Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Tone]

It was supposed to boost research, it appears to boost research but it does nothing. It doesn't harm your civ apart from waste a valuable SGL and give you false information about the completion of a research project.

It is the same as the turn after a GA when you no longer have a commerce boost but the computers calculations are telling you that you still have.

 

[MAS]

How is it broken? It doesn't do anything, it only provides a partial benefit, or it hurts your civ?

It just doesn't do anything at all.

Ever heared of the "Lying character screen" phenomenon prevalent in many CRPG's? Well, this works a much like it...

Activating it wastes your SGL!

 

[btfx]

Uhh, hello. A few questions:
1st, I thought I would hate civIII when I saw my friend playing it, but I can see how awesome it is now that I have it. Awesome game, really improved. I have C3C in case it matters. The no-cd patch is for v1.15, and I have v 1.22, but it seems ok other than a few string mismatches. If there is a no-cd patch for 1.22, please do tell (as far as I know it's just a matter of replacing the executable).

1. Sometimes the settler shows the would-be city radius when you tell him to go somewhere, sometimes he will not, any reason for this?

2. This is a big one, in Civ2, your goal for city placement was basically to fit four "special" tiles into the distant corners of one city, if your city radii were not connected, it's no big deal. Here everything is different with territory and all. What are the optimal settlement plan for civ3? I have heard of loose city placement with temporary "camp" cities to maximize production early. Is there a good article somewhere? there seems to be a lot of conflicting information.

3. Damn AIs are always trying to settle in my "unofficial" territory. I understand that the AI is a lot better now, but is there any way I can make a fair settlement plan with them? I saw people doing this in multiplayer games, drawing a line in the sand to divvy up the continent. I have never seen a city "culture flip", so it's obviously not probable, unless it is surrounded by opposing cities.

4. Cultivation. Mining grassland? This is very foreign to me, coming from civ2. What is the optimal cultivation plan? The one thing I think was preserved is the importance of an infrastructure between cities.

5. Fortress/barricade. The way I see it these are the same thing, one is simply beefier. Has anyone ever used these? From civ2, I recall connecting to my opponent civ with a road over a mountain, building a fortress on the mountain, and then declaring war. The civ would waste all their offensive units, and I wouldn't even lose a single defender, even if the civ was ahead in tech.
Sometimes when I wanted to protect a city I would fortify units in fortresses AROUND it, and the ZOC would force enemies to empty at least one fortress if they wanted to give the city a try. Now there is some new and weird ZOC that I don't get, can someone explain it? Has anyone ever used a fortress/barricade? I noted that the AI is not stupid, they did not attack my units while on a mountain, so why would they even consider trying a barricaded unit?

6. Craters. I noted that this is a wonderful way to screw things. Stealth bombers can make craters pretty much 100% of the time, catapults, not so much. How are craters determined?

By the way, I LOVE the war academy!

 

[Aabraxan]

Welcome to CFC, btfx!

I can't answer all of your questions, but I'll address the ones that I can.

1. Sometimes the settler shows the would-be city radius when you tell him to go somewhere, sometimes he will not, any reason for this?

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing that the settler is standing on land on which a city cannot be built (like mountains or marshes).

2. This is a big one, in Civ2, your goal for city placement was basically to fit four "special" tiles into the distant corners of one city, if your city radii were not connected, it's no big deal. Here everything is different with territory and all. What are the optimal settlement plan for civ3? I have heard of loose city placement with temporary "camp" cities to maximize production early. Is there a good article somewhere? there seems to be a lot of conflicting information.

I didn't play Civ2, so I can't make any comparison. Here's what I can tell you, though: One common mistake made by new players is spacing cities too wide. CxxC is a good all-around rule of thumb, but there will be some variation depending on play style. I'm not aware of any War Academy articles specifically for city placement, though.

3. Damn AIs are always trying to settle in my "unofficial" territory. I understand that the AI is a lot better now, but is there any way I can make a fair settlement plan with them?

A fair settlement plan with the AI? My "fair settlement plan" usually involves cannons and cavalry, so you might want to ask someone else . . .

4. Cultivation. Mining grassland? This is very foreign to me, coming from civ2. What is the optimal cultivation plan? The one thing I think was preserved is the importance of an infrastructure between cities.

