Balance and Gameplay discussion.

A woody 2 axe has a poor chance of taking down an unpromoted axe in the woods. That's bad, should be the other way around. At the very least a woody 2 axe against green axe fighting in the woods the expert woodsman should be the favorite. I'm OK with a fresh woodsman getting poor odds against an unpromoted unit, but the expert woodsman should do better then even in that situation.
 
I'm OK with a fresh woodsman getting poor odds against an unpromoted unit, but the expert woodsman should do better then even in that situation.

Ok. I think the woodsman I unit should already have at least 50-50 odds attacking an unpromoted unit in the woods. With its training it should have at least equal odds against unexperienced units. And I think the expert woodsman II unit should have at least 50-50 odds attacking a fresh woodsman I in the forest. This is easily possible without giving the woodsman III a huge bonus against units in the forest.

For instance:

(forest +25% defence instead of 50%)
New woodsman promotions:
I: +25 attack vs forests, +10 defence in forests
II: +15 attack vs forests, +10 defence in forests, +1 first strike chance, double move in forests
III: +15 attack vs forests, +10 defence in forests, +1 first strike
(bonuses are cumulative)

(Battles in forest: Woodsman I attacking unpromoted is equal odds, Woodsman I attacking Woodsman I loses, Woodsman II narrowly beats Woodsman I unit when attacking and narrowly wins when defending against Woodsman II. Woodsman III comfortably beats Woodsman II when attacking and is equal when defending against Woodsman III)

Main idea: woodsman line of promotions makes it ever easier to attack through woods and every level of this promotion is better in woods than any other promotion in the woods. The promotion line is also somewhat useful outside of the woods (the first strikes of WII and WIII follow those of DrillI and DrillII). The weird healing bonus has been removed (I think the medic II promotion could use a boost).

If I assume that the guerilla promotion stays at the 20-25-30 progression in LoR, then you'll also see that a guerilla II unit has far better odds at beating a unit on the hills than a woodsman II unit at beating a unit in the forest. So being an expert in the hills is helping you more than being an expert in the forest when attacking. That can work, but it wouldn't have my preference.

It seems as if we are looking for a different balance. That's ok, it's your mod. I'm just a fan who gives his opinion.
 
Well I just played my first game of LoR and I must say I didn't get anything that could really be called a bug although I learned that defying the United Nations is a very bad idea. Now I kind of know what Saddam Hussein felt like after gulf war 1 :sad: About the only thing that I got that might be considered a bug is that I noticed when the AI declared war on me that I would get a notification that such and such leader is willing to sign a peace deal the next turn but when I went to the diplomacy screen that was obviously not true. Its such a minor issue though I am not concerned about it. I do have a couple of questions in regards to LoR and hopefully phungus or someone with the LoR will answer it.

I like the concept of the Legendary units although the Red Barron really shut down my war effort when the Romans got him :spear: I suggested this on another board but I would like to see Nelson Mandela be an alternate leader for the game. I was also thinking that if you can put Simon Bolivar as a leader of the Inca's why not Santa Anna as an alternative to Monty.

1.) This is a general game play question but I couldn't find the answer in Civilopedia. Does the unhappiness penalty for defying the U.N ever wear off? I continues an illegal war against the Koreans when the rest of the world condemned me and was stuck with -5 penalty (the rest of the world considers you a villain) for the rest of the game.

2.) When LoR loads I noticed in the screen that there is a thing that says Religioun Options: none. This is the same screen where it tells you if IDW is and revolutions are enabled in the game. What exactly are the "Religion Options"? Is that something that is going to be incorporated in a future version of Lor?

3.) I had a question about the spy promotions. When you get the promotions cause 50% more unrest/poison does that mean a city will suffer a -12 happiness/health penalty instead of 8 when you do those missions or does it mean that when you complete any type of espionage that it will cause some sort of additional penalty to whoever your screwing over?
 
