Current (SVN) development discussion thread

[iOnlySignIn]

I'd like to mention that in my games things are A LOT different from what TD described. In my games (3000 BC):

(1) Spain gets Conquerors less than 25% of the time. Instead there's a variety of Conquerors, including Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Khmer, English, French, Viking, Byzantine, Portugese, and others.

(2) AI Mongol never manages to accomplish anything. They'd be lucky to hold 1 city in Russia, and their Iranian/Seljuk conquerors more often than not simply melt away against Independents. This is because Mongols flip a lot fewer cities (Samarkand almost always gets razed by barbs, and there is no Merv/Kashgar at all) or units (due to late Great Wall) in the 3000 BC spawn.

(3) Instead of mega-Mongols, I always get mega-Russia. It's always huge and often leading in tech. And that is when it does NOT control any Islamic Wonders, which it sometimes does (which means Russia teching to Rocketry around 1850).

(4) England is OK. Neither good nor bad - they definitely tech slower than the Prussians and the Chinese; sometimes even the Russians, French, Japanese and Vikings are faster. This is because in 3000 BC start, Indian city locations are crap, so England gets much less out of conquering India.

For very obvious reasons, 3000 BC starts are a lot more diverse than 600 AD ones. I suggest playing some 3000 BC starts before you complain about the lack of variety.

[Fresol]

Did you take difficulty/speed factor into consideration? What happens in Emperor/Epic frequently may not appear under Monarch/Normal that often.

[iOnlySignIn]

Originally Posted by Fresol

Did you take difficulty/speed factor into consideration? What happens in Emperor/Epic frequently may not appear under Monarch/Normal that often.

Emperor does not matter since all AIs play on Monarch against each other. The things I described happen whether I play as China, Greece, Japan, or America.

As for Epic, I've always said that everyone should play on Epic. Now there's just one more reason. There're 3 speed settings, Normal Epic Marathon. The middle one should be the default one, yes? Like how Monarch is default out of Viceroy Monarch Emperor.

Seriously though, I really, genuinely think it's a difference between 3000 BC and 600 AD. When I play 600 AD I always get mega-Spain too (on Epic/Emperor) which is why I play 3000 BC since I hate mega-Spain.

TLDR if you don't like Epic/Emperor fine, at least play on 3000 BC. 3000 BC makes a lot more difference than Epic.

[Fresol]

Originally Posted by iOnlySignIn

Emperor does not matter since all AIs play on Monarch against each other. The things I described happen whether I play as China, Greece, Japan, or America.

As for Epic, I've always said that everyone should play on Epic. Now there's just one more reason. There're 3 speed settings, Normal Epic Marathon. The middle one should be the default one, yes? Like how Monarch is default out of Viceroy Monarch Emperor.

Seriously though, I really, genuinely think it's a difference between 3000 BC and 600 AD. When I play 600 AD I always get mega-Spain too, even on Epic/Emperor, which is why I play 3000 BC since I hate mega-Spain too.

I don't really know this, but does AI receive bonus in teching/building when difficulty goes up?

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Originally Posted by iOnlySignIn

I'd like to mention that in my games things are A LOT different from what TD described. In my games (3000 BC):

(1) Spain gets Conquerors less than 25% of the time. Instead there's a variety of Conquerors, including Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Khmer, English, French, Viking, Byzantine, Portugese, and others.

(2) AI Mongol never manages to accomplish anything. They'd be lucky to hold 1 city in Russia, and their Iranian/Seljuk conquerors more often than not simply melt away against Independents. This is because Mongols flip a lot fewer cities (Samarkand almost always gets razed by barbs, and there is no Merv/Kashgar at all) or units (due to late Great Wall) in the 3000 BC spawn.

(3) Instead of mega-Mongols, I always get mega-Russia. It's always huge and often leading in tech. And that is when it does NOT control any Islamic Wonders, which it sometimes does (which means Russia teching to Rocketry around 1850).

(4) England is OK. Neither good nor bad - they definitely tech slower than the Prussians and the Chinese; sometimes even the Russians, French, Japanese and Vikings are faster. This is because in 3000 BC start, Indian city locations are crap, so England gets much less out of conquering India.

For very obvious reasons, 3000 BC starts are a lot more diverse than 600 AD ones. I suggest playing some 3000 BC starts before you complain about the lack of variety.

For the record, let it be known that I never play anything other than 3000BC, Monarch and Normal.

What I'm talking about is based on observations as late spawning civs, with no opportunities to interfere with anyone's development (Prussia, America).

