1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Unofficial BTS 3.13 patch

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Bhruic, Oct 5, 2007.

  1. Aquatic

    Aquatic Child of Surprises

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    91
    It would seem obvious that No Tech Brokering should apply in full to colonies as to any other civilization (and a colony essentially is another civilization even though a vassal). Case 1 seems clearly to come under this stricture. Case 2 comes under it as well, since the colony did not actually do the research.
     
  2. Craterus22

    Craterus22 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2001
    Messages:
    689
    is there a reason why we couldn't cap the generation of exec's similar to missionaries? at the very least there wouldn't be wasted production on exec's... capping may be a step that can be taken until a solution for the money aspect comes along.

    (built my first corp today - not an expert on this portion of play - there didn't seem to be a limit currently).
     
  3. syndicatedragon

    syndicatedragon Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    135
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Add me to the "ayes", if it's possible to fix it, please do!

    Thanks
     
  4. Bhruic

    Bhruic Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    I wouldn't agree that it's a serious bug. But yes, it doesn't fit with my definition of how "no tech brokering" should work - but I'm not sure my definition matches any sort of universal definition. We've already seen a marked difference on whether tech stealing should qualify under "no tech brokering", this might be another area where there's some disagreement.

    This is a pretty grey area, imo. It's not like the traditional "master" and "vassal" relationship, in this case you are actually taking part of your empire and placing it under a different flag. But those cities were part of your empire, originally, so I'm not sure they should lose the benefits that empire provided to them (namely the fact they did or did not "research" techs).

    In any case, I'd prefer a consensus before making a change of this nature.

    Bh
     
  5. oedali

    oedali Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    840
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I'm curious to hear how one would argue against this. It's simple logic: the master civ traded for the tech and thus cannot trade it away, so why should a vassal who inherited it be able to trade it away? Say you have 3 techs that you cannot trade under no tech brokering and split off a colony. Now the colony who has ALL your techs to start with (and I'm not arguing it shouldn't) trades those 3 techs away for 2 new techs and advances further in the tech tree, getting more advanced than even its master, just because of its "colony" status?


    Here it's not a matter of having the benefits of the techs - of course the colony has access to ALL the techs of its master, regardless of whether they were researched or traded for. But should the colony be able to trade them away for newer techs or not? I think not since the colony didn't research it itself. But I understand that the game rules don't mention "researching" , they say "trading", so if "inheriting" a tech is different from "trading" for it, then they should be able to trade them.. this is the grey area.
     
  6. Bhruic

    Bhruic Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    It is a matter of not having the benefits - the ability to trade a tech is a "benefit" of researching that tech. And make no mistake, those cities contributed towards researching that tech (yes, there can be circumstances where that isn't true, but it works as a general rule). No one traded the new Colony those techs, they researched them themselves - as part of your previous empire. Getting split off shouldn't change that, imo.

    Bh
     
  7. _alphaBeta_

    _alphaBeta_ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Messages:
    976
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    Well personally, I would like to see it changed that when colonies inherit techs, they fall into the category of "traded" techs. This would only have an effect if "no tech brokering" is on. The decision would be left up to the player as to which option to use when starting a new game.

    I think the previous example sums it up for me. It doesn't make sense to me that your newly formed colony can become more advanced because it's magically allowed to trade tech that you yourself could not.

    This is just going to discourage colony making among those that want to keep a tech lead. There would be no option available to stop this behavior. Plus, when the AI makes a colony, a human player can exploit that.
     
  8. Bhruic

    Bhruic Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,457
    You're making a conclusion that doesn't follow your premise. If we used (1) from oedali's list, then they wouldn't be allowed to trade techs that you couldn't, but they wouldn't be stopped from trading techs that you can. Which is different than having all their techs fall into "traded" status.

    Personally, I'm leaning towards (1) as being the best fit for game balance and design "intentions".

    Sure there's an option to stop that behaviour - turn off tech trading completely. Barring that, once you form a colony, they get to behave as a separate entity - including doing things that you might wish they don't. It's the trade-off you get for decreasing your maintenance overhead.

    Bh
     
  9. oedali

    oedali Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    840
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I see your point about option (2), that makes sense. I am now leaning towards (1)
     
  10. Minor Annoyance

    Minor Annoyance Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,247
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario
    I'd say that if a civ that researches something and then draws a line on a map saying that these cities can govern themselves it wouldn't change the fact those cities researched it, but the no tech brokering rule doesn't really make sense anyway. How can you not be able to teach someone how to ride a horse just because someone else was breaking their ribs learning all the ways you don't to ride a horse. So since it doesn't make sense to begin with, the intention of the rule would be that the colony can't trade what they start with.
    The realistic way would be if you couldn't research the next thing if you didn't research the tech before it, but that wouldn't work because then you'd trade for a technology and then have to research that tech you just got to get the next one and trading would just mean getting something early, not free.
    Anyone reminded of those aliens on Star Trek: TNG that stole all their technology and so couldn't fix anything if it broke?
     
  11. Todd Hawks

    Todd Hawks Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    228
    In my opinion, all techs of a newly created colony should be considered traded and therefore the colony civ shouldn't be allowed to trade it away when the "no brokering" option is turned on.

