RFCEurope 1.5

[AbsintheRed]

—Is it historical that the decline of the Hanseatic League led to a big population fall in the regions where it had been? I guess it was exacerbated since I controlled a ton of Hanseatic resources and so I had like 10 food per turn before it vanished, but it made a massive difference suddenly when it vanished.

I'd like to echo this. The Hanseatic League giving food doesn't really work that well now that it's a company and can move in and out of cities without you really having much control over it. Maybe it could be modified so that the Hanseatic League lets you build a special building that gives you the food instead?

Good idea. How about something like:
Hanse Kontor
- Small bonus to or with Dye, Cotton (representing trade with fabrics) or Fur
- Small bonus to with Salt or Fish
- Stores 10% food, +1 food with Wheat or Barley

Sure, moving the food bonus to the building (which stays even after the company leaves), while leaving most commercial bonuses at the company itself is a great workaround!
Nice idea guys!

 

[Swarbs]

Good idea. How about something like:
Hanse Kontor
- Small bonus to or with Dye, Cotton (representing trade with fabrics) or Fur
- Small bonus to with Salt or Fish
- Stores 10% food, +1 food with Wheat or Barley

Possibly also add +2 experience to ship construction alongside the commerce bonus when the league is present, to reflect the Hanseatic League's ability to source arms for its ships. Definitely agree that the massive amounts of food is unbalancing and not particularly historical - the Hansa were merchant guilds not fishermen!

 

[El Bogus]

When conquering the Aragonian capital you get to keep the bonus of the Aragonian UP.

Spoiler :

 

[AbsintheRed]

When conquering the Aragonian capital you get to keep the bonus of the Aragonian UP.

Great find, thanks!

 

[gilgames]

I took the time and made a russian game from 500ad. I post the start of this game as well as how i did in ~1600.
This time i focused more on military and less likely on building (as i used to). My main concern is technology. I was running 70% or above all the time. im still behind by far. including many expensive techs. so i am curios what to do how to win.

 

[Civilai Khan]

I think that is Bad idea.
One Civ AD500 start Scenario and One Cuv AD1200 start Scenario have the SAME UHV.

Why not change UHV?

 

[AbsintheRed]

I think that is Bad idea.
One Civ AD500 start Scenario and One Cuv AD1200 start Scenario have the SAME UHV.

Why not change UHV?

You suggest to have different UHVs for the different scenarios?
Interesting idea. While I see where is this coming from, I see very little benefits compared to the huge amont of work something like this would need. Not to mention if it's even possible to solve this elegantly.
Also where would be the end of separation? For many civs it would also call for different unique units/buildings/powers, different settler and war maps, different provinces and stability maps, etc. Even a different/more detailed tech tree would be justified, probably.
So in short, I think it would be better to have a direct modmod for that, where one can go all the way with fine-tuning the civs for the specific starting date.

PS:
Btw, one of the main goals for the scenario is to be able to play with the later-starting civs with a shorter autoplay (loading) time, with a preset base map which would lead to more feasible starting situations.
While playing for the (remaining) UHVs is fun and/or challenging with some earlier starting civs as well, it's not perfect for all of them.

 

[Orbii]

As a more significant suggestion, something DoC did a while back (and I'm pretty sure this is a pretty long time ago) is to change how the tech penalties work when expanding.

From what I understand, back then, as in most RFC mods, techs become more expensive depending on how many cities the Civ had. DoC changed it so that the penalty was tied instead to population. I believe this was done to decrease the incentive for megacities and to not penalize founding lots of cities.

This is something I've always wanted to see in RFCE, especially given how dense city placement is in parts of the map.

If it was already implemented at some point, great. I honestly have no idea about the specifics of how each works, or even if DoC still uses it, just a memory that it is/was a thing. And of course RFCE has a different tech leader penalty than DoC, so it's not a 1:1 comparison.

