Civilization IV

[Kekvit Irae]

I have a full gig of DDR SDRAM
My processor is AMD Athlon XP 2500 running at 1.47 GHz
Video card is an nVidia Geforce FX 5600 Ultra 128mb using 77.72 drivers

[The_Doctor]

d'oh.

Other than the processor it is alround better than my PC.

Maybe the patch will fix it.

[The_Doctor]

A quick RAM question.

I have this type of motherboard:
http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Product...=Specification

Is this the type of RAM that will work in it:
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/sto...0&tm=undefined

512MB
DDR DIMM
PC2100

[screwtype]

Martinus, I've seen lots of folks with problems posting their tech specs at CivFanatics, and the overall impression is that these lag problems seem to occur almost at random, regardless of spec. There are people with very high end systems who are getting severe lag, others with systems which are actually below the recommended specs who have no problems. You just can't tell whether your system will be one of those affected by looking at your machine's spec.

I seem to be one of the lucky ones, the game runs fine for me unless I enable anti-aliasing, in which case it starts getting lag and other graphical glitches. I have an Athlon 64 3000+, 1 Gig RAM, 9800 Pro. But there are other folks who have the latest AMD CPU and video card and multi-gigs of RAM who can't run the game at an acceptable speed.

Extra RAM will probably improve the performance to a degree but don't assume it will fix the problem. BTW, some people say they've improved performance by defragging, turning off their antivirus program and all other background tasks, and increasing the size of their HD swap file to a couple of Gigs. But again there are no guarantees. Other than that you'll probably have to wait and hope for the patch.

[Papewaio]

Once you get past the amount of RAM needed to run an application it rarely improves the speed of a game.

The exceptions are where there is a memory leak... in which case the extra RAM acts as a bucket... the bigger the bucket the more time you have before it overflows and you get problems.

The other side is the amount of other applications that you can have running on your PC at the same time.

RAM is like deskspace... the bigger the desk the more books you can have out and the longer the time you have until you run out of space to use.

[Kekvit Irae]

Once you get past the amount of RAM needed to run an application it rarely improves the speed of a game.

The exceptions are where there is a memory leak... in which case the extra RAM acts as a bucket... the bigger the bucket the more time you have before it overflows and you get problems.

The other side is the amount of other applications that you can have running on your PC at the same time.

RAM is like deskspace... the bigger the desk the more books you can have out and the longer the time you have until you run out of space to use.

This is only true in some situations. Morrowind and FarCry (mostly FarCry) was lagging for me at 512mb of RAM, so I popped in another 512mb and now the improvement is very noticable, making the games into something enjoyable now.

[frogbeastegg]

I'm also one of those lucky amphibians for whom the game runs very well, now my initial problems have been solved. Although sound still seems too quiet sometimes, and there are great long stretches without any music at all.

Anyone else finding the random map generator to be a bit ... erm ... rubbish? Or am I supremely unlucky? I get a rubbish start in every map I've tried - deserts, jungles, tundra, ice, mountains. As I explore I continue to reveal bad terrain. I manage maybe 4 cities if I put them in places I don't exactly like, and then that is it, no space to expand because there is no terrain capable for supporting another city. Jungle at least can be cleared to something which might be useful, slowly and painfully, but the rest is permanent. :grumble: I'm using the default temperate/continents/etc settings too. :grumble:

Another strange thing; the lighthouse building. Only one of my cities could build it in my last game, though I had two others with a good amount of coastal tiles in their workable range. What's going on? It's one of those Very Important Improvements. The manual blurb on them is not helpful; it only lists effects, cost and tech requirement, nothing like how close to the coast you have to be to build them.

I've seen a lot of people complaining about ships in this game. I have to agree - they are too slow, and it takes too long to get anything capable of leaving the coast lines. If I can find out how I might mod those two aspects.

I might also mod myself a 'useful' epic mode, one with slower research than the normal game mode, but faster unit production and building production the same. Epic should mean a long game with slower progression along the tech tree, not slower everything to the point of having less to do, IMO.

On the whole, though, I do like the game, more than civ3. The civics system is great, and I like the unit promotions. I am beginning to understand the religion system now too, and I like the way it is going. Not needing to cover the entire map in roads and railways to get the commerce bonus is good too; the hamlet/village/town system is neat. The game is ... fun, the first in the true Civ series to be so for me.

