Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Roland Johansen]

How do you clear the cache?

My game is slow when loading mods and it takes a long time to unload.

I don't know if this has anything to do with the cache. It could be that it has something to do with it as the standard game rules are probably saved in the civ4 cache and thus load faster. Deleting them doesn't help directly as it only means that no rules are in the cache now and the game has to load the new rules from scratch.

Clearing the cache can help avoid rule conflicts which can occur when loading a mod after having played the original game (or the other way around).

The cache can be deleted by holding [SHIFT] during the startup of the game. But that isn't the way I like to do it because I wan't to see it gone (and because I've heard of people where it doesn't work all the time).
The cache folder is stored in:
C:\Documents and Settings\[Administrator Name]\Application Data\My games\Civilization 4

Note that Application Data is a hidden folder and you thus must enable seeing hidden folders in order to find it.

If you can't find the cache folder, then you can do a search in your C-partition for the directory. Make sure that you enable searching within hidden folders in the advanced search options or you won't find it.

Deleting the cache folder is a sure way to get a fresh version of civ 4 loaded.

 

[frankcor]

Gherald I suggest you make an image of the CD/DVD and mount it with something like Daemon Tools (I use the old 3.47 non-adware version) or PowerISO, etc.
This is perfectly safe (downloading NoCD cracks from warez sites is very risky), easier to maintain (NoCDs have to be re-downloaded for every patch), and ethical -- not to mention legal.
The only downside is the image for Civ4 is around 1.5 GB in size, but with today's hard drives that's not unreasonable.

Sounds good, can you explain more about how that works and why it's legal?

@a4phantom, I don't recall seeing your question answered. Utilities such as those mentioned (I use Alchohol 120%) set up a virtual CD drive and mount a CD image using hard drive space to do it. Your operating system sees the drive with assigned letter as just another drive device in your directory tree.

 

[Matty R]

Religion hoarding isn't a bad thing as such, but you have to get ALL of them for it to work properly (on most types of maps). Therefore, it really only works on Noble difficulty or less, and usually only with a Mysticism-start civ (unless you're on Settler or something). If it's a higher difficulty level, it just becomes far too difficult to ensure that you'll get all seven of the religions, and to prevent the AI from beating you to them. So on the higher difficulties, it's probably better to found only a couple of religions and let them spread around a heap, if only for the gold benefit (once you get shrines).

Also - don't underestimate the power of owning the only Shrine in the world. Even if you've founded all the religions, it may be better to hold off on building additional Shrines until much later in the game. The benefit of having a single one of your religions spread massively around the world is quite huge indeed.

Whatever the scenario, it's always good to try to found at least ONE religion. You can't go wrong with that.

Are the shrines the buildings you can have once you've got a certain number of temples for a religion? So if you have 4 Buddhist temples you can build the Buddhist shrine? Or are the shrines the buildings that Prophets can build in the cities that religions are founded in?

 

[frankcor]

Cathedrals may be built after 4 temples of the corresponding religion have been completed. Shrines are built by Prophets and only in cities in which a religion has been founded.

 

[Matty R]

Cathedrals may be built after 4 temples of the corresponding religion have been completed. Shrines are built by Prophets and only in cities in which a religion has been founded.

Thanks. Just wish I'd have known that before I'd built all 7 shrines. Ah well. The options are set to make the other civs favour war. More culture for me.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Actually, the number of Temples required for Cathedrals (as with the requirements for many other specific buildings and wonders) varies with the size and type of the map, the number of players, and the game settings. Just thought I'd point that out.

 

[frankcor]

Right you are, Lord Parkin!

 

[a4phantom]

Yes, I thought so too. So any obsolete unit that you're building is not a waste as the production transfers to the newer more modern unit, not?

If the modern unit becomes available before the current production completes. I've become an axes-tanks constant warmonger, but when I used to have peaceful eras there was sometimes nothing to build and no units that made sense. Also think of Pacifist civs, they don't want to be building units just to spend production.

I can't remember culture influencing diplomacy in civ3 a lot. There was a small effect but it was so small that it never made a change in the game for me.

