No settlers

[Nikis-Knight]

I've been trying this option lately and find it brings quite a bit to the game. Yeah, I know I'm not the first to do so, but personally I've always thought that it wouldn't be any fun, but without settlers you have wilderness areas that stick around for a long time, resource limitations that you have to work around, and with fewer production sites you won't see quite so big stacks of doom.
Of course I think this alone makes too much open space, but if you play with barbarian world, or even better, add many more civs to the map (like a large with 19 players) this isn't a concern. I didn't think to try to do it last time, but with "Require complete kills" also selected it would make things more challenging because taking an ai's city won't take them out if their units were elsewhere about to make a capture for instance.
This does favor warfare a bit much, since peaceful civs can't expand, so I was thinking of instead modding settlers to cost double and require courthouses or something.

Anyone else have fun with this kind of set up?

 

[PPQ_Purple]

A mod that makes settlers cost 2X as much and require a courthouse to build might be interesting.
You could also make them national units to mix things up.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

I considered national units, but I literally never have more than three settlers either idle or in queue.
What might be good is making a few techs that automatically give a settler, as the religion techs do disciples.

 

[Azhral]

My main form of FFH2 gameplay is basically this these days.

No tech brokering, no Vassal States, no settlers, no city razing, advanced start, barb world, raging barbs, and heaps more civs than normal on Marathon.

You start with a few cities, and expanding is slow. But over time the barb cities show up in the wilderness, get conquered and soon everyone shares borders.

Current game of this as Malakim (put on hold due to Civ V and other stuff) the Overcoucil has about 10 different civs and the Bannor running Crusade (my nearest neighbours and used to be closest allies) have just invaded. Trying to hold them off till I can force an Overcouncil vote for peace and/or Liberty (if you can still do that?), all the while at war with the winning Svaltafars on the other side of the continent, waiting for their SoD to show up.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

It might be interesting if settlers were not built, but could be born like great people.

 

[SolkaTruesilver]

It might be interesting if settlers were not built, but could be born like great people.

I think you might be on to something there.

 

[Jarrema]

I love No Settlers in connection with Avanced Start, so everybody have about 3 cities at start

 

[PPQ_Purple]

I like the idea of having less settlers and a slower expansion but I can't stand the no settlers option.

This is mostly because I tend to be psychotic about placing cities in just the right spot.

 

[Breunor]

I haven't tried the option, but my first thought is worrying about strategic resources. Does going RoK and getting the mines of Gal-dur become too obvious a strategy?

Of can you get around this issue by conquereing barbarians?

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Verdian]

I like doing No Settlers, and then at 50, 100, and 200 turns I give each civilization a settler. It slows down expansion a lot, while still letting people have multiple cities. The only downside is that it requires looking at all of the enemy cities in world builder, which is a pretty big cheat.

 

[Pickly]

I like doing No Settlers, and then at 50, 100, and 200 turns I give each civilization a settler. It slows down expansion a lot, while still letting people have multiple cities. The only downside is that it requires looking at all of the enemy cities in world builder, which is a pretty big cheat.

You might be able to do this with Python. (some code, probably in the events python folder, that adds up to "if the turn is 50/100/200, give every civilization a settler in its capital.")

 

[Azhral]

I haven't tried the option, but my first thought is worrying about strategic resources. Does going RoK and getting the mines of Gal-dur become too obvious a strategy?

Of can you get around this issue by conquereing barbarians?

Best wishes,

Breunor

The mines have always been strong, but If you don't have any Iron you're gonna have to go take some, either off the AI or the barbs.

Gunpowder, Mithril and Mana are much harder to acquire.

 

[SolkaTruesilver]

The mines have always been strong, but If you don't have any Iron you're gonna have to go take some, either off the AI or the barbs.

Gunpowder, Mithril and Mana are much harder to acquire.

Do you think we could have spells that transform ressource nodes?

Like, Earth 2: Alchemy

Transform Copper in Iron. Iron in Mithril.
Silver in Gold

 

[Skarn]

I love No Settlers in connection with Avanced Start, so everybody have about 3 cities at start

I like to do that, also lessening the amount of Advanced Start points, so that everybody has only one city to begin with. With Barbarian World enabled, it makes for very interesting games (of course you could always warrior-rush everyone, but since I prefer a more builder-oriented strategy and don't play on Pangaea maps...): lots of areas to explore, and an awesome "city-states" feel. It also reduces the size of the SODs, which feels like a breeze in the end-game (no more 5-minutes WOCs, yeah).

 

[Old_Lion]

In a no settlers game, barbarianworld game, I suppose the clan is off-limits, because it has it really too easy with Rantine.

Alone it might be fun, but in multi of any kind, I don't see how it could be resisted.

 

[Jarrema]

In a no settlers game, barbarianworld game, I suppose the clan is off-limits, because it has it really too easy with Rantine.

Alone it might be fun, but in multi of any kind, I don't see how it could be resisted.

Yes, that is why I restricted it in PBEM hosted by me with no settlers option

 

[Verdian]

You might be able to do this with Python. (some code, probably in the events python folder, that adds up to "if the turn is 50/100/200, give every civilization a settler in its capital.")

If someone can do that, let me know. I know nothing of Python.

 

[SolkaTruesilver]

Current Calabrim game, I waited until turn 375 for the Barbarians to settle a city in the valley north of my capital. They've been spawning bars nonstop for DECADES, and FINALLY, they have a city.

Then I wait with Rosier on its doorstep to grow to level 2, so I can conquer it.

I have to say, it's a pain, but it's also delighfully limiting. Force me to stay away from barb spawning points, so they can spawn their cities for my expansion.

Or I grow bored, and I just go all-out on the Lurchuip. Yhea, I'll do that.

 

[Pablod]

did you settler in units said what is cost
my xlm units file settler unit does not have a cost
to do cost -1
civ v

 

[Azhral]

I, uh, what?