One thing zappara I'd like for you to consider is reducing the number of Civics that have No State religion. It leans to the No State more than State and is unbalanced in that respect IMHO.

Also Gov Funded HC is too strong in generating red faces if you don't have it. Makes having anything else very difficult. A reduction of a redface or 2 maybe?

Just my 2 cents. This is still by far The Best Mod for BtS IMHO. :D

JosEPh
I'd like to add my vote to these suggestions.

One other thing that is bugging me is Slavery. It's pretty useless as it is now, In fact, the use of slaves was common practice for quite a while, and commonly accepted. The civilopedia text for Slavery is heavily biased with our current moral standard.

I think slavery should be made much more useful up till around - say - AD1000, at the very least till AD100 or so. It should then be more and more difficult to sustain. I don't know exactly how this can be done. Perhaps the slave market (or just slavery) can start adding unhappiness with certain newer civics, or perhaps unhappiness from slavery can be introduced through techs.

Why government civics are showing "no state religion" is because of Theocracy. If one or more civic choices in category has "state religion = 1" boolean settings, then the rest with 0 setting will appear in civilopedia as "no state religion" while nothing for them has really changed - if all in one category has 0 on that setting no civilopedia is shown for this setting. Since it's 0 for almost all civic choices, it could be shown for all those as "no state religion" and it wouldn't change anything.

I don't use Theocracy but Majority Rule instead. But many of the other Civics Groups, not Gov't, have No State religion as part of their *list* of attributes.

So what I see is a narrow choice of Civics (all categories) to Keep a State religion.

If one or more civic choices in category has "state religion = 1" boolean settings, then the rest with 0 setting will appear in civilopedia as "no state religion" while nothing for them has really changed - if all in one category has 0 on that setting no civilopedia is shown for this setting. Since it's 0 for almost all civic choices, it could be shown for all those as "no state religion" and it wouldn't change anything.

So are you saying that even though it Says "No State Religion" under a Civic (outside of Gov't Civic choices) then there is actually a State religion allowed? I think I'm now more confused.

If I get the opportunity I'll list what I'm talking about.

JosEPh

You can notice it in the scoreboard that you will still have the icon of your state religion when running Majority Rule though the pedia lists "no state religion" for it. You can check the Religion Adviser page as well as the effects of the state religion and the buildings and wonders that depend on it. You will find that all such effects are active unless you choose Free Religion in the Religion category.

That I understand.

But when you open up Civics every category seems to have more No State vs State. Maybe it's a preception thing. As I said when I get the chance i'll elaborate better.

Not on my computer at the moment so I can't look at the game to give more detail.

JosEPh

After playing a good number of games with the latest RoM 2.2 I think I can now point out some points that I find annoying.
1 - In about 10 games I was able to build glass smiths only in one game after colonizing the new world on a standard terra map. In my current game I actually conquered Sumeria and gained control of the only stone resource I can see on the map (late in industrial era now). I also conquered a minor civ on a remote island only to get access to a salt resource.
Bottom line the requirement of both stone and salt for glassware makes it quite rare to have it. Both stone and salt are rare resources. Observatories are quite important as they become available in the time you lose the scientific output of monasteries. I know that in RoM we have museums but they don't cover the lose of monasteries especially that most cities usually have more than one monastery. (Also it is unfair for the french as they would rarely build their UB)

2 - Health civic category has two options that both cause unhappiness for civs that don't adopt them. Besides being contradictory it is unrealistic. We don't see people going on strikes all over the world demanding one health policy or another. With the health option that negates unhealthiness from buildings it is really frustrating as one would naturally choose this civic to allow cities to be productive. Cities grow in RoM beyond 20 pops easily by the modern era so health and happiness become more difficult to manage. Solving one problem only to make the other to sever to solve is frustrating.

3 - Not really annoying but I feel it is not making enough sense to have theocracy as gov. civic. Historically despotic, monarchical, oligarchic, and republican states practiced theocracy. Unless you think of theocracy as the direct rule of clerks. In such case it would make sense though it would represent a very rare occurrence in history.