Mining grassland may seem foreign, but perhaps I can at least clarify the reason for it: the despotism penalty. Anything getting 3 or more food, gold shields gets a -1 unit penalty under despotism. That means that a grassland (2 food), which is irrigated (+1 food) under despotism (-1 food) winds up with 2 food. Wasted worker turns.

The "optimal cultivation plan" is whatever you need your empire to have. In the core, that will include both mines and irrigation. In the way-outlying hinterlands, you'll likely water everything and create specialist farms. (See Bede's War Academy article "The Role of the Specialist Citizen.")

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

About the Settler thing, I have noticed that he will not show potential would be city borders as long as he is currently inside one of your territorial borders. It seems he has to move a step outside your territory to show it's potential boundries.

Of coarse, I've seen it show boundries later in the game with your Territory all expanded and taken up an you go to a wide open spot within your territory. So that's something I don't quite understand either.

 

[btfx]

Wow, fast response.

Welcome to CFC, btfx!

Thanks!

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing that the settler is standing on land on which a city cannot be built (like mountains or marshes).

No, it must be something else.

One common mistake made by new players is spacing cities too wide. CxxC is a good all-around rule of thumb, but there will be some variation depending on play style.

Argh, I suppose so, old habits are tough to break, will CxxC allow for Metropoli though? Assuming 2 food/tile, because I need the unit support for my army. Also,

A fair settlement plan with the AI? My "fair settlement plan" usually involves cannons and cavalry, so you might want to ask someone else . . .

Err, I was thinking very early game, I guess it's because I play pangea maps. On continents and arch, you can generally set limits with only 1/2 cities. On a Pangea you are surrounded by AIs, and there are few geographical features to set implicit limits on everyone's expansion. A place like America, populated by an AI and you is easy to divide. Just smack a city on panama, and everybody gets half, any cities you sneak into your enemy's continent are a bonus, on pangea the AI will sneak cities into your "implicit" territory, it's extremely frustrating. When you are playing humans (I never have in Civ3), you can negotiate the division of a landmass, even without chokepoints. Oh well, AIs will be AIs....

Mining grassland may seem foreign, but perhaps I can at least clarify the reason for it: the despotism penalty.

Blast! I feel stupid.

The "optimal cultivation plan" is whatever you need your empire to have. In the core, that will include both mines and irrigation. In the way-outlying hinterlands, you'll likely water everything and create specialist farms. (See Bede's War Academy article "The Role of the Specialist Citizen.")

Thanks very much!

 

[btfx]

About the Settler thing, I have noticed that he will not show potential would be city borders as long as he is currently inside one of your territorial borders. It seems he has to move a step outside your territory to show it's potential boundries.

Of coarse, I've seen it show boundries later in the game with your Territory all expanded and taken up an you go to a wide open spot within your territory. So that's something I don't quite understand either.

Hmm, no, I have the opposite problem, when he is within the territory he always shows potential borders, when outside, not always.

NEW QUESTION! Anyone ever use pre-artillery bombarders? What for? I would love to have catapults as involved in my strategy as they were in civ2...

 

[sercer88]

IMO on catapaults, you need to make sure you aren't bombing pikemen or better with them, or else they won't be too effective. But at stack of 10-15 catapaults can easily red-line every unit in an AI city in the AA! So, I think they're worth it.

with regards to the city borders...are you in someone else's borders?? If the settler is, then IIRC, the settler won't show any potential borders because you aren't allowed to build a city in AI territory (unless you want war with them

 

[gmaharriet]

old habits are tough to break, will CxxC allow for Metropoli though? Assuming 2 food/tile, because I need the unit support for my army.

CxxC will probably not allow Metros, but (assuming you're a Republic) although 1 metro will support 4 units, 2 cities will support 6 and they will get to that size much earlier and without Sanitation/Hospitals, so you can cram more into the same space.

Early defense is easier with a 1-move unit being able to move from one town/city to the next in 1 turn.

You can only have 1 army for every 4 cities, so you can have more armies with cities than with metros.

