Development thread for 1.5

[AbsintheRed]

okay, I fired up the SVN again, it downloaded a single file (40kb) and told me I'm at 1263, so either that was a display-bug earlier or there havent been any large changes since 1226^^.

Did you check the changelog?? Did you even take a glance at it??

You start with a huge army (I already disbanded 5 or 6 units and still had something like 8 or 10 decent offensive units left, not counting city defenders). And it seems you're not allowed to do literally anything with it (because it takes >100 years to properly develop your lands so you can actually take cities from Cordoba, it seems). I'd recommend scaling down their starting units and maybe instead increasing their growth and give them possibly a settler more.

Umm, Morocco starts with 2 Maceman and 2 Armored Lancers. All the rest are defensive and civilian units.

Tried a game with Scotland to compare. And they can seemingly just do what they want. I conquered and razed and conquered and yet my stability was always +10 or higher. However, there I ran in the issue that France wouldn't sign a defensive pact with me "because my lands are too far away". Awesomesauce. And they vasallized England around 1200 AD. Despite me playing like their little lapdog (selling them 7+ resources, being on "friendly" since before 1100AD and joining every war of theirs within 1-2 turns) I was only at around 1000 relation points with them in 1500 AD. Also, what's the point of building the forts? I mean it's cool that they have a unique goal, but...I just dont get why I should use my workers to essentially do nothing for half a century.
Also weird: I had countries declare war on me for seemingly no reason at all. Countries like Genoa or Arabia, that really have no interest in my lands, at all. Not that it was an issue, they never sent any units my way (except maybe a single ship), but it just felt weird.

The Scottish Auld Alliance UHV isn't perfect. Will be improved in some form for the next version.

Either way, maybe it's just me, I dont seem to have as much fun playing this mod as I used to. And compared to games like EU4 the limitations of the civ-engine start to show here and there.

Well, the mod only improved in the past period, mainly for the needs of the players.
Also most mechanics you are questioning origin from vanilla RFC.
So if you loved the mod and played it a lot, they surely didn't disturb you before.

 

[Chep]

regarding the changelog: of course I did, the first time I updated from my old version, it downloaded several hundred megabytes (or at least something in that neighbourhood). but afterwards it told me that I was "up to date" and that the SVN was 1226, I assume now that this was the "first" one it had downloaded and not the last one and have no idea why it would do that, but either way, I was playing on a current version, as indicated by me trying to update again and only getting the 1263-changelog. I probably should have made that clearer instead of failing at making a joke about it.

Regarding the Moroccan units: yeah you got those 4 plus another 3-4 when Cordoba declares war plus the ones in the 2 cities that flip to you plus some more Crossbowmen than you need for defense (since you'll generally flip some spearmen/archers as well). Considering you're not supposed to invade the Iberian peninsula early on, then why start with those 4 units at all? If Cordoba doesnt declare war you dont need them and if they do, you get more anyway. It seems this "power budget" would be better spent to give them another settler or so instead. (again, this is what I tried to say last time but apparently failed at conveying)

And I'm sorry, I didn't mean to attack this awesome mod that you (and others) have spent so much time and effort and what the Germans call "herzblut" on. I still think it's the best Civ4 has ever been (with RFC: DoC slightly behind it). I just think my love for Civ4 has dimmed somewhat over time and after playing newer, somewhat similar games. And while I still enjoy many things about this mod, it seems that every time I try something "new" (as opposed to for example another Kiev/Byz run, those have always been fun and still are), I run into some issues that are part my approach and part balance problems.

I still love RFCE, but I feel like I've already done everything there is, over and over again. Maybe some sort of contest could change that, but then basically no one participated in the Kievan challenge either back in the day. I'm sorry.

 

[AbsintheRed]

regarding the changelog: of course I did, the first time I updated from my old version, it downloaded several hundred megabytes (or at least something in that neighbourhood). but afterwards it told me that I was "up to date" and that the SVN was 1226, I assume now that this was the "first" one it had downloaded and not the last one and have no idea why it would do that, but either way, I was playing on a current version, as indicated by me trying to update again and only getting the 1263-changelog. I probably should have made that clearer instead of failing at making a joke about it.

Ohh, okay. No worries.

