.90 beta test / World Congress troubles.

[FooFight2000]

Quick review of .9 as its late here.

No city flipping, Cultural flips but no new Civ flipping.

World Congress came in 1390.... 6 or 8 voting boxes came up, i voted on 3 and got results (the wrong results i'd get the egpytian results after voting on china's request) but the others didnt provide a final vote tally box. A Muslim Egyptian city transfered to Arabs (which was fine, Egypt was christian.)

I was Greece and i voted no (obviously) to transfer Byzantion to Persia. Everyone except me voted YES. now Persia has a city in the middle of my empire. I controlled Nineveh, Babylon, Jersulem, all more logical choices than Byzation which was size 12 and was the christian holy city. It transferred without a war .

I requested for Persiia to transfer Ur to me. I was the only yes vote and a bunch of abstains (the only abstain votes in the whole process) and a few no's.

The problem with flipping these cities in the middle of empires is that culture crushes them immeaditly starving them.

The idea seems cool, but if players are loosing holy cities in the middle of their empire for no reason, it can be very frusterating.

After the vote the game would not allow me to advance or click on units or cities.

Nice to see the Russian & Mongol city names.

Maybe add Kiev as a babarian city???

Wars seemed better.

Ill post save games tommorrow.

 

[Eddiit]

Quick review of .9 as its late here.

No city flipping, Cultural flips but no new Civ flipping.

World Congress came in 1390.... 6 or 8 voting boxes came up, i voted on 3 and got results (the wrong results i'd get the egpytian results after voting on china's request) but the others didnt provide a final vote tally box. A Muslim Egyptian city transfered to Arabs (which was fine, Egypt was christian.)

I was Greece and i voted no (obviously) to transfer Byzantion to Persia. Everyone except me voted YES. now Persia has a city in the middle of my empire. I controlled Nineveh, Babylon, Jersulem, all more logical choices than Byzation which was size 12 and was the christian holy city. It transferred without a war .

I requested for Persiia to transfer Ur to me. I was the only yes vote and a bunch of abstains (the only abstain votes in the whole process) and a few no's.

The problem with flipping these cities in the middle of empires is that culture crushes them immeaditly starving them.

The idea seems cool, but if players are loosing holy cities in the middle of their empire for no reason, it can be very frusterating.

After the vote the game would not allow me to advance or click on units or cities.

Nice to see the Russian & Mongol city names.

Maybe add Kiev as a babarian city???

Wars seemed better.

Ill post save games tommorrow.

Im not a big fan of the congress isea anyways. The idea of the world getting tohether to make you lose a city to me is pretty bleh. One thing is for sure that congresses start way way too early. My first congress was in 1310 and resulted in me losing two cities in my egyptian homeland.

 

[Vishaing]

I would think civs shouldn't be able to ask for a city another civ founded unless they held it for a long period of time, enough to get a substantial bit of culture there.

Also I feel you should be able to go to war over the results even if you were invited. Perhaps after a city gets taken from you or isn't given to you a popup appears saying "Our people are outraged over this event, shall we go to war to correct it. Be warned, we will likely anger some of the congress members." Also if a city is taken from someone, and they go to war, I would remove the aggressor war weariness penalty, if that's possible.

Also, I thought the congress system was what happened on the end of a war, not just at a point in time? Maybe I'm just weird, but I think that would be something cool to have, we might need to get coordinated ends to wars working though, and I have no idea how that would work, or maybe just every civ that ended the war withing 5 turns of the original two participents, maybe more if there were defense pacts involved, get invited to the war congress.

 

[Rhye]

who discovered Nationalism so early?

 

[FooFight2000]

Greece (I) did

maybe require 5 civs to have nationalism before the congresses begin

 

[Barak]

WHat determines if a city can be voted on? I thought only border cities could be votes on? How could a city in the center of yuor empire be selected for vote?

 

[Elhoim]

Also, I thought the congress system was what happened on the end of a war, not just at a point in time? Maybe I'm just weird, but I think that would be something cool to have, we might need to get coordinated ends to wars working though, and I have no idea how that would work, or maybe just every civ that ended the war withing 5 turns of the original two participents, maybe more if there were defense pacts involved, get invited to the war congress.

I like this idea.

 

[SilverKnight]

Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to play entirely through v0.90 yet, but I've got a nice Greece game going. In fact, I'll try to finish it and write a comprehensive strategy guide for Greece (as is I have one for up to the Renaissance).

The only thing I dislike with the new wars system is the lack of motivation. In 650 AD Rome declared war on me (perfectly natural, he was annoyed), yet had no troops ready for an invasion. There wasn't even a declaration of war via diplomacy! I actually razed two of his cities near mine and decimated the only Praetorian-filled galley he sent with my larger navy.

Now sometime after 1060 AD or so, Persia--a Pleased ally who shares a religion with me--just declared war on me, again with no declaration of war! And just after they wasted a huge stack of troops against Makkah, which could have been used against me. Now my Phalanx and crossbowmen fill the countryside along with Arab swordsmen.

