What is the difference between Civ 3, PTW and Conquests?

[Aiken_Drumn]

Is there any reason to play Civ3 or PTW, if I have Conquests?

 

[Quintillus]

There are a few people who prefer PTW to Conquests. One reason that I can recall off the top of my head is that the AI is more competent at using armies in PTW; in Conquests an Army boosts movement by 1, and the AI only adds units that have the same movement as the army, so e.g. if they add a Cavalry, they'll only subsequently add a unit that has 4 movement, which doesn't exist in the base game. In PTW, armies don't add movement, so the AI uses them more effectively, making a more challenging game.

There also is a PTW-based Game of the Month concurrent with the Conquests one, so you may wish to play PTW to play that GOTM. I've done that occasionally when I feel like playing a GOTM, but the Conquests one is too difficult for me.

One of the people who prefers Conquests could probably chime in with some additional reasons.

Edit: Found Sulla's article about this topic: https://sullla.com/Civ3/conquestsed.html Additional reasons include:

- Lethal bombardment making airplanes too powerful
- Airplane range doubling making airplanes too powerful
- Bombardment always hitting units first in cities, rather than a 1/3 chance to hit units as in PTW, making artillery too powerful, and weakening the AI (who rarely/never bombards cities) versus the human. <-- This one I agree with
- Science leaders (which are actually broken, though Sulla didn't know that)
- Armies, both what I mentioned above and that the buffs to them in Conquests made them unbalanced in the hands of a human
- The Status of Zeus making a civ that's lucky enough to have Ivory massively overpowered
- Conquests adds Civil Engineers and Policemen, which the AI doesn't know how to use, further buffing humans. <-- I'm curious how many people use these in practice.
- Volcanoes and marshes being unfun.
- Feudalism and especially Fascism making the game worse, especially fascism due to the AI's tendencies to wind up in it late game and implode spectacularly as a result (and more quickly than the Vanilla/PTW Communism implosion).
- The change to move map trading to the Middle Ages in Conquests negatively affecting balance and AIs. <-- I tend to disagree with this one, as the early map trading was (as Sulla admits) unrealistic, resulting in potentially knowing the whole world in 1000 BC.

Sulla also cites a reason to prefer Vanilla over PTW:
- PTW adds the Medieval Infantry. This lets Swordsmen upgrade (making the Horseman/Swordsman tradeoff less interesting), and makes the Longbowman obsolete unless you lack iron. <-- I can see his point here, although as strategy has evolved, good cases have been made for going Horseman over Swordsman even in Conquests.

I think most of the reasons people prefer PTW are a combination of the above, though there may be a few other reasons as well. Most of Sulla's reasons seem to fall along the general line of, "the AI doesn't know how to use the new features, making the game less challenging and interesting".

 

[vorlon_mi]

I use Civil Engineers, even though I realize it's probably not optimal.

I nearly always go for Space, so that means I'm actively developing and expanding into the Industrial Age. My newly founded (or conquered) cities have almost no infrastructure and produce only 1 shield per turn because I have so many cities. I like to put a harbor in every coastal town, even those that have tundra or desert around them so that they can grow. I use "hard hats" to boost production in those towns for 20 or 30 turns to build buildings. Yes, I've read the advice from better players that the return on investment (ROI) for those buildings may not pay for themselves. But my inner builder instinct hates to leave towns with 3 or 4 citizens and *no* buildings at all.

Once I've given each town something -- a marketplace or a culture building for a border pop -- I switch the hard hat to a scientist and let them build wealth until my spaceship is complete.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

- Science leaders (which are actually broken, though Sulla didn't know that)

What is the "Age of Science" that Science leaders are supposed to be able to do? I actually don't find them useless at all, as I can use them to rush production on important projects (e.g., the UN).

- Conquests adds Civil Engineers and Policemen, which the AI doesn't know how to use, further buffing humans. <-- I'm curious how many people use these in practice.

I used them to try & get my preferred GWs (e.g., UN again) faster in case someone else is building it and is ahead of me.

