Impressions and Suggestions

Gunner

Emperor
Joined
Aug 21, 2004
Messages
1,389
Location
Goochland, VA
It’s been a little while since I was last involved in the project, and I apologize for my absence. I should be able to stay more active now since the part of my school year that matters for college applications is behind me :cool:

A lot has changed and several things have been added since I was last here. Now that I have one 1.36 game under my belt I thought it’d be nice to post my thoughts, with emphasis on the comparison between the mod’s status now and from around October.

One big thing I’ve noticed has been the great increase in overall polish for the mod. Things just seem to be working much better and more intuitively. Where before civilizations would collapse at seemingly random times, we now have a new stability system which clearly tells when a player is in trouble. Fighting independence wars is no longer the complete headache it used to be, yet they are still challenging.

The first incarnations of UHV’s were just being implemented when I drifted away, and at the time I was opposed to the idea. Most of the proposed objectives seemed either tedious, unfun, or ridiculously hard, and I had little hope for their eventual salvation. While by no means perfect, the current batch of UHV’s seems to be much improved. In my game as Carthage I was pushed to try things I never would have considered in a normal game of conquer everything in sight at a deliberate pace/just wait and build the spaceship. I hadn’t realized just how much of an improvement this is before, and I can now in good conscience say that UHV’s have fundamentally changed the game for the better.

There have also been some notable improvements made to the UP’s. The ones that really stuck out to me were the English and Persian powers, which previously IMHO were just awful.

There are a few other mostly superficial changes which I would also like to complement. First off, I think Prestidigitator has done a wonderful job with the Babylonian civ. It is just as professionally done as the rest of the civs. I also enjoyed the addition of the Coliseum and Leaning Tower as wonders. They do a good job to further differentiate the mod from vanilla and add some always desired flavor. Finally, I applaud the introduction of Chamaedrys’ ME art set. Little things like that really help.

Unfortunately I didn’t come across any instances of the plague in my one game as Carthage. The game ended rather early at 970 AD, so I’m not sure if that was intended or not. I do recall at one point seeing the plague icon next to India on the score panel, but that was it.



Here are some of my suggestions specifically related to having played as Carthage. My initial reaction one starting up the game was that the Carthaginian civ doesn’t have easy access to either dye or elephants (arguably) the two resources it was most famous for. To remedy this I suggest that the current elephant resource in modern-day Morocco be moved to somewhere along the North African coast. Specifically I think the tile 4 west and 1 south of the city of Carthage would be best, but really any would do. Putting a dye resource near Carthage would solve two issues. The first is the rather obvious historical/role-playing one. The second is that it would make the dye UHV more manageable and enjoyable. In its current implementation one must obviously conquer Per-Wadjet and Tyre, which might give you the necessary 3 resources. In my game, however, I only received one of the resources near Tyre, since culture from the Babylonians took the other. This forced me to then make a mad dash for the dye in northern France. Giving an additional dye resource near Carthage’s starting location would make the player only have to go after Per-Wadjet and Tyre, which would be the case if Babylon had already fallen anyway. Without you are forced either conquer part of Babylon or settle northern France, neither of which seems like a reasonable or intended part of the objective to me.

One overall suggestion I have is to somehow make stability a bit more transparent. I completely realize that we don’t want to have every factor displayed in a spreadsheet matter, but the current implementation tells the player almost nothing. First of all, I didn’t realize that those categories on the financial advisor were related to stability until I had almost finished my game, and that was only accomplished through my re-reading of the readme file. A simple title above them would go a long way towards alleviating the problem. Beyond that, I wish there was just some way to get more feedback overall. I didn’t have much of a clue what the problem was when my cities category had only one star. Would it be possible to somehow have a tool tip come up over the categories and tell you something? I understand that that might be very difficult though.

My final suggestion is actually a restatement of one of my old ideas. Here’s my original post from the second page of this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4458744.
I just got a kinda crazy and interesting idea for what we could do with America once we're upgraded to Warlords.

At 1605 you would have America be born like usual now, but the catch is that it would start out as a vassal. The master would be whichever civ America takes the most pop points away from of the cities given to it at birth. This would most of the time be England. If there are no cities there by 1605 then the master would just default to England.

I think this would be very fun for the American player and also rather historically accurate. It would make playing as America a very unique experience. You would have to strive to get 50% of the land and pop of your master to get freedom, and it would happen in a much more natural way than just granting them independence automatically like now.

What do you guys think?
If you read farther down you’ll see that 9 individuals went on to complement the idea and agree that it would be an excellent addition once Warlords was implemented. What does everybody think of it now?



I’m going to start a new game as the Turks soon, so maybe then I’ll be able to comment on the plague system and any improvements in the congress system. One final thing I'd like to close on is just to reinforce how much I think the mod has improved. Despite what some of you may be thinking about how certain small issues may be ruining it now, let me assure you that in the bigger context of things this is definitely RFC's best moment so far. Great job Rhye :goodjob:
 
I agree that the mod has become much more polished and balanced in the last few updates. Specifically, congresses, stability, and plague are more reasonable.