[The_Doctor]

I upgraded my PC to 1GB and now it runs a lot better. For example, the Medieval scenario took me half an hour to load and now it only takes a minute or two.

Another strange thing; the lighthouse building. Only one of my cities could build it in my last game, though I had two others with a good amount of coastal tiles in their workable range. What's going on? It's one of those Very Important Improvements. The manual blurb on them is not helpful; it only lists effects, cost and tech requirement, nothing like how close to the coast you have to be to build them.

The city has to be on the coast.

[screwtype]

I'm also one of those lucky amphibians for whom the game runs very well, now my initial problems have been solved. Although sound still seems too quiet sometimes, and there are great long stretches without any music at all.

Yes, I find the game a tad quiet too.

Anyone else finding the random map generator to be a bit ... erm ... rubbish? Or am I supremely unlucky? I get a rubbish start in every map I've tried - deserts, jungles, tundra, ice, mountains. As I explore I continue to reveal bad terrain.

There has been quite a bit of controversy over the map generator at CivFanatics. I've complained about it myself. The maps seem smaller and pokier than they did in the previous game, even on huge map size. I never played the huge map with Civ3, it would take forever to finish a game. On Civ4, it's the only setting I use.

And yes, you can have a bad run with starting positions. I had a whole bunch of starts in the middle of [snip] jungles, which totally cripples your chances. Jungle makes your townsfolk sick and takes time to clear, but you can't even start clearing it until you get iron working, which is quite a way into the tech tree. IMO there shouldn't be so much jungle on the temperate setting.

If I get a bad starting position now, I immediately dump the game and start a new one. Unfortunately, the game does not remember your previous game settings and you have to reset them all before trying again, but it beats trying to win from jungle. It took me six or seven goes to get a good starting pos last time.

Another strange thing; the lighthouse building. Only one of my cities could build it in my last game, though I had two others with a good amount of coastal tiles in their workable range. What's going on?

Your city has to be adjacent to a coastal tile, not merely have one "within its workable range". It was the same in Civ3 too BTW. So you have to build your city either adjacent to the sea or two tiles away from it, otherwise you end up with a bunch of sea tiles you can't improve.

I agree it's a bit limiting. I think at the very least you should be able to build a "coastal" city next to river tiles. Maybe that could be modded in.

I've seen a lot of people complaining about ships in this game. I have to agree - they are too slow, and it takes too long to get anything capable of leaving the coast lines. If I can find out how I might mod those two aspects.

Not sure if I agree with this. It was much the same in the earlier game, the only real difference is that now galleys have an MP of two instead of three. But there is an "auto-explore" function which is quite useful. Build a couple of galleys early and put them on auto-explore, they will map your continent out in no time.

I might also mod myself a 'useful' epic mode, one with slower research than the normal game mode, but faster unit production and building production the same. Epic should mean a long game with slower progression along the tech tree, not slower everything to the point of having less to do, IMO.

These are similar to the changes I'm considering myself. Unit production really is cripplingly slow (much like Civ3) and epic mode does not seem terribly epic, especially in the later stages. However, the buzz for me ATM is trying to beat the game on standard settings

On the whole, though, I do like the game, more than civ3. The civics system is great, and I like the unit promotions. I am beginning to understand the religion system now too, and I like the way it is going.

Yeah, it ain't bad. But its moddability is probably its great redeeming feature. I'm sure we're going to see a lot of good mods for it over time

[Kekvit Irae]

Yes, unit and building production is slow as heck. I loved CivIII, but CivIV seems like a downgrade instead of an upgrade

[frogbeastegg]

There has been quite a bit of controversy over the map generator at CivFanatics.

Really? I've been reading a bit over there and a bit on Apolyton, but there is so much traffic and I only have a bit of time, so I'm mostly speed reading the strategy forums to see what others think. Good; if people are grumbling en masse then Firaxis will see, and they might do something.

So far I'm not troubled by the size of the map, but then I've only played two learning games on lower difficulties, default map size and settings, with 4AIs a piece. When I get all 18 civs on the map I expect it will be crowded ... so I may not even bother. I have heard plenty about all civs and the largest map making for a slow lagfest of a game. I expect my PC has the umph to handle that, since the game is running almost perfectly, but the possibility of finding my game unplayable after a few hours puts me off trying.

I had a few bad starts in the older games, but never quite like this. I feel like I have the 'jungle' setting on, or the 'ice age' one, or both at once. From my next game on I think I may join you in dumping maps, unless I desire to play a game with a poor starting position.