Well I just played my first game of LoR and I must say I didn't get anything that could really be called a bug although I learned that defying the United Nations is a very bad idea. Now I kind of know what Saddam Hussein felt like after gulf war 1 :sad: About the only thing that I got that might be considered a bug is that I noticed when the AI declared war on me that I would get a notification that such and such leader is willing to sign a peace deal the next turn but when I went to the diplomacy screen that was obviously not true. Its such a minor issue though I am not concerned about it.
The UN behavior is unchanged from BtS. ;)
As for the minor issue with saying will sign peace, that's just something from BUG, it will eventually be fixed, but it's such a non issue I'm not going to worry about it.

I like the concept of the Legendary units although the Red Barron really shut down my war effort when the Romans got him :spear: I suggested this on another board but I would like to see Nelson Mandela be an alternate leader for the game. I was also thinking that if you can put Simon Bolivar as a leader of the Inca's why not Santa Anna as an alternative to Monty.
Personally I'm glad to hear the Red Baron was actually useful, even if that was for the AI. I was worried he might be a "useless" legend, so thanks for letting me know he was a thorn in your side. That's actually good from my standpoint :lol:

As for Santa Anna, definatly not. His claim to fame is loosing massive territory to the US, he just doesn't seem like an influenctial leader. With Mandela I suppose we could use him to replace Reagan, but I doubt it. Bolivar seems like a good fit for the Inca, they are the only South American Civ, and he's considered in modern times as the great liberator of South America from European influence, it just fits. Mandela has no such direct Civ counterpart. Zulu would be the closest, but the Zulu aren't really South African, and definatly don't fit for Ethiopia or Mali. I just can't see the direct connection, so it's unlikely.

1.) This is a general game play question but I couldn't find the answer in Civilopedia. Does the unhappiness penalty for defying the U.N ever wear off? I continues an illegal war against the Koreans when the rest of the world condemned me and was stuck with -5 penalty (the rest of the world considers you a villain) for the rest of the game.
:hmm: you may have stumbled across another aspect of the interdependency bug in RevDCM (all the rest have since been fixed by hardcoding "hack" fixes in the latest RevDCM build). I'm not sure though. Any chance you have a save game? UN behavior is unchanged from BtS, it works like so: If you defy the UN you get the 5 unhappy penalty, but it's supposed to go away after you accept a UN mandate (you vote yes on a UN proposition that passes) a certain ammount of turns (I think it has to be at least 15 turns after you defied) after you defied. So did you ever vote yes on a UN proposition that passed after you defied? If so you have discovered another interdependency issue, and I need to bring this to glider's attention. A save game would be really nice here if you could upload one after you defied the resolution.

2.) When LoR loads I noticed in the screen that there is a thing that says Religioun Options: none. This is the same screen where it tells you if IDW is and revolutions are enabled in the game. What exactly are the "Religion Options"? Is that something that is going to be incorporated in a future version of Lor?
Press Ctrl + Alt + O when playing a game. This brings up the BUG menu. Look under the RevDCM tab, there are a bunch of religious options you can toggle there.

3.) I had a question about the spy promotions. When you get the promotions cause 50% more unrest/poison does that mean a city will suffer a -12 happiness/health penalty instead of 8 when you do those missions or does it mean that when you complete any type of espionage that it will cause some sort of additional penalty to whoever your screwing over?
I suppose so, I never really get into the spy game myself, so have no real experience with the spy promotions. Maybe someone else could answer this.
 
If you defy the UN you get the 5 unhappy penalty, but it's supposed to go away after you accept a UN mandate (you vote yes on a UN proposition that passes) a certain ammount of turns (I think it has to be at least 15 turns after you defied) after you defied. So did you ever vote yes on a UN proposition that passed after you defied? If so you have discovered another interdependency issue, and I need to bring this to glider's attention.

For some reason many many players on this forum think that the unhappiness is related to accepting a UN mandate while this is simply not the case. It is just a 20 turn period of unhappiness and then it simply ends. The Full Member status and the +2 hammers from religious buildings of the AP religion are related to voting in favour of a successful resolution.

If it doesn't work that way, then something in this mod changed it. I hope this will make things clear for JimboVT.
 
