It always bothered me so much in this scenario but I guess the idea was that the empire at the time was broken and inept and it made “room” for the barbarians to go in and burrow themselves in Europe
@@TAFKASYFY also that western europe have low population. The key zones of the empire were greece, egip and italy. All the other zones were basically barbarian lands not much time ago, and were not really rich
So funny how Suede searches for the "Germans" but Goths and Angles and Saxons ARE indeed germanic tribes. XD Thats why we call ourself Deutsch (from the Teutonic order) The french call us Allemagne (from the tribe of the Alemani, near the french border) Or in english just Germans. (which is actually the worst translation since it includes many tribes and not one specific people)
Is it the worst translation or the best? After becoming Christian the German tribes all lived together in one big kingdom. They still had separate languages, traditions etc., but they were all "Germans", so it makes sense to not use the name of one tribe for the whole nation, right?
No they fought bitter wars. Especially in ancient times. BEcause there never was a view of ONE germanic (germanisch) folk. In the year 1871 !!!! after Prussia hat defeated France (and some others) it was the first time that there was an united german (deutsch) nation- The German Empire. Half of scandinavia was settled by germanic tribes which later became countries like Denmark or Sweden. So try to tell a Danish person that hes german. He will laugh. When hes educated he knows that thousands of years ago there were some germanic tribes and they settled there first. look up on wikipedia for "List of germanic tribes" There are some nice maps. Half of Europe was settled by them. So for me its just funny that someone looks for Germans in Roman Times. Because the word to VANDALIZE something originated from the germanic vandals tribe that sacked Rome. They then were driven away by the Goths (another germanic tribe) to western africa. Whatever. XD So again, in english they almost sound the same: GERMAN and GERMANIC. But the meaning is something completely different. Please never mistake these two words or think they are the same in any way,. They are not. @@rdrrr
I’d love to see you playing as the vandals in this scenario and migrating to Carthage like they did in real life. Would be a challenge but could be fun. Great content and I would love to see more!
1:00:01 I thought the Gordian Knot was named after the city it was in, which would make sense to me why Gordia the Persian city was far to the right on both Rome conquests. Apparently Gordius was the king of the city it was in, which was Phrygia, somewhere in slightly west central Turkey.
Hey Suede, you made a mistake in your Ghandi vid by saying that Forbidden Palace does not help with corruption for cities adjacent to it just the city it is actually in. It does help because it reduces Distance Corruption for those cities which now calculate it to the FP not the original Palace. The thing is Rank Corruption can be so high in those cities that you don't notice the reduction much. In my recent run I built a fairly far off FP while in Monarchy and noticed only small improvement to the surrounding cities. But when I did the same in Fascism I was able to make a second homeland out of Japan (I was Korea, oh the irony). It also reduces Rank Corruption by some amount globally too IIRC. Anyway quite enjoy that Ghandi series so far, though a run without the scam could be fun in the future if you think you can do it.
Interesting! I ran a test, and you are correct. This is actually quite usable information. This suggests that it's actually better to put your forbidden palace kind of close to home. If a city has too much rank corruption (it's already at the 90% max) it doesn't benefit from the reduction in dstance corruption.
@@suedeciviii7142 Yes. I usually put my FP at two times the distance where my towns become 50% corrupt minus one city to account for rank corruption increase. You can find the exact rules on corruption on CivFanatics, figure you knew them but forgot.
On this scenario rome falls easy because they only have to lose 7 of their cities and most of the roman cities are not very gaurded, and usually only produce 2 units the entire game lol
The barvors need to be pitted against distant factions, they will withdraw the main troops from your borders, for example, to the Sassanians, Huns, and you can get out. Without saving, of course it will be difficult.
a large territory and many cities at the start, this is money. The main cities producing units are in Italy, where shields are plentiful. in cities on the periphery we use money to speed things up and it’s great. I passed both Romes on the side, that was cool!