I have seen better AI-AI wars; France razed one of the rebuilt Roman cities shortly after it spawned (allowing my borders to expand more! ), and before declaring war on me, Persia was really hassling Arabia.

But I don't like simply being at war without a reason. Any hopes of changing this?

BTW Rhye, so far this version is VERY entertaining! Despite the wars, I am dominating, since I finally adapted to the economy of the world. Alexander the !

SilverKnight

 

[dh_epic]

The tricky thing about the tech tree is that nationalism DOES come around early. It's rougly contemporary with Education and Gunpowder, both of which were invented around 1000 AD! It also precedes the first constitutions!

So the fact that Nationalism came along in 1390 AD is no surprise at all, really.

To me, you should only be able to select a city to be voted on if:

1) The city contains at least 1% of your culture. (Would likely be a border city.)
2) The city was, at any point in the game, owned by you.

That would be a good start.

 

[Elhoim]

Borders cities only for me would be perfect. Almost all disagrements between countries is on borders. And personaly I think the congress should happen after a war is finished, where the contestans can choose cities, and the other respectable world members say if it is okay or not to give them.

 

[abman]

The tricky thing about the tech tree is that nationalism DOES come around early. It's rougly contemporary with Education and Gunpowder, both of which were invented around 1000 AD! It also precedes the first constitutions!

So the fact that Nationalism came along in 1390 AD is no surprise at all, really.

To me, you should only be able to select a city to be voted on if:

1) The city contains at least 1% of your culture. (Would likely be a border city.)
2) The city was, at any point in the game, owned by you.

That would be a good start.

I like those requirements, but would add:
3) If the city has your state religion, and the owning empire has another state religion which the city does not have.
I think that would be acceptable as well, though it should really still be somewhat close to your borders. That might just extend the range a little bit. I don't like the idea of civs being able to take a city no where near them either.

 

[Gunner]

I like those requirements, but would add:
3) If the city has your state religion, and the owning empire has another state religion which the city does not have.
I think that would be acceptable as well, though it should really still be somewhat close to your borders. That might just extend the range a little bit. I don't like the idea of civs being able to take a city no where near them either.

What would be the point of this in addition to the other two. I think that its much more likely that this would just let you take a random city inside the other civ's heartland (or at least not on the border with you.) Seems to me that the two options set out by dh_epic would be fine.

 

[Elhoim]

1) The city contains at least 1% of your culture. (Would likely be a border city.)
2) The city was, at any point in the game, owned by you.

Great and simple!

 

[Rhye]

AI judges the city to ask on factors like if it has ever owned the city, if it's in its settlers favourite area, or if it is close to the borders.

You are arguing about something that's already active.

 

[FooFight2000]

The thing we all need to keep in mind is that this is in beta. and Rhye is devoting tons of time to it. It is only going to keep getting better.

The question i have for Rhye though is on the Byzantion transferring Is it a bug??? or is it meant to be that way.. Persia never owned Byzantion and had no culture there.

Im attaching my saved games.

Again thank you for all your excellent work on this mod.

 

[Eddiit]

The thing we all need to keep in mind is that this is in beta. and Rhye is devoting tons of time to it. It is only going to keep getting better.

The question i have for Rhye though is on the Byzantion transferring Is it a bug??? or is it meant to be that way.. Persia never owned Byzantion and had no culture there.

Im attaching my saved games.

Again thank you for all your excellent work on this mod.

Yeah I think we all undertsand that this is a beta but as beta testers we're just trying to help him get it right.

But I agree Rhye is doing an outstanding job and things are coming along wonderfully.

 

[Rhye]

The question i have for Rhye though is on the Byzantion transferring Is it a bug??? or is it meant to be that way.. Persia never owned Byzantion and had no culture there.

The choice of Byzantion was due to the fact that Persian settlers "like" that area.
You're right if this is a wrong case (it should have been closer to borders), but I added that condition thinking of trading far away colonies.
I'll tweak the condition adding a sub-condition for preserving colonization.

 

[V. Soma]

Rhye, may I repeat my words about congresse here?

"I belive it would be important that only cities bordering the civ that asks for a city could come into the question... maybe shoreline can be an exception..."

By "shoreline" I think of overseas cities, so a civ may ask for a city on an other continent if it is on shoreline, well, maybe even on the same continent, too...

How does that sound?

 

[V. Soma]

test of 0.90

I play Rome

Well, after not playing civ for 5 weeks, it was nice to see things again...

I love the swift roads of Rome, it really gives it an empire feeling...
Now, Greece had Melpum in place of Mediolanum, so I put my capital a bit north (Arretium).
/oh, the name-location of cities are just grrrreat! /
After securing Italia, I went for Gades in "Spain".
Then I built quite an army to face the barbarians, while had contact with Egypt.

Barbs came but less and not as fierce as in earlier builds (e.g 0.60 or so).
And then Spain appeared - but no flips!
As in 850, Gedes is still a happy Roman city, and now I think of attacking Izabella...

 

[Rhye]

i know i know 090 doesn't flip, it's buggy.