Your city has to be adjacent to a coastal tile, not merely have one "within its workable range".

Thought it would be something like that. Pity; my city is about half coastal, but not quite on the coast thanks to a mass of jungle and mountains. It's an odd location. I was lucky to even squeeze it in in a location where it would do more than cost me money. My third city, and the last one to go in a location I didn't have to spend ages hacking jungle before the site became useable. Oh well, there goes my hope of having it work the coast - not enough food to support it, unless I pull workers off my very productive mines. That would be pointless, detrimental, even.

Not sure if I agree with this. It was much the same in the earlier game, the only real difference is that now galleys have an MP of two instead of three. But there is an "auto-explore" function which is quite useful. Build a couple of galleys early and put them on auto-explore, they will map your continent out in no time.

I haven't played civ3 in years; my main memories of it are covering the world in cities, roads and railways, and hating the music in the modern eras.

It's not my continent I want to map via sea; I usually have it done by land units before I even consider building a navy. It's other continents and islands I want to map by sea, to find the civs that are not on my own continent and to look at possibly expanding to a new land mass. Which I can't do until optics gives me caravels. So I ignore the sea until I get the techs needed for that.

One game in this series, I suspect it was civ3, had three different types of ocean. Coast, sea, ocean, something like that. Each advance let your units go out one type further, so that your ships capabilities echoed the historical possibilities reasonably well for such an abstracted game. It's a pity they didn't keep that.

Yeah, it ain't bad. But its moddability is probably its great redeeming feature. I'm sure we're going to see a lot of good mods for it over time

Yes, that is the best thing. If you don't like it you can change it, and that will soon apply to everything in the game. :cough: Though I doubt I will be able to do more than simple text editing type changes, due to being a modding n00b.



Anyone finding definite preferences for leaders yet? I find Qin Shi Huang to be mine thus far. Industrious and commercial; wonders and cash in large quantities. Louis sounds like another I might like; industrious and creative.

Aggressive, spiritual, expansive, organised - they don't feel much use to me. They could be nice, but I wouldn't like to pass up something which feels better to play as those traits. Depends on your playstyle, I suppose, but it seems to me that those bonuses are either not used very often, can be imitated by a wonder or civic, or don't really seem to be needed. Hehe, but then I am a builder/researcher frog.

[ah_dut]

Do you people think it's worth forking out £35 or thereabouts or is there a better game to get at the moment (legally bearing in mind I'm under 15 and have no credit card etc)

[Kekvit Irae]

Do you people think it's worth forking out £35 or thereabouts or is there a better game to get at the moment (legally bearing in mind I'm under 15 and have no credit card etc)

Honestly? Buy CivIII Gold and the Conquerers expansion. It is much better, in my opinion. It's fun playing a Regicide game in the Sengoku era of Japan

[econ21]

Ah_dut, it depends whether you like Civ-type games (ie slow turnbased, with an emphasis on building rather just total war). If you do, I think it is very nice addition to the genre. Lots of fun features and keeps the same tried n tested turnbased strategy game play. It's a pretty substantial game (the manual is 200 pages, pretty much all solid content), so it is worth a full price tag (I saw it in ASDA today for £29.99). So far, I've got to 1750 or so in an epic huge game on noble (the neutral difficulty setting), and it's been fun - building wonders, developing cities, winning the tech race, getting stabbed in the back and fighting wars of vengenance etc.

Whether there is a better game out right now, I don't know. BI is better, but other than that nothing recent has grabbed my eye (Oblivion is the next one on my radar).

Froggy, I'm glad you can hear the opening music - I really took a liking to it when I found out it was the Lord's prayer in Swahili (knowing the meaning behind it gives it more gravitas).

I agree with your assessment of traits - in terms of leaders, I'd recommend Elizabeth. I nearly always play English as I find it easier to remember my towns. But she has two nice traits - financial hauls in the cash (good for a tech lead) and philosophical give you more great leaders which are just fun. The redcoat is a nice and flavoursome unit - it kicks in about the time I might want to fight (being a turtler by nature), although even on epic it was very quickly made obsolete by infantry.

