Current (SVN) development discussion thread

Yeah, pointlessness is exactly what I want to avoid.

Well, we don't know anything yet about IVC..
Perhaps here's my suggestion :

UHV1 : Gain X coins from trade routes only before India spawn (based on their trades with Mesopotamia & Central Asia)
UHV2 : Build 2 (IVC UB) in non-coastal city and 1 harbor in coastal city (so you need 3 city total) before India spawn (Harappa, Mohenjo-Daro, Lothal)
UHV3 : Be the first to build a wonder in Indian subcontinent (add Great Bath back to DoC)

Leoreth said:

I made the mechanic to model the transatlantic slave trade, and haven't decided yet if it's appropriate for Muslim slavery as it is.

Yes.

I plan to do that, but currently everything stays.

Click to expand...

The Muslim slave-trade was at least as destructive and inhumane as the transatlantic, began at a much early period, and is still going on underground today in places like Sudan and Morocco.
Many Muslim countries only outlawed slavery in the 20th century, and only then under pressure from the United States & European governments.

I'm amazed that Poland has finally been able to included, (I never thought anyone would be able to do this!) but inclusion of the Congo seems pointless from either any gameplay or historical impact, and having the slave-trade an historical "achievement" strikes as more than slightly offensive imho.

The question is not if Muslim slavery existed, but rather if it makes sense to represent it with the mechanics we currently have.

And the Aztecs already have a UP and UHV goal based on slavery so I don't see why there should be any double standard.

Speaking of Muslim slavery, I feel like there should be some way to represent the Barbary coast pirates.

A problem with the Congo goal is that it requires usually going to war with Mali and Moors to get the slaves to Europe as sending them through Africa does not work. Don't know if others have a problem, but I at least do.

Don't the Portuguese have colonies in Africa?

Leoreth said:

The question is not if Muslim slavery existed, but rather if it makes sense to represent it with the mechanics we currently have.

And the Aztecs already have a UP and UHV goal based on slavery so I don't see why there should be any double standard.

Click to expand...

It's more that the "achievement" involved basically represents selling off thousands of your own people as slaves to a foreign power; the Aztec UHV is more representing a "what if" they beat the Europeans.

SouthernKing said:

Speaking of Muslim slavery, I feel like there should be some way to represent the Barbary coast pirates.

Click to expand...

Moorish respawn seems a no-brainer to me. I haven't go the SVN but I suspect they collapse sometime soon after losing Andalusia?

I have a minor bug with the enslave/draft button when i move the mouse over the icon i see: "requires autocracy".

Pavel Chichikov said:

The Muslim slave-trade was at least as destructive and inhumane as the transatlantic, began at a much early period, and is still going on underground today in places like Sudan and Morocco.
Many Muslim countries only outlawed slavery in the 20th century, and only then under pressure from the United States & European governments.

I'm amazed that Poland has finally been able to included, (I never thought anyone would be able to do this!) but inclusion of the Congo seems pointless from either any gameplay or historical impact, and having the slave-trade an historical "achievement" strikes as more than slightly offensive imho.

Click to expand...

Kongo are definitely as deserving as the like of the Mayans anyway.
I don't think there is a need for a full civ for the IVC though

Leoreth said:

Don't the Portuguese have colonies in Africa?

Click to expand...

Eventually, but not as effective.

I am completely impressed by the mechanics for religious schism (in Christianity) and am wondering if we might see the same for Islam (ie. Shias / Sunni) as Islam is obviously a big religion in the came, spread across many empires and it would be great to include that eventual distinction if possible?

On a semi-related note, I know the AI build weight for missionaries was decreased a while ago, but maybe too much. They are never able to spread religions anymore and Corddoba under Spain never gets Catholicism, or Wahran under Moors gets Orthodoxy.

I think Morocco is screwed over in the new updates. In my games, they end up collapsing from being so weak. It's as if they're worthless, they don't even build La Mezquita.

Solzhenitsyn said:

I think Morocco is screwed over in the new updates. In my games, they end up collapsing from being so weak. It's as if they're worthless, they don't even build La Mezquita.

Click to expand...

Sometimes they are strong in my game, and Spanish is jailed inland, leaving Montevideo / Buenos Aires blank until I settled it in 1700s.

I think, about colonizing, we shouldn't accord to history too tightly. It was somehow random (see how Spain and Portugal divided south America), why can't the first pioneer get the best land in south America and suffer no stability penalty if they are not Spanish?

I agree that Kongo has merit as inclusion as a full-fledged civilization.
It also is worth mentioning that the slavery achievement as Pavel mentioned
should be changed to something better though.