this is one of my favorite scenarios and I always fricken wondered what it would be like LMAO, bro top tier content homie!!! Wish I could sub twice lmao
Hello. Well done for recording the video, great game. He himself played several times for Western and Eastern Rome. It's cool when you steal the technology of the barvors. Then you trade their development branch with them and you can build their wonder of the world, earning points. I even changed the government to barbarians, accumulating money, then changing it back and spending it :) I set up a city in a flattering place, taking the paint from Eastern Rome, but I had to keep a good garrison there :)
Funny thing about this one, it's possible to brute force Barbarism (assuming you're the Sassanids, who can benefit from the tech but don't start with it). The max amount of time a tech takes to research is 50 turns, and you only need 3-4 four techs from the second era (wonders are a waste of time compared to killing Rome), so it's quite possible to grab those techs during the first third of the game, get barbarism over the second, and then trade luxuries for the other barbarian techs and flood the map with warlords during the final third. That said, while Rome can't build any of the unique units from that tree, I do believe that if you brute forced the tech it would give you access to Tribal Council as a government type. That alone would make it worth the hassle. Edit: That 's odd, looks like the max research cap was screwed around with for this scenario and bumped up to 400 turns. You're going to need to steal this tech instead, but Tribal Council is still worth it.
I saw you were worried about a city flipping. An easy way to prevent that is to make a worker. Reduce it to 1 pop, then rush population growth. Newly gained pop will be of your culture, reducing the risk of a flip. Also, why not start each city with a temple to speed up cultural expansion? Easy way to close gaps on the border.
He hates temples as he sees them as a waste of production and costs every turn. He doesn't view them as happiness buildings even though they are. This strategy only works for him because he keeps cities small and tries to conquer very early. Even on the higher difficulty levels, I usually only wage wars later on then he does. I have a massive economy by then it doesn't matter. You end up wasting the production "saved" by not building temples on military units that get killed or get lost when cities culture flip. So you don't save anything. Finally, without Temples you can't build Cathedrals which are great for happiness and for culture.
And reducing population of a captured city I rarely hear mentioned anywhere. The created workers are of the old culture, and reduces the chance of a flip. The new citizens made are all of yours.
Question (idk where else to ask you since you don't use social media and I don't use discord) Say you research the Manhatten project and you wanna build nukes, but you're missing uranium in your land, you notice another civ has it, but you can't ask for a trade because they haven't researched that resource yet, what do you do? Are there any options other than waging war on an entire civ just for that one resource?
Saw some of your vids. Good stuff in general, even I learned stuff. Though I must say I dislike parts of your playstyle. Like giving in to AI demands and settling cities so close is kind of irritating to me as I consider future inefficiency, but I guess you prefer current efficiency to potential payoff in the future. Heh but maybe my fuck the AI attitude (I also don't like giving them tech or trading if it is not a fair trade for me) is why I dislike playing on difficulties above Monarch. Still you did influence me, I might finally give Republic a shot, it is the only govt. I never used along with Feudalism. I used to always go Monarchy>Fascism which I do think you malign too much, it is good for a mid to upper mid sized empire which wants to pursue a war strategy. Plus if you properly space towns with its lesser corruption you can have a lot of great cities, especially if you place your Forbidden Palace well (I'd say 5-7 nations worth of *usable* land) The pop loss is minor especially if you haven't gone for hospitals yet. I guess no culture thing hurts if you use Culture Conversions which I don't since as you say it is a BS mechanic. I recently actually enabled it after a long time and I thought my game version is buggy when towns were flipping to straggler towns across the map, guess that wasn't a bug from what you say. It really should drop off sharply with distance. Though there was this weird thing where AI strongly avoided war with each other instead attacking me always even from the opposite ends of the map when I was many time stronger than them to boot. Any idea if that was also not a bug? Anyway in the unlikely case you read this, good content, keep it up ;)
Giving into AI demands sucks but it's part of the game. It's the game's way of punishing you for keeping a smaller army. If you keep a big army they won't bother extorting you :) I don't consider my city plants to be very close together. Depends on which playthrough you're talking about.
@@suedeciviii7142 I think all of yours I saw ;) I build my cities so that the big fat crosses as you call them don't touch or touch minimally so that when the time for hospitals comes they all have 20ish squares to play around with. I am about as likely to let a few squares go to waste by not being part of any town as I am to let two or more towns overlap the same squares. To me this is a matter of primarily efficiency as those cities will grow big and all those squares will be improved by one library/uni/research lab cutting down on maintenance. It also cuts down on rank corruption secondarily as I cover more land with fewer cities. And finally it just looks more aesthetically pleasing to see all big towns rather than most or all of them being runty. I guess you could definitely say I am a builder Not sure if my placement style is viable on highest ranks. Genuinely curious to know if other Sid tier players all plant as close as you or if some plant like me. Also looking at your 101 tips right now, good stuff. Figured out most of that on my own by experimentation over the years but some bits of trivia I never would have learned on my own I think.
