Future Direction of the Mod

[ezzlar]

I also like the RFC Classic handling of religion and replacing old ones. That would also tie the old wonders to Europe.

 

[Mr.Kwast]

I think will be cool a indian civ in AD.

 

[BenZL43]

edit: never mind.

but I choose #1

 

[Leoreth]

No bugs . (You should strongly propose to run the mod in Windows 7, I think it can't run properly on XP anymore...)

That's not a bug issue, but a resources issue. XP appears to be unable to handle the amount of memory required for DoC.

(Edit: I can possibly address some of that by stealing C2C's deferred rendering, though.)

For civics, I could just do away with anarchy and add dozens of new civics and a few new categories. But what about concepts such as 'universal suffrage', 'emancipation', 'free speech', and so on? That would fit more as a toggleable function, not as separate civics.

Indeed, and in fact one of my more radical ideas is to remove civic categories altogether.

 

[need my speed]

I am most intrigued.

Because, yeah... If you want to do civics even moderately well, you end up with a gigantic mess. The below - which, I believe, I have already posted somewhere - doesn't include every historical option by far, as I tried to restrict each category to five, ten, or a similar number of options - and it's already gigantic mess (I suppose 'juche' could be scrapped, and 'feudal monarchy' could be added):

-Government
Chiefdom
Noble Oligarchy (small group defined by bloodline)
Aristocratic Oligarchy (small group defined by ability)
Plutocratic Oligarchy (small group defined by wealth)
Clerical Oligarchy (small group defined by religion)
Absolute Monarchy (all power)
Constitutional Monarchy (bound by law)
'Military Monarchy' (find a better name, controlled by military force; Praetorian Guard, Iron Guard...)
Privileged Democracy (ancient Athens)
Parliamentary Democracy (while not true in reality per se, this has a separate head of government and head of state, both elected, to differentiate between this and a Constitutional Monarchy)
Presidential Democracy (no separate head of government and head of state, like the USA)
Direct Democracy (from Switzerland, all the way to 'no representatives, everyone votes for everything')
Authoritarianism (generic dictatorship)
Totalitarianism (charismatic, the leader is great, legitimate, we all love him and his ideology - this could be fascism, or Ba'athism, or what have you)
Junta (military dictatorship)
Theocracy (ruler is god, laws are divine revelations, et cetera)
Ecclesiocracy (religious leaders rule)
Fascism
Juche
Technocracy (the difference with aristocracy is that this isn't a small group of able people, but generals would govern the military, economists would deal with the financial side, et cetera)

-Structure
Hegemony (indirect conquest, fear of aggression keeps other regions in line - this doesn't have to be a totalitarian hellhole, this would work for city states (ancient Greece) too)
Confederation (federal authority is accountable to the states)
Empire (centralisation, direct conquest)
Federation (states are accountable to the federal authority)
Unitary State (one single unit, one central authority)

-Foreign
Universalism (spread our culture and ideals)
Tolerance (we have our own culture and ideals, they have their own)
Colonialism (colonise stuff, naval)
Imperialism (invade our neighbours before they become a threat / conquer the world)
Isolationism (as if we care about others, pfah)

-Military Structure
Militia (citizens, defend yourself)
Mercenaries (we'll just hire people for our armies, make use of natives, et cetera)
Warrior Code (honour and all - culture, slower build time, more experience, small elite army)
Social Status (voluntary, but used as a means to advance one's status, greatly appeals to the poor (but would also work for prisoners and slaves), like Marius' reforms - come to think of it, the modern USA is moving towards this)
Levies (your lord requires one of your sons to become a knight)
Warrior Caste (you're born in the military caste)
Pacifism (a military? Maybe a defense force at best)
Military Conscription (everyone (or every man, whatever) is required to serve for some time)
Voluntary Force (a voluntary profession in the modern sense)

-Military Doctrine
Raiding Parties (probe for weakness, take loot, not very organised)
Preclusive Security (keep the military on the border behind fortifications, nobody can kill them anyway, and logistics (excellent roads) make sure the military can outlast any invaders and can quickly get the needed resources)
Guerilla (withdraw, strike, withdraw, et cetera - anything from the Parthian shot to Mongol tactics to Vietnam)
Chivalry (glorious (hugely inefficient, too) charges with cavalry; the elite nobility)
Grande Armée (huge land armies sweeping over the enemy's territory in a coordinated and organised fashion)
Rule the Waves (focus on naval power)
Human Wave (swarm the enemy with infantry, like Russia sort-of-not-really did, or like trench warfare I guess)
Blitzkrieg (rush the enemy with tanks, smash their fortifications, win)
Shock and Awe (bomb the enemy into oblivion with airpower and missiles, mop up with ground support)

