Finally, we are releasing the (hopefully) last Beta version of RFCE!
So, you can get Beta 12 here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/rfceurope/files/

We got quite a few changes for this one, with huge help from all the RFCE players here in CFC :goodjob:
The biggest thing is the Minor nation mechanics/revolts, which will be further expanded for the next version
Also check out the new art added - especially Isabella ;)
Here is the detailed changelog:
General changes and UHV updates:
- Adjusted the spawn time for the Russian cities to historically accurate times
- Adjusted the AI flags for the various units, hopefully the AI would be more adequate now
- The Dutch now spawn with contact with England, Spain, France, Germany, Norse and Sweden
- Norse UHV 1 now requires the conquest of Novgorod instead of Crimea (use Berserkers and it is a better representation of the Varangians)
- Norse UHV 2 now requires accumulation of Viking points from conquering cities, sinking ships and pillaging improvements
- Missile (light) Cavalries can recieve the Drill promotions
- Norse now needs 30 Viking Points for their 2nd UHV, but sinking ships add 2 points instead of 1
- Hungarian Huszar upgradeable to Knight too (it's an Armored Lancer replacement after all)
- Religious buildings give half culture if using the "wrong" religion
- Carinthia is OK for Germany, Bavaria is Solid for Austria, Iceland is unstable for England, Sicily is OK for Spain, Brest is OK for Lithuania
- Cyprus, Crete and Rhodes are OK, Transylvania and Moldova are unstable for the Ottomans
- Arabia starts with Islam selected as State Religion and Islam is founded as soon as Arabia builds a city
- The AI now highly values the Atlantic Access resource and will not be willing to trade it so easily
- Swedish 2nd and 3rd UHV updated (added Lithuania to the 2nd, 10 cities on 2 more provinces for the 3rd)
- New 1st UHV for Genoa: Control Corsica, Sardinia, Crete, Rhodes and Crimea in 1566AD
- Shrine of Uppsala has double production speed with Amber
- The city of Rome starts with 2000 culture, to make the 1st Byzantine UHV harder
- New Wonder: La Lanterna. Gives extra production on water tiles.
- The new bonus for the Shrine of Uppsala is not coded yet. Temporary bonus is +3 happiness in the city where it is built
- Shrine of Uppsala doesn't have to be coastal, prereq tech is Architecture, obsolete tech is Divine Right
- Adjusted all buildings probability to stay on conquest:
--- All world wonders, corporations (and plague) have 100% chance to stay
--- All national wonders, religious buildings, military buildings, stability/culture/defense giving buildings have 0% chance to stay
--- All other buildings have 66% chance to stay
--- Exceptions: Jewish Quarter with 100% (because of the judaism spread mechanics), Pagan Temple with 66% (to increase the probability of the Shrine of Uppsala wonder)
- French 1st UHV expanded with Picardy and Lorraine
- Calais now spawns in 800AD (for the french UHV)
- Hungarian respawn chance in 1686 - reconquest of Buda from the Ottomans
- Reduced wild animal spawn in the mod. Also, animals can only defend
- Moved Pressburg Castle to Siege Engines
- Updated ALL leader personalities based on Caliom's changes (thx again!) - will keep everything here improved
- Updated city name maps: Venezia, Genoa, France, Burgundy, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Norse, Sweden - thx for everyone who helped in these!
- Spawning of Indy cities cannot be blocked by units any longer

Map and province changes:
- Added new French province Picardy to split Normandy
- Isles of Man moved to Mercia not Northumbria, makes the English UHV easier
- Moved the River near York one tile South (more geographically accurate)
- Expanded Franconia into Bavaria
- Bavaria merged with Tyrol and Salzburg (effectively moving Bavaria South-East)
- Added more resources to Gemany (mostly food for Bavaria and Saxony)
- Adjusted the borders of Saxony and Brandenburg so Luebek is in Brandenburg (French UHV now requires to build a city in Saxony, may change that)
- Readjusted Swedish provinces as per Beta 11 thread post 68
- Removed the land bridge between Sweden and Finland (no more Norse building strange roads)
- Removed some of the northern most islands above England
- Updated German city name map
- Updated the resources near Alexandria
- Ephesus replaced with Smyrna for a starting city of the Byzantines
- Rearranged a couple resources on the northern Atlantic
- Adjusted province borders within Estonia-Livonia-Lithuania
- Small changes near the Augsburg-Salzburg area
- Moved Madeira a few tiles SE
- Improved the Neman area (Lithuania)
- Removed and rearranged a couple resources in Anatolia, thus making it less fertile
- Changed the northern coast of Anatolia
- Revised all the rivers in Kiev, Lithuania, Poland
- Updated North Africa based on Morholt's suggestions (still not final)
- Adjusted the provinces to these last few changes
- French and German rivers improved
- New island-provinces: Madeira, Isle of Man (better for the English UHV with a separate province)

XML/text updates:
- UHV name for some UHVs
- New texts for some leaders
- XML Cleanup
- Updated the UHV condition text in accordance with the new/different provinces
- Added names to some of the Barbarian from some of the invasions
- Arabian UHV reads: "The House of Islam"
- The text for the Norse UHV is now correct
- Wonders got the "requires state religion" line in Civilopedia
- Removed unusable unit classes from Drill 2, 3, 4 in Civilopedia
- Byzantine preplaced cities now Constantinopolis (was Constantinople), Thessalonica (was Thessaloniki)
- Spanish 1st and 3rd, French 2nd, Genoan 1st and Polish 3rd UHV text update
- UHV name update for Byzantium, Hungary, England and Austria
- Updated civilopedia entry for Free Religion (Religious Tolerance)
- Added the dot for some civic texts
- Some general citynames are fixed
- Pedia entry for the remaining leaders
- Arabia UP text updated
- Moved Druzhina and Konnik to correct position in the XML code
- Added russian tags to all the leaders

Python/C++ updates:
- Speedup on the code for Independent city spawn (not all cities are checked every turn)
- We can now add names to spawning Barbarians
- ADDED MINOR NATION MECHANICS:
--- Cities in some provinces try to revolt, you can do several things to prevent them.
--- The result is either independent cities and/or spawning barbarians and/or loss of gold and/or nothing.
--- Current "Minor Nations" include Serbia, Scotland and Catalonia
- Moved Protestantism icon to Printing Press (needed C++ code to prevent non-Catholics from founding Protestantism)

Art updates:
- New art for Isabella
- Background for the button of Vytautas
- Removed unused wondermovie (to reduce the size of the mod)
- New/Better ethnic unit art for Russian civs, Muslim civs

Balance:
- Crossbowman city defense bonus reduced to 25%. They are still better than Archers, but it makes the Arbalestier more valuable
- Calais no longer flips to England
- Luebeck no longer flips to Germany
- Germany gets back the second starting settler (probably for a city in Saxony)
- Some large indy and barb cities spawn with Workers
- Removed the walls of Alexandria
- Removed free priest from protestant cathedral
- Austria starts with Arbalestiers instead of Archers
- Theatre (Opera House, Hippodrome) cost increased to 80, Inn reduced to 120
- +10% great person birth rate to Coffee House
- Notre Dame now gives +2 happiness in all cities (instead of all cities in the continent)
- Palazzo San Giorgio now gives +1 free specialist in all cities (instead of all cities in the continent)
- La Lanterna's cost increased to 400, Pressburg Castle cost decreased to 500

Bugfixes:
- Fixed: Moscow UHV 2 should work now (used to be that it required 2% land only)
- Fixed: Colonea now Stable/OK for Byzantium
- Fixed: The player can no longer prosecute religion from foreign cities (unless the player is the Pope)
- Fixed: Trading Companies no longer count towards the build colonies for the UHV conditions (except for Spain)
- Fixed: A bug with the pre-defined wars causing strange wars (bad array permutation when the civs were changed)
- Fixed: Viking points don't count roads and improvements inside own culture borders, also points count against Byzantium
- Fixed: The player wasn't able to prosecute even from own cities
- Fixed: the Round Church abliity is now lost upon change of religion, thus we will not have unintended hostility between non-Orthodox players
- Fixed: the Jewish part of the Polish UHV is counted as successful if you build/conquer the Temple Mount (it prevented you from building quarters)
Still many things to do:
- revise the whole mercenary system
- finalize map changes
- update all civs city name, settler and war maps
- keep improving dynamic civ names and leader personalities
- adding western accent to the names, instead of the russian characters
- further art updates, while releasing a computer friendly version of the mod (using vanilla art)
- and of course countless smaller changes, bug fixes and balancing
Anyway, we are closing :)

- French and German rivers improved

Does this mean that Toulouse is now on a river tile ?

And good work BTW, this looks more and more like a finished version.

Does this mean that Toulouse is now on a river tile ?

Indeed, the Garonne river is also corrected

since there have been quite some talk about it, and its not in the changelog ...

have the provinces in Sweden been tweeked as well adding Scandia?

since there have been quite some talk about it, and its not in the changelog ...

have the provinces in Sweden been tweeked as well adding Scandia?

Swedish provinces look like post 68:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=425721&page=4

Just ran a couple of games, 200 years as Norse and Calais never spawned .. think you broke it :D

If the Shrine is to be a culture wonder, why does it have prophet GP points and not artist?

Sicily seems to have been fed a lot a performance enhancing drugs .. getting it with anything but a full invasion fleet is pure dumb luck now. Sent my zerks over York and directly through Gibraltar and Palermo already had 2 archers, 2 workers, 4 skirmishers and 4 spears .. landing on that rock turned out to be suicide (even on the hill) :D

Thirty Viking points is too low, make it fifty (or higher, still testing). Sack York, Dublin and Palermo and pillaged Tunis for thirty so very low indeed.
Edit (Norse complete): Scotland Settler ready in 1041 for UHV. 59 Viking Points (this can go very, very high if persued aggressively :)). Pressburg built in on English stone, Vinland in Lund, Shrine in York). 6 cities in Scandinavia. 24785 points.

attack Sicily from the sea and sail them back outside the borders for healing

Perhaps Isle of Man province can be renamed "The Isles" (as in the Kingdom of the Isles) and include hebrides and orkney.

Aaaargh, the evil developers threw me a curve-ball!!

"The Scots are revolting!" .. what the hell? Just smashed a French resurgence and now this .. life as an Englishman sure isn't as easy as the tales let on :lol:

La Lanterna is gorgeous. Great job.
Isabella is a right proper minx! Would totally hit that! .. hahahaha.
- Awesome graphics lads.

PS: Am I the only that experiences a slight pause/hiccup when Frederick comes to court? takes 2-3 times as long opening his image than all the others, very odd (has been so for me since Beta 9 I think).

Downloading now, did the third Spanish UHV get changed to something possible?

Downloading now, did the third Spanish UHV get changed to something possible?

Why do you consider the old version "impossible". I haven't thought much about it, but it should be doable if you have an army ready and you beeline to the Printing Press (right after you complete your "conversion" UHV).

The player can no longer prosecute religion from foreign cities (unless the player is the Pope)

Very glad to read this.

Just downloaded and played this, as the Venetians, but the game crashed as soon as I met the Pope... at about the second turn.

Do you have a savegame. It would really help fixing the problem.

Hey, are those cities supposed to have these names?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=295561&d=1310731560

The reason that the third Spanish UHV may be impossible is if the world converts to Protestantism in 1584-1586. There is no time accomplish the third goal. IMO, founding printing press first should NOT be allowed as Spain, as they are a catholic country.

As i posted in the UHV thread:

"The 3rd Spanish UHV can be quite simple (Protestant faith not founded) or IMPOSSIBLE: founded in 1584 with immediate conversion.

In my current game Poland founded printing press in 1582 and Germany and Poland converted. There is no way I can get my armies over there in time to take three cities."

To me if the correct civ discovers printing press (Germany) right before 1588, there is very little chance the Spanish can get their armies over there in time. If we are going for Historical accuracy as much as possible, it is unrealistic to park a huge army near the German lines anticipating the event. I actually like the goal, just wish it were more based on turns after founding, rather than a hard date.

Example: Allow no Protestant nations by 1588 OR Conquer three Protestant cities within XXX turns of founding of Protestantism.

Hey, are those cities supposed to have these names?

Indeed it seems that burgondy dosn't spawn in Dijon, but in Beaune, and that Lyon is replaced by Vienne.
Tolosa and Burdigala are the roman names for Bordeaux and Toulouse, so that's fine, and for Chatelleraux and Auxerre well... The AI has a really poor city placement, but these are the real names of cities in the area.

I was actually only wondering about the Burgundian names (and Chatelleraux and Auxerre)... because in the other betas they were different. And then i remembered my Norse game when Lund had another name, and i asked myself if the citynames are buggy.

Spain is fairly simple, just be the first to discover Printing Press and mobilise immediately afterwards.
I usually have time to spare and stop PP at 1 turn and pop it as soon as 1/3 is achieved .. the beauty of it is the EP bonus that allows you beeline PP and still 'keep up' through spies, my biggest beef with Isabella is that the UU comes too late to have any significant impact.

Indeed it seems that burgondy dosn't spawn in Dijon, but in Beaune, and that Lyon is replaced by Vienne.
Tolosa and Burdigala are the roman names for Bordeaux and Toulouse, so that's fine, and for Chatelleraux and Auxerre well... The AI has a really poor city placement, but these are the real names of cities in the area.


The French and Burgundian name maps have been revised, as detailed in the City Names thread.

Beaune for Dijon and Vienne for Lyon are errors which will be corrected. (in the current beta Dijon and Lyon are actually 1 north of Beaune and Vienne.

Chateauroux, Auxerre and others are sizeable cities with proud medieval histories, they make fine additions.

Umm, actually later I restarted and it's been just fine, maybe it was just my computer. I'll tell you if it crashes again.

