Vox Populi or Realism Invictus?

[Hafenguy]

Hello!
I played Vox Populi some time ago.
But a few things bothered me, so I went back to good old Civ 4 Realism Invictus.
Now I wanted to ask again if some things have changed?
- It bothered me that enemy infrastructure could not be destroyed.
- Are there real alliances now like in Civ 4? In my memory there were only research agreements over certain times.
- Are there still those instant bonuses for one-time population growth?
- The happiness system still ensures that cities don't have to be specialized and every city basically has to build everything, right?
- RI has a stability system that makes it possible to harm competitors without having to declare war on them. Is there something similar in VOX Populi?
- In Realism invictus there is the possibility to process resources, is there something similar in Vox Populi?
- In Realism invictus there are resources that accelerate the construction of wonders of the world. This makes the competition for resources and the construction of wonders more satisfying. Is there anything like this in Vox Populi?
- What I missed in Civ 4 is the building of mines for resources, so that it is only possible to develop new resources by building nearby cities. Is this also the case in VOX Populi?
- And last but not least: Is there a good German translation for Vox Populi?

Thank you very much for your help

 

[Anarcomu]

• It bothered me that enemy infrastructure could not be destroyed.
  • If you mean tiles, then no, apart from pillaging them whilst at war and thought espionage, you can't. You also can't destroy enemies buildings without conquering them.
• Are there real alliances now like in Civ 4? In my memory there were only research agreements over certain times.
  • Defensive pact and Research Agreement. Both have a time limit. Also Vassalage, but it is favored in one direction.
• Are there still those instant bonuses for one-time population growth?
  • Yes.
• The happiness system still ensures that cities don't have to be specialized and every city basically has to build everything, right?
  • Yes.
• RI has a stability system that makes it possible to harm competitors without having to declare war on them. Is there something similar in Vox Populi?
  • No. You have two indirect way of harming your competitor thought : making sure your cities produce the most yields (as happiness is based on the world median), and tourism. It can inflict a heavy happiness penalty against enemies of different ideology.
• In Realism Invictus there is the possibility to process resources, is there something similar in Vox Populi?
  • You can convert production into culture, science, gold, food etc. if this is what you mean. Otherwise, no.
• In Realism Invictus there are resources that accelerate the construction of wonders of the world. This makes the competition for resources and the construction of wonders more satisfying. Is there anything like this in Vox Populi?
  • Marble increase production of ancient and classical Wonders, but that's all, so no.
• What I missed in Civ 4 is the building of mines for resources, so that it is only possible to develop new resources by building nearby cities. Is this also the case in Vox Populi?
  • No.
• And last but not least: Is there a good German translation for Vox Populi?
  • Can't tell you. Look for modmods I suppose ?

 

[rkkn]

possible to harm competitors without having to declare war on them

Espionage can harm competitors. You can sabotage wonder production, steal gold, incite revolt, etc

Marble increase production of ancient and classical Wonders, but that's all, so no.

there's also Stone. Marble is +15% and Stone is +10%. They stack, but are strictly local to the city that owns the tile.
Also Stone is ancient and classical. Marble is all the way up through renaissance. ancient, classical, medieval, renaissance

What I missed in Civ 4 is the building of mines for resources, so that it is only possible to develop new resources by building nearby cities. Is this also the case in Vox Populi?

• No.

Is the question mis-worded? I don't know anything about Realism Invictus, but the answer here would be yes: You can only build a mine on a tile owned by a city. But this is also the case in vanilla Civ 5.

 

[Anarcomu]

Is the question mis-worded? I don't know anything about Realism Invictus, but the answer here would be yes: You can only build a mine on a tile owned by a city. But this is also the case in vanilla Civ 5.

There is a feature in vanilla Civ 4 : when you build a mine not on resource, there is a tiny chance you spawn a new random mine resource. Pretty sure this is what @Hafenguy was referring to.

 

[Hafenguy]

Ok thanks for your fast answers.
I must say I just didnt get into the tourism concept. How did it harm the enemy what the purpose of tourism? It has anything to do with culture right?

 

[Hafenguy]

There is a feature in vanilla Civ 4 : when you build a mine not on resource, there is a tiny chance you spawn a new random mine resource. Pretty sure this is what @Hafenguy was referring to.

No sorry.
Let me try to explain what im referring to: we assume there is marble outside of the City culture and the City culture will never reach to the marble.
Is there any way to get the marble without founding another city?

 

[rkkn]

If it's just 2 tiles outside the borders then you can use a Great General to build a citadel, which claims land around it, and that would be enough to reach the marble. This can only be done within or adjacent to a city's borders, though, and adds the land to the city's ownership.

For more distant resources no. There's nothing like building an outpost to exploit distant resources. Only cities.

 

[Anarcomu]

Ok, tourism is a little complex :

• It is split into 2 part :
  • Culture is a defensive tool against tourism.
  • Tourism is the offensive tool.
• The total accumulated culture from the beginning of the game is your base for defense.
• When you meet someone, you start to accumulate tourism against them.
  • You have tourism accumulation for each civ. You can have a lot against one you have met a long time ago, and very few with someone you just met.
  • There are modifier for tourism :
    • Positive : having a diplomat (spy) ; sharing religion, trade route, open border ; great musicians
    • Negative : different ideologies, having more cities than them.
• When your tourism compared to their culture reach certain threshold, you start getting bonuses against the civ.
  • Thresholds are 10% (Exotic), 30%(Common?), 60%(Popular), 100%(Influential), 200%(Dominant)
  • Bonuses for trading routes, spy move duration, less building/population loss on conquest, less resistance time on conquest too.
• Finally, if your threshold is superior to your enemies', you push them toward your ideology.
  • If you share ideology, this act as a bonus defense against the following,
  • If you don't, this act as a malus in the form of extra unhappiness for them.

