Realism Invictus

[Noddahrassa]

Third game in a row I've played of Realism where the map was generated without a single Horse resource. Pangaea map type.

The built-in RI map generator is extremely biased towards luxury resources at the expense of strategic and food resources. On the last map I generated (huge), there were more than 40 instances each of sugar, dyes, gems, and gold, 37 elephants, but only 3 potatoes, 3 wheat, 2 rice, and 0 corn. Horses could be found on 2 of 7 continents (4 instances in total).

 

[Cykur]

The built-in RI map generator is extremely biased towards luxury resources at the expense of strategic and food resources. On the last map I generated (huge), there were more than 40 instances each of sugar, dyes, gems, and gold, 37 elephants, but only 3 potatoes, 3 wheat, 2 rice, and 0 corn. Horses could be found on 2 of 7 continents (4 instances in total).

The problem is partly with how Civ generates resources, compounded by how many resources exist in RI and how many civs are in your game. I'm guessing you guys seeing problems are using 30-50 civs on your random maps? I had this problem in the past when I would play the Rise of Mankind mod and load it up with 50 civs.

When the map is generated resources are put down in order, with critical resources like iron and oil going down first and things like food and finally luxuries going down last. The game tries to guarantee a certain number of strategic and luxury resource per civ in the game, usually 1, plus some extra based on how much land area is out there. This is further complicated by what type of terrain spawns, because things like horses are finicky about what type of terrain they will live on, but there is always excess jungle to drop things like elephants, and gems. By the time critical resources are placed, there isn't much left for food, which kind of fill up the remaining available spots and do not get the 1 per civ priority that strategic resources get.

Some map generators also have start location sweetening, so that can be a factor in what you are seeing as well.

The way to fix this is to use less civs in your game, or use a bigger map for the same number of civs, or go into the CIV4BonusInfos.xml file and adjust the ratios so the game determines number of resources less based on the number of players and more based on the land area. Of course, there will be a lot more fighting over strategic resources this way, since they will become more scarce, but there should be more room for an equitable distribution of resources.

 

[Babri]

About the new SVN version, why add small buildings enabled by feudal aristocracy? Just give castles a boost by that civic, that would be more easier to understand & a cleaner implementation.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Please, forgive my ignorance, but I wouldn't know where and how to start it.

You should just open the map you wish to edit in a simple text editor (WordPad will do) and the stuff you seek to change will be in the very beginning of the map, like Victory=VICTORY_TIME. Just remove the ones you don't want.

i didnt see the pedia entry for the logistics system, epidemic and more stuff.

Yeah, we're not very diligent with moving the explanations of new concepts to in-game pedia, since we have a manual that comes with the mod and explains all that stuff. Maybe we're a bit lazy...

I was wondering if there are plans to allow cities to utilize a third ring of land plots? I come to this mod from C2C and find that knowing that lone unused resource tile will eventually fall under my domine calms my OCD tendencies and makes city specialization more practical.

Not really. We are trying to move into a different direction. As technology advances, we're trying to make most of a city's population actually work in the city itself, not the countryside. The new industrial system that's already in SVN is a big step in that direction - after a certain point in game, the main production drivers of your cities will not be mines and other terrain stuff, but rather craftsmen employed in the factories.

hey guys again,
damn this mod is hard as hell.

i kept getting killed.
monarch level.

If you are used to playing at Monarch in vanilla Civ 4, I'd like to suggest you temporarily move down a couple of difficulty levels, and then, after you get a good hang of what to do, gradually move up. In general, when compared to vanilla, our mod's difficulty levels with the same name feel roughly one higher IMO.

is the epidemic thing - is it all in the sdk? does it have python codes in it?

Mostly SDK. We try to move most bells and whistles from python to SDK to increase performance.

Hello,

Can anyone advise on the airlift function.

Once you get a airbase you can then airlift units but it seems only to your own cities? Im sure you used to be able to airlift to any friendly cities, as in any open borders.

Presuming this is meant to occur it seems odd that i can deploy 150 bombers to a friendly city but i cannot airlift 1 unit to it.