For the French cities:

AbsintheRed was doing the maps and I wasn't following the discussions. He will be gone for a few days, but when he comes back he can address the issues.

Was the faith points sytem reworked? I'm playing as Genoa, and I only have OB with Bulgaria (the only Orthodox country). The diplomacy bonus for 17 faith points is ony 1 point!

Also, Byzantium fell, but Constantinople never was captured.


Good job to the team for another step closer to perfection!

The reason that the third Spanish UHV may be impossible is if the world converts to Protestantism in 1584-1586. There is no time accomplish the third goal. IMO, founding printing press first should NOT be allowed as Spain, as they are a catholic country.

As i posted in the UHV thread:

"The 3rd Spanish UHV can be quite simple (Protestant faith not founded) or IMPOSSIBLE: founded in 1584 with immediate conversion.

In my current game Poland founded printing press in 1582 and Germany and Poland converted. There is no way I can get my armies over there in time to take three cities."

To me if the correct civ discovers printing press (Germany) right before 1588, there is very little chance the Spanish can get their armies over there in time. If we are going for Historical accuracy as much as possible, it is unrealistic to park a huge army near the German lines anticipating the event. I actually like the goal, just wish it were more based on turns after founding, rather than a hard date.

Example: Allow no Protestant nations by 1588 OR Conquer three Protestant cities within XXX turns of founding of Protestantism.

I had similar issues in my Spanish game - I conquered and held France and Italy, then vassalised Burgundy and Germany, and had them research something else on their way to Printing Press. I had spies at the ready to screw up other civ's civics (causing research turns lost through disorder, and hopefully instability). The Dutch spawn with Printing Press, so I only had to take Amsterdam, Groningen and Antwerpen (easily done, with their anemic starting stack). However, this only worked because my vassals (Burgundy) had settled Anvers . . . otherwise I'd have only had 2 cities to take from them and would need stacks randomly placed across the map to rip another city.

Before this winning game, though, I struggled, since I had my troops assembled in Normandy to storm Britain, but they never converted in the turns after the Dutch spawn. Instead I paid every converted civ to return to Catholicism, and at the end of turns 186 and 188, I ensured there were no Protestants, but I still failed - I think the game might check in between turns, as the Dutch continued to respawn (since Burgundy drew me into a resistance war by auto-DOWing over Anvers), and the Dutch resistance fighters reappearing counted as a Protestant civ - despite killing them off at the end of each turn, I still failed.

The best way to handle this UHV goal is to put troops in the Low Countries to take Amsterdam and Groningen, then place a stack in central France (to attack either France or Burgundy), a stack in the Salzburg area (to attack Germany, Austria, Hungary or Venice), and a fleet of Trojan Galleons in the North Sea (to attack Denmark or England). At least one of those civs will convert, and if you take both Dutch cities, you'll only need one more. If you're lucky, there will be 3 Dutch cities on the map.

I feel that some provinces are too cramped and you have to place a city on a sub-optimal position just to win it. This is mainly in the German-Polish are, Silesia for example. But also Flanders. Can we merge them instead?

Cultural domination is also difficult since they are thin but long.

What about the Round Church? It still has the art of Oracle.
And about Hagia Sophia. Wouldn't it be better if you remove the minarets? Hagia Sophia was originally built as an Orthodox church, not Muslim. It would cost to make at least because in this scenario, the Hagia Sophia is used as a symbol of Orthodoxy.

P.S: Sorry for my English, if you've found mistakes:)

One more thing. I played as Venice, and couldn't build Skirmishers. There simply was no button.

Are you sure you couldn't build Mounted Infantries? IIRC, you have the tech and the resources aren't a problem either, because they are close to Venice.

Not sure if it is intentional, but barbarian spawns from pillaging the pre-placed towns are gone (doesn't count for Viking points, just Gold). Its a god-send for the early spawners as you can get 3-400G over 300 years or so by having Skirms roam the land.

One more thing. I played as Venice, and couldn't build Skirmishers. There simply was no button.
Once you hook up horses skirmishers are replaced by mounted sergeants, that is probably why.

What about the Round Church? It still has the art of Oracle.
And about Hagia Sophia. Wouldn't it be better if you remove the minarets? Hagia Sophia was originally built as an Orthodox church, not Muslim. It would cost to make at least because in this scenario, the Hagia Sophia is used as a symbol of Orthodoxy.

P.S: Sorry for my English, if you've found mistakes:)

Oracle art is fitting as the Round Church was exactly round and made of marble and gold.

The Hagia Sophia minarets may go, but the domes should stay.

Not sure if it is intentional, but barbarian spawns from pillaging the pre-placed towns are gone (doesn't count for Viking points, just Gold). Its a god-send for the early spawners as you can get 3-400G over 300 years or so by having Skirms roam the land.


Once you hook up horses skirmishers are replaced by mounted sergeants, that is probably why.

That's right! I could build Sergeants! Now it's clear.

I just thought you've deleted Skirms, but there still was an article about them in Civilopedia, so i was puzzled.

The Hagia Sophia minarets may go, but the domes should stay.

That's great! It'll be real Orthodox:)

That's great! It'll be real Orthodox:)

That may be. But we can't edit it before we have an art without Minarets. If you (or someone else) can provide us with the art, we can include it, but not earlier.

Playing as France, three cities in solid areas in the year 750, -11 stability and Tours declares independence. Have you changed the stability modifiers for France?

Playing as France, three cities in solid areas in the year 750, -11 stability and Tours declares independence. Have you changed the stability modifiers for France?

Cities is not the only thing affecting Stability. Post a savegame to see what else is going wrong. This may or may not be a bug.

Aaaargh, the evil developers threw me a curve-ball!!

"The Scots are revolting!" .. what the hell? Just smashed a French resurgence and now this .. life as an Englishman sure isn't as easy as the tales let on :lol:

La Lanterna is gorgeous. Great job.
Isabella is a right proper minx! Would totally hit that! .. hahahaha.
- Awesome graphics lads.

;)

PS: Am I the only that experiences a slight pause/hiccup when Frederick comes to court? takes 2-3 times as long opening his image than all the others, very odd (has been so for me since Beta 9 I think).

You mean Barbarossa, right?
He has a couple texturing issues - the texture files are different, and takes longer to load
Also, the eyes are quite strange in some cases, and coloured oddly
He is based on a Civ IV: Colonization leader, my guess is that we have these problems because the original maker didn't port the LH perfectly

Anyway, I was never totally happy with the LH itself, and still looking for a better art

For the French cities:

AbsintheRed was doing the maps and I wasn't following the discussions. He will be gone for a few days, but when he comes back he can address the issues.

Yep, just report all the naming issues, preferably in this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=429472)
All city name maps are still under development

Just ran a couple of games, 200 years as Norse and Calais never spawned .. think you broke it :D

Hm, does anyone else has issues with city spawning?
I may have missed something when changed the spawn date...

Thirty Viking points is too low, make it fifty (or higher, still testing). Sack York, Dublin and Palermo and pillaged Tunis for thirty so very low indeed.
Edit (Norse complete): Scotland Settler ready in 1041 for UHV. 59 Viking Points (this can go very, very high if persued aggressively :)). Pressburg built in on English stone, Vinland in Lund, Shrine in York). 6 cities in Scandinavia. 24785 points.

No prob, we can increase the number of Viking points needed
Did you test the pillaging, everything ok with it?
0 points for own improvement, 0 point for roads (anywhere on the map), 1 point for any improvement outside cultural borders

Btw did anyone think about the meaning of pillaging roads?
Does it really make sense in a medieval mod?
I mean, how can a bunch of soldiers "pillage" or ruin a dirt road?

Chop trees so they lay across the road :)

Playing as Byzantines. Managed to destroy starting stack of Arabs, Bulgars, Venetians, Germans.

But on the other hand, research was really slow. I had aristocracy, siege engines and plate armor (guisarmier, castle and chopping) ready 40-50 years before the Seljuk spawn. One guisarmier is about 154 hammers and seljuks now have 13 strength, wasnt that 12 earlier? I am thrilled to see how it works out :)

Edit: The seljuk spawn is somewhat broken. They used to spawn in the north eastern part of Anatolia, now I get spawn outside Damascus and Jerusalem.

just finished winning Portugal on Monarch and i have some observations and complaints.
Cordoba absolutely killed Spain. by the end of my playthrough (around 1700) Spain had 3 cities in the upper left of Iberia and Cordoba owned the rest. England conquered Scotland very late. I never met Lithuania. they collapsed before i met them. Austria spawned, became Hungary's vassal, collapsed, respawned, lost Vienna to Hungary in a war, and collapsed again. Arabs collapsed early on and never respawned. Genoa conquered Belgrade for some reason. Burgundy built a lot of cities close together but actually went from Marsaille to the Netherlands. Sweden didn't get Aland. the Norse had built a city there and it didn't flip to Sweden which i found odd. I built Magellan's Voyage in Lisboa and now there was a graphic of a ship in the middle of my city. i found that quite humourous :D lastly, i built East and West India Companies and my colony counter went up as if it counted them as colonies. but they weren't counted as colonies toward my UHV goal so by the time i won my colony counter said i had 8 colonies. very good game and i had a lot of fun playing :)

I tried Moscow last night, the "get 20% of the land" UHV didn't trigger. I had 22% land and Lithuania, Hungary as my vassals. Conquered Istanbul too.

The Muscovy UHV is easy: just spam troops and settlers. The most important tech is drama(adjust culture rate to get land), the second is gunpowder(need bombards to siege Constantinople).

And about Hagia Sophia. Wouldn't it be better if you remove the minarets? Hagia Sophia was originally built as an Orthodox church, not Muslim. It would cost to make at least because in this scenario, the Hagia Sophia is used as a symbol of Orthodoxy.


As much as i dont like the minarets on the hagia sophia too, suggestion for such minor changes are quite irrelavant, unnecessary, and quite frankly makes you sound like some guy who likes to come here often and make suggestions to suit his personal cultural tastes and has no impact on gameplay whatsoever :)

P.S oh and on behalf of that guy i would like to suggest that the hagia sophia "grow" back its minarets upon capture of the city!

I tried Moscow last night, the "get 20% of the land" UHV didn't trigger. I had 22% land and Lithuania, Hungary as my vassals. Conquered Istanbul too.

The Muscovy UHV is easy: just spam troops and settlers. The most important tech is drama(adjust culture rate to get land), the second is gunpowder(need bombards to siege Constantinople).

I am not sure if Vassals count towards the land victory. Do you have a savegame?

I am not sure if Vassals count towards the land victory. Do you have a savegame?

Here. In the screen there was no X% + Y%(vassal) like regular game and RFC.

Here. In the screen there was no X% + Y%(vassal) like regular game and RFC.

As soon as I hit "End Turn", I won the game. Vassals don't count and you had just made it to 20.1% of the land (excluding Vassals). I will add a proper counter so you can see the real percentage.

Here. In the screen there was no X% + Y%(vassal) like regular game and RFC.

LOL. Tried again, and the UHV triggered just after the turn(1528) ends. 22.5% land, 2.5% was of vassals. In the stastitics I have 800000 square km. So it is 40000 = 1%.

When I redo the mercenary mechanics, should I leave the option to contract mercs away or should I make it so that you can only hire and release mercs?

I would think that only hire/release should be fine and most fitting.

What do you guys think?

When I redo the mercenary mechanics, should I leave the option to contract mercs away or should I make it so that you can only hire and release mercs?

I would think that only hire/release should be fine and most fitting.

What do you guys think?

i think just being able to buy mercenaries is the best route. countries didn't sell their army to other countries :P

Only make hire and release, countries didn't hire out their soldiers (or at least not the ones present in-game)

Another vote for only hire and release. Also my biggest problem with the system as it is is that there are rarely any mercs to hire past early game, I suspect it has to do with the 10% cap on mercenaries.

Then I will make only hire/release options. This would be easier to code.

Then I will make only hire/release options. This would be easier to code.

Cool, I always found the contracting out mechanics unrealistic
Don't forget to get rid of the other bugs/issues of the current system:

So, the bugs and incompleteness in the current mercenary system (the ones I know of):

The mercenary gold bug which can cause unrealistic amount of gold in a few specific cases
Gold calculation bug of the Carthagian (Genoan) UP - this may be related to the previous one
Another small bugs in the code which enables negative gold, thus "free" mercenaries
Clicking on the mercenary button (on the main interface) causes CTD for many people
The mercenary screen UI has some small issues as well
There's also a bug in RFC/RFCE that creates mercenaries with 0 level, or with -1 XP sometimes
Contracting units out is very unrealistic. Why would the ruler get money, after some mercenaries left to serve someone else?
Also, the income you get from the current contracting out mechanics isn't balanced at all.
The "price" of mercenaries is more or less based on the number of promotions they have, rather than the actual stregth of the unit (in RFC/RFCE a spearman with 5 promotions is much more expensive than a knight with no promotions)
Mercenary naming is also screwed up currently, at least if you want to use regional names. And it won't work the province system the way it is now



Of course if you rewrite the whole thing from scratch, then most of these won't be a problem at all

Of course if you rewrite the whole thing from scratch, then most of these won't be a problem at all

Don't worry, I will remove all the old code (along with the bugs) and introduce my own set of new bugs that would be unique to our mod.

and introduce my own set of new bugs that would be unique to our mod.

Awesome :lol:
RFCE deserves it's own bugs :mischief:

Love the delay of the Longbows but have run into another (related) issue. Kniggits!

How the hell does one go about countering these things? AI spams horse like there is no tomorrow and with double promotion (Barracks/Stable) the available counter (Guisarmier) runs its head against a brick wall.
Also, the religious orders are able to build knights before (sometimes very early) Chivalry is even remotely close which just feels wrong somehow. Teutonics/Templars are already cheaper and more powerful than vanilla Knights so is a double whammy.

