@3Miro:
The code for founding religions should allow Protestantism for only Catholic or preset Protestant (Dutch) players
But if I understand it correctly, there is a bug here, and your code allows it for everyone else too (highlighted in red):
if (NO_RELIGION != eReligion)
{
if ( eReligion == iSchismReligion ){
if ( (GET_PLAYER(eBestPlayer).getStateReligion() == iParentReligion) || (GET_PLAYER(eBestPlayer).getStateReligion() == iSchismReligion) ){
GET_PLAYER(eBestPlayer).foundReligion(eReligion, (ReligionTypes)iI, false);
};

}else{
GET_PLAYER(eBestPlayer).foundReligion(eReligion, (ReligionTypes)iI, false);
};
}

I don't see the bug?

iSchismReligion is iProtestantism and iParentReligion is iCatholicism. The red code gets executed only if eReligion is not Protestantism, which in our game means Islam (only Islam and Protestantism get founded in our game). The black part of the code reads that Protestantism would be founded by either a Catholic player (.getStateReligion() == iParentReligion) or by a player that already has Protestantism as a state religion which means the Dutch (.getStateReligion() == iSchismReligion).

Oh, I probably misunderstand where that else goes
I thought it's for the third if there, not the second one.
Now I see there is a } there before the else, so it closes the third if...

Alright, so this part of the code is clear
But then I have no idea what could cause those issues for AdrienIer

Oh, I probably misunderstand where that else goes
I thought it's for the third if there, not the second one.
Now I see there is a } there before the else, so it closes the third if...

Alright, so this part of the code is clear
But then I have no idea what could cause those issues for AdrienIer

I think this code was added after Beta 12, I am not sure which code Adrienier is using. IIRK Beta 12 used Python only Reformation (with Protestantism set at Industrial age in the Tech Tree), which is a different story. Adrienier doesn't even remember if it was RFCE or RFCE++.

It was RFCE++ (with Egypt), and with the latest version (alpha 4, based on beta 12 of RFCE). But Morholt didn't touch the code for protestantism IIRC so...

It was RFCE++ (with Egypt), and with the latest version (alpha 4, based on beta 12 of RFCE). But Morholt didn't touch the code for protestantism IIRC so...

I can't think off the top of my head if the code AbsintheRed is talking about was introduced in Beta 12 or later. Can you check the Tech Tree and see if Protestantism is listed under Printing Press or at the very end with Industrial Tech.

I didn't change any of the Reformation mechanics. Protestantism is listed under Printing Press in Beta 12.

I didn't change any of the Reformation mechanics. Protestantism is listed under Printing Press in Beta 12.

Then I can't figure it out without a savegame.

Perhaps there should be a promotion line dealing exclusively with urban combat with a 10/15/25 progression equaling 50% because it would be to both attack and defense and the bonus is half way between city attack/defense III and combat III. Also Towns should act as cities for combat purposes, because in real life they would be quite similar to a small city in game

Also Towns should act as cities for combat purposes, because in real life they would be quite similar to a small city in game

I like the idea. At least, sounds realistic. Though would involve a lot more "paying attention" in war. Or would attract more pillaging...

What do you think about spawning barb stacks outside of Jerusalem of mounted lancers/knights/macemen etc every now and then to represent the continuous pressure on Jerusalem instead of only having the large crusades? Or would that be too much?

I don't think barb stacks would correctly represent the cathloic pressure on Jerusalem

- Paco Da Ribeira is somewhat useless now since you get free civic changes during Golden Ages. I still think we should go back to no free changes of civics.
- On of the best units in the game are the privateers. Very strong, fast, free pillaging of atlantic access without war. How about a new attitude modifier when >3 privateers "You have been issuing letters of Marque!"
- Wasnt Sweden supposed to have one AA at some point in time?
- Year is 1540, mongols just captured Alexandria. In SVN.

Sweden does get AA. (in 1680 near Göteborg)

- Year is 1540, mongols just captured Alexandria. In SVN.

Yeah, I also noticed the very late mongol spawns in the Levant
I probably broke something in the spawn code in that area
Will check it, I already updating these anyway

- On of the best units in the game are the privateers. Very strong, fast, free pillaging of atlantic access without war. How about a new attitude modifier when >3 privateers "You have been issuing letters of Marque!"

Sounds nice, but it's not that easy to add new diplo modifiers like this
Also, I don't really like new diplo modifiers for which we cannot have memorydecays (for the leaders)
Without those, all diplo boosts are permanent

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11103177&postcount=106Oh I see what you mean... Their names are too long and the hire button is hidden because of it. Can be reported in bugs thread...

Yeah, I also noticed the very late mongol spawns in the Levant
I probably broke something in the spawn code in that area
Will check it, I already updating these anyway


I have also seen Byzantium respawned after 1540 :eek: ... But Ottomans finally behave like that should :goodjob:

I have also seen Byzantium respawned after 1540 :eek: ... But Ottomans finally behave like that should :goodjob:

Actually I meant the barbarian spawns, didn't check the Byzantine code lately
Also, I'm not sure if it's a bug.
Is it really a problem if we have a late Byzantine respawn every now and then?

Actually I meant the barbarian spawns, didn't check the Byzantine code lately
Also, I'm not sure if it's a bug.
Is it really a problem if we have a late Byzantine respawn every now and then?

Late as in 13th century is fine, but 1540? Yeah, that sounds really bad. I don't think Byzantium should respawn any later than ~1300.

I think 1300 is rather arbitrary.

Technically, they respawned in the 1200s... after the Latin rule of the city resulting from the 4th Crusade in 1204 was brought to an end.

I think 1300 is rather arbitrary.

Technically, they respawned in the 1200s... after the Latin rule of the city resulting from the 4th Crusade in 1204 was brought to an end.

The most legitimate "respawn" date irl was 1261, when the Empire of Nicaea reconquered Constantinople from the Latins. Andronikos III (1328-1341) was the last Emperor under whom the Byzantines showed any vitality. The plague devastated them far more than it did their enemies the Bulgarians and Turks. For the last half of the 14th century, the Empire held very little except for Constantinople and the Peloponnese. That's whey it's hard to imagine them springing back into action with Thrace and parts of Anatolia after the 13th century.

Just as the pope is sending a message that the re-formation is heresy

Attached is the save game just before the crash.

Is there are thread for map change suggestions? Smaller ones that is, move some resources or change some terrain?

Is there are thread for map change suggestions? Smaller ones that is, move some resources or change some terrain?

Post it in the Beta 13 thread, or even here
We don't really use an individual thread for smaller map suggestions

While I understand it is impossible to have unique great people for each country, could you please carve it into blocs like Muslims countries, France/Burgundy, Italy, Portugal/Spain, Germany/Austria, Kiev/Muscovy etc? I really get annoyed with getting Muslim GP as an Italian country

While I understand it is impossible to have unique great people for each country, could you please carve it into blocs like Muslims countries, France/Burgundy, Italy, Portugal/Spain, Germany/Austria, Kiev/Muscovy etc? I really get annoyed with getting Muslim GP as an Italian country

The thread for civ or region specific GPs: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=412259
It only stopped because there wasn't any real interest
But I'm more than willing to get back to this

The most legitimate "respawn" date irl was 1261, when the Empire of Nicaea reconquered Constantinople from the Latins. Andronikos III (1328-1341) was the last Emperor under whom the Byzantines showed any vitality. The plague devastated them far more than it did their enemies the Bulgarians and Turks. For the last half of the 14th century, the Empire held very little except for Constantinople and the Peloponnese. That's whey it's hard to imagine them springing back into action with Thrace and parts of Anatolia after the 13th century.
Yes, but, it could have happened, as some sort of Greek nationalist type rebellion... the greeks tend to be very hellonocentric, after all.

Didn't really happen, but not 100% impossible to have happened (if the Ottomans had been weaker at the time).

They basically did respawn in the 1800s, after all.

Would it be possible to get a -25% forest attack/defense penalty for all archery troops?

Would it be possible to get a -25% forest attack/defense penalty for all archery troops?

Good idea, I like this.

When the mercenary hire button is unavailable due to long names, is there any way to get around it and hire them anyway?

Would it be possible to get a -25% forest attack/defense penalty for all archery troops?

How about just drop the forest bonus for archers on defense? Because the only units that don't get a bonus in forest (other than archers if there was this new rule) are cavalary, and I would feel weird giving cavalry a bonus on defense in forest.

How about just drop the forest bonus for archers on defense? Because the only units that don't get a bonus in forest (other than archers if there was this new rule) are cavalary, and I would feel weird giving cavalry a bonus on defense in forest.

All cavalry and siege units (except a few UUs) ignore all terrain boni. This will just reduce the bonus that archery units get from forests from 50% to 25%. Giving them an inbuilt "reverse woodsman" effect is much easier than telling forests to only benefit certain troop types.

I would have suggested -50%, thus negating the effect of forests altogether for archers, but that may be too drastic.

I think it's all about the level of abstraction. If we regard Archers as a plain archer battalion, without any other types of units, it can be justified that they have a disadvantaged in forests. However I there are some things to think about:

1. What does a tile need to be seen as a forest or a woodland? Each tile represent an area of more than 100 (probably over 1000, it's not about this number but you get what I mean) square miles, so the archers might search for a place with less dense forest to defend themselves. The archers deal with the inconveniences of the forest by going elsewhere with less trees.
2. Trained archers can shoot quick and precise, only in a very dense forest this becomes a serious disadvantage over heavy melee units. Forests, especially those without paths, are tougher to cross than flatlands, hence the mountain bike routes that are located in forests. Equipment doesn't help those troops either.
3. What should be called an archery unit? 100 Archers? 1000 Archers? 1000 archers and 500 other units? Those other units don't have the disadvantage achers have, should they lose strength?

I think this is why Firaxis decided to give archers defense bonuses in forests. Cavalry and Siege units lose much of their strength, Archery units not so much (I think). I think it is not worth the trouble to create an anti-woodsman bonus. Archery units cannot get a woodsman promotion whereas Melee units can, I think that is enough.

I think this is why Firaxis decided to give archers defense bonuses in forests. Cavalry and Siege units lose much of their strength, Archery units not so much (I think). I think it is not worth the trouble to create an anti-woodsman bonus. Archery units cannot get a woodsman promotion whereas Melee units can, I think that is enough.

I'm with Wessel on this
Archery units don't necessary have disadvatage in forests, at least not against all unit types

futhermore it can be expected that archers would use some ammount of guerilla fighting hiding themselves in treetops/shelters, being a massive pain to rout

I just saw a screen shot of the ordinary Rhyes, for stability and great general appearance there are small symbols of a balance and the great general head. Copy/paste?

I just saw a screen shot of the ordinary Rhyes, for stability and great general appearance there are small symbols of a balance and the great general head. Copy/paste?

I don't know what you mean by it. Can you post a link to the screenshot?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=317527&page=153

Post by Jusos #3054

IIRC, we already have the stability shown that we, along with some other things. I don't know if the GP symbol and the GG symbol are also shown.

Yepp, but not the symbol. That´s what I said ;)

futhermore it can be expected that archers would use some ammount of guerilla fighting hiding themselves in treetops/shelters, being a massive pain to rout

+1.

I think there was a large battle in the 100 year war between French Knights and English Longbowman that took place in a forest and the English won big time.

In the SVN the seljuk spawns consisted of the usual cavalry but also crossbowmen and guisarmiers. Not nearly as difficult as the 13 strenght cavalry. And seljuks are much easier then keshiks (1 first strike and light cavalry).

Teutonic knights and Knight Templars shouldnt be allowed as mercenaries!

In the SVN the seljuk spawns consisted of the usual cavalry but also crossbowmen and guisarmiers. Not nearly as difficult as the 13 strenght cavalry. And seljuks are much easier then keshiks (1 first strike and light cavalry).

Those are supposed to defend the cities once the Cavalry captures them. Otherwise it is too easy to retake the captured cities.


Teutonic knights and Knight Templars shouldnt be allowed as mercenaries!

They are available as Mercs in the Jerusalem area for the time period of the Crusades. They can be hired by Catholics only.

I see, both of them sound reasonable. Except that as a human Byzantium there wont be any captured cities to defend ;)

Edit: Playing as Ottomans. Conquering Anatolia is really slow since I have to defend against numerous spawns of Keshiks. Not a trace of Bulgaria except some keshik cities.

I see, both of them sound reasonable. Except that as a human Byzantium there wont be any captured cities to defend ;)

Yeah, we should keep both the way it is now
I think I will add a few more Seljuk Cavalry against the human player though

I have noticed one thing in my recent game:

- Crusade that captures Jerusalem and nearby cities
- Arabia collapses
- Jerusalem revolts, goes independent
- New crusade, new catholic civ, captures Jerusalem and a few other cities
- Jerusalem revolts etc

This is leading to large armies and several different civs holding cities in the holy land. And they keep them (unless the player drives them out)!

This is not necessarily bad or ahistorical.

In game play terms it means that the holy lands consist of europeans and keshiks. There is no islamic pressure.

maybe letting Independents flip Barbarian cities in most of Levant? ... and then handwaving it as small semiindependent muslim citystates

In game play terms it means that the holy lands consist of europeans and keshiks. There is no islamic pressure.

All Indy cities in the area are Islamic and the Jerusalem revolts are Islamic too (Jerusalem wouldn't revolt against a Muslim player). There is just a general lack of strong Muslim player, but this isn't too ahistoric (Arabia does respawn once, they just collapse back again). Historically the Crusaders were around the area until 1291 and then it isn't long before the Ottomans come and take over the entire region.

wall of text so spoiler ;) :


Since I read some nice gampeplay reviews, I figured I'd give it a try so I decided to summarize a game with Portugal that seems to be turning into a UHV victory. I have to add that it took about 15-20 attempts with 3-4 different starts. The thing is that you have 2 potentially very dangerous neighbors, Cordoba and Spain.


In most cases Spain can knock Cordoba out of the game, but this shouldn't happen too early, nor too late in the game. If it happens too early, you get into more trouble with Spain since pleasing them isn't always easy. If Cordoba survives and holds it's ground you're most likely in for a fight. Usually at sea and land. Cordoba can build ships fast, and that medic promotion is annoying too :)
Their land attack usually are just pillaging runs with berbers and such, but you constanty have to rebuild improvements and protect your workers. The real problem starts when Spain decides that you're next after finishing Cordoba, or that they can handle smashing Portugal and then Cordoba.
But well.. to the game ;)


Decent start with 4 extra workers and the pig and horse already improved. Guessing Cordoba had a city there. At war with Cordoba, contact with Spain. Indie Porto at size 8. Founded Lisboa on the spot and OB with the Pope and Spain after switching to catholicism. Founded Faro asap 1W of the wheat in reach of the fish.(took 7-8 turns in Porto)
It was improtant to gift Spain gold on turn 1 too, so that relations turn to friendly. Afterward several 'small' payments of 50-100 gold every 10+ turns or so. Whenever the diplomatic relations balance went down to +1 I gifted gold. Keeping Spain at the very least pleased, aiming for friendly. They usually get whatever they want from me money, resources(time limited, can cancel after 10 turns), war with someone etc.
Well after some turns of building and being quite passive in a war against Cordoba they collapsed and were swallowed by Spain. To my dismay Spain also captured Tanger/Ceuta. But luck was on my side and I received a great merchant in Porto in time to found the Hanseatic League in Lisboa(1272). I spread it to A Coruna, Porto, Faro, Sevilla, Ceuta and later Casablanca and Rabat. I think Spain spread it a bit further. I'm not sure but I think now in 1620 I'm going through the 4th plague. 1st shortly after founding the Hanse, 2nd while building La Lanterna in Porto (1419), 3rd while building Torre de Belem (1506) and now again, but Spain isn't a problem anymore. They collapsed sometime around the 15th century after DOW France and losing Barcelona, Valencia, Pamplona and maybe more. On the other hand Spain had settled all the islands in the SW atlantic (Canaries?) by 1500. My 4th and 5th cities were Casablanca and Rabat both founded 1494. The 3 other req. island cities are waiting to be built in 1620 but I'm waiting due to the plague.

