Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Robo-Star]

No. If neither is at war with B, then both get trade routes (with or without open borders with B).

Thanks. So, they don't even need a trade network in friendly/neutral territory to get trade routes - do they need one to trade resources?

 

[Abegweit]

No. You can trade resources even if you don't have open borders.

 

[Robo-Star]

No. You can trade resources even if you don't have open borders.

Thanks. I guess as long as you're not at war with a civ, tiles under their border is counted as neutral territory - I thought "neutral territory" meant "unowned tile"?

 

[Seraiel]

You're wrong there, Seraiel. Nothing prevents you from building a missionary (assuming a monastery) in another religion and spread it into your cities even in Theocracy. And nothing prevents any AIs running Theocracy from spreading a foreign religion provided you gift them missionaries. Obviously, the mission might still fail if they try to spread into a city that already has a religion. And sure, this is the only way they can ever get a foreign religion they don't have yet, unless you switch them out of Theocracy or gift them a city.

Uh...

This is embarassing, I'm getting teached in a newbie thread .

Doesn't matter, at least I know the truth now. I have to test that out some time though because it seems so completely against logic for me.

TY...

 

[God-Emperor]

Uh...

This is embarassing, I'm getting teached in a newbie thread .

Doesn't matter, at least I know the truth now. I have to test that out some time though because it seems so completely against logic for me.

TY...

On the bright side, you now have something you can post over in the "After years of playing, what new things have you found in Civ 4?" thread.

 

[Sisiutil]

Uh...

This is embarassing, I'm getting teached in a newbie thread .

"I'm getting taught in a newbie thread"

Yes. Yes you are.

 

[Seraiel]

Isn't "teached" ok in A.E.? I'm quite sure I've heard that form of that verb quite often already.

 

[Abegweit]

Isn't "teached" ok in A.E.? I'm quite sure I've heard that form of that verb quite often already.

teached is not a word. full stop. Not in A.E., E.E, or any other kind of E.

 

[dalamb]

"teached" is used at the stage where a learner has mastered a few of the general English rules for word formation but hasn't memorized the many special cases like "taught". So you might hear it, but not from a fluent speaker.

 

[UnforcedError]

Er, guys, I guess Seraiel meant to ask whether 'to teach' had a concurrent regular form as some other English verbs would. I doubt you have to explain to him what an irregular verb is.

 

[Manco Capac]

I like when people teecht me stuff ^^

Grammar nazi, grammar nazi everywhere!

 

[Sisiutil]

I like when people teecht me stuff ^^

Grammar nazi, grammar nazi everywhere!

Trolls, too, apparently...

 

[Lennier]

To get us back on topic: how is the number of EP generated by a great spy infiltrate mission calculated? Should you infiltrate into the enemy city that is most expensive for your spies to exicuted missions or the least expensive? Or does it not matter?

 

[Lennier]

OK, my question was answered by Ghpstage here.

 

[Olson]

In Bts v3.19 (the only relevant version of BtS), this is wrong. I just checked the source code and it is also wrong in both Warlords v2.13 and in plain Civ v1.74.

Spoiler :

The only functional difference (there is a slight differences in the exact method of doing one of the checks, but it is functionally the same) between the canSpread function in BtS vs. Warlords is that BtS added the cannotSpreadReligion Python callback as the first thing checked. The Warlords and BtS versions are functionally the same (again, slight differences in the exact method of doing one of the checks, but it is functionally the same). Aside from the Python callback, all 3 versions do the same type of checks which includes as the last thing checking to see if the player has the "no spreading non-state religion" condition active, but in all 3 cases it checks that only if the unit and the city do not have owners that are on the same team - the code for this is identical in all 3.

You can spread any religion you want to your own cities via a missionary even when you are in Theology, subject to the usual failure chance if there is already at least one religion present.

Of course the AI will not give you a missionary so you will be limited to those you can build yourself. Being more clever than the AI, you can give it a missionary and it will use it to try to spread the religion. There might be a few situations where the AI won't use the missionary, like maybe if it is in financial difficulty and decides to disband some units in which case it might disband the missionary instead of using it. Other than that it will use the standard missionary unit AI and do what it does.



Also wrong, for the same reason.

Theology does not block the Spread Religion mission if the missionary belongs to the same team as the team the city's owner is on. You can look at the source code yourself, where I indicated, or just try it and see. The mission is still possible and the failure chance is no different than usual.

Thanks for checking God-Emperor. So, Theocracy only prevents organic religion spread from another religion's Holy City? That changes the way I view Theocracy. Funny how in game observations can lead to the wrong conclusion.

[Edit: read following posts; I think I'm a little confused but this is a 'quick answer' thread so won't go on about it. I'm thinking: if the religion is not already present w/in one's borders it can't be intro'd during Theocracy, in Single Player (SP) -no team- game, by any means. But, in Theo., if the religion is already present somewhere, but not the State Rel., it can be spread to other cities.]

 

[Deckhand]

... Funny how in game observations can lead to the wrong conclusion.

We all agree that Civ IV is the best game EVAR!
But, EXplore in 4X should stand for exploration of the map and not the game mechanics.

 

[Lennier]

Thanks for checking God-Emperor. So, Theocracy only prevents organic religion spread from another religion's Holy City? That changes the way I view Theocracy. Funny how in game observations can lead to the wrong conclusion.

It also prevents foriegn non-state missionaries from spreading religion.

 

[God-Emperor]

Thanks for checking God-Emperor. So, Theocracy only prevents organic religion spread from another religion's Holy City?

Well, no. It also blocks someone who is not on your team from spreading a non-state religion via missionary in your cities. It just turns out that this is not a significant problem for a human trying to spread a religion.

It does, on the other hand, block the other AI civs from using missionaries to spread religions other than the state-religion to the cities of a player in theocracy, both to the human player and to another AI, since the AI does not use the "give them the missionary" trick (which presumably wouldn't work against the human player anyway, what with the human being clever enough to not fall for it, but would work against another AI). An AI in Theocracy will only spread religions it already has and pick up new ones from a human using the "give them the missionary" trick, it won't get any new ones via the natural spread or another AI's missionaries.

Unless the human choses to use the trick to get around it, Theocracy does therefore block the introduction of new religions into a civilization. This is a bit less restrictive than the civic's description makes it sound, but only a little.

It may also slow the spread of non-state religions that are already present in the theocratic AI's cities since it might build fewer missionaries of the non-state religions, and possibly none at all for non-state religions for which it doesn't control the holy city. I vaguely recall seeing some adjustments in the AI build decision code for things like this, but don't remember for sure.

 

[Ghpstage]

Unless the human choses to use the trick to get around it, Theocracy does therefore block the introduction of new religions into a civilization.

Not entirely, the civ can always capture a city with a new religion

 

[God-Emperor]

Not entirely, the civ can always capture a city with a new religion

That's not so much an introduction as it is a kidnapping.