No stability mod?

[ziamatt]

I cannot seem to understand stability, so until I figure it out can someone provide a no stability mod that causes no collapse caused by stability? I tried the one I found for normal RFC, but it didn't work right. Is there anything like this available?

[ZachScape]

You won't understand stability any more if you use a no stability mod. Stability takes time to understand, but many parts are easy. For a good economy, build lots of cottages instead of farms and workshops. Courthouses help a lot, and expanding too large is a no-no. I'm not too good at stability myself, but when you invaded a country, capture cities and raze their capital, it is a refreshing feeling to have them collapse. Also, without stability, there's not a whole lot of obstacles for the AI from building giga empires.

[ziamatt]

Well is there a way to modify stability so that it's still calculated but not actually applied? That way I can check my stability in a sort of "sand box" mode without the risk of collapse so I can learn how to play when I remove the mod.

And to be honest, I'd rather see empires expand without stability. The normally powerful empires aren't affected, at least in normal RFC, much by stability changes but stability is far too much of a hinderance to a weaker civilization who wants to start an empire.

[ZachScape]

Yes. That is exactly what the no stability mod does. I don't know exactly how to do it, but you may have more luck posting on the RFC & RAND Modcomp Request Thread in the RFC Modcomps folder.

[rjaco31]

well, you could just change the collapsing & civil war value to -999 and it'll do it

[The Q-Meister]

Wow, have you played RFC classic very much? I found stability to be much, much easier on RFC Rand. I played a game as Babylon recently and I was on "Strong" stability post-Arabia spawn, which almost never happens in regular RFC without a GA.

[The Q-Meister]

Follow up thought regarding stability on RAND: I don't know if anyone else does this but when i started to play the European civs I noticed stablity became more of a factor. I realized that this is because I play the European civs different than I do a ancient or classical era civ.

When I play a civ like Babylon for instance and my goal is to keep it around for as long as possible I am very, very careful about stability: checking it constantly, expanding judiciously, only in the "right" areas (in RAND case near to where the blue circles are) and making sure to take care of the economy.

With a Euro civ I play much looser especially at the beginning and this comes from playing in RFC where the Europeans start out so strong initially you really have to do something disastrous to have bad stability early on. Even later on if you don't 1. Become huge or 2. Control too many core areas stability should be OK.

In RAND however a Euro civ can be punished early on with stability so this is a new thing for me at least that I had to get used to. I couldn't play with them as loose and just do whatever I like such as in the RFC classic Euro spawns. This could also be because in classic the Euro core areas are so tightly spaced that you are almost forced to settle in the "good" areas initially.

So in a weird way I think RAND is better for stability than RFC if you want to take an ancient or classical era civ all the way to the end but same if not worse for later civs especially if you don't settle very carefully.