Summary:
Most of the the game is peaceful building and exploring while attending to the military and diplomacy so that nobody attacks. Just build buildings/army get hit by the plague, grow back to size building armies, get hit by the plague and so forth. From around 1300-1500 I was busy doing that. You usually come out of each plague stronger that the previous plague so at some point expansion is possible. Then NA comes into play. It may be possible to settle NA earlier but Spain definately likes Ceuta and might DOW if you are concidered weak enough or just for kicks, I'm not quite sure about that. The AI has become quite aggressive imo in Beta 13. Portugal, Genua and Austria all have been giving me a hard time.

One comment on the UHV's they are all quite close together do that achieving 2 of 3 and getting the Golden Age doesn't really help/matter. In my game I could get the GA now in 1620 during the plague or wait for it to end and then click away the last turns with a GA until 1640 pops hoping that nobody attacks.
Another comment on the UU, the Knights of Avis or somewhat well.. I don't usually build them.
In regular RFC Portugals UU was the carrack as opposed to the caravel capable of transporting troops(even if only 2 per ship). Very nice for the required expansion.
I know that you are somewhat opposed to another naval UU but something like that, allowing Portugal to bypass Tanger/Ceuta to colonize the islands a bit earlier would be really nice imo. Basicly a carrack UU for Portugal that can carry 1-2 units(can travel ocean) available with Shipbuilding. Or carracks could genarally be able to carry troops, galleons would still be useful for larger armies.

Score:
1st most likely Ottomans, but no contact
1st France 1975
2nd Germany 1838
3rd Portugal 1641
4th Muscovy 1427
5th England 1377

General Observations in 1620:
I could have founded Protestantism around 1494 it got founded in 1580 in Germany.
Medici Banks founded in Lithuania.
France has the entire 'Holy Land' Damascus, Tyre, Jerusalem, Alexandria etc.and half of Iberia
Germany stretches from the Rhein to 'Tilsit' somewhere around the Memel. Poland vassalized to them with 2 cities left. Austria is gone with Wien occupied by Hungary the rest owned by Germany.
Knights Hospitaller founded by Kiev owned by Muscovy. Templar by Norse, Teutonic by France.
Genoa and Venice both collapsed, Venice usually collapses and Genoa pretends to be an empire.
Ottomans are huge as usual, luckily I'm far away from them.


Colonies(chronological order):
Gold Coast, Cuba, Panama, Hispanola, Aztec/Inca Conq, East Africa built either in Lisboa, Porto or Faro

Wonders/Corporations:
Hanseatic League(Lisboa 1272), La Lanterna(Porto 1419), Torre de Belem(Lisboa 1506), Magellans Voyage(Porto 1510), The Alhambra(Porto 1530), Gardens of Al Andalus(Lisboa 1538), Paco da Ribeira(Lisboa 1560)

Wonders under construction(1620):
Palazzo San Giorgio, Palacio del Escorial, Chateau de Fontainebleau in Lisboa (should all finish)
Sistine Chapel in Faro
Leonardos Inventions in Porto


Guidelines (can vary):

Buildings:
After preferrably 1 turn to push the cultural borders Lisboa and Porto build work boats to work the crab. Then the priority is Smokehouse, Manor House, Market, Feitoria, Church/Brewery etc.
The nice thing about producing culture for the 1st expansion is that it only takes 1 turn if you produce >6 culture (not sure about the exaxt number, also depends on the civ, but you can end up with 9.75 culture after 1 turn) the second part is that the following building/unit starts with some/all of the production from running culture. I don't know if it's a feature or bug, but prefer to think of it as feature :)

Techs:
First Tech I go for is 'Plate Armor' that way you can chop down those woods and further improve you cities (and speed up production in the process). After that main goal is Clockmaking, Bureaucracy, Monument Building. Clockmaking should be done around 1250-1270 so that founding the Hanseatic League is possible. Having switched to Bureaucracy & Org. Religion earlier helps towards this goal. After that Apprenticeship & Guilds then Limited Monarchy & Imperialism. Gunpowder has a high priority.
But you have to pretty much research/trade everything except Patronage, Divine Right, Replacable Parts which can be delayed quite a while. Trading techs is essential, its always nice to give the Pope someting old like Blast Furnace and get Bureaucracy in return. Getting to know other civs is important anyway not just for tech trading, also resource trading.

Resources:
You have 3 resources soon available that can be traded. Wine, pig & crab. I usually try to get in contact with England quickly so that I can get them to trade barley for wine(hoping they hold on to Scotland). They can also provide fish and sheep. The Pig is usually traded against cow from France, Hungary or Germany. The crab is usully traded depending on what is available. Later in the game I try to trade with weaker/far away civs so that I don't support expansionist powerhouses like France/Spain/Germany too much.
The workers prioritize on improving resources and then farms and mines chopping down everything in their path except for the forests down by Faro/Lisboa with the honey.
I like to keep that area as a 'defensive line' against whoever has Sevilla. If the forest on the east bank of the river hasn't been chopped down I build a lumbermill there and a watermill on the west bank to increase production for Faro. Most mines are later replaced by windmills when Apprenticeship/Guilds and/or Replacable Parts come into play.
The horse, iron in Morocco can also be traded against usually more than 1 resource.
Getting the gold and sheep from Tanger/Ceuta is nice but not necessary.


Military:
It is essential to have a strong defensive force due to the aggressive nature of Portugals neigbors.
I start to feel 'safe' with about 6+ units stationed in a city, more in the capitol. Having a few cavalry units standing by is also useful. A few ships should also stick around to defend against barb pirates and anyone else wanting to pillage your fishing boats.

Daffy, I like your comment, but i don't understand your point about the UU. If you can cross Ocean tiles with Shipbuilding (i.e. before anyone else), then settling the Islands is trivial. Also, once you have Astronomy and can cross Ocean tiles, then you don't need to go anywhere near Tanger.

The Knights of Avis are very defensive Unit, designed to help the Portuguese against their powerful neighbors. They are also good for attack, if Cordoba is still alive when you spawn, you can use your initial stack to conquer and collapse Cordoba.

I find it annoying that AI Spain always goes after friendly Portugal, I'm guessing that Spain collapsed in this game before ever getting to Italy or the Low Countries. :rolleyes:

Daffy, I like your comment, but i don't understand your point about the UU. If you can cross Ocean tiles with Shipbuilding (i.e. before anyone else), then settling the Islands is trivial. Also, once you have Astronomy and can cross Ocean tiles, then you don't need to go anywhere near Tanger.

The Knights of Avis are very defensive Unit, designed to help the Portuguese against their powerful neighbors. They are also good for attack, if Cordoba is still alive when you spawn, you can use your initial stack to conquer and collapse Cordoba.

I'm not really sure what I was getting at, it's not really about by what means you get to settle those islands. It's more that settling those islands isn't a challenge or can be dragged out until the end of the game(I think Azores and Madeira aren't any any civs settle maps?). I'd like to settle them much earlier but they have so little to offer in general. I usually already have most of the resources and don't really care about the few more.

So basically I win UHV 3 (Colonies) first then either I settle the islands shortly before 1640 and get the GA and win the game in 1640 or I wait for 1640 get the GA and settle at any convenient time before 1800 on the islands to win the UHV. Even if all the islands were settled by say Spain you can at any time build a fleet and an invasion force to either conquer and win or conquer/raze then settle and win(sneak attack).

And Spain invades the Canaries, did so at least twice. Once when I settled Puerto de la Cruz where it gets 2 whale, banana etc.. Second time spain had already settled that island so I settled on Spain's Palma de Gran Canaria location where you get sugar, whale, fish. Spain DOW and invaded both times and were generally quite eager to settle everything down there.

I'm not really sure about this one but there's also one thing that's been bugging me a bit. There are quite allot of 'negative features' in the game. The plague, barb invasions, barb pirates, revolting provinces(Scotland, Jerusalem, Aragon), respawning civs. Imo the game could use a few more 'positive aspekts' like these free churches/monastaries/gold from the pope or so. I think I also read something against it but ideal would be something like the mini quests and/or random events in RFC. Succession crisis.. 'choose free GP'. Build xy amount of Harbors to gain bonus or something like that.

I'm not really sure what I was getting at, it's not really about by what means you get to settle those islands. It's more that settling those islands isn't a challenge or can be dragged out until the end of the game(I think Azores and Madeira aren't any any civs settle maps?). I'd like to settle them much earlier but they have so little to offer in general. I usually already have most of the resources and don't really care about the few more.

So basically I win UHV 3 (Colonies) first then either I settle the islands shortly before 1640 and get the GA and win the game in 1640 or I wait for 1640 get the GA and settle at any convenient time before 1800 on the islands to win the UHV. Even if all the islands were settled by say Spain you can at any time build a fleet and an invasion force to either conquer and win or conquer/raze then settle and win(sneak attack).

And Spain invades the Canaries, did so at least twice. Once when I settled Puerto de la Cruz where it gets 2 whale, banana etc.. Second time spain had already settled that island so I settled on Spain's Palma de Gran Canaria location where you get sugar, whale, fish. Spain DOW and invaded both times and were generally quite eager to settle everything down there.

We are redoing the Azores right now so we will keep this in mind. The Canaries are in Spain's Settler's map, but I am not sure about the Azores. We may also add them to the French and English, just to create competition.


I'm not really sure about this one but there's also one thing that's been bugging me a bit. There are quite allot of 'negative features' in the game. The plague, barb invasions, barb pirates, revolting provinces(Scotland, Jerusalem, Aragon), respawning civs. Imo the game could use a few more 'positive aspekts' like these free churches/monastaries/gold from the pope or so. I think I also read something against it but ideal would be something like the mini quests and/or random events in RFC. Succession crisis.. 'choose free GP'. Build xy amount of Harbors to gain bonus or something like that.

There are many bad things in the mod because it is about the Middle Ages. If I have to pick a time period where I want to live, the Middle Ages would be last on my list.

Unfortunately at this point Random Events will not be added to the mod. Maybe others would want to add them for RFCE 2.0, but right now we will not have them.

Unfortunately at this point Random Events will not be added to the mod. Maybe others would want to add them for RFCE 2.0, but right now we will not have them.

I was toying around with the idea of events too, but it won't happen for 1.0
As 3Miro said, maybe for 2.0

Maybe some way to convert unstable provinces to okay would be cool, for example if I hold an area for 400 years shouldn't it stop being so unstable?

Maybe some way to convert unstable provinces to okay would be cool, for example if I hold an area for 400 years shouldn't it stop being so unstable?

If you hold the cities for so long, then you will have the opportunity to build lots of Stability boosting buildings. In effect, this offsets most of the negative stability for getting the city in the first place, hence the province becomes less unstable.

Is there anyway to group independents in the same area to belong to each other? If arabia collapses all the independents in the area would be the same. Otherwise its too easy to pick them out one by one.

There could be one anatolia/arabia region, one N.A/Iberia region etc. Or is it intentional that they split up?

Is there anyway to group independents in the same area to belong to each other? If arabia collapses all the independents in the area would be the same. Otherwise its too easy to pick them out one by one.

There could be one anatolia/arabia region, one N.A/Iberia region etc. Or is it intentional that they split up?

This would somewhat defeat the purpose of the Indies. They are not supposed to be in large groups, but separate cities. Also, Arabs did often fight each other.

Indies tend to unite under external threats

Just played a late game, loaded the Dutch. Biggest things that bothered me were the two colossal grey empires. France, Burgundy, Germany, and Genoa had all collapsed. In the East, the Ottomans had beaten the Byzantines, Bulgarians, and Hungarians and then collapsed. The first UHV for the Dutch was a challenge because I had to sail all over looking for civs that weren't collapsed and throw gifts at civs that didn't like me. I think that the destabilizing effect of losing a city as well as the instability from collapsing neighbors should be reduced.

Maybe some way to convert unstable provinces to okay would be cool, for example if I hold an area for 400 years shouldn't it stop being so unstable?

I don't think we should mess up with dynamically changing provinces connected to cities, would be a nightmare to code
But I had a similar idea a while ago: if you hold a city in an unstable province for ~100 turns, you get +1 stability points
This would effectively change your unstable province into OK after those ~100 turns, which seems realistic
Since the AI usually don't have many unstable cities won't really change stability or gameplay for AI civs at all
For the human player it also wouldn't change much (if you have to hold to city for long enough), but adds another interesting concept to your strategy

But isn't there a civic that gives you stability for owning cities in less than stable area ? Wouldn't it be too much to have +1 stability in unstable provinces after some turns and the stablility from the civic ?

But isn't there a civic that gives you stability for owning cities in less than stable area ? Wouldn't it be too much to have +1 stability in unstable provinces after some turns and the stablility from the civic ?
The +1 would represent a decrease in nationalism and cultural assimilation whereas Imperialism is about a better administration

That wouldn't work. Stability is super easy for the human player and the AI usually doesn't control a far away province anyway for such a long time. If 1 of the stability buildings loses it's bonus, then I think we might discuss it but I think that will give the same result as it does now. Right now the borders of my empire is bounded by military strength, not by stability.

I'm not sure how to say it but anyway..
I don't know how stable the civs in genaral should be but.. I started a game with Genoa and not once (after the first 10 turns) has my stability been at 10 or higher, usually around -2/+3 constantly fighting to keep it at least 0 or a positive number.
Although I built stability buildings with a very high priority, I rarely build that many Castles (every city received all stability buildings ultimately) and that without really bothering about stability, I build courthouses because of the corps and most other stuff for all kinds of reasons. I'm not even sure if I bothered with the 'Night Watch' with Portugal and certainly not all cities received castles.
The game I played with Portugal was much much more stable. Usually at around +10, at the last save point +18 and I am actively waging war against France (winning back those territories of my vassal Spain after they respawned xD)

or maybe I shouldn't have founded 5 corps.. you do get a stability hit -2 each time you found one, but that was something I just had to do ;)

I'll just post the numbers from the civics screen.
Both civs running the same civics (Lim. Monarchy, Bureaucracy, Appr./Guilds Org. Religion, Imperialism) pretty much established the civs in the same order too.

1. switch manorialism/feudal monarchy(genoa), manorialism/militarism (portugal)
2. switch bureau. / org. rel
3. switch appr./guilds
4. switch lim. mon/imperialism

Portugal: 11 Cities, +18 very stable in 1772, Hanseatic League and Bank of St. George (built all colonies)
cities: 7/6
civics: -1/-1
economy: -5/7
expansion: 13/-8

Genoa: 10 Cities, +4 stable in 1566, 5 Corps (Hanse, Hospitaller, Medici, St. George, Augsburg Fam.)
cities: 8/-2
civics: -10/1
economy: -3/5
expansion: 11/-4

the stability figures are similar for both civs, except for the civics part as I just noticed.

Any ideas what I did wrong with Genoa? Besides taking Napoli which seems to have had the hardest impact on stability which I never got a grip on after that. Or still running Bureaucracy? Or razing those 2 annoying indie cites in greece?.. but they had to go. DOW on indies every time I passed through the area and the indie cities in sicily and north africa retaliated on my seafood resources and ships. That just had to stop.

So.. to get to the point, I really like the idea of a small stability boost for a city if you hold it long enough, but that might be way too much for other civs..
I just noticed one of these 'tip of the days' during game load..
Merchant Republic is great for peaceful small empires (something like that)
France in my latest Genoa game.. solid/very solid with 15 cities in France/northern Spain
running...
Merchant Republic, Bureaucracy, Apprenticeship, Manorialism, Imperialism
well with those civics and that 'Empire' I certainly wouldn't expect solid/very solid
with the proposed stability boost they would be 'rock solid'?

From that I guess my concerns about Bureaucracy possibly ruining my stability as Genoa were unwarranted.
And btw the game with Genoa was a UHV victory in 1640 so that's working fine ;)
But getting open borders with 10 civs in 1640 wasn't easy since there were only maybe 12-13 civs around, luckily Bulgaria respawned early 1600's. And I finally did get Mercs with Genoa but only 2 'Condotorri' in the entire game, even founded Zurich (named Cumae) to have a settlement in Swabia for Swiss Pikemen, but didn't get any. Especially since it's the UP of Genoa (cheaper mercs). But all in all the new merc thing seems nice. But I'm not so sure about the part of only being able to hire certain mercs when you have a city in the province.

The current SVN version has a very detailed Stability Guide in the reference folder. It should answer all stability related questions.