We didn't really change anything in this regard compared to vanilla.

I've started a new game with the latest SVN and wanted to make a couple comments about the mine / precious mine.

First, I'm not sure it was really necessary to break these up, but I guess I can see that you wanted one mine for industry and another for commerce. OK...

The main problem is that technologies gave the same bonuses to all mines before. I think it is more logical that gold mines, for example, should increase their commerce output, not their production, with better mining techniques. Also, we wanted to reduce commerce from precious metals early on, and that wasn't possible while having only one type of mine.

The problem I see is now you have no chance to discover precious resources from your mines because only Precious mines discover these, but they can only be built on an existing precious resource. Regular mines can only discover hammer/industry resources, and since they are the only mine that can be built on a plain hill, no gold / silver / gems will ever be discovered.

The possible solution is to have a regular mine be able to discover a precious resource just like before, but then have to use workers to change the improvement to a precious mine from a regular hammer oriented mine to gain the precious resource benefits.

Yes, this is most likely what we'll do.

I have an issue with espionage in RI & tech stealing. Since in RI we already get huge boosts to techs researched by other civs, there is no point of diverting your resources to espionage as investing all your commerce into science is much more effective & direct.
Espionage on the other hand takes too long to accumulate, the tech is too expensive & you need to baby sit spies all the time.

My suggestion would be to reduce tech steal cost with civs you have open borders with, investing in espionage should make tech stealing considerably cheaper. I would even say that revamp espionage system to more like a passive system & remove most of the blot such as poison & cause unhappiness.

But isn't it actually how it is in real life as well? You don't really need to spy on your good neighbors who willingly collaborate with you on technological development - the one reason to use spies to steal technology historically was when it was denied to you by closed borders, like in the Cold War.

And maybe make your spies sit at the position & do there work continously till they are caught or ordered to stop instead of babysitting them from capital to their destination. I don't know if it is possible to mod or in your to do list but a lot of players would be grateful if spies are changed to be less of a nuisance.

A more passive espionage system would actually be pretty nice, come to think of it. Modifiers instead of active missions, and maybe even no spy units at all would reduce a lot of micromanagement. A noteworthy idea!

The way to fix this is to use less civs in your game, or use a bigger map for the same number of civs, or go into the CIV4BonusInfos.xml file and adjust the ratios so the game determines number of resources less based on the number of players and more based on the land area. Of course, there will be a lot more fighting over strategic resources this way, since they will become more scarce, but there should be more room for an equitable distribution of resources.

Couldn't have put it better myself. Straight to the point.

About the new SVN version, why add small buildings enabled by feudal aristocracy? Just give castles a boost by that civic, that would be more easier to understand & a cleaner implementation.

Mostly because we don't have the XML tags to add this directly through a civic. Also, one of the new buildings is independent from Feudal Aristocracy and castles and is something we wanted to do long ago.

 

[Babri]

But isn't it actually how it is in real life as well? You don't really need to spy on your good neighbors who willingly collaborate with you on technological development - the one reason to use spies to steal technology historically was when it was denied to you by closed borders, like in the Cold War.

Still investing your commerce in espionage should be worthwhile. We get extra benefits when shifting slider for culture, then why not some bonuses for espionage.

A more passive espionage system would actually be pretty nice, come to think of it. Modifiers instead of active missions, and maybe even no spy units at all would reduce a lot of micromanagement. A noteworthy idea!

Yes it would be more interesting to have espionage work without too much micro. For example a spy dedicated to tech stealing would continously give you beakers but it would consume your espionage points per turn. Or it could give you a tech boost modifier.
Similarly a spy could be placed to learn about the approximate size of the enemy army & so on.

Sent from my One V using Tapatalk

 

[civman110]

Yes it would be more interesting to have espionage work without too much micro. For example a spy dedicated to tech stealing would continously give you beakers but it would consume your espionage points per turn. Or it could give you a tech boost modifier.
Similarly a spy could be placed to learn about the approximate size of the enemy army & so on.

