it seems 3.25 has a problem in direct ip multiplayer,
Have you tried using pitboss? It is very handy.
Id there a magic way to get around the 18 Civ limit for Islands maps?
In Custom Game, you can set any amount of civs you want.
All I was trying to say is that balance wise there seems to be a tipping point and the immortal difficulty level is past that point and it doesn't appear to be viable, at least from my experiences.
That may very well be true. I am under no illusion that I would be able to pull off a decent performance on Immortal myself. But I guess there are some masochistic people who like this level of difficulty - or, for instance, it could be good for people playing cooperative multiplayer.
Question for the PTB's
lol
; Is it intended that while playing on the world map scenario as the Inca, that the player is able to discover Africa in a early warship?
Interesting, I will look into it. Generally speaking, since all civs can sail ocean tiles within their own borders, strategically placing cities
should be able to get you to places you otherwise wouldn't reach.
Aside from that, i was thinking that you should be able to use a Great Prophet to spread your religion to another empire (which would be historically accurate) the same way you can use you Great Spy to conduct a mission.
Well, I think there is already plenty of uses for Prophets in RI. This mission would be pretty hard to code...
Leaders (with their specific traits) should appear at the specific time in the history they belong. I know its alot to change and might be hard to implement, but still. What if leaders would be some kind of GP? What if rulers with different traits would appear at different periods in the game?
Do you realize that for a full span of the game time, you'd need at least 300 leaders per civ? And that early on, they would change each turn?
Having a single leader per civ the whole game is, in my opinion, a necessary level of abstraction for a game that spans 6000 years, just like wars early in game that last for 500 years or more. Of course, we could remove them altogether, but then we'd be removing a major gameplay element without providing anything in return. Changing leaders are a much better fit for a game that only covers 100-500 years.
We may try to implement it in some of our historical scenarios where it would feel appropriate, but even that is currently a far away plan.
So its a good thing you can uncheck tech transfer. In my opinion it should be replaced with something more realistic and more balanced.
What is, in your opinion, something more realistic and balanced than our current tech transfer system?
Some quick feedback:
I noticed that the Rocky Island terrain feature yields one more food then the "normal" Island terrain feature.
I guess it's a mistake, and should be the other way around. If it's intended though, can you give me the logic behind it?
It is intended, and it is dictated more by gameplay reasons - the higher latitudes really need that to be at least somewhat viable. But if you want a real life reason, small islands in extreme latitudes are usually home to a lot of seals and other large marine animals, while tropical islands as a rule don't have large animals.
I guess the Crusades scenario is still unplayable.. Any plans on fixing it in fairly soon?
Also, while checking I noticed Hungary isn't among the playable nations in the scenario. Mistake/oversight?
Ohh, and I noticed Bela IV in the civilopedia, yet he is not tied into Hungary, only to the Crusader Kingdoms...
It actually shifted from playable to unplayable and back several times in last months. Right now I am trying to fix it and make it playable again, who knows for how long.
Thanks for pointing out unplayable status of Hungary; actually, some other civs were also undeservedly unplayable. Fixed it as well.
Most leaders from Crusades scenario are tied to Crusader Kingdoms instead of their respective civs. It's a technical measure that doesn't really affect anything since you can't choose leaders in scenarios anyway.
Without open borders: no tech transfer in the first x turns after discovery date, y% tech transfer after the x turns passed
With open borders: y% tech transfer in the first x turns, 2y% tech transfer after the x turns passed
The formula has to be simple, since it is used for all civs at every turn. I think it would be reasonably improved by a couple of simple changes:
1) Tech transfer bonus only active if it is possible to trade with civ in question. Will eliminate many situations where a civ is too far away, beyond oceans or blocked by your aggressive neighbor.
2) If you share a land border, you get a smaller bonus even without open borders (1/2 to 1/4 of the full bonus).
3) When you are at war with a civ, you get a full tech transfer bonus from it. Trophies, defectors and other war-related discoveries were often the source of technological advances in warring states.
I would love to have Hungary as a playable civ in RI, and would be very much willing to help in it.
Thanks for a lot of good advice! Hungary is certainly quite high on our list of potential playable civs.
hi,
is it possible to make the epidemic to be a game option?
also - i think theres too less health bonuses ?
We are trying to make many game options toggleable, but I can't say that this one will appear in near future.
As far as health is concerned, I already have a draft for reworking mid-late game health management to give it more flavor and more power to players to raise health in their cities (but at certain costs).
i hate to tell you this, but game still crashes when screen jumps to piechota (polish WWII infantry).
Ah, I thought I fixed both. I tried once more with the WW2 infantry; this one may work better.
Does the 'Give independence' option become available with a tech or was it just removed? Thanks
Ah, I realize now that this is an unfortunate side effect of us switching off vassal states for both World Maps. We will have to once again consider if it is worth it...
