Help with English expansion

mscheaf

Chieftain
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
12
My expansion stability is always 1 star with a down arrow. I keep trying different things and reloading. I try to stand pat. I try to conquor. I try to colonize. It just stays at 1 star with a down arrow.

I have resettlement. I have 3 cities in scandanavia, 2 in sounth africa, 4 in australia, 1 on solomon islands i guess, 3 on the western side of south america, 3 in canada, 2 in US. It is around 1650. My civics are the bottom ones (free religion, environmentalism, etc).

What should I be doing at this point? They are always telling me to expand and asking me to build settlers. Do I keep colonizing or what?
 
My expansion stability is always 1 star with a down arrow. I keep trying different things and reloading. I try to stand pat. I try to conquor. I try to colonize. It just stays at 1 star with a down arrow.

I have resettlement. I have 3 cities in scandanavia, 2 in sounth africa, 4 in australia, 1 on solomon islands i guess, 3 on the western side of south america, 3 in canada, 2 in US. It is around 1650. My civics are the bottom ones (free religion, environmentalism, etc).

What should I be doing at this point? They are always telling me to expand and asking me to build settlers. Do I keep colonizing or what?

You've made the logical mistake of thinking that expansion means just that, expand as much and as fast as you can. Thing is, Rhye sort of thought that that would make this mod a tad too easy, so expansion takes a more ambiguous definition, you see, you can both underexpand and overexpand. Underexpansion means not expanding outside of your initial starting position too much, which especially for colonising civs like England is rather unhealthy. Overexpansion means you're placing too many cities in too many places too quickly, which is precisely what you're doing, my friend. :p

First off, don't listen to the messages that you have to build more settlers. That pop up's part of the default Civ 4 which doesn't taken the changes in RFC into account. Secondly, it's really not necessary to build so many new cities so quickly. And third and perhaps most importantly, is historical location. England, Britain, or the UK never settled in places like Scandinavia or the Western coast of South America. Settling here anyway will give you a stability hit, represented through expansion.

Now, this perhaps conflicts with the English UHV which is "build 3 cities on every continent by 1670" (correct me if I'm wrong with the date) That's the entire thing about the UHV, it gives it that extra challenge to balance out stability and be able of reaching the industrialisation/modernisation goal. I'll give you some tips on how to generally improve stability.

Civics can and do help, however, not in the way you'd always expect. The bottom civics aren't always the best for each civilization, and this is dependent on a bunch of factors. Small, technologically advanced empires thrive with the combination of representation, beurocracy, and caste system, while huge expansionist empires work better with a combination of police state, nationhood, and state property. There's an entire list of variables, which I hope someone can provide in this thread, and it requires some mixing and matching to get it right. Regardless, as a colonising nation, I'd suggest definitely using the Resettlement civic once you have Astronomy.

Also, another tip, certain buildings help with stability, which is especially handy if you're going to go for the entire large empire thing. Courthouses and jails are the two most prominent examples, but I believe intelligence agencies and several other buildings did the same. Wonders also add to stability, so if you have the capability to build a few that'll help you without it taxing your general empire-building too much, it can also give a handy boost.

Hope this already helped a bit. This mod really is pretty complicated, isn't it?
 
A good solid Europe start is to settle London, Dublin, flip Inverness, settle Utrich (whatever Amsterdam in English is), Denmark, and possibly expanding one more city a bit east (in between Vikings, Russians, and Germans).
 
I was just under the impression that your expansion stability was based off how close you are to historical size. The english empire was 1/6 of the world's landmass.
 
And right now I can't seem to get the expansion stability to rise. I have tried standing pat for 20 turns and it never rose above 1 star. I have also tried giving cities away (contracting my empire) and it still isn't working. Is it just too late at this point?

I played this with japan and didn't have any expansion issues. I just thought as England if I didn't expand all over the place I would lose stability.

Meh, it is frustrating. Too complicated and no guidance at all. I think I am going to download some wwi and civil war mods and play those. I am much better at military tactics than administration anyway.
 
Check this map to see which locations should be colonised and which shouldn't, in order to give you the best stability.



The expansion maps (of which there are others for each civ at the wiki site) are guidelines for managing to have a good rating in the "Expansion" stability indicator. However, don't take them too literally: that value is influenced by many other parameters, and a certain tolerance margin exists anyway.