I also think a more passive espionage system would be worthwhile. I never really like how espionage was implemented in civ4. Most of the time it's only useful for causing a hassle for other civs, rather than for your own benefit. I also agree that taxes and beakers are much more valuable than espionage points. The only time I put anything into espionage is when I have 1 a-hole civ that is just relentlessly spying on me non-stop.

The problem that I see with espionage isn't that the cost of missions are too expensive, it's that the missions usually aren't of any benefit to you. I also don't like the random success/failure system.

I like your idea of preforming a mission continuously, rather than all at once based on a random success/failure rate. This would also make it possible to add some new missions such as slowing production in a city, stealing a % of income from a city, as alternatives to sabotage and steal from the treasury.

I also don't like how the "incite a revolt works." I think it's way too powerful of a weapon. It's really two different espionage attacks rolled into one. For example, most castles were actually taken by a spy secretly allowing the enemy troops in, while the vast majority of city riots do not remove the city's defences, or allow an enemy into the city. They just damage troops and buildings in that city. I think that "incite a revolt" should only damage troops and destroy some buildings in a city, while there should be another separate mission to drop a city's defences. I also think it is quite unrealistic to drop a city's defences to 0% when you have walls, a castle, and a fortress. Unless you're somehow sending James Bond into the city.

 

[zoob]

I also think a more passive espionage system would be worthwhile. I never really like how espionage was implemented in civ4. Most of the time it's only useful for causing a hassle for other civs, rather than for your own benefit. I also agree that taxes and beakers are much more valuable than espionage points. The only time I put anything into espionage is when I have 1 a-hole civ that is just relentlessly spying on me non-stop.

The problem that I see with espionage isn't that the cost of missions are too expensive, it's that the missions usually aren't of any benefit to you. I also don't like the random success/failure system.

I like your idea of preforming a mission continuously, rather than all at once based on a random success/failure rate. This would also make it possible to add some new missions such as slowing production in a city, stealing a % of income from a city, as alternatives to sabotage and steal from the treasury.

I also don't like how the "incite a revolt works." I think it's way too powerful of a weapon. It's really two different espionage attacks rolled into one. For example, most castles were actually taken by a spy secretly allowing the enemy troops in, while the vast majority of city riots do not remove the city's defences, or allow an enemy into the city. They just damage troops and buildings in that city. I think that "incite a revolt" should only damage troops and destroy some buildings in a city, while there should be another separate mission to drop a city's defences. I also think it is quite unrealistic to drop a city's defences to 0% when you have walls, a castle, and a fortress. Unless you're somehow sending James Bond into the city.

I like the idea. With those mechanics a civ can passively resource warfare an enemy civ.

 

[Kikos1]

Iam sorry to say but this mod is totally unplayable save for the "Earth" map scenarios (which play out fine for some reason).

The computer is a cheating bastard. Plain and simple. Here is the situation.

Iam playing at Prince difficulty having picked the Roman empire. At first things were going smoothly. I read the posts complaining about the barbarian onslaught and thus I was ready. It did cause me trouble but at the end I was cool. Soon enough I was advancing and at some point I topped the score chart (at least regarding the civs I knew...as I learnt later on...).

The troubles began around 500 AC when the nordic empire attacked me with 15 sufficiently advanced units from the south! They were about 10 technologies behind me, only had 5 cities (I had 8 at that time) and they only had 3 workers. Despite that they easily managed to field 3 waves of 15 units each!

After surviving this onslaught I tried to fight back. Little by little i advanced despite the fact that they were (inexplicably)producing units around 5 (yes 5!) times faster than me at that time. At the end, I managed to capture one of their cities (getting an inexplicably big amount of gold as plunder) and sued for peace. They accepted and I thought that this was the end of it. This brought me to 10 cities to their 4. It has to be noted here that the godlike nordic city I captured turned to a pathetic gold-drain the moment I took it.

Alas. After 11 turns, the nordic empire stroke back with -no joke here- 40!!!! units! It took 4 turns for my best city to produce a unit while even their smallest city was churning one unit per turn! I was really curious to see what was going on and thus I entered the world builder.

