I'm starting this thread so you can post some ideas for the last UHVs of some Civs.

These Civs need a last UHV:
The Burgundians: currently resources
The Dutch: currently colonial
The English: currently colonial
The Franks: currently colonial
The Kievans: currently resources
The Moscowans: currently 2 vassals
The Portuguese: currently colonial
The Spanish: currently colonial
The Venetians: currently resources

For the Dutch, English, Franks, Portuguese and the Spanish we could do something with Colonies.
The Dutch can be the richest Civ in X-AD or have X gold in X-AD.
The Venetians the same as teh Dutch. Or have 10 OBs in X-AD.
The Portuguese could colonize that little isles (like Ponta Delgada).

All these are just my ideas.

How about for Portuguese colonize Ponta Delgada and 2 other islands, and finish 1 colony project by X-AD.

Dutch, English, Spanish, Portuguese and Franks were initially decided to have colonial projects as UHV. They could not coded until the colonies were in.

Kiev, Venice and Burgundy had resource requirements, those could not be coded until the resources were in.

The only one that has not been agreed upon is the Moscowan.

We could change those of course, but I think they make sense. Check the wiki for details.

Also Portuguese UP could be +25% on colonial project hammers.

Dutch, English, Spanish, Portuguese and Franks were initially decided to have colonial projects as UHV. They could not coded until the colonies were in.

Kiev, Venice and Burgundy had resource requirements, those could not be coded until the resources were in.

The only one that has not been agreed upon is the Moscowan.

We could change those of course, but I think they make sense. Check the wiki for details.

What was suggested for Moscow was 3) Control 3 vassals by 1600AD. This and other suggestions incl. tweaks to existing conditions are all included in bold in the civ UHV lists in the wiki.

Yesterday I finished the Venetian UHV in 1350. And with some more strengh of purpose, it could have been 1280-1300.
In Standard-RFC there are UHVs, which are not quite historical. So Germany never conquered England, the Ethiopians could not hold the Europeans out of South and East Africa and the Maya couldnt survive till 1745!
Maybe the UHVs in RFC-Europe should be handicapped. For example, the Venetians UHV could be, to control the Turkish Riviera and Sicilly with 2 cities each. (Conqering Rhode can only be a joke :crazyeye: not?)
Same suggestions for some more Civs. To be discussed...

Yes I think in RFC each civ has 1 UHV which didn't really happen, but if it would then the civ would have been much stronger in RL, like Rome not losing any cities to barbarians until 1000 AD or the Greeks circumnavigating the world (maybe it wouldn't have help them very much but it would have contributed to science by a very large amount), Germany winning WW2 and so on.

Yes I think in RFC each civ has 1 UHV which didn't really happen, but if it would then the civ would have been much stronger in RL, like Rome not losing any cities to barbarians until 1000 AD or the Greeks circumnavigating the world (maybe it wouldn't have help them very much but it would have contributed to science by a very large amount), Germany winning WW2 and so on.

Yes; this is what I've been pushing for in some redesigned UHVs such as the English and Burgundian ones. A lot of the UHVs still need major work. Some civilizations such as the Venetians and Genovese still have a very easy time of it, at least in the hands of the human players.

Yes; this is what I've been pushing for in some redesigned UHVs such as the English and Burgundian ones. A lot of the UHVs still need major work. Some civilizations such as the Venetians and Genovese still have a very easy time of it, at least in the hands of the human players.

We try to give all civs a a-historical UHV. Also, we are still working on the balance. Do you have any specific suggestions.

I think the Venetians and Genoans should expand more into the Mediterranean!

The second Venetian UHV - to conquer Rhodes - is much too easy, maybe it could be to conquer Constantinople, like Eric Dandolo did. In SP it is manageable, I think.