Dark green: core area. No penalty for founding cities here, but ensuring that there is no foreign presence is critically important
Light green: territories within historical bounds. Expanding here brings no penalties other than the increased number of cities
Yellow: territories within historical bounds, but belonging to other civs core area. These territories are unsafe, because of possible revolts and of generic instability of the area
Orange: territories out of historical bounds. Expanding here brings a penalty if exceeding a certain tolerance.
Red: territories out of historical bounds and belonging to other civs core area. The worst place to expand

Scandinavia certianly shouldn't be part of the English empire, if you want a good Expansion stability rating.
 
I believe that the definition of green and yellow tiles should be more liberal. Mexico and Peru should be fair game to all European powers, at least (conquerors).

Here's how I'd have made the English area:



I also play RFC with some stability tweaks, which make it more forgiving for large empires. I agree that stability system can be frustrating.
 
Here's what I do, seems to work great, the last UHV is hard though. You should have lots of settlers and musketmen/longbowmen before Astronomy correct? send 3 anywhere in south america and try to settle all at the same time, doesn't need any defenders. If your lucky inca should ask to become your vassal, I accept and liberate the cities I just settled to them, that raises your expansions significatly, if not just grant independence. Settle the east coast of america ASAP, Savanah, Annapolis/washington dc, new york. These become good production cities to pump out more settlers, or whatever you need. I would then go for India (600AD start is alot easier) the south and east are unsettled. settle 3 cities, conguer the other ones later if arabia/turkey doesnt, I'd war them later for those cities but nows not the time. I then go for south africa, I settle cape town, durban, pretoria... and i forgot the name of the other town... winburg maybe. then australia... and voila! Build courthouses and economy based things so your economy goes up to counter expansion. once you settled all your cities you plan on and have several vassals switch to viceroyalty.
 
I have my doubts about the Eastern USA, though. England shouldn't strive to settle it, but it should be fair game for England to win the Independence War. Are stability maps and settler preference maps different? If no, then eastern USA should be yellow for England.
 
Are stability maps and settler preference maps different?

Yes they are different, but they rely on the same definition of 'historical' area, which I believe Rhye created. Here is the settler map for England (a bit old, 1.184 in this case):



And for comparison, here is the England stability map as created and posted by Rhye on the wiki site:



Some locations within the historical areas are ranked higher than others for settling.
 
Yes they are different,

Then it's OK to have the Eastern USA as fair game for English stability.

The settler map needs moar India (for 600 AD, when it's open for settling) and non-flipping areas and less flipping East Coast and one-tile islands. Like this:

 
I believe that the definition of green and yellow tiles should be more liberal. Mexico and Peru should be fair game to all European powers, at least (conquerors).

Here's how I'd have made the English area:



I also play RFC with some stability tweaks, which make it more forgiving for large empires. I agree that stability system can be frustrating.

I really like that - is it possible you can upload your modified files somewhere or explain how you did it? Preferably the first :D
 
I really like that - is it possible you can upload your modified files somewhere or explain how you did it? Preferably the first

I didn't change the English area, since I am quite inept at modifying and compiling the *.dll. It was only a suggestion (I'd have made).

The settler maps are in CvRhyes.cpp. Search for settlersmaps. Using some logic and the bitmaps here, it's relatively easy to understand what number is what tile.

I've been unable to find where the stability maps are so far. Can anyone tell me?

However, you can change the tolerance for "bad" tiles. Just go to the stability.py and look at

iNumPlotsAbroad = max(0,self.getOwnedPlotsLastTurn(iPlayer)-32)

That means that 32 bad tiles are tolerated. Change 32 to whatever you like.
 
Oh, so stability is based on tiles owned? I thought that the colors only mattered for tiles the city was on. Kinda invalidates some city locations I've been using...
 
I've been unable to find where the stability maps are so far. Can anyone tell me?

I believe that Rhye compiled them specifically to close out some debate that was ongoing about whether the settler maps were actually stability maps (they aren't). They may not actually exist in the code as such, would be my guess.
 
So you're saying it is possible to edit the settler maps and change what cities the AI likes to settle?

On a side note, the colours for the settler maps are different - what do they all mean? I can take a guess but I don't think I'd be correct...
 
Top Bottom