Is there any way to automatically switch to Clean Map when entering Globe View? Or better, to just hide city names in Globe View and show them in Standard? The map can get pretty cluttered in mid- to late-game.
We don't have any specific interface tweaks for that. All stuff concerning interface is from vanilla Civ and BUG mod.
some of the civics are bad and useless - like republic, and some others, yu guys really need to change some stuff there...
I believe current civic balance is actually quite good. Republic, for instance, is an often misunderstood civic. It is true that it isn't useful for players most of the time, but if you only have a limited amount of cities (less than would put a strain on your economy), it is the best out of all early government civics.
... so i suggest adding an earlier unit that can enter ocean and can carry troops, but will be limited to 1, like a national unit and transport 1-2 troops.
this will help move things along i think.
I don't think we'll be adding anything along these lines officially, but I think you should just modify your own versions, since you seem to have quite a good vision of what you need. If you need any advice on how to do so, I'll be glad to help.
the ai sometimes does stupid stuff
Yep, it does. And I don't think we'll ever get rid of all the stupid stuff AI does, but we try to keep the amount of stupidity down.
And it doesnt solve the problem, because the true, biggest problem of civ iv (which was solved only by the Colonization patch) is the lack of correlation between the number of soldiers and the population of the empire.
That is simply not true. Even in vanilla civ, the amount of units your civ can support is based on your total population. If you go over that limit, you incur significant extra costs.
The fact that an AI, having a total population of 5 or 10 in an early phase of the game, can build infinite amounts of units, as if only hammers would be required to build soldiers!! At any point in the history, the army of an empire or nation was strictly correlated with its population.
One should remember that a population of a "city" in game terms is actually a population of a whole province governed by that city and can thus be quite large. I find it reasonable to assume that 1 unit of city population equals 100 000 people (maybe even more in later ages, since for a nation to have relatively modest 50 M people it'd have to have 500 combined population in industrial/modern era, and it's quite a lot even for huge maps).
Now, if we consider the sizes of military units, early on it can't be much more than 1000 people per unit, while in later ages it is roughly 10 000 (a division). As we can see, a civ with total population of 10 has around 1 000 000 people, and thus can quite comfortably support an army of at least 25 000 people, or 25 early units, and with enough strain, could probably field twice that.
Moreover, if we take examples from modern warfare, say, WW2 Operation Barbarossa. Germans deployed 146 divisions to Eastern Front (not counting their allies and all of their troops elsewhere), in three army groups (which, for game purposes, we could consider "stacks of doom"). So, as you see, WW2 on Eastern Front saw Germany deploy three doom stacks around 50 units each.
So from the realism point of view, I don't find any discrepancies. Of course, there is still a purely gameplay issue of late game unit bloat that - quite realistically, but still annoyingly - puts you in command of hundreds of units (and throws hundreds of units against you in wars). So yes, we are pondering the ways of how we could deal with this without compromising realism (and if possible enhancing it).
... I know that making such changes could prove challenging. And i know that the chance of you, guys, even taking my idea into consideration are 0,01%. But since i myself lost a combat when the chances were 99,99% in my favor, i decided to give it a try
We will most likely not implement it the exact way you are putting it, but some of your ideas might indeed find way into our designs.
One way to end the madness that is the Stack of Death™ is to neuter it by separating a country's military in 2 categories: levy/conscripts and professionals...
The quality vs quantity approach is very hard to handle right in strategy games in general; I must say that even in some of the best and my favorite games out there this problem was not solved. I have some ideas along those lines, maybe not as clear cut as your suggestion, but time will see if we have the resources to implement them.
second thing: healing show be only available when in stack of units at least one have "medic" promotion
You understand of course that when a unit of 1000-10000 men is "healing" in game terms, it is actually mostly getting fresh reinforcements to replace killed/incapacitated soldiers, and actual healing of the wounded accounts for only a fraction of this "healing" process. So the presence of field medics should of course speed up the "healing" to some degree, as more wounded return to service instead of dying/becoming permanently incapacitated, but by no means should be the main source of reinforcing a unit back to full strength.
We have two types of migration
MIGRATION INSIDE COUNTRY
MIGRATION OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY
...
Migrations as a whole are a very underrepresented concept in Civ series. Earlier in history, whole peoples migrated from place to place, sometimes across whole continents. That is unfortunately not modeled by the game engine at all, and it is quite sad. We might one day find strength in ourselves to make a big component that would reflect that, but I can't see it happening anytime soon...
How do these developers make any money off of the mod? Or is it like a hobby?
No money at all. We do it in our free time and for free. We are strictly non-commercial and not-for-profit.
Going by past experience, I'd say 3.3 will be out on Christmas... 2016.
Here you are guys, now you know who to blame.