Regarding the Moroccan units: yeah you got those 4 plus another 3-4 when Cordoba declares war plus the ones in the 2 cities that flip to you plus some more Crossbowmen than you need for defense (since you'll generally flip some spearmen/archers as well). Considering you're not supposed to invade the Iberian peninsula early on, then why start with those 4 units at all? If Cordoba doesnt declare war you dont need them and if they do, you get more anyway. It seems this "power budget" would be better spent to give them another settler or so instead. (again, this is what I tried to say last time but apparently failed at conveying)

Yeah, it's one of the mechanics from vanilla RFC I meant in the last post. Adding extra units if there is an additional war declaration in the first turns.
Actually I was thinking about removing it altogether. Or at least change it so it's only applied for AI civs, mainly against the human player.

And I'm sorry, I didn't mean to attack this awesome mod that you (and others) have spent so much time and effort and what the Germans call "herzblut" on. I still think it's the best Civ4 has ever been (with RFC: DoC slightly behind it). I just think my love for Civ4 has dimmed somewhat over time and after playing newer, somewhat similar games. And while I still enjoy many things about this mod, it seems that every time I try something "new" (as opposed to for example another Kiev/Byz run, those have always been fun and still are), I run into some issues that are part my approach and part balance problems.

Thanks!
Well, even BtS is almost 10 years old now.
It's still one of the best (if not the best) strategy games till now. Surely not in every aspect, but in many important ones.
I do beleive modding Civ IV still has a long future. Up until a worthy successor is made, with the same modding possibilities.
Right now, the only thing I envy from Civ V and VI are the hexes. Everything else is either already better here, or can be made better with the wonderful level of modding access.

I still love RFCE, but I feel like I've already done everything there is, over and over again. Maybe some sort of contest could change that, but then basically no one participated in the Kievan challenge either back in the day. I'm sorry.

I would love to see a couple more challenge threads up!

 

[Swarbs]

Regarding the Moroccan units: yeah you got those 4 plus another 3-4 when Cordoba declares war plus the ones in the 2 cities that flip to you plus some more Crossbowmen than you need for defense (since you'll generally flip some spearmen/archers as well). Considering you're not supposed to invade the Iberian peninsula early on, then why start with those 4 units at all? If Cordoba doesnt declare war you dont need them and if they do, you get more anyway. It seems this "power budget" would be better spent to give them another settler or so instead. (again, this is what I tried to say last time but apparently failed at conveying)

Use them to take the cities in the Magreb. In conquering as far as Tunis you will build up their experience ready for the invasion, and also accumulate the happiness and health resources needed to avoid instability when you invade Iberia. Also if you don't move east early then Arabia may colonise Ifriqiyah and make the UHV impossible.

If you want to hit Cordoba hard in the early game, do it slowly. One city at a time, not trying to rush them before you are ready. Just grabbing Malaqah then making peace is a good early strategy, as you establish a foothold and by the time you attack it will have enough culture, health and happiness to not be a big stability burden any more. Then at the next DOW go straight for Cordoba and collapse them at which point you can clean up at leisure. You have 200 years to do it, so don't need to rush straight for Iberia in the first 50 years or so.

 

[AbsintheRed]

I would love to see a couple more challenge threads up!

@Chep
Btw, we had a Viking points challenge thread, not sure if you saw it.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/norwegian-viking-uhv-challenge.566941/

But as I said, I would love it if a couple more were created.
We have lot's of "achieve by" UHVs, some of them might also work as a challenge.

 

[cmakk1012]

@Chep
Btw, we had a Viking points challenge thread, not sure if you saw it.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/norwegian-viking-uhv-challenge.566941/

But as I said, I would love it if a couple more were created.
We have lot's of "achieve by" UHVs, some of them might also work as a challenge.

What about a "Victory Challenge" thread? I actually came pretty close to Domination as France with a mega Arabia vassal once, I'm curious if any civ besides France could do it. I'm sure Cultural Victory is doable as well...

 

[AbsintheRed]

Sure, anyone can start whatever thread he/she feels like.
DoC even had various game threads for example (quite a few actually). From elimination threads (Civ/UP/UU/UB/UHV just to mention a couple examples) to many other fun forum threads.
For some reason those never appeared for RFCE, but I wouldn't mind them at all.
It actually has some benefits from a modding point of view too, with getting a more clear sight what's the more popular stuff for the players.

 

[Chep]

I'm currently playing a game as Cordoba and while it's rather easy (though the sheer amount of mounted sergeants made things dicey for a while), I once again found stability to be somewhat weird.

I had decently positive stability (+6 or 9 or so) when the Portuguese spawned which for some reason lowered my stability to -1, no biggie.