 

[Hafenguy]

Ahh ok thanks. Now I see this thing clear.
Im in a quandary.
This Features sounds great. Especially the World congress is a Diplomatic Instrument which sounds like it increases diplomacy on a higher level.
But when I start the mod, above mentioned points causes that I dont feel fun playing it.

 

[Stalker0]

Ahh ok thanks. Now I see this thing clear.
Im in a quandary.
This Features sounds great. Especially the World congress is a Diplomatic Instrument which sounds like it increases diplomacy on a higher level.
But when I start the mod, above mentioned points causes that I dont feel fun playing it.

Then I’m not sure what the quandary is. If you’re having more fun playing invictus…play invictus.

 

[Hafenguy]

Realism invictus has the disadvantage of limited diplomacie. It feels like the the main focus is on managing your own empire and interaction with other civs is very limited. In Vox Populi there is more interaction with other civs or the city states.

 

[N.Core]

I just wanted to make sure that Vox Populi is not aiming for realism. Having a realistic mechanic could be good for historical accuracy purposes, but the mod favors more fun factors than just plain realism. Having a realistic mechanic but unfun (for humans or the AI) is not welcomed in VP.

 

[Anarcomu]

Realism :
When the "Computer" technology is research, get an empire-wide bonus to happiness, coupled with an all-yield percent malus...

 

[Hafenguy]

The main point for me is not realism but fun.
Because of the above mentioned points, vox populi is not thet much fun for me.
Nevertheless I installed it yesterday again. It has simply more Diplomatic options.
I forgot one question about the diplomacy:
When I attack a Civilization a and Civilization b didnt like Civ a.
Will civ b angry against me cause in attacked it or does it not care like in civ?

 

[hokath]

@Hafenguy take a look at https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/vox-populi-diplomacy-guides.683886/

 

[rkkn]

When I attack a Civilization a and Civilization b didnt like Civ a.
Will civ b angry against me cause in attacked it or does it not care like in civ?

civ b will probably like you more
definitely will if they are currently at war with A
Tho I think they still don't like when you take cities

 

[AspiringScholar]

Realism invictus has the disadvantage of limited diplomacie. It feels like the the main focus is on managing your own empire and interaction with other civs is very limited. In Vox Populi there is more interaction with other civs or the city states.

I solidly prefer Civ IV to V (and this mod for it especially), but this is unfortunately true. In an interactive sense, there is very little scope of possible decisions outside of war declarations, gold demanding/requesting, and resource trades (though that has added depth in this mod with the way that it implements an industrial system of resource inputs and outputs, where raw material resources are utilized to make finished goods, as well as various production bonuses, as mentioned), but even the passive modifiers are there, visible, and (in my opinion) far more satisfying than in Civ V, where relations are all opaque and the static effects of things like shared civic choices, longstanding trade relationships, border friction and refused/granted tribute are not clearly communicated or even potentially relevant at all, where in Civ V none of that granular detail is there. This makes your other in-game decisions carry a diplomatic shade to them, and, though it would be much more fun if the scope of the actual interactivity was expanded (though we do have the Apostolic Palance and UN as an added dynamic), I still think that the relationship between diplomacy and the rest of gameplay is more strategically satisfying and interconnected in IV.

 

[Whitehorns]

Maybe some day someone some how would make a VP modmod for the resources - products system, but I remember back then while I was playing Realism invictus, one can buy out raw materials, for example, copper, for industrialization, building more bronze workshops for more hammers, and monopolize bronze weapons, thus further overpowering the AIs, I don't know if you can still do that with years of update, but if you can, I think there are already enough ways to fool the AIs in CIV IV, and don''t know if it is really a good idea to make it into CIV V.

 

[Stalker0]

I solidly prefer Civ IV to V (and this mod for it especially), but this is unfortunately true. In an interactive sense, there is very little scope of possible decisions outside of war declarations, gold demanding/requesting, and resource trades (though that has added depth in this mod with the way that it implements an industrial system of resource inputs and outputs, where raw material resources are utilized to make finished goods, as well as various production bonuses, as mentioned), but even the passive modifiers are there, visible, and (in my opinion) far more satisfying than in Civ V, where relations are all opaque and the static effects of things like shared civic choices, longstanding trade relationships, border friction and refused/granted tribute are not clearly communicated or even potentially relevant at all, where in Civ V none of that granular detail is there. This makes your other in-game decisions carry a diplomatic shade to them, and, though it would be much more fun if the scope of the actual interactivity was expanded (though we do have the Apostolic Palance and UN as an added dynamic), I still think that the relationship between diplomacy and the rest of gameplay is more strategically satisfying and interconnected in IV.

just noting, if you turn on "Transparent Diplomacy", you will see a lot more of the diplomacy modifiers in civ 5, so that might help some of your issue there.