In short: The mid-game lacks tactical options. We have managed to replace Longbow spam with Knight spam which is great for Civs with Horses but still makes for a bland landscape.

Crusade mechanic needs a rethink, as Germany I got #1-4 in the span of a 100 years or so. Lost Jerusalem trice to respawn/revolts and every time Rome sent out a new decree .. in the end I had 30 Knights +support in the Levant and all of Europe was begging for my protection.
Is it possible to make getting subsequent crusades for a single civ more difficult/less likely?

PS: Early Pressburg + Hungarian UB = "Lol". That is just scary, my Austrian game was vaporized in no time flat when I suddenly came up against twin generals leading Knights ... hahahahah :)

Knights are best countered by more Knights. Guisarmier need to use terrain and city walls to properly defend against Knights. I will do the math again, maybe we can give Guisarmier a small boost. (Also, Arbaleist in cities should be enough to stop Knights)

I will think about delaying the Knight Orders until the first Crusade and the ultra powerful Crusades are on the "to fix" list.

Knights are best countered by more Knights. Guisarmier need to use terrain and city walls to properly defend against Knights. I will do the math again, maybe we can give Guisarmier a small boost. (Also, Arbaleist in cities should be enough to stop Knights)

I will think about delaying the Knight Orders until the first Crusade and the ultra powerful Crusades are on the "to fix" list.

Giving Guisarmier +100% vs Heavy Cavalry instead of +75% would have them at 12str vs knights still less than an ordinary knight with its 13str
and they still don't have anything vs light cavalry so they aren't too strong imo

spearmen(4) have +100% vs heavy cavalry giving them 8str vs lancers(7) and heavy lancers(10)
guisarmiers(6) have +75% vs heavy cavalry giving them 10.5str vs heavy lancers(10) and knights(13)
and cavalry units are easier to build with 2 promotions(barracks, stables), infantry for the most part only get 1 promotion (barracks)

I'm having a tough time with Portugals infantry against the seemingly endless cordoban cavalry assaults (everything from horse archers/berber cavalry/armored lancers and later knights)
Having their UU replace the maceman and become available later with chivalry isn't helping either :)
The problem isn't defending cities, it's defending resources and workers :)

..The problem isn't defending cities, it's defending resources and workers :)
Hahaha, yeah. Not a lot of options for evicting a stack pillaging along whatever strange path the AI choses.

Spain planted five triple-strength Knights on the Luebeck Salt when I was playing Vikings, they never moved and didn't pillage it either.
Once I had a stack of mace and guisarmier (no horse for norse :sad:) moved into range they sprang into action, wiped out my stack (never should have chopped that forest :)) and pillaged everything in sight .. very odd.

Since the pikes come relatively late, making Guisarmier better at their job might not be such a bad idea. Light cavalry is not a big problem due to the low strength (hate their running away though :)) but heavy poses a significant obstacle unless it decides to suicide against castle walls.

But the knights are supposed to be dominant until ~15th century. I think a better solution would be making heavy cavalry more expensive, and maybe even add an extra upkeep cost to them.

Not sure if this is the right place to post this but...

It says in the civilopedia that crusades can target non-christian player's capitols.
I think this should be more common, as I haven't seen it happen yet.

Maybe if Jerusalem is already taken when the time for a crusade occurs?

And about the knights- Morholt has a good idea. Knights were dominant, but expensive.

Not sure if this is the right place to post this but...

It says in the civilopedia that crusades can target non-christian player's capitols.
I think this should be more common, as I haven't seen it happen yet.

Maybe if Jerusalem is already taken when the time for a crusade occurs?

And about the knights- Morholt has a good idea. Knights were dominant, but expensive.

This is part of the 4th Crusade dynamics. If you play as a Catholic player and you get a lot of gold, then you can "buy" a Crusade, becoming the leader and sending it towards the Capital of any player. The AI will only do this as Venice -> Constantinople and Spain -> Cordoba.

Spain planted five triple-strength Knights on the Luebeck Salt when I was playing Vikings, they never moved and didn't pillage it either.
Once I had a stack of mace and guisarmier (no horse for norse :sad:) moved into range they sprang into action, wiped out my stack (never should have chopped that forest :)) and pillaged everything in sight .. very odd.


I think they are stuck there because they wan't to attack the city but can't. Because Luebeck is not on spains warmap. :(

Could id be that stability is a bit out of control?
Just started a game as Netherlands and watched the replay. Many AI civs collapsed because of overexpansion. They conquer many often independent cities in a few turns and collapse.


Venice managed to conquer Constantinopel via Crusade. Byzantium collapsed. Venice conquered some more cities and collapsed too.

Burgundy captured Jerusalem, Dumyat, independent Groningen ?!, Ragusa ?! and collapsed.

Ottomans captured independent Byzantine cities and collapsed.

Muscow captured independent Kiev cities and collapsed.

Austria conquered one hunagrian city, Hungary immediatly collapsed, Austria captured some more cities within a few turns and collapsed.


It is sad that so many major players collapse without any intervention from other civs. There is probably no way to tell the AI to expand more slowly. But maybe we could lower the treshold for complete collapse and grant independence to few cities more often.

England conquered and lost the scotish provinces three times :D

Could id be that stability is a bit out of control?
Just started a game as Netherlands and watched the replay. Many AI civs collapsed because of overexpansion. They conquer many often independent cities in a few turns and collapse.


Venice managed to conquer Constantinopel via Crusade. Byzantium collapsed. Venice conquered some more cities and collapsed too.

Burgundy captured Jerusalem, Dumyat, independent Groningen ?!, Ragusa ?! and collapsed.

Ottomans captured independent Byzantine cities and collapsed.

Muscow captured independent Kiev cities and collapsed.

Austria conquered one hunagrian city, Hungary immediatly collapsed, Austria captured some more cities within a few turns and collapsed.


It is sad that so many major players collapse without any intervention from other civs. There is probably no way to tell the AI to expand more slowly. But maybe we could lower the treshold for complete collapse and grant independence to few cities more often.


This sounds like a bug in the Stability module. Did you get any errors in the PythonErr files?


England conquered and lost the scotish provinces three times :D

This is intended and it is what you guys wanted, right?

This sounds like a bug in the Stability module. Did you get any errors in the PythonErr files?

No, there are no errors in the log files. I have also the ingame python-error-popups turned on. But i don't know if they appear when autoplay is on.

This is intended and it is what you guys wanted, right?
Yeah, therfore the smiley

No, there are no errors in the log files. I have also the ingame python-error-popups turned on. But i don't know if they appear when autoplay is on.


Hm ... when stability drops, then the player should first start losing cities from secession and this should slow down the expansion. There are also safeguards against snowball secession (secession results in a small boost of Stability). Maybe there is a problem with changing civics and the temporary loss of stability form Anarchy (although this has been nerfed for the AI). I will look into it.

What about Byzantium respawn later as Greece?
To add some trouble for Turks:trouble:

Guisarmiers shouldnt be stronger. Knights should dominate and guisarmiers safe behind walls. They cant be on pair with knights, leave them be.

Instead of a 100% bonus vs. Heavy Cavalry instead of a 75% bonus, a 25% defense bonus vs. Knights will maybe be better.

Guisarmiers shouldnt be stronger. Knights should dominate and guisarmiers safe behind walls. They cant be on pair with knights, leave them be.

Who said that Guisarmiers should be stronger than or equal to Knights?

It's more about giving them a decent chance at defending against cavalry.
Currently a Guisarmier is relatively weaker than a Spearman concidering their usual opponents(Lancers/Heavy Lancers/Knights).
Prior to increased use of gunpowder pretty much the only thing that a cavalry/knight unit shouldn't attack is a unit of spearmen/polearms headon. Outflanking was the way to go on this.. not a simple charge which was the main and pretty much only attack of Knights. If it weren't for this advantage of polearms/spearmen they probably wouldn't have been used that much since pretty much any other type of unit defeats spearmen :) (excluding maybe peasants armed with field tools^^)
Usually from what I gathered Spearmen didn't participate in a fight that much, they were mainly used to secure an area from a cavalry assault, since a headon assault against a wall of spears was pretty much suicidal for cavalry.

I had already posted the stats about the units but I added some more info, like the promotions

Spearman(4) +100% = 8str vs Lancers(7) and Heavy Lancers (10)
14,3% stronger than a Lancer while a Heavy Lancer is 25% stronger than a Spearman

Guisarmier(6) +75% = 10,5str vs Heavy Lancers(10) and Knights(13)
5% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 30% stronger than a Guisarmier

suggested:
Guisarmier(6) +100% = 12str vs Heavy Lancers(10) and Knights(13)
20% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 8,3% stronger than a Guisarmier


including promotions:attack 1 for infantry(10%), attack 2 for cavalry(20%)

Spearman(4) +110% = 8,4str vs Lancers(8,4) and Heavy Lancers (12)
equal to a Lancer while a Heavy Lancer is 43% stronger than a Spearman

Guisarmier(6) +85% = 11,1str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
5% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 40% stronger than a Guisarmier

suggested:
Guisarmier(6) +110% = 12,6str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
10% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 24% stronger than a Guisarmier

As I had suggested an increase in the defense bonus vs. heavy cavaly to 100% would still leave Guisarmiers weaker than (comparable)cavalry. And the cavalry units still have the additional benefit of more promotions due to barracks/stables.
(which also makes cavalry/knights the better unit even with a 'buff' for Guisarmiers.

including defense bonus: 25%

Spearman(4) +135%= 9,4str vs Lancers(8,4) and Heavy Lancers (12)
12% stronger than a Lancer while a Heavy Lancer is 28% stronger than a Spearman

Guisarmier(6) +110%= 12,6str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
5% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 24% stronger than a Guisarmier

suggested:
Guisarmier(6) +135%= 14,1str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
17,5% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 10,6% stronger than a Guisarmier


so..
a Guisarmier 'dug in' on plains or so for 5 turn(25%) are atm still weaker than attacking Knights.

And a Guisarmier attacking Knights still is a bad idea even with 100% vs heavy cavalry

I still dont agree. You are missing all the easily obtained defense bonuses like forest hill, rivers and castles.

Who said that Guisarmiers should be stronger than or equal to Knights?

[...]

I had already posted the stats about the units but I added some more info, like the promotions

Spearman(4) +100% = 8str vs Lancers(7) and Heavy Lancers (10)
14,3% stronger than a Lancer while a Heavy Lancer is 25% stronger than a Spearman

Guisarmier(6) +75% = 10,5str vs Heavy Lancers(10) and Knights(13)
5% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 30% stronger than a Guisarmier

suggested:
Guisarmier(6) +100% = 12str vs Heavy Lancers(10) and Knights(13)
20% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 8,3% stronger than a Guisarmier


including promotions:attack 1 for infantry(10%), attack 2 for cavalry(20%)

Spearman(4+10%) +100% = 8,8str vs Lancers(8,4) and Heavy Lancers (12)
4,76% stronger than a Lancer while a Heavy Lancer is 36,4% stronger than a Spearman
Should be 8.4 strenght for Spearman. So Spearman is equal to Lancers and 26.7% weaker than Heavy Lancers.

Guisarmier(6+10%) +75% = 11,55str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
3,75% weaker than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 35% stronger than a Guisarmier
Should be 11.1 strenght for Pikeman. So 7.5 Weaker than HL and 28.8% weaker than Knights.

suggested:
Guisarmier(6+10%) +100% = 13,2str vs Heavy Lancers(12) and Knights(15,6)
10% stronger than a Heavy Lancer while a Knight is 30% stronger than a Guisarmier
Should be 12.2 strenght for Pikeman. So 1.7% Stronger than HL and 21.8% weaker than Knights

etc.

You're makings some big mistakes. A guisarmier (if it had a 100% bonus vs. Heavy Cavalry) with Combat I promotion doesn't recieve a (6+10%)*100% vs. Heavy Cavalry, but a 6+110%. So no 13.2 strength, but a 12.2 strength. Als the modifiers are cummulative.

I still dont agree. You are missing all the easily obtained defense bonuses like forest hill, rivers and castles.

The castles can be bombarded away, so I think you shouldn't count those. But then you still have 25% for Fortify and maybe for hills and rivers. Outside the city you can indeed count 25% upto 75% for terrain bonus'.

Just discovered Amber can be randomly discovered in mines which doesn't make much sense.

As far as I know amber wasn't mined during the middle and early modern ages, it was picked by hand from the beach. Perhaps the Camp is a more suitable improvement?

The Greek Phalanx in RFC has a 100% defence bonus against Chariots, as in they die horribly if attacking. That is exactly what the Guisarmier needs in my opinion, you'd need knights to attack but can use the more easily accessible polearms to block their advance and stop the pillaging of the innocent villages.
Just discovered Amber can be randomly discovered in mines which doesn't make much sense...
Just the random resource spawn mechanic at work, part of Civ4 I believe (or is it RFC?).

Early days amber was collected by hand, but as with everything else of value to the gentler sex man eventually found it easier to mine it directly from the veins the "loose" bits originally come from (Google/Wiki is your friend :))..

Just discovered Amber can be randomly discovered in mines which doesn't make much sense.

As far as I know amber wasn't mined during the middle and early modern ages, it was picked by hand from the beach. Perhaps the Camp is a more suitable improvement?

Not a Camp, a Quarry perhaps, but definitely not a Camp (with tents in the woods).

The random discovery of resources is a feature in BtS and it is still present in the mod. However, the chance is pretty small.

It is sad that so many major players collapse without any intervention from other civs. There is probably no way to tell the AI to expand more slowly. But maybe we could lower the treshold for complete collapse and grant independence to few cities more often.