After looking thru the Civic categories I realize that the Gov't series and Religious Series are what have given me the impression/perception that there is not enough Civic choices for State religion. And that it is coupled with those that do allow State religions but have a penalty to research, sometimes a very Large penalty(-25% is huge). Almost all do. And I feel that that is somewhat unfair to religions after monasteries are made obsolete. It does limit my choices for my play style. (I know adapt or die old man. :p )

I used to play Hereditary for sometime before switching to Majority rule. But now I rarely use it as i feel it has too many negatives attached. This could be a perception problem but it does seem to make despotism more viable longer till I get to majority rule.

And I use majority rule for the benefit of being able to pay for a building/unit/wonder. The No State is a drawback but it's liveable moreso that Hereditary.

I never use serfdom to use citizens to pay for a *build*. I do use serfdom though for the worker bonus even if I have majority rule. Till I can build the Hagia Sophia. But if I'm to slow to get it built I'll hang in with serfdom much longer even thru the renaisance era.

Getting sidetracked now. I would seriously like to see No State religion removed from at least one more Gov't Civic, maybe representative or majority rule.

And as a final thought, I agree with Kalimakhus about the Gov Funded Hlth care and the other one. One with the *penalty* is quite enough. Now I will say that it does make the later game more intense when you are fighting a major war and trying to keep the Citizens from geting all "Red in the Face". ;) But seeing that most of my play is Warlord and occassionally Noble level I'd be crushed very soon if i played a higher level.

Again just some observations and suggestions. And I give them because RoM is how I play BtS now. Straight BtS now seems too tame when compared to RoM. :D

JosEPh

Some of you still are not getting what "No state religion" listing in the civic means. It isn't a drawback or a benefit, it is nothing at all, it is benign, an oddity of the game engine that means nothing.

A civic (such theocracy) either grants you the ability to suppress the spread of non-state religions in your cities or it does not. All the other options in the same civic category as theocracy work as normal, is that any religion has the potential to spread to your cities.

Whether or not you have a state religion is not even chosen on the civic screen, you do that on the religion screen.

"No state religion" would be better described as "Any religion may spread to your cities" Where as the other (theocracy, etc) should read "Only the state religion may spread to your cities."

If it remains confusing for people perhaps change the TXT_KEYs for them if that is at all possible.

@Kalimakus

I agree with your general assessment above. Only have a couple comments to add to #1.

I never understood why salt is a requirement to glassware to begin with (or stone for that matter, but some requirement does help put a balance on it) The occurrence frequency might be upped a tiny bit. Also, a salt works building could be added, restricted to coastal cities, which provides a salt resource (sea salt).

After playing a good number of games with the latest RoM 2.2 I think I can now point out some points that I find annoying.
1 - In about 10 games I was able to build glass smiths only in one game after colonizing the new world on a standard terra map.

I'm in total agreement with this, it being one of my two primary gripes about gameplay. Seems to me that stone and marble in the vanilla game are sort of tweener resources; they are great for building a handful of wonders speedily, otherwise a waste of time. In RoM, however, marble is still relatively useless (haven't counted, but it's actually used in what, maybe 10 buildings?), but stone has now become very useful because of the glass-making line, paved roads, etc., while the new salt is worthy of being considered a strategic resource. Far, far too many buildings and bonuses rely on salt now for it to be so rare.

(Also, historically speaking, valuable does not equal rare! Salt, though very important to the development of civilization, is not exactly rare: it is available in every area of every continent on our planet. And this isn't a new discovery... the oldest documented mines on every continent are for guess what... salt! Every major and minor civilization (from those considered most to least advanced) throughout recorded history has had access to salt.)

Ok, gameplay gripe #2: I suppose this might have to to with the dreaded balance and era question, but I find it slightly irritating that I have to hunt (i.e., restart the game ~10 times) to find a good starting location. Not prime, mind you, but just decent enough that I can actually survive on noble or prince through Industrial. You get zerged by barbarians and any aggressive AIs within stone-throwing distance, animals on steroids pick off your scouts and even warriors on walkabout, you get all sorts of weird foreign religions popping up in your pretty new colonies, and then you realize by about 500AD that there is no copper, salt, stone, iron, or horses (or elephants if I play Siam) within 2,500 miles, usually with an ocean or two and the bloody Aztec (they always hate me, no matter who I play) in the way.

Just saying.

