Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

[Leoreth]

Okay, I pondered the Roman problem quite a bit (had nothing else to do while sitting in the train), so this will probably a lengthy post and I'll better split it in two. So first to everything not Rome-related:

So I settled Cyprus as Phoenicia and I got an Utica >_<

I hate Utica, specially from my RFCE experiences

Kition would be a somewhat suitable name for a city founded there as Phoenicia.

Anyway that's my first impression of the mod my first time around I like the religion changes so far, haven't got a game to reformation yet though.

Haha, how true. Thanks for providing me with a name as well, I'll apply it right away. Phoenician Kition, Roman Citium, Greek and Turkish Larnaka, Egyptian Kittim (actually Jewish, but it kinda fits).

By the way, the modmod is currently more geared towards the post 600 AD game, but as you see we're already working on the classical world

Also is there by chance a scripted palace change for Phoenician AI players ~the year 600BC? I think that will help Carthage focus more on the western mediterranean and also make it less vulnerable to collapse after losing Tyre.

I intend to include scripted capital changes for the next version. These I think would fit:

Makkah => Baghdad
Oslo => Stockholm
Kyoto => Edo/Tokyo
Sur => Qart-Hadasht

Did I forget anything? Oh and I don't think it would be possible to give China a different early capital, if you were thinking about that

hey i had a problem trying to extract the files...

I've never seen that kind of error, did you try to use another extracting program?

If these are the only files that couldn't be extracted and the rest is where it belongs, the modmod should already work for you. All that's missing is part of the DLL sourcecode.

On Ethiopia's UHVs, what about:

1. Found one religion (a bit iffy on that one because it really relies on luck)
2. Establish trading relations with Mediterranean and Far-East civs (either by gaining some there-exclusive resources like Silk or Spices or Marble, or by having Embassies or by Open Borders only?)
3. Ensure there's no European colonies in subsaharian Africa in 1900 AD

(instead of #1 we could have something about culture but I'm not sure how; "make Aksum the most cultured city in X" is already done by other civs, and I'm not sure Ethiopia can really compete)

I find the first goal is now rather manageable ... remember that you can always also found Protestantism should Catholicism not work.

But the idea for the second is very good, I especially like the foreign resources version.

 

[Leoreth]

Now on to Rome. As I see it, there are three possible reasons why they can't even expand to Greece:

(1) The AI simply doesn't cares enough.
(2) Rome can't produce enough units to wage its wars.
(3) Their legions are not strong enough to defeat Greek hoplites.

First of all, thanks for your brilliant suggestions, I think they are all very good. I'll still write my thoughts down as I had them without adding the respective quote (it would get messy then), I guess you still know when you're meant.

Okay, so this are the possible solutions I came up with. I don't know if we need or even should implement all of them, but most of them are equally as easy.

Roman total war against Greece
That is what I already tried. The Byzantine spawn gives a good opportunity to observe the possible situations in late antiquity, and even with the total war Rome owns one Greek city at most. So problem (1) doesn't seem to be the only thing keeping them from conquering Greece.

Make Legions more effective against Hoplites
It was already suggested here that the Greek UU might be a problem. While in general it might be a good idea to turn them into Spearmen with +50% against melee (this would mean a 8 vs. 6 for the legion), there's still nothing that stops Greece from producing Axemen. Therefore it might be a better solution to make legions stronger instead and give them +25% against the Axeman unit class, which would mean 10 vs. 7.5 against Axemen/Phalanxes.

Make legions cheaper or Rome more productive in general
I think the former shouldn't be combined with the +25% against Axemen buff, but the latter wouldn't hurt at all. As already said, it's no problem that Rome is overpowered; the European and Near Eastern spawns should take care of that.

Reduce Rome's inclination to build wonders
In many of my 330 AD starts, Rome was building three wonders simultaneously while only owning Italy and Gaul, so its not surprising they can barely cope with the Barbarians. The Romans weren't known for classical wonders anyway (most of them are in the Eastern Mediterranean), so I think not even historicity is harmed when we make them building less wonders (maybe only excepting the Flavian Amphitheatre and the Pantheon).
I just realize that all this also may be the fault of Augustus' personality.

Make Greece produce units slower or less of them
In general the same idea as above, just the other way around. Greece has quite a lot defenders, and if they would need more time to build them, could be a much easier target. The problem is of course, as already mentioned, that they could be even more overpowered should they build more wonders and survive.

Enforce more Greek expansion into the east
Another way of getting rid of Greece's defenders. The basic idea is that they lose more units and have to spread out their empire more. Alex also likes to build many units, but doesn't start a war to use them. That would have the positive side effect of even more historicity. I just don't know if that's possible. Maybe the solution is to get rid of the "continent barrier" that troubles the AI so much.