I think it did. I usually had an awing culture and it helped compensate for a late military buildup.

You could have an influence of culture on diplomacy in a version of civ. But would a strong culture be a positive or a negative thing in diplomacy? Do they despise your strong culture or admire it?

Interesting historic/philosophical question, but in the game I'd imagine you'd want to reward high culture. Have you read Asimov's Foundation?

No, they removed that option in civ4 because it could easily be exploited in civ3. You could create a healing point and pocket of your culture by building a city in enemy territory in civ3. That allowed you to use the railroads already present in that area and with enough settlers that allowed a kind of blitzkrieg that was virtually unstoppable. (You could use a settle/disband city trick to use enemy railroads anywhere.)

Yeah, I remember people using that to bring artillery and cavalry two spaces away from a big city on the first turn they attacked, and arguing with people on this forum who insisted it wasn't an exploit.

Sounds like an interesting conquest. Not all wars are easy and if they all would be easy then the game would get boring rather fast, not...
Maybe you want some Aircraft Carriers with fighters to bomb enemy units and shoot down enemy bombers. When you can move your own bombers to the conquered city, then you can use them to bomb the enemy and the fighters as defence against enemy bombers.

I thought of carriers but it seemed unwieldly because all my big ports were building transports and most of my airforce was heavy bombers. So I used battleships to demolish the city's defenses, took it in a bloody battle the turn after landing, then flew my airforce over and have used it to cripple all Inca units in range and eliminate the defenses of the landlocked cities while my battleships tour the coast bombarding the ports.

By the way, many Inca infantry units have garrison but not combat1, which an aggressive civ's gunpowder units should have. Does this mean that when an archer is upgraded to gunpowder the combat1 isn't gained, or is it something else? Similiarly my Mech Infantry that used to be Marines seem to have retained amphib, is that supposed to happen?

Final question: is there any unit that upgrades to Marines?

 

[Roland Johansen]

If the modern unit becomes available before the current production completes. I've become an axes-tanks constant warmonger, but when I used to have peaceful eras there was sometimes nothing to build and no units that made sense. Also think of Pacifist civs, they don't want to be building units just to spend production.

If you don't want to conquer any more cities, then I guess that produce wealth and science becomes a viable option.

Interesting historic/philosophical question, but in the game I'd imagine you'd want to reward high culture. Have you read Asimov's Foundation?

Indeed, if you introduce culture in diplomacy then it probably needs to have a positive effect. If you make its effects more difficult or realistic, it might become too incomprehensible for starting players.

I've read I Robot and have heard about the Foundation series. They belong to the (long) list of books that I still want to read someday. Why do you ask? Does the book consider effects of culture on a civilization? His books are a bit philosophical, so I can imagine the book discussing a somewhat difficult issue like that.

I thought of carriers but it seemed unwieldly because all my big ports were building transports and most of my airforce was heavy bombers. So I used battleships to demolish the city's defenses, took it in a bloody battle the turn after landing, then flew my airforce over and have used it to cripple all Inca units in range and eliminate the defenses of the landlocked cities while my battleships tour the coast bombarding the ports.

Sounds like a nice battle

By the way, many Inca infantry units have garrison but not combat1, which an aggressive civ's gunpowder units should have. Does this mean that when an archer is upgraded to gunpowder the combat1 isn't gained, or is it something else? Similiarly my Mech Infantry that used to be Marines seem to have retained amphib, is that supposed to happen?

I've seen similar strange stuff. Apparently you keep the promotions that the old unit had after upgrading. There is some logic in it. With the marine, you've apparently inversted resources in its amphibious training. It's a pity that you can't do that in general. Something like +20% production cost for 1 extra promotion, +50% cost for two extra promotions. It would have been fun. Maybe a bit difficult for the AI though. You could limit the trained promotions to the lower level promotions.

Final question: is there any unit that upgrades to Marines?

I don't think so. Maybe in the expansion.