I'm going to try this scenario as a two player playing Visigoths and Vandals, as they start off as even scores (sadly means Anglo Saxons and Ostragoths dont exist due to multiplayer cap of 8 Civs). I'd like to try two player playing both sides of Rome but seems Eastern Rome starts with a huge score/power advantage, so presumably that would be unbalanced?
@@suedeciviii7142 Thanks. The video title promised "rise" not "stall" :p On this scenario on multiplayer both Romes are prefixed as AI, so I wonder if the original intention was for them to not be playable given the victory conditions. A good test would to play the Polish based Civ on Rise of Rome, with a permanent alliance with Carthage (against Rome) and with Persia (against Greece). The late game legions are crazy.
@@whothehelcares162 This would be of great interest to me, but I'm struggling to find it. Do you know if it different to the 'Cross Platform Civ3 Editor' listed as a download on CivFanatics? Apologies, I am not technically minded.
He must have ticked down the war weariness some too. (Nope at 1:31:38 he showed his government rules and it was still high. I think I went to war with too many civilizations at once then.) I started fighting and three or four moves later, most of my cities were in disorder because they were tired of the war. And I was winning the war with only a few units in my territory. Plus I had a lot more luxuries and happiness buildings then here. I'll have to tweak and re-play. Since I was so strong and able to negotiate, I could have coasted to the finish without fighting any wars and the computer only slightly fighting amongst themselves. But that isn't fun.
why do you guys always have these "extra buttons" in the Actions Menu? I just can choose between the "normal" Actions like "Go" "Explore" "fortify" "Attack" ....
Hey,suede civIII I modified the civilization 3 Middle ages scenario And gave Byzantium legionaries! Let me know if you would like to see that scenario.
@@GXM1210 Entertainers eat food but don't produce any. In despotism where it's hard for a citizen to produce more food than it eats (you need a cow or wheat or something), that just completely shuts off your growth. I'd much rather disorder for a turn from time to time rather than completely stop growing for several turns.
I record on a 4 year old laptop, honestly it's a miracle I even got 720p to work. One of my goals in monetizing was to buy new equipment so a new computer. Once I do, I'll try to set up higher video quality.
There's so much space between cities, it hurts to look at
It always bothered me so much in this scenario but I guess the idea was that the empire at the time was broken and inept and it made “room” for the barbarians to go in and burrow themselves in Europe
@@TAFKASYFY also that western europe have low population. The key zones of the empire were greece, egip and italy. All the other zones were basically barbarian lands not much time ago, and were not really rich
19:36 Classic civ 3 moment right there.
that nearly made me cry, think that would have been the gg for me :'(
@@squatlebherz4434 spearman is the best defensave unit in the game lol
@@yourecarsextendedwarrent3416i’ve seen spearmen beat tanks before lol
So funny how Suede searches for the "Germans" but Goths and Angles and Saxons ARE indeed germanic tribes. XD
Thats why we call ourself Deutsch (from the Teutonic order)
The french call us Allemagne (from the tribe of the Alemani, near the french border)
Or in english just Germans. (which is actually the worst translation since it includes many tribes and not one specific people)
Is it the worst translation or the best? After becoming Christian the German tribes all lived together in one big kingdom. They still had separate languages, traditions etc., but they were all "Germans", so it makes sense to not use the name of one tribe for the whole nation, right?
No they fought bitter wars. Especially in ancient times. BEcause there never was a view of ONE germanic (germanisch) folk.
In the year 1871 !!!! after Prussia hat defeated France (and some others) it was the first time that there was an united german (deutsch) nation- The German Empire.
Half of scandinavia was settled by germanic tribes which later became countries like Denmark or Sweden. So try to tell a Danish person that hes german. He will laugh. When hes educated he knows that thousands of years ago there were some germanic tribes and they settled there first.
look up on wikipedia for "List of germanic tribes" There are some nice maps. Half of Europe was settled by them.