If I'm playing China, yes, Mongols are not going to amount to anything. That is a given.
If I'm twiddling my thumbs and waiting for the world to build itself, then yes, Mega-Mongols, Mega-Spain and Uber-England are permanent
fixtures of a 3000BC, Monarch, Normal environment. The lack of variety that I've observed on aforementioned settings comes from
a couple generated Prussia & America starts, and also other users' screenshots of the world.

[Bair_the_Normal]

Originally Posted by Tomorrow's Dawn

That's actually not a bad idea.
Make the Indie Scottish city have a stack of Heavy Swordsmen (to represent the Highlanders) to block off the English.
Part of the reason why they tech so fast though, is because of their UP, the No Maintenance thing.
I'm tempted to ask that Leoreth disable the UP for the AI.

My point is that they will have to spend time on both colonizing and fighting Scotland off, but this may be a stretch, as I've personally never experienced uber-Britain, so I'm not quite qualified to talk about it. :\

However, we can kill two birds with one stone by making France more powerful. That will help inhibit both British and Spanish growth. This might be stretching it, but if you think about it, France and Britain will fight over India and North America, while France will push up against Spain past the Pyrenees.

[Fresol]

Originally Posted by Tomorrow's Dawn

For the record, let it be known that I never play anything other than 3000BC, Monarch and Normal.

What I'm talking about is based on observations as late spawning civs, with no opportunities to interfere with anyone's development (Prussia, America).

In my games the Mongols definitely can take quite a few cities, and in some cases would grow to be a strong empire, but not always, sometimes they collapse after a while.

[Fresol]

Originally Posted by Bair_the_Normal

My point is that they will have to spend time on both colonizing and fighting Scotland off, but this may be a stretch, as I've personally never experienced uber-Britain, so I'm not quite qualified to talk about it. :\

They are not often quite large in size, but if they managed to beeline Economics, after taking India they'll be hard to stop.

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

@Bair_the_Normal: Boot up a couple America/Prussia starts, enter WorldBuilder and you can see what I mean.

EDIT: Same settings of course; 3000BC, Monarch, Normal.

Also, arguably, about the Speed quip, Leoreth himself had stated that the mod was to be balanced around Monarch difficulty, and Normal speed as the baseline.
That is why I have run all my tests under those circumstances. I may try some of the slower speeds sometime, but not before we weed out all these issues.

[Bair_the_Normal]

Originally Posted by Tomorrow's Dawn

@Bair_the_Normal: Boot up a couple America/Prussia starts, enter WorldBuilder and you can see what I mean.

S' why I added the French portion. I think that that could be a root cause, and that the British UP is just a contributing factor. They have no competition or cause to worry up there, and can just tech and build in peace forever. With France maybe landing on England every so often, that will help to put a cap on it. At least I think.

[iOnlySignIn]

I don't know why. The AI Mongols are always pathetic in every game I played, even when I'm America (see the Jeffersonian Democracy game World Map in my sig). Their conquerors do nothing, they tech nothing, and build nothing.

If it's nerfed any further you might as well delete the civ altogether, as it serves no purpose whatsoever.

On Spain though, I agree mega-Spain is annoying, but only on 600 AD.

As for England, half of the time when I load a Prussian spawn, England does not even have Rifling. The only times I have seen mega-England is when I load an American spawn - but then it stops being an issue as I take over half the British Empire.

And finally, mega-Russia. If there's any AI that's OP in my games, it's Russia. Seriously. They threaten Domination/Space Race/UHV in half the American games I played.

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

I'll give you one thing about the Mongols, iOnlySignIn.

They're typically huge, but they're behind in tech. Usually, they'll have huge roving stacks of Curassiers roaming around,
and while they're behind, they have so many units, that their Power rating is high, and no one wants to mess with them.

[iOnlySignIn]

Originally Posted by Tomorrow's Dawn

They're typically huge,

Not in my games. Mongols are lucky to hold 1 city in Russia and 1 in Iran in my games. Really, they are pathetic and rarely expand beyond their Core.

Usually, they'll have huge roving stacks of Curassiers roaming around,
and while they're behind, they have so many units, that their Power rating is high, and no one wants to mess with them.

Not if you set up your Defensive Pacts properly and trade Rifling to your important allies.

