America Redesign

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

IIRC France has Historical areas in Australia.

It does, and likewise, it shouldn't.

 

[blizzrd]

It does, and likewise, it shouldn't.

Are you equally against the Dutch having (as they currently do) historical areas in Australia?

Dutch explorers were the first to encounter the western coast of Australia.

French explorers were the first Europeans to reach Queensland and the Great Barrier reef in the 1750s.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Are you equally against the Dutch having (as they currently do) historical areas in Australia?

Dutch explorers were the first to encounter the western coast of Australia.

French explorers were the first Europeans to reach Queensland and the Great Barrier reef in the 1750s.

It does have historical merit, but whether that deserves to translate into stable territory for them to settle on is more shaky.
I have a feeling that although it wasn't an intentional design purpose of Rhye's,
that it does present a balancing factor to prevent the monopolization of Australia by England.

 

[apenpaap]

Generally, though, the Dutch mainly use Australia to compete for that coveted Crappiest-City-in-the-Game-Award by making utterly awful desert cities on its west coast, instead of going for the quite decent spots on the east coast.

 

[banestrider]

Are you equally against the Dutch having (as they currently do) historical areas in Australia?

Dutch explorers were the first to encounter the western coast of Australia.

French explorers were the first Europeans to reach Queensland and the Great Barrier reef in the 1750s.

The French never found Queensland, just the Great Barrier Reef. Cook was the first European to set eyes on the East Coast. Just about everyone found Western Australia because of the trade winds that take you there from Africa.

The French never settled Australia or even had a plan to at any stage. The Dutch found Western Australia and were like this and told the Dutch government that there was no point in settling the area. However, because it is unfair to let England have the hole place to themselves then there should be Historical areas in Aus that the Dutch can settle such as the coast of WA and parts of the Northern Territory and Tasmania. The French should get Historical for Tasmania Coast of WA, Coast of South Australia and parts of the NT. The British and Americans (because of the current culture in Aus) should get Historical for the entire Continent. I just seems fair that if you are gunna have historical areas for two civs that never settled the place then you also let the dominate culture (American) also have historical.

 

[Barbuesque]

Who do you trade with? For the early game (before you get SoL) you are at war with the entire world. Except in the rare case where you don't flip any cities - but that should not, and almost never happens. After early game wars, I agree Happiness is less of a problem if you're careful. It's before that I'm concerned with.

Nevertheless, AI England can often settle Vancouver before you reach it, giving you even more problems with Happiness resources over a longer time period.

One euro nation + vassals isn't the entire world... and war is far from being guaranteed as you describe it. I am puzzled by your statement because I never experienced anything remotely ressembling what you describe in regard to happiness. Cities start at size 4, and you should have at least 4 happy resources connected by the time they reach 10+. You shouldn't grow cities working unimproved tiles.

On the other hand I believe you play with far more specialists than I do. I use cottages + 1 or 2 GP farms, which don't start until a great engineer is out. So your cities may tend to be much bigger in the initial phase than mine, as I whip them for workers until their growth start matching the rate at which tiles are being improved. So we may be experiencing different things due to different playstyles.

As a rule the game is balanced for AI vs. AI because the vast majority of players are AIs.

Prussia, and particularly America, need more. Especially in terms of Culture boosts. Prussia has less of a problem because

I do agree that AI America and Prussia need a boost as they are rather puny in their current state.

On the other hand I think it's fairly safe to say that the first focus should be to balance the game around the human player, and I believe it has been stated several times by Rhye and Leo. My experience in both playing and watching AI America is more about getting new cities up and running.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

One euro nation + vassals isn't the entire world... and war is far from being guaranteed as you describe it.

(1) By the time you spawn, Euros have already signed a complex web of Defensive Pacts with each other. Being at war with one usually means being at war with most of them.

(2) Euros will demand your cities in Congresses, and often the Congress will vote against you. This is twice as bad against France due to their UP, and Napoleon will ALWAY demand New Orleans (opposite to what happened IRL).

(3) You need to start on Monroe Doctrine asap, especially if you have a lucky tech advantage (either France, Portugal or Spain could have colonies but no Rifling). This coupled with (1) lead to massive DoWs.

(4) Due to your low Power rating but high treasury & tech at early game, some AIs like to make unreasonable demands and then DoW when you reject them. In one of my most nightmarish American games, Catherine demanded 1,000 Gold from me at turn 1. Naturally I refused. Then c.a. 1805, Russia DoW-ed, sending a fleet of 4 Galleons and 4 Frigates loaded with Cossacks, Rifles and Cannons and landed in Maryland. R.I.P., U.S. of A..