User comments about changes made in new builds (such as the fact Crossbows no longer deal with mounted defenses outside cities) help me determine balancing decisions, and tweaks to be made in updates. This is particularly important given we are aproaching the end of the beta stage in development (1 or 2 more full builds before the mod comes out of beta), and once this mod comes out of beta there will be no more balance tweaks made for many months if ever. Just letting you guys know that feedback on new builds is vitally important in the development process, and without it I'm not really sure if some changes (particularly the medieval era unit changes) are working as intended, and/or improve gameplay :dunno:

I actually have many balance requests. Some, I consider important, some less. Some related to LoR, some would be equally valid for regular BTS. I don't expect you to agree with all of them as each player has a different idea about balance. However, I'm one of those players that thinks that game balance is very important, so I'll list some of my requests and balance issues now. Please don't view it as criticism.

I was also wondering why you might not balance the mod after version 1.0? I think that mods that reach the 'finished' or 'polished' state typically attract more players and thus more balance issues will be detected after a while. Some balance issues regarding regular civ4 were also only detected after many players played the game for quite a long time. Perfect balance is probably a utopia, but it is likely that better balance can be achieved and recognized only once the game has reached the 'finished' state for a while. Especially the late game balance issues won't be recognised until the mod has been around for a while.

Issue 1: Ranged bombardment can kill units while regular attack by siege units or bombardment from the sky cannot. In my opinion, ranged bombardment would be far better balanced if it also had a damage cap. Without a damage cap, regular attacks aren't needed anymore as you can bombard everything into nothingness.

Issue 1b: Non-combat units (workers, executives, missionaires, etc) are immune to any form of ranged attack (bombardment by artillery and air and guided missiles) except nuclear attacks.

Issue 2a: Special forces are a fun unit that allows some very special moves. I'm just afraid that their combination of commando and invisibility to most units will make them a game element that is great for the human player but extremely hard to counter for the AI. The unit can move through enemy terrain at a rate of 10 moves per turn while at war. Workers, for instance, can easily be destroyed in large numbers by this unit and I wonder if the AI will understand what is actually happening to its workers and counter with detection mechanisms. However, I haven't been able to test the game mechanic yet.

Issue 2b: Similar to 2a, stealth destroyers are extremely hard to detect. They are actually harder to detect than submarines and can't even be seen by planes (except UAV) which is weird. The only sea unit that can see them is the supercarrier. The civilopedia entry wrongly says that they can be seen by stealth destroyers.
The unit shouldn't have the escort AI as they can't protect anything in a stack as they are rarely even detected by the enemy stack and thus don't defend.
I think the unit would actually function better without the stealth feature. With its ability to carry a scout aircraft, good vs subs, good detection abilities and high strength, they are useful enough. And the 2 first strikes and high retreat odds are enough to symbolise their stealthiness.

Issue3: Archers aren't useful as city defence in the classical age. They can't cope with the combination of swordsmen and the ability to remove defensive bonuses.

Issue4: The serfdom civic hasn't been improved. Many might think that adding an ability like using food to build units is an element that strengthens the civic, but it's not. 1 :food: is worth a lot more than one :hammers:. Whether you use slavery to convert food (population) into hammers or caste system to build powerful workshops, you'll get a far better conversion than 1 to 1 and it can be applied to everything, not only units.
Whenever you use food to build units, it will be an inefficient use of food.
It's a fun concept, but not balanced.
Removing the benefits that the civic used to give (faster workers) and adding bad elements (1 :yuck:) of course doesn't help things.

Issue5: Because crossbowmen ignore knights when attacking, there exists no contemporary unit that can protect your stack against attacking crossbowmen. No unit has better than 50% odds on flatlands.

Issue6a: Late game tile improvements: you can build ectreme climate versions of cottages and farms but not of workshops on tundra, ice, desert. It's not really a balance thing, but I don't see why one tile improvement is allowed in bad terrain and the other not. It's especially weird that it is impossible to build workshops in terrain that is good enough to farm. Is there a philosophy behind this game design?