-Economy
Self-sufficiency (agriculture gets a boost, trade a malus)
Palace Economy (Masonry (?), ancient version of communism (Egypt, Tawantinsuyu, et cetera))
Merchant Capitalism (Currency, Rome, Islamic nations, although the traditional form comes from 900+ AD Europe, but I feel there needs to be another economic policy between Masonry and Guilds / Optics)
Guilds (Guilds (but really, shouldn't the tech 'Guilds' come much earlier?), boosts Cottages)
Mercantilism (Optics, considering mercantilism originates from the the Atlantic (England) and Mediterranean (Venice et cetera) trade routes)
Unregulated Capitalism (Liberalism, free market)
Regulated Capitalism (Economics, social market is an ahistorical name (1949, West Germany, CDU))
Corporatism (Corporations (?), both the third way of fascism as well as just corporations being dominant (like a more extreme USA))
Communism (Communism, utopia)

-Religion
Animism (speaks for itself)
Pantheon (sort of paganism, religion is now institutional, Civilization is way too focused on monotheism / Abrahamic religions)
Free Church (church isn't linked at all to the state, apparently it's like a random guy declaring his home to be a church and that's that, originated in the USA according to Wikipedia, but Wikipedia also mentions Constantine I, Luther, et cetera, so who knows - how about using this for Persia? Basically, state religion with tolerance)
State Church (sanctioned but not necessarily owned by the state, Rome, for example)
Fundamentalism (church controls the state, no segregation between church and state)
Divine Cult (leader of the state is a god)
Tolerance (like various Muslim nations; there is a state church and followers of another religion are discriminated against (taxes, for example), but they are tolerated and not treated as inferior human beings)
Secularism (free religion)
State Atheism (forced atheism)

Then there's IV's 'Legal' and 'Labour' category... Which are just weird. For labour, I thought up the following:

-Labour
Corvée
Slavery
Serfdom
Caste System
Indentured Servitude (I'll work for you for an X amount of time, like a slave, and after that I'm free to go - widely used to finance a trip to the Americas for example)
Industrial Labour (factory workers, deadly conditions, child labour, nineteenth century horribleness)
Civilian Conscription (everyone (or every man, whatever) is required to serve for some time, but no military duties here)
Labour Unions (Emancipation effect?)
Automatisation

But... This doesn't make much sense to me, as many of the options can, do, and have existed together. And the 'Legal' civic is so weird, I haven't even touched it.

But civics have always interested me, and it's rather educative to research them too, so... I'm interested!

 

[VGL]

I am most intrigued.
-Government
Chiefdom
Noble Oligarchy (small group defined by bloodline)
Aristocratic Oligarchy (small group defined by ability)
Plutocratic Oligarchy (small group defined by wealth)
Clerical Oligarchy (small group defined by religion)
Absolute Monarchy (all power)
Constitutional Monarchy (bound by law)
'Military Monarchy' (find a better name, controlled by military force; Praetorian Guard, Iron Guard...)
Privileged Democracy (ancient Athens)
Parliamentary Democracy (while not true in reality per se, this has a separate head of government and head of state, both elected, to differentiate between this and a Constitutional Monarchy)
Presidential Democracy (no separate head of government and head of state, like the USA)
Direct Democracy (from Switzerland, all the way to 'no representatives, everyone votes for everything')
Authoritarianism (generic dictatorship)
Totalitarianism (charismatic, the leader is great, legitimate, we all love him and his ideology - this could be fascism, or Ba'athism, or what have you)
Junta (military dictatorship)
Theocracy (ruler is god, laws are divine revelations, et cetera)
Ecclesiocracy (religious leaders rule)
Fascism
Juche
Technocracy (the difference with aristocracy is that this isn't a small group of able people, but generals would govern the military, economists would deal with the financial side, et cetera)

Theocracy should be removed.Its not a type of government.we have a republic theocracy and king like theocracy.And to many kinds of Fascism.Just one Fascism kind,Authoritarianism,will work and where a feudal king?

 

[Theodorick]

So far the general opinion seems overwhelmingly one choice.

 

[need my speed]

Theocracy should be removed.Its not a type of government.we have a republic theocracy and king like theocracy.And to many kinds of Fascism.Just one Fascism kind,Authoritarianism,will work and where a feudal king?

That is true, but you can see I have no 'republic' as a civic, as that would be having a 'non-monarchy' option, which makes no sense as a lot of options are 'non-monarchies'. I do have a clerical oligarchy and an ecclesiocracy, in addition to a theocracy. I'd say that covers the various theocracy-like governments?