The first Genoan UHV - to controll Milano, Marseilles, Sardinia, Crete and Cyprus in 1540 could be added by Sicilly, Corsica and one City in Spain (maybe Barcelona or Valencia). I tried this in my last Game, it was no problem. But I cheated a bit. When Genoa spawned, I opened the WB and moved a Settler one tile to the East. It's a much better staring-position. Maybe you should think about it. :)

You see, the beauty of the UHV system is not to spell everything out for the player to achieve. If you've ever seen the show Blue's Clues, it's fun for the children (and I consider all RFC players children, myself included:lol:) to guess the 3 clues so that the "aha!" moment actually comes to them. It doesn't get boring after the first run (in fact, the show ran 5 days a week with the same episode).

So for example, Genoa's UHV says to control its areas but specifically without Sicily mentioned. Well, normally a player would go settle in Sardinia and get it over with. Wrong! Sicily is the best closest land mass for Genoa and has plenty of resources, and grows much quicker than Sardinia. What would be the fun in telling the player to go settle Sicily specifically, rather than letting them figure it out for themselves the second time around? (hint for the Norse)

And the point about settling Genoa 1E, yes, that is the most logical move, and it's up to the player to do it. (I actually think that the reason Genoa spawns on top of the iron is that sometimes the AI doesn't improve tiles that are too close to the border, and making the AI build on top of the iron will guarantee them iron.)

Yes; this is what I've been pushing for in some redesigned UHVs such as the English and Burgundian ones. A lot of the UHVs still need major work. Some civilizations such as the Venetians and Genovese still have a very easy time of it, at least in the hands of the human players.

Whatever you do, please make it possible for the emperor UHV to be achievable. Making the Genovese harder is fine but make sure it's possible.

You see, the beauty of the UHV system is not to spell everything out for the player to achieve. If you've ever seen the show Blue's Clues, it's fun for the children (and I consider all RFC players children, myself included:lol:) to guess the 3 clues so that the "aha!" moment actually comes to them. It doesn't get boring after the first run (in fact, the show ran 5 days a week with the same episode).

So for example, Genoa's UHV says to control its areas but specifically without Sicily mentioned. Well, normally a player would go settle in Sardinia and get it over with. Wrong! Sicily is the best closest land mass for Genoa and has plenty of resources, and grows much quicker than Sardinia. What would be the fun in telling the player to go settle Sicily specifically, rather than letting them figure it out for themselves the second time around? (hint for the Norse)

And the point about settling Genoa 1E, yes, that is the most logical move, and it's up to the player to do it. (I actually think that the reason Genoa spawns on top of the iron is that sometimes the AI doesn't improve tiles that are too close to the border, and making the AI build on top of the iron will guarantee them iron.)

Okay, thats good argumentation about Sicilly, but what do you think about Valencia/Barcelona? At least, this game gives you a lot of time to complete the UHVs, so it can be more difficult, not?

The problem of moving the Genoan Settler 1E is, that it takes one turn. So you run in danger, not to get the 2 or 3 Builders in the beginning. Some Civs take one, others two turns till they get them. Maybe you should check this. If I would have two turns for it assured, I wouldn't open the WB :)

Allmost everyone says the Venetian UHV is too easy. So I propose to change the 2nd UHV. Instead of conquer Rhodos, conquer Rhodos and Constantinople.

I like the conquer Constantinople part, but it might be too hard for emperor (since the AI builds tons of guisarmes roaming the country--it's not impossible, just need a surprise attack). How about conquering Rhodes, Athens, Cyprus and Naples (also part of the Venetian empire at one point or another)?

I like the conquer Constantinople part, but it might be too hard for emperor (since the AI builds tons of guisarmes roaming the country--it's not impossible, just need a surprise attack). How about conquering Rhodes, Athens, Cyprus and Naples (also part of the Venetian empire at one point or another)?

Try it with a Crusade.

Can the Austrian UHV be changed so that if you or your vassals own cities in the Carpathian basin that will count? It was the Austrian-Hungarian empire, after all. That way, you can either capture Pest or try to win Hungary over diplomatically.