Other than that, its brilliant! But seriously, some sort of AI refining needs to occur in conjunction with balancing of resource allocation in some way (especially since there are so many reasons for AIs to not trade you any necessary resources).

it is available in every area of every continent on our planet. And this isn't a new discovery... the oldest documented mines on every continent are for guess what... salt!

.. ok, overstatement for obvious reasons. Give the penguins another 100 years and maybe we can include Antarctica as well.

Some of you still are not getting what "No state religion" listing in the civic means. It isn't a drawback or a benefit, it is nothing at all, it is benign, an oddity of the game engine that means nothing.

A civic (such theocracy) either grants you the ability to suppress the spread of non-state religions in your cities or it does not. All the other options in the same civic category as theocracy work as normal, is that any religion has the potential to spread to your cities.

Whether or not you have a state religion is not even chosen on the civic screen, you do that on the religion screen.

"No state religion" would be better described as "Any religion may spread to your cities" Where as the other (theocracy, etc) should read "Only the state religion may spread to your cities."

If it remains confusing for people perhaps change the TXT_KEYs for them if that is at all possible.

<snip>.

Alright then I quess I better refine and re-examine my perceptions on State vs No State and the Gov't and religious Civics in general then.

Something just *seems* to be a bit off. Or carries a greater *slant* in one direction than others. In previous RoM incarnations Hereditary seemed useful and appropriate for the early eras. Now it just doesn't seem to be useable unless forced to. Even Representation is less useful for me in this iteration of RoM. Again this could all be associated with my own play stlye and I'm crying "wolf" at the Moon again. :p ;)

JosEPh

I agree re: the Salt and Stone issues, although so far since I have been getting to grips with the game at a lower level (Noble only, so far), I have each time been able to, ahem, acquire those that I don't have. I have never once started with any more than two of Copper, Salt, Stone or Marble nearby, and it is very rare that all of those are on the same continent in Tectonic, or Big and Small.

Something just *seems* to be a bit off. Or carries a greater *slant* in one direction than others. In previous RoM incarnations Hereditary seemed useful and appropriate for the early eras. Now it just doesn't seem to be useable unless forced to. Even Representation is less useful for me in this iteration of RoM. Again this could all be associated with my own play stlye and I'm crying "wolf" at the Moon again. :p ;)


Again, I agree on Hereditary Rule. Even when it is the only alternate choice for a huge segment of the game, I have not yet chosen it in my games. It just isn't worth it - I find the appeal of Nobles, well..unappealing, and the +1 Gold support per unit is downright ugly at the stage of the game that my cities don't have much of an income, yet I find I either need to field an army or at least bulk up defenses a bit. Hereditary Rule needs to be at least somewhat more attractive for a civ that owns a few units. Think of how the entire Middle Age period, including the Crusades and Hundred Years War involved monarchies that fielded conquering armies whilst still proving to be somewhat more productive than all-powerful emperors. The Magna Carta and the power of the nobility in England was at least one of the reasons that nation got ahead of places like France for so long. Indeed, perhaps a military-related boost to Hereditary Rule might be justified considering the strong traditions that build up to protect the Royal Family and their connection with the armed forces. This would also tally with the military success of e.g. Richard the Lionheart leading an army at the other end of Europe in actually making progress against a far larger, richer and more civilised society.

Representation though is still awesome with the bonuses to specialists, however I have been using it less in favour of combinations with other civics in specialist situations (currently Theo and either Vassalage or Serfdom, giving unit and building production bonuses to all my cities with the State Rel - and I make sure that's in EVERY city - as well as a nice XP boost for my Grenadiers before I can build Garrisons). I think that's a great strength of many of the newer civics though - new combos mean new synergies and ideal choices for specific situations in the game.

My Civic Changes suggestions:

I'm tending toward suggesting to Move Theocracy back to the Religion Category, but I'm not totally sure yet.

Remove the military unit production and -1 unhappiness bonuses for Barbarism, and make it No Upkeep.

Remove the military unit production and +2 happiness bonuses from Despotism

Remove the +1 support cost for military units from Hereditary Rule.
If possible, add 1 free noble per city for Hereditary rule. (in addition to unlimited nobles)
Add +1 Happiness from Palace.

Remove the +10% production from Majority rule. (it need to be a decent equal choice against Hereditary Rule based on your empire layout) Add a +10% maintenance modifier for number of cities.