Totalitarianism revolves around a charismatic leader who the people (or, some of them) love, like an idol, and who often has a unique ideology. Through this, the leader is connected to the nation and the people.

Authoritarianism is more like your run of the mill authoritarian regime; a powerful individual who attract loyal people simply through rewards (instead of ideology), more focused on the status quo and perhaps defending the country / traditional institutions (whereas totalitarian leaders often have a grand vision; the thousand year empire of Hitler, the restored Roman empire of Mussolini, the worldwide communism of Stalin... - and that easily leads to more offensive ideas; we must forcefully spread 'communism', we must acquire land for the glorious Aryans, et cetera).

For example, I would associate authoritarianism with Hussein or Marcos, whereas I would associate Stalin or Mussolini with totalitarianism.

That said, there are tons of different interpretations of this. For example, you could easily say there's a scale of individualism versus authoritarianism, on which you can put democratic nations, totalitarian nations, monarchical nations, and so on.

So, yeah, I could scrap 'authoritarianism' too, I suppose. And I agree that 'fascism' and 'juche' can also go away, but I can only think of 'feudal monarchy' as a replacement, and I would need two others. 'Sides, I like my interpretation of authoritarianism versus totalitarianism, as you can differentiate between 'random dictatorship without much of a unique flavour' and things such as the Nazis, North Korea, et cetera.

Anyway... This isn't really the topic for it, I think. But thank you for your contributions!

 

[VGL]

Theocracy means that a government that interpenetrates a religious book or studies as it's laws.so that can be a presidential republic or a Absolute monarchy.Anything religion like should be removed from the government group

 

[need my speed]

Mhm, perhaps you're right. I do have divine cult and fundamentalism already, after all.

 

[Leoreth]

That is definitely too numerous for my tastes. Instead of having dozens of categories it is much cooler to create one specific form of government by plugging multiple civics together.

So instead of having Feudal Monarchy and Constitutional Monarchy you would have Feudal Monarchy = Monarchy + Vassalage and Constitutional Monarchy = Monarchy + Limited Government and so on. I have tried to approximate that within the current framework but abolishing the category requirement could enable even more opportunities.

 

[Red Boxer]

So instead of having Feudal Monarchy and Constitutional Monarchy you would have Feudal Monarchy = Monarchy + Vassalage and Constitutional Monarchy = Monarchy + Limited Government and so on. I have tried to approximate that within the current framework but abolishing the category requirement could enable even more opportunities.

A mod called Dark Civ (I think) did something very similar to that. Adopting certain civics in combination would unlock certain bonuses/buildings/units. They also had terrorist groups and extra-state actors in the mod.

 

[need my speed]

That is definitely too numerous for my tastes. Instead of having dozens of categories it is much cooler to create one specific form of government by plugging multiple civics together.

So instead of having Feudal Monarchy and Constitutional Monarchy you would have Feudal Monarchy = Monarchy + Vassalage and Constitutional Monarchy = Monarchy + Limited Government and so on. I have tried to approximate that within the current framework but abolishing the category requirement could enable even more opportunities.

I definitely agree with that... But I couldn't get it to make any logical sense. Because the various forms ('monarchy', 'democracy', and so on) don't have any subsets that broadly align (a constitutional, feudal, absolute, or other variants of a monarchy, a presidential, parliamentarian, direct, or other variants of a democracy...).

 

[KMRblue1027]

I would like to see the government types be significantly more powerful in buffs but also come with major trade-offs. I been playing Caveman 2 Cosmos as my "regular" style Civ for over a year now and jumping between this and C2C it strikes me on how weak overall your choices are. I also still want 2 spaces between cites rule, getting the AI to spread out placement more, but I have no idea if it could work.

 

[Leoreth]

I definitely agree with that... But I couldn't get it to make any logical sense. Because the various forms ('monarchy', 'democracy', and so on) don't have any subsets that broadly align (a constitutional, feudal, absolute, or other variants of a monarchy, a presidential, parliamentarian, direct, or other variants of a democracy...).

But you don't have to end there, you can make civics depend on others or have two civics being incompatible.

I view such a system as your civilization's skill tree more than the traditional set of specialization options. There could be a "republican tree" and a "monarchist tree" for instance with different civics associated with it - adopting new civics within a tree could be free while switching would produce anarchy and so on. There are a lot of directions you can take this into.

