Taking away corruption?

microbe

Cascaded Mansion
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
4,596
Hm, so it seems CIV4 is going to do it as it's "unfun".

I'm not sure whether it's a good thing or not.

While it's unfun, it's an important balancing factor in the game b/t big and small countries. I don't know if they are going to introduce sth else to balance it out?
 
Corruption > 50% is unfun
Moderate corruption I never had a problem with
 
Well, I am probably a 'fan' of corruption, simply because it offers another strategic decision (where to put the FP & Palace for example).

Aside from that, if there was no corruption, then I guess production would increase. However, it would increase for the AI as well, so the balance isn't really destroyed.

Given that the AI is actually pretty rubbish at making the same strategic decisions that the humans make (at least in terms of FP & Palace corruption negation), then 'no corruption' might actually make the game more balanced.

The converse to this is that corruption is like a dampening factor that prevents the largest empire growing exponentially. I'm not sure how to stop that if there is no corruption.
 
I agree, while we all HATE corruption and the concept behind it, it is needed to balance and even things out.


IDEA:

How about tying production to money? To get one more shield out of outlying cities, this should cost you lots of money. All production should be tied to money, too -> not only shields for a unit, but money, too.
 
Please allow me to point to this posting of mine , where I tried to give some hints about how to make the corruption model more senseful and give it a more realistic feeling.
 
If they remove corruption, I will not buy this game.
 
I liked the corruption model atleast in Civ3 1.29f and PTW. I always thought things like corruption, maintenance, etc. were an integral part of the game. True, I didn't like pollution much.
 
Back
Top Bottom