I think that also, in fact Hungary was not on the same level as the Austrian parts of the Empire, the Habsburgs were crowned as Hungarian kings. The Hungarian nobles gave up their right to elect the king only in 1687. But it wasn't the Austrian-Hungarian Empire: it existed only from 1867.

All the build / found uhvs always need some luck at emporer, maybe change to "or conquer" so you can actually do something if the ai chooses your techs, because there is really no way you can be faster with techs for the first few hundered turns.

Maybe you can't be faster forever, seems the ai gets faster with techs when i do good. Playing a later nation the ai lacks a lot of techs they have at that time when i play an earlier nation. Maybe it's because i avoid to hurt the ai, i really hate when everything that could be a threat collapses.

bye Myri

Norse 1st UHV, have a city in France in 1100. Everything you should have there, warmap, settlermap, will be english in 1065, 1068. Maybe back to 1050 or add something to warmap, settlermap, that won't flip to england?

bye Myri

Are you sure the victory is "in" as opposed to "by"?

Oh, sorry, it's "before", nothing said :)

bye Myri

I think the Venetian UHV is still too bent on easy conquests. That makes a boring game.

Also don't like the phrasing of the Spanish "four cities TOTAL" requirement. That means the player can just settle anywhere in North Africa, which is mostly empty. A city in Italy (not Sicily or the islands) at least should be mandatory.

Most UHVs are to easy, only mean play "normal" and you can't avoid it. There are more UHVs needed you actually have to do something difficult, at least one per civ. At the moment very few civs have a difficult UHV.

Far to much empty space and ressources (and colonies for those UHVs) are one reason most UHVs are to easy, you can always expand as much as you want without fighting much and get much more ressources you actually need.

bye Myri

One of the UHVs that really need fixing is Poland's. As Hungary it's pretty easy to be the largest empire by territory because Arabia doesn't count in calculating territorial size. But as Poland it's nearly impossible to have more population than Arabia by 1540 because the Arabs have a big start in time and the space to expand their empire. Except when it collapses and doesn't respawn, of course. Which isn't very often. Either Arabia should count as being in Europe or not at all in calculating a civ's UHVs. In every case, not just one.

I agree with Jedi that Venice UHV is too easy. Capturing Constantinople is a must for them (1200 deadline).

I agree with Jedi that Venice UHV is too easy. Capturing Constantinople is a must for them (1200 deadline).

I'd suggest dropping Rhodes and requiring them to control Constantinople in 1300 as the first UHV.

Or on climax:
1) Control the Dalmatian and Ionian coast, Peloponnese and Constantinople in 1300.
2) Control the above plus Crete, Cyprus, Rhodes and own a city in Lombardy in 1450.

Played Poland, you have more than enough land and ressources available to have 5 times the population the ai has (after moscow spawned 75 % of russia is yours, you just have to settle there) ... even if you stay in the borders of the settler map you will have more population than everyone else (i did, thought could be interesting, but was pretty easy). That Arabia counts is a bug, it's not in europe. The other 2 UHVs are a complete joke, don't loose a city (prepared for war that's totally impossible) and have 8 cities ...

Add Genoa or all east and center med isles to 1450 and Venetia has actually something to do. With your UHVs Venezia still most likely does not need any tech, just a surprise attack or a crusade on Constantinople.

bye Myri

I am in favor of keeping the UHVs as realistic as possible. Perhaps the third UHV should be something on the lines of ''be the first to research x economic or naval technology'', in order to make the player balance growth with research breakthrough (something actually not easy because of the modifiers ;))

I agree. Counting Arabia for highest pop. is a bug and should be fixed. That's the only thing that's ever stopped me getting the UHV win.

I also agree with micbic. Giving Venice a historical naval goal would be more interesting. Either getting a naval tech or achieving naval dominance in the Med. by x date.