 

[srpt]

moving Stability to the DLL, for the speed increase which I'm assuming would result

breaking the connection between the civs and player slots completely, so one could theoretically play as China from 3000BC to 2020AD, encountering possibly hundreds of other states and city-states, all full civs, as long as no more than 35 (or whatever) or so are on the map at once.

a real solution to closely packed cities. I would rather solve this by making closely packed cities a winning option than by working with AI city placement. in the real world civilizations always produce a bunch of closely packed cities: the Ganges Plain, the Po valley, the Yellow river valley, the Levant etc etc. I would really like this mod more if Pataliputra-Varanasi-Indraprastha or Venice-Genoa-Rome were actually optimal setups.

I guess I'm also curious about what happened with k-mod. I started a k-mod/RFC conversion myself, got as far as attaching my python to theirs and getting the autoplay to work, but then struggled getting the AI to do what I wanted in 2 ways: a bunch of neighboring 1 or 2 city civs refused to go to war with each other no matter what I did with the variables, which I'm assuming is because the smart k-mod AI won't go to war when there's so much free land up for grabs, and the standard "birthInvasion" type thing also caused weird behaviour. then I noticed that once there was a decent amount of python running the k-mod version wasn't actually any faster the the non-k-mod version, which was built off of the final version of Sword of Islam. this made me think that maybe the critical speed changes of k-mod were already in SoI. I think I recall edead saying that he had already taken what he wanted from k-mod.

But you don't have to end there, you can make civics depend on others or have two civics being incompatible.

I view such a system as your civilization's skill tree more than the traditional set of specialization options. There could be a "republican tree" and a "monarchist tree" for instance with different civics associated with it - adopting new civics within a tree could be free while switching would produce anarchy and so on. There are a lot of directions you can take this into.

I really like these ideas

 

[Leoreth]

moving Stability to the DLL, for the speed increase which I'm assuming would result

I think since I have included your great system of triggered instead of periodical stability checks, stability isn't that much of a factor anymore. I'm sure there is still some speedup to be gained, but on the other hand the Python implementation is much more elegant in how it ties into the event management system. A couple of inefficient aspects such as parameter storage has already moved into the C++ classes.

breaking the connection between the civs and player slots completely, so one could theoretically play as China from 3000BC to 2020AD, encountering possibly hundreds of other states and city-states, all full civs, as long as no more than 35 (or whatever) or so are on the map at once.

The thought alone makes my head spin, but yeah that would be cool.

a real solution to closely packed cities. I would rather solve this by making closely packed cities a winning option than by working with AI city placement. in the real world civilizations always produce a bunch of closely packed cities: the Ganges Plain, the Po valley, the Yellow river valley, the Levant etc etc. I would really like this mod more if Pataliputra-Varanasi-Indraprastha or Venice-Genoa-Rome were actually optimal setups.

I agree. I have actually thought about this for some time, but I don't think you can get there without completely changing the role of specialists. Without changing the entire economic system you're stuck with the connection that more land = more food = more everything.

I tried to address that a bit with the City States civic, but that's not enough obviously. Maybe I can have a smart idea while doing other things.

I guess I'm also curious about what happened with k-mod. I started a k-mod/RFC conversion myself, got as far as attaching my python to theirs and getting the autoplay to work, but then struggled getting the AI to do what I wanted in 2 ways: a bunch of neighboring 1 or 2 city civs refused to go to war with each other no matter what I did with the variables, which I'm assuming is because the smart k-mod AI won't go to war when there's so much free land up for grabs, and the standard "birthInvasion" type thing also caused weird behaviour. then I noticed that once there was a decent amount of python running the k-mod version wasn't actually any faster the the non-k-mod version, which was built off of the final version of Sword of Islam. this made me think that maybe the critical speed changes of k-mod were already in SoI. I think I recall edead saying that he had already taken what he wanted from k-mod.

K-Mod inclusion is dead to me. I actually arrived at full inclusion at one point and observed exactly the same effects. K-Mod AI doesn't mesh well with the kind of scripting RFC needs, maybe the AI needs to be dumb enough to let itself be guided the way we want it too. Trying to solve that cost me a couple of months (actual effort and loss of motivation).

I was never really interested in the speedup stuff because as you said, the low hanging fruits have long since migrated into the mod through the SoI engine. I was interested in the AI and still am in some aspects of it, especially unit AI. Unfortunately I'm not literate in the Civ4 unit AI code, so I can't just pick that part without messing up the connection with everything else.

 

[srpt]

breaking the civ-to-player thing:

I've thought a lot about how it could be done. say you're playing Egypt and its the middle ages. all 52 slots in the WBS you started are/were taken by ancient and medieval civs and now the Aztecs need to spawn. the game picks an open slot or if theyre all taken chooses a likely target to kill based on date, who the human players is etc and assigns the new identity. people who want to play late civs from a 3000bc start would use a different WBS, all identities then being reassigned for the autoplay.

closely packed cities:

I've recently implemented 2 new mechanics in RFCCW: extra trade routes and a percentage GPP bonus for cities closer than 4 tiles. I think these seem intuitive and logical and fit the real world characteristics of the regions in question. I was also thinking of making food resources worth more in the intial 3x3 square than in the other tiles of the BFC.

