The Three Phases of Expansionism

[D0NIMATRIX]

First, there is the obvious settler rush to get as much free turf as you can before war is necessary, then powerful units (i/e swordsmen, med. infantry, longbowmen, knights) become available, and you start fighting neighbors. This continues all through the middle ages, and finally, riflemen begin to kill cavalry. Most of the industrial age is just waiting for tanks and bombers. After that, it's just war or no war, because artillery(bombers) become useful and powerful as well as land fighters.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

BTW, when using a gold-to-rush government, you can hurry a cheap thing (like a worker or something) and then hurry a big thing and pay only a fraction of the base cost. How strange, how strange...

Found this out on the best Scenario EVER!!

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=95741

Go to this and DL the files, it's better than any other scenario ever.

 

[gmaharriet]

BTW, when using a gold-to-rush government, you can hurry a cheap thing (like a worker or something) and then hurry a big thing and pay only a fraction of the base cost. How strange, how strange...

That's called "short-rushing". It can also be used in a pop-rushing government, but it's slightly more complicated avoiding waste of your citizens.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Pop-rushing is pretty useful when you have a billion citizens, and you just use MPs to quell the angry citizens.

When citizens are mad: "Dissatisfied? Drafted."

 

[gmaharriet]

Pop-rushing is pretty useful when you have a billion citizens, and you just use MPs to quell the angry citizens.

I generally use pop-rushing only in a 100k culture game, and all the temples, cathedrals and colosseums help keep them happy. Short-rushing with pop helps get the more expensive cultural improvements more quickly.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Good point, I never thought of that.
There should be less corruption so that rushing isn't all that necessary anyway.

 

[Lord_Megahertz]

Corruption sucks. Whenever I play a standard rule game, I end up with 70% of my cities being completely useless.

 

[Aabraxan]

Welcome to CFC, Lord Megahertz. Don't think of those cities as useless. Think of them as specialist farms.

 

[Lord_Megahertz]

I guess there not that useless, but they could be better.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

I'm working on a scenario that hopefully depicts reality more than Civ3, but nothing can be perfect without changing the source code, but oh well...

 

[AutomatedTeller]

I try to poprush mainly only in 100K games, but I've found it useful in some conquest games as well.

 

[Lord_Megahertz]

What does 100k mean?

 

[Tone]

What does 100k mean?

One of the two types of cultural victories.

100K=The total culture from all of your cities combined has reached 100 000 points.

20K=One city has reached 20 000 cultural points

 

[Lord_Megahertz]

Thanks for the information

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

One question: Has anybody ever used democracy and republic efficiently, or does their unrealistic design prove to be too hard to use?

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

I think that to make the game more fair to liberalistic governments, the corruption should be greatly reduced, the war weariness should be more accurate, where if you declare war, your people are just mad instead of revolutionary. In the Iraq war, people are mad, but COME ON, nobody's seceding from the U.S. to Canada! Also, the unit support should be ramped up. People who are under a democratic regime will obviously want to preserve it, so they will see the value in a standing army.

 

[Aabraxan]

One question: Has anybody ever used democracy and republic efficiently, or does their unrealistic design prove to be too hard to use?

Republic is quite probably the most popular government for C3C on this board. Run a search for threads discussing governments and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Lord_Megahertz]

I think that to make the game more fair to liberalistic governments, the corruption should be greatly reduced, the war weariness should be more accurate, where if you declare war, your people are just mad instead of revolutionary. In the Iraq war, people are mad, but COME ON, nobody's seceding from the U.S. to Canada! Also, the unit support should be ramped up. People who are under a democratic regime will obviously want to preserve it, so they will see the value in a standing army.

Maybe you can change that in you're more realistic mod of civ3

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Yes, sometime or other I will post a mod to the game, but no fancy new units or new graphics, but I WILL change some of the more ridiculous elements, like the corruption and some units, as well as democracy and republic. You people may like it, or you may say it doesn't change enough, just keep in mind that I'll probably just spend 3 hours on it.

 

[mr_lewington]

I think that to make the game more fair to liberalistic governments, the corruption should be greatly reduced, the war weariness should be more accurate, where if you declare war, your people are just mad instead of revolutionary. In the Iraq war, people are mad, but COME ON, nobody's seceding from the U.S. to Canada! Also, the unit support should be ramped up. People who are under a democratic regime will obviously want to preserve it, so they will see the value in a standing army.

i think the game was getting at how the america reacted to the vietnam war and how unpopular it is (could be anything else) but i do think that there should be less civil unrest because i remember playing one time and i got attacked and every1 of my cities went beserk and started rioting trying to stop the war and i ended up loses half of my empire because i couldnt produce any units!!!!!!!!! what about popular wars liek ww2 and such?