Is it possible to code it to ignore the faith-points granted for Pope gifted buildings?

Seems to me that is the primary reason for FRA getting the first (and most important) Crusade as it is possible to build just a couple of religious huts due to him having an extended "alone time" with the Pope.
FRA is pretty damn strong and when he gets that free GA just when techs are getting expensive, it translates into a massive boost making him virtually untouchable by the other AI (Burgundy, England in particular).

Is it possible to code it to ignore the faith-points granted for Pope gifted buildings?

Seems to me that is the primary reason for FRA getting the first (and most important) Crusade as it is possible to build just a couple of religious huts due to him having an extended "alone time" with the Pope.
FRA is pretty damn strong and when he gets that free GA just when techs are getting expensive, it translates into a massive boost making him virtually untouchable by the other AI (Burgundy, England in particular).

How much of a problem is this, the French should control most of the crusades as they did in real history, however, I have seen plenty of Crusades by other leaders. The AI isn't good with Faith Point anyway and the Pope doesn't build free buildings until 800AD, which means that the French get only 10 turns of "alone" time before the Burgundians come (which translates to basically one building).

10 turns, is that it? Hmmm, they must be spamming buildings more than I thought then .. I need to try to play a FRA game where I ignore the UHV like the AI as I rarely have time to Temple spam :).

It is a problem in the long game as that "early" (1st Jerusalem sack) GA acts as an insane booster as it happens at what is simply a perfect time. Whomever gets the 1st is generally first to Guilds, Chivalry, Education and all that follows, thus providing a staggering surge in power back home ..
GER sometimes manages to snag the 1st but it seems to be fairly rare, entirely dependent on how badly FRA is hit by the norse barbs I reckon. That GA is currently basically 'given' to FRA and it upsets the power balance in Europe quite severely:
Burgundy seems to be consistently wiped out when FRA gets the 1st,
ENG seems to be consistently invaded (yes, INVADED!) when FRA gets the 1st, and
GER rarely founds Protestantism when FRA gets the 1st.

Was some talk a while ago about making the loss of Jerusalem have a negative effect back home which makes sense historically and could help with the power-surge gained from it (even later Crusades due to resources) .. perhaps that is an option?

Could just be that I am being paranoid though.

I suggest making theocracy unstable with feudal law since the independent lords undermine the ruling clergy. But more in game play terms, restrict the player from using that combo of unit production bonuses.

Some feedback for the Kievan Rus:

First, Kharkov was founded in 1654 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv). By Moscowites. So, it probably should be replaced by another City, maybe Chernigov or Pereyaslavl.

Second, i think the goal "Rulers of the Northern Black Sea" is odd, considering that the Rus never ruled the Nothern Black Sea:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Kievan_Rus_en.jpg
Calling it "prince of the Rus" and change the Provinces to more Northeastern ones would historically more fitting, imho. Of course, that can make the Food-Goal pretty difficult.

(It seems like someone in the early stages of the mod thought of the Kievan Rus as an early Ukraine, which isn't true - the Rus was as much a predecessor to modern Russia and White Russia as to modern Ukraine.)

Yeah, you are probably right
I'm not against changing that UHV to something more exciting

Some feedback for the Kievan Rus:

First, Kharkov was founded in 1654 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv). By Moscowites. So, it probably should be replaced by another City, maybe Chernigov or Pereyaslavl.

Second, i think the goal "Rulers of the Northern Black Sea" is odd, considering that the Rus never ruled the Nothern Black Sea:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Kievan_Rus_en.jpg
Calling it "prince of the Rus" and change the Provinces to more Northeastern ones would historically more fitting, imho. Of course, that can make the Food-Goal pretty difficult.

(It seems like someone in the early stages of the mod thought of the Kievan Rus as an early Ukraine, which isn't true - the Rus was as much a predecessor to modern Russia and White Russia as to modern Ukraine.)

I thought Kiev did eventually establish control over Crimea and the north coast of the Black sea, but I can't get a map from right before the Mongol invasion.

Can you give us a list of the provinces that you think would be accurate, you can hold Ctrl and hover over the map to see all the provinces.

I thought Kiev did eventually establish control over Crimea and the north coast of the Black sea, but I can't get a map from right before the Mongol invasion.


I am sorry for the size of the map, but I find it quite accurate and informative:

http://www.ostu.ru/personal/nikolaev/russia_eng/east_eur1250en.gif


Can you give us a list of the provinces that you think would be accurate, you can hold Ctrl and hover over the map to see all the provinces.

Historical Kievan Rus' Provinces (Principalities) before the Mongol invasion are: Kiev, Podolia, Pereyaslavl (+Sloboda, but it is better to merge this province with Pereyaslavl), Chernigov, Volhinya, Minsk, Polotsk, Smolensk, Moscow, Murom, Rostov, Novgorod, Vologda and (Karelia -- may be not).

Nizhni Novgorod really needs to be renamed into Povolzhye or Volga Region, or Volga Bulgaria. Would be nice to see Islam in Bulgar.


If you rather go with the earlier Yaroslav Rus' (before the partitions) we better go with this map:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Kievan_Rus%27_historical_map_980_1054.jpg

So no Vologda. One can say -- but look, there is also a Moldavia!, however map is a little inaccurate there -- Steppe and lower Dnestr, Dnepr and Don was never controlled or populated by Kievans (almost no cities there). Barbarian nomads should come from south.

As for the cities I really recommend starting at Kiev but flipping Smolensk (one of the oldest cities in the region) and Novgorod. Smolensk was mentioned in the story of founding Kievan Rus' -- Novgorod was the pre-Kievan Rus' from where Oleg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_of_Novgorod) launched an expedition to conquer Kiev, making it his capital and taking over the Smolensk along the way. Settling 12-13 provinces is a grand task (one needs to fight barbarians all the time) -- so extra Novgorod will help. Keep it unstable to encourage historical separation of Novgorod into the separate (Indy) Merchant Republic later in the game.

This will also solve a problem of Moscow existing with Kievan Rus in many games. When Moscow spawns and flips many Kievan provinces they will collapse much more often.

And finally Byzantium could use Khersones in Crimea -- after all that city helped Russians to become Orthodox (Vladimir was considering Islam as well but did not like no wine drinking part ;) ) Unfortunately, it can make Genoan UHV harder....

Thanks Tigranes, that pretty much says it all :)

Moscow could be left, because it wasn't a principality before the Mongols.

Also, Volhinya maybe should get expanded - mostly for gameplay reasons. That place is mostly swamp, and as Kiev you likely had to found a city in there.

The game is too easy.
AIs can not manage their workers well and can not train enough military units.

Thanks Tigranes, that pretty much says it all :)

Moscow could be left, because it wasn't a principality before the Mongols.



Actually, before the Mongol invasion Moscow represents Vladimir-Suzdal. How do you imagine pre-Mongol Rus' without Vladimir? :)

Anyway, I think that settling 13 provinces on time can prove to be impossible, unless we add some preplaced cities -- like Beloozero(862), which was one of five original Russian towns (the other being Ladoga, Novgorod, Polotsk, and Rostov).

Actually, before the Mongol invasion Moscow represents Vladimir-Suzdal. How do you imagine pre-Mongol Rus' without Vladimir? :)

Anyway, I think that settling 13 provinces on time can prove to be impossible, unless we add some preplaced cities -- like Beloozero(862), which was one of five original Russian towns (the other being Ladoga, Novgorod, Polotsk, and Rostov).

13 provinces is too much, we should make the number something more manageable, but those are good reference point.

I am against including Novgorod in the Kiev's spawn. The real history of Europe is hard to capture in the limited game dynamics that we have and some compromises should be made. I want to leave Novgorod as independent and available for the Norse and Kiev to conquer.

Can somebody make sticky threads of:

Feedback thread
Bug thread
UHV thread

Other modmod forums have it. That should help new players find the correct threads.

Edit: RFCE++ also deserves a sticky!

First, Kharkov was founded in 1654 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv). By Moscowites. So, it probably should be replaced by another City, maybe Chernigov or Pereyaslavl.


I already removed Kharkov, and would like to add another city in the close area which can flip to them
On the other hand, both Pereyaslavl and Chernigov are too close IMO
Any other ideas?

EDIT: Added Kursk for now

I already removed Kharkov, and would like to add another city in the close area which can flip to them
On the other hand, both Pereyaslavl and Chernigov are too close IMO
Any other ideas?

EDIT: Added Kursk for now

Kursk is ok even though Kievans need 2 cities from flip. I just mentioned below that oldest Russian towns were Beloozero, Ladoga, Novgorod, Polotsk, and Rostov. Personally I really favor Smolensk though -- it plays very important and symbolic role for Eastern Slavs and became known around the time when Kievan Rus was established. It is halfway between Novgorod and Kiev and consistent with the idea that Kievans should establish themselves towards the North, not South.

I suggest Smolensk and Rostov.

Can somebody make sticky threads of:

Feedback thread
Bug thread
UHV thread

Other modmod forums have it. That should help new players find the correct threads.

Edit: RFCE++ also deserves a sticky!

None of the devs of the mod have the authority to moderate the threads, thus while we do have separate threads, there is no way to enforce any rules should people decide to diverge on a tangent discussion. Furthermore, some concepts are hard to classify, like a bug with the UHV or feedback on how easy/hard an UHV is. It would have been nice to have things sorted, but they are not. I have started working on an official guide for the 1.0 release, while ugly, it is completely current and contains most of the useful information.

There is no point in making an RFCE++ sticky, in about a month, RFCE++ will merge with RFCE, then there will be only one mod (or two versions of the same mod, RFCE 1.0 and RFCE development going into 2.0)

Kursk is ok even though Kievans need 2 cities from flip. I just mentioned below that oldest Russian towns were Beloozero, Ladoga, Novgorod, Polotsk, and Rostov. Personally I really favor Smolensk though -- it plays very important and symbolic role for Eastern Slavs and became known around the time when Kievan Rus was established. It is halfway between Novgorod and Kiev and consistent with the idea that Kievans should establish themselves towards the North, not South.

I suggest Smolensk and Rostov.

Smolensk and Rostov are way too north for the Kievan flip zone
I think I won't even flip Kursk to them, just leave it as a close and easily conquerable city
Anyway, they now have Minsk, Smolensk and Polotsk on the settler and war maps, so the core area looks pretty nice between these cities and Kiev and Kursk
On the new UHV I agree with 3Miro: Novgorod, Rostov and the other N or NE territories shouldn't even be included

I get the feeling that science in the game around 1400 converges among all the civs. Teching is about 10 turns no matter how small you are and the civs are all researching basically the same things. Shouldnt there be more diversity? Dont know what is causing this, it must be the beelining penalty?

Maybe a system where the total number of techs determine your science speed? That means it would be possible to beeline something but then teching would slow down as the number of techs you have increase.

None of the devs of the mod have the authority to moderate the threads, thus while we do have separate threads, there is no way to enforce any rules should people decide to diverge on a tangent discussion. Furthermore, some concepts are hard to classify, like a bug with the UHV or feedback on how easy/hard an UHV is. It would have been nice to have things sorted, but they are not. I have started working on an official guide for the 1.0 release, while ugly, it is completely current and contains most of the useful information.

There is no point in making an RFCE++ sticky, in about a month, RFCE++ will merge with RFCE, then there will be only one mod (or two versions of the same mod, RFCE 1.0 and RFCE development going into 2.0)

The point isnt to force anybody. But as new to the mod you might appreciate some guidance, your question might already have been answered in the correct thread if you see it. You are still free to post in any thread you like. I could ask a mod unless we should just leave it as it is?

The point isnt to force anybody. But as new to the mod you might appreciate some guidance, your question might already have been answered in the correct thread if you see it. You are still free to post in any thread you like. I could ask a mod unless we should just leave it as it is?

I think the main reason 3Miro doesn't want this is because the main thread we preferred to use is changing with each version (Beta 13, Beta 12, etc)
I don't mind at all if a few more threads are stickied, but don't really see the point either
Maybe the playtesting feedback thread, and the small bugs/fixes thread. Or we should have a new one for 1.0?

i believe its healthly to get new threads every now and again, so people knows that the old threads are old and out of date, and not being intimidated by the size of them, cause what would happen if you posted a suggestion made before in same thread

In my recent game I built a lot of religious buildings before I converted to the religion in question. But faith points are only counted when you build stuff, not owning them. Just like stability buildings.

But when it comes to faith points, shouldnt owning rather than building them count? Since I cant raze my own buildings I can never get faith for already built structures.

I think the main reason 3Miro doesn't want this is because the main thread we preferred to use is changing with each version (Beta 13, Beta 12, etc)
I don't mind at all if a few more threads are stickied, but don't really see the point either
Maybe the playtesting feedback thread, and the small bugs/fixes thread. Or we should have a new one for 1.0?

And thats why I didnt mention the "beta X" thread in my suggestion above. But we can drop it, no problem. But it seems common in many other forums for mods.

And thats why I didnt mention the "beta X" thread in my suggestion above. But we can drop it, no problem. But it seems common in many other forums for mods.

As I said, I don't mind it either way
There is probably no real need for them in this subforum, but if you guys want a few of them stickied I'm also fine with that

In my recent game I built a lot of religious buildings before I converted to the religion in question. But faith points are only counted when you build stuff, not owning them. Just like stability buildings.

But when it comes to faith points, shouldnt owning rather than building them count? Since I cant raze my own buildings I can never get faith for already built structures.

Owning is much harder to count. Besides if you conquer someone else's Church, it is not the same as you spending the resources to build one of your own. The next version contains more information in the reference folder, I did some work on a new Manual (the old one is out of date), but the new one is accurate. Also, the new manual is very ugly.

I dont think its the construction of the church that counts but rather how big the religious power is in the society, and then its the number of buildings that count.

Some other observations (bugs?):

-AI pays a lot for strategic resources they dont need. Like copper when have iron. Or timber hundreds and hundreds of years before being used. Why not to spawn of timber until appropriate tech? Same thing with sulphur even if they dont have the tech to make use of it.
- Some techs are are almost always cheaper than the tech that preceded it: Vaulted arches and Alchemy

Is it even possible to conquer a city with a church, don't they count as culture buildings and are thus always destroyed?

Yay for ugly but up-to-date manual \o/

Is it even possible to conquer a city with a church, don't they count as culture buildings and are thus always destroyed?


Indeed
A few Betas ago I set that all religious and stability buildings are removed on city conquest
They can only stay if the city flips to you

I think that Amsterdam would maybe look better one tile North after the terrain changes to the area. It might be more accurate because of the new tile added to the left and it would mean more room for Dutch cities. Does anybody agree?

I think that Amsterdam would maybe look better one tile North after the terrain changes to the area. It might be more accurate because of the new tile added to the left and it would mean more room for Dutch cities. Does anybody agree?

I disagree. The tile 1 north is less historical, and the spot is worse.

I have question regarding "Star Fort" feature damaging ALL nearby enemy units EACH turn.

After few games with massive wars Ottomans vs. Russians, I have a feeling that this feature is overpowered. One inexpensive building, also without garrison units, inflicts each turn damage to dozens of enemy units, even if they are only by-passing city.

In CIV4 we do not have zones of control around cities/units which stops enemy units movement, so I think that the shouldn't be features that automatically damages nearby units - I this map scale, units on adjacent field should be out of fort / castle weapons range.

My suggestion is that Star Fort feature should be changed to:
1) auto-damage for all units ATTACKING city with fort
or
2) giving X (i.e. 2) first strikes for unit defending city with fort

What do You think?

Is it possible to double culture bonus of pagan shrines and then only make them available if no religion is present in city, ie. obsoletes as organized religion makes inroads in addition to the tech based hard-obsolete? Would help the early Norse something fierce ..
Spain gets whacked on spawn by Cordoba quite a lot, probably due to the AI leaving capital undefended the first turn giving Cordoban horse ability to raze it .. might want to look at tweaking Iberian roads to make it less common.

Has the guaranteed barb wins been increased? Used to be 3 I think but I just had a Skirmisher survive archer + horse archer attack after having killed the 4 bows in Ireland, just just be extreme luck of course :)

I have question regarding "Star Fort" feature damaging ALL nearby enemy units EACH turn.