 

[Tigranes]

As expected I found myself in a minority...

Development of this mod clearly became a mod in itself. Like game in the game. And if I ask OP with all sincerity: what do you enjoy more -- history and modding or being a local celebrity, I am not sure what the answer would be.

Rhye had a simple vision: Earth based BTS with more realistic historical mechanics. Most accurate Earth simulator ever achieved in Civilization series -- with vanila civilizations. Rhye made BTS deeper, with more things "under the hood", while the look of the hood was kept the same.

In the beginning DoC vision was "we will make it even more accurate". Pandora box was open, even more and more stuff came in. Some things been changed under the hood, but mostly hood itself was decorated and transformed. I was honestly expecting things to get deeper, but they become larger, wider ... slower.

Fine balance is somewhere in the middle. Content vs mechanics, there has to be some optimal ratio, after all. Things like AI, Leaders' attitude, internal politics, teaching AIs to struggle for UHVs , not conquest or domination, which never happened in history -- this could be the vision.

In the Theory of Inventions there is a concept called IFR -- Ideal Final Result. Say you want to invent a better table lamp. What is the most ideal behavior one can expect from a table lamp? It basically has to read your mind, switch on when you want it, without you doing much. So people then invent sound sensors to make lamp switch on with one clap.

What is the IFR for DoC? Just to have fun! Ok, I understand, but how? Perpetual development for perpetual interaction with fans? It is a worthy goal, free country, everyone does what he wants to do. Something else? Then maybe it is worth to publish some Vission Statement or Modding Manifesto, or some kind of DoC Constitution -- I mean something so people could settle around some tile with river and Corn, instead of wondering for the best spot all these years.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

As expected I found myself in a minority...

Development of this mod clearly became a mod in itself. Like game in the game. And if I ask OP with all sincerity: what do you enjoy more -- history and modding or being a local celebrity, I am not sure what the answer would be.

Rhye had a simple vision: Earth based BTS with more realistic historical mechanics. Most accurate Earth simulator ever achieved in Civilization series -- with vanila civilizations. Rhye made BTS deeper, with more things "under the hood", while the look of the hood was kept the same.

In the beginning DoC vision was "we will make it even more accurate". Pandora box was open, even more and more stuff came in. Some things been changed under the hood, but mostly hood itself was decorated and transformed. I was honestly expecting things to get deeper, but they become larger, wider ... slower.

Fine balance is somewhere in the middle. Content vs mechanics, there has to be some optimal ratio, after all. Things like AI, Leaders' attitude, internal politics, teaching AIs to struggle for UHVs , not conquest or domination, which never happened in history -- this could be the vision.

In the Theory of Inventions there is a concept called IFR -- Ideal Final Result. Say you want to invent a better table lamp. What is the most ideal behavior one can expect from a table lamp? It basically has to read your mind, switch on when you want it, without you doing much. So people then invent sound sensors to make lamp switch on with one clap.

What is the IFR for DoC? Just to have fun! Ok, I understand, but how? Perpetual development for perpetual interaction with fans? It is a worthy goal, free country, everyone does what he wants to do. Something else? Then maybe it is worth to publish some Vission Statement or Modding Manifesto, or some kind of DoC Constitution -- I mean something so people could settle around some tile with river and Corn, instead of wondering for the best spot all these years.

I am in the tiny minority of people who voted option 2, but I kind of agree with what you're saying: where is the point where we've hit the complexity limit of the mod? I feel like changing too many BTS features that are already perfectly compatible with DoC. Culture and religion need a overhaul, but that's because they're fundamentally incompatible with what RFC in general is trying to be, and the unit/tech trees had design problems from the start that got worse with the timeline that DoC has, but I think going any farther is going more into the "kitchen sink mod" territory than what we are looking for.

I think that in order to fulfill the goal of this mod- which is to create a more in depth and more accurate history simulator and improving on the flaws with original RFC, we should be focusing more on perfecting RFC mechanics, such as spawning, rebirths, and colonization, rather than changing BTS mechanics (possibly for the worse). If we want to change the fundamental ways the original Civ4 engine works, that should either be a separate project or maybe even a new, standalone game that could be started from scratch (of course, the latter is a pipe dream that Leoreth probably doesn't have the time or motivation to pursue).