[Kekvit Irae]

I personally prefer Frederick for the +100% GL Birth Rate and Panzers, or Catherine for the Cossacks. I havent yet tried the Fast Workers

[doc_bean]

Anyone finding definite preferences for leaders yet? I find Qin Shi Huang to be mine thus far. Industrious and commercial; wonders and cash in large quantities. Louis sounds like another I might like; industrious and creative.

Aggressive, spiritual, expansive, organised - they don't feel much use to me. They could be nice, but I wouldn't like to pass up something which feels better to play as those traits. Depends on your playstyle, I suppose, but it seems to me that those bonuses are either not used very often, can be imitated by a wonder or civic, or don't really seem to be needed. Hehe, but then I am a builder/researcher frog.

All traits have their benefits, you just have to use them right

I finished my first game on normal game speed (warlord, lakes map, domination) the game became very unstable towards the end, I had to replay 1894 at least 3 times before I got past that turn properly. I hope the patch will fix things...

[screwtype]

Do you people think it's worth forking out £35 or thereabouts or is there a better game to get at the moment (legally bearing in mind I'm under 15 and have no credit card etc)

Remember you're taking a risk with your money given that lots of folks are having problems running it. If you really want to buy it, try and buy it from a store that has a good refund policy so you can get your money back if it doesn't work.

But Kek's advice ain't bad. If you haven't played a Civ game before, get a copy of Civ3 with the Conquests expansion. You should be able to pick them up for a song. It will give you a feel for the Civ paradigm and whether you like it or not.

Civ4 has better graphics, but in many ways it's not much different from its predecessor. And there are some features of Civ3 that are actually better - the human advisors for example.

The one thing I would do before playing Conquests is go into the game editor and wind corruption back to about 50%. At the default 100% setting, it's just an exercise in frustration.

[screwtype]

Really? I've been reading a bit over there and a bit on Apolyton, but there is so much traffic and I only have a bit of time, so I'm mostly speed reading the strategy forums to see what others think. Good; if people are grumbling en masse then Firaxis will see, and they might do something.

Actually, huge map size ain't so bad. I'm just getting into a huge map campaign and in retrospect the continent I'm on really is big - there's enough room for forty or more cities on it.

My complaint is more along the lines of the lack of variety of the maps. I selected "Continents" for this game but got only two mega-huge continents, which is what I got the previous game. It's all but a pangaea map. When I select continents I expect, you know, three or four of them at least. But there's no obvious way to get a map with several large land masses that I can see.

So far I'm not troubled by the size of the map, but then I've only played two learning games on lower difficulties, default map size and settings, with 4AIs a piece. When I get all 18 civs on the map I expect it will be crowded

Personally I don't like games with lots of Civs. I usually take the default number for a map size, or fewer. I like to have room to expand before encountering opposition.

I had a few bad starts in the older games, but never quite like this. I feel like I have the 'jungle' setting on, or the 'ice age' one, or both at once. From my next game on I think I may join you in dumping maps, unless I desire to play a game with a poor starting position.

I'm told there is an option called "Tilted Axis" in the Custom screen that gives you more varied starts. It's under the "maps" option apparently. I must have missed it. But I haven't tried it yet, so can't verify that it's better.

my city is about half coastal, but not quite on the coast thanks to a mass of jungle and mountains...there goes my hope of having it work the coast - not enough food to support it

Yeah, I made the same mistake in the first campaign I played. Gotta watch that one

It's not my continent I want to map via sea..It's other continents

You often had to wait quite a while in Civ3 too.

civ3, had three different types of ocean. Coast, sea, ocean, something like that.

Yeah, Civ3 had that, but it was still a gamble using your galleys to cross sea tiles, because they had about a 50:50 chance of sinking. You had to hope that another land mass was only a few tiles away.

Perhaps the big change in Civ4 in that regard is that you can no longer enter non-coastal hexes with your galleys at all. So you can't even try to explore and take the risk of losing your ship.

I doubt I will be able to do more than simple text editing type changes, due to being a modding n00b.

I'm sure there will be plenty of modding guides eventually posted at CivFanatics.

Anyone finding definite preferences for leaders yet? I find Qin Shi Huang to be mine thus far. Industrious and commercial; wonders and cash in large quantities. Louis sounds like another I might like; industrious and creative.

I always go for a religious leader with the mystical trait, because then you can found Hinduism (the AI always seems to go for Buddhism) and get the early advantage of temples and extra smileys. And then you can found Organized Religion and get another smiley and a 25% building bonus in your cities. If you start out in a game where you don't have contact with another Civ and don't have your own religion, you will soon see what you're missing IMO.

