RFCE 1.3 Playtest Feedback

[soul-breathing]

Text error in Scotland UHV1, 4 castles and 10 forts in victory screen, but in fact you need 12 forts

 

[merijn_v1]

Text error in Scotland UHV1, 4 castles and 10 forts in victory screen, but in fact you need 12 forts

That's only a display error. You need 10 to win the UHV. Will upload a fix soon.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Yeah, I changed it back and forth a couple of times. I guess I forgot to adjust the text in the end.
How many forts should it be? 10? 12? Even more?
I will upload a bigger commit tonight, will change it to what we decide

 

[AbsintheRed]

Looking at these pictures, i want to ask you Absinthe if you have any other DCN changes planned? Right now civs like France and England still have static names (plus Kingdom of GB and Scotland shouldn't be co-existing). I think the changelig only mentioned dcn changes for Scandinavia & Bulgaria.

Yep, I will continue to improve the DCN system too
Especially France, England and Hungary needs an update AFAIK

 

[gilgames]

THX Merijn, ill try it to finish the game now!

I have a good Byzy game now, and i think we can add to the secound uhv apuila too. about the third, being the richest make no sense, thats clear, have only orthodoxy in ur cities is very ahistorical, but maybe have 4-5 ortodox nation is ok. or make it more without time limit or "by" xxxx ad. need try and discuss

@ FORTs: 10 is enough, u can place 5-6 without problem, 10 if u do it in ireland too, but 12 have no plce to build them without hurting production. anyway building forts is brainless thing in 99.9%. so dont puch it to 12!!!

 

[AbsintheRed]

Like I said in the other thread, I would prefer to go for Norwich as a preplaced city in England along with York. It was one of the most important Anglo Saxon cities, historically captured and burned by the Danes and in East Anglia.

Danes then just need to capture York, Norwich and London, which were three of the main cities they actually captured IRL during their invasions, rather than settling Mercia, which was largely raided and pillaged rather than captured.

The conquest approach is the closest to my taste as well
I'm not totally sure about it yet, but probably something along these lines

I'm playing with the idea of adding Norwich and another city in Mercia as preplaced cities, and turning them into towns on the English spawn (unless the player is with the Danes of course)
Any thoughts on that? Really unsure about this, usually I'm against the cities turning to town mechanics, from a gameplay perspective

 

[gilgames]

Danes OR norvegians!!!!

also pls help me again, my sweedish game stucked again...
View attachment 392629

 

[AbsintheRed]

my stability was +4 just before founding Revel and it then went to -2. is Estonia meant to be Border/Outer/Contested for Novgorod? Revel is basically the adjacent city site to capital and part of Estonia is actually in your capital's BFC.

can one prevent those revolts with a large garrison or just reduce their chance? do all cities in border areas have revolt potential or just some?

sorry for the basic questions. if their is an up to date stability guide somewhere I could just read that.

Estonia will be potential with my next commit
garrisons do prevent revolts to some degree (not much though)
border areas are not really used in RFCE, instead cities in border provinces have 4x chance to revolt, cities in unstable provinces have 9x chance

Barbarian tendency to raze should probably be toned down; I just loaded up a Novgorod game and Lyon, Thessaloniki, Adrianople, Tarsos, and Edessa had all been razed.

city razing is already quite low for barbs
I guess it was just an unlucky roll

Also, maybe the Muscovite spawn area could be shrunk a little bit to include less of the northern area, now that we have Novgorod?

also already done, my commit will be up soon

The four tiles directly east and southeast of Lake Peipus should probably be part of the Novgorod province, since they form the territory of Pskov. The Russian (Novgorod, Kiev, Muscovy) CNMs should also be adjusted so that the tile SE of the lake is named Pleskov/Pskov, where it historically is and where Novgorod is also inclined to settle.

noted

Edit: Also, perhaps Scottish Highlanders should only spawn when Scotland is dead? It doesn't make very much sense for them to spawn and then harass Scotland.

and better adjusting barbarians to the new civs is already WIP

 

[AbsintheRed]

Danes OR norvegians!!!!

also pls help me again, my sweedish game stucked again...
View attachment 392629

The problem is with Paris this time
Delete the city or the attacking stack

I think the issue is with a c++ access violation, based on one of the python files
Probably one of the functions returns null in some cases, thus resulting in an Access Reading Violation
Hopefully will be able to find the exact bug soon enough. I'm a mathematician, not a coder (at least not for a living), so it's not that trivial to me where to look in some strange cases like this one :/

PS: That's a real nice Turkey you have there, with Hungary and Bulgaria as vassals

 

[AbsintheRed]

1.The Umayyad Mosque <> The Kaaba, I think that the income from this building should not be.
Adding muslim company (Karimi) can help Caliphate with money.
2.In old version RFCE and in RFCE++ after the Black Death Rome's population always stay at 1.(I can not check out the problems with the 32byte system).