 

[El Bogus]

Also, you wouldn't get such a harsh penalty for founding new cities.

 

[AbsintheRed]

As a more significant suggestion, something DoC did a while back (and I'm pretty sure this is a pretty long time ago) is to change how the tech penalties work when expanding.

From what I understand, back then, as in most RFC mods, techs become more expensive depending on how many cities the Civ had. DoC changed it so that the penalty was tied instead to population. I believe this was done to decrease the incentive for megacities and to not penalize founding lots of cities.

This is something I've always wanted to see in RFCE, especially given how dense city placement is in parts of the map.

If it was already implemented at some point, great. I honestly have no idea about the specifics of how each works, or even if DoC still uses it, just a memory that it is/was a thing. And of course RFCE has a different tech leader penalty than DoC, so it's not a 1:1 comparison.

Also, you wouldn't get such a harsh penalty for founding new cities.

This is certainly something to consider, thanks for the idea/suggestion!
Does anyone know if it still works this way in DoC?

 

[ganker14]

What are the main changes you are going to put in with the new patch? (i read genoan and lithuanian uhv will change)

 

[freethink]

Are Pagan religions now included in this mod?

 

[El Bogus]

No, just the paganism civic.

 

[SanJose]

suggestion
Adding differnt between religions(no effect from pigs/wine for Islam)
Persecution of Jews (as bad event during Black Death for example)

 

[gilgames]

suggestion
Adding differnt between religions(no effect from pigs/wine for Islam)

I like it.

 

[freethink]

I am sure it would take a lot of work but I would like to see the inclusion of Norse Paganism or German Paganism into this mod, as it was distinct from the Christian World for centuries. The religious differences between the Christians and the Norse is very clear from the Anglo Saxon Chronicles where the author attacks the Invading Norse for being 'faithless pagans' rather than foreigners to Britain.

 

[AbsintheRed]

The long-pending update is finally up. Most parts of it.
This will be the base for 1.6 (together with the updates from early Spring and last Winter), which will come in a couple weeks.
The aimed release date is dec. 23.

Of course a lot of updates will have to follow this new revision before that.
It needs a fairly big amount of testing and balancing, there are way too many changes to measure all impacts without enough playtests.
And while I already did a fairly thorough testing with the individual features/addons/changes, much less time was spent on proper balancing.

So the best way to help me is to play with the civs normally, checking how gameplay for the given civ works with the new setup, how could it be improved.
All feedback is very welcomed, and of course, have fun playing!

 

[The Turk]

Awesome, looking forward to playing immediately! Shall we post our thoughts here or on another thread? Or create our own?

EDIT: Borgund Stave Church needs to have Christianity as a requirement, otherwise you can build it in Damascus in 632 haha.

Also probably should have access to lumber or something like that, to keep it in Northern Europe.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

The long-pending update is finally up. Most parts of it.
This will be the base for 1.6 (together with the updates from early Spring and last Winter), which will come in a couple weeks.
The aimed release date is dec. 23.

Of course a lot of updates will have to follow this new revision before that.
It needs a fairly big amount of testing and balancing, there are way too many changes to measure all impacts without enough playtests.
And while I already did a fairly thorough testing with the individual features/addons/changes, much less time was spent on proper balancing.

So the best way to help me is to play with the civs normally, checking how gameplay for the given civ works with the new setup, how could it be improved.
All feedback is very welcomed, and of course, have fun playing!

Awesome! Will it include the 4 new civs discussed here previously?

 

[AbsintheRed]

Awesome, looking forward to playing immediately! Shall we post our thoughts here or on another thread? Or create our own?

I don't mind it either way.
You can post here, or the new pre-1.6 thread, also in any other thread if that seems the most fitting.

EDIT: Borgund Stave Church needs to have Christianity as a requirement, otherwise you can build it in Damascus in 632 haha.
Also probably should have access to lumber or something like that, to keep it in Northern Europe.

Noted, thanks!