Ack, get some isles and be the first in naval technology (or have x ships of y size, whatever can be coded) would be nice. The main problem with Venzia at the moment is that you don't need techs at all.

bye Myri

Why is counting Arabia a bug? The UHV just needs to be stated differently (see emperor thread when I pointed this out).

Arabia or europe is the bug, i don't care :) With all that land to the east have 2 times the population of Arabia would be to easy.

bye Myri

Why is counting Arabia a bug? The UHV just needs to be stated differently (see emperor thread when I pointed this out).

I don't remember what you said in Emperor. But counting Arabia as Europe in the case of Poland or not counting it in the case of Hungary is inconsistent and plainly wrong. Which should it be? Is Arabia in Europe or not? Yes or no? You can't have it both ways.

I think Europe was meant as the whole map (since it's RFC of E), not just Europe. If you just count Europe, then how do you split the Byzantine Empire (when Asia Minor is half their empire)?

I think Europe was meant as the whole map (since it's RFC of E), not just Europe. If you just count Europe, then how do you split the Byzantine Empire (when Asia Minor is half their empire)?

Fine. By your logic then the Hungary UHV is calculated wrongly. Either way is OK but we've got to be consistent.

Well, I played Hungary to be the largest empire on the map, not just Europe. Is the UHV criteria for Hungary just for Europe proper (not including Arabia)?

Well, I played Hungary to be the largest empire on the map, not just Europe. Is the UHV criteria for Hungary just for Europe proper (not including Arabia)?

Yes. I have got all 3 UHVs as Hungary several times while being 2nd. in territory behind Arabia. Although the victory screen says most territory in Europe. That's why it's inconsistent. The same rules should apply to all.

The Hungarian UHV counts the tiles owned by each nation in "Europe". It excludes Africa and Middle East, so Arabia can bet Hungary if Arabia spears into Europe (i.e. the Balkans).

The Hungarian UHV counts the tiles owned by each nation in "Europe". It excludes Africa and Middle East, so Arabia can bet Hungary if Arabia spears into Europe (i.e. the Balkans).

I understand that. So why can't it be the same for Poland? Not counting Africa and the Middle East, I mean?

Venezia: Have 7 harbours (useful coastal cities) and 13 galleas (tech, production and money) by 1330 (maybe 1350, 1370, has to be tested) would be a nice UHV that sure can be coded (it's a quest in RFC) and reflects the position of Venizia.

If you can't / won't count the arabian, byzanz, ottoman population in europe for the Poland UHV rename it to "have the most population in 1540" and the bug is gone. Having more population than Arabia is easy enough, actually so easy that Poland misses a single difficult UHV.

bye Myri

Venezia: Have 7 harbours (useful coastal cities) and 13 galleas (tech, production and money) by 1330 (maybe 1350, 1370, has to be tested) would be a nice UHV that sure can be coded (it's a quest in RFC) and reflects the position of Venizia.

If you can't / won't count the arabian, byzanz, ottoman population in europe for the Poland UHV rename it to "have the most population in 1540" and the bug is gone. Having more population than Arabia is easy enough, actually so easy that Poland misses a single difficult UHV.

bye Myri

Whichever way we count it, it should be the same for Hungary and Poland.

Anyway, I've been testing Venice and come up with an idea for the 3 UHVs. I've tried this and its doable on Monarch although you have to tech pretty fast to Shipbuilding and Banking to get the 3rd. one. But it reflects Venice's financial power and requires you to build their UB, the Arsenal (shipyard).

1. Control Constantinople and 1 city in Greece in 1300AD.

2. Control the Dalmatian coast, Sicily, Crete and Cyprus in 1400AD.

3. Build 6 Arsenals and 6 Banks by 1500AD.

What do people think of this?

Whichever way we count it, it should be the same for Hungary and Poland.

