The "i dont believe this" factor

[Muslim]

Hi people, im about to make some tough comments, so just to get some things out of the way:


1) Ive been playing civilization games since 1998, and i am perfectly familiarized with all the concepts of the game (Meaning i can win a deity game with no cheating)
2) I understand that there is no way to have a AI so good that would be enough to play with a human. Hence there is the Rubberband principle, which involves some "cheating" by the computer


BUT


There are some facts I cant simply overlook and try to have fun with civ 4. Most of you think that civ4 was an improvement, and maybe im just overreacting to the following points:

• "your %whatever% was eaten by a barbaric lion" What exactly is a "barbaric" Lion? Massai infants had to defeat a lion by the age of 11, and yet a whole group of settlers is killed by beasts? Right...
• You cant capture tech while taking over cities. Paper went from the far east into europe because turk raiders captured a chinese-cultured city in which there was people able to manufacture paper. Jet fighters started popping out of the US and URSS soon after WW II because of the captured german cientists. And technology cant change hands by the power of force.
• You are on you own minding your bussiness. Someone declares war on you. You capture all of his cities, and BANG you are bankrupted. In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years. But you simply have to accept that it cant be accomplished in the game. Specially if you are playing on marathon mode
• you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on .

I really had more complaints before the BTS expansion, mainly because of spionage, but it was fixed. I am eagerly waiting for civ5 because the above bugs are really frustrating and preventing me from enjoying the game. I still play civ II, and when that old radio button diplomatic table opens up i dont mid. i just remember that it was made more than a decade ago so i just dont even pay attention to the problems. However i cant do that when playing a game whose age can be measured in months.

Does anyone else feels like that?

 

[Blaarg]

At some point you have to realize it's a game that's supposed to be fun. To that end the developers will take some artistic license with the facts of history in order to make things more balanced.

 

[DigitalBoy]

In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years

This was right before they went broke from maintenance, all their units went on strike, and they got overrun by barbs.

 

[vicawoo]

I think the masai warriors are given spears, so they are "spearmen" vs lion. People definitely have had problems with wolves, and I don't think a person can take a bear without weapons.

Wouldn't it be more ridiculous if a group of barbarians with axes came out of the hills and took over a city, and then they started building stealth bombers?

If you capture cities, first of all, it's ridiculous that all your soldiers loot all the buildings so you have to rebuild them. But given that it's your city and you start having to pay for reconstruction and maintenance, I think it makes sense it costs more. Think the US in Iraq.

 

[troytheface]

yes to ur third complaint-there should be some really good tech loot from a random city or two- (not all- to overpowering #1 and i don't read anywhere about the Romans taking all of Archimedes war inventions and using them-
or ..who else...well persia destroyed Athens but didn't start using the Phanlx armor weapons or formation.
The idea of a counter to the enemies weapons (ie anti tank unit) is a good idea, or tech advance during war increases...hold it..it took all those sentences to come to a decent idea..how about when your at war your war tech advances at a faster rate. Think i will try a game with only going for war tech advance and espionage. And by the way The Great Wall is the best wonder.

 

[Bino]

I too played civ since Amiga version, but a common mistake in judging games is pretending realism when in fact having things "like reality" would simply mean either cumbersomeness or unbalanced game. Think about it...you are tech leader and loose one newly captured city or faraway colony...oh look now my enemies have infantry too...

 

[Wenla]

• "your %whatever% was eaten by a barbaric lion" What exactly is a "barbaric" Lion? Massai infants had to defeat a lion by the age of 11, and yet a whole group of settlers is killed by beasts? Right...
• You cant capture tech while taking over cities. Paper went from the far east into europe because turk raiders captured a chinese-cultured city in which there was people able to manufacture paper. Jet fighters started popping out of the US and URSS soon after WW II because of the captured german cientists. And technology cant change hands by the power of force.
• You are on you own minding your bussiness. Someone declares war on you. You capture all of his cities, and BANG you are bankrupted. In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years. But you simply have to accept that it cant be accomplished in the game. Specially if you are playing on marathon mode

With these I agree.

I am eagerly waiting for civ5 because the above bugs are really frustrating and preventing me from enjoying the game.