So for me its just funny that someone looks for Germans in Roman Times. Because the word to VANDALIZE something originated from the germanic vandals tribe that sacked Rome. They then were driven away by the Goths (another germanic tribe) to western africa. Whatever. XD
So again, in english they almost sound the same: GERMAN and GERMANIC. But the meaning is something completely different. Please never mistake these two words or think they are the same in any way,. They are not. @@rdrrr
I’d love to see you playing as the vandals in this scenario and migrating to Carthage like they did in real life. Would be a challenge but could be fun. Great content and I would love to see more!
1:00:01 I thought the Gordian Knot was named after the city it was in, which would make sense to me why Gordia the Persian city was far to the right on both Rome conquests.
Apparently Gordius was the king of the city it was in, which was Phrygia, somewhere in slightly west central Turkey.
Hey Suede, you made a mistake in your Ghandi vid by saying that Forbidden Palace does not help with corruption for cities adjacent to it just the city it is actually in. It does help because it reduces Distance Corruption for those cities which now calculate it to the FP not the original Palace. The thing is Rank Corruption can be so high in those cities that you don't notice the reduction much. In my recent run I built a fairly far off FP while in Monarchy and noticed only small improvement to the surrounding cities. But when I did the same in Fascism I was able to make a second homeland out of Japan (I was Korea, oh the irony). It also reduces Rank Corruption by some amount globally too IIRC.
Anyway quite enjoy that Ghandi series so far, though a run without the scam could be fun in the future if you think you can do it.
Interesting! I ran a test, and you are correct. This is actually quite usable information. This suggests that it's actually better to put your forbidden palace kind of close to home. If a city has too much rank corruption (it's already at the 90% max) it doesn't benefit from the reduction in dstance corruption.
@@suedeciviii7142 Yes. I usually put my FP at two times the distance where my towns become 50% corrupt minus one city to account for rank corruption increase. You can find the exact rules on corruption on CivFanatics, figure you knew them but forgot.
Suede: never build a courthouse in your capital
Also Suede: Where are some buildings I can delete?
Rome: I AM THE LAW
"Please tell me we don't have war weariness."
*Consults editor and not civilopedia*
The Troops are moving like there are on railroads
It is just quick movement option on
On this scenario rome falls easy because they only have to lose 7 of their cities and most of the roman cities are not very gaurded, and usually only produce 2 units the entire game lol
The barvors need to be pitted against distant factions, they will withdraw the main troops from your borders, for example, to the Sassanians, Huns, and you can get out. Without saving, of course it will be difficult.
a large territory and many cities at the start, this is money. The main cities producing units are in Italy, where shields are plentiful. in cities on the periphery we use money to speed things up and it’s great. I passed both Romes on the side, that was cool!
this is one of my favorite scenarios and I always fricken wondered what it would be like LMAO, bro top tier content homie!!! Wish I could sub twice lmao
Hello. Well done for recording the video, great game. He himself played several times for Western and Eastern Rome. It's cool when you steal the technology of the barvors. Then you trade their development branch with them and you can build their wonder of the world, earning points. I even changed the government to barbarians, accumulating money, then changing it back and spending it :) I set up a city in a flattering place, taking the paint from Eastern Rome, but I had to keep a good garrison there :)
Strong Rome, as it should be.
Funny thing about this one, it's possible to brute force Barbarism (assuming you're the Sassanids, who can benefit from the tech but don't start with it). The max amount of time a tech takes to research is 50 turns, and you only need 3-4 four techs from the second era (wonders are a waste of time compared to killing Rome), so it's quite possible to grab those techs during the first third of the game, get barbarism over the second, and then trade luxuries for the other barbarian techs and flood the map with warlords during the final third.
That said, while Rome can't build any of the unique units from that tree, I do believe that if you brute forced the tech it would give you access to Tribal Council as a government type. That alone would make it worth the hassle.
Edit: That 's odd, looks like the max research cap was screwed around with for this scenario and bumped up to 400 turns. You're going to need to steal this tech instead, but Tribal Council is still worth it.
Could be because highest difficulty
I saw you were worried about a city flipping. An easy way to prevent that is to make a worker.
Reduce it to 1 pop, then rush population growth. Newly gained pop will be of your culture, reducing the risk of a flip.
Also, why not start each city with a temple to speed up cultural expansion? Easy way to close gaps on the border.
He hates temples as he sees them as a waste of production and costs every turn. He doesn't view them as happiness buildings even though they are. This strategy only works for him because he keeps cities small and tries to conquer very early. Even on the higher difficulty levels, I usually only wage wars later on then he does. I have a massive economy by then it doesn't matter. You end up wasting the production "saved" by not building temples on military units that get killed or get lost when cities culture flip. So you don't save anything. Finally, without Temples you can't build Cathedrals which are great for happiness and for culture.
@@joelwillems4081 I see them as cheap cultural expansion tools.
@@0311Mushroom Same.
And reducing population of a captured city I rarely hear mentioned anywhere. The created workers are of the old culture, and reduces the chance of a flip. The new citizens made are all of yours.
@@joelwillems4081 Except Suede doesn't station troops in cities, if he thinks they may be deposed.
I love your content Suede! You always have such excellent commentary.
26:10 rome is gonna overthrow rome and lead rome to glory
Question (idk where else to ask you since you don't use social media and I don't use discord)
Say you research the Manhatten project and you wanna build nukes, but you're missing uranium in your land, you notice another civ has it, but you can't ask for a trade because they haven't researched that resource yet, what do you do? Are there any options other than waging war on an entire civ just for that one resource?
You don't need an account to use discord. And I have twitter! twitter.com/SuedeCivIII
You can just give them the tech.
Saw some of your vids. Good stuff in general, even I learned stuff. Though I must say I dislike parts of your playstyle. Like giving in to AI demands and settling cities so close is kind of irritating to me as I consider future inefficiency, but I guess you prefer current efficiency to potential payoff in the future. Heh but maybe my fuck the AI attitude (I also don't like giving them tech or trading if it is not a fair trade for me) is why I dislike playing on difficulties above Monarch.
Still you did influence me, I might finally give Republic a shot, it is the only govt. I never used along with Feudalism. I used to always go Monarchy>Fascism which I do think you malign too much, it is good for a mid to upper mid sized empire which wants to pursue a war strategy. Plus if you properly space towns with its lesser corruption you can have a lot of great cities, especially if you place your Forbidden Palace well (I'd say 5-7 nations worth of *usable* land) The pop loss is minor especially if you haven't gone for hospitals yet. I guess no culture thing hurts if you use Culture Conversions which I don't since as you say it is a BS mechanic. I recently actually enabled it after a long time and I thought my game version is buggy when towns were flipping to straggler towns across the map, guess that wasn't a bug from what you say. It really should drop off sharply with distance. Though there was this weird thing where AI strongly avoided war with each other instead attacking me always even from the opposite ends of the map when I was many time stronger than them to boot. Any idea if that was also not a bug?
Anyway in the unlikely case you read this, good content, keep it up ;)
Giving into AI demands sucks but it's part of the game. It's the game's way of punishing you for keeping a smaller army. If you keep a big army they won't bother extorting you :)
I don't consider my city plants to be very close together. Depends on which playthrough you're talking about.
@@suedeciviii7142 I think all of yours I saw ;) I build my cities so that the big fat crosses as you call them don't touch or touch minimally so that when the time for hospitals comes they all have 20ish squares to play around with. I am about as likely to let a few squares go to waste by not being part of any town as I am to let two or more towns overlap the same squares. To me this is a matter of primarily efficiency as those cities will grow big and all those squares will be improved by one library/uni/research lab cutting down on maintenance. It also cuts down on rank corruption secondarily as I cover more land with fewer cities. And finally it just looks more aesthetically pleasing to see all big towns rather than most or all of them being runty. I guess you could definitely say I am a builder
Not sure if my placement style is viable on highest ranks. Genuinely curious to know if other Sid tier players all plant as close as you or if some plant like me.
Also looking at your 101 tips right now, good stuff. Figured out most of that on my own by experimentation over the years but some bits of trivia I never would have learned on my own I think.
Hey when are you going to be sponsored by raid shadow legends?