Reduce the +15% commerce to +10% in Representation, change +15% war weariness to +20%.

Remove the +5% commerce form Universal suffrage, change +25% war weariness to +50%.

Reduce the +15% production bonus to +10% in Police State. Remove the -2 happiness in X largest cities. (this is no different from a +2 happiness, and the +1 happiness per unit in a city covers it fine)

Remove the +10% science bonus from Corporatism, change the +75% war weariness to +50%.

If possible, give +1 free slave to all cities (in addition to unlimited slaves) for Slavery.

I'll add more suggestions for other civics later on.

My Civic Changes suggestions:

I'm tending toward suggesting to Move Theocracy back to the Religion Category, but I'm not totally sure yet.

I'm fine with Theocracy as a Gov't and Religious Civic.

Remove the military unit production and -1 unhappiness bonuses for Barbarism, and make it No Upkeep.

I agree with the No Upkeep, not to sure about the rest.

Remove the military unit production and +2 happiness bonuses from Despotism

I'm fine with Despotism so I quess I'm not in agreement here.

Remove the +1 support cost for military units from Hereditary Rule.
If possible, add 1 free noble per city for Hereditary rule. (in addition to unlimited nobles)
Add +1 Happiness from Palace.

Sounds good to me.

Remove the +10% production from Majority rule. (it need to be a decent equal choice against Hereditary Rule based on your empire layout) Add a +10% maintenance modifier for number of cities.

All I want changed here is the No State.

Reduce the +15% commerce to +10% in Representation, change +15% war weariness to +20%.

I think this might make rep even more unusable, especially with war weariness.

Remove the +5% commerce form Universal suffrage, change +25% war weariness to +50%.

I don't like ANY war weariness over 15%. There is a period of time during the classical, medival, and reniasance(sp?) were excessive war weariness does not have a counter to help control it.

Reduce the +15% production bonus to +10% in Police State. Remove the -2 happiness in X largest cities. (this is no different from a +2 happiness, and the +1 happiness per unit in a city covers it fine)

I could live with this.

Remove the +10% science bonus from Corporatism, change the +75% war weariness to +50%.

Definitely reduce WW. Like the Science boost, but by the time you can have corp your science is booming anyway, or at least it should be.

If possible, give +1 free slave to all cities (in addition to unlimited slaves) for Slavery.

No opinion on this one as I've never used it.

I'll add more suggestions for other civics later on.

I'd like to see them. :)

JosEPh

IMHO the elephant rider and war elephant NEED to have the "build improvements ( automated) " , "build trade routes (automated)" and " improve nearest city ( automated ) " , cause right now their building abilities require wayyyy too much micromanagement to be useful... I've built some of them knowing they would be useful for war AND building, but now I'm just sitting them around cuz I can't be bothered to manually tell em to build every little piece of road they COULD build... REALLY annoying.

speaking of civics, pacifism should be in the education category instead of religion, imho it makes more sense. and maybe change theocracy back to religious civics as others have suggested. also, I don't see how secularism could be beneficial actually..

Remove the +10% production from Majority rule. (it need to be a decent equal choice against Hereditary Rule based on your empire layout) Add a +10% maintenance modifier for number of cities.

If possible, give +1 free slave to all cities (in addition to unlimited slaves) for Slavery.


- I completely agree with these. How about adding +1 free slave for slave market building, too?

Hereditary rule is definitely too weak. Perhaps there should be some bonuses or more beneficial events for that type of government.

Hi there. Just a suggestion with regards to cottages versus workshops. I never find myself building workshops as they just don't seem to compete. I do think cottages are overpowered compared to other improvements, even mines and farms. It's especially notable in comparison to workshops.

Perhaps you could take a look at the bonuses of cottages versus farms and workshops and play with the numbers a bit to make it a conscious choice? I find farms early on and cottages soon after is the only strategic choice to make.

Cheers.

I agree that cottages are currently well overpowered, although I'll often use workshops on non-river forest tiles in lieu of lumbermills unless food happens to be tight. Need to look at making railroads less useless as well - perhaps have railroads add two commerce to farms as they allow wider distribution of perishables?

I'd also like to see more wonders like Big Ben in Rise and Rule (it required a certain number of townclocks to be built before becoming available).