You guys ever consider buffing the Native archers in NA? When the French and English first settled Canada the Natives were actually a formidable enemy in some cases. The French even allied with the Hurons to fight the Iroquois and the English.
They were buffed quite a lot in one of the recent revisions.
Hi guys, a few comments from the most recent SVN
The Transoxanian aryk farm doesn't spread irrigation. Is this intentional? I think given the qanat systems of Central Asia, they should if anything be better at spreading irrigation than other civs!
Will check. I have a feeling you are right, but there might have been a reason behind that decision I already forgot.
The Ministry of Labor provides every city with a carpenter, but maybe it should be a sawmill which replaces the carpenter.
Fixed.
The big problem with Civ4 is the vast explosion in the number of military units in the endgame. It turns army stacks of 5-10 into vast stacks of 20++ that are very unwieldy, especially when trying to read an enemy's stack.
Answered elsewhere. In short, we're trying to think of something.
For all interested, I could also recommend this old, but brilliant book:
http://monoskop.org/images/a/ab/Tainter_Joseph_The_Collapse_of_Complex_Societies.pdf
Also, when are you guys planning to start merging Revolutions mod? I know it could be massive work, but that would make this mod even better.
Soon.
Two questions regarding the mod:
1. If I'm reading the OP properly, has MAF stopped being a big issue on random maps on 32 bit systems? This was a huge issue for me when I played the mod in the past, but if I understand correctly, it's been addressed to some extent?
It hasn't, but a smaller random map could probably be played quite far on a 32-bit system with very moderate risk of MAF. We can't address it directly, as it is a technical limitation of the game's exe file. We can only try to streamline the stuff we're using, and believe me, a lot of effort is going into that.
2. If there were one thing I'd want to add to RI, it'd be something like C2C's leader development system, where over time leaders receive new traits, both positive and negative. Are there any plans to implement something like this?
Not in close future. As we begin merging Rev, it will likely occupy our attention for quite long.
Hi all, wonderful mod. However, being of the Portuguese persuasion I immediately went for the Portuguese Civ. To my surprise, in spite of it being in BtS, it's not available for pick in RI...
However, going to the Civilopedia I can see that Joao II and the Portuguese are listed and defined normally within the RI ruleset. I just don't seem to be able to pick them from the new game interface for some reason.
At this point I'm pretty sure this is probably happening to multiple civs and I just happened to stumble into one. What's up with that? How can I fix this? Thanks!
Portugal, along with many other civs, is currently a "minor civ", available only in scenarios and as a liberated colony. The reason why it's in BtS, but not in RI is that we are older than BtS, and by the time BtS came, the amount of content required by our civs was already too high to automatically include them all. Some BtS civs we made playable, but at least half are still not. Portugal is quite high on our list of potential new playable civs, but no promises here.
Seems like early siege weapons are lacking -- they have no collateral damage and can only damage a single opponent to 75% which it seems they can heal back in 1 turn. I never had one siege engine survive a battle -- so they are a 1-shot unit as far as I can see. Is this intentional?
Yes, it is very intentional. Gunpowder creates a revolution in siege weaponry, as it should. Before that, siege engines are disposable one-shot tools, as they were historically.
One problem remains though. the startup time of the game with the mod seems to be very long, a couple of minutes actually. Is this normal ?
Yes, the assets in SVN version are not packed (since that is where we work on them), so each time you launch, the game has to cache literally tens of thousands of files. Hence the long launch times. Our release versions have packed assets and launch instantly.
Many moons ago I invented a new road system called the Sea Lane. It essentially gives ships that used them increased movement. I created a nifty "advanced" looking graphic that pulsed in the ocean, but certainly it could be used with more subtle graphics such as a buoy.
I offer this idea to your mod. You could reduce all ship movements by 1 or 2 then allow this technology to supplement movement. I used several ships to "build" the sea lanes and my play testers really enjoyed the addition to the bland oceans of the game (at least 60% of the map)
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=372481
Cheers!
Unfortunately AFAIK the mod that improves our AI includes some changes to pathfinding. While they offer a very significant performance increase, they assume that there are no routes on water. Therefore, our AI wouldn't realize your routes are there.
Hi, I noticed that 'No Vassals' is ticked in the custom scenario. Is that done for a reason? Like with the technology transfer. I did not find any information on that, so I am asking here.
Yeah, we found that the scenarios are much better balanced without vassalization. If you don't like this change, you can try turning it back on.
So the choice is there to do that.
and then if you cottage 3-4 riverside grasslands or plains you can grow to size 5 or so and be an early-game economic powerhouse. Early farms are so weak that you would need 2 or 3 of them to support a city of the same size and even then you're missing out on so much commerce. Check out my recent 
points. And that increase to city maintenance you mention can be more than recuperated from another very productive citizen (or specialist!).
Despite they are still not as intended -but close to - the goal is reached.