After few games with massive wars Ottomans vs. Russians, I have a feeling that this feature is overpowered. One inexpensive building, also without garrison units, inflicts each turn damage to dozens of enemy units, even if they are only by-passing city.

In CIV4 we do not have zones of control around cities/units which stops enemy units movement, so I think that the shouldn't be features that automatically damages nearby units - I this map scale, units on adjacent field should be out of fort / castle weapons range.

My suggestion is that Star Fort feature should be changed to:
1) auto-damage for all units ATTACKING city with fort
or
2) giving X (i.e. 2) first strikes for unit defending city with fort

What do You think?

Since when do Star Forts also damage enemies, I must have missed that one. I do think this is OP. The way it works, it damages enemies at the beginning of the turn so that you can attack them before they get a chance to heal. This is huge.

What was wrong with the Star Fort before, it gives unbreakable defense?

Since when do Star Forts also damage enemies, I must have missed that one. I do think this is OP. The way it works, it damages enemies at the beginning of the turn so that you can attack them before they get a chance to heal. This is huge.

What was wrong with the Star Fort before, it gives unbreakable defense?

I know only current features of Star Fort. It is very hard to explore enemy territory if you have to by-pass area with cities with star forts. Even if you have more soldiers and also medic units.

Since when do Star Forts also damage enemies, I must have missed that one. I do think this is OP. The way it works, it damages enemies at the beginning of the turn so that you can attack them before they get a chance to heal. This is huge.

What was wrong with the Star Fort before, it gives unbreakable defense?

Huhh, you also missed that one? I thought I was the one who missed the reaons for that change :crazyeye:
It's there since quite a few Betas, and I thought it was your change
Never really agreed it with, I also think it's overpowered

Huhh, you also missed that one? I thought I was the one who missed the reaons for that change :crazyeye:
It's there since quite a few Betas, and I thought it was your change
Never really agreed it with, I also think it's overpowered

Well that leaves merijn_v1, maybe he did the change intentionally, but I doubt it. It is possible that I did the change unintentionally when I was messing around with the Star Fort special defense. Either way, we should remove the "damage enemies" property.

In short, if you don't take a city with a star fort within two or three turns, the siege is doomed and the attacker's armies get wrecked, currently, which makes sieges rather difficult, especially when facing a comparable force. However, due to the insanely massive amount of units in the late game, something still needs to be done to prevent crazy steamrolling.

Well that leaves merijn_v1, maybe he did the change intentionally, but I doubt it. It is possible that I did the change unintentionally when I was messing around with the Star Fort special defense. Either way, we should remove the "damage enemies" property.

It's possible I did it, but I can't remember. But it doesn't matter who has done it. It should be removed. Which I already did in rev 894 yesterday. ;)

It's possible I did it, but I can't remember. But it doesn't matter who has done it. It should be removed. Which I already did in rev 894 yesterday. ;)

The point is that you didn't do it on purpose for some very important reason. Nobody did this on purpose, someone did it by accident, either way it is fixed now, so we can move on.

A flipping city should not keep its national wonders.

Whoa, I got the Swiss Line Infantry unit around 1560...a few centuries too early, methinks ;)

I think the ottomans should not have the advantages they do now. Playing as Muscovites i find it's really difficult to capture Constantinople. The Ottomans come to dominate Bulgaria and Serbia and Crimea (which is understood) early in the game, and continue to be very powerful through the whole game. If in a war with the Ottomans, you're most likely in a war also against Crimea (which is pretty dangerous). Overall, I think the Ottomans are overpowered

I think the ottomans should not have the advantages they do now. Playing as Muscovites i find it's really difficult to capture Constantinople. The Ottomans come to dominate Bulgaria and Serbia and Crimea (which is understood) early in the game, and continue to be very powerful through the whole game. If in a war with the Ottomans, you're most likely in a war also against Crimea (which is pretty dangerous). Overall, I think the Ottomans are overpowered

Are you playing RFCE or RFCE++?

Russia's third UHV is supposed to be hard, since it is ahistoric. Really difficult is actually a good thing here (so long as it is possible often enough game). The Ottomans are not equally powerful in every game, sometimes they are rather weak, due to autoplay there is no way to say what situation you will find. You also have two possible ways of achieving the UHV (you can go against Sweden).

due to the comment about Crimea (which is a ++ only as of yet) i'm betting my hat on that he's playing RFCE++ :p

and nothing is difficult if you just bring enough Seige with you :p

For the first Polish UHV. Called "The commonwealth" control etc cities in different provinces.

Is there a possibility to add a counter for how many cities you have conquered or in those areas regarding the UHV's condition?

Similiar to the one where you have total viking points etc when playing vikings.

For the first Polish UHV. Called "The commonwealth" control etc cities in different provinces.

Is there a possibility to add a counter for how many cities you have conquered or in those areas regarding the UHV's condition?

Similiar to the one where you have total viking points etc when playing vikings.

I'll see if I have time to code it. I try to add useful info for the UHV conditions whenever possible, but I haven't done it for all civs.

I'll see if I have time to code it. I try to add useful info for the UHV conditions whenever possible, but I haven't done it for all civs.

I'm sincerely grateful for all the work you do :)

Just done a Genoan UHV. Built Marco Polo and Cluny abbey at start, conquered Milan, Florence, Valencia and Tunis. In midgame I built Krak des Chavalier and every wonders expect La Lanterna(Venice built it, and I used a GE to finish San Marco Basilica), stole 3 techs (banking, paper, astronomy) from Venice, also I conquered Tangier and settled Canaries. In late game I built every avalible colonial projects, had Spain, Portugal and Venice as vassal, helped Venice against a strong Austria & Poland. In the end I got "emperor".

The most important tech I think, is divine right - once you built all 3 wonders, you can switch to limited monarchy - free labor - free religion. The second is public works - the 2 wonders that give free tech and free revolution. Once you have that, the rest game is too easy.

This is because all the bonuses from wonders and corporations sum up to the endgame to being ridiculously overpowered in a couple extreme cases - usually in the hands of an experienced human player
I very much intend to change this, but only for RFCE II, as it would need a complete rebalancing

And with the free tech I always chose Renaissance Art and receive a large period of time to complete over powered wonders.

Playing as the Norse. It is 1239 and the turn won't pass. The little globe waiting thing just lasts forever. I've tried changing stuff, re-loading, turning the game off...something is making the game stick. It isn't frozen, i can save, load a game, even look at civilopedia, but the game won't go past turn 213. Really frustrating.

Here is the link

Playing as the Norse. It is 1239 and the turn won't pass. The little globe waiting thing just lasts forever. I've tried changing stuff, re-loading, turning the game off...something is making the game stick. It isn't frozen, i can save, load a game, even look at civilopedia, but the game won't go past turn 213. Really frustrating.

The issue is Spain
Didn't find the cause of the infinite loop yet
It's probably related to the crusade or the Cordoban respawn - both is supposed to happen in that AI turn

For now a simple solution: you can continue playing if you go to WB and manually collapse Spain into indy cities
Not a perfect solution, but they wasn't really stable in the first place, and will probably respawn anyway in a couple turns

The issue is Spain
Didn't find the cause of the infinite loop yet
It's probably related to the crusade or the Cordoban respawn - both is supposed to happen in that AI turn

3Miro (or maybe Morholt) can you also look into this when you have some time?
Still don't know what's the exact cause of this bug...

The issue is Spain
Didn't find the cause of the infinite loop yet
It's probably related to the crusade or the Cordoban respawn - both is supposed to happen in that AI turn

For now a simple solution: you can continue playing if you go to WB and manually collapse Spain into indy cities
Not a perfect solution, but they wasn't really stable in the first place, and will probably respawn anyway in a couple turns

Ok. Junked Spain and the game went a turn. Thanks for the fix. You know how ti is when you have a good game going, you hate anything to stop it. Fun mod though, you guys did a first rate job.

Is this problem likely to pop up again this game?

Ok. Junked Spain and the game went a turn. Thanks for the fix. You know how ti is when you have a good game going, you hate anything to stop it. Fun mod though, you guys did a first rate job.
Thanks!

Is this problem likely to pop up again this game?

I don't think so
Couldn't find the cause, but it must be pretty rare, as noone reported anything similar AFAIK
Probably you can finish your game without any further issues

Playing as the Norse. It is 1239 and the turn won't pass. The little globe waiting thing just lasts forever. I've tried changing stuff, re-loading, turning the game off...something is making the game stick. It isn't frozen, i can save, load a game, even look at civilopedia, but the game won't go past turn 213. Really frustrating.

Thor has brought down his wrath upon you

Thor has brought down his wrath upon you

Perhaps.

Finished the game. Won on score. Playing as Norse. Grabbed all of Scandinavia, Ireland, Scotland and invading and took England after they spawned (plunked a city in Iceland in 1700 or so).

Real fun game. Pretty easy since I had the Baltic and the Channel between me and the other civs. Notes and points of interest.

1. Lithuania really hated me and kept declaring war. Very cool, they even used ships to land troops. Eventually though I took the war to them and vassaled them.

2. I was the only Protestant power. I founded it, is that why no one else ever converted?

3. Took a long time but my stability was in the toilet till 1650 or so.. Was it because of England?

4. France is a run away powerhouse (took a good chunk of Spain and Italy (and Burgundy). I suppose this is historical though. I wonder if they do that every game.

5. Loved the Byzze-Ottoman conflict. Very very historical.

2. I was the only Protestant power. I founded it, is that why no one else ever converted?
In my current game, Denmark (I'm playing ++, so there's Denmark, Norway, and Sweden) was the only one to go Protestant, despite France founding it.


4. France is a run away powerhouse (took a good chunk of Spain and Italy (and Burgundy). I suppose this is historical though. I wonder if they do that every game.
I hear people say this, but that has never been the case for me. The only games I remember very well are my last Germany, Bulgaria, and Spain games, but even as Bulgaria, France stayed strong but not overwhelmingly so and then collapsed. When I was Germany, they stayed relatively weak and then declared war on me, and that war ended with France only controlling the southwestern third of modern France. They only collapsed in the late 1700s, though, which is the best I can remember. In my current game as Spain, they were actually doing very well. They held all of modern France, the Netherlands, and a significant portion of Germany. Then they went to war with the entire HRE, myself (I controlled the entire Iberian peninsula), England, and Tunisia and had both Burgundy and the Netherlands show up fighting for independence. You can imagine how well that went.

In my current game, Denmark (I'm playing ++, so there's Denmark, Norway, and Sweden) was the only one to go Protestant, despite France founding it.

Looks like that might need a tiny tweak.

I hear people say this, but that has never been the case for me. The only games I remember very well are my last Germany, Bulgaria, and Spain games, but even as Bulgaria, France stayed strong but not overwhelmingly so and then collapsed.

Good. France SHOULD be one of the most powerful, it certainly was in OTL. Nice to see it gets shaken up now and then. Started a game as the Rus, see how it goes.

There is too much religion changing in rfce++, dont know why. I have seen a Byzantine switch during the first hundred years or so. Christian Arabs etc.

There is too much religion changing in rfce++, dont know why. I have seen a Byzantine switch during the first hundred years or so. Christian Arabs etc.


I saw Cordoba change religions, but they WERE losing to the Spaniards, so it fit. Byzantine, Russian were Orthodox.

Yeah, ++ does need help on religions, but is still much better than regular rfce

Why doesn't RFCE have a Ship of the Line? Frigates just aren't strong enough...

Why doesn't RFCE have a Ship of the Line? Frigates just aren't strong enough...

I plan to look into the unit upgrade chains for RFCE II
Some of them are strange or doesn't feel full, for example the light cavalry upgrades
Didn't look into this, but we can also add Ship of the Line then, if it's historically accurate for the mod

I captured Jerusalem with the Germans. Sometimes I get the message "new mercenaries available
in Jerusalem", but checking the merc screen there are none. (And they would come handy..)

Also, I think it was asked several times, anyway, a culture counter for Lithuania could be nice, if it's not much to do. Thx.

I captured Jerusalem with the Germans. Sometimes I get the message "new mercenaries available
in Jerusalem", but checking the merc screen there are none. (And they would come handy..)

You always get that message if a merc is first availeable in the province
But you may not have the minimal culture to hire it - at least not yet
Since the merc will be there if you acquire enough culture, it's intentional that you get the message

Also, I think it was asked several times, anyway, a culture counter for Lithuania could be nice, if it's not much to do. Thx.

Will look into it

So my latest games....

Kiev- Lost. I lost....That is the first RFC game I've lost in at least 4 years. Insane, in a good way.

Germany- Easy walkover until the Ottomans won a Domination victory!

England- Spain won the UHV!! (Eh, I was losing anyway, I couldn't keep up in tech).

You actually lost?!? Think I have been playing this mod too long...

So my latest games....

Kiev- Lost. I lost....That is the first RFC game I've lost in at least 4 years. Insane, in a good way.

Germany- Easy walkover until the Ottomans won a Domination victory!

England- Spain won the UHV!! (Eh, I was losing anyway, I couldn't keep up in tech).

All 3 sounds awesome! ;)

You actually lost?!? Think I have been playing this mod too long...

Yeah, those Mongol Keshik stacks can be tricky with Kiev on your first few plays :mischief:

All 3 sounds awesome! ;)


They were awesome. I'm putting together a long (3+ pages) 'report' on my findings and possible small tweaks for the next version. I know I don't sound like a good player (look at those losses!) but I've been around the RFC block a time or two.

Do AIs actually remotely try their UHVs?

Do AIs actually remotely try their UHVs?

afaik, no

unless their uhv is to do something an AI would do anyway..
like control 'xyz' regions by year 'xyz'

I've only had an AI achieve a 3x UHV win once, that was burgundy and many alphas/betas ago

afaik, no

unless their uhv is to do something an AI would do anyway..
like control 'xyz' regions by year 'xyz'

I've only had an AI achieve a 3x UHV win once, that was burgundy and many alphas/betas ago

Well, Spain just won one in my game. It is a bit too easy. Will try to show why in my next post.

The AI isn't even aware of the UHV. If it wins one, it's just coincidence.

I've started two games at the same time in this new RFCE: Arabs and Byzantine

As both some bugs keep happening, and they're not from this version, they were present in Betas too:

Autosaves that happen in the turn that cities try to flip to a new civ when loaded cancel the flip as if it never happened.

The Merc system is really bizarre. Sometimes they tell me some mercs are available when they're not, even in provinces such as Egypt (it happened with both Arabia and Byzantium), where I had only Alexandria and surely I had more then the minimum culture necessary. Not once, but all the time it happens. The same way, the message that mercs left when there were none on the same provinces. It's like they come, keep some time there and then leave, but I couldn't hire then because they never showed on my merc advisor. And last not least, they come at a specific level, but when they appear on the map the level drops to 1 and the ups don't disappear. This opens the possibility for overpowering mercs ( I had one with Byzantine a Khazar Horse Archer with Medic I, Medic II, Strengh I, Drill I and after 2 battles it got to 6 XP, so I could put Withdraw I and II, only 4 XP left to get March and make this Merc the Overlord of my troops)

And the last one happens when two civs at war call you at the same turn asking something from you. The last example that happened to me: France was at war with Cordoba. The turn started and France called me to declare war at Cordoba. I agreed. Exactly after this Cordoba asked me to declare war at France. I negated. Then I was at the Diplomacy screen with Cordoba, even being at war with them (and necessarily they wouldn't accept a diplomatic chat with me at the same turn I declared war and no war move was made to make them reconsider the chat). I clicked "We would like to make a trade proposal" and suddenly there was no "trade proposal" screen, but the same screen as before with the options as I was proposing some kind of deal, but there was no deal. I clicked at the first option asking if Cordoba would accept my phantom deal and they agreed, stopping the war as if we had proposed Cease Fire. Same happened as Arabia when Cordoba asked me first to declare war on Spain and after that Spain came asking the same to me.


