Current v1.13 Development Discussion

[DC123456789]

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to make Scotland and Ireland foreign for the British.

 

[ales_]

Yes, they should be at least historical.

 

[youtien]

Now statesmen from palace is gone, courthouse should provide 2 statesmen slots, like library and market does.

 

[char81]

Scotland should definitely remain core, Ireland is good as historical. I still think it could be a good idea for a city to spawn in Scotland before the english spawn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vit20141012]

It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to make Scotland and Ireland foreign for the British.

Yes, they should be at least historical.

Scotland should definitely remain core, Ireland is good as historical. I still think it could be a good idea for a city to spawn in Scotland before the english spawn.

Creation of the uniform Union State of Great Britain happened in 1707 (Acts of Union). In 2014 there was a referendum on independence of Scotland.
In 1949 Ireland was proclaimed the independent republic. It was declared a republic exit from the British Commonwealth.

 

[Lokki242]

As far as I know, Germany doesn't currently control the Congo, and the Netherlands doesn't control Indonesia or South Africa. Historical means just that. Historical. Not necessarily current. Not necessarily a happily ruled over region.

 

[Leoreth]

As far as I know, Germany doesn't currently control the Congo, and the Netherlands doesn't control Indonesia or South Africa. Historical means just that. Historical. Not necessarily current. Not necessarily a happily ruled over region.

^ my view on this.

 

[citis]

As far as I know, Germany doesn't currently control the Congo, and the Netherlands doesn't control Indonesia or South Africa. Historical means just that. Historical. Not necessarily current. Not necessarily a happily ruled over region.

It seems a little problematic. This rule is to enforce player and AI recreate history on a degree. I suggest that historical area is the area you can settle. So historical and foreign tiles would be the same from stability perspective.

 

[Leoreth]

It seems a little problematic. This rule is to enforce player and AI recreate history on a degree. I suggest that historical area is the area you can settle. So historical and foreign tiles would be the same from stability perspective.

^ not my view on this

 

[char81]

Creation of the uniform Union State of Great Britain happened in 1707 (Acts of Union). In 2014 there was a referendum on independence of Scotland.

In 1949 Ireland was proclaimed the independent republic. It was declared a republic exit from the British Commonwealth.

For the purposes of this game it makes sense to keep Scotland core, there is no Scottish civ and Scotland has remained an integrate part of the UK for 300 years. Making Scotland historical or foreign would be like making Catalonia historical or foreign for Spain at this point. Ireland should remain historical, after all the British did control it for nearly 800 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[agentxorange]

Aren't historical and foreign tiles, by definition, different from a stability perspective?

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, however they also have an impact on AI settlement. Under normal conditions, the AI will never settle on an ahistorical tile. I suppose citis was suggesting to untie this relationship.

 

[youtien]

Yes, however they also have an impact on AI settlement. Under normal conditions, the AI will never settle on an ahistorical tile. I suppose citis was suggesting to untie this relationship.

I agree the idea of untying. Maybe we can try this.

 

[agentxorange]

Why would we want the AI to settle ahistorical areas?

 

[citis]

Why would we want the AI to settle ahistorical areas?

We don't. Historicallity of a tile is measured by AI's willingness to settle that tile.

But yes I would like to see foreign and historical tiles be treated the same way for stability purposes. Obligating human to settle only in historical tiles is a good way to avoid exploitations in this scenario.

 

[cudfather]

Forbidding the player the freedom of choice when it comes to city settlement would radically narrow the scope of this mod, making it 'history-only'. There's loads of alternate-history buffs among DoC players, me included; don't kill our joy, especially since you have no gain from this (if you want to settle historically, nobody stops you from doing so).

 

[agentxorange]

We don't. Historicallity of a tile is measured by AI's willingness to settle that tile.

But yes I would like to see foreign and historical tiles be treated the same way for stability purposes. Obligating human to settle only in historical tiles is a good way to avoid exploitations in this scenario.

That sounds very limiting and extremely problematic. None of the rules are in place to "enforce history" anyway. Why would we want to limit where the human (of all players) could settle?

I'm actually very confused as to why there is so much discussion about stability and historical tiles right now. Those mechanics do not need a rework.

 

[Leoreth]

We don't. Historicallity of a tile is measured by AI's willingness to settle that tile.

But yes I would like to see foreign and historical tiles be treated the same way for stability purposes. Obligating human to settle only in historical tiles is a good way to avoid exploitations in this scenario.

Hey how about this, cities can only be founded at specific pre-selected plots. Better make sure they get founded at the right dates too so the pesky player won't get in the way. There'll just be a popup:

Do you want to found Boston?

YES        HELL YES

 

[agentxorange]

You won't even have to build settlers anymore. You just obtain cities at specific dates. In fact, you don't even have to build military units anymore. You just flip cities at specific dates.

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, but a little cutscene plays narrated by Nathan Fillion or whatever