Issue6b: Late game, the special resource improvements like plantations, camps, wineries and (oil) wells are very poor because all the other improvements have gotten bonuses but they have remained the same. I've always thought this as an oversight in game development of basic civ4. Especially oil wells should be a good improvement which they aren't.

Issue6c: Forests should be able to be planted. This can easily be done without unbalancing the game by requiring the forest to grow for a long time (like cottages) before it can be used. There are other mods that use this idea.

Issue7: Bronze working is still a hugely powerful technology. It allows the powerful slavery civic, the powerful chopping of forests, the visibility of copper and the production of axemen (and indirectly spearmen).
If the visibility of copper would be moved to mining and the slavery civic to masonry, then the balance would be improved. Bronze working would still be very useful, but less overpowered.

Issue8: The espionage cost for changing civics and religions is independent of the size of the civilisation which you influence while the damage that you inflict (both in forcing worse civics and in the potential anarchy cost of reverting back to better civics) is related to the size of the civilisation that is harmed. These missions are also fairly cheap, only slightly more expensive than starting a 1 turn revolt in a single city. These 2 missions are badly balanced.

Issue9: It's very hard to balance corporations because their value depends on the actual map that is used, the amount of resources that are available on that specific map (I'm aware that changes were made to the corporations). This results in some corporations which are better than others. It would be very nice if all of the corporations got their use on a map. Culture corporations in border cities while food and hammer corporations would be used in core cities and gold and science corporations would be used in the Wall Street and Oxford cities and other well improved commerce cities. However, that is not the case, some corporations are just better than others on a map.
If the corporations were capped in their output (and cost), then it would be much easier to balance them against the state property civic and against eachother. If the founding of a corporation would also allow the creation of branche headquartors by other civilisations (national wonders that allow the building of executives but don't offer gold per city with the corporation), then these corporations would maybe be used in more than one civilisation.

Issue 10: The air assault unit is a bit weird. It's very powerful and historically I can't understand it. It's not an easy thing to capture and control a city by only using some helicopters or troops delivered by helicopters. The numbers transported this way just are not enough. They are useful in real life to capture key areas, but not to control large areas. In game, they function like normal civ4 tanks on steroids: city raider promotions on 4 move units. Removing city raider promotions from tanks in LoR was logical as tanks aren't so great in cities. But helicopters surely aren't any better!

Issue 11a: Limited air capacity in land based - cities versus unlimited on water. This is a BTS issue: the carries allows unlimited air units on water and coastal cities with 3 or 4 per carrier while cities can only hold very few airplanes. That's an imbalance at the very core of the combat mechanics and the AI can't cope with it while the human just adds some carriers to coastal cities to overcome the artificial limitations.

Issue 11b: Airports allow the transport of 1 unit per turn but can receive an unlimited amount of units per turn. I think that a limit to the number of units it can receive per turn would help limit the power of getting an airport on a foreign continent. Now when you have one, your amphibious operations can end and everything can be transported by air.
Not all players no this special feature of airports that they can receive unlimited airlifted units per turn.

I've probably forgotten to mention a few things, but this is it... For now. ;)
Good luck with version 1.0! :goodjob:
 
I'm not going to adress all of your list, as it's very long, and some of it I don't consider an issue, or the issue is too complex or minor to adress. But these points I agree and think I have the abilities to fix.
I was also wondering why you might not balance the mod after version 1.0? I think that mods that reach the 'finished' or 'polished' state typically attract more players and thus more balance issues will be detected after a while. Some balance issues regarding regular civ4 were also only detected after many players played the game for quite a long time. Perfect balance is probably a utopia, but it is likely that better balance can be achieved and recognized only once the game has reached the 'finished' state for a while. Especially the late game balance issues won't be recognised until the mod has been around for a while.
I will patch the mod with new RevDCM updates, and after a couple months of the mod being out I may adress balancing issues that arise. Civ4 itself and all of it's expansions have been patched with balancing tweaks. But any balance tweaks that happen after 1.0 will be very infrequent, as in a year to 6 months after the release, as that will allow enough time for issues to shake out. Basically development after 1.0 for LoR will stop.