To my astonishment, I found out (could not resist using the world builder to find out what was wrong) that their cities were almost devoid of buildings (they were too busy churning out legions of troops each turn) but despite that, they were truly godlike! My best city had a base production value of 16 while their worst had a production value of 20! Their capital had a meager base production value of...50, a population of 12 (we were still around 900 AC) and a base commerce value of 40! Mind you, the area around all the nordic towns was not nearly as developped as the area around my towns probably due to the fact that they only had 2 workers by the end of the 1st war and they never bothered creating more!

To sum things up, by 900 AC and a tech level that had hardly reached the middle ages, a computer empire that was controlling 4 cities was able to:

1. Create 40+ sufficiently advanced (it did not create cheaper, earlier units) units in 10 turns.

2. Financially support an army in excess of 50 military units.

3. Have 600 gold in its treasury

4. Reach a population of 12/8/8/7 in its cities.

5. All this happened while its cities were almost devoid of buildings. While the only wonders it had built were the heroic epic and the national epic (not a single world wonder). While its countryside was less developped than mine. While it was badly lagging in the tech race. While its score was 500 and mine was 850!

 

[Shuikkanen]

Iam sorry to say but this mod is totally unplayable save for the "Earth" map scenarios (which play out fine for some reason).

That's strange since I've played hundreds of games in my comfort zone of Monarch difficulty and I win regularly. (I guess I should move up a level by now, but I'm a builder-type and hate losing.) There's people who play Emperor and Immortal and keep winning that regularly post in this thread.

You're confusing difficulty with unplayability. You can't just hop on to this mod with your regular civ style and expect to win easily. Go down a difficulty level, master that level, and then try again. The difficulty levels also have clearly documented modifiers, which increase the production and commercial capabilities of AI as the levels go up. If that's what you refer to cheating, then it's something that the vanilla does already. But on Prince the benefits still clearly favor the player. Maybe you got really screwed regarding your starting territory, but frankly it's not that the AI best city production values seem high, it's that yours seem low.

Also, did you keep an eye on your power rating? Because if you're weaker than a neighboring civ, then expect to be attacked. The AI makes the decision some time before it actually does, and builds a sizable army to do so. This is something you need to learn to prepare for. Generally speaking it's easier to attack them first since defending against a marauding stack efficiently takes some practice.

At the end, I managed to capture one of their cities (getting an inexplicably big amount of gold as plunder) and sued for peace. They accepted and I thought that this was the end of it.

Well, your assumption was false, and now you know better in the future. Once the AI has picked a fight with you, it tends to follow through until one of you is utterly beaten. And suing for peace to buy time when one's army is weakened and the enemy spearhead is moving into your territory seems like a good strategy, no? If you do take an AI city, and especially if it's within their territory instead of an outlying city, they WILL want to take it back. As for the quickly produced stacks of reinforcements, have you taken a look at what the slavery civic can accomplish? I'm not saying the AI necessarily used that to whip out most of the units, but it's common.

 

[HannibalBarka]

Iam sorry to say but this mod is totally unplayable save for the "Earth" map scenarios (which play out fine for some reason).

The computer is a cheating bastard. Plain and simple. Here is the situation.

Iam playing at Prince difficulty having picked the Roman empire. At first things were going smoothly. I read the posts complaining about the barbarian onslaught and thus I was ready. It did cause me trouble but at the end I was cool. Soon enough I was advancing and at some point I topped the score chart (at least regarding the civs I knew...as I learnt later on...).

The troubles began around 500 AC when the nordic empire attacked me with 15 sufficiently advanced units from the south! They were about 10 technologies behind me, only had 5 cities (I had 8 at that time) and they only had 3 workers. Despite that they easily managed to field 3 waves of 15 units each!

After surviving this onslaught I tried to fight back. Little by little i advanced despite the fact that they were (inexplicably)producing units around 5 (yes 5!) times faster than me at that time. At the end, I managed to capture one of their cities (getting an inexplicably big amount of gold as plunder) and sued for peace. They accepted and I thought that this was the end of it. This brought me to 10 cities to their 4. It has to be noted here that the godlike nordic city I captured turned to a pathetic gold-drain the moment I took it.

