Why did these 3 Civ III features get dropped?

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by TabascoBob, Apr 22, 2009.

  1. TabascoBob

    TabascoBob Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Morris County New Jersey
    There are three features from Civ III that I miss a lot, and I don't know why they did not make it through. They are:

    1. The colony- not the vassal colony, but the "convert the worker into an improvement outside your cultural borders" colony. Especially if you conquer another capital, and some of the luxuries are a few border pops away.

    2. Adding population to existing cities. Why not? Especially, for example, a plains city with no farms until biology could power up some 1/1h/cottage tiles if you could add workers or settlers. If this was unbalanced, why not allow a settler to add one pop to an existing city?

    3. Trading luxuries/gpt for techs.

    Is there a way to add these back in through a mod? (or have they been, anywhere?)
     
  2. z0wb13

    z0wb13 undead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    657
    1. they made it harder, now you have to burn a settler instead of a worker. and now you have to pay upkeep.

    2. you could cheat too much, there were too many exploits. like, you could join your free worker to your city and have enough pop to build a second settler slightly earlier.

    3. because this was also exploitable by offering a ridiculous amount of :gold:/turn for a tech, then declaring war on the next turn to break that deal. i thought that this could still work if, by entering some sort of :gold:/turn deal, you sign a defensive pact that lasts until whenever.

    so, to answer the question, 1 is still sort of in the game because you can build cities on top of resources to claim them, and 2 & 3 were taken out. i don't know of any mods that would allow them to be put back in, and from my extremely limited experience with python i don't think that it would be possible to reprogram or replace those game features.
     
  3. TabascoBob

    TabascoBob Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Morris County New Jersey
    OK, I understand your points, but I think they could have been tweaked instead of dropped. The colony made complete sense, and founding a city (combined with the OCN limitations) makes "temporary" resource grabbing tough.

    Jump to 3., when you agree to a demand, you get a peace treaty; why not create an unbreakable treaty for 10 turns?

    Back to 2., what about using a settler to add one population point (instead of two).
     
  4. GeneralGab

    GeneralGab Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    57
    Regarding #2: Late-game, that would be very abusable. Create a settler in 1 turn, then add to city. Repeat. A high-production city would be pumping out settlers continually, and the population of cities would be huge.
     
  5. royal62184

    royal62184 Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    312
    Location:
    Oak Ridge, TN
    It could have a cap. Say settler can't join a city if city size exceeds 10. Obviously creating a size 100+ city is abuse because you can join city before it starves down.
     
  6. vanatteveldt

    vanatteveldt Emperor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,039
    Location:
    Amsterdam
    OTOH, it is completely silly that in an era of railroads and modern transport city size is limited to what they can grow in a 100 mile radius. Even ancient Rome was fed with grain shipped in from sicily and carthage...
     
  7. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    All of those features were abandoned because the AI wasn't able to handle them or because they were heavily exploitable in Civ III.
     
  8. UWHabs

    UWHabs Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,786
    Location:
    Toronto
    I don't see why they couldn't keep in at least the GPT for techs. Especially if the AI is smart enough to not count GPT it's receiving from deals like this as possible to trade (to avoid the, "here's 20 GPT for your tech. Now give me 20GPT for this resource. Okay, now that the tech wears off, you're now poor! Mwahahahaha") Especially if you're a bit short of cash, paying 300 gold + 1 per turn instead of 320 could be useful. Then you could even do deals like trading 300 Gold for like 32 GPT, as a form of investment income for later.
     
  9. mboettcher

    mboettcher General

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    524
    @ vantteveldt
    The game isn't realistic its just a game

    @zowb13
    Also for Gpt for techs or any other trade you make when you sign a deal you get a peace treaty for 10 turns so it can't be broken the next turn even if you wanted to

    The thing that I find slightly annoying is trading in war ending treaties.

    When a war is won (or lost) there can't be exchanges in the treaty. You can only give or receive bonus'. I think that you get a set value for how much of an advantage you gained and can add to that with some techs. Say trade a peace treaty and 3 bad techs for 2 good techs and a city or something. Normally the trade wouldn't happen because you can't give them anything on top of peace. I also don't think it would be an exploit.
     