Besides these issues I was considering something about the last UHV of Byzantines. In my opinion it's one of the easiest UHVs on this game. If you could make Constantinople the most powerful city in 1025 (UHV1), and you could gather all Anatolia under your thumb (UHV2), UHV3 can be simply done by controlling the Ottomans and putting 100% of your commerce on the treasure for the rest of the turns (more or less a hundred years to make that).
But there is a way even easier to do that (even when you can't handle the Ottomans but you can survive until the limit year of UHV3). All my games in all versions of RFCE (excluding a bugged one long time ago that Arabia had more then a million gold) had the Papal states as the richest Empire in the world by far (with thousands of gold). But they can't fight any civilization in the espionage battle, losing easily even to the worst of them. Some turns of EPs directed at the Pope and a single spy is all you need to steal thousands of gold from him in a single move making you the richest and putting the old richest behind you. So what's the challenge in this UHV?

The AI isn't even aware of the UHV. If it wins one, it's just coincidence.
I was wondering if stability maps help it, at least as far as, control such and such areas...
Does the AI know the stability maps? I assume it doesn't.

I'm not sure about this one. But the AI is aware of the settlermaps and warmaps, so I'm not supprised if they also understand the stabilitymaps.

It actually isn't very important. They places where the AI will settle (because of the settlermaps) are mostly in their stable area. (I assume that the stabilitymaps and settlermaps are somewhat syncronized)

Hey,
first i would like to thank you guys for this great mod, you brought civ4 back to my timetable.
I played a game as Cordoba recently when i noticed that there was no Holy-City/Mosque in Damaskus. Played a bit with Arabia/Byzantium and found the following. It seems like AI-Arabs goes for Antiochia first right after spawn if that city is weak. As a result Antiochia is the first and therefore capital city. If thats the case there is no Holy-City or a Holy-Shrine for Islam even is they found Damaskus in the same turn. Maybe you could force the Arab-AI to build Damaskus first no matter what or link the Holy-City to the Arab-Palace. Cheapest solution would be to place a wood or something that slows the Arab-Cav so they won't be able to conquer a city before they found the first.
Pretty sure someone spotted this bug before but i would like bring the topic back up because i don't think AI-Arabia is able to survive the crusaders without the gold from the shrine... the hardly ever do with the gold.
Thanks
Wuzzel

Just played Moscovy for the first time in a while on 1.0.
It was actually very enjoyable. The barbarians to the east are annoying, but manageable, and I was about to easily snatch up all the barbarian cities from the dead Kiev empire. The new Kiev placement works better with Moscovy in my opinion.
Lithuania was already dead and Germany soon killed off Poland, making the boundaries of my empire Germany and the Ottomans (sounds like RFC Vanilla eh?).

But it was still pretty cool. Russia is a fun to snatch up all the territory and crank out knights once I finally researched them. I'm sure with ++ and talk of 2.0, there will be a few more players for Russia (Novgorod? Crimea? Armenia? though I'm not crazy about extending the map all the way to Armenia especially since it's not really Europe) while will make things more interesting. I wish the Swedes started with stuff in Finland though (the part across the Baltic from Sweden).

I suppose you mean version 1.0 ?

The Crimean civilization in ++ has a really unique gameplay, and while the UHV isn't too hard I've had a really fun play with them.

To remain on the subject of feedback (supposing that you indeed play version 1.0), do you think that Poland and/or Lithuania are too weak currently ?

I suppose you mean version 1.0 ?

The Crimean civilization in ++ has a really unique gameplay, and while the UHV isn't too hard I've had a really fun play with them.

To remain on the subject of feedback (supposing that you indeed play version 1.0), do you think that Poland and/or Lithuania are too weak currently ?

I certainly agree. I think they get squashed by Germany somewhere in 1200-1400 almost always. I think Poland could use a good boost, perhaps a couple extra techs, 1 extra settler and a couple units, and maybe change some balancing (instead or in addition). You'd also have to change Lithuania so Poland wouldn't crush them in turn.

I'll play around with the values...

Poland starts late and are tech backwards, they need a boost.

Poland starts late and are tech backwards, they need a boost.

I know how to change tech rate, growth rate, etc in the "stability" file. But where do I change starting units and starting techs?

I know how to change tech rate, growth rate, etc in the "stability" file. But where do I change starting units and starting techs?

look into RiseAndFall.py --> createStartingUnits and --> assignTechs

Ok I added Machinery, Monasticism, Code of laws, and Aristocracy to Poland , which about equals Genoa and Spain (civs at the time). Also added a few more military units to Poland and Lithuania and gave Lithuania one more settler. Lithuania's science looks good in my book.

Research levels look good on the books, I might switch that stuff around. Poland's territory isn't half bad, I think this starting bonus will help them a good bit.

Wow, that thread has been asleep for quite some time ! Anyway, since some people are still working on v1.1 I'd like to add a suggestion based on my playtest of the latest version : Calais used to spawn shortly before the English spawn to guarantee an English city in northern France, but now that it doesn't flip to England I'd like to see an indie city spawn in Normandy if Normandy is empty around 1050. Something to make certain England and France do have something to fight about in the early game...

I have to agree with AdrienIer, when I played with France I didn't make any city on Normandy until some time after the English Spawn. Without the need of Normandy in UHV1 the player can avoid this early struggle with the english. The french AI usually makes a city there, but not always. The player on the other hand can do exactly as I done and skip this struggle, something that an indy city would make almost impossible to do.

Maybe its a stupid question, but how can i hurry production in this mod by sacrificing the population? There is no needed tech for it, but i cant click on it, while i get enough pop to sacrifice. Or its not possible? :(

Pochok: Slavery is disabled in this mod. You cant hurry production by sacrifice population.

The only means to speed up production are chopping light forests (plate armor tech) or rushing with great engineer.

So, for indy/barb city changes:
Belgrad should be one tile south, while instead of Calais there should be another city in the English flip zone (Normandy)
Any other problems?

Augsburg is located right next to Bavaria meaning that you either have to settle a crappy city too close to Augsburg to get UHV1 for the Germans or place it in the Austrian flip zone.

Augsburg is located right next to Bavaria meaning that you either have to settle a crappy city too close to Augsburg to get UHV1 for the Germans or place it in the Austrian flip zone.

That's intended
Settle Salzburg if you want to go for the UHV
Tension with Austria is a good thing here IMO

The AI will go for the Austrian flip zone but I think players want to avoid the flip penalty and go for a crappy city two squares east of Augsburg. And probably just feel pissed with city design?

Either move Augsburg, change flip zone or change province boundaries. If you must settle in the flip zone it is not that a big deal...

If you must settle in the flip zone it is not that a big deal...

Okay, I'm not against that
Will extend the flip zone, or reduce the province

A few things I still feel need some modification:

- Armies should be more expensive/cash. Economy is not a problem in this mod while the war burden was very heavy on the people of medieval Europe.
- Higher maintenance on mercs
- Continue the concentration of resources to some areas forcing trade to get health surplus
- Reduce number of different happiness resources. Total amount is ok.

Otherwise it is a very enjoyable mod! :)

After finishing two games over the last few weeks i have a question concerning the hungarian UHV: Why is Thrace left out of the Defender of Europe goal? Looks like an oversight to me.

And the other one is about Lithuanias Commonwealth UHV: Right now it leaves Poland out of the equasion, which is a shame. You really don't need Poland for the UHV and i just conquer it because it's right there and kind of nice;)
Here is my idea: Either put Poland in the other UHV, so it says "Conquer or Vassalise Moscow and Poland" or change the Commonwealth to "have 18 cities within the provinces of (insert historical area)".
I know it's a minor issue because players should conquer Poland anyway, put having to do it might spice up those UHVs.

- Armies should be more expensive/cash. Economy is not a problem in this mod while the war burden was very heavy on the people of medieval Europe.

Economy is not a problem in this mod only because research is almost worthless. Research is almost worthless because techs are basically impossible to research until a few years before their historical discovery date (due to scaling).

Civilization IV is designed so that you're expected to put most, if not all of your surplus GNP into research. RFCE's design has completely invalidated that so that you shouldn't be spending money on anything. That is why "economy is not a problem".


- Higher maintenance on mercs

Hardly relevant as

(1) There aren't many mercs around, especially good mercs;

(2) Mercs are for suicide attacks anyway. If you finish a war with surplus mercs remaining, you've hired too many and should disband them.


- Reduce number of different happiness resources. Total amount is ok.

This only applies to Colony resources IMO. Human player is able to build most, if not all Colonies, ending up with a ridiculous amount of resources.

Colonies should provide a greater variety of benefits, other than just resources. For example:

(1) Small +:commerce: per turn in your largest cities. This is equivalent to transcontinental colonial Trade Routes.

(2) Number of free units (as in free unit support). This is another effect of building colonies in vanilla RFC (as well as IRL).

(3) Slave units/periodic :hammers: bonuses. Similar to the effects of chopping forests in vanilla BTS/RFC.

Colonies should also be possible to trade between different civs IMO.

Obviously you don't only sign in...

Obviously you don't only sign in...
Usually I only sign in. This forum is an exception.

A few things I still feel need some modification:

- Armies should be more expensive/cash. Economy is not a problem in this mod while the war burden was very heavy on the people of medieval Europe.
- Higher maintenance on mercs
- Continue the concentration of resources to some areas forcing trade to get health surplus
- Reduce number of different happiness resources. Total amount is ok.

Otherwise it is a very enjoyable mod! :)
Economy is not a problem in this mod only because research is almost worthless. Research is almost worthless because techs are basically impossible to research until a few years before their historical discovery date (due to scaling).

Civilization IV is designed so that you're expected to put most, if not all of your surplus GNP into research. RFCE's design has completely invalidated that so that you shouldn't be spending money on anything. That is why "economy is not a problem".


Hardly relevant as

(1) There aren't many mercs around, especially good mercs;

(2) Mercs are for suicide attacks anyway. If you finish a war with surplus mercs remaining, you've hired too many and should disband them.


This only applies to Colony resources IMO. Human player is able to build most, if not all Colonies, ending up with a ridiculous amount of resources.

Colonies should provide a greater variety of benefits, other than just resources. For example:

(1) Small +:commerce: per turn in your largest cities. This is equivalent to transcontinental colonial Trade Routes.

(2) Number of free units (as in free unit support). This is another effect of building colonies in vanilla RFC (as well as IRL).

(3) Slave units/periodic :hammers: bonuses. Similar to the effects of chopping forests in vanilla BTS/RFC.

Colonies should also be possible to trade between different civs IMO.

Yes, actually I agree with both of you in all points
IMO these are some of the key problems of the mod

1.
Actually I never really liked the way 3Miro nerfed the research system, exactly because of these reasons
Revising it is on my todo list ever since it was imlplemented, but it's a huge work and it's not not yet clear which path should I follow

2.
Mercenaries are way too rare currently, and it's too easy to maintain lots of them through centuries
You guys are definitely right about this one too, but it's partly because of the too easy economy
It's a smaller change, but not trivial either. Nevertheless, improvements will be made soon

3.
I have some ideas for making health and happiness harder, but the other 2 have bigger priority in my eyes
We will see what to do with it

+1
Another key problem IMO is the overpowered bonuses from the wonders
They get stacked up, especially for the human player, thus making the game way too easy
Right now I'm working on this
New wonders will be added, but overally the wonders will be nerfed. Many of them by much

After finishing two games over the last few weeks i have a question concerning the hungarian UHV: Why is Thrace left out of the Defender of Europe goal? Looks like an oversight to me.

And the other one is about Lithuanias Commonwealth UHV: Right now it leaves Poland out of the equasion, which is a shame. You really don't need Poland for the UHV and i just conquer it because it's right there and kind of nice;)
Here is my idea: Either put Poland in the other UHV, so it says "Conquer or Vassalise Moscow and Poland" or change the Commonwealth to "have 18 cities within the provinces of (insert historical area)".
I know it's a minor issue because players should conquer Poland anyway, put having to do it might spice up those UHVs.

Thrace is an oversight, and I agree with the Lithuanian UHV as well
Thanks for the feedback! :king:

IOnlySignIn: Great feedback!

1. Somewhat I agree. But if you compare to vanilla RFC or RFC:doc economy is really hard in the beginning. Often I end up doing 40% science because of cash issues. In this mod I am constantly doing 80-100% research while keeping economy in good shape.

2. Because of 1 it is no problem of hiring the few mercs that show up with their "minimal" impact on game turn cost. If economy was worse, cost would be relevant.

3. Colonies appear late in game. Resources other than colonies are also too many.

Absinthered: Some tech revision would be great! Instead of a unique year for every tech one might have the total number of techs in the current era modifying all tech costs. Meaning that you could beeline for one or two techs but then research on the other ones become expensive.

Wonders are also over powered, religion requirements might reduce some of that effect by distributing the most powerful ones.

+1
Another key problem IMO is the overpowered bonuses from the wonders
They get stacked up, especially for the human player, thus making the game way too easy
Right now I'm working on this
New wonders will be added, but overally the wonders will be nerfed. Many of them by much

It's not necessary to nerf Wonders much. Just make them obsolete sooner. Take for example The University of Sankore in DoC. Its effects are very OP, but it obsoletes with Education (it's available with Paper, which is 1 tech before Education).

I agree with the rest of your post. Especially about the priorities. Many of the problems in RFCE can be traced to the research scaling. However, I don't think getting rid of it entirely is a good idea, especially in the very early game where only a few civs are alive and not in contact with each other (which means highly unpredictable outcomes, for example Bulgaria killing Byzantium or vice versa). Perhaps decrease the effect of scaling (up to +300% instead of up to +900%), and increase the effect of other tech balancing factors, such as how techs that your neighbors have will cost less.

Another tool is the standard "only your best 10 cities count towards your research" trick, aka research costs scale upward with number of cities. This will slow down HI France or Byzantium a bit, for example.

We could also reduce the effects of tech scaling by era. I feel that in Early/High Middle Ages, the scaling could be more severe, whereas in later eras it shouldn't be so severe.

----

Finally, on an unrelated note:

Been playing Byzantium on SVN. Really like the new soundtrack. Except the RobinHood song. I like Robin Hood - he's a lovable rogue and a hero. But why would anyone think "Down, down, down down down down" is good lyrics? It's like Lady Gaga's "Pa-Pa-Pa-Pa-Poker Face", except it manages to be annoying without being catchy.

I had to delete that song. It's so annoying.

1. Somewhat I agree. But if you compare to vanilla RFC or RFC:doc economy is really hard in the beginning. Often I end up doing 40% science because of cash issues. In this mod I am constantly doing 80-100% research while keeping economy in good shape.

2. Because of 1 it is no problem of hiring the few mercs that show up with their "minimal" impact on game turn cost. If economy was worse, cost would be relevant.

3. Colonies appear late in game. Resources other than colonies are also too many.

1. I think a lot of it is due to City Maintenance costs, instead of Unit Support costs. Unit Support costs in RFCE is comparable to RFC or DoC. City Maintenance costs are much lower in RFCE compared to RFC or DoC.

I understand that City Maintenance costs are scaled down in RFCE because of Corporations - but Corps are mostly local and appear late. So how about we scale up City Maintenance costs a bit while we decrease the costs of Corporations (or better still, make them auto-spread with no maintenance costs like in SoI and DoC).

2. Yes.

3. I don't think Resources are that abundant before Colonies. For one thing, their distributions are quite local, just as they should be. For example, no matter how well they're doing, it's likely that France/Byzantium/Spain will not have Fur/Amber; and Sweden/Germany will not have Wine or Olives. Another example is Silk/Cotton. To get them without Colonies, you pretty much have to conquer the Levant. France has no Barley. England has no Wheat. etc.

1/2: I guess that is a good solution!

3. But maybe combined with the fact that the AI usually always trade 1:1 health/happiness you end up with all the resources you need. Even if fur/sheep/incense is hard to get by there are usually enough other resources to trade.

It's not necessary to nerf Wonders much. Just make them obsolete sooner. Take for example The University of Sankore in DoC. Its effects are very OP, but it obsoletes with Education (it's available with Paper, which is 1 tech before Education).

It's necessary for a couple wonders
For example, Marco Polo: 2 silk, +1 happiness, 3 (!!) trade routes, a free merchant?
These bonuses are enough for 3 wonders

St Basil: 4 free specialists, and +10% birth rate??
Magellan: 2 free trade routes in all coastal cities?
Leonardo: free artist, free engineer, and +50% production?
Torre de Belem: 4 gold on all water tiles, and 2 free merchants??
These are just a couple examples, the list goes on...

