Current (SVN) development discussion thread

[iOnlySignIn]

If Krakow doesn't get at least 1 of the 2 Wheat in its BFC it's going to be extremely weak. So there are 3 things you could do:

(1) Extend the Polish stability map.

(2) Move at least 1 of the Wheat around a bit so that it becomes immediately accessible to Krakow.

(3) Do nothing and let Krakow (and hence AI Poland) remain extremely weak.

Still, if only we could remove Poland so that this problem doesn't exist any more...

 

[Leoreth]

I'm going with (2) after the map changes introduced in the suggestions thread have been dealt with.

 

[soul-breathing]

I was Inca. When I try to take control of Argentina, first click "no" when it asks me whether take control Mexico or not, then I click "yes", but next turn I take control of Mexico instead.

Spoiler :

Spoiler :

 

[Jusos2108]

Polish Mexico!

 

[Leoreth]

Oh yeah, forgot that I still have to fix that.

 

[luckeitor]

Poland as a vassal and controlling Mexico? WOW

 

[soul-breathing]

Poland as a vassal and controlling Mexico? WOW

Yes, the vassal of Holy Romen at 1400AD, when they discovered Aztec, and I discovered them at the same time by workboat(Epic speed, Emperor).

But Polish Mexico is not so rare to see, actually I saw Japanese Inca one time...

 

[youtien]

There are still infinite loops when it goes to 1520.

 

[Leoreth]

There are still infinite loops when it goes to 1520.

Please clarify?

 

[Leoreth]

A new revision is currently being committed:
- complete version of the 1700 AD scenario
- independents pay no unit upkeep
- Argentina, Mexico and Brazil have a dynamic state religion based on the religions in their core
- moved Indian respawn into the 20th century
- AI conquerors start with some experience now
- new capital locations now prefer cities on the same continent as the old capital to avoid faraway colonies

 

[Bair_the_Normal]

Excellent.

 

[KievanRus]

A new revision is currently being committed:
- complete version of the 1700 AD scenario
- independents pay no unit upkeep
- Argentina, Mexico and Brazil have a dynamic state religion based on the religions in their core
- moved Indian respawn into the 20th century
- AI conquerors start with some experience now
- new capital locations now prefer cities on the same continent as the old capital to avoid faraway colonies

This is the best Canada Day ever!

 

[The Southerner]

No XXXX for me when I get home from work tonight!

Thank you Leoreth!

 

[Wilhelm Meister]

Omg Leoreth...Ich liebe dich!

 

[borhap88]

I'll avoid hours of game just to see a realistic modern world: thanks!

 

[therox]

Leoreth could you make europeans with dynamic state religion too ? like depending on Rome's state religion ?

 

[Cosmos1985]

Leoreth, you continue to amaze us. This is brilliant.

One small question, after taking a quick WB-lookaround: doesn't Mongolia look a bit too empty? I have no clue about the state of that area in 1700, but shouldn't there perhaps just be an indie city in the area?

Scandinavia looks perfect really. Perhaps give Oslo 1 more defender, to hold the Swedes up a tiny bit longer - afterall they're not supposed to conquer it for the next 100 years - but other than that I think the current setup is exactly as it should be.
(Oh and I still think Oslo should be moved 1W, but: )

 

[iOnlySignIn]

OK Leoreth you know I'm not good with congratulatory stuff, so I'll skip straight to critiques (which is what I'm here for, after all):

(1) Stability is messed up. England and Netherlands should be Solid, not Collapsing. It' Spain who should be Collapsing, instead of Stable, etc. etc.

If you're planning a complete overhaul of the Stability system then it's fine to ignore this. Otherwise this is the main problem that makes the scenario currently unplayable for me, as (for example) England would surely collapse at American spawn no matter what.

(2) I agree with making most civs UHVs unplayable, but there are huge wasted opportunities here. The most prominent example is Japan. IMO 1700AD should be Japan's "canonical" scenario (i.e. the one which should be used as a standard for designing and balancing the civ), just like how 3000BC is the "canonical" scenario for China, whereas 600AD is the "canonical" scenario for England.