Anyway, I've been testing Venice and come up with an idea for the 3 UHVs. I've tried this and its doable on Monarch although you have to tech pretty fast to Shipbuilding and Banking to get the 3rd. one. But it reflects Venice's financial power and requires you to build their UB, the Arsenal (shipyard).

1. Control Constantinople and 1 city in Greece in 1300AD.

2. Control the Dalmatian coast, Sicily, Crete and Cyprus in 1400AD.

3. Build 6 Arsenals and 6 Banks by 1500AD.

What do people think of this?

I like it. And Rhodos could be implanted in the 2nd UHV, if you like it.

I only disagree with Sicily. I would prefer it to be replaced by either Corfu or Rhodes, even both of them. On the others I agree it is definitely a step up.

I disagree with 1500, far to easy. Shipbuilding has very few prereqs, you can have in 1300 at emporer. One prereq of shipbuilding is banking, so you will build the banks while you research shipbuilding, nothing to achieve, you barely can avoid.

bye Myri

I disagree with 1500, far to easy. Shipbuilding has very few prereqs, you can have in 1300 at emporer. One prereq of shipbuilding is banking, so you will build the banks while you research shipbuilding, nothing to achieve, you barely can avoid.

bye Myri

I agree that Rhodes could be left in rather than Sicily as it's more historic. But I think the 3rd UHV should be 1500 for several reasons. Firstly, "by 1500" doesn't stop the Monarch player from accomplishing it earlier and getting a higher score. Secondly, we judge a UHV victory on how hard it is for Monarch players. Emperor players will always do everything so much quicker but most people won't be playing at Emperor, will they? Third, the longer timespan allows people to enjoy the game for longer if they wish. And enjoyable gameplay is really the point after all, isn't it? Not just how fast you can win at a particular level.

EDIT To myri and AP (or anyone). Here's your challenge. Let's see how quickly you can achieve all 3 proposed UHVs at Emperor. By 1400? By 1300? Even earlier? I'd love to see a screenshot and saved game. OK?

RFC UHVs: You can win earlier if you follow a plan, achieve something, play well.
some RFCE UHVs like your 1500: You will win earlier because you are around.

A 1500 UHV for Venezia is fine, but the last UHV should not be something you get just because you are around. Venezia only needs 11 techs to build 6 arsenals (and banks), no reason to focus on that, just be around and you will have in 1500.

The Norse have nice UHVs, they really have to do something to win, all civs need such UHVs, do something, not just be around.

bye Myri

I agree with you. I tried to make the 3rd UHV tech-based and achievable for the average player. Can you suggest one that will give them more to do than just focus on research or conquering?

EDIT: Like maybe build something historically specific to them. Maybe the Basilica San Marco and 6 Arsenals?

EDIT: Like maybe build something historically specific to them. Maybe the Basilica San Marco and 6 Arsenals?

And Banks IMO.

And Banks IMO.

So revise to:

3. Build the Basilica San Marco, 6 Arsenals and 6 Banks.

OK?

I share myri's view on having to achieve something to accomplish something (from the very beginning). To be honest, I think that some UHVs may lack some creativity; don't feel blamed as I haven't contributed to that much on that eiter. But, since the map has a different base from the map used in RFC (our map has much more land), we could come up with some very different goals. Here's a list of what could be possible, and since I lack historical knowledge to assign them to specific civilizations, feel free to do that. Some might create unhistorical situation (e.g. the first), but they create more replayability as they can be achieved in multiple ways.

