Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Sashie VII]

RNG is the random number generator.

t is my contention that absolutely nothing matters but dumb luck.

I disagree. RNG dice roll may swing on luck sometimes, but it's up to you to raise the odds in your favour. Sometimes it's just bad luck to draw an extreme result like

In my Iroquois game HOW CAN AN INCAN ARCHER BEAT ONE OF MY ELITE TANKS

Bad luck on the RNG roll. Sometimes these things happen whatever you do.

 

[vmxa]

There is a calculation for the battle that determines the hits or misses. A random number controls it. Take a game with the seed off and fight any battle say 6 times. Just load it over and over and see the out come.

You will see things like two equal units on the same terrain have swings like one wins with no loss of HP's to the other winning with no HP in an extreme case. It would be common to see a fight where one unit that was much better lose in a close battle and reloading have it win with no damage.

Fire Power was used in II to prevent that as a powerful unit such as a tank would have a very high FP and a weak unit like an archer would never over come that fire power rating.

I was among many that beg to get FP back in and they were testing a method to damping the current rng impact, but were not happy with the out come and ran out of money.

So we are stuck with crazy out comes. The rng should have an impact, but it should not be so wide. I would not mind is a combat could swing a bit, but not from no damage to dead.

It makes the combat just a lucky roll, unless you have over whelming numbers. I live with it, but I still shake my head when my elite cav dies on a red lined cav or worse.

If the elite cav lost to a 3 hp cav, that is fine, maybe even a rare lost to a 2 hp, but not 1 hp. The worse I recall is in a GR game I had a tank army nearly lose to a middle age unit.

 

[vmxa]

It is my contention that absolutely nothing matters but dumb luck. Whoever wins, wins and whoever loses, loses. Every battle is just a crap shoot.

I have to go along with Sashie here, it is mostly planning. Now if you have 20 cavs against 20 cavs, then it should be luck. If you plan it better and have 20 cavs vs 20 cavs, but they are all red lined, you should expect to win at least 18 of 20.

 

[TheOverseer714]

With just luck you might win, you might lose. Add skill and good strategy to luck and you almost always win. The crap shoot should be in individual results, not your overall game. I lose my share of powerful units to weaker ones, but if I have enough of the powerful ones, I still win the war. Just have to roll with the punches and get used to losses in battle, figure in a 20% margin for acceptable losses.

 

[anaxagoras]

The crap shoot should be in individual results, not your overall game.

Right, and make sure you bring along a healthy dose of realistic expectations. Expect your cavalry to get massacred by infantry. Expect your archers and horses and even swords to lose to spears. Expect some losses of even med inf to spears. Don't expect your elites to be substantially more powerful than your veterans. On defense, expect your pikes and muskets to have a hard time against knights and med inf. Expect to lose when defending against cavalry up until infantry.

If you keep your expectations in line and plan with a slightly pessimistic assessment of your own strength, you are more likely to find that you are able to do what you wanted, even in the face of some adversity and lousy luck.

Just as importantly, don't let a string of good luck alter your expectations for the future. Just because your med inf waded through a stack of pikes without taking significant losses, don't expect that to happen the next time. Just thank the stars and hope you don't need to rely on luck like that again.

 

[NickyH]

Question: On Emperor or higher difficulty it's not uncommon to lose a warrior to a barb warrior, especially if you're the attacker. This is normal and happens every now and then when i meet a lone barb walking around the map. But when I attack barb camps with my warriors, it seems to me that i almost always win the battle and get my 25 gold, even if I attack with a regular warrior.

Is there anything in the mechanics that gives you better odds when you attack a camp, or have I just been very lucky for as long as I can remember? It could be cognitive bias of course, but I don't think so…

 

[anaxagoras]

Is there anything in the mechanics that gives you better odds when you attack a camp, or have I just been very lucky for as long as I can remember? It could be cognitive bias of course, but I don't think so…

You've maybe been lucky, and there is probably some cognitive bias, too.

You will win, on emperor, most of the time against barbarians (the bonus is 50% at this level). Warrior v. warrior, the defender will win slightly more often than they otherwise would, but a veteran civ warrior against a single fortified barbarian camper on grass still has something like a 75% chance of winning.