(3) The map is obviously missing a great number of pre-placed Wonders, such as Notre Dame and Sistine Chapel. Even though the possibility of starting as America and building the Notre Dame sounds hilarious, I'd rather not have it.

 

[soul-breathing]

(1) Stability is messed up. England and Netherlands should be Solid, not Collapsing. It' Spain who should be Collapsing, instead of Stable, etc. etc.

If you're planning a complete overhaul of the Stability system then it's fine to ignore this. Otherwise this is the main problem that makes the scenario currently unplayable for me, as (for example) England would surely collapse at American spawn no matter what.

(2) I agree with making most civs UHVs unplayable, but there are huge wasted opportunities here. The most prominent example is Japan. IMO 1700AD should be Japan's "canonical" scenario (i.e. the one which should be used as a standard for designing and balancing the civ), just like how 3000BC is the "canonical" scenario for China, whereas 600AD is the "canonical" scenario for England.

(3) The map is obviously missing a great number of pre-placed Wonders, such as Notre Dame and Sistine Chapel. Even though the possibility of starting as America and building the Notre Dame sounds hilarious, I'd rather not have it.

Just as what I'm thinking about. And I will add another suggestion: some civs(England, France, Dutch, Spain, Portugal, Russia, etc.) should have more tiles revealed. After all, in 1700AD, most of the earth had been discovered by European.

And, how does Leo think to represent the fast development of Japan in later 19th cantury? Seems that Japan is difficult to be one of the strongest countries in the world in early 20th century now.

 

[Leoreth]

One small question, after taking a quick WB-lookaround: doesn't Mongolia look a bit too empty? I have no clue about the state of that area in 1700, but shouldn't there perhaps just be an indie city in the area?

For example?

Scandinavia looks perfect really. Perhaps give Oslo 1 more defender, to hold the Swedes up a tiny bit longer - afterall they're not supposed to conquer it for the next 100 years - but other than that I think the current setup is exactly as it should be.
(Oh and I still think Oslo should be moved 1W, but: )

Okay. I placed the units intuitively and haven't given much thought to observe how things turn out

(1) Stability is messed up. England and Netherlands should be Solid, not Collapsing. It' Spain who should be Collapsing, instead of Stable, etc. etc.

Judging things from 1700 AD stability is not the best idea. I've run multiple Argentine starts to observe how everyone's doing and usually England and Netherlands are fine, while Spain and Turkey needed a buff to survive until then.

If you're planning a complete overhaul of the Stability system then it's fine to ignore this. Otherwise this is the main problem that makes the scenario currently unplayable for me, as (for example) England would surely collapse at American spawn no matter what.

I do, but it'll take a while until I get to it so it's necessary to balance it within the current rules. But my observation is that England makes it through the American spawn just fine.

(2) I agree with making most civs UHVs unplayable, but there are huge wasted opportunities here. The most prominent example is Japan. IMO 1700AD should be Japan's "canonical" scenario (i.e. the one which should be used as a standard for designing and balancing the civ), just like how 3000BC is the "canonical" scenario for China, whereas 600AD is the "canonical" scenario for England.

Japan's UHV should be playable in 1700 AD?

(3) The map is obviously missing a great number of pre-placed Wonders, such as Notre Dame and Sistine Chapel. Even though the possibility of starting as America and building the Notre Dame sounds hilarious, I'd rather not have it.

Yes, that's something I didn't yet manage to include. I'd have almost forgotten it.

Just as what I'm thinking about. And I will add another suggestion: some civs(England, France, Dutch, Spain, Portugal, Russia, etc.) should have more tiles revealed. After all, in 1700AD, most of the earth had been discovered by European.

It's tedious to do that, though. I haven't observed any disadvantages for the AI and humans tend to know where everything is anyway. But I might need to set the circumnavigation bonus.

And, how does Leo think to represent the fast development of Japan in later 19th cantury? Seems that Japan is difficult to be one of the strongest countries in the world in early 20th century now.

Maybe it's a good idea to buff some of their modifiers when entering the Industrial era, especially tech speed.

By the way, comments on the tech speed and its synchronization with the current year are appreciated.