New Roman UP
While I personally like the current UP, it's not that powerful. A replacement could help them with expansion. Ideas:

The Power of Conquests: could be some variation of the former Mongol UP.
- city conquest flips surrounding cities in the area OR
- conquest of capital flips the entire core area (only for Mediterranean civs)

The Power of Legions:
- can draft units (would the AI use it?)
- city conquest or a certain amount of defeated enemy units spawns a legion in your capital

Less Barbarian pressure before 300 AD, but more afterwards
I intend to redo the Barbarians anyway (Mali and India definitely need more pressure), so that could be part of it. Also makes sense from a historical perspective.

Construction on spawn
More catapults means more conquests. And what are Romans without siege engines?

If anything of that would make Rome overpowered, I think it wouldn't be a problem. A powerful AI is always good for the game, and a more powerful player only needs a more difficult challenge

/discuss

 

[kairob]

I like all of these ideas.

 

[Leoreth]

Added the free construction possibility.

My question is more: would all of it be too much? And if you're in favor of a new UP, which one?

 

[AdrienIer]

I think that Rome is not nearly as powerful as it should be and as it was historically, so giving them an overpowered UP is definitely better than their current good but underpowered one. What about a "free" draft each turn until 400AD, of a special unit (not legion which would be really overpowered, but maybe some auxiliary unit with 5-6 strength and no bonus). It would provoke Rome to produce at least a unit per turn in its historical era and the AI would definitely use it (it's free... if it doesn't then there's nothing we can do).

 

[Leoreth]

I don't know if I can add a draft that circumvents the usual drafting rules (it costs population and happiness), though.

Edit: I guess I'll start with free construction, less wonders, better legions vs. axemen and less barbarians. Will be interesting to see the effects.

 

[AdrienIer]

or just a new unit that costs 1 and that can only be built in one city at a time. But your changes will probably be good enough.

 

[kairob]

I think that giving them too much and then taking some away in needed would be better so I would vote in favour of adding as many of these as possible.

In terms of the UP I think that the Drafting is the best idea personally, I don't think costing happiness and population would be a problem, but would it be possible to be a special unit instead of something useless like archers.

Also one problem I see in almost every AI war is that the AI just sits in the first city it has conquered for quite a while before going for the next city. I have three theories for this.
a)they might not know where the next city is?
b)they are waiting for the revolt to end?
c)they are waiting for the units to heal?

Whichever it is if we can solve it then AI wars should be far more fruitful.

 

[Jusos2108]

I personally like the free unit for every fifth (or so) unit killed UP the best.

 

[KMRblue1027]

The Roman UP is so good why would you like to ditch it? After engineering the road movement is at 6 which is close to RRs. The only UPs I think are better are the German on (So helpful for late game.) and the American one (Super OP but makes since.)

 

[kairob]

we would try to replace it because we do not think that it is so good. Ok from time to time it is mildly useful being able to get somewhere one or two turns faster if you are caught unaware by barbs or a war declaration but in general easier access to troops would provide a superior advantage.

 

[AdrienIer]

I think I disagree on the fact that its one of the best UPs : the French one is useful, the Indian one is one of my favorites, the Mayan one is just incredible (but normal since they would be so crappy without it) and the greek one is just perfect. I might even add the Russian one with those and the money you get from pillaging as Viking (50+ for one mine) is such a relief for your economy. The Roman road movement is nice, but since their land is stretched across the Mediterranean it's not that great. It dosen't help galleys go any faster. Also, why would roman roads be an "only roman" feature while the aqueducts are there for all civs ? With construction there could be a new type of road called paved road that would give 1/3 mvt per turn, only buildable in Europe.
Last point, even though the French UP is useful, it dosen't really represent anything historically (in Europe at least), France being one of the most warmongering nation in history. Why not "start at peace with natives and have better relationship with the civs outside Europe" ?

By the way, I'm getting tired of seeing the Mayans conquer/vassalize/weaken very strongly the Aztecs in most games in the 3000BC start. Could you do something about it ? Their greater tech rate makes them strong enough in 1200 to beat the Aztecs. Or does your recent feature that lowers stability of civs who live longer then there real selves correct that already ?

 

[Ekolite]

What about replacing the Roman UB with Roman roads at Construction instead? That would mix things up a bit and open up the slot for a new UHV. What's more, the roads would still be usable when the Europeans spawn which is quite realistic.

 

[AdrienIer]

Would it replace anything ? Or would it be a UB that's a totally new building, which would be... really unique !

 

[kairob]

I think it would replace regular roads?
A UB that is a worker improvement is pretty intriguing and I don't quite know if I like it or not yet...

 

[Opera]

I really like the idea of gaining Legions with fighting. Either with killed units or (my personal pick) with city conquests; after all Rome included a lot of the people it conquered into its own armies IIRC. Spawning in capital is good too...

... Especially combined with unique roads that would allow a very quick way to reinforce a front.

Also, the foreign resources thing for Ethiopia is my favorite as well
Note that the #1 said "NO" before Protestantism was even founded in my game... Right when Islam had been founded, it said I'd failed.

 

[Llama231]

Is it possible to make Greece colonize the Mediterranean more?