When barbs attack you, you actually have even a slightly better chance than that of winning. However, it is usually at a moment not of your choosing, and they can end up with two or three shots against the same unit. So you'll probably actually lose a unit more often when you are on defense, and you'll probably notice more often when a babarian gets lucky if they are attacking you, because you'll have to make an adjustment you didn't expect to have to make.

If you attack a camp and lose, well, that was unusual, but you recognized it ahead as one of the possibilities, didn't you?

 

[TheOverseer714]

Barbs are conscripts, so if you send veterans, you should win many battles. Terrain has alot to do with it, as does level. The higher the level, the stronger the bonus barbarians get. At Sid, attacking a camp with less than a Mace is very risky. Fortunately, the AI tribes are very efficient at barb cleanup at that level. Even at Emperor, the AIs have troops beelining towards barb camps pretty much all the time.

 

[tt2241]

This will probably sound like a stupid question because I have been playing CIV for a while but here goes.
How do you change your attitude/mood towards another CIV? I have CIV 3 Conquests btw. I have read that you can supposedly do this but I have no idea how it is done.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Be nice, they like you more. Be nasty, they rapidly hate your guts. Alliances, RoPs, MPPs, gifts, giving in to demands and trading is nice. Wars, razing, deal-breaking, demands refused, and settling close all are nasty. There are many subtleties, but those are basics.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

When, say, a catapult bombards a warrior of its own free will (your turn, you click the button), what factors determine whether or not it hits? And on the defensive, what factors determine whether or not it hits?

 

[tt2241]

What I mean to say is that is there some kind of actual menu that you can use to change the attitude you have towards another CIV in the game? Wether it be happy, neutral, etc. . .

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

No. There is no program that allows you to change your status towards them.

 

[againsttheflow]

That's not really programmed in anyway. They don't care how you feel toward them they only care about their own feelings. They do realize certain things can annoy you but they never know exactly what you think of them.

It would be interesting to see what there feelings are toward other civs but afaik this too is hardcoded (unless maybe one could find it in debug mode?)

 

[Timmymtd]

Hey, new player here. I found my brothers Civ III game and I started playing it, pretty steep learning curve. I got a question about civil disorders, I get them all the time and I don't understand how to stop them. I do know that adding a joker will make them happy but then it will make it so the city has no growth. What should I build to make it so my citizens are happy and have enough food? Also what is a rule of thumb to do with my workers? (right now I just automate them). Sorry if these were in the FAQ, It wont load for me. BTW I have only Civ III no expansions or patches.

 

[Aabraxan]

Hit F1. There are two sliders in the upper right corner: the science slider and the luxury slider. The latter helps keep people happy by allocating spending to entertainment. Use that. Also hook up luxuries (dyes, wines, spices, etc) to keep people happy. Build marketplaces to increase the effectiveness of luxuries. In order to avoid civil disorder you need at least as many happy faces as unhappy faces. Neither specialists nor content citizens count in determining whether a city will fall into disorder.

Temples and cathedrals will also help keep people happy, but whether they're advisable depends on your victory condition.

As a rule of thumb, while in despotism, mine green and irrigate brown. The exception to that is green that has a food bonus, like a cow on grassland. Go ahead and irrigate those.

Welcome to CFC, timmymtd.

 

[Meteor Man]

Usually, just let them riot until the city gets to be a size 3, then you can add a joker. However, if your city in in the middle of a desert or tundra, I would try to connect some luxuries to the city because it will NEVER grow, unless you can somehow irrigate to it.

And...
WELCOME TO CFC!!!!


I love saying that.


EDIT: Cross post with Aabraxan

 

[Timmymtd]

Thanks for the quick replies. Thanks for the welcome!

 

[Meteor Man]

Thanx,


Here it is again: WELCOME TO CFC!!!!

hehe.

 

[Timmymtd]

I was wondering if anybody could link me to a "How To Install mods or patches" or post instructions here because I think I saw a few to improve the graphics of the game.