,045
When is it coming out?
same question over here.
Patch v3.13 change list
- Thread starter alexman
- Start date
- Status
same question over here.
im actually getting kinda worried about corp costs being eliminated from inflation period without some smarter AI, reduced hq income and higher base costs (both to start up, and with increased resource consuption).
It just seems there will be no negatives in having a corp, foreign or otherwise.
It just seems there will be no negatives in having a corp, foreign or otherwise.
GenocideBringer
King
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
- Messages
- 628
Untrue.
As someone who uses Solver's unofficial patch with an .xml edit that reduces the income to 4 (so this patch will be no change to me), corps are perfect. If you spread them to your own cities, you will still lose money (the only real way to gain a lot of money via corps is to spread them to foreign nations).
It's often excellent to have a foreign corp, too. Mali decided to spread Mining inc to me in one game. While it hurt my gold income, it also accelerated my space race victory.
As someone who uses Solver's unofficial patch with an .xml edit that reduces the income to 4 (so this patch will be no change to me), corps are perfect. If you spread them to your own cities, you will still lose money (the only real way to gain a lot of money via corps is to spread them to foreign nations).
It's often excellent to have a foreign corp, too. Mali decided to spread Mining inc to me in one game. While it hurt my gold income, it also accelerated my space race victory.
heres the rub though. at what point would it not be optimal to use corps? at what point is it not best to use corps instead of other strategies, period?
and you also have to take into account that the ai could be programmed better inregard to corps as to prevent the human player from exploiting them.
and you also have to take into account that the ai could be programmed better inregard to corps as to prevent the human player from exploiting them.
methane
Warlord
Unless you're running state property, it should be optimal to have some corps in your cities. However, devoting a great person and aiming your research in order to found a corp shouldn't always be optimal. You should be equally tempted to go up other tech lines, targeting wonders, military advances, or whatever. It should be the same sort of tradeoffs involved with targeting a religion to found.
Reducing the power of founding a corp (by reducing the gold per city) while reducing the cost of hosting a corp is a good step to making this work. I've enjoyed this part of the game under Solver's patch, though I'm not sure it's perfect yet.
You don't have to destroy city after city, you just have to stay at war with at least one nation all the time (should be easy in general, even a very weak one will make it) and you can reach conquest without reaching domination... Domination can only be reached at peace.
I like the change to the diplo win rule, it looks much more 'diplomatic' to me. No more cheesy diplo 'domination' win.
DrJambo
Crash-test dummy
Can someone explain in more detail how the new diplomatic voting will work? Is it just that you can't vote for yourself anymore? If so, do you just abstain each time?
Jamesds
Great Scientist
This is excellent 
, I can't wait. The gameplay enhancements are excellent, though I wonder about the Cristo Rendetor change, is it still going to be worth it?
, I can't wait. The gameplay enhancements are excellent, though I wonder about the Cristo Rendetor change, is it still going to be worth it?
azzaman333
meh
I think it means you can still vote yourself if as long as someone else votes for you as well.
JungleBoot
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2007
- Messages
- 29
What a crock. If they have a patch, it would be released. This seems like somebody's idea of a bad joke.
The poster is an official member of Firaxis, come on...
Mortac
Warlord
Yep, it should be like that (released immediately), but unfortunately with contracts and publishers there are rules that need to be followed. It's the side-effect of business.
Psyringe
Scout
Actually, it's the expansion's producer's idea of interaction with the customers, and I like it very much.
And btw, they *do* have the patch, it just has to go through QA (as usual), and this takes time. Releasing a patch as soon as you "have" it, without proper testing, is a bad idea. There's a good example for this not too far away.
MrCynical
Deity
JungleBoot said:
Releasing a patch without testing it is really not a good idea. They did that with 3.03, and managed the classic error of a patch that caused more bugs than it fixed. It'll take them a long time to live that one down, so I don't think they'll risk cutting corners on testing this time round.
[Gripe mode]
Ahh - the clasic catch 22 for any game developer:
1.) "No one ever talks to us! They are not listening! etc. etc."
vs.
2.) "They told me it was coming! I want it out NOW! Why did they talk to us and not have it done??"
Damned if you do, damned if you dont.
Personally I appreciate the updates and knowledge of what is coming out/what they are working on/etc. It will be out when it is ready, so let's all have a little patience!
[/Gripe mode]
Of course, such concerns didn't bother them from releasing Vanilla, Warlords and BtS before they were ready when it suited their interests and pocketbooks to do so.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