However the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade is much different than the Muslim slave trade, in motivation, and long-standing effect.
The African-American and Afro-Caribbean populations today are a result of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. That's huge.
Can the Muslim slave trade say the same or have the same impact? It has nothing to do with brutality or inhumanity, of which it is agreed that all slavery constitutes (For that matter, underground slavery still exists in the USA and both Western and Eastern European countries, as well as the rest of the world, let's not try to have a double-standard here).
If we were to institute it for Muslim civilizations, then I could name off a dozen other slavery systems other European or Asian civilizations instituted that are all at least of equal mention.

IrishDragon said:

Kongo are definitely as deserving as the like of the Mayans anyway.
I don't think there is a need for a full civ for the IVC though

Click to expand...

Who are IVC? I'm really curious.

Sometimes I don't know about Mayans being deserving of inclusion, though many people seem to love them so it's a mute point. Can somebody convince me of the Congo being more than a gameplay stopgap? I can think of Israelis, Assyrians, Hittites, Goths, Iroquois, the Confederate States, Tatar Khans, Finland, Scots, Magyars, Mexican/Mameluke Respawns as having a better claim to inclusion.

...But if most computers can cope with it, then it's ultimately just more gameplay options.

Hippo8085 said:

On a semi-related note, I know the AI build weight for missionaries was decreased a while ago, but maybe too much. They are never able to spread religions anymore and Corddoba under Spain never gets Catholicism, or Wahran under Moors gets Orthodoxy.

Click to expand...

Building Missionaries is for suckers anyway, there's absolutely no reason do it under the current level of Religion spread-rate unless you're pursuing a UHV. For example the Norse are nearly always Catholic before 900 AD so the free Missionaries aren't really necessary, though why they get them in the first place beats me.
I always much reduce the spreadrate in my games to give a point for Missionaries and time to build Classical wonders.

Lawrie said:

I am completely impressed by the mechanics for religious schism (in Christianity) and am wondering if we might see the same for Islam (ie. Shias / Sunni) as Islam is obviously a big religion in the came, spread across many empires and it would be great to include that eventual distinction if possible?

Click to expand...

I've considered this, but I don't think it's that necessary. The only civ that is historically Shia is Persia, and maybe respawned Egypt (but only for a while). The Christians had to be divided, because there's just so many of them and historically about even numbers ended up Catholic/Protestant/Othodox. For the Muslim civs, most of them historically ended up Sunni so that wouldn't accomplish anything besides weakening Iran which isn't all that powerful already anyway.

Pavel Chichikov said:

Who are IVC? I'm really curious.

Click to expand...

The Indus Valley Civilization. We don't know their name (and can't even translate their writing), so it doesn't have an actual name, even though they're usually referred to as Harappans after the first IVC city that has been discovered.

can think of Israelis, Assyrians, Hittites, Goths, Iroquois, the Confederate States, Tatar Khans, Finland, Scots, Magyars, Mexican/Mameluke Respawns as having a better claim to inclusion.

Click to expand...

Yeah, if you like short lived (Israel, CSA), geographically crammed (Israel, Assyria, Hatti, Iroquois, Finland, Scotland, Hungary) or impossible to model civs (Tatar Khans, Goths) and in general more of the same, maybe they have (this means I don't think so).

Consider Congo:
- lives in an empty area that is at most represented by independents? Check.
- is long lived enough to warrant inclusion? Check.
- messes up nobody else in the area? Check.
- is different from what's already in the game? Check.

And seriously, the CSA? What's next, the Paris Commune?

(And on a general note, maybe you should play things first before criticizing them.)

I am unable too use SVN.

Addition of Congo has just really shocked me is all, I think it shocked everyone.
CSA could work on a conditional spawn, it's a huge empty continent & it's probably the biggest of all the "what if's" of modern history. The only problem is American AI isn't great, though admittedly I've played that far in maybe 15 games since RFC first came out.

Do you think that Latin America could get some work though? A lot of people seem to torture themselves over getting the perfect spawn for America so they can recreate the Mexican wars.

Addition of Congo has just really shocked me is all, I think it shocked everyone.
CSA could work on a conditional spawn, it's a huge empty continent & it's probably the biggest of all the "what if's" of modern history. The only problem is American AI isn't great, though admittedly I've played that far in maybe 15 games since RFC first came out.

Click to expand...

It wasn't shocked.On the contrary,I expected it long before it was added.
CSA does not deserve to be a civilization,it was a short-lived nation that didn't accomplish anything important.