 

[Leoreth]

Also, the foreign resources thing for Ethiopia is my favorite as well
Note that the #1 said "NO" before Protestantism was even founded in my game... Right when Islam had been founded, it said I'd failed.

Oh, sorry, there you see how much I claim without even playing the civ or even checking the code

The game still assumed that Islam was the last possible religion for them, and set their goal to NO directly after it's founded. It's fixed now.

Is it possible to make Greece colonize the Mediterranean more?

What would you like to see? I think as far as Massilia doesn't make much sense, but maybe I can get them to go to Cyrenaica or at least Anatolia more. I suppose the barrier here is the Europe/Asia/Africa barrier.

On the Romans: good to see all your comments on them. While I'd also pity to lose the current UP, it's not as strategically useful as it should be in theory. But the code is already there, so we don't have to get rid of it completely. I don't know if tile improvements can work as a UP, but maybe we can implement it with a wonder? "Via Appia" or even more generic "Highway system" for example ...

 

[kairob]

I had an idea last night about adding in a new continent for the Mediterranean.


The attached pic shows it in several stages.
Red, 3000bc -> ~500bc, shows iit in early antiquity
Blue, 500bc - 500ad shows it during the late antiquity
Yellow shows it from 500ad to the mid 19th century and the scramble for Africa
Lastly the green shows the dissolution of the Mediterranean continent with its last pieces being absorbed into Asia and Africa

I chose dates and borders that I thought were appropriate, such as;
The Indus being the border from Asia and the Med as very few empires went very far in both directions.
Siberia in Europe might help Russia and stop the Mongolia settling there.
the Sudan/Ethiopia reason is the same as for the Indus
Germany is included in the Roman time-frame for two reasons; to give the barbs somewhere to come from (I don't know if they get confused by the continent borders or not) and because the romans did try to pacify that region.

 

[jammerculture]

These are imo after playing probably close to 50 starts as classical civs, the barriers to a realistic classical period in general, and if you are thinking about tackling Rome, you really need to deal with the whole period in general, in order to make it work the best.

-Babylon too strong, lives to long. Persia and Greece rarely become neighbors which means they rarely are in conflict. This is also effected by:
-Phoenicia does not act properly. The AI civ should be actively colonizing the mediterranean and Anatolian coast more. As well, they need to move their capital and hence their focus from the east to north Africa

What often happens, is this sort of buffer zone exists between the west and the East made up of Sur, Jerusalem, Babylon, Gordion. Often times these will be under a too strong Babylon, or a collection of Independants. Because of this Persia rarely expands into this area, comes into conflict with Greece, to ultimately weaken them for Rome. Instead these three regions (Perisa, Rome and Greece) only interact with the "buffer" neighbors.

-A combination of movement speed and production times make it difficult for Rome to cover the distance it needs to on the map.

My suggestions to fix this:

Persia and Greece need to be more interested in the Levant. Something needs to draw Greece east and Persia west. Perhaps just using relationship modifiers with each other might help to get them fighting more.

Rome needs to be more expansionist. this is tough due to production and distance. As well the AI doesn't seem to like sending troops overseas. I think Phoenicia is key to fixing this. If Rome was coded for Total war with Phoenicia, and Phoenicia was coded to found more cities, then this would force Rome out into the world. I like the idea of UP being gain an army (2 Legions and two catapults maybe) when you conquer a city in a new continent. this kills both birds with one stone, as when you conquer your first African and Mid Eastern city, you are given troops, at that city (maybe after revolt). the AI will not send them home, they will use them in that area, which will guarantee expansion. As well, in effect you are gaining free hammers, and free movement, which is like free turns, effectively lengthening the time-frame for conquest.

Combined this with a more antagonistic Greece/Persia relationship which would turn Greece's interest and military strength east, and we might have the possibility of the AI functioning more historically.

The other barrier is the barbarians. In my experience as playing Rome the barbarians are a little excessive. In particular, they come at you from too many angles. If you have sufficient troops to deter them, they just mass on your borders. The larger your empire, the more "focal" points to barbarian activity their are. These are: France from two directions, northern Greece, Anatolia, North Africa. The problem is every time you expand, you create another front where barbarians mass outside your borders. Eventually one front will be overwhelmed and you have to move troops to fill the void and then your swamped. It is very hard to expand when you are this pressed to defend. In history Rome had lots of barbarian enemies but these were always something that came at Rome from outside of Rome. In RFC the way the barbarians spawn does not reflect this. You can have barbarian spawns from inside your front lines. I have played a few games as Rome where my goal was to completely subdue France and Spain, and then just guard the Rhone and Danube frontier. It does not work. Spain is always the dagger at your back. Could this be tied to stability maybe?

I have always thought barbarians should fight each other. This would be realistic and help this problem out without being too deterministic (lessening the spawns). So in some games the barbs would be more united, in others divisions outside your borders would help you out. Would it be possible to have barbarian stacks be hostile to other barbarian stacks?