Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[D0NIMATRIX]

True, but I meant using population or gold. I'm pretty sure that the AIs can rush even in anarchy.

 

[EMan]

What I should have said was: "Wait until they are in a Republic Government.....and then attack 'em".

However, I think if they are in Anarchy, it is unlikely (in practice) they will (be able to) pop-rush in size 2 or 3 cities.

I'm surprised they would be programmed to disband units, at a fraction of their purchase price to rush-build a unit!? (Can you cash-rush in Anarchy?)

@vmxa: What would be an example of that?

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Say you have a settler that only needs 2 more shields to finish, and the city is making 1 per turn. You can disband a warrior in that city, and a message will come up saying something like "Our warrior has been converted into 2 shields." Those 2 shields will be put into whatever project (except wonders and small wonders) the city is currently working on, in our case a settler. The settler will be finished the next turn.

I don't know about what would happen on the IBT if it got disbanded under those same circumstances, if the settler would be built on your turn or the turn after...

 

[timerover51]

I go by a simple rule, and that is that the AI does not play with the same set of rules that the human player does. Having seen the same phenomena on a fairly regular basis in the last couple of major unit testing wars, of units coming out of nowhere, or a stream of units coming from a city of population one, it appears that it is something you are just going to have to learn to deal with, along with the biased RNG. Just gets very frustrating at times.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

It does help to counterbalance the human's ability to think, though.

 

[darski]

It does help to counterbalance the human's ability to think, though.

you are taking an awful lot on faith there that may not be justified. (at least not in me)

They can think rings around me.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

You can't say that there haven't been times when a trick saved you though, can you?

 

[Bartleby]

I've notices a couple of times that I get builds finishing during Anarchy, when I haven't disbanded anything or chopped a forest. Has anybody else noticed this, and does anybody know the cause?

 

[Zefyrinus]

"Civ3 weirdness" is something that just seems odd while playing the game. One of your small, recently captured towns flips, suddenly it is defended better than it was the first time you grabbed it. Or you have a red-lined cav unit that just grabbed a city, your opponent has a healthy MDI right beside the town, and on the IBT he keels over due to lack of unit support causing disbandment. Or, you attack a galley with a frigate, the galley wins! Civ3 weirdness, all.

What's MDI and IBT?

 

[Bartleby]

MeDieval Infantry and InBetween Turn, respectively.



edit: Presumably the "d" is to help distinguish between Medieval and Mechanised Infantry...

 

[anaxagoras]

Presumably the "d" is to help distinguish between Medieval and Mechanised Infantry...

Yep, just as GLB and GLH distinguish the Great LiBrary from the Great LightHouse, and MGL and SGL make Military Great Leaders and Scientific Great Leaders distinct from both. It is a complicated game with its own lingo, no question.

 

[Zefyrinus]

Okay, thx. So what's weird about this?:

Or you have a red-lined cav unit that just grabbed a city, your opponent has a healthy MDI right beside the town, and on the IBT he keels over due to lack of unit support causing disbandment.

 

[Bartleby]

If the MDI attacks the cav and re-takes the city, the AI would probably be able to afford to keep the MDI.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

I've notices a couple of times that I get builds finishing during Anarchy, when I haven't disbanded anything or chopped a forest. Has anybody else noticed this, and does anybody know the cause?

If on the turn before anarchy was entered, especially if you just get a tech and say yes to the pop up that appears, the unit will be finished, but you will be in anarchy, so it gets created in the anarchy.

 

[PaperBeetle]

^ I disagree. If you revolt during the interturn, after getting a new tech, you have already received your commerce for that interturn, but the game has not yet gone through your towns, producing food and shields. When it does go through the towns, they will be at 100% corruption, and you will not get any new shields added to the production boxes. From carefully microing dozens of anarchy periods, I am pretty certain that this theory matches up with what happens in practice.

A build will finish during anarchy (and even during city revolt) under exactly the same situation as under any other government; the production box must be full after the game has done the shield-harvesting phase of the interturn. Of course, during anarchy and revolts, you get 0 shields net during shield harvesting, but there are other ways of making the shield box full: rush shields into the box (anarchy allows neither whipping or buying, but that still leaves chopping, leader rushing, disbanding and recycling), reduce the size of the shield box by changing the build, or have a full box left over from the turn before (i.e. a worker or settler unbuilt because there was insufficient population).

 

[bnj.s]

Hello,

I was just wondering what is the hierarchy between the different corruption level. I have a file that says (about corruption level):
anarchy = catastrophic
despotism = rampant
feudalism = problematic
monarchy = problematic
communism = communal
fascism = nuisance
republic = nuisance
democracy = minimal

The question is: Is problematic more that communal? Is rampant less than nuisance? Etc.

Can somebody give me the order of this set? Thank you very much.

 

[timerover51]

Hello,

I was just wondering what is the hierarchy between the different corruption level. I have a file that says (about corruption level):
anarchy = catastrophic
despotism = rampant
feudalism = problematic
monarchy = problematic
communism = communal
fascism = nuisance
republic = nuisance
democracy = minimal

The question is: Is problematic more that communal? Is rampant less than nuisance? Etc.

Can somebody give me the order of this set? Thank you very much.

The corruption levels from lowest to highest are:
minimal
nuisance
problematic
rampant
catastrophic

I am not sure how communal works as I have not played Communist at all. Based on the boards, what you get is the same level of corruption in every city. People with communism experience need to check me on this. The degree of corruption in a given city is dictated by the corruption level, the distance from the capital, and the number of cities controlled by the player. The more cities, the higher the level of corruption. If you go to the editor, choose custom rules, and go to the diffuculty level screen, you will see a slider labeled Corruption Default. By changing that, you can change the level of corruption that you encounter all the way to zero or double it.

You can also change the level of corruption for each government if you want, to reflect your own views on how corrupt each government should be. There are also some other ways to influence corruption in the game.

You might want to look at the discussion in this thread for more information.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=275062

 

[Zefyrinus]

If the MDI attacks the cav and re-takes the city, the AI would probably be able to afford to keep the MDI.

Oh. But isn't it so that the checking whether or not a player can afford to keep his units is done before that player gets to move his units?

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

@timerover51

Communal means that no matter the distance from your capital/forbidden palace/Secret Police HQ, the corruption will be moderate. However, this negates both aspects of other corruption systems, so you don't have economic super-centers, but you don't have the 1 shield crappers either.

 

[timerover51]

Thanks, Dominatrix, for your information. I was uncertain as to exactly how it worked. I have played around with various things and managed to avoid the I-shield disasters as well.