HOWEVER, this caused a "Spanish uprising" which I managed to quell but which made about half of my cities (4 or 5) rebel for 2 turns - which lowered my stability to -20, As a result I had 4 cities declare their independence and the turn they did I had +8 stability (despite still having a -11 swing), two turns after they did I was already above +16.

I really think the declarations of independence come a bit too quickly. It's not a huge issue for my run but for countries with a tougher midgame this would be unsurmountable, I fear.

 

[AbsintheRed]

I had decently positive stability (+6 or 9 or so) when the Portuguese spawned which for some reason lowered my stability to -1, no biggie.

That's intended. Some of your provinces were changed from historical to contested.

HOWEVER, this caused a "Spanish uprising" which I managed to quell but which made about half of my cities (4 or 5) rebel for 2 turns - which lowered my stability to -20, As a result I had 4 cities declare their independence and the turn they did I had +8 stability (despite still having a -11 swing), two turns after they did I was already above +16.

I really think the declarations of independence come a bit too quickly. It's not a huge issue for my run but for countries with a tougher midgame this would be unsurmountable, I fear.

Yeah, once again you were rather unlucky if a Spanish uprising happened right away, before you could consolidate your stability.
On the other hand it's historically plausible this way, so maybe it's not an issue after all.

The other part is direct consequence of the unsuccessful uprising.
Even though a full Spanish civ didn't born again, those cities were revolting for a while, which resulted in instability, which in turn led to some cities seceding your rule.
Once again, I find this fairly realistic.

Having said that, I agree with you that it could be made better from a gameplay point of view.
4 city secessions in a couple turns is quite frustrating, no matter what are the circumstances.

 

[DC123456789]

Well, I don't think players would mind city secessions as much if it wasn't so costly to reconquer them (i.e. in terms of stability - all the independent culture you now have - and all the buildings you lose).

 

[gilgames]

Well, I don't think players would mind city secessions as much if it wasn't so costly to reconquer them (i.e. in terms of stability - all the independent culture you now have - and all the buildings you lose).

Precisely

 

[AbsintheRed]

Well, I don't think players would mind city secessions as much if it wasn't so costly to reconquer them (i.e. in terms of stability - all the independent culture you now have - and all the buildings you lose).

Yeah, revising some of the culture-related mechanics are scheduled for the next version.
As of buildings: will double check it, but IIRC none are removed on the city secession itself. They are removed on the start of the revolt/resistance when you conquer the city back.
Unfortunately I can't really have separate rules for conquering recently seceded cities.
(not without adding otherwise unnecessary counters and checks in the background, for all city secessions and all conquests)

On the other hand improving culture change rules on the city flip might solve this too.
I'm not really sure about the values for it in the vanilla mechanics, but I remember that if your culture is high enough in a city, you conquer it revolt-free.

 

[DC123456789]

If that's the case then retaining some of your culture in cities that have seceded should resolve much of the gripe about it.

 

[AbsintheRed]

If that's the case then retaining some of your culture in cities that have seceded should resolve much of the gripe about it.

Yep, that's what I meant.
Not yet sure about how big percent of your culture should stay, it might have some strange effects on the plot culture system.
(city culture is actually semi-independent from plot culture in Civ IV)

 

[gilgames]

I tell you how much! 100% !!!!
Just imagine! a single city revolt against it's empire, and go indy. If that empire is france i.e. and lets say founded a city in north-Saxony (out of flip zone) then they goes indy due to stability. Then they are still 100% french ppl. And later they should revolt back, when stability allows it! and let the indy civ struggle with my culture, instead of they go indy and become 100% indy in 1 turn! thats absurd.

The compromise solution might be to lose own culture in the city by every turn. I would say 50 turns sounds good. so in 5 turns (average time take back ur city) you loose only 10% culture.
Only an "abandoned" city will become real indy on the long run. IMO

 

[AbsintheRed]

I tell you how much! 100% !!!!
Just imagine! a single city revolt against it's empire, and go indy. If that empire is france i.e. and lets say founded a city in north-Saxony (out of flip zone) then they goes indy due to stability. Then they are still 100% french ppl. And later they should revolt back, when stability allows it! and let the indy civ struggle with my culture, instead of they go indy and become 100% indy in 1 turn! thats absurd.

The compromise solution might be to lose own culture in the city by every turn. I would say 50 turns sounds good. so in 5 turns (average time take back ur city) you loose only 10% culture.
Only an "abandoned" city will become real indy on the long run. IMO

First of all, percentage in indy cities can't really show population. I can only see it as the loyalty level to your rule in those areas.
If a city goes indy in, the population doesn't suddenly change.
So it's going 100% indy only means that they are entirely independent from your rule, with all people wanting it.
Obviously this is not a perfect representation given how the culture generation mechanics work, but I don't think we can have anything better with the culture ruleset we have in Civ IV.