Hm ... when stability drops, then the player should first start losing cities from secession and this should slow down the expansion. There are also safeguards against snowball secession (secession results in a small boost of Stability). Maybe there is a problem with changing civics and the temporary loss of stability form Anarchy (although this has been nerfed for the AI). I will look into it.

I agree with Caliom, would be better for gameplay this way
The total collapse of civs should be rare (down by 5-10 stability points), so losing cities from secession would be much more common.

Just discovered Amber can be randomly discovered in mines which doesn't make much sense.

As far as I know amber wasn't mined during the middle and early modern ages, it was picked by hand from the beach. Perhaps the Camp is a more suitable improvement?

Not a Camp, a Quarry perhaps, but definitely not a Camp (with tents in the woods).

The random discovery of resources is a feature in BtS and it is still present in the mod. However, the chance is pretty small.

I don't really have problems with "mining" Amber, or even discovering a new site every now and then
But if you guys want to, we can change it to a Quarry

It's just strange to find Amber in the middle of the Alps when it occurs on seashores IRL.

My assault on Leon was also made worse when I discovered a Spanish mine producing amber. Like that city needs a buff, or another handy happiness resource! I guess it could have been worse and been iron, though.

Is Notre Dame supposed to be available to build for everyone? I noticed that Krak Chavallier was Catholic state only and the cathedral is a lot more 'pious'.

Is it intentional that forests do not add health? The benefits of chopping and dropping mills/workshops/cottages keep most trees from long lives but would be nice to at least have the option.

Is Notre Dame supposed to be available to build for everyone? I noticed that Krak Chavallier was Catholic state only and the cathedral is a lot more 'pious'.

Is it intentional that forests do not add health? The benefits of chopping and dropping mills/workshops/cottages keep most trees from long lives but would be nice to at least have the option.
Yes, a cathedral can be adapted to another faith (Hagia Sophia anyone?), but the Krak was a fortress used by crusaders.

Yes it is because health is supposed to be scarce

But surely a Muslim or Pagan civ wouldn't build the Notre Dame?

If all civs can build the Temple Mount - the Holy of Holies - without being Jewish, than a cathedral makes sense for all civs to build. It would make sense to require catholocism present in its city, like St. Sophia does with Orthodoxy.

But surely a Muslim or Pagan civ wouldn't build the Notre Dame?

Why not? It is ahistroic, but we don't want to script the game and make it run on rails.

Karak was a Crusader thing. The Dome of the Rock is a specific Muslim thing. The Round Church is associated with Orthodox politics and Caesaropapism. Notre Dame is a gigantic temple/cathedral and I don't see why it couldn't be a temple for any religion (including Paganism).

If all civs can build the Temple Mount - the Holy of Holies - without being Jewish, than a cathedral makes sense for all civs to build. It would make sense to require catholocism present in its city, like St. Sophia or the Round Church do with Orthodoxy.

Temple Mount isn't the Temple Mount. Temple Mount is The Old Synagogue of Krakow, this is something that I have been thinking about fixing for some time now.

Easy boys, just wanted to know if a glitch had snuck in as I haven't played Arabia in a while and noticed the difference :D

Is it possible to add a list of the religion specific wonders to the civilopedia entries for the religions?

PS: Seljuk spawns next to Jerusalem is not nice by the way :(

Easy boys, just wanted to know if a glitch had snuck in as I haven't played Arabia in a while and noticed the difference :D

Is it possible to add a list of the religion specific wonders to the civilopedia entries for the religions?


The wonders do list if they require specific religion. I will look at the reverse.

The wonders do list if they require specific religion. I will look at the reverse.

Sry Veshta, but I don't think this is necessary, noone would really use it
There are only 5-6 wonders with state religion requirement, and they are easy to find

Sry Veshta, but I don't think this is necessary, noone would really use it
There are only 5-6 wonders with state religion requirement, and they are easy to find
No worries, just a bit a convenience junkie when it comes to such things :lol:

Temple Mount isn't the Temple Mount. Temple Mount is The Old Synagogue of Krakow, this is something that I have been thinking about fixing for some time now.

I think renaming it to "Jewish Quarter of Krakow" is the best option. At least for now.

I think renaming it to "Jewish Quarter of Krakow" is the best option. At least for now.

I don't want to name it after a city as it may be build in another city. It should be generic, like Grand Synagogue or something. The idea is to represent the laws established by Casimir that protected the Jews, leading to lots of Jews migrating to Poland.

I understand. Maybe the Old Synagogue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Synagogue_(Krak%C3%B3w)) is better. Or Kazimierz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazimierz) (The best known Jewish Quarter in Krakow). I don't think there is a city with the same name.

I understand. Maybe the Old Synagogue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Synagogue_(Krak%C3%B3w)) is better. Or Kazimierz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazimierz) (The best known Jewish Quarter in Krakow). I don't think there is a city with the same name.

I vote for Kazimierz.

Temple Mount isn't the Temple Mount. Temple Mount is The Old Synagogue of Krakow, this is something that I have been thinking about fixing for some time now.

So it is . . . I always built it in Jerusalem when playing as a crusader civ (since I always purged the Jews -if present- from my cities to increase papal favour and odds of leading a crusade), which only further cemented my confusion here.

Easy boys, just wanted to know if a glitch had snuck in as I haven't played Arabia in a while and noticed the difference :D

You have to admit you had it coming - you know the internets mean serious business. :p

So it is . . . I always built it in Jerusalem when playing as a crusader civ (since I always purged the Jews -if present- from my cities to increase papal favour and odds of leading a crusade), which only further cemented my confusion here.


You cannot prosecute religion in Jerusalem, if you can then it is a bug. You can prosecure Jews form cities after you build the Temple Mount, but you cannot prosecute the city with the Temple Mount itself.

Again, Temple Mount is the Polish wonder representing the Polish tolerance for Jews (i.e. the Synagogue in Krakow or something similarly appropriate).

You cannot prosecute religion in Jerusalem, if you can then it is a bug. You can prosecure Jews form cities after you build the Temple Mount, but you cannot prosecute the city with the Temple Mount itself.

Again, Temple Mount is the Polish wonder representing the Polish tolerance for Jews (i.e. the Synagogue in Krakow or something similarly appropriate).

Sorry I wasn't more clear - I meant to say I persecute the Jews in my core cities - Jerusalem is often the only city left for me to build the "Temple Mount" in, which further led to my confusion that the "Temple Mount" was the Temple Mount.

I also vote for changing the name to Kazimierz, to prevent further confusion regarding the wonder's origin & purpose.

Now with that dynamic research cost, GP-bulbing seems far less useful now.
Any comment with this issue?

Now with that dynamic research cost, GP-bulbing seems far less useful now.
Any comment with this issue?

Do you mean that scientist are less useful? They probably are less useful, but they are still useful. It is not too difficult to get about 20 or so turns ahead of everyone else and with good timing, 20 turns can make a huge difference. How many cities can you get in 20 turns of Knight domination? Scientist are less useful then before and they require more strategic timing, but they are still useful.

For long R&D projects they are useless, but once you get down below 20 turns they have a noticeable impact, especially when racing to critical techs.
Can't count the number of times bulbing the path of a tech like Public Works has saved me from collapsing .. stability buildings are almost as important as wonders some times even more so :D

GPs are fairly weak though, except the ever dominant engineers. Perhaps adding a few extra bulbs/coins/notes/whatever to them when they are settled would help bridge the gap.

Edit: Don't know if its a bug or not, but seems that I don't inherit the wars my vassals start. Spain started at war with Netherlands on their spawn but I am not at war with them, I did get Isabella's wars against Cordoba/Portugal when they were initially vassalized so must be the "start at war" thing.

Scholars (and especially spies :mad:) annoy the hell out of me when they pop up, but I usually save them for a Golden Age. If I'm Catholic, my first priority is to build a church ASAP and run a priest so I can found a military order (preferably Templars, since they can scout out the map and lead to big profit when it's time to trade mapae mundi, but Teutonics work as a condolence prize). After that, I run merchants for corps & settling, with the odd engineer thrown in.

The scholars do feel nerfed in this mod, but if used to trigger a Golden Age, they're still quite valuable to have around.

Do you mean that scientist are less useful? They probably are less useful, but they are still useful. It is not too difficult to get about 20 or so turns ahead of everyone else and with good timing, 20 turns can make a huge difference. How many cities can you get in 20 turns of Knight domination? Scientist are less useful then before and they require more strategic timing, but they are still useful.

I think general bulbing was meant.
i.e. using a great priest to bulb divine right

the thing is that bulbing only gives about 1000 research points towards the tech
once you're around banking in tech the GP's become useless since pretty much all techs worth bulbing cost a hell of allot more. (like 10000 for divine right)


If I try to bulb banking I usually only get about half of the research from the bulbing, the rest has to be researched normally (saving 3 turns woohoo^^)

so basically the only techs that can be bulbed are techs early on or obsolete techs once you've passed them.

Currently I only use GP's either to found a corp, elsewise I settle them in a city.
Usually Great Priests (Hammers and Gold) or Great Merchants (Food and Gold)
When running Guilds/Apprenticeship Great Scientists can be quite nice too (Hammers and Research)
but they usually don't have much of an impact

p.s. due to the guild house there are also allot more Great Engineers spawning

You cannot prosecute religion in Jerusalem, if you can then it is a bug. You can prosecure Jews form cities after you build the Temple Mount, but you cannot prosecute the city with the Temple Mount itself.

Again, Temple Mount is the Polish wonder representing the Polish tolerance for Jews (i.e. the Synagogue in Krakow or something similarly appropriate).

If you change the name you might also want to change the picture that shows up when you build the Temple Mount. I'm currently under the impression that it shows Jerusalem. (The Golden Dome in the backround)
I think that's another main reason for thinking that it's the Jerusalem Temple Mount..

I have found myself bulbing techs that can be bulbed instantly or to leave a turn or two.

Once past that point in the tech tree all my GPs go towards Golden Ages except any surplus ones (usually Engineers) who get settled.

Sometimes I find myself running three golden ages back to back when combining GP golden age, 2/3 victory conditions and Versailles all at the same time. 20+ turns of golden age gives a massive research, gold, and production boost.

Just generally from the GP golden ages, the extra benefits of the golden age seem to me to outweigh the benefits of several settle GPs.

I think it depends on the civ played to says which is better ;)
Settling GP's vs GA through GP
and the 20+ turn GA you mentioned was only 1/3 due to the GP's ;)
Since I usually play the smaller civs like Genua, Portugal, Netherlands etc. a GA usually isn't that great concidering the amount of cities. Another factor would be how early you can settle a GP or how long that guy will be giving the bonus in the long run. And the boni from Guilds or wonders like Fontainebleu that affect specialists also affects settled GP's. But anyway I've always like the bonus food from great merchants (2 GM's = 1 bonus citizen/specialst).

But the reason for the posting...
umm I've tried several games with Portugal now and I've noticed that I almost always start at war with Cordoba. Sometimes France is already at war with me too.
I've just started a game with England and they start at war with France... :/
This was something that wasn't intentional iirc? (No bonus troops when cities flip since you're already at war)

and btw. it's nice to see Cordoba build the Alhambra, La Mezquita and Gardens of al Andalus most of the time, but they absolutely dominate Iberia since Spains AI seems even more stupid than usual (Or it's just Cordoba that's become so strong, kick my butt when playing Portugal, well not really but only a stalemate.. I'm not getting anywhere with them, but I don't play aggressive either)
Tried a game with Spain and had Cordoba wrestled down by the spawn of Portugal it wasn't even hard.. so it is possible.. it's just the AI that can't/won't
Have a save from Portugal in 1449 where Spain only has 3 cities in Spain but captured Florence and Genua while Cordoba owns the rest of Iberia :)

and for the sakes of the settled GP's a save from Genoa (I find Zena to be quite a nice city^^)
but I was extremely lucky in that game concidering what wonders I was able to build (Leaning Tower, La Lanterna etc.)

It is really nice to see Cordoba build its wonders. I think a few more of the obviously religious wonders should require state religion. This makes it a little bit more likely for the wonder to be built in its homeland or at least a similar society. Imo, the following religions should be necessary for the following wonders:

Catholicism- San Marco Basilica, Sistine Chapel
Orthodoxy- St. Basil's Cathedral
Paganism- Shrine of Uppsala

Muslim wonders are handled pretty well since most of them require Arabic Knowledge. Unfortunately, the Dome of the Rock is the only Muslim wonder that actually requires Islam. I can totally see why realism-wise, but it would be very nice to have the +50% GA length available on an accessible wonder.

Cordoba's performance is very dependent on how hard they are hit by the 3-4 waves of barbarians early on. I have had Spanish starts where they are collapsed and Portuguese starts where the best Cordoban unit is the mighty archer .. others they have flooded the peninsula with Berber's and have Isabella reeling.

Spain usually wins out when the supermodel queen starts buying out crusades and get papal assistance though but can happen quite late..

In my current Beta 12 game as Austria, Cordoba has destroyed Portugal and has cities controlling 2/3 of the Iberian Peninsular. Spain has the northern 1/3.

Other observations:
- The arctic causeway is gone, meaning that Vikings/Sweden can't march troops to Finland without them getting wet feet (or vice versa). Sweden has proven to have accumulated less cities than Vikings in this game, although are more powerful in terms of their military.

- The gap in the mountains in southern Hungary between Hungary and Bulgaria is now a gaping hole! I don't recall if this was discussed but thought that it was worth a mention. No problem at all in the current game but could be for a Hungarian game vs an active Ottoman Empire.

- France and Burgundy split later French territories.

- Germany was pretty weak when Austria began (but that can be said for many player-neighbours on start).

- France has gained all of Outremer through the Crusades. Arabia seems weak (at least in this run).