 

[btfx]

Wow, I started a new game, standard continents, 70% water, 5 billion, and I LOVE IT! As netherlands, I made quick work of contacting all civs on the continent, and the two mid-size islands near it. With Aztecs, Iroquois and Americans on the same landmass, I thought Cxxc would screw me over, because I HAD to contain them, and I expected to have a slower territorial expansion rate, way wrong. CxxC makes an AMAZING improvement in the game, well worth the lack of metropoli, besides, the coastal cities will make metropoli anyway. I have outdone all my neighbors by a longshot, nearly 90% of my cities produce settlers, I got ahead fast, and with the increased commerce made an amazing tech lead extremely early, I got an SGL, and used him to rush the pyramids (which I swore to myself not to build, but this just seemed right). This allowed me to make workers and settlers at a rate unprecedented to me. AND the new science discoveries earned me another SGL, who I will save for another wonder. The Aztecs and Iroquois I would normally fear are safely boxed into a small quasi continent, and the Americans are free to a jungle field to the south (to be conquered after the area is cultivated). I have discovered a short route to the other continent, and cannot wait to finish settling this one.

In short, CxxC has turned the game around for me, though I mined some grassland, My focus is to keep up my road network as the empire expands.

 

[EMan]

Sounds like you have a good handle on the game for such little experience!

If you check out the Civ 3 Hall Of Fame (HOF) games, you can refine your skills depending primarily on your choice of Victory Condition. For example, if you want to get a high-scoring Histographic Victory, you will need to use a 60% Water Archipelago map.

 

[Aabraxan]

. . . . the new science discoveries earned me another SGL, who I will save for another wonder. . . .

Sounds like you're off to a good start, btfx! Just bear in mind that as long has you're holding that SGL, you won't be able to get an MGL.

 

[Keroro]

It's difficult to overstate the case for CxxC city spacing in Civ 3. I jumped two difficulty levels in two games when I started using CxxC rather than CxxxxC. If you want to play Civ 3 for high scores then it (or even CxC) is the way to go. Also - don't forget the specialists.

 

[btfx]

Sounds like you're off to a good start, btfx! Just bear in mind that as long has you're holding that SGL, you won't be able to get an MGL.

I sure am! Thanks for the heads up! I saw him in the military advisor screen, so I thought it might be the case. By the way, I have a few more questions.

1. I think I get ZOC, I saw a cavalry shoot at a passing cavalry once, so that makes sense, but do Fortresses give this ability to ALL units? Like... will a warrior chop at a passing enemy when in a fort/barricade? If so, I don't see why the AI wasn't programmed to use them (I have never seen one).

2. AIs, they all suddenly got annoyed at me. Is it because I was charging them money for ROP? I thought whoever had more area could do that.

3. Also, some more AI stuff. For example, I just got a viable route with Portugal. They have plenty of extra wine, but I had to trade Furs, Spices, Ivory AND Horses for the booze. That doesn't seem fair, even though it would be more valuable to me had I marketplaces. What's up with that?

4. Expansion is over, every little open space has been claimed, from my previous experiences, this is when World War Stupid starts, and the AIs dispose of each others archers. I have been waiting calmly for the Aztecs and Iroquois to do this, but they seem so calm and controlled. Any reason for this? Any way I can instigate?

By the way, funny thing happened. In the beginning of the game I sent a curragh out to search for the other continents, it didn't sink for 5 turns, (though I am seafaring), which was very good luck, then, just as I discovered the new world, and the Carthaginians, it sank 1 tile from the coast, which was bad luck, then I established an embassy with them, and found a much shorter/less risky route to the continent (good luck). Crazy stuff.

 

[darski]

In a (Warlord) game I had yesterday - using CA II- I was able to hold my own on all fronts. I never lost a city that I had taken, never started a war but finished them getting techs and money from the evil enemy Civs. I have a stronger military than the others (left) on my continent.

so when it is time for some numbskull to try to expand onto our continent, why do they try to take me out?

Why not kill off the Evil Aztecs who are more accessible?

Why not kill off the Iroquois who have that nice little continent all to themselves? or the Zulu for the same reason. (must have been really hard on Shaka; not a single enemy to kill )

Why not the Persians who have few cities and could be gone in a quick run?

Is this a built in bias to try to kill the human player? They seem very happy to kill each other generally, why this push against a greater enemy?

 

[Norton II]

With Aztecs, Iroquois and Americans on the same landmass

Do you have "culturally linked starting locations" checked? If so, uncheck that option, or the American civs will be in every game you play (not good, since four of them are agricultural).

 

[psweetman1590]

@ Darski - The AI dogpiles the leader. Just like you would if one of the AI's were winning, you want to hurt the guy who's most likely to win. From your description, that sounds like you. Double edged sword, eh?

btfx:

1. I think I get ZOC, I saw a cavalry shoot at a passing cavalry once, so that makes sense, but do Fortresses give this ability to ALL units? Like... will a warrior chop at a passing enemy when in a fort/barricade? If so, I don't see why the AI wasn't programmed to use them (I have never seen one).