Sry, I'm not really sure what do you mean here
You cannot use the SVN?

 

[Swarbs]

The conquest approach is the closest to my taste as well
I'm not totally sure about it yet, but probably something along these lines

I'm playing with the idea of adding Norwich and another city in Mercia as preplaced cities, and turning them into towns on the English spawn (unless the player is with the Danes of course)
Any thoughts on that? Really unsure about this, usually I'm against the cities turning to town mechanics, from a gameplay perspective

Is it possible to have a mechanic that independent Norwich and Chester (for example) spawn in 900AD only if the player is Danish? That would be the most elegant solution if it can be done - Danish human player has two cities to conquer but nothing happens for the English player.

 

[gilgames]

thx for the tip.

I want wanted to play with ottomans, this time its went to the spawn, but my situation was so bad, i had to abandon....we shoud rethink their situation.

 

[SanJose]

Sry, I'm not really sure what do you mean here
You cannot use the SVN?

I updated successfully, but Civ4 CTD through several turns always (problem with video memory)

 

[Baron03]

Out of a few games: Orthodoxy, or any religion for that matter, doesn't spread to Novgorod unless Byzantium sends missionaries (which is rather late and rare). If the spread rate is low, then maybe raise it? Or have Novgorod start with one orthodox missionary.

Denmark and Norway have a similar problem to a lesser extent from my observations.

 

[Myri]

New promotion: Cargo Capacity (+1 cargo space in ships) is not in the game.
Genoa builds Zena as Capital, other City names seem to be ok.

Will you include the BUG Mod? I love the alerts (x is willing to trade tech or open borders) in DoC.

Less devastating plague like in DoC would be nice, too.

bye Myri

 

[AbsintheRed]

New promotion: Cargo Capacity (+1 cargo space in ships) is not in the game.
Genoa builds Zena as Capital, other City names seem to be ok.

Are you sure about the promotion? It needs combat 3 for ships
It's primarily for the Aragonese, as they get it for free for all ships (with their UB)

Zena is the Genoan name for the city of Genoa

Will you include the BUG Mod? I love the alerts (x is willing to trade tech or open borders) in DoC.

Less devastating plague like in DoC would be nice, too.

bye Myri

Will think about the BUG mod. Some parts of it might be nice but it's not in my immediate plans
Plagues... I'm not sure. In some cases I feel they are not devastating enough...

 

[Swarbs]

Genoa builds Zena as Capital, other City names seem to be ok.

Zena is the Genoese / Ligurian translation of Genoa. Same as Cordoba being Qurtubah, Rome being Roma etc.

Less devastating plague like in DoC would be nice, too.

Agree with this - plague shouldn't kill units outright imo, just weaken them. It definitely shouldn't kill the last defender in a city.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Out of a few games: Orthodoxy, or any religion for that matter, doesn't spread to Novgorod unless Byzantium sends missionaries (which is rather late and rare). If the spread rate is low, then maybe raise it? Or have Novgorod start with one orthodox missionary.

Denmark and Norway have a similar problem to a lesser extent from my observations.

I'm not sure why isn't it spreading there
Orthodoxy already has one of the highest spread rates for Novgorod
For a quick solution, they will get an Orthodox missionary

 

[Swarbs]

Zena is the Genoan name for the city of Genoa

Snap!

Plagues... I'm not sure. In some cases I feel they are not devastating enough...

The problem with plague, imo, is that it can kill the last unit in a city which can leave the city vulnerable and in disorder. In general, I think plague should weaken units rather than kill them outright, and should have disproportionate impacts on foreign / attacking units to prevent the plague becoming an opportunity to capture cities easily.

Maybe have plagues be more devastating to population but less damaging to units? After all, armies were typically able to contain plague through quarantine measures, whilst the civilian population was largely unable to contain it.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Agree with this - plague shouldn't kill units outright imo, just weaken them. It definitely shouldn't kill the last defender in a city.

Yeah, the initial unit-kill is too much, I agree with that part. I myself also disliked always disliked it. Rhye originally included it to keep the number of units on a low(er) level.
Probably it's not needed anymore though.
Quite annoying for the player, and it also seriously hurts the AI

But the plague itself, isn't that harsh IMO in many cases
Maybe it's effect should even be increased