 

[a4phantom]

I've read I Robot and have heard about the Foundation series. They belong to the (long) list of books that I still want to read someday. Why do you ask? Does the book consider effects of culture on a civilization? His books are a bit philosophical, so I can imagine the book discussing a somewhat difficult issue like that.

I can't get into it without giving too much of the book away, read Foundation when you get the chance adn you'll see what I mean. It's a great book, very simple and straightforward yet interesting and deep, and I never thought of this before but it could have lots of connotations for Civ.

I haven't read I, Robot, but I'm going to to protest that awful movie.

Sounds like a nice battle

Yep, it was big, messy, and I won.

I've seen similar strange stuff. Apparently you keep the promotions that the old unit had after upgrading. There is some logic in it. With the marine, you've apparently inversted resources in its amphibious training. It's a pity that you can't do that in general. Something like +20% production cost for 1 extra promotion, +50% cost for two extra promotions. It would have been fun. Maybe a bit difficult for the AI though. You could limit the trained promotions to the lower level promotions.

And link minor upgrades to techs short of the one that allows the next class of unit. Yeah I was hoping they'd do that for Civ4, because there weren't enough variations and gradations of quality between units before. For example the excellent Soviet T34 is the same generic "tank" as the ridiculous American Sherman or lame Japanese tanks. They went with experience based promos instead and I'm not complaining.

I don't think so. Maybe in the expansion.

Oh well Washington still has kickass traits. I would have sure loved City Raider 3 SEALs though. Sadly the marine remains an extreme niche unit.

 

[Roland Johansen]

I haven't read I, Robot, but I'm going to to protest that awful movie.

The book has little to do with the film. I knew when I went to watch the film that my expectations were going to be too high and even knowing that my expectations were way too high.

And link minor upgrades to techs short of the one that allows the next class of unit. Yeah I was hoping they'd do that for Civ4, because there weren't enough variations and gradations of quality between units before. For example the excellent Soviet T34 is the same generic "tank" as the ridiculous American Sherman or lame Japanese tanks. They went with experience based promos instead and I'm not complaining.

Nice idea. But both our ideas are probably too detailed for a civilization game. They don't want to lose the accessibility of the game to the main audience. The ideas might be implementable in a mod. Maybe somebody already did, I haven't looked at the mods section a lot lately.

Sadly the marine remains an extreme niche unit.

Indeed a unit I seldom would use. Especially since the amphibious promotion is open to many units. I hope an airdrop promotion will be introduced in an expansion so that we can create paratroopers.

 

[a4phantom]

The book has little to do with the film. I knew when I went to watch the film that my expectations were going to be too high and even knowing that my expectations were way too high.

I know, they went with the cheap and easy "robots go mad and try to kill everyone, so Will Smith has to blast them". Which would be fine and enjoyable as yet another dumb action movie, but it bothers me that they used someone as subtle and original (like Tolkien for fantasy, Asimov created what became cliches because everyone else depended on them) as Asimov for the facade.

Nice idea. But both our ideas are probably too detailed for a civilization game. They don't want to lose the accessibility of the game to the main audience. The ideas might be implementable in a mod. Maybe somebody already did, I haven't looked at the mods section a lot lately.

I tried something with Civ3 about making more units with improving stats and higher costs as tech improved, i.e. WWI era Infantry, WWII era Infantry, Vietnam era Infantry. The main problem is that with lower level units the stats are often only one point apart, so it's hard to make subtle improvements.

Indeed a unit [marine] I seldom would use. Especially since the amphibious promotion is open to many units. I hope an airdrop promotion will be introduced in an expansion so that we can create paratroopers.

That would be cool, airdropping defensive units on unguarded resources or on the roads connecting them.

 

[.Shane.]

Is the RNG truly random? Meaning, does it do any balancing in terms of ensuring that if you get a few bad RN's, then you'll get favorable ones? Or is the number generated completely independent of prior numbers?

I hope this makes sense.

 

[Roland Johansen]

I tried something with Civ3 about making more units with improving stats and higher costs as tech improved, i.e. WWI era Infantry, WWII era Infantry, Vietnam era Infantry. The main problem is that with lower level units the stats are often only one point apart, so it's hard to make subtle improvements.