Of course this is contingent on the mod becoming popular. When 0.8.2 was released it had near 1000 downloads in it's first week, and about 2500 at the end of it's first month. 0.9.4b has only 300 some odd downloads in it's first week, no where near what 0.8.2 had. So it is becoming less popular, and I fear it may just be dyeing a slow death :sad:

Issue 1: Ranged bombardment can kill units while regular attack by siege units or bombardment from the sky cannot. In my opinion, ranged bombardment would be far better balanced if it also had a damage cap. Without a damage cap, regular attacks aren't needed anymore as you can bombard everything into nothingness.
OK, I will talk to glider about this and see about changing the behavior, and adding a ranged bombard cap, or probably I will tie in the ranged bombard cap to max damage. I may not even need to talk to glider about this, I may be able to just track down the code myself and implement it. It'll take a bit though, but this will go on the list of things to implement before the release of 1.0.

Issue4: The serfdom civic hasn't been improved. Many might think that adding an ability like using food to build units is an element that strengthens the civic, but it's not. 1 :food: is worth a lot more than one :hammers:. Whether you use slavery to convert food (population) into hammers or caste system to build powerful workshops, you'll get a far better conversion than 1 to 1 and it can be applied to everything, not only units.
Whenever you use food to build units, it will be an inefficient use of food.
It's a fun concept, but not balanced.
Removing the benefits that the civic used to give (faster workers) and adding bad elements (1 :yuck:) of course doesn't help things.
I'm all ears on suggestions on how to implement a new and improved Serfdom civic. I don't think the AI is aware of the food for military unit build ability, at least it doesn't seem to be, so this was something I was planning on changeing anyway. But I wasn't sure how...

Issue5: Because crossbowmen ignore knights when attacking, there exists no contemporary unit that can protect your stack against attacking crossbowmen. No unit has better than 50% odds on flatlands.
Again I'm all ears for ideas on how to tweak unit balance in the Medieval era.

Issue6a: Late game tile improvements: you can build ectreme climate versions of cottages and farms but not of workshops on tundra, ice, desert. It's not really a balance thing, but I don't see why one tile improvement is allowed in bad terrain and the other not. It's especially weird that it is impossible to build workshops in terrain that is good enough to farm. Is there a philosophy behind this game design?

Issue6b: Late game, the special resource improvements like plantations, camps, wineries and (oil) wells are very poor because all the other improvements have gotten bonuses but they have remained the same. I've always thought this as an oversight in game development of basic civ4. Especially oil wells should be a good improvement which they aren't.
OK, I'll add an exteme climate workshop, and give some late game tech bonuses to plantations.
 
I'm not so sure that it's dying a slow death. Many folks are probably sitting on the fence waiting for the final release.
 
I'm not going to adress all of your list, as it's very long, and some of it I don't consider an issue, or the issue is too complex or minor to adress. But these points I agree and think I have the abilities to fix.

Sure, it would have been very weird if you agreed on all points. I guess that about every player has a different idea about the ultimate civ4 experience and it's hard to get close to that with modding. I just wanted to make sure that I explained what I considered issues before version 1.0. Thanks for reading through that lengthy post of mine. :)

I will patch the mod with new RevDCM updates, and after a couple months of the mod being out I may adress balancing issues that arise. Civ4 itself and all of it's expansions have been patched with balancing tweaks. But any balance tweaks that happen after 1.0 will be very infrequent, as in a year to 6 months after the release, as that will allow enough time for issues to shake out. Basically development after 1.0 for LoR will stop.

I had understood that you were going for an ultimate version. But I'm happy to hear that you'll consider patching some stuff.

