Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Nov 19, 2015.
Yeah, and with all the buffs to vassalage, there is no reason to use meritocracy for anyone either.
Yeah, Isolationism is awkward as it tends to kill your economy. Regardless of real life accuracy, it makes for a civic that isn't very great. Honestly, the +1 commerce per specialist Meritocracy got may have been better off given to Isolationism to represent the economic shift from outward trade to inward production.
Why not just to double the revenue from internal trade roads? You can then use it when you are at war or when yoour trading partners went isolationist and you lack other options.
Isolationism removes the foreign stability penalty and you still get trade routes from your vassals so I think it's quite useful.
I did not know that. That's actually pretty cool. Does the AI know how to take advantage of the stability removal?
I recommend taking a look at the stability influence factors section in the civilopedia, it helps a ton if you know this kind of stuff. You can easily get a huge stability bonus from monarchy/manoralism/monasticism, clergy or theocracy/vassalage/regulated trade/tributaries in the medieval era, then switch to centralism and isolationism in the renaissance and boom your stability is in the skies. Your economy obviously won't be doing too well but it'll be almost impossible to collapse you. I don't think the AI knows that though, it usually makes really poor decisions when it comes to choosing civics.
Not sure if this is a bug or not, but I thought collapses and city breakaways weren't supposed to happen while you are in a golden age?
I think that only applies to cities going Independent, not resurrecting civs.
Is it really possible to release your vassals?
I know it is possible to release cities on non-historic tiles (sometimes) via F1-screen (orange fist symbol), but war vassals?
I suggest adding a 100%-200% trade route yield modifier to Isolationism. I think this would compensate well for the loss of valuable income from foreign routes. As a science-oriented Civ player, I tend to shy away from Isolationism due to the loss of lucrative foreign trade. If even 100% is too powerful, maybe just 50%?
Is there a particular reason why razing cities is no longer instantaneous?
hospitaller/ I believe isolationism already has +1 specialist? Since it gives vast stability boosts, there should be some economical trade offs after all.
Oblyvion/ Perhaps for more reality?
Just finished a Prussia game, late game is amazingly fun if you are the industrial/military superpower Germany is supposed to be.
Considered going full fascist but I had already nearly finished off Russia (which was the last one remaining of the Lebensraum victory condition)
so I decided to go full democratic instead.
God bless the Federal Republic of Germany.
--note: Iran is definitely not the unexpected superpower they used to be, but the balance of power in the region still leans heavily towards them. The Ottomans are extremely unstable and weak roughly after the end of the renaissance era, perhaps due to their lack of a good cottage economy. Do you think they need a buff so they can make a small comeback as the Republic of Turkey?
Hm I'd like to discuss the balance situation of Ottoman Turkey in general. The times where a runaway Ottoman Empire becomes the undisputed research or military leader seem to be over, now it seems to be half and half for an Ottoman Empire of significant power and a very weak one. I don't know why that is at the moment, though.
Is it true that Lumbermil on Forest erases 50% defense bonus?
Any improvement does.
Thank you. Another question: Brazil starts with Nationhood and Slavery -- mutually exclusive civics. One cannot use Slaves under Nationhood, perhaps set them on Colonialism instead? Also, the main focus of the bandeirantes' earlier missions was to enslave native populations. But we have no native population in South America. Brazil's second UU is guaranteed to capture slaves, but from where? No Natives on their continent, should we send them to Africa? Perhaps captured Portuguese Workers can turn to slaves? Someone was working in Brazil just before Brazilian civ spawn -- for all we know these could have been Native people or Black Africans, who look like workers. Slavery within the African Portuguese colonies, was abolished in 1869. In Brazil, which had become independent from Portugal in 1822, slavery was finally abolished in 1888. If Congo collapses (like it often does) how can Brazilian player acomplish their UHV without Slaves and n possibility to create some?
Good point about the civics. Bandeirantes are the Portuguese UU though.
Oh, silly me, some of them flipped to me and I did not pay attention. Still cannot get used to idea that some civs have 2 UUs and some just 1. But problem still remains: no slaves around. And thus no slave plantations. Some kind of better and more elegant slave mechanics desperately needed. Other Europeans may have 1 or 2 Slaves laying around, but it is very luck based. Sub Saharan civs more often then not are vanished before you contact them. Building a city in Africa and hoping for Natives is very ahistorical. Perhaps pillaging non-European improvements in Sub Saharan Africa can result in creation of a slave? Not entirely elegant but at least one can send some units as slavers to pillage Indy tiles and recover some forced labor? Indeed, what happens to the population when you pillage a Village? You get some gold but also capture some people.
That's a good solution, let me think about it. Probably won't make it into 1.16 though.
Separate names with a comma.