Don't. IMHO Civ has gone worse since Civ II and I don't anymore except it coming better ( and I'm not talking just about technical issues but also about how you enjoy playing).

Wenla

 

[Quechua]

you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on

You don't have to do this, there's an option 'What would make this deal work?,' that offers you the best deal that they'll accept. This sounds like Deity on Civ3 not 4.

 

[Underdawg]

Hi people, im about to make some tough comments, so just to get some things out of the way:


1) Ive been playing civilization games since 1998, and i am perfectly familiarized with all the concepts of the game (Meaning i can win a deity game with no cheating)
2) I understand that there is no way to have a AI so good that would be enough to play with a human. Hence there is the Rubberband principle, which involves some "cheating" by the computer


BUT


There are some facts I cant simply overlook and try to have fun with civ 4. Most of you think that civ4 was an improvement, and maybe im just overreacting to the following points:

• "your %whatever% was eaten by a barbaric lion" What exactly is a "barbaric" Lion? Massai infants had to defeat a lion by the age of 11, and yet a whole group of settlers is killed by beasts? Right...
• You cant capture tech while taking over cities. Paper went from the far east into europe because turk raiders captured a chinese-cultured city in which there was people able to manufacture paper. Jet fighters started popping out of the US and URSS soon after WW II because of the captured german cientists. And technology cant change hands by the power of force.
• You are on you own minding your bussiness. Someone declares war on you. You capture all of his cities, and BANG you are bankrupted. In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years. But you simply have to accept that it cant be accomplished in the game. Specially if you are playing on marathon mode
• you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on .

I really had more complaints before the BTS expansion, mainly because of spionage, but it was fixed. I am eagerly waiting for civ5 because the above bugs are really frustrating and preventing me from enjoying the game. I still play civ II, and when that old radio button diplomatic table opens up i dont mid. i just remember that it was made more than a decade ago so i just dont even pay attention to the problems. However i cant do that when playing a game whose age can be measured in months.

Does anyone else feels like that?

Those are very very minor gripes.... with which I don't find to be 'bugs' at all or even bad design - except maybe the animals one.

There's a mod that enables capturing techs from cities. It's been out since Civ 4 first came out (in the first months).

you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on

Use the "What do you want for this" button.... and then just lower the price by 500, then 250, then just go on from there.... never had a problem with this.... The "What do you want for this" button eliminates a lot of the "5001? 5002? 5003? tediousness of Civ III".
If that's preventing you from enjoying the game..... I don't know what to say...

 

[Cookie Crumbs]

The idea that tech can be extorted with force is valid, but I believe such a system wasn't incorporated because of balance. It would allow 'pointy-stick researching' as I've heard it, and it would make war favourable in all circumstances.

 

[Lillefix]

When it comes to the maintance thing(gripe number 3), change your strategy. This is Civ4, not Civ3, 2 or 1.

 

[Quintillus]

Yes, I also feel like that. Point #3 especially is valid - sure it'll cost a bit more to have a huge empire, but it's rather ridiculous how quickly you become bankrupted in CivIV. Though it also was rather ridiculous how quickly cities became 100% corrupt in CivIII, at least there the new cities were simply non-helpful until you built some Courthouses instead of actually detrimental.

The main problem with tech capture from city capture is, of course, that it makes war too powerful. If my civilization went from Monotheism and Feadalism to Steam Power and Nationalism instantly because of war, it would not only be quite unfun for everyone else, but would actually be too quick of a change to be realistic.

I can see settlers being killed by lions - we're assuming they're unarmed, and most of them probably aren't Massai, anyways, but it is rather ironic now that you mention it that they're called "barbaric" lions. I'm eagerly anticipating the next time I lose a worker to a "civilized panther."

I think I'll take a wait-and-see approach on CivV and try the demo first. I bought CivIV right away after how good CivIII was and was overall quite disappointed - it certainly didn't give the "awesome new game" feel CivIII and later Conquests did.

 

[CivFan87]

• "your %whatever% was eaten by a barbaric lion" What exactly is a "barbaric" Lion? Massai infants had to defeat a lion by the age of 11, and yet a whole group of settlers is killed by beasts? Right...