But apart from that, I think all the Civs have their strengths.

[ah_dut]

I've got Civ III and the expansion and quite liked it...I just got really stressed with a) corruption and b) ridiculous military stuff like axeman defeating rifleman

[econ21]

Just finished my first Civ4 game - space race victory in 1880 on noble difficulty in a huge continental world with 8 civs and epic speed. It played ok on my computer, although towards the end, there were some crashes that rebooted my computer.

Like Screwtype said, I found the world a bit boring - three mega continents, which we all peacefully carved big sections from. Virtually no land seemed "up for grabs" by the time we could travel the oceans. The two fun parts for me were my two wars.

One occurred early when my near neighbours, the Japanese, decided to attack my warrior-only land with axemen (yikes) .

The other happened when four of us squabbled over the one free bit of territory we found in the middle ages (a barbarian town). It was the furthest possible from my land and I saw two massive Roman armies take the barb town and march away. Cheekily, I tried to settle there, prompting the Romans to do an about turn and used their massed armies to squash me my few upgraded veterans of the war with Japan. Soon after I got redcoats and seized the main Roman homelands in a very uneven war of against nothing better than musketmen.

After that, the game got a little dull - no one tried to make any serious moves. I remember finding the last few centures of Civ2 tedious as well - once you get past a tipping point, you are so strong anyway the AI is unlikely to stop you.

I guess the next step is to raise the difficulty level, but I may try a different map first (I liked being able to bag most of the wonders). Maybe large rather than huge to induce more conflict. I might try terra, although my impression from surfing is that one is most prone to crash your computer for some reason.

[Kekvit Irae]

I've got Civ III and the expansion and quite liked it...I just got really stressed with a) corruption and b) ridiculous military stuff like axeman defeating rifleman

Corruption is a constent problem in CivIII. My suggestion is... for large empires, Communism is the key to controlling your corruption. Combine that with Police Stations and such, and you wont have a problem. Democracy is for small empires, which works better than Communism. A shame it isnt like CivII, where Democracy completely eliminates corruption

[screwtype]

A shame it isnt like CivII, where Democracy completely eliminates corruption

Now that's what I call an unrealistic game mechanic!

[screwtype]

"Democracies are Buerocracies which, by nature, handle and faciliate corruption quite well."

Ya reckon???

[doc_bean]

I've got Civ III and the expansion and quite liked it...I just got really stressed with a) corruption and b) ridiculous military stuff like axeman defeating rifleman

CivIV really isn't that much different from CivIII, so I would hesitate to pay full price (as I did) if you already have that. It is however, imho, a better game than CivIII, so i don't regret buying it.
Now about:
a) corruption has been replaced by other factors like health and unhappiness, infaltion, civic upkeep and a cost per city in order to keep you from spawning cities like cray. pretty much all of these can be countered by adopting the right civics, chosing a leader with the right traits or building some wonders. Iy's still a bit of a hassle to manage a large empire though.
b) The combat system has been completely revised as you probably know. It makes victories a lot more predictable. That said, a rifleman still blew up my modern armour in my last game (no city defense bonusses), it seems like those high powered units don't really live up to their stats to me (winning is one thing, how strong your unit is after the battle is quite another).

After that, the game got a little dull - no one tried to make any serious moves. I remember finding the last few centures of Civ2 tedious as well - once you get past a tipping point, you are so strong anyway the AI is unlikely to stop you.

The AI does seem less aggressive than it was in civIII, barbarians seem to your main concern in the early turns, and in the later turns civs will rarely attack unless you're culture-absorbing them.

My complaint is more along the lines of the lack of variety of the maps. I selected "Continents" for this game but got only two mega-huge continents, which is what I got the previous game. It's all but a pangaea map. When I select continents I expect, you know, three or four of them at least. But there's no obvious way to get a map with several large land masses that I can see.

That's how I remember CivII to be too, I even got a Pangaea map once when I had selected continents (there was a small landbridge). Other times there were 2 huge continents and a couple of islands, the civs on those islands didn't stand a chance to begin with, I think that's what they were trying to address in CivIV.

[ShadesWolf]

This is an expensive game.

I used to have a ATI Radeon card and purchase the game on its day of release. I then spent until yesterday trying to get hte game to work.

I followed all the things the website said and it just wouldnt work. So yesterday, I had had enought so I went out and got a new card. Only a cheap one £75.