    Reason? Gameplay. The "no tech brokering" option is there for one reason only: To allow the civ that researches a tech to decide who gets the tech and who doesn't (unless someone else does the work to research it as well, of course).
    If a colony was allowed to trade away any tech it inherits, this wouldn't apply anymore since I cannot control to whom my colony gives its tech. Which punishes me for creating the colony. Which is bad for gameplay.
     
  12. Dagta

    Dagta Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    97
    Has anyone else experienced this?
     
  13. Omegon3

    Omegon3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Michigan
    Bhruic, first off I wanted to thank you for the great FIX to Firaxis' non-fix of AI trading. Secondly, I wanted to comment on the outstanding job you did on modifying the "spying" form -- I like it quite a bit better than the old. Overalll you did a fantastic job on your update.

    Now, not having weeded through forty-four (44!) pages of responses to your post, I have a couple of complaints... First off, what happened to the "Glance" form on foreign relations. While I CAN calculate how deeply in sh*t I am with other civs (or how much they love me!!), I kind of liked the one-shot glance at how good or bad your relationships were.

    Lastly, did anything you did possibly impact that recycling centers have? I was playing my first game after applying your fix and noticed that whereas before recycling centers removed all building population including those of coal power plants and laboratories, they no longer seemed to be doing so. Also, bringing in the Three Georges Dam always resulted in an immediate improvement in health; it appeared to no longer do the job... I checked one of my cities immediately after bringing in the dam and it sure looked like the coal plant was still having a (bad) health effect on it.

    Anyway, enough with the beefs -- great job on the fix. You made it fun to trade again.
     
  14. jpinard

    jpinard Martian

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    760
    Location:
    Enceladus, Saturn
    Your first *cough* complaint should be leveled at Firaxis. They took out the glance tab. Use his fixed python files and you'll have it back.

    Coal power plants have ALWAYS continued to have their negative impact on your cities. just because you built a hydro plant doesn't mean you removed the coal plant. And that's part of the strategy. Do you want power right away for cheap? Build coal. Want better more expensive power later with meltdown chance? Get nuclear. Want reasonable cost and no polluting power? Wait until hydro power for applicable cities.
     
  15. KaytieKat

    KaytieKat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    999
    Hi

    Actually that was never how it was supposed to work. The intent was/is if you have power no matter what the source in a city it is supposed to get 2 yucky faces "from power". Coal plants have benefit of coming the earliest but they give two extra youcky faces from power for a total of 4 if you use coal plants. If you replace em with another type of plant or three gorges then it drops to plus 2 from power. Hydro plants were bugged in that they gave no pollution from power if they were built in a city that didnt have another type of plant already and this was supposed to be fixed in 3.13 patch.

    Kaytie
     
  16. Omegon3

    Omegon3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Michigan
    Hate to argue, but building the Three Georges Dam -- so far as I could determine by checking -- ALWAYS removed the coal plant ill health problem. Also, do you have any idea of why recycling centers no longer work?

    Lastly, where do I get the "fix" for the "Glance" form? It was there after the 3.13 fix (I'm fairly certain...).

    Thanks.
     
  17. KaytieKat

    KaytieKat Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    999
    Hi

    Before BtS yeah when three gorges got built any city on that continent no laonger got yucky faces from power. With BtS they made it so health was a bigger issue so having any kind of power meant -2yucky faces and coal plants mean 2 extra on top of that.

    I havent noticed a problem with recycling centers. As far as I know they still remove yucky faces "from buildings". I think in one of Buric's patches starting with like 1.10 he made it so even if a recycling plant is in that city buildings like labs will still show as giving a yucky face in build menu and in buliding list instead of being removed. I am not exatcly sure why it was changed that way cuz it kinda made things a lil more confusing at least for me but other than being a lil more confusing there still shouldnt be any yucky faces "from buildings" in the health list at top of city screen in cities that have a recycling plant. But if you expect recycling plants to be as effective as in vanilla and warlords they wont be because there are new types of pollution like "from power" and "from bonuses" that recycling centers wont stop.

    I played one game to very end using 1.10 and 1.105 patches and recycling plants seemed to work ok. But I admit it was just one game and I went to 1.09 patch just cause 1.10 version patches seem to be slower and crash more than earlier versions so it made me nervous bout staying with those versions :/.

    Kaytie
     
  18. Omegon3

    Omegon3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Michigan
    Kaytie

    I played a game just last night and all buildings showed unhealthy faces even with recycling centers. This may not be a portion of the "unofficial" fix; perhaps I just happened to notice it then. Either case, there APPEARS to be a problem with recycling centers now.
     
  19. Omegon3

    Omegon3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Michigan
    My apologies, Kaytie, I'm a little slow on the upswing at my age... I think that what you are telling me just sunk in. At the newer "fix" level there are new types of pollution (i.e. power that just happens to include coal plants) that recycling centers don't resolve? This kind of sucks because it probably means there is no way to combat it other than getting overall "healthier" (i.e. via Genetics and other healthful buildings).

    A little strangely, even after the new improved unhealthful help I just scored a best health-wise in that game. Typically I'm dead last with all my buildings, power plants, and population -- I was actually first living to a ripe old age of... 61? Boy, those guys and gals must HATE being members of an advanced civilization.
     
  20. Aquatic

    Aquatic Child of Surprises

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    91

Share This Page