Alas. After 11 turns, the nordic empire stroke back with -no joke here- 40!!!! units! It took 4 turns for my best city to produce a unit while even their smallest city was churning one unit per turn! I was really curious to see what was going on and thus I entered the world builder.

To my astonishment, I found out (could not resist using the world builder to find out what was wrong) that their cities were almost devoid of buildings (they were too busy churning out legions of troops each turn) but despite that, they were truly godlike! My best city had a base production value of 16 while their worst had a production value of 20! Their capital had a meager base production value of...50, a population of 12 (we were still around 900 AC) and a base commerce value of 40! Mind you, the area around all the nordic towns was not nearly as developped as the area around my towns probably due to the fact that they only had 2 workers by the end of the 1st war and they never bothered creating more!

To sum things up, by 900 AC and a tech level that had hardly reached the middle ages, a computer empire that was controlling 4 cities was able to:

1. Create 40+ sufficiently advanced (it did not create cheaper, earlier units) units in 10 turns.

2. Financially support an army in excess of 50 military units.

3. Have 600 gold in its treasury

4. Reach a population of 12/8/8/7 in its cities.

5. All this happened while its cities were almost devoid of buildings. While the only wonders it had built were the heroic epic and the national epic (not a single world wonder). While its countryside was less developped than mine. While it was badly lagging in the tech race. While its score was 500 and mine was 850!

Humm, the figures you are putting do indeed seem too big for Prince level. Were the nordic cities happy? What version are you using?
I play on Emp/Immortal and win very regurarly. Please post a save I'll try to give you a more "documented" answer.

 

[PKSRoman]

I think that may be helpful

Spoiler :

 

[pioswa]

As long time lurker i can remember that some time ago another forum user was complaining about prince difficulty level. Maybe there is something wrong with Prince. Maybe for some reason Prince difficulty give bigger bonuses for AI than it should be.

 

[civman110]

I just played two games (Immortal) on one of the latest SVN versions and I figure you might be interested in my feedback. I really like the changes to the civics and the unique buildings. I tested out the new Republic features and they worked really well and were very fun and balanced . The new production system seems cool, but I didn't play past the Renaissance so I never got a really good chance to test it out.

My first game I expanded to 3 cities off the start as usual before I went for Despotism, but it put me so far behind tech/commerce wise that I just started a new game after reaching the Renaissance. My second game I went for Despotism first then expanded to 3 cities then very slowly and steadily expanded up to 9 cities by the Renaissance. I had a holy city with the wonder and I was running a skeleton crew of an army. I found it very difficult to compete productivity and research wise although I had build 4 academies, settled 2 GS, 2 GM, a holy wonder, 2 other WWs, and was very careful and calculated with my expansion. It was slow going. A lot of waiting for units/buildings to be built.

The city maintenance costs seem to be slightly too high for the human, and too low for the AI. City productivity and research also seems to be a bit slower overall. I'm finding it difficult to expand and keep progressing at a decent pace, but the AI seems to have no problem. In past versions I would easily be around 12 cities by the Renaissance. I also find that unless you rush for writing and switch to Despotism right away you're screwed, since without it maintaining even 2 cities is quite challenging and 3 puts you way too far behind economically.

In my second game both Mongolia and France founded religions and they each scorched the earth, meeting in the middle. Thankfully, I was Japan and I stayed off the mainland and out of trouble. The bottom line was that I just couldn't devour territory at the rate the AI was able to although I had all of Indonesia and Australia to myself to potentially expand to. France and Mongolia were each really going at it without any tact whatsoever. It was a double rampage. If I kept playing I may have been able to get a cultural victory, but if would have been very difficult if I got attacked.

Rome actually did somewhat decent I noticed! They still lost Antium early, but this time they kept expanding. I also think if France and Mongolia didn't get all of that gold from the holy wonders that there would have been some really cool power dynamics throughout Europe and Asia! They only began steamrolling everyone after founding a religion.

Gold producing Holy Wonders have always seemed to be one of the big factors in dictating which civs are going to be runaway civs. Would there be any way to scale how much gold each city with a religion would provide the appropriate holy city in proportion to the map size? and do you think it could be beneficial to increase the production cost of missionaries?