Of course this is contingent on the mod becoming popular. When 0.8.2 was released it had near 1000 downloads in it's first week, and about 2500 at the end of it's first month. 0.9.4b has only 300 some odd downloads in it's first week, no where near what 0.8.2 had. So it is becoming less popular, and I fear it may just be dyeing a slow death :sad:

I understand. It's hard to get motivated to patch stuff when only a relative few players use your mod. But I think you're being a bit too negative here. So I'll give you 2 motivating thoughts:
-I play long games that take many weeks to finish. So for playing purposes, it's useless to keep up with your recent frequent updates. The only reason I downloaded these, was to be sure that I had all the mechanics right when I made a comment about balance. There are bound to be other people that will just download the newest version when they start a new game, not when you release a new update. Make sure that the newest version of your mod is mentioned on the main page of this site when Thunderfall periodically announces the newest civ4 modifications.
-This mod is bound to be used as a basis for various other mods. And people will always go and look at the new and shiny stuff. So when they download a mod based on your mod, then they're indirectly downloading your mod. Just like your mod creates indirect downloads for the mod components that you've used.

By the way, you can also just be proud of the product itself that you've created. It's a bit harder to get a good fan following of the mod now that the game has been out for many years. If Fall from Heaven in its first rougher form was being developed now instead of in 2005-2006, then I don't think it would get the attention that it has been enjoying the last few years. It takes a while to get such a following and it works better when the game itself is new.

OK, I will talk to glider about this and see about changing the behavior, and adding a ranged bombard cap, or probably I will tie in the ranged bombard cap to max damage. I may not even need to talk to glider about this, I may be able to just track down the code myself and implement it. It'll take a bit though, but this will go on the list of things to implement before the release of 1.0.

I'm glad to hear that. If you're able to make this value more accessible (for instance by making it equal to the normal damage cap), then mod mods will also be able to access it.

I'm all ears on suggestions on how to implement a new and improved Serfdom civic. I don't think the AI is aware of the food for military unit build ability, at least it doesn't seem to be, so this was something I was planning on changeing anyway. But I wasn't sure how...

There was some discussion about the nationhood civic (offensive drafting thread) in the betterAI mod recently. Jdog explained how the various civics in this category competed with eachother. He thus understands real well how civic value is programmed in the code. (I still have to react to his post there as we're discussing how the AI could possibly use nationhood better.)

Slavery and caste system both offer additional production in a time period where it's hard to get hammers from the flat land while many profitable buildings become available. Caste system is slower in developing its use than slavery but better for bigger cities and it offers the great specialists bonus. Serfdom has to compete with pretty useful civics.

If serfdom offered the same hammer bonus to workshops as caste system in addition to its normal BTS faster workers, then it would compete. But that's a bit boring maybe.

Another more complicated version is this:

-food can be used as a production resource for all units with a 100% bonus (making a grassland farm equal to a 2 :food: 2 :hammers: tile which is not subject to hammer bonuses). This would be able to compete in productiveness with the other two civics but only for units.
-the +50% faster worker speed.
-farms give +1 commerce

This would be a good civic and would make it hard for me to choose. Learning the AI that the civic is good might be harder. The civic should be more attractive for the AI when at war or planning a war (building units). It keeps the theme around farms and workers which I like for a civic named serfdom.

Again I'm all ears for ideas on how to tweak unit balance in the Medieval era.

I never really understood why you wanted to remove the knight as a counter for the crossbowman as the crossbowman had its uses even with the knight as a counter. It would be the best stack protector against melee units and the ultimate attacker when the enemy stack didn't contain knights. Of course it would be slightly less valuable than the pikeman and heavy footman, but I'd still like to have at least 1 or 2 of them in my stacks even with knights as a counter.
So why did you want to remove knights as a counter?

OK, I'll add an exteme climate workshop, and give some late game tech bonuses to plantations.

You can use similar workshop output on tundra, but will have to think of something new for deserts/arctic as these tiles can't have -1 :food:. I'd suggest something like 2 :hammers: output less than the normal workshop for this terrain as the negative :food: will have no impact. Make sure that the improvement is worse when used on grassland, plains or tundra than the normal workshop.

Note that normal workshops can be build on riverside tundra just like normal farms can be build on riverside tundra, but can't be constructed on non-riverside tundra.
 
