@Xink
I often just dump my whole /mods folder into the dev package, so if people want to test an identical game they can do so.
I've since updated to v3 of wwgd. Some of those other mods are described a bit in the "recommended" section of the 1st post of this combined thread.
@Txurce
I used Emigration to specifically solve the "ignore unhappiness" exploit. Since Firaxis added rioting or something at -20
, I feel it's unnecessary now. I played with tech diffusion for a while but found it's not working... probably because of changes to the lua file in the patch. I was waiting to see if Afforess would update it, but might just do so myself.
Tectonics is a map script I
loved back in the Civ IV days. I took it and modified it a bit back then to my own preferences, and it's the standard one I played on. I feel Civ V has much more realistic terrain than IV so I'm unsure it's necessary anymore, but I've still been trying it out for fun.
Seek explained his mod.
@juckie
I wonder if something like +1
/N
in every city would be interesting for Arabia? It's possible to do by making the trait alter the palace to put a new building in every city (cumbersome I know, but would work!). So basically any building effect we can use for a unique trait. This would essentially be the same effect as a trade route bonus, as trade is dependent upon population. I'm not really sure it'd fit them thematically though.
Another idea is I could give them one of the unused Policy effects (see the bottom of
this post). This would be possible by creating a 'dummy' unused policy and giving it to Arabia in lua code on turn 1. Perhaps improve Arabia's merchant specialists +1
?
@Kirschi
Wow I didn't realize the influence change would drop it to 0 eventually! Ooops well that's what testing versions are for...
The problem is the influence formula is rather obscurely hidden. It's hard to figure out how to modify the multiplier and divisor (only two factors we can change) to do something as simple as 50%
/
. Increasing the divisor actually drops the influence gain, and doubling the multiplier apparently results in that drops-to-0 thing you encountered. It's very frustrating.
I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean about strategic resources in the ocean, I haven't seen that.
@Txurce
I do think RA costs are a bit off. Techs increase approximately 2x per era while RAs increase 1.5x. I think it might be better to start off RAs at 200 (in classical... you can leave off describing the ancient era cost for obvious reasons
) and double it per era. Also, I discuss RAs further in the Research thread.
Thalassicus said:
The ideal solution I see is marekb's suggestion (discussed on page 2 of this thread) combined with increasing cost per agreement (like golden ages) instead of per era. This of course isn't possible yet, but eventually it's what I want to do. The per-era route is one I've seen many mods take so I guess I'll finally give in to pressure. The main problem is the nerf to isolated starts, which are already sorta weak (average expense per agreement is higher for them with the per-era shift). I don't really like replacing one problem with another... but since the problem of late-game research pacts is probably bigger than the issue of isolated starts, it seems like an acceptable temporary tradeoff.
It'd be great to find a way to counterbalance the nerf to isolated starts with a buff in another way, and am open to suggestions. I've started exploring the start location placement code and that might be a route to take... though the code is so insanely complicated (over 10,000 lines) it'd be very difficult. I'm wondering if there might be a better option somewhere out there.
@Sneaks
Sure! Though I'd advise against including the testing version of course, as there's still bugs and balance issues.
...
keep up the good work Thal!
. The RA mechanic seems pretty broken right now to me, and although there's been some anecdotal evidence saying that it's somewhat better since the patch, the ability to "game" it creates an enormous advantage for the player. See 