However, I don't think getting rid of it entirely is a good idea, especially in the very early game where only a few civs are alive and not in contact with each other (which means highly unpredictable outcomes, for example Bulgaria killing Byzantium or vice versa).

Agreed, I don't plan to get rid of it entirely

Perhaps decrease the effect of scaling (up to +300% instead of up to +900%), and increase the effect of other tech balancing factors, such as how techs that your neighbors have will cost less.

Another tool is the standard "only your best 10 cities count towards your research" trick, aka research costs scale upward with number of cities. This will slow down HI France or Byzantium a bit, for example.

We could also reduce the effects of tech scaling by era. I feel that in Early/High Middle Ages, the scaling could be more severe, whereas in later eras it shouldn't be so severe.

These are good points, will see what direction to follow
But I'm not yet there to start the actual work for this...
Right now I want to finish the building overhaul and the inquisiton code, then release 1.1 as soon as I'm ready with those

Finally, on an unrelated note:

Been playing Byzantium on SVN. Really like the new soundtrack. Except the RobinHood song. I like Robin Hood - he's a lovable rogue and a hero. But why would anyone think "Down, down, down down down down" is good lyrics? It's like Lady Gaga's "Pa-Pa-Pa-Pa-Poker Face", except it manages to be annoying without being catchy.

I had to delete that song. It's so annoying.

The new sounds are only there for testing, not yet sure about all of them myself
Actually I'm waiting for feedback like this, so thanks :)

(1) There aren't many mercs around, especially good mercs;

I'm planning to redo some parts of the merc system, so more mercs will be aviable. This will be fixed soon.



The wonders should indeed be tuned down. Especially if we add some more wonders. Especially the wonders that boost religious buildings should be tuned down, because there are much more religious buildings in the game. How about +1:gold: (instead of +2) for La Mezquita and +2/3:culture: (instead of +5) for the Sistine Chapel?

After finishing two games over the last few weeks i have a question concerning the hungarian UHV: Why is Thrace left out of the Defender of Europe goal? Looks like an oversight to me.

And the other one is about Lithuanias Commonwealth UHV: Right now it leaves Poland out of the equasion, which is a shame. You really don't need Poland for the UHV and i just conquer it because it's right there and kind of nice;)
Here is my idea: Either put Poland in the other UHV, so it says "Conquer or Vassalise Moscow and Poland" or change the Commonwealth to "have 18 cities within the provinces of (insert historical area)".
I know it's a minor issue because players should conquer Poland anyway, put having to do it might spice up those UHVs.

As I stated before, I'm still playing the non-SVN version, up to patch 1.01, and there Hungarian UHV3 is:
Defender of Europe
Allow no Ottoman cities in Wallachia, Moesia, Thrace, Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Thessaly, Epirus, Arberia, Serbia, Bosnia, Dalmatia and Croatia in 1444 AD

Did it change? why?
If not, are you sure of this Krschtschn? Maybe you were playing an older version or just didn't see it on the list.

About Lithuania I don't see a problem here, but I can't see any problem in specifying the Provinces. 18 Cities to get from 5 fronts:
Livonia/Estonia - Naturally your first aim (or at least the most secure, but the smallest one too). Livonia is almost entirely in your flipping zone, so it's pretty easy.
Former Kievan Rus' - Naturally your over-expansion from Lithuania, as the barbs are a lot easier to handle then your neighbors (at least after the mongols stopped spawning)
Muscovy Contested Territory - Needed for UHV3, but you'll probably get only few cities because you either conquered it early, so not many cities to get there, or you left it for the finishing blow, one that you could do only to Moscow, but couldn't handle for the entire Muscovy Realm (they can't be left alone for many years, if not they will crush you)
Hungary - Far from you, maybe not the better of ideas, but a possibility
Poland - The easiest foe on RFC Europe. Seriously Poland is so pathetic that anybody can handle it. Germany usually vassalize them, if not it's Austria, if not it's Muscovy or Hungary, or they just collapse. Sometimes even Sweden strike at them (if they survived long enough). In my current game with Austria I took Hungary just after my spawn, and Germany was the next target. Because of me and my aim at somewhere else, I found Poland to be a good partner and they found enough partnership and room to expand. Soon they took the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. After they couldn't handle Muscovy, they declared war on me just to wait a few turns and ask for capitulation without a single city taken, just some dead polish troops discarded on my Silesia city (just outside of their capital). They were one of the major players (placed on top 5, with the third biggest territory - losing to me [1st] and to Cordoba [2nd :eek:])

18 cities are a lot of cities, and with this configuration, Lithuania player will most of the time get them from Poland and Kievan Rus', as the Rus' lands aren't enough (and Ottomans on Northern Black Sea are a lot worse to handle then poor Poland). But specifying the territories IMO wont change anything, I would put the following:

Get 18 cities in Lithuania, Livonia, Estonia, Volhynia, Galicia, Brest, Minsk, Polotsk, Smolensk, Chernigov, Kiev, Podolia, Sloboda, Pereyaslavl, Suvalkija, Pomerania, Masovia, Lesser Poland, Greater Poland and Silesia.

It's necessary for a couple wonders
For example, Marco Polo: 2 silk, +1 happiness, 3 (!!) trade routes, a free merchant?
These bonuses are enough for 3 wonders

St Basil: 4 free specialists, and +10% birth rate??
Magellan: 2 free trade routes in all coastal cities?
Leonardo: free artist, free engineer, and +50% production?
Torre de Belem: 4 gold on all water tiles, and 2 free merchants??
These are just a couple examples, the list goes on...

You see what all of them (except Magellan, which is as good as the Great Lighthouse) in common?

Free Specialists. It seems every other Wonder in RFCE provides Free Specialists. Kazimierz and St. Marco's Basilica (my favorite) both give Free Merchants.

In RFC/BTS this would be hilariously unbalanced, but in RFCE it's less so, because Specialists are useless except for Commerce/Yield, and GPs are only good for settling (except Priests and Engineers for Faith Points and Wonders), because:

(1) It's impossible to bulb techs due to the tech scaling;

(2) Great Merchant trade missions/Great Scientists settling are useless, again due to tech scaling;

(3) Great Artists are useless for most civs because there are no Cultural goals, and Culture is super easy to get - just build Minarets;

(4) Even Great Priest have limited utility. Faith Points have an upper limit, and your Faith Points will usually be very high already if you conquer a lot and build Temples/Monasteries/Minarets everywhere;

(5) So the only really useful GP is Great Engineer (yay!). But you hardly need Wonders like Leonardo's for them, as you can easily get GEs with Guild Hall (+1 Free Engineer? Can you imagine that in BTS or RFC).

TL;DR

- Free Specialists, Free Specialists everywhere.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/26700001.jpg

- Specialists are of very limited utility in RFCE (and in most cases can be replaced by straightforward Commerce/Yield bonuses, a la Noria/Chateau), so the effect is actually much less significant than one would expect.

As I stated before, I'm still playing the non-SVN version, up to patch 1.01, and there Hungarian UHV3 is:
Defender of Europe
Allow no Ottoman cities in Wallachia, Moesia, Thrace, Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Thessaly, Epirus, Arberia, Serbia, Bosnia, Dalmatia and Croatia in 1444 AD

Did it change? why?
If not, are you sure of this Krschtschn? Maybe you were playing an older version or just didn't see it on the list.

You are right, i actually typed in the wrong province. I meant Morea, the southern part of Greece. I tried it out with a quicksave because i thought that couldn't be right. I downloaded from the SVN, I think Rev. 973, but it's definetly higher than 1.01.


On an unrelated note, i think i found a bug. In my first hungarian game Islam had no Holy City. As far as i know Holy Cities are unrazable, so there must be something wrong.

Yeah, IIRC I had a few cities around 28 pop in one if my games
After a few more thoughts on this: very similar to the last one, just much more straightforward, and all the results are int: (x^2)/2 + 3.5x
1: 4
2: 9
3: 15
4: 22
5: 30
6: 39
7: 49
8: 60
9: 72
10: 85
11: 99
12: 114
13: 130
14: 147
15: 165
20: 270
25: 400
30: 555
I don't think we should go below these, I would hate to see Europe's total population below 10 million through the whole game

I was thinking about populations sizes - again
I disliked the population popups (your glorious civ now holds 1 million population), so I changed all of them to urban population
Maybe we should also update the numbers for the cities, for even more realistic feel
Or do they look good enough for medieval city sizes?

I wasn't thinking about a big change, only slightly decreasing the numbers
For example, instead of the ( x * (x/2 + 3,5) ) we could use ( (x-2) * (x/2 + 3,5) + 7 )
That actually means -x from the previous one, so:
1: 3
2: 7
3: 12
4: 18
5: 25
6: 33
7: 42
8: 52
9: 63
10: 75
11: 88
12: 102
13: 117
14: 133
15: 150
20: 250
25: 375
30: 525

On a related note, I plan to set the demographics screen as well
Change population and territory, probably soldiers too:

Population simply renamed to Urban Population there too, as the number only shows up the total population in your cities
Or we can add an era dependent multiplier there. So it shows 6 * your Urban Population when you are in the Early Middle Ages, 5* if you are in High Middle Ages, 4* if you are in Late Middle Ages and 3* if you are in Renaissance
Just an example, but you get the idea
The only problem with this is that the number what it shows for your population will drop on each era change
EDIT: More elegant solution to represent this would be to have X * (5 - (y/500)*2), where X is your urban population, y is the turn number
This ranges from 5 to 3, slightly dropping on each turn
Nevertheless, the drop will be there, but not as noticeable as in the previous example

Territory can be much more accurate as it is currently, as our map size is fix
We can have pretty close values to reality

Territory can be much more accurate as it is currently, as our map size is fix
We can have pretty close values to reality

On my calculation, a tile is somewhere around 2200-2300 km2 in the mod

Muppet question: Is it possible to whip in RFCE? If so, how?

It's nasty and immoral, but when I get impatient I wonder where it is.

No, there is no slavery in RFCE, so no whipping
Slaves were very rare in medieval Europe, thus it would have been very inaccurate to keep anything like that in

Thanks; it's sensible reasoning. Maybe put it in Civilopedia > RFC Concepts > Odds & Ends for people who wonder....? That's where I looked first.

Yeah, I plan to update the concepts in the civilopedia
Already updated the reference files
Check them out for some general information under (Mods Folder)/RFCEurope/Reference/

I'm very pleased how the improvements on the demographics screen turned out:

- Tweaks to the previous stats: Urban Population, Military Power, Land Area, etc.
- New statistics on the demographics screen: Total Population, Soldiers

Total Population = Urban population * era multiplier + 1500 * unit number + constant
The era multiplier is based on turn number (slowly decreasing from 8 to 4). The result for total population is rounded to 5000
Military Power is an index for power (both current and potential), while Soldiers show the actual number of military units

@ Absinthered

I see you made the Horse Archer a replacement for the Mounted Soldier. I can see the philosophy behind it, but I don't realy like it.

Now it looks like those civs have a 2nd UU, while they haven't really. It's just their version of the Mounted soldier. It just looks weird to see that some civs have a "2nd UU", while others don't. And new players could get confused.
And IMO, the UU in that are shown in the civilopedia should realy be an UU, not an unit that is share between some civs. When 6 civs (1/4 of the civs!) have an "unique" unit, it isn't unique anymore.
Because it's not really an UU, you could swap it around. You could also say the Mounted Soldier is a replacement for the Horse Archer. So you can't really say which one replaces the other. I would say neither of them replaces the other.

So I would rather have the changes reverted and have those 2 units alongside eachother. It doesn't make any changes in gameplay, but IMO, it's aesthetically better.

Along with that, the Horse Archer is much better. They have a 2 extra first strikes, are cheaper and have a bonus vs. catapults and trebuchets. I think they should be more equal. They can have a little difference, but the difference they have now is too big IMO.

Keep in mind that RFCE doesn't have to be simmetrical for the civs
Balance in RFC mods is a totally different thing than balance in "normal" BtS mods
Also, take a look at Realism Invictus for example. Not similarity matters, but overall balance

Having said that, I plan to further improve the Horse Archer and Mounted Sergeant thing in RFCE.
IMO the best would be to have a general unit type for the earliest light cavalry units
Horse Archers would replace that for Bulgaria, Hungary and Kiev, some kind of early beduin light cavalry would replace that for Arabia and Cordoba, and Mounted Sergeant would replace that for all the other civs
It's not an actual UU, only differentiating the unit type more.


So I would rather have the changes reverted and have those 2 units alongside eachother. It doesn't make any changes in gameplay, but IMO, it's aesthetically better.
I'm absolutely against that
The worst thing we can do here if we enable both units to be built by all civs
I don't want to see any horse archers for say France or Germany or Spain

Along with that, the Horse Archer is much better. They have a 2 extra first strikes, are cheaper and have a bonus vs. catapults and trebuchets. I think they should be more equal. They can have a little difference, but the difference they have now is too big IMO.

I see no problems with that
We can differentate them as much as we want to
Check SoI, embrydead made a fine job there regarding Horse Archers and Heavy Horse Archers

In SoI, horse archers and cavalry are on the same tier, but horse archers are only available to Turkic civs and they are a bit more powerful than cavalry. That's fine and realistic. So I think Absinthered's plan is good.

I'm not saying that every civ should be able to build both units. I'm saying that the HA shouldn't replace the the Mounted Soldier. IMO, they should exist alongside eachother. (like the SoI naval model I describe below). The eastern civs can only build Horse Archers and the Western civs can only build Mounted Soldiers. IIRC, the old system had that, but without the Horse Archer replacing the Mounted Soldier. (Gameplaywise, it's the same as you want, but IMO, aesthetically better in the civilopedia)

I fully agree with you that a French Horse Archer is bad. I think I was a bit unclear.

Look for example at the SoI naval model. The Arabian civs can build Dhows and Baglahs. The "Western" civs can build galleys and Roundships. Both units have the same function, only buildable by different "cultures" (can't currenlty come up with a better word) The exist alongside eachother, but one doesn't replace the other. The Horse Archer and the Mounted Soldier should be like that.

I don't mind if the units diverse a little in the bonus they recieve, but the Horse Archer has currently too much advantage over the Mounted Soldier. (2 first strikes, 25% cheaper, 50% attack bonus vs. catapult and trebuchets)

IIRC, the old system had that, but without the Horse Archer replacing the Mounted Soldier.
The way it was before wasn't perfect for all civs. AFAIK some civs were able to build them both
Also had some annoying bugs regarding how the UUs XML tags was called from the .dll
Caused some crashes with memory usage

I don't mind if the units diverse a little in the bonus they recieve, but the Horse Archer has currently too much advantage over the Mounted Soldier. (2 first strikes, 25% cheaper, 50% attack bonus vs. catapult and trebuchets)

IMO it's not that much, but we can bring the bonuses closer if you want
Btw, complete unit rebalancing is on the plate as well, one of my long term plans for the later versions

I'm saying that the HA shouldn't replace the the Mounted Soldier. IMO, they should exist alongside eachother.
Look for example at the SoI naval model. The Arabian civs can build Dhows and Baglahs. The "Western" civs can build galleys and Roundships. Both units have the same function, only buildable by different "cultures" (can't currenlty come up with a better word) The exist alongside eachother, but one doesn't replace the other. The Horse Archer and the Mounted Soldier should be like that.
Yes, as I said in my last post, that's my plan
They replace a fictional early light cavalry, and all of them are the same level:
Having said that, I plan to further improve the Horse Archer and Mounted Sergeant thing in RFCE.
IMO the best would be to have a general unit type for the earliest light cavalry units
Horse Archers would replace that for Bulgaria, Hungary and Kiev, some kind of early beduin light cavalry would replace that for Arabia and Cordoba, and Mounted Sergeant would replace that for all the other civs
It's not an actual UU, only differentiating the unit type more.

The way it was before wasn't perfect for all civs. AFAIK some civs were able to build them both
Also had some annoying bugs regarding how the UUs XML tags was called from the .dll
Caused some crashes with memory usage

Wasn't it much easier to forbid the civs that could build both to build one of them than to make it a fully replacement?
I have never experienced such problems. And the barbarians always had this. I don't see why a normal civ suddenly should have problems with it.

