too many cities :(

[apostolos]

The main reasons I did not like Civ. 3 were the following:

1. In order to keep up woth the computer I had to build a galizion cities or keep going to war. What I liked in civ 2 was that I could build 5-6 cities on normal, small map, try not to go to war unless it was inevitable and go to war late at the game, where I would face a nice challenge. In civ3 the computer builds cities EVERYWHERE and with no logic. I hate having to use the same tactic. However, If I dont build cities constantly or go to war (which I hate) I get too much behind and loose. Any changes for the better in conquests OR any tools to limit that (i.e the co\pu building infinite cities??)??


2. Corruption: From what I read there are now specialists and city improvemnets that make the game better. Your experience?

I have PTW and did not like it. Should I buy conquests??? It is not a matter of cost, I just hate to get games and not play them.


Thanks

Apostolos

PLease respond to am59@ath.forthnet.gr

 

[superslug]

There's material in the War Academy regarding OCC's. Maybe that would be your cup of tea?

 

[The_Unforgiven]

The placement of your cities should not be at random. Explore territory first and go for rivers, coastal tiles. Check for bonus resources as well, and of course the other resources (strat/lux). There are several techniques you should read about, each fits a different playing style:
OCP=optimal city placement: no tiles wasted while max number of tiles per city
RCP=ring city placement: to minimize corruption
ICS=infinite city sprawl: to get lots of cities fast and use all tiles in the beginning of the game. Lots of time cities don't need all the tiles you ginve them in the other techniques.

I don't know what you mean with 2. There are imps that reduce corruption: police station and courthouse. And a nice small wonder: forbidden palace. Read about corruption in some older thread: use the search function

Conquests is better than PTW IMO. If I were you, I'd get it

Hope it helps

edit: I dug some up for ya
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_rank_corruption.shtml
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8516
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73325
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19922

The palace exploit is fixed in C3C though

 

[apostolos]

Originally posted by The_Unforgiven
The placement of your cities should not be at random. Explore territory first and go for rivers, coastal tiles. Check for bonus resources as well, and of course the other resources (strat/lux). There are several techniques you should read about, each fits a different playing style:
OCP=optimal city placement: no tiles wasted while max number of tiles per city
RCP=ring city placement: to minimize corruption
ICS=infinite city sprawl: to get lots of cities fast and use all tiles in the beginning of the game. Lots of time cities don't need all the tiles you ginve them in the other techniques.

I don't know what you mean with 2. There are imps that reduce corruption: police station and courthouse. And a nice small wonder: forbidden palace. Read about corruption in some older thread: use the search function

Conquests is better than PTW IMO. If I were you, I'd get it

-----------------
My quesion was ( I guess I was not made my point specific) whether the computer continues to build on every damn corner of the map. Or the number of cities that are built can be limited (not by limiting the map). The reason I dont like civ 3 is that I hate to have to build more than 6-8 cities and go to war. However, if I dont do any of the two I loose easily since I cant keep up with the AI building citites on every damm spot it can.

Has aggresion level changed that>>>>???? I.e Lower aggresion less city building??

Apostolos

Hope it helps

edit: I dug some up for ya
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_rank_corruption.shtml
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8516
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73325
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19922

The palace exploit is fixed in C3C though

 

[Tatran]

Originally posted by apostolos
The main reasons I did not like Civ. 3 were the following:

1. In order to keep up woth the computer I had to build a galizion cities or keep going to war. What I liked in civ 2 was that I could build 5-6 cities on normal, small map, try not to go to war unless it was inevitable and go to war late at the game, where I would face a nice challenge. In civ3 the computer builds cities EVERYWHERE and with no logic. I hate having to use the same tactic. However, If I dont build cities constantly or go to war (which I hate) I get too much behind and loose. Any changes for the better in conquests OR any tools to limit that (i.e the co\pu building infinite cities??)??


2. Corruption: From what I read there are now specialists and city improvemnets that make the game better. Your experience?

I have PTW and did not like it. Should I buy conquests??? It is not a matter of cost, I just hate to get games and not play them.


Thanks

Apostolos

PLease respond to am59@ath.forthnet.gr

I have the same feeling about the settler rush and
many others with you on the corruption problem.
You can use Civil Engineers and Policemen,but it's
too much micromanagement.

