Current v1.13 Development Discussion
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
Fallen_Kings
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 97
I guess the old way was still the best way,but i found i was 20+T behind.
But more seriously, that's what Paragon is about. The whole idea of it is that it's the highest player difficulty with even stronger AI on top of it. You have to be really good, and certain things may be completely impossible on this setting.
Especially UHVs can only be reasonably balanced on one particular difficulty level.
Especially UHVs can only be reasonably balanced on one particular difficulty level.
Fallen_Kings
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 97
So don't you think those UHVs are already too difficult?
Imperator Knoedel
Simperator Knoedel
Or you could just git gud.
Russia and China are doable techwise both on monarch.
I don't know about Arabia. The maintainance cost has increased. On the other hand, there will be excess gold due to conquests, but this will make even more difficult the 3rd UHV. So there might be a problem with Arabs.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 9,927
Two odd developments in India on 3000 BC starts when autoranning to 900 ADs: lot's of Barbarian Swordsmen spawning in the only south India spot without culture -- southern tile of Ceylon. Second thing -- India completely shunning away from Harappa core, not building cities in one of the most densely populated region of the world -- Indus river valley. I am not sure how things look without Harappa enabled though. And by the way -- IVC now promptly collapsing as intended every single time I do autorun, perhaps we can just bring them in default game? Because the only impact they are having are couple of city ruins anyway.
Playing an emperor epic 600 AD English game, wiped out Franks early and captured Frankfurt - Rome - Naples - Venice - Egypt, vassalized Holy Romans, kept peace with Spanish, stole tech all around by spies (got first great spy before Portugal spawn). Researched astronomy around 1500, AI still struggling in medieval era, Spanish and Portugal still far from colonial era, maybe because I kept stealing money from them. Now it is another mega game with no match.
General strategy for early Europeans: do not research until you steal guilds from Portugal. Save gold, build warriors for happiness, catapult to siege, chariots to upgrade later.
General strategy for early Europeans: do not research until you steal guilds from Portugal. Save gold, build warriors for happiness, catapult to siege, chariots to upgrade later.
That's what paragon is for...
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 9,927
So here is another example that something is wrong with AIs attitude towards resources. Just started game as Rome, met Greece, they are cautious (Regent), and yet they are willing to give me one of the two of their Marbles for free! So the problem is: some resources are valued extremely high (AI sometimes asks 74 gpt for a petty luxury resource) and some are very low, or even nothing, which does include important strategic resources as in my example, where Marble valued less that 1 gpt.
Malchar
Prince
I've had a few cases where the AI cancels an active deal because it's no longer good enough for them, and when you try to renegotiate they agree to the same original deal except that the AI is willing to give additional gpt on top of everything else. Otherwise, I really like the new system even if it is a bit frustrating at times. You really have to work for the trades now. It feels a lot more realistic and fair.
NerfCothons
Warlord
On the topic of AI negotiations, I have noticed that in order to reach a defensive pact agreement AI's are usually demanding some small +1 on my side of the bargain (a resource or 1gpt will suffice) but when the defensive pact expires the resource or gpt remains as a regular gift that does not terminate on its own. So it looks like there's something weird, but not really problematic, with the way the AI values defensive pacts compounded by the way that defensive pacts seem to terminate.
Malchar
Prince
I have a few general questions. 
How come sometimes you can't request another civ to change their civics? In one game, I'm running central planning, but I can't ask my vassals to switch to central planning, or any civic for that matter. I know that they have the required techs.
Similarly, how come sometimes I can't trade a city to another civ? The list of cities doesn't even appear in the trade menu. I can trade cities to some civs but not others.
On a side note, is it correct that there is an outdated penatly for all organization civics other than totalitarianism and egalitarianism after you discover communism? It has nothing to do with central planning which is the civic unlocked by communism. If you research communism before fascism, then the only choice is egalitarianism. It seems like representation should be acceptable at least until fascism is discovered.
How is the stability penalty for losing wars calculated? I was fighting multiple wars, but I believe that I was winning the wars as I was able to sue for peace with things added on my opponent's side of the trade.
Finally, in my attached screenshot, what does the column with the red circle represent on the city info screen? The values are 12, 10, 10, 9, 9, etc.
How come sometimes you can't request another civ to change their civics? In one game, I'm running central planning, but I can't ask my vassals to switch to central planning, or any civic for that matter. I know that they have the required techs.
Similarly, how come sometimes I can't trade a city to another civ? The list of cities doesn't even appear in the trade menu. I can trade cities to some civs but not others.
On a side note, is it correct that there is an outdated penatly for all organization civics other than totalitarianism and egalitarianism after you discover communism? It has nothing to do with central planning which is the civic unlocked by communism. If you research communism before fascism, then the only choice is egalitarianism. It seems like representation should be acceptable at least until fascism is discovered.
How is the stability penalty for losing wars calculated? I was fighting multiple wars, but I believe that I was winning the wars as I was able to sue for peace with things added on my opponent's side of the trade.
Finally, in my attached screenshot, what does the column with the red circle represent on the city info screen? The values are 12, 10, 10, 9, 9, etc.
Attachments
No idea, I could look it up in the code.I have a few general questions.
How come sometimes you can't request another civ to change their civics? In one game, I'm running central planning, but I can't ask my vassals to switch to central planning, or any civic for that matter. I know that they have the required techs.
Similarly, how come sometimes I can't trade a city to another civ? The list of cities doesn't even appear in the trade menu. I can trade cities to some civs but not others.
Yeah, that's true and actually a good point.
It's a trend score similar to how economic and happiness stability are calculated. That is, for every turn that your war score exceeds your enemy's against you by a significant amount, your score increases and vice versa. So if the enemy was ahead of you for a longer while and you made significant gains very quickly, it might take some additional time for the score to adjust to that.
City upkeep! It's a red coin.
DC123456789
Deity
Wow. I've been playing for 4 years and I've never been able to figure it out.
Malchar
Prince
I've always wondered about that back in normal civ4 as well. It's particularly relevant here because I'd like to give some of my extra cities to my vassals. I attacked Russia, took over a few cities, and they capitulated, but then I wasn't able to gift back their core cities. It was weird because I did the same thing in a previous game, and it worked just fine. I'd also love to be able to impose central planning on my vassals.
I tried to adapt the great person economy style from BTS into this game. You want to get farms rather than cottages and then work a bunch of specialists and get all the civics that synergize with great people. You start with republic, representation, agrarianism, mercantilism, and scholasticism. You then transition into industrialism and central planning during the industrial era. Fascism is probably better than representation due to the decreased city maintenance anyway, but it just seems weird how the outdatedness kicks in at that particular tech.
I had assumed that it would update along with the progress of the war, but having it be a trend makes sense too.
merijn_v1
Black Belt
I have a few general questions.
How come sometimes you can't request another civ to change their civics? In one game, I'm running central planning, but I can't ask my vassals to switch to central planning, or any civic for that matter. I know that they have the required techs.
Could it be that they switched civics a few turns earlier? Maybe they are in the cooldown and can't switch civic yet, like the human player.
Initially it was calculated only on the war score as is, but there are events that have a huge effect on war score (like city conquest) and that made the score too volatile. Also, it was hard to calculate the score in a way that adequately accounted for the length of the war.
- Status