IMO it's not that much, but we can bring the bonuses closer if you want
Btw, complete unit rebalancing is on the plate as well, one of my long term plans for the later versions

I was thinking of giving the MS also a bonus vs. catapults and trebuchets. And maybe increasing the costs of the HA a little bit. So the HA will still be a bit cheaper and have some first strikes. I think this is fair enough.

es, as I said in my last post, that's my plan
They replace a fictional early light cavalry, and all of them are the same level:

The difference between our ideas is that you want both of them being in the same unitclass, and so making the civs only able to build one of them, while my idea is to make them in a different unitclass and forbidding each civ to build one of them. The effect is the same. But with my version of execution, you don't get the "extra UU" in the civilopedia. And if you go to the HA page, you don't see that it's the UU of Arabia, Cordoba etc, as it is now. (I'm not on my own computer now, so I can't upload a screenshot of what I exactly mean)

Wasn't it much easier to forbid the civs that could build both to build one of them than to make it a fully replacement?
I have never experienced such problems. And the barbarians always had this. I don't see why a normal civ suddenly should have problems with it.

Too many assert failures can cause some memory CTDs
Check this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=472267
So I'm looking for a better solution than leaving those NONE unittypes there

I was thinking of giving the MS also a bonus vs. catapults and trebuchets. And maybe increasing the costs of the HA a little bit. So the HA will still be a bit cheaper and have some first strikes. I think this is fair enough.
Sounds good to me

Oh, I see. That would be annoying indeed. I haven't experienced such problems before.
(Or does Realism Invictus also have a lot of NONE tags? I do have allocation failures there. If yes, than I did experience it)

Is it possible to forbid civs to build units with python?

2 screenshot to explain what I try to avoid.

This is how edead did it. Units on the same tier, but each type only available to certain civs. The heavy versions later both upgrade into mounted gunners.

That's exactly the same idea I had.


But that has the NONE tags, which can cause the CTD, as absinthered explained in post 5944.

Personally, I prefer the old way. (Which is the same way as SoI). It's aesthetically much better.

It may give a CTD sometimes, but with reloading (an autosave) you can play on. As I have never experienced this with this mod, I don't think it's a problem. However other people can think different about this.

I put them back the way it was before
But I'm still not statisfied with this, so it's only until I find a better solution...

EDIT: I already expereinced a couple CTDs, this is definitely connected to it
If this stays this way, I have to find and fix a couple other assert failures before release...
(I'm not perfectly sure about it yet, but my guess is that these memory CTDs may only accur if there are too many assert problems)

Bug report here:(for 1.0) When I discover Astronomy, my city display screen gets half crippled. It looks like a zoomed in region of the map with some of the information superimposed on the map but much of it inaccessible. The only thing I can think which I did oddly was I discovered techs which made colonies possible before discovering Astronomy. Anyone familiar with this thing already? Should I post a savegame?

It's a small display issue for France and Portugal
Copy over the files from the patch in the second post: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=455068

Btw, there is a small delay in the next version, but RFCE 1.1 will be released in a couple days
I'm finalizing inquisitions right now, try to solve a couple more assert failures with the debug dll, then a little balancing and it is good to go

Like I mentioned earlier, I like the new persecutions. But in the case the persecutor fails, I think the city should revolt for 1 turn anyway.

Like I mentioned earlier, I like the new persecutions. But in the case the persecutor fails, I think the city should revolt for 1 turn anyway.

It does revolt
Also unhappiness for a couple turns

I interpret an unsuccessful persecution, that there still were killings and trials and whatnot, just the persecution couldn't achieve it's goal in the end
The religion's roots were to deep in the city
Unhappiness, and a small revolt to represent the religious controversies is fitting IMO, both on successful and on unsuccesful persecution

I might be wrong, but I thought there was only a message that the persecution failed, no other effects?

I might be wrong, but I thought there was only a message that the persecution failed, no other effects?

Revolt and unhappiness is there for months now

Tested. You are correct!

I didn't found better thread for my issue:
Game crashes each 5-10 turns after 1700s with message "bad memory allocation" or something like this. Using windows 7. Graphics reducing doesn't useful at all, perhaps because in this game nothing to reduce ;D
And it is really annoying in lategame, because each turn lasts 5-10 minutes. What should i do?

I didn't found better thread for my issue:
Game crashes each 5-10 turns after 1700s with message "bad memory allocation" or something like this. Using windows 7. Graphics reducing doesn't useful at all, perhaps because in this game nothing to reduce ;D
And it is really annoying in lategame, because each turn lasts 5-10 minutes. What should i do?

MAFs (memory allocation failure) will happen in Civ IV no matter what, at least if you are on a 32 bit OS
This is an issue with the base game itself, no matter what the modders do it, will be there
Switch to 64 bit OS, and you are fine

Alternatively, there is a "MAF fix", which includes adding more memory for the game
It doesn't really solve MAFs though, only postpones them

Check these posts:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=224178
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12192629&postcount=209

Hi everybody!

I'm new here, as a poster, but I play RFCE a while ago. Right now I want to give you a hugh bunch of playtest feedback, coutry by country and a general one. I have to tell, that i'm a viceroy player, and made only a few monarch game, but i've fopund them too annoying. Soon I'll finish all the UHVs on viceroy, so then I goto the next level of challange.
!!!WARNING!!! A wall of texts are coming!!!

(ps: I'm a hungarian player, so my english is crapy, sorry for that!)

So first lets see the generel things:

- The map is awesome I like it really!
- So: Unit upgrade cost are simply bad. specially archery and meele units upg. cost. pls check it. i.e. arbeleister to mustekman 10g, archer to crossbow 50g, I just dont get it, a crossbow is much cheaper, than a musket :D btw early in game its too expesive, later ok or cheap!
- The AI is still an idiot! While I was waiting to my nation I saw a message: Ivan Asen was choosen to lead the crusade (Jerusalem)!!! wtf? Cordobans as chatolic is common or Genoans take Lübeck os Roskilde!!! and so on, I can tell more if needed.
- I suggest to make the last crusade for sure, its usually missing. I talk about the ~1269's its missed 3 times out of 5.
- Wonder issues: Shrine of Uppsala: I cant build it after a while. Last time I played with Lithuania and it wasnt built yet, got a shrine in my city and had not the tech: Divine Right. But couldnt built it for no reason :( Vinland: Played as Venetian and norse wiped, without this project. To meet the 3. uhv, I thought its the fastes way. Got my ship to iceland, take the city made a workboat, and still could not build it :( I was so dissapoited.
- there is a lost of civics that refer to small empires (i.e. burocracy ect.) but there is only 1.5 country to use that! Venetians in the very fisrt period and Netherlands! nobody else! (maybe portugal, but no)
- Inquisitors in general miss to often in my experience they work with 40% efficiency, but a good play require imo 70-80%
-Scores!!! Just for testing, played Norse on viceroy and on monarch. my scores were: v-15515 and m-15551, it simply does not woth it to play on monarch :D can you do something about it? (or wnat you?)
-
-
-

Byzantines:

Their unike power woth nthing imo. Its land is wast, but hardly usable is minor asia. The city of Antiochia is a shame, do something about is pls. Building something in is is 20-50 turns regardless what u do, what u improve around it.
UHV: 1, watch out for your cities, alexandria likly to grow bigger! 2. I never lost it, though bulgarians are the most dangerious, 3. never was a problem, after I dealt with the ottomans.

UP: like its nothig, UU: its nice, served me well. UB: its totally useless, never build them.
Otherwise its a nice and playable civ, I rate it for 9/10

French:

Oh my, France is a challanging one, then boring. Let me explain: the 1. UHV is a pain in the ass. Take France is natural, but Italy is strange, but imaginable if you guess you are trying to redo Charles' empire. But take Saxony (and swabia, catalonia) by Lybeack, thats just goddam far! Its seems a bit ahistorical too. Maybe if you would change it to Hannover or éeven more closer and more to south? Otherwise you should work on stability, but manageable. Graet land, nice going.
UHV: 1. Beside the issue mentioned avobe, HARD, you should work on it with full atention, with lots of sword and a few settlers. Bordeaux is a terrible city site, I used to burn it. I also burn Marseille to more easily meet the conditions and build it leater. 2. Hm I fialed it many times, due to the missing last crusade :( I suggest, to participate in all crusade and take Tyr for sure, and regullary empty the city, and collect army in Tyr. 3. If you achived the fisrt 2, the its cant be a probleme.
UP: Awesome, the best in the game, UU: its comes too late in game insignificant, UB: its awesome!!! i love it.
Its a good civ, I rate it 8/10.

Arabia:

Well, its defenietly not my style. I have not won it, due to the 3. uhv. There is no special issue with them, its quite straigth forward.
UHV: 1, Yopu almost got it, when the cities join to you. take Alexandria, build 1 in arabia and done. 2. Same as the 1. one, build several settlers and send a bunch of Ghazis to west and done. 3. Thats the real pain! My best rate was 27%, than collapsed, 'cause Arabia has a stability issue!, I recommand to take 1 good city in eurpe, like venice or genoa, and do not expand into unstable territories, out of 2. uhv's requests. Then spam missionaries from there.
UP: its a must for the third uhv, good and fun anyway. UU: its not bad at least. UB: its nice, help keep financial balance
Its a bit challanging civ. But its all about to prepare the 3. uhv. I rate it to 6/10.

Welcome Gilgames !

Feedback is always welcome, but please don't post several messages in a row. It's better to post a single long message.

Also the mod's aim is to balance Monarch, therefore some of the things you might have noticed on Viceroy difficulty are not really valid. I also play on Viceroy sometimes, but really the balance is for Monarch (for example the number of barbarians is not balanced on Viceroy).

Thirdly it seems that version 1.2 is going to get out soon(ish ?) so some of the issues you raise might be already corrected for the next version.

Please continue posting your feedback, just please try to keep in mind those three points. :)

Bulgaria:

I do love that civ, maybe 'couse its fits to my taste. So starting Konniks are your everything, and all depends on them. Ok lets see:
UHV: 1. do not estabilish any city in the first turn! Capture Odrin as ur capital, then you can found your cities (i prefer varna and ilfov). Then recuperate and take out Tsarigrad! if you can do this, you almost won the game :D Take the rest Byz cities in europe and start push pout settlers. 2. Now you do not have any enemy so focus your efforts on religion. Tsarigrad is your G.Prohpet factory, and all GP should used to improve faith, until you are very close to achive it. 3. Same as France, if you managed the fisrt 2, you can do it!
UP: Not bad, not good, UU: as mentioned above, later you wont need them. UB: its great, hepls a lot
Its a great civ, I rate is 10/10.

Thanks for this remind! Also i told, Monarch is annoying, I thought about the barbarians mainly. But as you can see, I dont really mentoin anything that are affected by difficulty level imo.

Thanks all, and I'll keep'em coming! I dont have such a feedback from 2 natoin only :D

Cordoba:

Its again, not my favourite, but very challanging.
UHV: 1. To acomplish that, you must FOCUS ALL UR EFFORTS on it! Set the city's production manually on the best spots, archer wall against the barbarians. the max size in my experiance is 13, wich should do by 1. 2-3. When you have done it, spain have arrived. You simply cant beat'em in an open conflict. They recive so mush deffence crusade, that even on viceroy, you cant outnumber then nor out tech them. So it will be a long shot. Amass an army and take 1 city, make peace, and repeat that until they collapse or wipe. Now the way is open to accomplish the 3. uhv. And during peace times you can build the wonders one-by-one. Portugal isnt an issue, they ar so weak.
UP: I found it useless. UU: I bearly built 1 during 3 game, useless. UB: its good
Alltogather its a real challange, I rate it 7/10.

Hi everybody!

I'm new here, as a poster, but I play RFCE a while ago. Right now I want to give you a hugh bunch of playtest feedback, coutry by country and a general one. I have to tell, that i'm a viceroy player, and made only a few monarch game, but i've fopund them too annoying. Soon I'll finish all the UHVs on viceroy, so then I goto the next level of challange.
!!!WARNING!!! A wall of texts are coming!!!

(ps: I'm a hungarian player, so my english is crapy, sorry for that!)

Great to see you here!
All your feedback is very appreciated :)

Norse:

They are compact. :D The one I won on monarch, and tried on emperor, but faild. You are a warmonger, act so!
All the need to acomplish their uhvs are given.
UHV: 1. I prefer land the shipped settler and found Halmstadt or Lodose and ship the settlers opn land and moce it to found rejkjavik. a bit later it takes 5-10 turns to build Vinland. 2. it comes with the 3. ship your men and take dublin (awsomke city) since its guaranteed win, move them forward (at least 2 bers) to Sicily, be aware of cordobans they are usually unfriendly (donno why) then take the city, and biuld lts of ship, to make some viking points. when your 3 city is up and running push out insane amout of berserkers and take all the city you have to. I finished all my uhv in 1020 on monarch too. Btw on emperor you got hugh stability problems, befor all city taken, i was collapsing!
UP: its a must and great help, UU: INSANE (best uu in the game) UB: very good!
It is the best civ to get familiar with RFCE, I rate it 9/10 (and not 10, due to its too easy, but very enjoyable)

UPDATE: Tonight I Won with norse on Emperor, it was insane! is smby want the savegame, I'll send him/her!! :D :D

Venetian:

I do not like them, hoever opnce won with it. They don not have any special issue.
UHV: 1, If you do not settle croatia, what the uhv dosnt want from you, as the AI does, then you can do this at start, by moving ur ships to south. 2. Chatolicism is a must have, and ur UP will help you to take over a crusade. Direct it to Conts. Take it and hold strong. 3. its might be a thech race, but is you keep urself small, might be good. Since you have no access: GB not used to build a city in wales! go there and take its access, or if u want do not go that far and take Tanger from indies (maybe cordoba).
UP: necessery UU: useless UB: useless 'couse when they come in play its too late to make any change!
Requires a special play style (dont like it) and give you a moderate challange. i rate them 6/10.

Burgundy:

Oh my, its remind me a bit to bulgaria, but a few centuries later with less room. But dont worry about nothing we got wine!
UHV: 1, If you can achive this, you made it at all! Build a capital, and move your other settler far north, as far you can (best to settle dunquerqe or bruxelles) and deffend it at all cost, until its up and running. So you are a burgundian, but first be a warmonger to enjoy wine later :D Aim your tech to Armord lancer, and crush france first, then a bit germany, after all, thats what uhv wants from you. France usually collapse, germans used to be a vassal. 2. if you done the first well, then you must be a moderate emipre with score lead. The culture is coming with the number of cities, so dont be shy expand with ur paladins! 3. its a LOL.
UP: its a must have for uhv2, UU: they are really OP, im pleased with them. UB: good, helps u in uhv2.
So if you have done the hard work, you can sit back and enjoy urself. I rate it 7/10.

Germany:

This civ is a short challange and a long wait! so boring, but well located do test other things.
UHV: 1. thats the challang part. I usually achive it a 100 years earlier :( and my biggest problem is where to put those goddam cities, to reach all the stuff and not to ruin their productions. First showdown with france, then burgundy, and use the usuall recipe: horse+iron asap, swarms of arm.lancer, done. 3. generally I got the 3. one in around ~1200. 2. after you beated the west, just go big and focus on research, nobody will ask you, what u do!.
UP: useless, till then i get rid of my enemies UU: to late to function, UB: nice and usefull, to keep those rebells quiet.
As you can see, after you made the first thing, its boring. I rate them to 5/10 (5 for the opportunity for testing other methods)

Kievians:

Aka: Fathers of the East. Because you build the foundation of 2 (3-4) other civs. Its a real challange to all. The problems comes from within, you must do all the uhvs at once, and a bit more.
UHV: I do not slpit them: The big dilemma come when you start the game, wherer to put the cties? You need lots of them and you can have lots of them, a abundance disturbance! your inital army should take Kurks, and u will need a city far east, near the iron on the hill (not the closer one) it will be you defender city. the rest is about balancing settler+worker - units - religion - and expanding on indies! It's a real pain to decide what to biuld and where! playable many times....
UP: must have for 2.uhv UU: nice one UB: really good!
A lovely civ with a big race against the time! Barbs are a true issue. I rate them 10/10!

gilgames, exactly which version of the mod are you playing with?

