CivicInfos in Assets\XML\GameInfo
C2C Options
- Thread starter Dancing Hoskuld
- Start date
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
...\Assets\XML\GameInfo\CIV4CivicInfos.xml
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
may have to try that for my wife and I - she really needs maps that are pro-player mostly to be satisfied with them.
Yeah, the script cares less about realism, and more about solid gameplay and proper contest. I put very little effort into it so far, but that is the intention of it and something that will be tweaked without messing with the existing C2C_Worlds
Septentrion
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2015
- Messages
- 152
I always click enable inquisitions because I don't see why not have them be possible. I don't think it ruins anything. There's such stringent requirements to build the inquisitor, and I think it's a "role play" strat anyways. Is there some controversy around Inquisition in C2C? If anything, it's undeveloped so I don't see why it's an option at game creation.
Somebody613
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,379
Me too.
And that's not only because I always use it, but I also don't see a problem with it, given how it is middle-game and strictly bound to certain civics or traits.
So from the player's side it's a background option that can be simply ignored if you don't like it, or comes useful for "role playing" if you want to really control "religion".
And from the AI's side it won't even register as an option more often than not, due to all those requirements for it to even work.
Thus, I think it should be silently (aka hidden) ON, and that's it.
Kinda no reason to eliminate it, or I can't see any that would affect the actual gameplay.
I don't like inquisitions as I love to have as many religions as possible. Having it turned off removes a unit from the list that I would never build anyway.
I can't understand why having a game play option for it is an issue. There are other options that I never change but I wouldn't want to force other players to adopt my play stile by hiding these options.
I can't understand why having a game play option for it is an issue. There are other options that I never change but I wouldn't want to force other players to adopt my play stile by hiding these options.
Somebody613
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,379
It's not an issue, it's just that the option itself is kinda strange.
Like, "do you want to NOT use a unit that is a part of the main game" strange.
And as of units, do you literally use every single unit you unlock throughout the game?
I certainly DON'T, lol.
That said, I'd certainly have a much more pleasant gameplay without Criminals (those are often so annoying, duh), yet I don't ask them to be made optional, do I now?
And that's it - I'm merely surprised why a certain unit would merit a whole option of its own, really.
There are multiple other units locked behind options.
For example you will never get Gladiator, Spartacus, Merchant Fleet and Treasure, if you play without events, as those are obtainable only trough events.
Somebody613
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,379
Oh, I didn't pay attention, lol.
And yes, I did turn Random Events OFF, because random volcanos are beyond annoying (endless notification-wise), lol.
Still, those are more like byproducts of that option, not that the entire option is dedicated to them specifically.
Septentrion
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2015
- Messages
- 152
Then you'll never see the inquisitor in your build list because you're definitively not taking the inquisitorial civic. It's already "removed." There's already a pretty big safeguard that makes the game option redundant on the player side.
I feel the same about the Warlord units.
It's super easy to opt out of doing Inquisitions, and and there's not a lot of incentive to do so. Complete religious pluralism is just the optimal play-style; Shinto alone makes up such a strong case for it. But if a player wants to do inquisitions, they have to adopt a the Inquisitorial civic which does not take precedence over specific other civics. Also, they would have to remember to have clicked that option on game creation(or use WB).
I don't know how often the AI uses inquisitions, but what it means to the player is that the Inquisitorial nation they taken cites from will have more religions.
Somebody613
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2019
- Messages
- 2,379
AI is probably the questionable point here.
Do they clean out other religions deliberately - or is it a triple-random chance based on randomly:
1. Having the correct civic.
2. Building an Inquisitor unit.
3. Actually using its specialty.
If all three are RANDOM choices (and not PROGRAMMED as a STRATEGY) - then even having the option ON would do pretty much nothing in practice.
You probably wouldn't even see them BUILDING Inquisitors, let alone USING them correctly.
Unless, of course, there IS some sort of Inquisition AI, but I doubt that as of now.
So it comes back to the player alone - and then it's just like you said: no Inquisition civic = no Inquisitions.
Solved, period - no need to make a whole option out of it.
The same way you can avoid Slavery - just never adopt it by building its Worldview, and that's it.
Yet I don't see Slavery having an option of its own, do I now?
LOL!
There is a big difference if I don't want to use inquisitors, slavery, nukes or whatever or if I also don't want to have it being used by the AI. You have made your point that you like to use inquisitors and that is absolutely valid. I don't want to use them and also don't want the AI to use them so please show the tolerance to my preferences.
I am thankful that the modders included this as an option and I haven't seen any convincing reason why it should be removed.
I am thankful that the modders included this as an option and I haven't seen any convincing reason why it should be removed.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Well said!
Septentrion
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2015
- Messages
- 152
I really don't plan that far ahead.
If anything, there should be more choices. Slavery is a much bigger deal, as it's a mechanic continually imposed on the game. I don't even know if I can ever expect to encounter an AI that does inquisitions as I haven't been in the medieval period for a while. There is no "Slavery" game option, so that's why "(Enables) Inquisition" strikes me as so weird. I could easily say I don't want the AIs doing slavery, but I don't really need my enemies to share my worldview as I conquer them. Also, all these types of options should be lump together with "no nukes."
Speaking of nukes, I don't know what to make of "Advanced Nukes." Is such divergent gameplay around nuke planned for the mythical modern era?
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
We'll probably go in a little different direction but take some strong inspiration from what was done in this option.
Septentrion
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2015
- Messages
- 152
The option to removes Happiness penalties from over expansion seems overpowered. It's appears to be almost like a debug option.
Same with Infinite Experience. I would guess keeping 75% of the XP would lead to powerful enough unit. Maybe It's more of a gamespeed thing, but I don't know if Long or Blitz would be expected.
I like Realistic Borders most of the time, but I had to misfortune of fighting an Ice-bound nation. There was a spot within there nations which was in the ice, bunch out of there borders despite so many cities closely surrounding that spot. I knew that that patch of ice would be the prison for my army for an indeterminate amount of turns unless I take one of the cities(which I didn't want). Some savescumming confirmed this. It's a nice option, but some base mechanics makes some situations really silly.
Same with Infinite Experience. I would guess keeping 75% of the XP would lead to powerful enough unit. Maybe It's more of a gamespeed thing, but I don't know if Long or Blitz would be expected.
I like Realistic Borders most of the time, but I had to misfortune of fighting an Ice-bound nation. There was a spot within there nations which was in the ice, bunch out of there borders despite so many cities closely surrounding that spot. I knew that that patch of ice would be the prison for my army for an indeterminate amount of turns unless I take one of the cities(which I didn't want). Some savescumming confirmed this. It's a nice option, but some base mechanics makes some situations really silly.