 

[Quintillus]

What is the "Age of Science" that Science leaders are supposed to be able to do? I actually don't find them useless at all, as I can use them to rush production on important projects (e.g., the UN).

I used them to try & get my preferred GWs (e.g., UN again) faster in case someone else is building it and is ahead of me.

It's supposed to boost science production by 20% for 20 turns, IIRC. I think it's the boost that's broken, it might be the UI for the boost. Sulla's complaint was specifically about that function, namely that rewarding a civ that's ahead in science by making them more ahead in science is a kind of broken mechanic. From a balance perspective.

You're right that they can rush important projects, which is another reason someone might prefer PTW, actually - in PTW (or was it Vanilla?), military leaders can rush great wonders. Whether that makes sense or is balanced can be debated, but I can see it being something people might prefer from PTW.

Good idea using engineers for wonders. I'd used them once or twice as vorlon_mi described, but had never thought to use them on late wonders or spaceship parts.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

You're right that they can rush important projects, which is another reason someone might prefer PTW, actually - in PTW (or was it Vanilla?), military leaders can rush great wonders.

I don't know about PTW (I jumped from Vanilla to C3C), but Vanilla had GLs that were not specifically military or scientific, so they could either form an Army or rush a Wonder. I had one game playing a SCI civ (I forget which) in which had something like seven SGLs, where usually I'm lucky to get 2 or 3. Got pretty much all the wonders I wanted, and building the Spaceship was a piece of cake.

Good idea using engineers for wonders. I'd used them once or twice as vorlon_mi described, but had never thought to use them on late wonders or spaceship parts.

I don't remember which tech makes engineers available, but it's typically late-game anyway. I've had games where I missed several important wonders by a turn or two. My most hated loss was one in which I'd missed getting the UN, then suffered a Diplomatic loss while well on my way to some other form of victory (I've forgotten which).

(I wish I could play more often, but work is killing me right now.)

 

[tjs282]

I like to put a harbor in every coastal town, even those that have tundra or desert around them so that they can grow.

I do understand the compulsion (oh boy, do I!) , but from a gameplay cost–benefit perspective, there's really no point doing this.

I know you know this already, but for AD and WJ, it breaks down like this...

For beaker-farming, maximising simple pop-growth in a farm-town is not the aim: what you need to maximise is the town's net excess food per citizen, because that's what allows you to convert (more) citizens into Scientists. But unless there's a Fish nearby, a Harbour won't give you any excess food from water-tiles, it will just bring them up to the minimum 2 food required to support the citizens working those tiles. Sure, the Harbour would let you grow a Tundra/Desert-farm to Pop6, but by the end of that growth you'd still only be able to run 1 Scientist (using the 2 food excess from the town-tile — which you already had at Pop1). And once the Harbour is complete, it will also be costing you 1 gpt maintenance (unless Smiths), negating the 1 uncorrupted commerce you were getting from that town.

Worst case scenario, you 'waste' anything up to 70 turns: 10–20 turns building the Harbour (30–60 shields at 3 SPT) and then up to 50 turns to grow the town (back) to Pop6 (maximum 5 x 20-food growth-cycles at +2 FPT); albeit less if your Civ is Agricultural, and/or you have freeGrans, and/or the town is not starting from Pop1, and/or you use Worker-joins to speed the growth.

So if I'm going for Space, I'd rather just leave that Tundra/Desert-farm at Pop1, and run a lone-Scientist, giving me anything up to 210 beakers over those otherwise 'wasted' turns.

It's supposed to boost science production by 20% for 20 turns, IIRC. I think it's the boost that's broken, it might be the UI for the boost. Sulla's complaint was specifically about that function, namely that rewarding a civ that's ahead in science by making them more ahead in science is a kind of broken mechanic. From a balance perspective.

The "Science Age" has always been broken in C3C.

Until @Flintlock patched it, that is!

Good idea using engineers for wonders. I'd used them once or twice as vorlon_mi described, but had never thought to use them on late wonders or spaceship parts.