I already am man, did you not see the 5 minute ad 3/4 of the way through the vid?
Shit, now you're a real youtuber!
6:00 the problem is what if you loss cities, your loss fast
i wish he would do more scenario videos
I love the thumbnail of this vid 🤣🤣 love the video too
9:47 yo what tha fuck look at all those Worker Actions
advanced settings
Btw what is an ICS Strategy? I seen it mentioned a couple of times now, and asking here might be as good as any place I guess...
Regards,
Thomas
Infinite city sprawl. Building a billion cities with one tile in between.
A man riding a pig? 0_o
Wanna to see next part soon!
Very intresting scenario!
can play fall of rome as celts?)
I'm going to try this scenario as a two player playing Visigoths and Vandals, as they start off as even scores (sadly means Anglo Saxons and Ostragoths dont exist due to multiplayer cap of 8 Civs).
I'd like to try two player playing both sides of Rome but seems Eastern Rome starts with a huge score/power advantage, so presumably that would be unbalanced?
Play on a high enough difficulty and it should be fine. Although I'm finding it's really easy to stall as Rome in this.
There is a tool that allows you to play with 31 players for civ 3 its called MPgui
@@suedeciviii7142 Thanks. The video title promised "rise" not "stall" :p On this scenario on multiplayer both Romes are prefixed as AI, so I wonder if the original intention was for them to not be playable given the victory conditions.
A good test would to play the Polish based Civ on Rise of Rome, with a permanent alliance with Carthage (against Rome) and with Persia (against Greece). The late game legions are crazy.
@@whothehelcares162 This would be of great interest to me, but I'm struggling to find it. Do you know if it different to the 'Cross Platform Civ3 Editor' listed as a download on CivFanatics? Apologies, I am not technically minded.
@@Brucemagoose511 forums.civfanatics.com/threads/multiplayer-tool-play-scenarios-up-to-31-players.456432/page-2
How did you get Rome and Byzantines on this? In my Civ 3 they are not playable in Fall of Rome
Edit player properties in the editor. See my latest video for info on that.
He must have ticked down the war weariness some too. (Nope at 1:31:38 he showed his government rules and it was still high. I think I went to war with too many civilizations at once then.) I started fighting and three or four moves later, most of my cities were in disorder because they were tired of the war. And I was winning the war with only a few units in my territory. Plus I had a lot more luxuries and happiness buildings then here. I'll have to tweak and re-play. Since I was so strong and able to negotiate, I could have coasted to the finish without fighting any wars and the computer only slightly fighting amongst themselves. But that isn't fun.
@@suedeciviii7142can you please share the link
1:18:35 if civilopedia isnt lying here, the barbs can multiply population with the migrant
It means like, the Vandals. Not the literal barbs.
why do you guys always have these "extra buttons" in the Actions Menu? I just can choose between the "normal" Actions like "Go" "Explore" "fortify" "Attack" ....
In the options you can turn them on
@@saksingjwait you're telling me i played this for a decade and never realised you can turn those extra actions on
@@nhalexhale3876 These are your words
Hey,suede civIII I modified the civilization 3 Middle ages scenario And gave Byzantium legionaries! Let me know if you would like to see that scenario.
The game won't let me pick Rome or Byzantium....why? 🤔
How do you play as Rome or Byzantines? It would only let me play as the enemies of the two.
I think he changed the playable nation's in the editor
maybe put "part 1" in the title
I don't understand why do you keep population management on manual. Simply give it to the governor and manually run those that you want.
Hmmm? The governor auto-assigning entertainers will complete fuck your growth and I'd strongly recommend against it.
@@suedeciviii7142I set emphasis as well, so I don't get anything like that.
I don't play over monarch difficulty, so I guess it could be that...
@@GXM1210 Entertainers eat food but don't produce any. In despotism where it's hard for a citizen to produce more food than it eats (you need a cow or wheat or something), that just completely shuts off your growth.
I'd much rather disorder for a turn from time to time rather than completely stop growing for several turns.
Any chance you could make your recording in higher def?
I record on a 4 year old laptop, honestly it's a miracle I even got 720p to work.
One of my goals in monetizing was to buy new equipment so a new computer. Once I do, I'll try to set up higher video quality.