- As others have mentioned - England struggles to control the whole of the British Isles due to Scotish rebellions. These mechanics seem to be working well. Have yet to play England on the current version to see how this affects a RL player.

- Vikings take an hour and a half to win with (including the time it takes to leave CIV going whilst cooking & eating dinner). This is funny but good as other civs are very long and painful in comparison (not specifically to this version - basically any of the ones that have late victory conditions).


Thanks for perservering with what is a wonderful MOD!

Last question - some time ago there was something posted that Lithuania was a placeholder and the UHVs were going to be redone for it. I am curious as to when this will happen and if there is any help needed to work out what these are. Lithuania is one civ I have failed repeatedly and would like to complete. I know almost nothing of their history so would have to research them to help with working out UHVs but am willing to do so if it will help!

- Vikings take an hour and a half to win with (including the time it takes to leave CIV going whilst cooking & eating dinner). This is funny but good as other civs are very long and painful in comparison (not specifically to this version - basically any of the ones that have late victory conditions).

I'm torn on how I feel about this one - on one hand, true Civ players love the long games - E/M are the only proper ways to play the game. However, Civ makes real life so much harder to live (loss of sleep, late for work, blowing off more important things, etc. :D), so mods with so MANY civs with unique play styles (damn Rhye for inventing UHVs!) make the game even worse. It is nice to have a few quick games here and there, and sometimes I wish a few more civs in the game had their 3rd UHVs occur a bit sooner, but at the same time the Epic/Marathon love makes me not care about long games, either.

The few truly quick games in this mod (Norse, Sweden, Dutch . . . well, as long as you don't include the waiting for the start of the last two, and if your rig is fast enough for the Late Ages turns to process at a reasonable speed) are still extremely fun to play, which is a testament to the work 3Miro, Absinthe Red & co. are doing with this mod - the quick games in regular RFC (like Egypt & Babylon) aren't nearly as fun, and feel too much like they're on rails, leaving you little-to-no breathing room if you're playing for the UHV. Great work lads! :goodjob:

Do you mean that scientist are less useful? They probably are less useful, but they are still useful. It is not too difficult to get about 20 or so turns ahead of everyone else and with good timing, 20 turns can make a huge difference. How many cities can you get in 20 turns of Knight domination? Scientist are less useful then before and they require more strategic timing, but they are still useful.

Maybe we can let them not only bulb techs, but also decrease further cost of all associated techs...for example, GS bulbs literature -> +1700 to literature and -5% cost from all techs GS can bulb.

This may be too complicated. But I think GPs could have some buff, like, -1 cost for golden age, free revolution in golden age like regular game...

Maybe we can let them not only bulb techs, but also decrease further cost of all associated techs...for example, GS bulbs literature -> +1700 to literature and -5% cost from all techs GS can bulb.

This may be too complicated. But I think GPs could have some buff, like, -1 cost for golden age, free revolution in golden age like regular game...

I think I will just increase the beakers from the light-bulb, this should solve the issue.

I was also thinking of giving golden ages a little buff
Most cities don't have huge population or big production, so no real boost here.
The science (commerce) boost also worths less because the techs are preferably researched in a certain date.
So I feel GAs are a little weak in RFCE, giving them anarchy free revolutions seems like a good solution to me

Just got home the other day and downloaded the new beta (12). You guys are doing an awesome job- so much improvement since the last time I played (beta 9)! Some of the UHVs still need some work, but still make for fun games (I love the German and French ones!)

Some things I have noticed-

-Cordoba is very weak (I beat them twice with starting units as Spain and Portugal, but they build their wonders.

-Byzantium is interesting- they lose east anatolia to arabs and seljuks, and collapse after Venice buys the Crusade, allowing Bulgaria to own all territory south of the danube. However, Venice collapses almost immediately after taking Constantinople.

As Ottomans I won in 1517, due to only having to fight indies, bulgaria, and Vienna (vassalized Hungary).

The scottish revolts work well- England can never hold on to their scottish cities. Also, if they can keep the norman city they flip, they have a tiny chance at getting the 1452 UHV, but that is rare due to the AI not being able to land SoDs.

Lithuania's unique unit is a god. I used a stack of ten of them to repel the mongols and then get the UHV. However, the AI never builds them, and gets steamrolled by keshiks.

Genoa's AI is excellent. The only thing with them is that city they build in corsica should be spelled Ajaccio, not Aiaccio.

Arabs are as good as dead once the crusades start. I recommend trying a mechanic where a "Jihad" occurs if they lose a city to crusaders and they receive units to take the city back.

Viking UHV is too easy. Maybe add the Shrine of Uppsala to the Vinland UHV. Also, if you really try, you can really rack up the viking points. In one game I got 86 (!)

All that said, there has been a tremendous amount of improvement. Civs actually go for at least some of their UHVs (specifically, Moscow always gets the barbarian one, Spain buys crusades and prosecutes to beat cordoba, and bulgaria gets their territorial one. Plague is a pain in the butt as it always comes at the worst time, but it is a nice challenge.

Just wondering, is there a way you can script wars into the game at certain years to mimic history? (You don't have to do every single european war from 500-1800 AD :lol: but some major ones, maybe even with some accompanying units would add some more flavor to the mod.

If there are any civs in specific you want playtested, just let me know and I'll cover it.

-HockeySam18

I was also thinking of giving golden ages a little buff
Most cities don't have huge population or big production, so no real boost here.
The science (commerce) boost also worths less because the techs are preferably researched in a certain date.
So I feel GAs are a little weak in RFCE, giving them anarchy free revolutions seems like a good solution to me

Golden Ages erase existing anarchy (IE, switching civics/relgion, then using your great people on that same turn removes the anarchy instantly), however it's not quite the same as being able to change civics on the fly during a golden age like you can in SOI. Even adding this (or single-GP Golden Ages) would be a huge step forward.

The only thing with them is that city they build in corsica should be spelled Ajaccio, not Aiaccio.

From what I've been able to find, Aiaccio is the original Italian spelling of the name, Ajaccio being more recent.

Viking UHV is too easy. Maybe add the Shrine of Uppsala to the Vinland UHV. Also, if you really try, you can really rack up the viking points. In one game I got 86 (!)

Good points. I think 50 Viking Points or so is doable. And the Shrine isn't bad either, although it's a wonder in (modern day) Sweden.

I was also thinking of giving golden ages a little buff
Most cities don't have huge population or big production, so no real boost here.
The science (commerce) boost also worths less because the techs are preferably researched in a certain date.
So I feel GAs are a little weak in RFCE, giving them anarchy free revolutions seems like a good solution to me

Perhaps something to counter anarchy? Like anarchy gives -3 permanent stability, a golden age could give +3 permanent stability.

Perhaps something to counter anarchy? Like anarchy gives -3 permanent stability, a golden age could give +3 permanent stability.

That's also sound nice, but we shouldn't have both permanent stability boost from GA, and no anarchy (thus no stability loss) under GA

3Miro, does every turn in anarchy gives -3 permanent stability (or number of cities / 3) for the player?
if ( pPlayer.isHuman() ):
pPlayer.changeStabilityBase( iCathegoryCivics, max( -3, -iNumCities / 3 ) )

That's also sound nice, but we shouldn't have both permanent stability boost from GA, and no anarchy (thus no stability loss) under GA

3Miro, does every turn in anarchy gives -3 permanent stability (or number of cities / 3) for the player?
if ( pPlayer.isHuman() ):
pPlayer.changeStabilityBase( iCathegoryCivics, max( -3, -iNumCities / 3 ) )

Yes. This is how it works.

Giving Anarchy-free Civic changes for Golden Age would be very beneficial.

Agreed, I also prefer to boost golden ages in this way
Will look into it

More emphasis on GA's will make the early Religious Law/Organized Religion switch even less of a choice .. AI already pumps a lot of GP and is very aggressive in using them for GA's.
If they give permanent stability you may run into late starters being unable to collapse the civs they need dead in time for the UHVs.

Better option as far as I am concerned is anarchy free switches during GA's

Hey Merijn, just saw your latest update
Why did you reverted my changes in the civilizations and leaders.xml files?
I know you are getting rid of every unnecessary xml entries, and that's great
But the leaders and civs from vanilla CIV were added there, because they don't have russian tags otherwise

More emphasis on GA's will make the early Religious Law/Organized Religion switch even less of a choice .. AI already pumps a lot of GP and is very aggressive in using them for GA's.
If they give permanent stability you may run into late starters being unable to collapse the civs they need dead in time for the UHVs.

Better option as far as I am concerned is anarchy free switches during GA's

Yep
My only concern is that the AI is unaware of this.
I'm not sure if it realize that switching through golden ages won't cause anarchy, and certainly won't know it spares a couple stability points

Hey Merijn, just saw your latest update
Why did you reverted my changes in the civilizations and leaders.xml files?
I know you are getting rid of every unnecessary xml entries, and that's great
But the leaders and civs from vanilla CIV were added there, because they don't have russian tags otherwise

Oh, I see. But if we want russian tags for all texts, we need to add them to ALL vanilla wonders, ALL vanilla buildings, ALL vanilla units, ALL vanilla RFC text, ALL vanilla resources, etc.. And still then they have to be translated and I don't think that will happen soon, if it will ever happen at all.

BTW, only a few did realy have a text in it. And I don't think anyone will translate the remaning texts into Russian. (At least, I don't get any sign some will) If they played the game as it was before my revision, they would get an English text, because there was no "text" in the tag. Now, they also get the English text, but then we save a lot of space. And most of the russian translations are outdated.

I think we should remove all text that haven't a translated tag in it, and keep (=readd) the ones that have a russian translation.

I'm also concerning removing the Russian tags completely. It will make fixing all problems with the fonts al lost easier. And most all neccesary things (Features like the UHV, concepts, Crusades, custom bonus' for civics etc.) aren't translated, so the game would even with the russian tags be impossible to play. E.g. when the popup for the Crusades come, they can't understand it because it is or in English, or no text at all. And they have this problem all over the game.

Lithuania's unique unit is a god. I used a stack of ten of them to repel the mongols and then get the UHV. However, the AI never builds them, and gets steamrolled by keshiks.

Could it be that the AI had no acces to iron? At least in my games they often did not settle near the iron.

Is it supposed to be possible for the pope to convert to Protestantism? Because that's what he did in my last game.

He converted back one turn later, but it was still fun to see a mostly Catholic Europe, with a Protestant Pope :lol:

Is it supposed to be possible for the pope to convert to Protestantism? Because that's what he did in my last game.

He converted back one turn later, but it was still fun to see a mostly Catholic Europe, with a Protestant Pope :lol:

This is a bug. Do you have a savegame?

Could it be that the AI had no acces to iron? At least in my games they often did not settle near the iron.

That must be it; they never hook up iron in my games either. On that subject, the Lithuanian core area seems rather sparse in natural resources for such a historically contested area for just that reason. They deserve a buff- it seems like they have only just spawned when genghis arrives with >20 keshiks and annhilates them. Adding a few pikes to the spawn might solve this without creating problems in the long run.

Viking Points can easily be increased to 50. My biggest beef with them is that the UHV is over before its begun .. its feels like the Egyptian blitz UHV from RFC, would love for a more open one but nothing really fits so don't know.
The power they can achieve makes them ideal for seeding just about any later civ though so not all bad (use them to give Lithuania/England/Austria/Moscow/Portugal developed land to work with and watch the mayhem :))

Lithuania are around at SWE spawn more often than not and from the replays it seems like it is Polish who stomp them and not the barbarians. Poland almost always takes Minsk when they beeline Chivalry which means a declaration on Lithuania on spawn .. unsettled/unimproved land does not lend itself well to a defensive war against Knights even if they manage to get the Iron and spam their maces.
Looking forward to Lithuania getting fleshed out though; interesting and open UHV, challenging area and awesome UU/UB will make them quite fun to play me'thinks.

Edit: Ouch! Genoan game just got trashed, settled Cumae (Crimea) in late 13th century and dead Kievan cities start flipping tanking my stability .. something is amiss!

Argh, I forgot that GAs don't allow free civic change in RFCE. I'll have to postpone my conquest of Jerusalem for a couple of turns.

I've also seen Lithuania underperforming, and often because Poland conquered part of it. Lithuania's land definitely needs a boost, but is there any way to make sure the AI hooks up iron? It really shouldn't be necessary to point such a thing out, but I guess such is the case.

Also, do countries that were historically quite friendly (Poland/Hungary or Poland/Lithuania for instance) get some sort of diplomacy boost? I'm not sure how much of an effect a +2 would have, but it might help, and would certainly be realistic.

@ 3Miro

Since we have the new DNC, do we still need the "Placeholder Error" names or can those be removed?

@ 3Miro

Since we have the new DNC, do we still need the "Placeholder Error" names or can those be removed?

Some of the placeholder names are still referenced in the XML (I think). I used a lot of copy/paste. We need to first set the correct names in the CivilizationInfos and then we can remove the unnecessary Text entries.

Ok. But I think all DNC for the Pope can be removed, because it should allways be the Papal states, don't they?

Ok. But I think all DNC for the Pope can be removed, because it should allways be the Papal states, don't they?

Yes. Just make sure you remove them in both XML files (civ and text).