That's not a real problem. I did some similar modding for civ3. Just multiply all unit strengths by 10 (in civ3 terms, a warrior would start with attack and defence 10) and go from there. For combat, only the comparison of the unit strengths is important. A strength 20 unit has just as good a chance to win against a strength 10 unit as a strength 2 unit against a strength 1.

It just is a lot of work to balance some 200 units against oneanother...

That would be cool, airdropping defensive units on unguarded resources or on the roads connecting them.

It is important that they can move a bit after being airdropped because otherwise they are useless as a unit. They will be destroyed before they can do anything if they can't move after being dropped (that was the problem with civ3 paratroopers in my opinion).
They should be so strong that they can just take a weakly defended heavily bombed enemy city with some losses. Anything stronger would make them overpowered. So maybe a unit can move after paradropping but will be significantly weaker just after paradropping until one turn has passed.

Is the RNG truly random? Meaning, does it do any balancing in terms of ensuring that if you get a few bad RN's, then you'll get favorable ones? Or is the number generated completely independent of prior numbers?

I hope this makes sense.

It is truely random. Any number is completely independant of any prior numbers. This means that long sequences of positive or negative results can and will occur, something that the human mind (which tries to find patterns in everything) doesn't perceive as random.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Are you certain on that Roland? I'm fairly certain that practically every time I've had a "completely woundless" battle, another always follows which is exceptionally bad for me. I always groan when I get a "perfect" result, because I suspect fairly heavily (and am usually proved right) that the next unit will be heavily wounded or dead...

Also think of Pacifist civs, they don't want to be building units just to spend production.

Actually, if they've got idiots like Alexander and Montezuma around them they probably do. Not everyone needs an offensive military, but everyone DOES sure as heck need a defensive one. Even the most pacifist peacenick.

 

[Roland Johansen]

Are you certain on that Roland? I'm fairly certain that practically every time I've had a "completely woundless" battle, another always follows which is exceptionally bad for me. I always groan when I get a "perfect" result, because I suspect fairly heavily (and am usually proved right) that the next unit will be heavily wounded or dead...

I'm certain. But that doesn't convince you, I guess.

You could create a small scenario in the worldbuilder to test your theory. Place 100 enemy chariots on one side and place 100 spearmen of yours on the other side and attack them (flatland, no rivers). There will be some perfect wins where your spearman unit doesn't take any damage (about 20 perfect wins). Write down the combatresult that occurs in the combat directly after each perfect win (also if it is another perfect win). The combatresult should record the winner and the number of hps left of the spearman if it wins. So 0 hps if the chariot wins and something like 72 hps if the spearman wins but gets wounded.

I can see if these results are 'above average', 'average' or 'below average' by comparing them with the results that a combatcalculator predicts. You would expect to see about 20 below average results, I would expect to see 20 about average results.

 

[Lord Parkin]

Sounds like an interesting challenge, I'll take it up and report back when I'm done.

 

[surferjmb7]

where can i find info on using the tool bars (the ones on most new mods with dots, triangles, squares & such) and what does the action icon mean that has the hand holding the scolls and what it does(total realism mod )

 

[Civbowl]

Is it better to fight a war during a golden age or wait until after it is over. I was within 2 turns of starting a war and finished the Taj Mahal, which gave me a golden age.
Do you normally fight the war during the Golden Age, or wait until the age is over and use the Golden Age to build up more troops and funds.

 

[a4phantom]

Are you certain on that Roland? I'm fairly certain that practically every time I've had a "completely woundless" battle, another always follows which is exceptionally bad for me. I always groan when I get a "perfect" result, because I suspect fairly heavily (and am usually proved right) that the next unit will be heavily wounded or dead...

Actually, if they've got idiots like Alexander and Montezuma around them they probably do. Not everyone needs an offensive military, but everyone DOES sure as heck need a defensive one. Even the most pacifist peacenick.

Who the heck runs Pacifism with a mad dog like Mont or Alex on his border?!