  10. Earthling

    Earthling Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Messages:
    8,518
    Forts should claim resources for you, perhaps with some additional feature (gold cost) to spread culture.

    Adding to city pop is broken and can't ever be implemented so that it mattered and wouldn't be broken.. But at the least you have corps late-game.

    I do miss GPT for trades. In fact civIII seemed to be better about tech trading as a whole. Civ4 AI are incredibly stupid, first with hard-coded stuff like WFYABTA. And then for some reason they didn't implement the same algorithms as civIII - in civ4 you can trade the same tech to every AI and they'd all give you a lot in return. In civIII they heavily weighted monopolies and you'd face rapidly diminishing returns; civ4 monopolies seem to be mostly just the hard-coded "we're building a wonder" stuff. The whole thing about the AI hiding their gold right now is also senseless and annoying, also the fact that they always have to rip you off - I think that we could bring back these features just by improving diplo as a whole (gpt could be a peace treaty and make the AI only accept at pleased or something, shouldn't be too hard).

    The #1 thing I miss about civIII though: GOOD SIEGE. Civ4 siege is absolutely awful, both for realism and balance. Ugh.
     
  11. oyzar

    oyzar Have quit civ/forums

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    6,923
    Location:
    Norway
    regarding #3 it is possible in MP
     
  12. TabascoBob

    TabascoBob Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Morris County New Jersey
    The other feature, that came up in my current game, is trading "contact with another civilization." I have Brennus to the north and I'm the only one with Optics; everyone else knows each other, and it would seem I could get some good value trading contact.

    Would trading a world map that includes an otherwise unknown civ create contact for the receiving civ?
     
  13. SlipperyJim

    SlipperyJim Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    Location:
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Cereal Mills and/or Sid's Sushi.

    In Civ4, Rome can still be fed with grain from Sicily, Carthage, Egypt, or even Iowa. You just have to have Cereal Mills on order to do it.
     
  14. dankok8

    dankok8 Elected World Leader

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Canada
    Don't forget ranged borbardment - this is how collateral damage should be done. Having to suicide a siege weapon to do collateral damage makes no sense and is totally unrealistic. Instead of armies constantly replacing siege units, I think regular units were replaced much more often since they died much more.
     
  15. troytheface

    troytheface Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,262
    more distressing - changing the Conquistidor, The f-15, the Mounted Warrior (most overpowered unit in the universe), the Trireme, and the Hoplite.

    their replacements are the inferior
     
  16. Antilogic

    Antilogic --

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    15,602
    These definitely sound like SDK changes, with the possible exception of #2, which might be feasible in Python. I know of no current mods that add these features back in.

    Also, #3 was my favorite "exploit" of the trusting AI. "You are really going to pay me 300 :gold:/turn? Really!?!" "Sure thing!" :rolleyes:
     
  17. CornPlanter

    CornPlanter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,067
    Location:
    Lithuania
    I too miss colonies. And the thing about city getting food only from it's own area... I considered it silly since Civ 1. Though probably dev's just didn't find a way to make it playble and non-abusable.
     
  18. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    I remember quite well that is was awfully easy to interfere with enemy colonies in civ III, because there was almost always a road tile in the path to the colony that wasn't on their territory. Because of that it was easy to cut the acess to the colony and then a horde of workers would come relink the colony..... and then you could capture them or simply repeat it ad nauseam. In fact, if i see a AI doing a road out of their teritory in Civ IV and I have a unit to spare, I'll still do it :p
     
  19. Antilogic

    Antilogic --

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    15,602
    You can mod Civ4 so that trade routes also produce food, just like commerce, which will give some semblence of what we want.

    However, it's a good design idea to avoid the supply crawler spam of SMAC.
     
  20. CornPlanter

    CornPlanter Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,067
    Location:
    Lithuania
    Generally I do not like messing with modding too much. The game is pretty much balanced as is and changing anything could only make it worse. Though thanks for telling this anyway, good to know :)
     

Share This Page