Added a couple new hints (on load):

You cannot prosecute a religion from cities where this religion is tied to one or more wonders/shrines. So if you play with Spain and want to win by UHVs, don't feel bad if you raze cities with such wonders
Watch out for minor civs. Their national identity is very high, so you can expect revolts if conquering them!
You cannot proclaim a state religion while you are at Paganism. You have to change your civics first, then declare a state religion.
Watch out for changing civics. Combining the right ones have huge advantages, but do not switch too often. Every turn of anarchy can permanently cause up to 3 stability points loss!
Golden Ages have an additional benefit in RFCE (compared to vanilla RFC): there is no anarchy when you change your civics
You can easily keep track of the progress of your UHVs in the Victory Screen (F8).
Don't let another civ keep a couple cities in your core territory. It will seriously hurt your stability.
If you hold down the "Ctrl" key while hovering over the map, you can check out the Provinces.
Check out the progress on the colonies as the game advances in the new Colony Information Screen. You can easily find out which colonies are already completed, and what parts of the world is still waiting for you. It's under the 5th tab in the Info Screen (F9).

Anything else I miss from the recent changes?

:goodjob: on the hints. Just couple of questions:

Golden Ages have an additional benefit in RFCE (compared to vanilla RFC): there is no anarchy when you change your civics
Did you already code that or do I have to look it up. I cannot remember if it was in C++ or XML.

Don't let another civ keep a couple cities in your core territory. It will seriously hurt your stability.
This should probably be:
Don't let another civ keep cities in your core territory. It will seriously hurt your stability.
You lose considerable stability even for one city.

Do we need the CIV4GameText_Events_BTS_fixed.xml ? I think it's better to remove it for a while (and put in in a backup folder), until we have working events.

Do we need the CIV4GameText_Events_BTS_fixed.xml ? I think it's better to remove it for a while (and put in in a backup folder), until we have working events.

I don't think we will ever have events and even if we do, those tags wold be useless. You can just delete it, I don't think any of the tags inside are being used.

I've also seen Lithuania underperforming, and often because Poland conquered part of it. Lithuania's land definitely needs a boost, but is there any way to make sure the AI hooks up iron? It really shouldn't be necessary to point such a thing out, but I guess such is the case.

Will check Lithuania, and add another iron if necessary

Also, do countries that were historically quite friendly (Poland/Hungary or Poland/Lithuania for instance) get some sort of diplomacy boost? I'm not sure how much of an effect a +2 would have, but it might help, and would certainly be realistic.

This is already in
Poland and Lithuania had +3, now I increased to 4
Poland and Hungary got 3

:goodjob: on the hints. Just couple of questions:


Did you already code that or do I have to look it up. I cannot remember if it was in C++ or XML.

I'm on it, I think I already got it work in my version of RFCE (on my comp)


This should probably be:

You lose considerable stability even for one city.

Yep, sounds better this way
Will change it in my next update

Do we need the CIV4GameText_Events_BTS_fixed.xml ? I think it's better to remove it for a while (and put in in a backup folder), until we have working events.

I don't think we will ever have events and even if we do, those tags wold be useless. You can just delete it, I don't think any of the tags inside are being used.

Agreed, you can just delete it
If we implement events, we can even look this file up in the svn or in RFC itself

Another thing, as you are organizing the xml files:
All files start with CIV4GameTextInfos_RFCE_*.xml
Just a totally cosmetic thing, but I feel those extra infos unnecessary - never seen in other mods either
Shouldn't they be CIV4GameText_RFCE_*.xml?

Yep, sounds better this way
Will change it in my next update

Ups, actually I uploaded the hint to the svn that way :)

Agreed, you can just delete it
If we implement events, we can even look this file up in the svn or in RFC itself

Another thing, as you are organizing the xml files:
All files start with CIV4GameTextInfos_RFCE_*.xml
Just a totally cosmetic thing, but I feel those extra infos unnecessary - never seen in other mods either
Shouldn't they be CIV4GameText_RFCE_*.xml?

I will change it.

Oh, I see. But if we want russian tags for all texts, we need to add them to ALL vanilla wonders, ALL vanilla buildings, ALL vanilla units, ALL vanilla RFC text, ALL vanilla resources, etc.. And still then they have to be translated and I don't think that will happen soon, if it will ever happen at all.

BTW, only a few did realy have a text in it. And I don't think anyone will translate the remaning texts into Russian. (At least, I don't get any sign some will) If they played the game as it was before my revision, they would get an English text, because there was no "text" in the tag. Now, they also get the English text, but then we save a lot of space. And most of the russian translations are outdated.

I think we should remove all text that haven't a translated tag in it, and keep (=readd) the ones that have a russian translation.

I'm also concerning removing the Russian tags completely. It will make fixing all problems with the fonts al lost easier. And most all neccesary things (Features like the UHV, concepts, Crusades, custom bonus' for civics etc.) aren't translated, so the game would even with the russian tags be impossible to play. E.g. when the popup for the Crusades come, they can't understand it because it is or in English, or no text at all. And they have this problem all over the game.

There isn't that many civs/leaders/wonders/buildings/units from vanilla BtS or RFC that we use in RFCE
So it won't save that much space if we readd them here with russian tags
It's also easier to edit the xml entries if we have everything in one place. Right now these are handled in 3 or more different xml files (vanilla Civilization IV, Warlords, BtS, RFC, RFCE)

Btw, having them in one place may even get the mod to run slightly faster, as the engine doesn't have to search for the entries in different places
I'm not sure of this at all (from what I know, the xml files may be loaded once, on startup), but certainly won't slow down the mod.
Also, all of these extra text files are 1-2 additional megabytes tops, and have to be downloaded only once.
In my eyes this means nothing in a 500+ megabytes mod

One more thing: It may still be possible to have both russian chars and european accents in the game.
Even if we can't run the mod in russian, I would still keep the tags. As I said, those additional entries in the text files won't cause any problem for the mod.
And who knows, we may even get an enthusiastic russian playtester who will gladly finish and update the russian translation.

There isn't that many civs/leaders/wonders/buildings/units from vanilla BtS or RFC that we use in RFCE
So it won't save that much space if we readd them here with russian tags
It's also easier to edit the xml entries if we have everything in one place. Right now these are handled in 3 or more different xml files (vanilla Civilization IV, Warlords, BtS, RFC, RFCE)

Btw, having them in one place may even get the mod to run slightly faster, as the engine doesn't have to search for the entries in different places
I'm not sure of this at all (from what I know, the xml files may be loaded once, on startup), but certainly won't slow down the mod.
Also, all of these extra text files are 1-2 additional megabytes tops, and have to be downloaded only once.
In my eyes this means nothing in a 500+ megabytes mod

One more thing: It may still be possible to have both russian chars and european accents in the game.
Even if we can't run the mod in russian, I would still keep the tags. As I said, those additional entries in the text files won't cause any problem for the mod.
And who knows, we may even get an enthusiastic russian playtester who will gladly finish and update the russian translation.

Ok, I won't remove them.

I will change it.

Cool! And thanks :)
If we uniformize all the files: could you also rename the CIV4GameText_RFCHints.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_Hints.xml, the CIV4GameText_Victory.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_Victory.xml, the CIV4GameText_UP.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_UP.xml, and all the similar ones?

Ok, I won't remove them.

Thanks
I will look into the font files, and check the russian-western char issue again. I was already experimenting with Asaf's font editor.
Hopefully will be able to come up with something...

Cool! And thanks :)
If we uniformize all the files: could you also rename the CIV4GameText_RFCHints.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_Hints.xml, the CIV4GameText_Victory.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_Victory.xml, the CIV4GameText_UP.xml to CIV4GameText_RFCE_UP.xml, and all the similar ones?

No problem.

This is a bug. Do you have a savegame?

Yes, from the turn after it happened (the turn the pope was Protestant).

296457

@ 3Miro & Absinthered

From wednesday, I'm away for 10 days, so I won't be able to code etc. I will return home Fryday next week.

@ 3Miro & Absinthered

From wednesday, I'm away for 10 days, so I won't be able to code etc. I will return home Fryday next week.

No prob, have a good vacation! :)

@ 3Miro & Absinthered

From wednesday, I'm away for 10 days, so I won't be able to code etc. I will return home Fryday next week.

Enjoy!

@3Miro
Adding anarchy free golden ages is very easy, as it was already introduced in BtS
But I'm not totally sure:
If I change some of the C++ code, do I have to recompile the whole dll for my changes to work?

Another golden age thing:
Should we keep the first golden age with 2 Great People, or enable it with only one GP?

If you change the C++, you will have to recompile. However, if you think you know where it is, just let me know and I will fix it. If you are not sure, then don't worry about it, I will find it and fix it.

I think 2 people for the first GA is good. Unlike BtS we also have Golden Age from 2/3 UHV conditions and for some players we have Crusades.

If I'm not mistaken, you just have to readd the lines in the cvplayer.cpp:

int CvPlayer::getCivicAnarchyLength(CivicTypes* paeNewCivics) const
{
bool bChange;
int iAnarchyLength;
int iI;

if (getMaxAnarchyTurns() == 0)
{
return 0;
}

if (isGoldenAge())
{
return 0;
}

iAnarchyLength = 0;

bChange = false;
...
int CvPlayer::getReligionAnarchyLength() const
{
int iAnarchyLength;

if (getMaxAnarchyTurns() == 0)
{
return 0;
}

if (isGoldenAge())
{
return 0;
}

iAnarchyLength = GC.getDefineINT("BASE_RELIGION_ANARCHY_LENGTH");

iAnarchyLength += ((getNumCities() * GC.getWorldInfo(GC.getMapINLINE().getWorldSize()). getNumCitiesAnarchyPercent()) / 100);

iAnarchyLength = ((iAnarchyLength * std::max(0, (getAnarchyModifier() + 100))) / 100);

if (iAnarchyLength == 0)
{
return 0;
}

iAnarchyLength *= GC.getGameSpeedInfo(GC.getGameINLINE().getGameSpee dType()).getAnarchyPercent();
iAnarchyLength /= 100;

iAnarchyLength *= GC.getEraInfo(GC.getGameINLINE().getStartEra()).ge tAnarchyPercent();
iAnarchyLength /= 100;

return range(iAnarchyLength, 1, getMaxAnarchyTurns());
}

Will keep the first Golden Age with 2 GPs

If I'm not mistaken, you just have to readd the lines in the cvplayer.cpp:

Will keep the first Golden Age with 2 GPs

Incidentally Rhye has a bug in his code, if you go into Anarchy and then hit the "Start Golden Age" button, the Anarchy will be instantly over. If you do things the other way around, you lose one turn of your Golden Age.

Don't worry, I will find it.

EDIT: I don't know what I was looking for. It is in getCivicAnarchyLength(), I will add the changes to the svn.

Incidentally Rhye has a bug in his code, if you go into Anarchy and then hit the "Start Golden Age" button, the Anarchy will be instantly over. If you do things the other way around, you lose one turn of your Golden Age.


After we have anarchy-free Golden Ages, this will be a feature, not a bug.
I think you should leave it this way

EDIT: I don't know what I was looking for. It is in getCivicAnarchyLength(), I will add the changes to the svn.

That's what I said: it's in the getCivicAnarchyLength() and getReligionAnarchyLength() functions
Or am I mistaken here somehow?

After we have anarchy-free Golden Ages, this will be a feature, not a bug.
I think you should leave it this way

I am not going to touch that for us, it is just that Rhye's anarchy-free Golden Ages prevention hack was incomplete.

EDIT: you said it was getCivicAnarchyLength(), but then I was looking at the wrong thing and I thought that it wasn't, but then I figured it.

I am not going to touch that for us, it is just that Rhye's anarchy-free Golden Ages prevention hack was incomplete.

EDIT: you said it was getCivicAnarchyLength(), but then I was looking at the wrong thing and I thought that it wasn't, but then I figured it.

Oh, no problems then. Cool :)
I see you already updated it to the svn too :goodjob:

Speaking of hints, I had a hint screen popup informing me I could track my spaceship progress by visiting the space race screen - I can only conclude you were referring to Lagâri Hasan Çelebi's rocket (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lag%C3%A2ri_Hasan_%C3%87elebi), but I haven't seen it featured in RFCE yet. :D

(This was in Beta 11, though, so my guess is you've removed this hint from the loading screen by now? If not, you might want to check the files, because this one is hiding in there somewhere . . . unless you're planning to add medieval Turkish spaceships to the mod, of course.)

Speaking of hints, I had a hint screen popup informing me I could track my spaceship progress by visiting the space race screen - I can only conclude you were referring to Lagâri Hasan Çelebi's rocket (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lag%C3%A2ri_Hasan_%C3%87elebi), but I haven't seen it featured in RFCE yet. :D

(This was in Beta 11, though, so my guess is you've removed this hint from the loading screen by now? If not, you might want to check the files, because this one is hiding in there somewhere . . . unless you're planning to add medieval Turkish spaceships to the mod, of course.)

No actually we decided to remove this strict historic tech rate and just add new techs to the tree. Now it is possible to build the Apollo Project before 1700AD, which gives you plenty of time for a spaceship. :crazyeye:

Seriously now. Here is a good point, is the hint list exclusive, i.e. are those all the hints we can see or would there be more hints from regular BtS.

Yikes, do the Byzantines do this well in all the Ottoman starts nowadays? I've been playing the western civs of late, so I don't know if they're always this big. Should the Seljuq invasions be beefed up a bit?

Also interesting is how big Bulgaria got despite not managing to hold any Byzantine land.

Yikes, do the Byzantines do this well in all the Ottoman starts nowadays? I've been playing the western civs of late, so I don't know if they're always this big. Should the Seljuq invasions be beefed up a bit?

Also interesting is how big Bulgaria got despite not managing to hold any Byzantine land.

With the new leader personalities we will have to rebalance some of the civs
Personally I have never seen Bulgaria conquering Hungarian land before
It can happen in a few cases, but shouldn't be the default situation
Byzantium is also too strong

Speaking of hints, I had a hint screen popup informing me I could track my spaceship progress by visiting the space race screen - I can only conclude you were referring to Lagâri Hasan Çelebi's rocket (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lag%C3%A2ri_Hasan_%C3%87elebi), but I haven't seen it featured in RFCE yet. :D

(This was in Beta 11, though, so my guess is you've removed this hint from the loading screen by now? If not, you might want to check the files, because this one is hiding in there somewhere . . . unless you're planning to add medieval Turkish spaceships to the mod, of course.)