I am puzzled by your statement because I never experienced anything remotely ressembling what you describe in regard to happiness. Cities start at size 4, and you should have at least 4 happy resources connected by the time they reach 10+. You shouldn't grow cities working unimproved tiles.

On the other hand I believe you play with far more specialists than I do. I use cottages + 1 or 2 GP farms, which don't start until a great engineer is out. So your cities may tend to be much bigger in the initial phase than mine, as I whip them for workers until their growth start matching the rate at which tiles are being improved. So we may be experiencing different things due to different playstyles.

Gah you hit the crux of the problem.

I don't whip when I play most civs in the game. I definitely don't whip as America, for RP reasons. I run Specialists or spam Workers. Too much time spent playing Lincoln/Washington in vanilla BTS I think.

Which is the point. America needs to have my new UP because otherwise this game implicitly advocates slavery.

Incidentally both Lincoln and Washington were Charismatic on vanilla BTS, which further justifies giving America an extra Happiness boost.

 

[apenpaap]

By the same logic it already "advocates" razing cities to the ground, colonisation, fascism (in certain situations), war, and plenty of other horrible things.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

By the same logic it already "advocates" razing cities to the ground, colonisation, fascism (in certain situations), war, and plenty of other horrible things.

Do you think I object to it because it's "horrible"?

I object to it because it's unrealistic. America being forced to switch to Dynasticism and Forced Labor to deal with its Happiness problem is unrealistic. Its old UP (which exacerbates this problem) should be called American Nightmare, not American Dream. This is why I proposed this new UP in the first place.

Not only unrealistic, it is also boring. I prefer each civ to have a distinct flavor. Dynasticism + Forced Labor is Egypt's signature Civic combo, not America's. Would you prefer that the earliest civ (Egpyt) and the latest civ (America) play out the exact same way? Stack units for Happiness and whip for Wonders? Isn't this why there are Unique Powers in RFC in the first place, so that you don't have to do the same thing with every civ?

 

[blizzrd]

The French never found Queensland, just the Great Barrier Reef. Cook was the first European to set eyes on the East Coast. Just about everyone found Western Australia because of the trade winds that take you there from Africa.

The French never settled Australia or even had a plan to at any stage. The Dutch found Western Australia and were like this and told the Dutch government that there was no point in settling the area. However, because it is unfair to let England have the hole place to themselves then there should be Historical areas in Aus that the Dutch can settle such as the coast of WA and parts of the Northern Territory and Tasmania. The French should get Historical for Tasmania Coast of WA, Coast of South Australia and parts of the NT. The British and Americans (because of the current culture in Aus) should get Historical for the entire Continent. I just seems fair that if you are gunna have historical areas for two civs that never settled the place then you also let the dominate culture (American) also have historical.

Your logic is inconsistent. The French never had any plans to settle and neither did the Dutch, yet you are quite happy for Dutch to have historical areas but not the French?

Where on earth is the "Tasmania Coast of Western Australia"?

There is no way that the Americans should have historical areas for the entire Australian continent. There is also no way that American culture is the dominant culture in Australia. If Australia becomes the 51st state of the United States, I might change my mind on this, but until then, NO.

The French sailed up the east coast of Australia before the English landed at Botany Bay.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

(1) By the time you spawn, Euros have already signed a complex web of Defensive Pacts with each other. Being at war with one usually means being at war with most of them.

(2) Euros will demand your cities in Congresses, and often the Congress will vote against you. This is twice as bad against France due to their UP, and Napoleon will ALWAY demand New Orleans (opposite to what happened IRL).

(3) You need to start on Monroe Doctrine asap, especially if you have a lucky tech advantage (either France, Portugal or Spain could have colonies but no Rifling). This coupled with (1) lead to massive DoWs.

(4) Due to your low Power rating but high treasury & tech at early game, some AIs like to make unreasonable demands and then DoW when you reject them. In one of my most nightmarish American games, Catherine demanded 1,000 Gold from me at turn 1. Naturally I refused. Then c.a. 1805, Russia DoW-ed, sending a fleet of 4 Galleons and 4 Frigates loaded with Cossacks, Rifles and Cannons and landed in Maryland. R.I.P., U.S. of A..

I've experienced the same. This is consistently worse on 3000BC.
I've managed with Prussia despite having enemies on all sides, but you benefit more distinctly from gaining a ton of stacks as a side effect
(I once received at least 30 units on a single Prussia spawn; this is no exaggeration).
With America however, you have no chance to strike back to make a fair peace deal because you can't hit their (Europeans) important territories like their homelands because of a lack of a navy. Now this isn't to enable America to wantonly rampage in Europe, but the way the game is currently setup, this is the best way to rack up a high warscore. What the current situation means overall is that while you can make peace with the Europeans with New World possessions, the ones that get dragged into the war but aren't on the continent are non-negotiable for much of the game.

There is no way that the Americans should have historical areas for the entire Australian continent. There is also no way that American culture is the dominant culture in Australia. If Australia becomes the 51st state of the United States, I might change my mind on this, but until then, NO.

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

 

[banestrider]

There is no way that the Americans should have historical areas for the entire Australian continent. There is also no way that American culture is the dominant culture in Australia. If Australia becomes the 51st state of the United States, I might change my mind on this, but until then, NO.

The French sailed up the east coast of Australia before the English landed at Botany Bay.

Really, next time you go to spell Colour or Programme think, it is Colour or Color, or Program or Programme. Aus in language is becoming more and more like America. Look at what is on the TV, most if not all programs started in the USA or actually from the USA. Don't get me wrong i think the Australia is independent and I love NCIS and Castle. But for the purposes of this game does it matter really. After all this is not an exact representation of history. If not historical bit map then at least have a settle map. We after all a mix of American and English culture.

If you could please point out who and when. From extensive research into the matter I can only say that they found the Great Barrier Reef but not the east coast. Also Cook sailed up the coast way before the colony at Botany Bay.

 

[blizzrd]

Really, next time you go to spell Colour or Programme think, it is Colour or Color,

I don't have to think about it, I know that colour is correct.

Aus in language is becoming more and more like America.

I speak English, not American. What about you?

Look at what is on the TV, most if not all programs started in the USA or actually from the USA.

For you, TV = culture. You probably watch too much TV. I don't agree with this view of culture. It wouldn't be hard for you to watch more TV than me. I haven't watched free-to-air commercial TV for many years.

If you could please point out who and when. From extensive research into the matter I can only say that they found the Great Barrier Reef but not the east coast. Also Cook sailed up the coast way before the colony at Botany Bay.

You should extend your research to Jean de Surville and his French merchant ship St Jean-Baptiste. Geoffrey Blainey's Sea of Dangers describes the previously unpublished and not translated pages of a French officer on the ship which encountered the east coast of Australia on 4 December 1769, passing within 20 to 40 miles of Sydney Harbour. This was actually before Cook had left New Zealand on his 1970 vist to eastern Australia.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

America needs a major graphic change:

American unit/building art should be dependent on which is the dominant northern new-word power at it's birth. It makes zero sense to have a swarm of pasty British settlers pop up when the continent is controlled by no-one else but (say) the Arabs.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

America needs a major graphic change:

American unit/building art should be dependent on which is the dominant northern new-word power at it's birth. It makes zero sense to have a swarm of pasty British settlers pop up when the continent is controlled by no-one else but (say) the Arabs.

Well, their units also speak American English, so.

Also in Industrial and later eras all civs share the same building art. Unless you're running Ethnic City Styles (which I'm not) or something.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

What the current situation means overall is that while you can make peace with the Europeans with New World possessions, the ones that get dragged into the war but aren't on the continent are non-negotiable for much of the game.

This is a very important problem. Perhaps the most important one in terms of AI behavior.

IMO this "Refuse to talk!" absurdity should not exist at all in this game. No one idiotic enough to refuse to consider diplomacy from another world power for decades has ever been a leader of a civilization (one prominent enough to feature in this game, anyway) for that long. Even North Korea demands money once every few turns instead of "Refuse to talk!"

Fortunately, England's AI (Elizabeth or Victoria) is usually happy to OB immediately after making peace, at Cautious. <3 England

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

(1) By the time you spawn, Euros have already signed a complex web of Defensive Pacts with each other. Being at war with one usually means being at war with most of them.

(2) Euros will demand your cities in Congresses, and often the Congress will vote against you. This is twice as bad against France due to their UP, and Napoleon will ALWAY demand New Orleans (opposite to what happened IRL).

(3) You need to start on Monroe Doctrine asap, especially if you have a lucky tech advantage (either France, Portugal or Spain could have colonies but no Rifling). This coupled with (1) lead to massive DoWs.

(4) Due to your low Power rating but high treasury & tech at early game, some AIs like to make unreasonable demands and then DoW when you reject them. In one of my most nightmarish American games, Catherine demanded 1,000 Gold from me at turn 1. Naturally I refused. Then c.a. 1805, Russia DoW-ed, sending a fleet of 4 Galleons and 4 Frigates loaded with Cossacks, Rifles and Cannons and landed in Maryland. R.I.P., U.S. of A..

The general rule in RFC is supposed to be "do what happened historically and it will work". How did the Monroe doctrine work and the end of European colonization happen historically? My lay understanding is that it's a combination of the Royal Navy stopping European powers acquiring new colonies and the spread of nationalism/liberalism (in its 19th century sense) leading to existing colonies breaking away.

How do we model that in the game?
- Spawning barbarian or independent rebels in eastern Latin America.
- a big American navy blockading so that European civs are separated from their American resources and can't reinforce (since there's no way to get the Royal Navy to do it for you).
- Making inland Latin America unstable for Spain/Portugal so that cities become independent and (in DoC 1.4!) the Latin American civs spawn.
-Getting enough culture to absorb Canada, which was the last major territory in the Americas to retain close links with its European metropolis, should be the difficult part of the UHV. Obviously a military element is appropriate here too.

I wonder whether it would be possible to have a UP that somehow reflects the dominance of American culture throughout the world. What about a "Journalist" unit that add American culture in other civs' cities.....? Does foreign culture reduce stability at all? Could that be unique to American culture?

Actually, the best way would be to have new religion of Liberalism, which reduces stability outside Core Areas and which America could spread.

Which is the point. America needs to have my new UP because otherwise this game implicitly advocates slavery.

Incidentally both Lincoln and Washington were Charismatic on vanilla BTS, which further justifies giving America an extra Happiness boost.

I am always in favour of eliminating slavery, for similar RP reasons.

 

[2phunkey4u]

I wonder whether it would be possible to have a UP that somehow reflects the dominance of American culture throughout the world. What about a "Journalist" unit that add American culture in other civs' cities.....? Does foreign culture reduce stability at all? Could that be unique to American culture?

Actually, the best way would be to have new religion of Liberalism, which reduces stability outside Core Areas and which America could spread.

It could be reasonable feature of those happiness-providing wonders (Wembley, Hollywood, Graceland) to also spread a bit of the culture of the owning civ to others who trade for the happiness resources - even more if there are radio towers or the Internet in play. And there you have cultural globalisation with a big incentive for America to build these wonders to be the main agent.

 

[apenpaap]

IMO this "Refuse to talk!" absurdity should not exist at all in this game. No one idiotic enough to refuse to consider diplomacy from another world power for decades has ever been a leader of a civilization (one prominent enough to feature in this game, anyway) for that long. Even North Korea demands money once every few turns instead of "Refuse to talk!"

I'm pretty sure it's for gameplay reasons. Look at France; their UP means they never refuse to talk to you, and this is incredibly easy to exploit. Play as Italy if you really want to see this: no matter how weakened you are, France is never a thread because you can instantly buy off their DoWs. The same goes for attacking France: it doesn't matter how strong they are, as long as you can manage to conquer a single city. Then you pay them a bit of gold for peace to prevent them to strike back. (For this reason I think the French UP should only work from their side, not from other civs' side)

 

[Jusos2108]

(4) Due to your low Power rating but high treasury & tech at early game, some AIs like to make unreasonable demands and then DoW when you reject them. In one of my most nightmarish American games, Catherine demanded 1,000 Gold from me at turn 1. Naturally I refused. Then c.a. 1805, Russia DoW-ed, sending a fleet of 4 Galleons and 4 Frigates loaded with Cossacks, Rifles and Cannons and landed in Maryland. R.I.P., U.S. of A..

The answer to your problem is in your post, I don't understand how you don't have a fleet of Ship of Lines in 1805 defending your coast. You have the right civic, the needed resource (iron), the needed technology and above all you have the money...

I'm pretty sure it's for gameplay reasons. Look at France; their UP means they never refuse to talk to you, and this is incredibly easy to exploit. Play as Italy if you really want to see this: no matter how weakened you are, France is never a thread because you can instantly buy off their DoWs. The same goes for attacking France: it doesn't matter how strong they are, as long as you can manage to conquer a single city. Then you pay them a bit of gold for peace to prevent them to strike back. (For this reason I think the French UP should only work from their side, not from other civs' side)

Agreed.
Although I retain myself from exploiting this by always destroying France completely as Italy, or anybody else nearby for that matter.

For happiness contact the Far Eastern civs. With a navy present, it is easy.