I always tend to forget that CE-shields can build Wonders as well!

I don't remember which tech makes engineers available, but it's typically late-game anyway.

Replaceable Parts gives CEs. And it might be an Industrial tech, but the beeline is only 3 techs from the start of the era (Steam —> Electricity —> RP).

Referring to the OP:

One more thing to mention about Vanilla/PTW is that (IIRC?) corruption is capped at 95%, making it an even greater problem in the hinterlands: you would need to harvest a minimum of 21 shields, just to get 2 SPT unwasted (I think — if fractional shields are rounded up[?], otherwise it's minimum 30 shields harvested to get 2 SPT).

In Conquests, the cap is 'only' 90%, so (if I'm right about fractional shields being rounded up) you get the 2 SPT unwasted once you reach 11 shields harvested.

- Conquests adds Civil Engineers and Policemen, which the AI doesn't know how to use, further buffing humans. <-- I'm curious how many people use these in practice.

Policemen are often useful in core- and semi-core towns to decorrupt those last couple of shields you need to make a nice round number for minimum wastage on builds (e.g. in a town generating 19 SPT, hiring a Cop to get that to 20-21 SPT is usually more efficient than putting up a[nother] production-boosting building!), and/or to decorrupt commerce in in towns where I already have multiplier-buildings like Libs and Markets.

CEs are usually a better option to speed up builds — especially Courthouses — in new/captured towns which are approaching the 90% corruption-cap.

However, a more distant town's underlying corruption-value may be (much) higher than this, and since Cops act on that underlying value (rather than the capped value), an individual Cop has no noticeable effect on towns which already have significantly more than 90% corruption. So I'll sometimes use a Cop to test whether a Courthouse (or other buildings) might even be worth putting up in the first place. And if not, excess Citizens will get converted to Scientists straight off the bat.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

Policemen are often useful in core- and semi-core towns to decorrupt those last couple of shields you need to make a nice round number for minimum wastage on builds (e.g. in a town generating 19 SPT, hiring a Cop to get that to 20-21 SPT is usually more efficient than putting up a[nother] production-boosting building!), and/or to decorrupt commerce in in towns where I already have multiplier-buildings like Libs and Markets.

CEs are usually a better option to speed up builds — especially Courthouses — in new/captured towns which are approaching the 90% corruption-cap.

However, a more distant town's underlying corruption-value may be (much) higher than this, and since Cops act on that underlying value (rather than the capped value), an individual Cop has no noticeable effect on towns which already have significantly more than 90% corruption. So I'll sometimes use a Cop to test whether a Courthouse (or other buildings) might even be worth putting up in the first place. And if not, excess Citizens will get converted to Scientists straight off the bat.

How would Cops be better than CEs in any particular instance? It appears to me a CE reduces production turns more than a Cop.

 

[tjs282]

How would Cops be better than CEs in any particular instance? It appears to me a CE reduces production turns more than a Cop.

That is true, but CE-shields can only be directly put to use for buildings and Wonders; decorrupted shields from Cops can be used for units as well (there is a workaround to allow CE-shields to be also added to units, but it's arguably an exploit).

And if I have a Lib+Uni (or Market+Bank) in a town, then for every commerce-point also decorrupted by each Cop, I can obtain 2 more beakers at SCI%=100% (or 2 more gold at TAX%=100%), which increases a Cop's total value beyond that of a CE.

 

[Civinator]

The "Science Age" has always been broken in C3C. Until @Flintlock patched it, that is!

May be here some clearification about the Scientific Golden Age in C3C is needed. The Scientific Golden Age had two problems:

1. The feature of the Scientific Golden Age itself was spoiled. Flintlock made a lot of brilliant improvements for C3C, but the seat of the problem was detected by Antal1987: Firaxis wrongly set the Science Age Multiplier to 1.25 instead of 3.00 : https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/infinite-golden-age-and-science-age.526292/#post-13228028. Antal1987 later also offered the fix for this problem here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/infinite-golden-age-and-science-age.526292/#post-13229034.