 

[terror51247]

I keep getting maf errors when playing in the world map(i am in the renaissance era).
The problem is that i have a 64bit OS and 16gb of ram.
Any help avaliable?

 

[VLTFV]

I keep getting maf errors when playing in the world map(i am in the renaissance era).
The problem is that i have a 64bit OS and 16gb of ram.
Any help avaliable?

Started playing this awesome mod a few days ago
The savegame file is now +-2.2mb, large? (random) map, with some 12 civs
I got win8.1 64-bit, 16gb RAM, i7 quad core, 1gb VRAM

I enabled the large address aware for BTS, however I still get MAFs whenever it gets to +-2gb RAM... When restarting it uses +-1.5gb, then gradually increases...

so we are now 2 awesome ppl with this non-awesome problem interfering with an awesome mod...

ideas?

 

[sjodster]

Started playing this awesome mod a few days ago
The savegame file is now +-2.2mb, large? (random) map, with some 12 civs
I got win8.1 64-bit, 16gb RAM, i7 quad core, 1gb VRAM

I enabled the large address aware for BTS, however I still get MAFs whenever it gets to +-2gb RAM... When restarting it uses +-1.5gb, then gradually increases...

so we are now 2 awesome ppl with this non-awesome problem interfering with an awesome mod...

ideas?

A few quick thoughts:

• ALT-TAB on occasion to leave the program and come back. I think this reloads some of the graphics into memory and may help to clear out cached assets from RAM.
• Try the light version of the installer. I'm not entirely sure this will make a difference but I've theorized for a long time that it might. If you try this let us know if it seems to make a tangible difference.
• Run single unit graphics (which is really a shame I know; try it as a last resort)

 

[PKSRoman]

there are plans to make version realism invictus 3.3 ?

 

[Babri]

Some general feedback about Realism Invictus. Right now I am playing the latest SVN available.

1. Lack of horses on most maps.
2. Cottage has much lower yield compared to farms so the you have to manually get your cities work on them to make them grow, this is very tedious micro for the player. Suggestion is to maybe give them some hammer & food yield with tech so they can compete with farms.
   
3. Levies don't serve much purpose unless you have very low production cities. Levies were quite common in most medieval armies. I would suggest reduce their maintenance cost, as levies should be much cheaper to maintain than professional armies. Same could be done about other levy type units.
   
4. Trebuchets aren't much of an upgrade compared to catapults, they also get obsoleted fairly quickly. Similarly crossbows have limited use. I would say increase trebuchet's strength to 5. Not sure about crossbows though, I almost never build them because of their very niche role which can be performed much better by other units such as heavy cavalry & pikes. Surprisingly they require a resource to build but a resourceless longbow is generally better for all purpose usage.
5. Cruel trait is a bit 'harsh'. Perhaps reduce the penalty so that it doesn't effect 1st promotion. Similarly foreign is very dangerous too. Sure negative traits are supposed to make you weak but these 2 are more harmful than others. For example excessive (-10% gold) & barbaric (-20% culture) aren't really punishing early in the game where it matters most.
6. A building idea : Stone works. Provides some hammers & commerce on nearby stone resource, and maybe 1 happiness from marble.
7. Food crops plantation aren't really strong yield wise compared to normal farms. I would suggest boosting them a bit.
8. AI shouldn't generally pursue building the wonder which gives all religious civics unless it wants to get cult of personality or free religion or has no other wonder to build.

 

[Babri]

there are plans to make version realism invictus 3.3 ?

I am sure there are plans as they are releasing updates to SVN reguarly. Why don't you give a try to SVN for latest changes?

http://www.realism-invictus.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=825

 

[PKSRoman]

I am sure there are plans as they are releasing updates to SVN reguarly. Why don't you give a try to SVN for latest changes?

http://www.realism-invictus.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=825

i prefer wait and play in full test and unbugged version. First impression is rather important ( thats why i play in 3.2 not in this what should be called bugism invictus 3.25 )