DoC v1.15 Changelog

Leoreth

Bofurin
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
38,035
Location
風鈴高等学校
I have compiled a complete list of changes made in v1.15 for everyone who is interested in what has changed. This is by far the longest changelog of any DoC version (almost 13 pages), so even though I have been working on 1.15 for a long time it was time well spent.

The changelog is HERE.

Feel free to discuss any aspect of 1.15 if you want, and bring up stuff I might have forgotten.

This does not mean release is imminent, and minor changes might still occur to the contents of this changelog (balance etc.), but I do not intend to add additional features from here on out.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, my mistake. Does it work now?
 
Do you want us to discuss the changes here? One thing I'm not a fan of is switching whales and sugar from happiness to health. That doesn't make much sense to me.

Other than that, it looks LEGENDARY! will the new map also be incorporated?
 
Do you want us to discuss the changes here? One thing I'm not a fan of is switching whales and sugar from happiness to health. That doesn't make much sense to me.

Other than that, it looks LEGENDARY! will the new map also be incorporated?

IIRC, the new map is planned for 1.17. 1.16 is going to be about restructuring the way civ slots work, and probably adding some new civs with it (i.e. Turkic civ in Central Asian, playable Celts)
 
Do you want us to discuss the changes here? One thing I'm not a fan of is switching whales and sugar from happiness to health. That doesn't make much sense to me.
You can discuss changes here if you want to.

The Sugar change is a bit misleading. In the base game, sugar is +1 base happiness and +1 health with Grocer. Since happiness/health modifiers on bonuses have been shuffled around and the Grocer is now removed, Sugar gives +1 happiness with Coffee House. So Sugar is still a hybrid bonus, I only swapped what comes as base and what is the building effect. For Whales, I never thought it made sense as a pure happiness resource, considering how they were also used for nutrition. So they are a hybrid bonus now, also getting +1 happiness with Market.

Both of these changes are also part of an effort to reduce "free" happiness in your empire that you can get just from acquiring a resource.
 
I can't make any promises to release before September.
 
I have assorted questions/comments about the changes:

1. "Units in cities can only be damaged as much as the current city defense modifier" and "Yields from city happiness or unhappiness are limited by city size." What exactly do these mean?
2. Why do dragoons require Biology, and why do heavy galleys require Alchemy?
3. Why does Westminster Palace require journalism?
4. I feel like the Pyramid and Hanging Garden abilities, while creative, might be too niche. It depends on what else you can use food to build in this mod, and
how many floodplains there are.
5. Why does the Shinto URV require settling great spies? I get it in the context of Japan, but that really doesn't have much to do with the religion itself.
6. I think the bonus meritocracy gives to paddy fields is too specific. I get it, and it's clever, but if it's meant to represent better agricultural management, why would it only apply to rice? I also mechanically that it's too narrow as well.
7. There are so many techs. I haven't played any version of Civ IV with this many techs, but my first reaction is that this might be too many and hamper
gameplay and create unnecessary frustration for players, both having to keep mental tabs on the big tech tree and having your capabilities diluted over
more techs than normal. I'm also unsure if all of them rise to the level of notability for a civilization game. They're all important in their own right, but on
this massive scale, stuff like Leverage, Psychology, Bloomery, Labor Unions, and Journalism seem out of place.
 
1a) Does it not say "damaged by collateral damage"? All siege units have a collateral damage limit, after which they cannot do any additional damage (you might have noticed that they become unable to attack in such a situation). With this change, city defenses also provide an intrinsic collateral damage limit. 100% city defense protects against all collateral damage, with 80% city defense unit can only be damaged to 80% etc. The idea is to favour defense bombardment over an immediate outright attack using siege weapons which was too powerful before.
1b) Public Welfare and the Thai UP provide extra commerce per excess happiness, Totalitarianism provides extra production per unhappy citizen. Both of these are capped by city size, i.e. even if your excess happiness is higher than your city population you cannot get more commerce from that.
2) The idea is better horse breeding and greek fire etc. respectively.
5) Sure, but that is often the case with URV goals.
7) Yeah, but the tech tree is also more regular and predictable now, and more content has been added to make every (admittedly most) techs meaningful. Part of the original motivation to do this came from my feeling that DoC had added too much for the basic tech tree, leading to overburdened techs. I guess its a matter of taste. The rigidity of the tech tree necessitated the addition of some techs that I otherwise would not have included just to have reasonable connections between all of them (dig up the old discussion thread if you want a taste of the hand wringing I did), but I'm pretty happy with how it turned out and which techs ended up being included. For example, Bloomery is code for Iron Working, which is a singularly important technology. Likewise Leverage represents all forms of classical simple machines, like levers, pulleys and the wheel. I decided to use this more general idea (as opposed to The Wheel) for better connectivity to other techs and keep the tech plausible for civs that did not use wheels (i.e. Amerindian civs).
 
1a. It doesn't say anything else, though I get it now. Although the wording sort of implies the inverse of what you explained (which is a nice addition). Most of the time we're talking about siege units dealing damage, not defenders taking it.

7. That makes sense, and tbh I thought bloomery had to do with horticulture. I think in some cases you went for technical accuracy/generalization too much at the expense of flavor and understanding (I also thought you were talking about political leverage, like Roman treaties). This is an odd thing for me to say, but there is an evocativeness factor that some of these tech names don't have imho.

I don't know how to feel about the new tech tree structure. Again, you've played it more than I have, but in concept I sort of like a more dynamic, asymmetric tech tree. Those different paths present another layer of strategy. So long as the tech tree isn't straight up 1 dimensional and parallel, it should be fine. I guess I don't know what you mean by rigid, in terms of tech tiers or how you move between them (though I suppose I will soon); what matters to me is how the techs are connected to each other.
 
Alright, I've made a note to update and clarify the changelog entry.

It's understandable to be worried about the tech tree judging only from these notes, and it's definitely worth looking into from inside the game. For example, context clues like the tech button and enabled units etc. should have made it clear early on what the tech name is referring to, even if it is confusing. The tech tree is more "rigid" in that techs are clearly grouped in tiers of seven techs, with three tiers per era. All tech connections are AND requirements and most connections are directly between adjacent techs in subsequent eras. You can see what that means best by looking at it from inside the game, or find the tech tree development discussion thread, it links to a Google sheet that also illustrates it quite clearly.
 
This is the discussion thread. It starts off discussing the History Rewritten tech tree which served as inspiration and base, and later developed into the DoC tech tree we have now.
 
Back
Top Bottom