By the way, a separate and relatively minor issue that I thought about just now:

The DCM mod added a port bombing mission that allowed airplanes a chance to kill ships in port. But this only works for ships in port which I find weird. Some arguments could be made for lesser manoeuvrability of the ships but equally valid arguments could be made for better air defence in the harbour area. Could the mission be translated to a normal mission that works on ships everywhere?
 
Phungus, you've done a great job so far and I'm looking forward to 1.0. I think part of the problem with the download count has been the bombshell of 3.19 and the monkey wrench thrown into RevDCM. Almost all of your delays are attributable to waiting on glider and jdog to track down the issues in RevDCM. I think that once RevDCM is stable and you are able to build 1.0 then you will see a rise in downloads. Think alot of people are on the fence until then.
 
Well I think I found a bug or if its not a bug then it is something that could potentially be a huge game changer in terms of imbalance. I am on my 2nd game of LoR, playing as Mansa Musa. I have decent technology lead. I wasn't really originally planning a conquest victory but everyone on my continent is rather puny and it seems only right that they should bow down and pay tribite to their king :worship: :king:

I am on one of the weirdest continents that I have ever seen playing Civ IV. I used some map called perfectworld12 when making the world. I seemed to have gotten lucky as there is only one religion on my continent anyhow I digress. I have been waging war on the Sioux. In the middle of my war I got a quest from my generals saying that they covet the Iron resource in the Sioux lands. I have gotten this quest in regular BtS and usually it will give me something like a bunch of horse soldiers or swordsmen. Well this worked out perfectly since I already had my forces in place and was on the verge of taking the needed city anyway. When I completed the quest I was given 4 Legio X legendary units :yeah:

The only one on my continent that I think can put up a good fight against me in Quin Shi Huang. He hasn't attacked me yet but I know he is thinking about it :trouble: cause I have so much espionage on him I can see he is building up his cavalry. That punk is going to s**t his pants :eek: when my Legio X units are rampaging through China on a mission of rape, loot and pillage :viking::sniper::run::mwaha::mwaha:
 

Attachments

  • Mansa Musa AD-1600.CivBeyondSwordSave
    473.7 KB · Views: 72
Actually, I'd crap my pants if I saw the AI (or, even worse, a human adversary) running around with a stack of those things. :lol:
 
That's hilarious. I wonder what could be causing that, must be that the event code in the python looks to give you the best units available or something, and fails to check the maxglobalunit tag. I'll have to see what's up with it and put in a fix, thanks for the report. Sounds like fun though, you're pretty much unstoppable now.
 
On a related note and this is just a general question not so much of your LoR but more of has anyone done this. Is it realistically possible to get true world conquest victory on a normal sized map or larger with Revolution component enabled? It seems to me that the more cities that you conquer that eventually those cities will spawn rebellions and that at some point your empire would cost more to maintain then the revenue you could generate. It seems to me that the only way even realistically have a shot at doing it would be to raze most of the AI's cities unless they had some crucial wonders or a lot of existing infrastructure that could be useful in a few turns after being sacked.
 
Thumbs up to Roland Johansen for your great ideas on balance, I would definately download a mod if they incuded all of your balance issues.

&
Thanks to Phungus for the great mod so far!
 
Thumbs up to Roland Johansen for your great ideas on balance, I would definately download a mod if they incuded all of your balance issues.

&
Thanks to Phungus for the great mod so far!

Having ideas is easier than implementing them. Phungus has already implemented many great ideas. But thanks.:)
 
Really incredible mod, guys. Thanks for all your hard work. This is really what I've always wanted Civ to be!

I have a suggestion pertaining to the Great Wall.

If Minor States are on and you have automatic war through the entire BC era, shouldn't the Great Wall wonder block other Minor States' warriors, etc, from entering your territory? After all, the other Minor States are essentially barbarians during this period, and the usefulness of the Great Wall suffers tremendously if it only keeps out what are technically "barbarians" under vanilla BtS standards...

What do you guys think?
 
How is the Mohawk Sentry? I'm concerned it may be an underpowered unit. Have people found it useful?

How is the Keshik? I'm concerned it may be overpowered.

Anyone have any specific unit balance issues, specifically with UUs/UBs?
 
Top Bottom