Actually that hint was there all along, at least since Beta 1 :crazyeye:
Now I removed it, all the hints you get on load should be connected to RFC Europe (or some general interface hints)

Yikes, do the Byzantines do this well in all the Ottoman starts nowadays? I've been playing the western civs of late, so I don't know if they're always this big. Should the Seljuq invasions be beefed up a bit?

Also interesting is how big Bulgaria got despite not managing to hold any Byzantine land.

Seljuks are strong, it is just that the Byz have enough time to recover before the Ottomans come. I don't think the Seljuk invasion is the solution to the strong Byz problem.

I have a problem. Every time when I try to end my turn in the year 1612 the games crashes. I'm playing as the Austrians on monarch. Here's the save

I have a problem. Every time when I try to end my turn in the year 1612 the games crashes. I'm playing as the Austrians on monarch. Here's the save

Will look at it when I get home from work.

Seljuks are strong, it is just that the Byz have enough time to recover before the Ottomans come. I don't think the Seljuk invasion is the solution to the strong Byz problem.

I guess in the 300 years between Seljuqs and Byzantines, the latter's culture makes the barbarian cities flip back to them, which is bad for both realism and gameplay. Is there any easy way to code Seljuqs that destroy all pre-existing culture in the cities they conquer?

Also, do the Byzantines already have reduced tech/production rates in the high/late middle ages? Maybe this malus should be amplified.

Maybe culture flipping should be deactivated (of if it already is, even for barbs).

I guess in the 300 years between Seljuqs and Byzantines, the latter's culture makes the barbarian cities flip back to them, which is bad for both realism and gameplay. Is there any easy way to code Seljuqs that destroy all pre-existing culture in the cities they conquer?

Also, do the Byzantines already have reduced tech/production rates in the high/late middle ages? Maybe this malus should be amplified.

Isn't the default setting that cities CAN'T flip back after being conquered? :confused:

Isn't the default setting that cities CAN'T flip back after being conquered? :confused:

I'm pretty sure barbarian cities can flip back to non-barbarians. I've got messages informing me that barbarians have conquered most of the cities in Anatolia, but if I check a decade or two later with WB, I find that some cities are back in Byzantine hands with plenty of culture, but not necessarily the westernmost Seljuq cities.

And if that happens in a couple of decades, then I'm guessing a century or more may be enough time for all of the cities in Anatolia to flip back to the Byzantines.

And yeah, deactivating culture flips even for barbarians should fix this.

Just playtested Vikings on Monarch to see if harder UHV conditions were possible. Built Vinland AND Shrine of Uppsala by around 900AD (built Reykjavik with one of the starting settlers, hooked up the amber when Roskilde expanded). The territory UHV was easy, although I got it in 1059 I could have done it earlier, just I wanted to play it safe and not give France a chance to take it back before I won. I ended up getting 58 Viking Points, although had I pillaged improvements or sank ships, I could have easily gotten 20 or so more. All the same, I think 60 is the most balanced yet challenging number. Stability was my biggest issue, but that was because I expanded fast at the beginning and lost stability when I razed cities. I think that as the Norse were a civilization of raiders, this should not affect their stability. Here are my suggestions for the UHV:

UHV 1: Build Vinland and the Shrine of Uppsala by 1009 AD (easily doable as long as you build Reykjavik early, get the amber, and remember to build your pagan shrines before getting monasticism).

UHV 2: current required provinces + Skaneland, Norway, and Brandenburg (forces you to build important historical cities like Lund and Stavanger, and conquer Lubeck, which was also important to Viking history).

UHV 3: 60 VP (for reasons stated above).

Just playtested Vikings on Monarch to see if harder UHV conditions were possible. Built Vinland AND Shrine of Uppsala by around 900AD (built Reykjavik with one of the starting settlers, hooked up the amber when Roskilde expanded). The territory UHV was easy, although I got it in 1059 I could have done it earlier, just I wanted to play it safe and not give France a chance to take it back before I won. I ended up getting 58 Viking Points, although had I pillaged improvements or sank ships, I could have easily gotten 20 or so more. All the same, I think 60 is the most balanced yet challenging number. Stability was my biggest issue, but that was because I expanded fast at the beginning and lost stability when I razed cities. I think that as the Norse were a civilization of raiders, this should not affect their stability. Here are my suggestions for the UHV:

UHV 1: Build Vinland and the Shrine of Uppsala by 1009 AD (easily doable as long as you build Reykjavik early, get the amber, and remember to build your pagan shrines before getting monasticism).

UHV 2: current required provinces + Skaneland, Norway, and Brandenburg (forces you to build important historical cities like Lund and Stavanger, and conquer Lubeck, which was also important to Viking history).

UHV 3: 60 VP (for reasons stated above).

Good job.

New players would scream. We can add the Shrine of Uppsala and maybe one/two more provinces, but lets keep the points to 50. I want to make sure this is not too dependent on random events (like early French collapse).

I have a problem. Every time when I try to end my turn in the year 1612 the games crashes. I'm playing as the Austrians on monarch. Here's the save

I played 5 turns after the save and I got no crashes. Does it happen for you every time?

yes it does.

I tried out alpak's save, and it crashed twice in a row for me too.

Also, I don't know if any of the developers saw this post from a few days ago.

It is really nice to see Cordoba build its wonders. I think a few more of the obviously religious wonders should require state religion. This makes it a little bit more likely for the wonder to be built in its homeland or at least a similar society. Imo, the following religions should be necessary for the following wonders:

Catholicism- San Marco Basilica, Sistine Chapel
Orthodoxy- St. Basil's Cathedral
Paganism- Shrine of Uppsala

Muslim wonders are handled pretty well since most of them require Arabic Knowledge. Unfortunately, the Dome of the Rock is the only Muslim wonder that actually requires Islam. I can totally see why realism-wise, but it would be very nice to have the +50% GA length available on a universally accessible wonder.

Alpav's save crashes for me too. On loading the savegame
What version do you use?
Can't it be that you started your game with an earlier version, and updated your RFCE since?

It is really nice to see Cordoba build its wonders. I think a few more of the obviously religious wonders should require state religion. This makes it a little bit more likely for the wonder to be built in its homeland or at least a similar society. Imo, the following religions should be necessary for the following wonders:

Catholicism- San Marco Basilica, Sistine Chapel
Orthodoxy- St. Basil's Cathedral
Paganism- Shrine of Uppsala

Muslim wonders are handled pretty well since most of them require Arabic Knowledge. Unfortunately, the Dome of the Rock is the only Muslim wonder that actually requires Islam. I can totally see why realism-wise, but it would be very nice to have the +50% GA length available on an accessible wonder.

Every civ can have modifier for each wonder, which of them they prefer to build (for the AI)
So, we can make it more likely that a wonder is built in it's homeland or a similar society, but I don't think we should restrict it to those
Too much wonders associated with state religion won't do good for gameplay IMO, we should leave as much freedom as possible to the players

Btw, the Shrine of Uppsala needs Pagan Shrine, so some sort of paganism is already required for it
The other wonders you mention could have been built by any of the religions, if medieval europen history works out differently

I agree on the other thing, the +50% Golden Age length wonder would be nice to be availeable to all civs.
Any suggestions on how to change the wonder bonuses?
Keep in mind that we have plenty wonders. So I don't really want to add a new one, only if it's necessary...

Every civ can have modifier for each wonder, which of them they prefer to build (for the AI)
So, we can make it more likely that a wonder is built in it's homeland or a similar society, but I don't think we should restrict it to those
Too much wonders associated with state religion won't do good for gameplay IMO, we should leave as much freedom as possible to the players

Btw, the Shrine of Uppsala needs Pagan Shrine, so some sort of paganism is already required for it
The other wonders you mention could have been built by any of the religions, if medieval europen history works out differently

I agree on the other thing, the +50% Golden Age length wonder would be nice to be availeable to all civs.
Any suggestions on how to change the wonder bonuses?
Keep in mind that we have plenty wonders. So I don't really want to add a new one, only if it's necessary...

Okay, I suppose that's fair.

I guess it is just uncanny coincidence, but in two of my last three games, Bulgaria built the Shrine of Uppsala in Preslav after they had converted to Orthodoxy. My guess is it took long enough for Orthodoxy to spread to one of their cities for them to build a Pagan Shrine, and from there they could build SoU anytime.

I'm not too sure what wonder the +50% GA length should go to, but Palacio del Escorial's current effect seems a bit unimpressive. If the switch is made, perhaps Dome of the Rock should have something like +50% faith point gains instead?

Alpav's save crashes for me too. On loading the savegame
What version do you use?
Can't it be that you started your game with an earlier version, and updated your RFCE since?

Are you using Beta12. Beta12 and the latest SVN have incompatible savegames. You need to test this on Beta 12.

Here is the screenshot from a few turns later, I have no idea why it would crash for you and not me.

Just discovered the marsh on (60,51) has no FEATURE_MUD on it.

Possible bug/oversight:
Trying a Moscovite game and grabbed a city with HQ for one of the orders.
The -50% discount appears to apply to corporate maintenance as well as it only runs a deficit of 6 when it should be 10-11 .. this can't be intentional or am I missing something?

You mean courthouses -50%? That applies to orders too!

just so you guys know, I was using beta 12 and i started the game on beta 12. Any ideas?

just so you guys know, I was using beta 12 and i started the game on beta 12. Any ideas?

If I cannot replicate the bug I cannot possibly fix it. Two possibilities:

- What is your video card, it may be a hardware issue.
- Can you post a savegame after you have made all the moves in the turn. I just hit end-turn without playing. You can also try to end the turn without moving units to see if it crashes.

Are you using Beta12. Beta12 and the latest SVN have incompatible savegames. You need to test this on Beta 12.

Here is the screenshot from a few turns later, I have no idea why it would crash for you and not me.

Indeed, it only crashes with the svn version
It works perfectly with vanilla Beta 12, I also played a couple turns to try it out (with moving units and everything)
So alpav, you didn't updated your RFCE to a newer version from the svn?

Just discovered the marsh on (60,51) has no FEATURE_MUD on it.

Thx, will look into it

video card is hd radeon 4650 and I downloaded beta 12 from the link on this thread. Also when I flip to a civilization how do I stop turns from automatically ending.

You mean courthouses -50%? That applies to orders too!
City just came out of anarchy when I noticed it, so no CH present.
Moscows unique ability: -50% decrease in all maintenance associated with number of cities.
If that applies to corporate costs as well then screw Germany's super-courts .. the cash potential of the eastern bloat empire outstrips it by a huge margin :lol:
Also when I flip to a civilization how do I stop turns from automatically ending.
Load the game to reset the .ini file. I usually just quicksave/quickload as the first thing when taking over a new Civ (used to close client and load manual save *sigh*, such a noob I was :))

video card is hd radeon 4650 and I downloaded beta 12 from the link on this thread. Also when I flip to a civilization how do I stop turns from automatically ending.

There is an option "Always wait at the end of the turn". I think you should always have it enabled.

The Video Card should be enough.

Just noticed some oddness while playing the Netherlands :)

Maastricht(Burgundy) was renamed to Antwerpen upon flip. It's at least 2 tiles inland.

I start at war with Spain, who has Portugal as Vassal.
Met Portugal upon city flip and opened borders with them while still being at war with their master(Spain)

Just noticed some oddness while playing the Netherlands :)

Maastricht(Burgundy) was renamed to Antwerpen upon flip. It's at least 2 tiles inland.

I start at war with Spain, who has Portugal as Vassal.
Met Portugal upon city flip and opened borders with them while still being at war with their master(Spain)

A simple question of the Netherlands name map needing updating to link in with the Burgundian.

City just came out of anarchy when I noticed it, so no CH present.I guess sometimes courthouses can survive a conquest.

Load the game to reset the .ini file. I usually just quicksave/quickload as the first thing when taking over a new Civ (used to close client and load manual save *sigh*, such a noob I was :))Or simply go into the options, uncheck then check again the "Wait at the end of turn" option and you're done.

City just came out of anarchy when I noticed it, so no CH present.
Moscows unique ability: -50% decrease in all maintenance associated with number of cities.
If that applies to corporate costs as well then screw Germany's super-courts .. the cash potential of the eastern bloat empire outstrips it by a huge margin :lol:


If Moscow UP halves corporate maintinenance cost as well (and not just the city distance and city number maintenace cost) that's definitely a bug.
3Miro, can you look into this?

I guess sometimes courthouses can survive a conquest.

Actually, no
In Beta 12 all stability giving buildings have 0 chance to stay on conquest.

I stand corrected :D

If Moscow UP halves corporate maintinenance cost as well (and not just the city distance and city number maintenace cost) that's definitely a bug.
3Miro, can you look into this?


I will.

This is part of the 4th Crusade dynamics. If you play as a Catholic player and you get a lot of gold, then you can "buy" a Crusade, becoming the leader and sending it towards the Capital of any player. The AI will only do this as Venice -> Constantinople and Spain -> Cordoba.

Okay, in my recent game as France, which I've almost won, I've seen Venice do this twice. I also saw Genoa target Constantinople once though. Note: By now my French Empire had vassalized Venice. Does that affect the Crusade mechanic?

Okay, in my recent game as France, which I've almost won, I've seen Venice do this twice. I also saw Genoa target Constantinople once though. Note: By now my French Empire had vassalized Venice. Does that affect the Crusade mechanic?

No. Vassalization doesn't affect the Crusader mechanics. At most you will find yourself at war with Arabia or the Byz, but other than that your Vassal would be doing all the fighting.

