Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

They're such simple bugs too. There's no doubt that Firaxis was very anxious to stop development on Civ 3 and simply left the project in the middle.
 
I have a dozen Conquests and two PtW games under my belt so far, but was wondering about one PtW strategy I've seen mentioned:

Why build a Forbidden Palace close to your core, and then move your regular palace elsewhere?

There must be a thread about that somewhere, but my searches only found discussions about free palace jumps and not the above mentioned...
 
because you do not rely on MGLs that way.

you can build the FP brick by brick in a strong core town and have a free jump of the capital if you prepare the new place well, simply by disbanding the old one.

t_x
 
I see. So it only makes sense when combining with the free palace jump, because otherwise you're in the same boat (slow construction or MGL) with the new palace as doing the far-away FP in the first place.
 
TeaWolf said:
I have a dozen Conquests and two PtW games under my belt so far, but was wondering about one PtW strategy I've seen mentioned:

Why build a Forbidden Palace close to your core, and then move your regular palace elsewhere?

There must be a thread about that somewhere, but my searches only found discussions about free palace jumps and not the above mentioned...
Click to expand...

This is because the core of the old regular palace will not be removed. Using many MGL you can build many palaces and thus get many cores. It is an exploit that was removed in conquests by introducing a new corruption system.
 
@ TeaWolf - most of the time it makes only sense combined with the free Palace jump, yes. of course, there may be cases where you simply like another Center better than where the original capital was - and if you have an MGL at Hand, why not simply rush the Palace somewhere else instead of disbanding the capital with all its buildings and culture and maybe even wonders?

@ justanick - ummm, no. even in PtW you can only have ONE palace. this is no change that only came with conquests.

t_x
 
templar_x said:
@ justanick - ummm, no. even in PtW you can only have ONE palace. this is no change that only came with conquests.
Click to expand...

You can build many palaces, albeit only one per turn and the old palaces will cease to exist. So there will only be one palace at a time. The cores generated by a palace however will not cease to exist, will they? I never played PtW, so i donnot know for certain. I only read it somewhere, if memory serves correctly Bamspeedy mentioned it. A short search brought me to this statement:

Bamspeedy said:
Rush palace in bayanhongor. This is technically using the 'palace-city rank' exploit. But who knows how many games people played and used this by accident. I could try arguing that I am doing this to ensure that this city never flips. My 'excuse' is that I had nothing else to rush anyways. I don't want to build the Pentagon. The pentagon lets you put 4 troops in each army. But then, you wouldn't be able to transport those armies until combustion (transports). And I don't want to have the possibility of accidently loading up an army with too many units.
Click to expand...
 
this i why i used "have" and not "build" - because yes, of course, all the properties of a new core cease to exist if you again move the Palace or FP somewhere else...
i cannot see how Bamspeedy´s comment would indicate a multiple core-PTW-thing at all. :confused:

i vaguely seem to remember that in civ1 you could indeed build multiple palaces. however, if you did never play PTW, it may be better to abstain from confusing those who seek advice here and give answers from interpretations of very old posts. ;)

t_x
 
I had Bamspeedy's problem with an army too big to be transported. All you need do, obviously, is transport the 3-unit army and load the 4th unit on the far side. Of course, this means the army can't come home until the discovery of undreamt-of technology, which is tough on the wives and kids of the transportees. But who cares about them?
 
justanick said:
You can build many palaces, albeit only one per turn and the old palaces will cease to exist. So there will only be one palace at a time. The cores generated by a palace however will not cease to exist, will they?
Click to expand...

They will! You are probably confusing this with the "rank corruption bug" in PtW: if you move your Palace far away from the rest of your empire, then all cities will be closer to the Forbidden Palace than they are to the Palace. The result of this is, that all cities have almost zero corruption...! :D

Note: this is a forbidden exploit under GOTM rules.

But you are right in that this was the reason for the introduction of a new corruption model in C3C.
 
Is there an article somewhere on the forum thay explains the random seed thing? I've been trying to find something like that but got nothing useful. So could someone help me with a link or an explanation please?
 
Dears,

Quick question : from where i can download CIv 3 ?
Original version, or any other version

I had it on my old laptop, but i have a new one and i was forced to uninstall all.:mad:

PS : without using torrents, as i have company laptop and i can't install utorrent or similar...

Thank you for your response

Best regards
 
Just a curiosity question...

Why would the game choose to build guerrillas over infantry when the resources are available and the price is the same?
 
AFAIK it's because the Guerrilla is a bombard unit like the Archer/Longbowman, whereas the Infantry is the Spearman equivalent. I think the game is set to auto-build the strongest offensive unit available and Infantry aren't an offensive unit. They both have attack of 6, but the Geurrilla also has the bombard. The defence rating is likely ignored by this system.
 
Buttercup said:
AFAIK it's because the Guerrilla is a bombard unit like the Archer/Longbowman, whereas the Infantry is the Spearman equivalent. I think the game is set to auto-build the strongest offensive unit available and Infantry aren't an offensive unit. They both have attack of 6, but the Geurrilla also has the bombard. The defence rating is likely ignored by this system.
Click to expand...

thank you. That makes sense so now I won't be wondering every time :lol:
 
oh dear... back to square one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
  • Sticky
TSG 270 Opening Actions
2
Replies
22
Views
877
Skifff
S
Nizef
  • Sticky
TSG 271 Annoucement
Replies
15
Views
1K
Bol
B
V
TSG 268 Opening Actions
Replies
12
Views
994
The_Black_Vegetable
T
V
TSG 266 Opening Actions
Replies
6
Views
818
The_Black_Vegetable
T
K
shield/beakers ratio
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
justanick
J
Back
Top Bottom