Yes, when the cav shot at a passing unit that was it's ZOC, and yes, fortresses give that to all units. And yes, the AI will never build forts (except on a bottelneck).

2. AIs, they all suddenly got annoyed at me. Is it because I was charging them money for ROP? I thought whoever had more area could do that.

No, that is not why they're annoyed. The AI doesn't get annoyed because of deals that you DO make with them (they tend to get annoyed if you DON'T trade with them). They also get annoyed if you're stronger than they, are weaker than they, have their shunned gov't, have less culture, have been at war with them in the past, and when you act too human. Don't worry about them being annoyed too much.

3. Also, some more AI stuff. For example, I just got a viable route with Portugal. They have plenty of extra wine, but I had to trade Furs, Spices, Ivory AND Horses for the booze. That doesn't seem fair, even though it would be more valuable to me had I marketplaces. What's up with that?

Seems like you guessed the answer yourself. That lux was more valuable to you than one would be to them. This is likely to be because you have more markets and/or you have more cities. The upshot is that you would get more happy faces than Portugal would, and that's why the price is exorbitant.

4. Expansion is over, every little open space has been claimed, from my previous experiences, this is when World War Stupid starts, and the AIs dispose of each others archers. I have been waiting calmly for the Aztecs and Iroquois to do this, but they seem so calm and controlled. Any reason for this? Any way I can instigate?

How do you know that they aren't at war already? You won't get an announcement unless you have an embassy with them. Also, the AI can be very... odd at times. I've played this game for upwards of five years and can't tell you everything about them. Perhaps they're weak? Maybe they didn't expand well enough for them to feel confident about attacking their neighbors? Maybe you just need to wait a bit longer? Every game is different, and I can count quite a few that didn't have world wars until halfway through the industrial age.

 

[btfx]

...yes, fortresses give that to all units. And yes, the AI will never build forts (except on a bottelneck).

Thanks! I will try to use these (I like variety in my strategy. Even at a slight cost.)

...they tend to get annoyed if you DON'T trade with them). They also get annoyed if you're stronger than they, are weaker than they, have their shunned gov't, have less culture, have been at war with them in the past, and when you act too human. Don't worry about them being annoyed too much.

Heheheh... Yeah, I signed ROP with all the distant ones, they're polite again.

Seems like you guessed the answer yourself. That lux was more valuable to you than one would be to them. This is likely to be because you have more markets and/or you have more cities. The upshot is that you would get more happy faces than Portugal would, and that's why the price is exorbitant.

Argh, I thought since I have few/no markets, this would not affect me, but I guess the huge # of cities screwed me here. Time to break open a can of cavalry...

How do you know that they aren't at war already? You won't get an announcement unless you have an embassy with them.

I usually have an embassy with everyone, as soon as finances allow. Is this wrong? Generally ROP tribute makes it a good investment.

Also, the AI can be very... odd at times. I've played this game for upwards of five years and can't tell you everything about them. Perhaps they're weak? Maybe they didn't expand well enough for them to feel confident about attacking their neighbors? Maybe you just need to wait a bit longer? Every game is different, and I can count quite a few that didn't have world wars until halfway through the industrial age.

Ahh, thanks! I thought archer warfare was standard. I also think there are no wars because I am a superpower, and they want to take me down rather than each other. I have never developed this fast before, the CxxC really turned the game around.

 

[psweetman1590]

I usually have an embassy with everyone, as soon as finances allow. Is this wrong? Generally ROP tribute makes it a good investment.

Not wrong at all. Most newer players don't though, so I sort of assumed.... yeah. Sorry. They are indeed good investments.

 

[Aabraxan]

In a (Warlord) game I had yesterday - using CA II- I was able to hold my own on all fronts. I never lost a city that I had taken, never started a war but finished them getting techs and money from the evil enemy Civs. I have a stronger military than the others (left) on my continent.

Congratulations. Sounds like your warmongering is progressing!

And it looks like psweetman1590 has already answered the rest: you're the strongest, so they are gunning for you. Now try some good, old-fashioned bribery and see if you can get them to dogpile each other while you keep getting stronger . . .

@btfx: I don't recall what difficulty you're playing on. If you're still on Chieftain, it's time to move up.