More imporantly, leaving the indy city with 100% percent of the original civ would have many unwanted consequences.
The original cultural borders would dominate the city right away.
City flips back to the original civ would occur every couple turns.

 

[cmakk1012]

Could there be a special event to make an Indy city regain your culture if you reconquer it? So it's 100% Indy on breaking away but if you take it back within a certain number of turns it turns 50/50?

 

[AbsintheRed]

Could there be a special event to make an Indy city regain your culture if you reconquer it? So it's 100% Indy on breaking away but if you take it back within a certain number of turns it turns 50/50?

Actually that's what I meant here:

Unfortunately I can't really have separate rules for conquering recently seceded cities.
(not without adding otherwise unnecessary counters and checks in the background, for all city secessions and all conquests)

Would need to add some variables and related turn counters to all cities. With lot's of additional checks, including some for all city ownership changes.
That's probably not worth it for a special ruleset like this (performance-wise).

Will see what can be done without adding specific stuff like that.
I'm fairly optimistic that it can be improved within the vanilla culture/conquest ruleset.

 

[Swarbs]

Would need to add some variables and related turn counters to all cities. With lot's of additional checks, including some for all city ownership changes.
That's probably not worth it for a special ruleset like this (performance-wise).

Will see what can be done without adding specific stuff like that.
I'm fairly optimistic that it can be improved within the vanilla culture/conquest ruleset.

SOI has an option on conquering a city to massacre all the heathens, which removes foreign religions from the city at the cost of halving the population. Could there an option in RFCE when capturing an indy city to 'drive out the rebels', which reduces the level of independent culture in a city at the cost of halving the population?

Potentially it could be done with any indy city, to reflect the tendency for some conquering empires to drive out indigent population and resettle their own people.

 

[dmd175]

The Scottish Auld Alliance UHV isn't perfect. Will be improved in some form for the next version.

I love RFCE. I have been playing it for 2 solid months.

Got around to Scotland this week. Thought it would be fun to "replace" William (analogous to the Burgundian French, Cordobans, etc). Scotland was hard - limited cities spots, little land, and poor land (moor, etc). Every other game I can guide my nation to the top and this time not so much. At least the mercs are good

Spoiler merc :

.

Maybe Scotland was intended in-game to maintain their Auld Alliance (until they need to take Bretagne) and not rocket to the top.

Others have commented on the forts requirement for UHV #1. It did feel like workers were doing idle tasks. But I learned - others correct me - a salt mine on the Isle of Man doesn't give salt but a fort did put it into my available resources. Forts did shave off a few turns for boats to cross.

Mainly though, the Auld Alliance is a super tough UHV, as others mentioned.
From start to 1560 you have 210 turns.

Assuming France doesn't collapse (and I was lucky, I had the biggest France in-game I've ever seen, conquering Burgundy, northern Germany, parts of Spain/Aragon), you have
2 points max good relations and 1 OB x 210 = 630 points.

Defensive pacts only are around for ~75 turns of the allotted time = 150 more points
Moreover, you can't sign a defensive pact in general because "your land is too far away". I had to conquer London (red stability zone) to get some tiles by France-proper.

Even if you have 9 resources traded, that is 3 ppt = 600 points.
(in general you can trade sheep, barley, honey, copper to France, for hopefully 4 of their resources in return, but note the barley, honey, copper will be your only sources).

So this 1380 points, best case.
Which means you need 1120 points from mutual wars, or 2 ppt for that, so you need 560 turns of mutual war. You will get some of that from England, in general this means you have to be at mutual war with at least 2.5 civilizations for the entire game from spawn to 1560.

With 100 turns to go to UHV #2 I was at 671 (I had mutual wars with Norway, England, Denmark) solely for the purpose of appeasing France.

I didn't want to repeat this, and facing certain failure, I resorted to WB to bring France in to war against everyone I declared on, submitted here for a chuckle.

Spoiler france :

Perhaps the next version (I realize RFCE 1.5 is just out) could center on net relationship points added per turn. E.g. above I have a +13 with France (still seemingly low after giving them resources, gold, etc). But +2/turn for good relations is maybe not enough, and we can reward the player for bumping this ratio up to cement the alliance. Some discussions focus on 1000 or 1500 which I think is more reasonable (especially consider in most games I have played France has collapsed).

Thanks again for RFCE