Flintlock integrated that fix into his highly recommended Flintlock Patch for C3C.

2. The Firaxis editor 1.03, coming with Civ 3 Complete and later versions of C3C, holds a bug about the appearance of Scientific Great Leaders. When using that bugged editor to the final edit of a biq, the appearance of Scientific Great Leaders in that biq is eliminated. The original Firaxis editor 1.00, coming with the first versions of C3C before the Firaxis patches, is not holding that bug. So if you want to modify a biq and want to have the Scientific Great Leaders still in the game, use the Firaxis editor 1.00 or the Quintillus editor or Steph´s editor.

That´s why I always use one of the three editors for modifying a biq. If you don´t modify a biq, you don´t run into that problem.

 

[justanick]

In Conquests, the cap is 'only' 90%, so (if I'm right about fractional shields being rounded up) you get the 2 SPT unwasted once you reach 11 shields harvested.
[...]
So I'll sometimes use a Cop to test whether a Courthouse (or other buildings) might even be worth putting up in the first place. And if not, excess Citizens will get converted to Scientists straight off the bat.

You are right about the rounding but i do feel the compulsion to point out that those 90% are not static.

The forbidden palace reduces it by 80 percentage points and courthouse and police station reduce it by 10 percentage points each. This can reduce the cap to zero, 70% or 80%, the later meaning that you get 2 unwasted shields once you reach 6 shields harvested.

Any town can have a corruption cap of 70%, which means that at least 30% of yields are free of corruption. So any large enough settlement can become semiuseful in the long run. Whether the needed investment of 80+160 shields is good choice is open to debate.

Any true builder will however build the harbour which combined with the courthouse will become useful. A more reasonable player may choose differently as it takes nearly forever for the investment to reach point even.

 

[r16]

this editor thing . Say , ı modify a biq using the 1.03 and no science leaders will appear . Unless ı find a 1.00 and do a final save in that , before playing it ?

 

[Fergei]

The only reason I would pick PTW over Conquests is the change to the Forbidden palace. In PTW it reduced corruption most in the cities closest to the Forbidden palace. So you could be far more creative and varied in your city positioning and overall geographical shape of your empire. In Conquests, for anything even approaching optimum corruption management, you are effectively a slave to positioning your most productive cities fairly close to your capital.

I'd love a PTW mod with everything from Conquests added, just so I could play with the PTW Forbidden palace.

 

[Aiken_Drumn]

@Fergei could you please explain this more?

I always though the FP gave you a second 'core' of production.. But that was only the case in not ?

 

[vorlon_mi]

The details (with mathematical formulae) are found in Alexman's strategy article https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/everything-about-corruption-c3c-edition.76619/

My high level understanding is that PTW did what you understood, @Aiken_Drumn , set up a second hub or core for cities to surround. One could use the "ring city placement" algorithm described when the game was first released.

C3C changed the role of the FP in rank corruption, where it somewhat expands the number of cities in the core with low corruption but not as clearly as it did in PTW. One is usually better off producing the FP in a productive city relatively near the capital in C3C.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

The only reasons I play vanilla (which I don't play often) are nostalgia and Religious/Expansionist Iroquois.

 

[Fergei]

The only reasons I play vanilla (which I don't play often) are nostalgia and Religious/Expansionist Iroquois.

Apologies if I am telling an experienced player how to suck eggs, but I think you may get enjoyment if you modified the Conquests Iroquois traits back to Religious / Expansionist and simply created maps off the back of that modification.

Your post has actually made me think to do that given how overpowered they arguably are with Agriculture plus fantastic UU.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

Apologies if I am telling an experienced player how to suck eggs, but I think you may get enjoyment if you modified the Conquests Iroquois traits back to Religious / Expansionist and simply created maps off the back of that modification.

Your post has actually made me think to do that given how overpowered they arguably are with Agriculture plus fantastic UU.

I think I might have done that before.

While the Iroquois traits in C3C make them more powerful than in the vanilla version, Religious and Expansionist are more fun as traits (I really despise having to go through anarchy).