With the dynamic research cost now, Cluny Abbey's +1 research for all state religion buildings seems too weak. What if we change it back to +2? If overpowered, maybe we can make it +1 or 2 free scholar / scholar slot.

With the dynamic research cost now, Cluny Abbey's +1 research for all state religion buildings seems too weak. What if we change it back to +2? If overpowered, maybe we can make it +1 or 2 free scholar / scholar slot.

I second this.

Btw, is tech trading somehow reduced in the current version? The history reviews keep telling me that I'm the most advanced country in the world, yet I never seem to have any technologies to trade with others.

Also, will the Alpha version include a list of what provinces are solid/OK/unstable in the civilopedia? Different colored provinces bases on stability and a stability map overlay (a la SoI) would also be nice, if it isn't too much effort.

You cannot trade a tech till a given date - usually 10-20 turns after the tech is supposed to be discovered.
Btw, I think this should be changed: should be 10 turns after the first civ discovered it rather than a fix date

A stability map overlay might get in for the next version, if 3Miro has time for it.
He said it's a little harder to add it in RFCE (provinces are handled differently)

I think 10 turns after first discovery is better, since several techs were discovered at different times in different parts. The only potential problem is the Muslim civs trading Arabic Knowledge, but I doubt that'll happen given religious differences.

I know that flips don't happen with provinces, but what else is different?

Speaking of which, what about tying flips to provinces? It would eliminate the need for the reference folder.

I thought the flips were tied to the provinces?!?

No they are currently tied to manually defined areas which are generally rectangles.

Speaking of which, what about tying flips to provinces? It would eliminate the need for the reference folder.

Agreed, I think SoI's system of core provinces = flipped provinces made it very easy for newcomers (and veterans) to understand the dynamics of the game. However, I'd imagine that would take a fair bit of time to code, and there are probably more important issues to take care of for the alpha.

Still, I think linking provinces to flips would be a great addition.

No problem to code I believe, instead of iteration over a rectangle you have iteration over a province (which is represented as a list of coordinates).

That would be so much more friendly than the current black box way of spawns.

How is Abu Bakr a leader of Arabia in the game if he died one year before their spawn? I recommend renaming him to Harun al-Rashid or some other leader.

Actually I already considered changing him to Harun al-Rashid
He is probably a better choice for early Arabia (or at least as good), and the current art is closer the Harun than to Abu Bakr anyway

EDIT: Also, there is a new Harun al-Rashid LH announced by the Capo: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10432961&postcount=2374
He is a little overwhelmed right now, but it will be ready in a couple months tops

Some observations from playing Arabia:

- Seljuks and Keshiks spawn all over (Al-Quds and Dimashq)
- No sulphur near good city, only that crappy city in the desert
- Second crusade against me spawned on the turn they could attack. Usually I get a free (annihilation) hit

could the spawn issue be because it was France that spawned it? (their turn is earlier in the list than Arabia) where the units spawn in the beginning of the first player turn

Will the every leader have a favorite civic in the alpha?

I think that should Harald Hardrada, Mindaugas and Vytautas prefer paganism, although they seem to do a pretty good job of staying pagan even without that.

You mean the paganism civic right?
I'm not totally sure if we should give any of the leaders a fav civic which doesn't give you any real benefits (0 tier civic).
It may work more or less for the Lithuanians, because of there UP they get bonuses additionally for the civic
But for a Norse leader we should probably avoid this

Suggest for mercenary system:

In history, mercenaries are seldom reliable, if they think they can't win, they often refuse to fight. Maybe we can set: if winning chance < 60%, mercenaries will refuse to attack, unless they have extra pay or promotion. At defense, they could also flee, or even betray. This way, we can nerf mercenary-spamming strategy a bit, and make more sense.

could the spawn issue be because it was France that spawned it? (their turn is earlier in the list than Arabia) where the units spawn in the beginning of the first player turn

Thats correct. Is it intentional? Crusades are a lot harder when they get a first hit opportunity.

Hi guys. This weekend I managed to successfully move from my old place. I hope to get back to coding this week so we can get back on track.

A few notes:
- currently spawns are based on rectangles mostly to allow fine tuning of exactly which cities would flip and which will not. Rectangles (and exceptions) allow us to specify individual tiles as opposed to whole provinces. It is probably a good idea to move this over to provinces, now that we have a more complete set of provinces, but it will take some time.
- visualizing provinces is hard. Many of you may not realize this, but the provinces change over time. The Byz start with pretty much everything being OK or Stable, however, as soon as Arabia spawns many of those provinces become Unstable or OK. Then the Byz get hit again when Bulgaria spawns. Germany has some Austrian provinces downgraded as soon as Austria spawns and so on.

If Moscow UP halves corporate maintinenance cost as well (and not just the city distance and city number maintenace cost) that's definitely a bug.
3Miro, can you look into this?


I am not the sure what the issue is with the Russian UP. The finance screen keeps corporation cost and civic city cost in the same category, however, in the code they are
different. The Russian UP lowers the cost associated with the number of cities that you have vs the civic that you use.

I started a game with Moscow and founded a corporation, however, I did not see any issues with the maintenance cost.

Hm, sry then :/
I wasn't sure about this, just posted this based on someone's feedback
Didn't have time to check it myself...

Beta 12:
Cordoba died stillborn in my latest Portugal game and Spain controlled all of Iberia upon Portuguese spawn :)
Does Portugal really need 6 cities in North Africa? Tetouan is pretty small(Tanger province).
Or just 2 cities somewhere in those 3 provinces?

Inland Hanseatic League(1/Austria):
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/4264/inlandhanse.th.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/856/inlandhanse.jpg/)

Inland Hanseatic League(2/Portugal):
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/8295/inlandhanseandaf.th.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/14/inlandhanseandaf.jpg/)
Spains performance in this game is umm.. Dominant :)
except for the colonies ;)

my guess about Hanse would be that the lake are salt-water hence viable for it

still of the opinion that Hanse should be reworked so it works in Coastal or Riverside cities, given that RL Hanse was also around all way down to Colonge and Dinant (Near Liege)

Cordoba sometime run afoul on Barbs ... I've had a Ggme with Spain where they collapsed 1 turn before my spawn

Ups, Lake Balaton is salt water right now? :crazyeye:
Btw, interesting idea about Hansa spreading to riverside cities, but I'm not sure how realistic would it be if we allow it to spread to all riverside cities.
For me it's really strange to see it in some of the russian cities 1000+ kms far from any oceans.
Or in south Germany (around Augsburg) right where the Danube starts

No, it's that the function that checks if Hansa can be build uses the isCoastalOld function which simply checks if the city is next to water of any kind. It is also founded in Novgorod every now and then.

I generated four games as Sweden, guess where it was every time? SO I said scre it and put Hansa in several cities

Beta 12:
Cordoba died stillborn in my latest Portugal game and Spain controlled all of Iberia upon Portuguese spawn :)
Does Portugal really need 6 cities in North Africa? Tetouan is pretty small(Tanger province).
Or just 2 cities somewhere in those 3 provinces?

Inland Hanseatic League(1/Austria):
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/4264/inlandhanse.th.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/856/inlandhanse.jpg/)

Inland Hanseatic League(2/Portugal):
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/8295/inlandhanseandaf.th.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/14/inlandhanseandaf.jpg/)
Spains performance in this game is umm.. Dominant :)
except for the colonies ;)

The Portuguese condition is to build 2 cities somewhere in the three provinces in Africa and 3 cities somewhere in the two provinces of the Islands.

well Absinthe ... as i stated, there is solid RL reasoning behind letting Hanse be established via rivers (would make it near universally useful for other civs than Venice, Genova, Norse and England) ... the part about how realisticly it would be to let it settle anywhere as long as it have coastal or river, is kinda double standard, given that everything else can be settled everywhere, without paying attention to how widespread they were RL

well Absinthe ... as i stated, there is solid RL reasoning behind letting Hanse be established via rivers (would make it near universally useful for other civs than Venice, Genova, Norse and England) ... the part about how realisticly it would be to let it settle anywhere as long as it have coastal or river, is kinda double standard, given that everything else can be settled everywhere, without paying attention to how widespread they were RL

Well Sian... I'm not against it
But not sure if it's worth the effort, and I don't know exactly how hard to solve this.
Maybe we can add a new xml variable into the buildingschemas (this means C++ code in the SDK), but still, it may cause some additional issues if we want to restrict that the units are only able to spread it into cities with specific attributes

Also, we would have to change the executive unit to a land unit
This is the smallest thing, but I kinda liked naval executives here

wouldn't the xml variables be largely pillageable from the Dike xml?

Wasn't there talk about adopting the SoI corporation system, where they spread to viable cities like religion?
If so then it is just a matter of adding a few key inland cities as viable (probably a huge assumption on my part :))

Well Sian... I'm not against it
But not sure if it's worth the effort, and I don't know exactly how hard to solve this.
Maybe we can add a new xml variable into the buildingschemas (this means C++ code in the SDK), but still, it may cause some additional issues if we want to restrict that the units are only able to spread it into cities with specific attributes

Also, we would have to change the executive unit to a land unit
This is the smallest thing, but I kinda liked naval executives here

How about an amphibious corperate executive :)
One that doesn't get the movement bonus from roads but instead from rivers would seem nice imo(or something like double movement on land, this would make a spread to extremely inland cities unlikely)

and thanks about the portuguese UHV, now I can stop spamming north africa with bad cities :)
and I assume it's intentional that Madeira is excluded from the 'islands UHV' (spanish island?)

When will random events be enabled?

When will random events be enabled?

Not soon. There is a chance they won't be anabled at all.

Why aren't they enabled?

Also, when is the next release due? After the mercenary rework?

We are far from the next release
The last 2-3 weeks was very quiet, none of us had too much time lately
3Miro planned it in the end of August, we will see how things turn out till then

We are far from the next release
The last 2-3 weeks was very quiet, none of us had too much time lately
3Miro planned it in the end of August, we will see how things turn out till then

Good. You guys need time to live/earn a living/ find the best ways to tweak it!

Is there any possibility of a switch to SoI's companies system? Too often do I see corporations founded too late (like crusaders founded past 1200), in the wrong location (Teutonic Knights in Spain, Hanseatic League somewhere in the Mediterranean) and never spread (only headquarters for up to a century after founding).


I think RFCE would benefit greatly from this switch. In SoI, companies provide a huge bonus for controlling certain regions while playing a certain way (like Venetians/Genoans for controlling the Mediterranean coast and having lots of luxury trade).

For example, all crusaders would require Catholicism in city and as State Religion and agreement (at least once) to send troops for the crusade. Teutonic Knights should start preferring the south Baltic coast in the 13th century. The Hanseatic League could start spread to cities on the Baltic Sea and some of interior Germany and Poland, prefering those that have good trade infrastructure, like markets, wharves, harbors.

Is there any possibility of a switch to SoI's companies system? Too often do I see corporations founded too late (like crusaders founded past 1200), in the wrong location (Teutonic Knights in Spain, Hanseatic League somewhere in the Mediterranean) and never spread (only headquarters for up to a century after founding).


I think RFCE would benefit greatly from this switch. In SoI, companies provide a huge bonus for controlling certain regions while playing a certain way (like Venetians/Genoans for controlling the Mediterranean coast and having lots of luxury trade).

For example, all crusaders would require Catholicism in city and as State Religion and agreement (at least once) to send troops for the crusade. Teutonic Knights should start preferring the south Baltic coast in the 13th century. The Hanseatic League could start spread to cities on the Baltic Sea and some of interior Germany and Poland, prefering those that have good trade infrastructure, like markets, wharves, harbors.

I actually don't like the Company system. At least for this Mod. It fits perfectly in SoI, but I think corporations fits RFCE better than companies. Even though the corps are found ahistorically most of the time.

I actually don't like the Company system. At least for this Mod. It fits perfectly in SoI, but I think corporations fits RFCE better than companies. Even though the corps are found ahistorically most of the time.

Currently he corporations in RFCE are totally unbalanced giving huge incomes, if abused properly. SoI's company system would be easier to balance and imo it would fit RFCE perfectly.

I actually don't like the Company system. At least for this Mod. It fits perfectly in SoI, but I think corporations fits RFCE better than companies. Even though the corps are found ahistorically most of the time.

Well, there is Hansa and the Bankers, and there is the knightly orders - for the first two, yeah, agreed, that works fine as it is, but can't we all agree that it's not very fitting for the three knightly orders, and that something SoI'ish could be a better solution?

For the Knight corps it might be better indeed, but I don't think we should incorporate both corporations and companies.

And we can change the corporation values to make those more balanced.

Increasing the number of executives/masters you can own could help with the slow spread. Maybe the unique corp units could have a special ability as well? (ie forego a promotion to spread corp to certain number of cities. That would well reflect the choice of some members of the military orders to protect civilians and pilgrims rather than fight abroad.

There is another idea that I have been thinking about for a while. If possible, the unique units of an order could have their own GP experience counter, that when filled, would generate, for example, a Templar Grandmaster. He could act like a super GG unit, who could either train some of the order's units (consuming himself), lead order units as a Grandmaster (like the regular GG unit) or join the city as an instructor (+100% military production, +5xp to order units. The bonuses could vary depending on the order.

Another suggestion:

Military techs should be able to be bulbed by great generals.

for sweden's third UHV is it ten cities in each province or any where in those provinces?

doubtfull that all of those provinces is big enough for 10 cities ... which doesn't matter since its 10 cities spread across those provinces (at least it was last i checked)

are u supposed to settle a city in each province then?

are u supposed to settle a city in each province then?

If it says "conquer", then you need to conquer or settle. If it says have X cities, you only need to settle/conquer X cities.