Magyarok(hungarians):

Cusp of my heart. They could be better in a few way, but well, at least a game where they exist!
UHVs, 1 of them should be changed! To the following: Explore the Atlantic ocean (preferably in spain) and Conquer Augsburg by 955. Maybe its not so widly known, that in the 10th centuries hungarians used to "adventuring" to south and WEST. they reashed even La Corunia! but have been defeated rougly at Augsburg in 955, that was the end point of these adventuring (raiding parties). For this of course you should weaken the city goard os strengthen the huns starting army (i prefer last option). But thats enough about history.
UHV: Luckily you got enough time to prepare. just axpand into the basin asap take Belgrad and if you are good, with that haste you can deal with the venetians too. But do not w8 to much to erase them, 'cause they have the ability to became very strong. if you move one of your initial settler to Bécs (wien) and biuld there a capital, austrians wont be a problem at all! (I know its squatting, but works and helps). the first test is to eliminate the mongol invasion, besides to reach Divine monarchy ASAP! (build wastminster-adopt free rel.) After 1300 when they are finally gone (another addon: in the carpatian basin, mongols appeared 2 times only!!!!!!(1241-42 and ~1260) not continously over 50 years!!!) So after 1300 focus your attention on south! gather your army, rebuild lost improvments and see what ottomans do. help retake Ardianopolis to byzants or to bulgars or if they are both a liability, take it yourself! ASAP If they could set foot in eurpe, you wont be able to kick them out. after this situation is solved somehow, sit back and axpand a bit more, the golden age will help a bit in the stability problems. (won on monarch too)
UP: i do not sense any advantage in it. UU: not bad, but too expensive, huns have a production issue. UB: not bad, hoever, if you aim the uhvs, cant really use its benefirs :(
Other issue: the names: If I capture Belgrad - regardless where is it - please rename it Nándorfehérvár and nor Macsó (plus: its a name of a territoy, not a city, one os a countless "counties"). An other liability is Belograd (supposed to be: Alba Iulia, couse latin) a totally useless city!!! plus, has no reason to be there! I can tell you a hundred more city to exchange with!
Summary is a nice civ with a "could be hard" challange and a bit confusing uhvs! I rated it 8/10


I'm sorry to forgot mention a few data: I played with 1.0 for a time, and changed to 1.1 a while back :D under winXP, BST 3.19

UHVs, 1 of them should be changed! To the following: Explore the Atlantic ocean (preferably in spain) and Conquer Augsburg by 955. Maybe its not so widly known, that in the 10th centuries hungarians used to "adventuring" to south and WEST. they reashed even La Corunia! but have been defeated rougly at Augsburg in 955, that was the end point of these adventuring (raiding parties). For this of course you should weaken the city goard os strengthen the huns starting army (i prefer last option). But thats enough about history.

Yep, I already posted this a couple times
Hungarian campaings in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_invasions_of_Europe) in the 10th century:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Kalandozasok.jpg

Having said that, an UHV similar to your suggestion couldn't be represented in the game
Hungarians shouldn't spawn earlier than 895 in the Carpathian basin, and 60 years until the Battle of Augsburg (Battle of Lechfeld) in only 15 turns
Not enough for any serious representation of this

I'm sorry to forgot mention a few data: I played with 1.0 for a time, and changed to 1.1 a while back under winXP, BST 3.19

Okay, thanks!
Many things were changed/improved since 1.1, watch out for the upcoming 1.2 release ;)

Spanish:

If you own your peninsula, you rule the world! But isabella is a "frigid " (we all know that from rfc too)
So Spain has only one problem, but its big (at least for me). WHERE TH HELL to put those cities in order to reach some production.....
UHV: 1. You are defenietly not pressed by time :D but to achive this, the best to own the whole land!!! So start to grow and take out Toledo, its usually weakly guarded by AI. If not then wait be very chatolic, gathjer faith, rather then army, do not make peace with those infidels and wait for the crusade wich aid you. (if i play spain its much more less and rare!!! :( ) and use this holy power with yours to reconquer the LAND. after a while i suggest to kick some portugal ass too. later they could be annoying, but at start: weaklings!! You have plenty of times to purge islam end judaism from your cities. sidenote: UP should be: three times more effective inquisitors!!! Sometimes it takes 5-8 inq. to purge islam from Toledo or Cordoba! (pls repair if not a feature)
2. After dealing with the peninsula, you have no threat by army, just copncentrate on the colonies. 3. as I sense, you can do very little about it. Be kind to all chatolics (england, germany dont play in this) and purge your own protester with the anti-reformation. I won with spain once (though tried once) and if not you are the finder of it, it have a small impact on europe, if you do, it has a lot bigger.
UP: as mentioned above, UU: cames in play too late, UB: nothing special.
Summary is quite good with a little sit back if your colonies are coming. I rate them 7.5/10

I admit it, be indulgent, i cant read through 300 page of posts :D
You are right about that, my suggested uhv is a bit weak, although there ar so many "alibi" uhvs, we could have one too :D by "just" take augsburg. with a method i mentioned, weaken their defense or improve starting army, like +2 HA or something.... maybe a make contact with indi: oporto minor civ, I dont have any clue about what can be programmed and what not :(

ps: can't w8 the 1.2....

Polish:

Its a true time pushed hard grind work! As RL hisory proved: if you are a polish, suffer from invaders!
UHV: 1, Religous one, its not to mention, have no tim limit, by luck. 2, the food stuff. its linked to the 3. and its the grinding part too. My suggestion to players: dont stop to build wonders or sit back for a sec, just expand - build stability - expand - build stability - ect... 'couse if you stop, you will loose all your uhvs. so build a city to west and fortify it hard and non-stop, the rest build and expand. thats it.
UP: same as huns, useless, UU: too late to function, UB nice one!
I founded it really hard and nerve-racking with lots of save-load. I rate it 8/10

Genoans: never played at all

English: played but never won, coming soon.

Portugal:

Thats a stupid one. I did not found any challange in it..maybe i have to try it on monarch too. But the recipe is simple: grind techs, keep up your 4-5 cities, aim shipbuilding, build the colonies, and a few more project, dont engage in wars. nothing special....
UP: Nice, since you do not have real production, UU: bad... UB: ok
This civ is uninteresting imo.... i rate them 3/10.

Og and sorry to intoduce so mush emotions in my descritions, but thats my way.

Lithuania:

Like gambling on a russian roulette!!! I mean it. Thus I have to tell you: it was a love at first sigth. No usual religion constraint but own old gods, a small nation how bear to dream big (hugh) and almost did it. You start in the cesspit of east. Surrounded by a dead, a strong and a rising power.
UHV: 1 and 2, Let's play this russian roulette: Settle your capital, preferably Kaunas on iron, and the rest, all conquered city build pagan shrine, then culture or vaivadija, nothing else. The only exception is Kaunas, who build infiite bajoras. take the inital army promote the to city attack, and bo berserk. From Novgorod to south...take as many city you can, before the russian does! skip only smolenks it will flip. when the plague and barbs ar gone, aim for the culture uhv. if got that, build defense everywhere beside basic economy. 3. The uhv refers to the civ, but it means only the region to take!!! however if you met the 2. uhv you got it all, an be proud!!!
UP: a must have, UU: not so goodm but dont have else, UB: awesomely good!!
This civ will provide you a nerve-racking and exiting challange. I rate it 10/10

Austria: just tried, not played serously nad looked very easy to me...but will do so later.

Ottomans:

I am strong, I am awesome, but how fast? Another time racer civ....
Issue: My historical knowledge may trick me, but i fell so, that the firt too goal was mixed up in RL. and they first took asia minor and than the eu part.... and the date: 1453 when ottomans captured Contantinapol !!! not the whole balkan!
UHV: After the flip, build barack+stable and set them to infinte knights... while taking Istambul! After it focus ALL ur power to north in europe and neglect the east side, Byzantz iant a threat at all
Be very very quick about ur business, oh and burn Ragusa to have same place for the bosnian city (i know is very historcal to take it, but its so small, na place even for a half one). If you managed this in time :D a dozen of knight will earse the rest of east. So you got a golden age? dont care! just focus on the third one!!! Hungary may give you an open border too!! (cant belive) 'couse you gonna be so powerfull. around 1550 i had 80+ stabiliy But austria, amass all the knight you can and prepare to an onslaught!! in additon the idiot AI may build an additional city in that province!. You aint depends on techs, stability not an issue, it must work on monarch too..
UP: its a crap (sry), UU: Great stuff, useable!, UB: same as UP :D
Summary is power vs time, good challange, i rate them 9/10

Muscovites:

Pretty the same as Ottomans, just a bit less time pushed. I'm annoyed, that the initail capital is not moscow, but i know this way is it historical (could you put on that spot a town?)
Endless hunger, Endless land. I won with them back in 1.0, since then I saw that the 20% has increased (not in munbers), but still not a problem, just a few more settlers...
UHV: 1, there is nothing else to do, but kick the mongols out of your land, cant be a real issue. 2, see as above, do what you have to...grab all land you see from baltic to Serkel. 3, Your trivial choise is Istambul. DoW on ottomans or whoever is in ur way and keep him under pressure. During that time: force 2 cities to build knights and 1 closer to build bombards. Unite them under the walls of Istambul and open fire. Not big story.
UP: awsomely usefull (stability 50-80), UU: not bad, UB: built them for stab. only...
Summary suggest me: if you like organize a real emipre its your choise. I rate them 6/10

Sweeden:

I am a lion? indeed, I am a LION. I have doubt its capability to complete the uhvs, but it was easy.
The most extrem surprise was the productivity: an avarage city built university in 3 turns!
UHV: 1, take ur inital army under the walls of Tonsberg, and take it. the rest shuold done in time, but less problematic. If done, organise your state, build guildhalls and soldattorps, improve land...ect. Expand carfully till 1700. 2, should not be an issue. 3. 2 galleon can carry all troop you recruit to the mainland. take all the costal cities and prepare several settlers in case of emergency :D and trade for stone! its important. The onyl thing will stop you is stability!! build any stability you can in conquered cities!!!
UP: its ok, UU: dissapointed me, usually with 70-80-90% to win, and died! omg, UB: its gorgeous
Summary shows, sweeden is a production powerhouse, insane number of units per turn! with moiderate challange level. I rate them 7/10.

Never tried Netherlands: but it doesnt seems very difficult....

Thank for your attentions, thats it for now. I told everything what i wanted :D from now on, I wont spam the topic this way.

We really appreciate your feedback. But could you please combine some posts next time. I lost the overview.
:crazyeye:

As I told it, there wil be no next time. If i post something again, it will be a regular one!! and I thought if i post the civs separatly, it helps to overview them. So im sad it doesnt worked well :(

As I told it, there wil beno next time. If i post something again, it will be a regular one!! and I thought if i post the civs separatly, it helps to overview them. So im sad it doesnt worked well :(

no problem at all!

As I told it, there wil beno next time. If i post something again, it will be a regular one!! and I thought if i post the civs separatly, it helps to overview them. So im sad it doesnt worked well :(

Here's a free formatting tip that will convey the style you were going for with separate posts: put each paragraph in a spoiler tag, in one post. That way it doesn't take as much space because you can open and close spoiler tags individually.

That might work, but, still u can be lost in textwall and harder to refer to a qoute' qoute, than a single post! imo
Btw I am a bit dissapointed, because all of you talk about how I posted these, and not about what I posted :(

ui: Absint fel tudnánk venni a kapcsolatot valahogy? lenne pár kérdésem, de azokból néhány off topic

The tendency for barbarians to raze cities really needs to be toned down. Anatolia is basically empty after the Seljuks.

The tendency for barbarians to raze cities really needs to be toned down. Anatolia is basically empty after the Seljuks.

Confirmed! I played several start game on monarch, and both of us were right :D Barbs appeared in my games and made some trouble, in anatolia, they razed 2 cities out of 4 in 200 years. But I was right too, once you are up and running, things are pretty the same, only slower research (which is compensated against viceroy). However I'm dissapointed and realized, why I choosed viceroy. On monarach the fun is lost! 'caouse you have to decide every step and move precisly. Although I'll make some further tests too.

The Seljuks are nothing compared to the Timurids (Keshiks). Keshiks have no hard counter, and the only soft counter is highly-promoted Knights.

In my latest Ottoman game, Austria reached its full potential because Germany and Poland both collapsed. Austria annexed Swabia, Silesia, Upper Hungary, Lesser Poland, and most of Brandenburg by 1450. From the German cities they control they get access to Teutonic Knights. They Vassalized Hungary after taking 3 Hungarian cities in the north but not before I vultured 2 Hungarian cities in the south. Austria's excellent modifiers really kick in after they get more than a few cities. They are able to quickly come up with SoDs after SoDs while maintaining an excellent tech rate. The siege of Vienna is going to be really fun.

Does castles builded by krak de Chevaliers boost stability? I had 2 almost similar games as France, one with krak and another one without. So, another game without krak much more stable, I control 55% of map. With Krak i never was able to control more than 35-40%. I always thought Krak don't work. Just decided to find out, the result on screenshot. (svn 1060) Btw, more than 1.000.000 gold in treasury ;D

I've encountered a bug a while ago, and now reappeared! If you play Orthodox country, there is a problem on the diplo screen! when I talk to another rthodox AI, it says -2: We hate you due to your religion! or something like this. And they do so, also. any idea about this?

Did you build the Round Church? That causes a diplomatic penalty with others of the same religion. At least I think it does.

Did you build the Round Church? That causes a diplomatic penalty with others of the same religion. At least I think it does.

I wanna play as the Papal States and build the Round Church.

Well I used to built it, but not allways

France
Beginning is annoying, so many barbarians. Lots of concentration needed.
Happiness and Unhealthiness abundant
Buy a mercenary and take over Bordeoux, and that one Southern French town
Get Armored Lancers and massacre Burgundy, take them over
England spawns, refuse flip. Nothing happens, possibly a bug
Send lancers over Channel and vassalize England
Send lancers into Iberia and save Spain from Cordoba. Spain peace vassals.
I lead Crusades. I vassalize Arabia.
Send Lancers and vassalize Portugal
Take over Genoa with knights at this point
All the while, building almost every single world wonder and being tech leader.
After Notre Dame, happiness is no longer a problem.
All the vassals make unhealthiness not a problem either
Germany is being slaughtered by Poland. Take out Germany.
Vikings declare war, who cares?
Take over Venice before they beat you to a wonder.
Vassalize Hungary really easily as the mongols attack them from the other side.
Give Hungary their cities back to stabilize them.
Austria declares war on us. They begin to take over Hungary, but I am quick --
I take over Swabia and Wien, and they surrender.
Take over and vassalize Bulgaria.
Spain declares independance and declares war. I don't care.
Vassalize Byzantium.
Vassalize Ottomans
Get bored with steamrolling over Europe :blush:

France
Vassalize...
Vassalize...
Vassalize...
Get bored with steamrolling over Europe :blush:
I would be surprised, if someone wouldn't get bored of such a "rich", full of vassalizing game. Every player, who have at least a tiny expirience can vassalize everything by France or Germany or Spain or Norway, etc. By any civ that starts early enough. Everyone can, vassalizing is for noobs ;D
Thats why, for example I made a challenge to myself, to maintain stability on decent level, capture all cities and avoid collapse. I don't wait, that someone going to do the same, but everyone could come up with his own challenge, if he like this mod.
--
But I hope for another balance in future. In one of my games ~ in 1830 year, overexpanded swedes suddenly declared war on me, they had such a huge stack of units, that easily took one of my cities with defenders, like ~15 line infantry, +20 highlevelled curassiers and 10 field artillery, that I used to bombard their stack. And they easely took a city. Near another city ~15 my line infantry in woods+ few field artillery with great difficulty restrained countless swedes. And it is not surprising, one hussar costs only 54 hammers for them, as i remember.
I just didn't expect of this, and long ago stopped to produce military, but anyway, it was awesome, that is was a war, not boring at all, I would like such an active and full of events wars in middle ages.

it was awesome, that is was a war, not boring at all, I would like such an active and full of events wars in middle ages.

Well you got some point! It has really small chance to find yourself in a 30years war, like in ~1640. there is no way to compete with 2-3-4-5 other strong civ at that point, because you already won an uhv or eliminated the rest. If you play a western civ do not meet with the russians (if they do something) nor ottomans (to far) and vica versa.:sad: