Beta 11

[AbsintheRed]

All of those nations are currently represented as Independents and Barbarians. It is highly impractical to make separate players (as AI and all of that) for every small nation

Not all of the civs, just a few with the biggest impact on history/most requested
This is also mostly flavor, as they would practically remain independent
But I'm sure most players would appreciate to have Scotland, Bohemia and Serbia in the mod this way

The purpose of the minor nations is to better represent things like the Scottish and Serbian revolts, those played important roles in history, but they are currently represented by small Barbarian invasions.

IMO this national revolt mechanic would also work better (gameplay wise), if you get those revolts after actually conquering those minor civs

Major nations do revolt too. There are random respawns that depend on stability, number of players currently alive and major revolts also cover many cities in larger territories. There are also scripted revolts at historically appropriate times.

Yeah you are right on this. Anyway, will need some balancing on the revolts, so it won't seem that minor civs are more likely revolt than major nations

Giving them more identity is a good idea. We should probably make it so that units build by the Indies in specific provinces would get a name like "Serbian (Axeman)" or "Bohemian (Archer)".

We should do this to all the other independents, being a minor civ should mean a little more identity.

Minor nation revolts work pretty much the same way, except cities become Independent as opposed to their own separate player.

Even better if they get back their original national identity and minor civ status

 

[3Miro]

Not all of the civs, just a few with the biggest impact on history/most requested
This is also mostly flavor, as they would practically remain independent
But I'm sure most players would appreciate to have Scotland, Bohemia and Serbia in the mod this way

That is still 3 - 5 from Scotland, Serbia, Catalonia and some that I forget.

IMO this national revolt mechanic would also work better (gameplay wise), if you get those revolts after actually conquering those minor civs

You need to own cities in that province, otherwise there is no revolt. So yes, you have to conquer them first.

Yeah you are right on this. Anyway, will need some balancing on the revolts, so it won't seem that minor civs are more likely revolt than major nations

This is easily adjusted. Most players would have only 1 - 2 minor nations to worry about and a lot more form Major ones.

We should do this to all the other independents, being a minor civ should mean a little more identity.

Even better if they get back their original national identity and minor civ status

Do you mean like separate players (i.e. not Independent).

 

[AbsintheRed]

That is still 3 - 5 from Scotland, Serbia, Catalonia and some that I forget.

I will gladly add the xml parts to all of them

You need to own cities in that province, otherwise there is no revolt. So yes, you have to conquer them first.

Of course, I just meant that it looks so much better to conquer a real Serbian minor civ, than just conquering a few provinces in that area

Do you mean like separate players (i.e. not Independent).

I imagine minor civs as improved independents.
No LH, no diplomacy, in most games they won't expand (disabled settlers) - same as independents
But still, separated from all the other independents with a capitol, own color, own flag, maybe an UU if appropriate
Still hate you and fight you if you didn't treat them well before...
Would only have 1-2 cities. If you conquer those cities, they would revolt in the mechanics you just implemented, and if they succed, come back as the same minor civ

Also, I always hated that normal independents are connected this much. We have 4 independent teams, sometimes an indy Edinburgh is the same civ as Palermo. Really annoying :/
This of course cannot be helped, but reducing the number of independents with minor civs will still be an improvement on this too

 

[rock_star]

I imagine minor civs as improved independents.
No LH, no diplomacy, in most games they won't expand (disabled settlers) - same as independents
But still, separated from all the other independents with a capitol, own color, own flag, maybe an UU if appropriate
Still hate you and fight you if you didn't treat them well before...
Would only have 1-2 cities. If you conquer those cities, they would revolt in the mechanics you just implemented, and if they succed, come back as the same minor civ

This worked well for Brennus & Byzantium in regular RFC - will you be assumed to be at a state of natural war with them (like Celts/Natives)? Or will they function as indies & fight if provoked and leave you be if you stay out of their land?

Also, I always hated that normal independents are connected this much. We have 4 independent teams, sometimes an indy Edinburgh is the same civ as Palermo. Really annoying...
This of course cannot be helped, but reducing the number of independents with minor civs will still be an improvement on this too

I used to get annoyed by that as well, until I looked at it being just a tiny version of a defensive pact between several small pissant duchys. The only time it really REALLY annoys me is when I DOW on an easy city in the west and an "allied" indy city in the east has a stack-of-doom near one of my lightly-guarded - but very important - fringe cities.

 

[AbsintheRed]

This worked well for Brennus & Byzantium in regular RFC - will you be assumed to be at a state of natural war with them (like Celts/Natives)? Or will they function as indies & fight if provoked and leave you be if you stay out of their land?

They would be similar to indies. More or less peaceful if you leave them alone

I used to get annoyed by that as well, until I looked at it being just a tiny version of a defensive pact between several small pissant duchys. The only time it really REALLY annoys me is when I DOW on an easy city in the west and an "allied" indy city in the east has a stack-of-doom near one of my lightly-guarded - but very important - fringe cities.

Yeah, I have been there too

 

[3Miro]

When you don't know how many Independent cities/regions you will have, you can only do it this way. Get 4 Indy players and work with that. We cannot dynamically add/subtract a player form the game.

I think Indy cities should work for now. Separate players would require a lot more code, not just XML, but Python and C++. I want to get Beta 12 next week, then fix the bugs and issues and get the first release candidate afterwards. By the end of August, we should release RFCEurope version 1.0. Then I will probably be moving and I will be unable to work on the mod. RFCEurope version 2.0 would be entirely in your hands.

 

[AbsintheRed]

I think Indy cities should work for now. Separate players would require a lot more code, not just XML, but Python and C++. I want to get Beta 12 next week, then fix the bugs and issues and get the first release candidate afterwards. By the end of August, we should release RFCEurope version 1.0.

Of course these changes cannot possibly be in Beta 12, but we should think about implementing them in 1.0. Especially if the revolt mechanics work fine ingame.
We will see, will have more than a month for adding real minor civs till the end of August

Then I will probably be moving and I will be unable to work on the mod. RFCEurope version 2.0 would be entirely in your hands.

As I said before, I'm really sorry to hear that, I prefer working in teams. Hopefully merijn will be still here, and you will get some time every now and then to still contribute to the mod...

 

[Bonci]

what about Milan or Florence as minor civs?

 

[3Miro]

what about Milan or Florence as minor civs?

Do you have dates of major revolts of those two against the major players (Venice, Genoa, Germany/Holy Roman Empire, Spain...)

 

[Morholt]

Do you have dates of major revolts of those two against the major players (Venice, Genoa, Germany/Holy Roman Empire, Spain...)

Milan in 1167, the anti-Emperor Lombard League is formed.

 

[AbsintheRed]

3Miro, I saw your recent changes
Note that with Arabia you still have to find your first city before you acquire one by conquest or flipping
Good job on the Protestantism!

Can you also check the code of Great Generals leaving to the crusade?

 

[AdrienIer]

I just realized that there is no UHV countdown for Sweden. I almost lost the 1rst one because Russia had a city in eastern Finland (hopefully it was not too late to start an invasion of Russia, which would've been needed anyway).

Also, the Swedish UHV is strangely put : first you get your own territory (that's ok), then you just make peace with Muscovy and Poland until 1700 (but you can still lose a city to Lithuania), and then you have 50 turns to conquer 5 cities (too much time after the 2nd UHV methinks, those two should be in conflict).

 

[AbsintheRed]

No problem for losing a city to Lithuania is a bug here, the UHV wasn't updated after we added Lithuania
You may be right on the 3rd is UHV is too easy. It came up a few days ago on another thread too, I will probably add a few more provinces

 

[AdrienIer]

You mean add a few more cities to conquer ? Or am I not understanding the UHV right ?

 

[ezzlar]

In my arab game, Seljuks spawned right outside Sour. Spawn bug?

 

[AbsintheRed]

You mean add a few more cities to conquer ? Or am I not understanding the UHV right ?

Sry, I wasn't clear
Add Livonia and Estonia in the UHV area, and increase the city number to 8 or 10

 

[Opera]

3Miro, I saw your recent changes
Note that with Arabia you still have to find your first city before you acquire one by conquest or flipping

Is that a problem? Don't you usually found Damascus on your first turn?

 

[rock_star]

I just realized that there is no UHV countdown for Sweden. I almost lost the 1rst one because Russia had a city in eastern Finland (hopefully it was not too late to start an invasion of Russia, which would've been needed anyway).

Also, the Swedish UHV is strangely put : first you get your own territory (that's ok), then you just make peace with Muscovy and Poland until 1700 (but you can still lose a city to Lithuania), and then you have 50 turns to conquer 5 cities (too much time after the 2nd UHV methinks, those two should be in conflict).

I mentioned the same things you mentioned in the provinces thread, and also suggested since Livonia and Estonia were long-held dominions of the empire, it seems like they should be OK in terms of stability (like Pomerania), and that even if they aren't added as OK, they should at least be added to the UHV3 area.

I was also going to report the tracking feature not working for UHV goal one - this is the actual reason I'm on the site now - but luckily I saw this post first.

I really loved the Swedish game (largely because my ancestry is Swedish), but also because it was damn fun - they felt like RFCE's Monglols, since their goals all involve conquest (well . . . I suppose the Ottomans are this mod's real Mongols, being Turkic and all). I was also at war with someone on each and every turn (the Norse asked me to DOW on Russia at spawn, which I did, and after that I signed a near perpetual defensive pact with Turkey, leading to many MANY wars). I had a decent start - the Poles were already conquered (the Spanish held Pomerania, the rest was Lithuanian or Austrian) and the Lithuanians and Russians were of course too backwards to offer any serious resistance. I built the Heroic Epic in Norkoping, and settled every Great General there, leading to level 3 & 4 troops & ships by the end game. Most cities could produce Karolin in a turn and once my Russian cities could contribute horses, I was cranking currasiers every other turn. Can you say zergrush? (Unlike the Swedes, though, I focused on finances - Norkoping was the only city building troops for most of the game while my core cities focued on wealth & research infrastructure and my conquered cities focused on stability buildings - I even managed to beeline to Right of Man and built L'Encyclopedie, instantly surging me from somewhat backwards to the dominant power in Europe).

 

[AbsintheRed]

Is that a problem? Don't you usually found Damascus on your first turn?

Of course not a problem, especially since these changes are mainly for the AI

3Miro said that "Islam gets one more turn before it is founded without a Holy City"
I just wanted to be more specific:
If you conquer a city/a city flips to you before you find your first city, you still won't get a holy shrine

 

[3Miro]

At this time period, Swedes were warmongers. You can look at the period as "the return of the Vikings".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden#Swedish_Empire