In the American game in my sig, China is my vassal and Japan (with Himeji Castle) is my Friendly Defensive Pact ally. When Mongols declared, I traded Rifling to both of my Asian allies, along with 2,000 Gold to China to upgrade their Muskets. China and Japan killed 50~100 Mongol Curassiers in the end. I didn't even lift a finger.

------

Russia is much more of a problem for me than Mongolia. Their stacks are around 3~5 times bigger than Mongol stacks (fitting, as their Production base is more than 5 times stronger) and not behind in Tech (due to Russia's tendency to get lots of vassals, and Catherine's high inclination to demand Techs from everyone).

And unlike with the Mongols, you cannot really invade Russia before you have Tanks or Nukes, so your AI allies are really ineffective against Russia.

I also have never been able to Vassalize Russia in any of my games (except as the old Germany with Panzers) since they pulverize the Mongols all by themselves. I always wonder how you could all Vassalize Russia in your Domination games.

[jammerculture]

well why don't you tell him what you really feel, lol

i think in every game, the possibility for one or more civs to gain a lead over their rivals exists (wars won or lost, wonders built or captured, etc.) and usually one or more civs is able to take advantage of these advantages, and in civ these advantages tend to snowball. I feel that I have seen a wide enough variety in the "top" civs, britain, france, spain, russia even sweden, reaching uber status to deduce that the games are playing out as they should, and the probability of any one civ reaching top spot is indicative of their relative historic strengths, and therefore a good thing.

I have not started a game in a very long time that I have had any one adversary so much more powerful then me that the game was unwinnable with the right strategy. really, complaining that Britain is often powerful, it's the frickin british empire, its supposed to lead the world.

[Fresol]

To vassalize Russia, you can try it early (like prior to 1200 AD) or wait for a respawn (if they are collapsed by Mongolian invasion).

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Originally Posted by jammerculture

well why don't you tell him what you really feel, lol

i think in every game, the possibility for one or more civs to gain a lead over their rivals exists (wars won or lost, wonders built or captured, etc.) and usually one or more civs is able to take advantage of these advantages, and in civ these advantages tend to snowball. I feel that I have seen a wide enough variety in the "top" civs, britain, france, spain, russia even sweden, reaching uber status to deduce that the games are playing out as they should, and the probability of any one civ reaching top spot is indicative of their relative historic strengths, and therefore a good thing.

I have not started a game in a very long time that I have had any one adversary so much more powerful then me that the game was unwinnable with the right strategy. really, complaining that Britain is often powerful, it's the frickin british empire, its supposed to lead the world.

Infantry & Machine Guns in the late 1700's is an issue.
I'm not the only one who has voiced this sentiment,
as I recall civ_king had some issues with Britain's tech rate as well.

[civ_king]

Originally Posted by Tomorrow's Dawn

Infantry & Machine Guns in the late 1700's is an issue.
I'm not the only one who has voiced this sentiment,
as I recall civ_king had some issues with Britain's tech rate as well.

Spawning as America and realizing Vicky has Infantry and Wembley has a tendency to cause me to rage quit

[iOnlySignIn]

Originally Posted by Fresol

To vassalize Russia, you can try it early (like prior to 1200 AD)

That only works if I'm Rome or China. My primary civs (that I play past 840 AD) are England, America, Japan, Portugal, the Netherlands, and Russia itself. France, too, until it became too easy.

or wait for a respawn (if they are collapsed by Mongolian invasion).

They collapse to the Mongols in around 5% of the games I play.

In 90% of the games I play they don't loose anything more than 2 or 3 small (usually Central Asian) cities to the Mongols, and take them back in no time.

Originally Posted by civ_king

Spawning as America and realizing Vicky has Infantry and Wembley has a tendency to cause me to rage quit

Never seen that. In fact, I've seen them with Muskets and go ROFL

Hell, I've only seen England build Trafalgar Square once on American spawn. It's usually built by Spain, or in the late 19th by the Japanese.

[iOnlySignIn]

To show what I'm talking about, I just loaded a Prussia start.

"Mega-England" with its fearsome army of Longbows, Muskets, and a sprawling empire of 2 cities:



"Mega-Mongols":



"Mega-Spain" in the Americas




The first two screenshots should give you an idea of what Russia looks like.

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

^Are those on my settings? Monarch+Normal+3000BC?

Or is it Emperor+Epic+3000BC?

If you're interested for the sake of science,
we could both run 10 America tests for those settings
(to find the average result; 1 is hardly definitive)
and post the results here in the thread.
I am not kidding when I assert that England
is too powerful (as well as Spain or Mongols)
under my circumstances.