Maybe you should buy Rise of Nations.No corruption
and most of all you can only build 8 cities.Only the
Bantu can build 9 cities and if you own the Pyramids
you also can build an additional city.The game is real-
time,not turn based as civ3 is.

 

[The_Unforgiven]

Or as slug said, maybe a # City Challenge is your style. They can become hard, but fun. AI will keep building but you restrain yourself to a certain number of cities. These games are winable, but require great skill as you move up the difficulty ladder...

The number of cities is hardcoded IIRC, so you cannot edit that. But you could use a smaller map. You indicated that you didn't want that... why not? 8 cities don't require a large map. A smaller one will stop the AI's building spree, since they run out of space.

 

[benben]

That's the reason I play small and tiny maps most of the time. I would love to stop expanding and focus on city development, but the thought of AI grabbing other availbale land and become unstoppable later in the game pushed me to keep building settlers and settlers.

There were times I planned for conquest or domination victory, but was too bored with so many cities and a corruption level that took forever to build a simple improvement that I quickly call for a vote or build a space ship to end my agony.

 

[apostolos]

Any way to limit the places where the cpu can build??

Apostolos

Maybe with the editor?

 

[Serpico]

You can set terrain types to not allow settling on them in the editor, I think. So you could disable settling on plains and create a map with lot of plains.

 

[Chieftess]

1 - You can use it to your advantage, since your turn comes before the computer's turn. Have the computer civs raze each other's cities, and in turn, have settlers ready to settle.

2 - I like them. In corrupt cities, engineers can build wonders quickly. In anarchy, you can have ALL of your cities be scientists, and still research! Corrupt cities can also become science rich cities. Just irragate everything (provided you aren't in despotism), and turn extra citizens into scientists.

 

[Deranger]

The funny thing is that '2. corruption' was made to fight '1. too many cities' by punishing big, widespread empires. If you like small countries, corruption should be no problem for you.

 

[sir_schwick]

I actually like it for many reasons.

1) the AI wastes time on building settlers that can be attacked
2) the AI gets little for another tick against the OCN
3) those cities on the interior of your empire usually don't generate much if any culture and can be disconnected from trade(Civil Disorder), this leads to lots of culture flips
What to do with the useless cities, specialist starve them till enough assimiliate you can abandon it.
4) usually the AI will pay a lot to buy the city back, if you don't care for the location

 

[Dogmeat]

What were the punishments for building lots of cities in civ2?
I'm pretty sure you get a decreased happiness if not in the entire empire but in those new cities if you had built too many.
I liked that idea.

 

[FeelGood]

Yea... AIs will always build cities until all available land are settled. I hate that too. But I just don`t like to change the rules of game. You can if you want too. We can do whatever we want just to have fun in this game. I hate corruption too. So, like slug, unforgiven say... play OCC. Or just play in archipelago with 80% water. Then you and the AIs don`t need to build many cities. So the AIs won`t be too strong unless you play the higher levels. Fewer cities means less micromanagement.

#CC is ok too. Just limit yourself to just maybe 5 cities or 6 an then stop expanding. Concentrate on culture or wonders. Just be sure to be nice with all AIs. Build enough defender though. You don`t need to have many cities to win. Research can be done with a small empire too. With small empire, luxuries and resources is cheap. If you`re ahead of the AIs, just sell techs to get all those resources. I`ve done this in my last game on emperor. However science wonders must be yours to succeed in this type of game (if you`re pacifist). You don`t need to go to war. Just defend yourself.

Specialists in C3C are very useful. Civil eng can be used to create extra shields. But sometimes it doesn`t . Can anyone explain this? Police can reclaim lost shield and gold too. Tax collector now adds more gold than vanilla AFAIK. You got two gold instead of one whereas scientist gives three beakers. As chieftess said, irrigate all tiles in a corrupt city and convert excess laborers into specialists. Maybe you should get C3C.

 

[whyidie]

Timely post. For some reason I find it annoying to see so much civ sprawl. Numerous AI Civs with a poplation of 2-4 is kind of irritating.

I always thought this was a result of my bad playing habits though. I typically try to stay under 10 citites while the AI will double that. Its reassuring to see its not just my poor playing style.