- In stead of "settle these territories by X AD", why not "settle on at least 10 different islands?" Portugal settling the Azores is historical, but wouldn't it be just as much fun to decide to settle Sicily, Ireland, Cyprus, some of the Azores and the Greek islands? At least, there are more possible combinations.
- Secure a monopoly / have a number of Y on resource X. For example, there are whales near Norway, Spain, the Azores, Ireland and Scotland. With the exception of Spain, all access points can be settled or relatively easily conquered. It could be an ahistorical alternative for a Portuguese UHV, or just a challenge. The same thing could be said about olives. Arabia is, even with the crusades, too hard to conquer, but the others are possible; Cordoba usually doesn't survive.
- The cathedral goal is a goal that I found a little strange. In my last game as Kiev, I remembered about it in 1370, so I had 20 turns left to build a monastery, some churches and 2 cathedrals; I barely made it. The point is, that I could also have done that much earlier, but I must admit that the way I did it (and the way it is in RFC) was more exciting. The goal is not bad at all, but we must find something suitable. There is only one religion to be founded, which is Protestantism and that religion is currently founded by Sweden in 1500 AD (they have too many techs IMO). So, we could ask the player to complete 2 or 3 cathedrals (depending on the civilization), and possibly x4 monasteries by 1560 AD, or whatever is appropriate, since most developed cities can build these in no time. I'm aware of the possible exploit that all catholic buildings are converted, so that there would be no real difference. No idea how to fix this yet, but if you guys like it, I'm sure someone comes up with an idea.

That's it for now, I hope you like them / find them useful.

So revise to:

3. Build the Basilica San Marco, 6 Arsenals and 6 Banks.

OK?
:goodjob:

Basilica is good, so you can't wait forever. Add Medici Banks? Much less likely you will win just because you are around :) You can add the banks for the flavour, it's just nothing to achieve, you will have the banks when you build the arsenals.

Agree with Wessel, everything you actually have to achieve something is fine.

bye Myri

Just thinking out a face-lifted French UHV:
1) REX time! 6 cities out by 800 AD
2) Control the historic French territory by 1475 AD
3) Grab the Notre Dame, the Versailles, Louisiana, Quebec and 2 other colonial projects of your choice by 1750 AD.
This way, we have the player 'roleplay' part of early Frankian Kingdom, while toning the difficulty a bit up.
Thoughts/objections on that?

I like the REX idea as well as the wonders. However, I believe the colonies should be arbitrary. That is, build any 4 - 6 colonial projects. I don't see why France should fail if they get Virginia and New England instead of Louisiana and Quebec.

I don't see why France should fail if they get Virginia and New England instead of Louisiana and Quebec.
Umm...maybe because the French founded colonies at Louisiana and Quebec in RL? Anyway, I think making the player build specific colonies makes the case even more difficult (specific research path + I-must-get-there-first). To leave some place for alt-history, the French can build 2 other whatever colonies. So this is a hybrid of accurate and arbitary.

OK I see your point, but let me add couple of things:

1. The mod is Eurocentric and I don't see European histrory changed much if Louisiana was French or English, the difference would have been if the French never became a colonial power. That is why I don't think picking individual colonies is relevant.

2. Another point, from a purely gameplay view, a goof French player is likely to be ahead in tech and thus get a lot of early colonies. It would be very frustrating if one has 6 colonies, but fails the UHV because he did not get Louisiana in particular.

I only think picking a specific colony is restrictive.

Okay: I agree to the Eurocentric thing, and I concede the point, as regards 1 at least.
Now, as regards 2, it is similarly frustrating if eg the Cordoba player had built 5 wonders, but not the Gardens of Al-Andalus.

Okay: I agree to the Eurocentric thing, and I concede the point, as regards 1 at least.
Now, as regards 2, it is similarly frustrating if eg the Cordoba player had built 5 wonders, but not the Gardens of Al-Andalus.

Wonders have very different effects, while all colonies simply provide resources most of which are not available in Europe (and most of them Sugar and Spices). If building specific colonies can be (for example) linked to a nation's monopoly over specific resource, then I would agree for UHVs requiring specific colonies, otherwise I think we should simply ask for X colonies.

French colonizing Louisiana vs Virginia had little impact on Europe. Cordoba builds or not the irrigation systems in Iberia would have a significant impact on Europe.

Testing the first condition of my French proposed UHV, I think that 6 is a good challenging number for city-founding.