• 
  
  Yeah but not everyone in the world is taught to defeat a lion by the time their 11. These are prides of lions attacking these groups so it's not like a single lion came across your 1000 man settler party and wiped them out. You can just pretend the lions attacked at night, killing or wounding many of them, including their leader. The rest of the party disperses into the wild/succumbs to disease/tries to hike it back to your capital.
  
  

  [*]You cant capture tech while taking over cities. Paper went from the far east into europe because turk raiders captured a chinese-cultured city in which there was people able to manufacture paper. Jet fighters started popping out of the US and URSS soon after WW II because of the captured german cientists. And technology cant change hands by the power of force.

  
  I agree with this. There have been many times in history when knowledge is passed on as a result of warfare. The question is how do you balance it? I know I know I would be furious if I spent a few hundred turns preparing Knights for an invasion, only for my enemy to learn engineering/pikeman from me after the first battle.
  
  

  [*]You are on you own minding your bussiness. Someone declares war on you. You capture all of his cities, and BANG you are bankrupted. In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years. But you simply have to accept that it cant be accomplished in the game. Specially if you are playing on marathon mode

  
  Someone mentioned this already but it's not like Rome survived. China managed to survive because they kept breaking up into smaller parts and then coming together again.
  
  

  [*]you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on .

I don't understand your complaint. In my experience the strategy of seeing if a Civ will accept something, then trying to lower my trade value hasn't worked since Civ3.

 

[King Flevance]

2 quick points.

• You are on you own minding your bussiness. Someone declares war on you. You capture all of his cities, and BANG you are bankrupted. In the early game (meaning anything before the 1800's in real world timing) you cant control more than something like 15 cities because you cant afford them. The romans had hundreds of cities, some more than 5.000 miles apart, and they lasted for one thousand years. But you simply have to accept that it cant be accomplished in the game. Specially if you are playing on marathon mode

Actually Rome fell because the economy collapsed due to the fact it was a warbased economy. At the end people were paying their taxes in food, which is a sure sign of a poor economy. (And that's an understatement.)

Also, look at the real world and look at how much land Rome controlled. Yes, it was large. But it was 1 Continent out of 7. Size wize. And it was probably the 3rd smallest at that. (Although I could be wrong with those numbers.) But the point is they owned less than 1/7th of the world, and they collapsed economically. As for how many cities they had, I agree with you, I would like to see a bigger map. But thanks to 3-D graphics that is a plus and a minus at the same time.

PLus, if reality was turned into a civ map, thus scaled down to be decently correct, Rome would probably consist of about 25-35 cities size wize. (And that is on a map larger than huge.)

• you want to buy a tech from someone. You give him 5.000 gold and he accepts it, then you load the game and give him 4.000 gold and he rejects it. Then you load, and offer 4.001, 4.002 and so on .

OK first off I am about to save you ALOT of time. Put the desired tech into the trade box, instead of putting gold into the box, ask what they want for it. SO long as you do not have any techs they want, they will give you a price (which is the lowest price they will accept) - if you dont have enough money, they will say no deal is possible.

However, the frustration is still there if all you want to do is give gold and not give him a tech he doesn't have. However, I personally find doing the 1-2-3 method a little rediculous personally. I couldn't take it in 3. (Although I did it at first. But soon was like screw it.) You may try playing "hot and cold" Because if the correct amount is 4865 you are going to be loading for days. First try 4100, then 4200, etc. When he excepts 4900, YOu know it lies between 4800 (because he said no) and 4900.
Then cut it in half - 4850. He will say no. Cut it in half again. 4875. He will say Yes. So now you know its between 4850 and 4875. Cut it in half (round down) 4862, no, 63, no, 64, no, 65 - Yes. Bingo. And you reloaded a total of 2 times.

Hope that helps some. The first one I responded to is the new maintenance (Corruption) system. It really isn't a bug, it is suppose to be that way. It seems to be hit and miss depending on the person. The second part is a part I think they were trying to do away with in the game due to its emphasis on multiplayer. I know if someone was wanting to reload a game we were playing so he could skimp the AI I would tell him to suck it up and just shell out a couple extra shillings. Just as I would if playing civ 3 and he was sitting there forever haggling with an AI. Besides the AI is still a dumbass and handing him and extra 135 gold isn't really going to make him a more fierce oponent. Hell, IMO they could use the help.