Came home and installed the card and now the game works perfectly. So I look forward to many happy months of gameplay.

First impressions, I have a lot to learn, I have been away from CIV for a long time.

[ah_dut]

I'll see if I can get it. Impressions seem to be that it's good but not worth full price, thanks

[econ21]

The AI does seem less aggressive than it was in civIII, barbarians seem to your main concern in the early turns, and in the later turns civs will rarely attack unless you're culture-absorbing them.

Just after I was bemoaning the passive AI, I've had a little more experience with the game - moving on to Prince after the "neutral" difficulty setting of Noble. I think the reason I had peace in some of my games is because I was so dominant, war would have been suicide. Raising the difficulty level just a notch can weaken you sufficiently that the sharks may want to feed.

I've had great fun trying to hold off 2 AI civs in the late ancient/medieval period - had to reload a couple of times to cope with the massed horse archers Montezuma sent my way (pillaging all my infrastructure). 3 other AI civs also joined in on occasion, despite not sharing a border. Thankfully, they do agree to peace when you have held them off (unlike TW), although they did manage to destroy my tech lead by diverting resources.

I must say I am impressed with the AI. I always admired Civ2 for having a relatively competitive and aggressive AI, and Civ4 continues this. It seems a much harder game than Civ2 to win - I could beat that on Deity; I think even Monarch will be a challenge for me in Civ4.

[frogbeastegg]

Patch is out, and suspended so autoupdate doesn't find it. Some vague mumblings about a possible issue, or something.


I made the first incarnation of the FrogMod, and it turned out quite well, aside from my not getting build times for structures quite right for the tech descovery rate, meaning I got stuck with nothing to build but units and none of the hammers->whatever techs available for a long time. Tweak that and that should be good. I made units build at 67% of the normal speed, like in a fast game, techs discover at 150% of the speed like in an epic game (and buildings will go to match this), and all the rest is as per the normal speed. Much better, IMO.

I might move catapults so they are available sooner, as in my test game I found there was a very, very long stretch of the game where everyone had large armies but could do hardly anything with them due to a lack of artillery support. I have a few other ideas too, if I can find out how to do them. Er, and get the time to do them.

[frogbeastegg]

The patch is available again.

Official 1.09 Patch for Civilization IV

Changes:
- increased cost of Apollo Program...
- increased SS parts cost...
- Animal Husbandry reveals Horses
- tweaked Rifling, Chemistry, Steel, and Railroad tech costs...
- increased late-game tech costs...
- can now add two specialists in size 1 city with Mercantilism...
- final score is now modified by difficulty level...
- Speed up load times
- Global performance enhancements

Added:

- Include WB map size in the description field
- Save login name
- Added password encryption
- Added regenerate Map Button to World builder Map Mode...
- checkbox for using low resolution textures
- more logging for init failure
- minspec / video memory checking
- Added ability to change to and from fullscreen while in-game
- holding during startup will clean out the cache
- improved bink playback, added ini options

Fixes:

- ATI issue Failed to Init Renderer Fixed
- Multiplayer Lobby list jump problem and lobby crash fixed
- fixed war weariness calculation bug...
- units maintain their name when upgraded
- fixed Gold-for-Gold diplo exploit...
- fixed no research choice overflow exploit...
- Fix for voice initialization crash
- Fix addressing takeover AI and retirement OOS.
- Fixed issue with diplomacy text being always used in its first form in the translator.
- Popups, screens, and diplomacy properly cleared when exiting from main menu.
- Games protected by admin passwords (only) cannot be loaded if the version is different from the one that created the save
- Fixed bug where player could not offer any deal to other human in PBEM/Hotseat
- Sorting by date on domestic advisor now works.
- fixed bug where settlers could not move if the strategy layer was selected
- fixed Ironworks...
- fixed AI units not obeying open borders rules on declaration of war...
- fixed bug that prevent placing of units in world-builder
- fixed bug that prevented gifting of units to a human player
- stack attack infinite loop fixed
- Civic screen update fix (wasn’t showing the right maintenance and anarchy values)
- ctrl-g crash fix, optimized city bar art
- fixed right-click menu crash
- Intro movie crashing problems

[UglyandHasty]

If anyone is interested in a PBEM game, me , Elmo and another ugli are starting a couple....

http://ugli.org/

only serious player though, we play one turn a day.