Dawn of Civilization General Discussion

[DanLT3]

The holy mountain quest is a hard one for all religions. I finally managed to complete one.
Such a poor reward for such a hard quest.
1+ happyness in all cities for x turns.
I expected more...

 

[Strijder21]

Some experiences from my China game:

• Apparently it is possible for the Viking AI to get Gunpowder by 1050 AD. This seems a bit on the quick side - it's a T3 Medieval era technology.
• Seljuk, Mongolian and Ottoman invasion of the Middle East and Anatolia seems to work great.
• Tech speed of the tech leaders seems to be fine late game (eighteenth century), but the laggers fall more and more behind, even with me handing out technology for a penny and a nickel. Maybe it would be possible to speed up tech diffusion for techs of a given era if you have open borders with a civilization which is two eras ahead, and increasing this for friendly relations, being even more eras ahead, physical bordering and defensive pacts? This mechanic seems hard to exploit by the player (on the receiving end), because it requires falling behind about 20 technologies.

Oh, that's a good point. I am not sure if the game already treats declarations of war due to defensive pacts differently than active declarations, but I think they should, especially under RFC rules. I think they should be completely ignored, the penalties for actually being at war, and for being friendly with their enemy via the defensive pact, are negative modifiers enough.

To expand on this: wouldn't it also be a good idea to let various negative modifiers decay slowly (in particular the 'You refused trading with our worst enemy!' or 'You refused to help us in war!' ones, but possibly also war declarations)? In the RFC context, it makes sense for a civilization to hold a grudge over one era, but less so for Modern Era France to despite Austria for the medieval war they held.

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, BtS makes a lot of modifiers stick around forever and I don't like that, but I would rather adapt Advanced Civ's changes in that area rather than reinventing the wheel.

 

[Hickman888]

The Civilopedia for the Portuguese Bandeirante states that he is "Guaranteed to capture slaves". In my opinion, I think this power should be expanded so that he is always guaranteed to capture slaves, even if Portugal is not running either Slavery or Colonialism. The reasoning behind my thoughts is the fact that the Colonialism civic, unlocked at Geography, comes fairly late in the historical Portuguese game, so the player is hardly able to utilize this ability (unless the player were to ahistorically adopt Slavery). In my Portuguese game, for example, I didn't get to adopt Colonialism until after 1650, and only had the time to use one slave plantation. Additionally, the Portuguese historical game comes at you fast and hard, with every turn between Cartography and 1700 AD being valuable. With so few turns to hook up the resources, and with so many of those resources being found on Rainforests (and thus taking longer to improve), the value of putting down a slave plantation instead of using several worker turns to improve it becomes obvious.
I think this little change would incentivize the player to train and use several Bandeirantes in a strategic way that is helpful to Portugal's 2nd goal.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

I'm also playing as China, starting in the 1700 AD scenario and intending to win a Space Race or anything else. Do I ask for something too absurd? Because IIRC China has a technological disadvantage starting with the Renaissance.

Also, how do I compete with the Brits technologically? Because they're way too ahead as usual and I intend to take away all of their cities in India except for one which I'll use for espionage.

 

[hnrysml]

In regards to the most recent update I think that while it makes sense for Trafalgar Square to not be built on an inland sea port, it seems wrong to me that "Lighthouse, Wharf, Customs House, Container Terminal (and by extension, Trafalgar Square) cannot be built at the Caspian Sea" as all these forms of coastal infrastructure exist in multiple ports on the Caspian Sea, such as in Baku, Astrakhan, and Bandar-e Anzali. The Caspian is linked to global maritime trade through the Don and Volga river systems. Perhaps the limitations of lakes could be changed to exclude only naval military units and buildings, as the advantages to commerce of developing a city on a significant body of water apply whether or not that water is oceanic or not.

 

[Leoreth]

They are in modern times, yeah. Not really equivalent to direct access to the global oceans, especially for most of the game's time period.

 

[hnrysml]

That's mostly true. Because I am sure you will find it interesting (not to push this agenda any further), I'm including the following I am reading in 10th century Persian geography book Ḥudūd al-ʿĀlam, from which I am inferring that there was lots of maritime trade as there are references to piracy "a horde (gurūh) of Ghūz Turks who have settled there loot (duzdī) on land and sea."; luxury goods production and export from an island in the Caspian: "It produces rūyan (madder, rūnās) exported to all the world and used by the dyers"; and the important of maritime trade to the Khazars: "The well-being (ni'mat) and wealth of the king (mlk, *malik or *mulk?) of the Khazars are mostly from the maritime customs (bāz-i daryā)."

 

[Strijder21]

I think vassal land should count (entirely) towards the first Persian UHV goal. Vassalisation and satrapies were kind of their thing, and their tech path is geared towards taking Contract. The 7% land goal is also quite hard and would not become trivial by making this change.

 

[black213]

The stability changes had some interesting side effects. In my first game of the new patch Rome and Greece were still around in the renaissance era. While it's refreshing to see it happen without human intervention for once, I do assume this is not intended.

 

[1SDANi]

The stability changes had some interesting side effects. In my first game of the new patch Rome and Greece were still around in the renaissance era. While it's refreshing to see it happen without human intervention for once, I do assume this is not intended.

Gonna need more than just 1 game's worth of data.

 

[troubleshooting]

Can confirm. Played a Thailand game from 3000 BC, Rome, Greece, and Mongolia all never collapsed. Mongolia was far and away the score leader, having vassalized China & Korea, and wiped me out shortly before 1900.

 

[1SDANi]

I just played an egypt game until 1200 AD, Rome and Carthage were still alive, but Greece had collapsed around 600 AD

 

[Leoreth]

I'm already looking into that.

 

[Gritzeldrei]

Can confirm the Carthage though.

In nearly all of my games, Carthage would always survive even until the 2020 end.

 

[Force44]

Could great generals be awarded on a linear scale to promote different kind of applications?

EG one great general for your first army and two great generals for your second army etc.
(also one great general for your first armory, two for your second etc.)

 

[Strijder21]

The Tamil victory is too easy. To be honest, both the first and goal could benefit from simply getting higher thresholds (two GMs is enough to get the second goal met - I achieved it in 750 AD when I popped my first one).

 

[LukeAtmey]

Hi,

I read from the Git updates thread the following:

"- other civilisations are a lot less likely to agree when European civs demand to reclaim a former American colony from a postcolonial civilisation (and they make those claims more rarely accordingly)"

This is great and a very welcome change. However, I wanted to ask if it could be clarified whether this also means the New World civilizations are also more likely to get their demands through when claiming cities like St John's or some Caribbean cities which do not flip on spawn but are included in the historical area of some New World civs?

 

[Leoreth]

No change in that regard, but they are already able to claim those cities if they are in their historical area. It may be more likely to get approved now because I removed some logic that made civs from other continents stick together when voting on claims on faraway cities.

 

[Zaddy]

Maybe an issue with the stability changes still: I have tried two Russia games, both of which have been blocked by a stable, 25-city Mongolia which controls about 50% of the world's military power and is a tech leader. I'm entering 1600 and they show little sign of slowing down. I have never observed Mongolia not collapsing before the latest stability changes. Perhaps a coincidence, perhaps not.