 

[Blaarg]

OK first off I am about to save you ALOT of time. Put the desired tech into the trade box, instead of putting gold into the box, ask what they want for it. SO long as you do not have any techs they want, they will give you a price (which is the lowest price they will accept) - if you dont have enough money, they will say no deal is possible.

Not true, I've experienced AI civs trying to get more than they'd except from me.

Me: What do you want for this?
Him: Tech A and B
Me: How about just tech A?
Him: deal!

 

[v8_mark]

You may try playing "hot and cold" Because if the correct amount is 4865 you are going to be loading for days. First try 4100, then 4200, etc. When he excepts 4900, YOu know it lies between 4800 (because he said no) and 4900.
Then cut it in half - 4850. He will say no. Cut it in half again. 4875. He will say Yes. So now you know its between 4850 and 4875. Cut it in half (round down) 4862, no, 63, no, 64, no, 65 - Yes. Bingo. And you reloaded a total of 2 times.

Or.

You could offer 5000, he accepts. Then carry on with the game.

 

[Muslim]

On the Maintenance topic:

Im playing in the marathon mode. I usually get around the maintenance problem on other levels by having quite a few workers, and when i invaded other peoples land, i would apply the mass cottage stunt in the recently acquired lands. However, on marathon it takes forever to improve a tile, and thats why it is impossible to hold a big empire together.


On the 'what do you want for this?' subject:

If it worked it would be great. most of the time when i ask for something, he will say 'it cant be done' which is a huge lie, since when i offer some stupid thing like tons of gold and some cities i almost always will get what i want. except when he doesnt like me enough :S

There is huge room for improvement in the diplomatic trade table!

 

[Muslim]

When it comes to the maintance thing(gripe number 3), change your strategy. This is Civ4, not Civ3, 2 or 1.

usually i am burning enemy captured cities, which i think its a terrible waste and a shame, because having lots of cities is cool. I try not to enter wars but, due to the rubberband effect, i always get pulled into them. what should i do? abandon the marathon mode?

 

[Gooblah]

Not necessarily. I've played and won Marathon Dominations on a Standard Fractal. The key is to take captured cities and build Markets, Courts, etc ASAP.
The highest production city on another continent builds the Forbidden Palace or Versailles. This keeps costs down until you can bring in Workers and start improving the land.
In Marathon, if you are a) lucky, and b) sensible with city specialization, you can have Code of Laws during the peak point of Praetorian rushes; Thus, captured cities have Courthouses, halving the deficit right there. Bringing research to a minimum helps, since if you CoL near the IW era, you can trade for most of your techs until your economy bounces back. Then slowly increase the research slider.
Lastly, try warring against a nation that shares your religion. If you have a shrine, this means an extra 1gpt per city captured, since the AI in my games usually does a good job spreading religion within their own lands. Thus, buildings become slightly (but not entirely) less of a priority.

 

[Quechua]

Lastly, try warring against a nation that shares your religion. If you have a shrine, this means an extra 1gpt per city captured, since the AI in my games usually does a good job spreading religion within their own lands. Thus, buildings become slightly (but not entirely) less of a priority.

Good advice on the whole, but I'm pretty sure you get the 1gpt from the shrine whether the city is in your possession or not...am I missing your point?

If it worked it would be great. most of the time when i ask for something, he will say 'it cant be done' which is a huge lie, since when i offer some stupid thing like tons of gold and some cities i almost always will get what i want.

As far as the trade screen goes, it certainly could be made more clear, but they never intentionally lie to you. If you have enough money for a tech buy deal, they'll tell you the exact amount they want - usually it's 150% of the beaker cost. If you don't have enough they'll start adding techs from the list from top to bottom until the deal is in their favor.

If the techs at the top have low beaker value they may ask for a worse deal than they'll accept, but this is just a fluke of the way the 'what do you want for this' option works. If you know what's going on, you simply set up a deal you are considering and ask 'what would make this deal work?,' and you'll find out if additional techs or money are needed on either side. The only time I could ever see trial-and-error reloading helping you is in the peace deal at the end of a war. There you have the equivalent of the 'what do you want for this' option, but not the 'what would make this deal work.' And even this is rarely a situation where reloading could tell you something you couldn't figure out from the trade screen.