Now that culture decreases with time, wouldn't be interesting to keep percentages of civilizations already dead in place? Isn't it strange that all culture vanish (and with this a great deal of instability for Revolutions) from a territory just because you destroyed their government? I mean, wouldn't people still want to be part of their homeland after a year that their nation collapsed? With culture vanishing a great deal of instability is removed from the conquered cities, facilitating the conquests.
Border issue
- Thread starter quasarsphere
- Start date
Afforess
The White Wizard
The culture decay isn't quite *that* fast. I mean on epic gamespeed, it will take 250-425 turns before the culture is nearly gone. That is quite a lot of time. You can adjust how often it decays, its in the XML: CULTURE_DECAY_TURNS
Setting a negative value turns off decay altogether.
I mean civs that die, not the decaying process itself. If I conquer all the arab cities (require complete kills), and he keeps a single unit alive (e.g. Great Spy, which can't die) he will keep his culture on the plots until the decay removes it or your culture just overwhelms his. But if he has a single caravel and it dies, all arab culture just vanishes from the game, and will only re-appear if he rebels from someone revolting.
I think the culture of dead civs shouldn't disappear, it should remain in place and it'll be dealt with the conqueror's culture and the decay process. It's nice because it helps the recently conquered region to rebel to the former holder. If not, total destruction is an option with much more benefits then capitulating the small remnants of a big empire.
what happens if two cities from two different empires fighting for tiles and during the "culture-halving" someone makes a culture bomb? Or influencing the opponent city with foreign culture (using a spy)? 
Can this mechanic be exploited in some way?
Can this mechanic be exploited in some way?
Afforess
The White Wizard
what happens if two cities from two different empires fighting for tiles and during the "culture-halving" someone makes a culture bomb? Or influencing the opponent city with foreign culture (using a spy)?
Can this mechanic be exploited in some way?
City culture is not affected by culture decay. Tile culture and city culture are only indirectly related. See the beginning of this thread for the explanation.
Afforess
The White Wizard
It's not that I don't disagree, it's that the amount I care about that tiny gameplay detail < effort to fundamentally change how culture on death works.
You judge it's a tiny gameplay detail? Maybe it is in standard normal, but in gigantic marathon surely it is not.
The bribes I had to give for the arab lands I conquered because I couldn't destroy the former owner in the game I'm playing are already more then 10k gold surely! (something around 8 cities, some bribed more then once, minimum bribe 700 gold, maximum bribe 1500 gold). If I had destroyed him, like I did to german AI, I surely would have paid less bribes or no bribes at all. Berlin wasn't near my capital, and was 90%+ German when I took it, but then in a few turns I destroyed Germany and Berlin became 100% mine, which killed any resistance. Korea OTOH I couldn't kill, so I needed to give a few 500 gold bribes to its 3 cities I conquered. I had to bribe the isle I took from the zulu too, until he died, when the situation finally began to improve.
I can't see how this is a minor detail, if in all 4 cases it seems destroying is far way more beneficial then capitulating with a land full of the capitulated's culture. I guess there is a guy in Legends of Revolution forum who is trying to revive the mod and developed the non-vanishing of dead civs' culture on his modmod, I don't know if this is useful but I guess so.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
In the overall play scheme yes it is. Do you really think that all players play with the same options and same methods of play? If so, that's a rather narrow view.
Again not everyone plays with REV On. And while it may make you work harder to achieve what you want, it may not be how others view or use it.
JosEPh
In the overall play scheme I think yours is a narrow view as well. If overall play scheme means what most people play, maybe you're right, you seem to be hanging around here far more time then I can imagine (I'm here for only a month or less), so you're probably better to judge what most RoM-AND players play like. But if overall play scheme means all possibilities of playing, I'm pretty sure any game with revolution ON takes this gameplay mechanic into full consideration. I've just started a blitz duel game yesterday and even in duel revolution kicks in nicely.
And it's not that I'm defending something that makes the game of people who don't use the same options as I do worse and that makes the game of people who play with the same options as I do better. I understand maybe some changes to fit in Gigantic games, wouldn't fit in standard. But this is a change which won't make much difference to people playing a game without revolutions, but to the ones who are it'll surely change the game drastically, and it'll make it better IMO, as it'll end once and for all the tactic of destroying a foreign nation completely only to be able to hold all his territory.
And it's a mechanic which makes the game more realistic. I guess this is one of the principles guiding this mod, as it seems to me a lot more realistic then LoR, the mod I used to play before joining this. If it doesn't change much to people without revolutions, and makes the game better and more realistic mostly to revolution users, but actually to all players even if slightly, why not adding it?
The only reason I can see is the charge of work that's needed to change this. I have no idea if it's hard or not, so I can't give my opinion. That's why I brought the info about the LoR revitalizing mod guy, because I thought it would be easier for development if the mechanic was already created by someone else and imported to the mod:
So actually my point is realism. If the mechanic won't create negative changes to other points and principles of the mod, if it'll make the game more just to people playing with the option Revolutions ON and it'll make it more realistic to all players, I guess it's worth the discussion at least. If it's not hard to add, I think it should be added.
45°38'N-13°47'E
Deity
I'm not promising anything, but I think I can have a look when I have time.
45°38'N-13°47'E
Deity
45°38'N-13°47'E;13252015 said:
Mmmm, looks a pretty easy change but I'm not 100% sure it works. I'll do some test.
45°38'N-13°47'E
Deity
I've tried importing changes from LOR but they don't work in AND (actually, are we sure they work in LOR too? What happens when a civ dies? Culture around that city remains the same?). I'm reverting back to the original before pushing the next SVN revision and I'll delay working on this feature.
45°38'N-13°47'E;13253229 said:
I didn't check his modmod of LoR, so I really don't know.
Don't take priority in this, it's not gamebreaking, it just forces us rev users to do more total wars. And with culture decaying ON the process is a lot more realistic anyways, so it's already an improvement in this matter.