Congresses: Whereas I used to scream at my computer screen when a civ made an totally ridiculous demand and it was accepted at congress, now I can predict which (if any) of my cities are likely to be asked for, and by whom. And thus I can prepare for this, deciding whether I feel keeping the city is worth a war, and if so, increasing my military capability against likely yes-voters.

Stability: In older versions I found that, for example, by the time I got a view of East Asia, 4 times out of 5 China had collapsed. Now, collapse is rarer.

Plague: In the most recent updates, plague duration can be very short if you keep your cities really healthy. I like this, as it means I actually build granaries and aqueducts in the ancient/classical/medieval eras, not only in the industrial/modern eras (to counter the effects of factories, etc.) as I used to.

The only concern I still have is, with all the extra building to be done (courthouses and markets for stability, granaries and aqueducts for plague) it takes much longer to develop an army. And I am not sure if the AI is building these things as much as it should.
 
I belive the Ideia of America a Vassal of England is wonderful!!

But, in normal warlords i think the player can't be a vassal... and this can be dificult to change ( or not =D ).

Vassals can build Settlers?
 
But, in normal warlords i think the player can't be a vassal... and this can be dificult to change ( or not =D ).
I'm not sure about this. To me the most reasonable presumption is that there is a block preventing players from becoming vassals, not something preventing the game's function if the player takes over a civ already acting as one.

Vassals can build Settlers?
Can they usually not? I've never noticed or heard of this, but then again, I never gave it any thought.
 
I think vassal can't build settler, one time France was my vassal, and after a war an enormous empty space was next to them, and they were choking with just one city. After 20 turn, france did nothing... and I take that land.

And if possible, there is a way to mod the game so you can give cities to the vassal?
 
Alright well I did a bit a research on the forums, and I can't find any evidence that vassals can't build settlers. Specifically, in this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4925254 it kinda indirectly mentions that they can (you can find the section by word searching that page for "settler").

There are a bunch of things which might explain why your vassal didn't build settlers in that one situation. One that jumps to mind is the settler maps for RFC.

Does anyone else know anything about this?
 
Here are some of my suggestions specifically related to having played as Carthage. My initial reaction one starting up the game was that the Carthaginian civ doesn’t have easy access to either dye or elephants (arguably) the two resources it was most famous for. To remedy this I suggest that the current elephant resource in modern-day Morocco be moved to somewhere along the North African coast. Specifically I think the tile 4 west and 1 south of the city of Carthage would be best, but really any would do. Putting a dye resource near Carthage would solve two issues. The first is the rather obvious historical/role-playing one. The second is that it would make the dye UHV more manageable and enjoyable. In its current implementation one must obviously conquer Per-Wadjet and Tyre, which might give you the necessary 3 resources. In my game, however, I only received one of the resources near Tyre, since culture from the Babylonians took the other. This forced me to then make a mad dash for the dye in northern France. Giving an additional dye resource near Carthage’s starting location would make the player only have to go after Per-Wadjet and Tyre, which would be the case if Babylon had already fallen anyway. Without you are forced either conquer part of Babylon or settle northern France, neither of which seems like a reasonable or intended part of the objective to me.

We had a thread discussing this. As is, you can win the Carthage UHV fairly easily. You just have to take Per-Wadjit and Susa in the first 10 turns. Personally, if that ivory resource is added, I think one of the three UHV conditions should change to, "Sack Rome". This would require controlling Medilodium and Roma.

Oh yeah, make sure you download the 140 version. Rhye made some huge changes between 136 and 140.
 
The only concern I still have is, with all the extra building to be done (courthouses and markets for stability, granaries and aqueducts for plague) it takes much longer to develop an army. And I am not sure if the AI is building these things as much as it should.


I've noticed this has made building chinas 120 unit UHV is more difficult with all the buildings that often need to be done.


I just got a kinda crazy and interesting idea for what we could do with America once we're upgraded to Warlords.

At 1605 you would have America be born like usual now, but the catch is that it would start out as a vassal. The master would be whichever civ America takes the most pop points away from of the cities given to it at birth. This would most of the time be England. If there are no cities there by 1605 then the master would just default to England.

I think this would be very fun for the American player and also rather historically accurate. It would make playing as America a very unique experience. You would have to strive to get 50% of the land and pop of your master to get freedom, and it would happen in a much more natural way than just granting them independence automatically like now.

What do you guys think?

Becoming independent could be a UHV option.
 
-> There isn't any dye in northern France by the time the deadline of Carthaginian UHV has passed

-> Human players as vassals ARE possible, but it's a kind of unknown field. I don't know the exact reason why Firaxis disabled that, and re-enabling this possibility would need some testing. Changing American starting condition would require more testing as well. I'm not in the condition right now to fulfill these requests, as I'm rushing.
 
Plague: In the most recent updates, plague duration can be very short if you keep your cities really healthy. I like this, as it means I actually build granaries and aqueducts in the ancient/classical/medieval eras, not only in the industrial/modern eras (to counter the effects of factories, etc.) as I used to.

The only concern I still have is, with all the extra building to be done (courthouses and markets for stability, granaries and aqueducts for plague) it takes much longer to develop an army.

Maybe the construction costs can be lowered a little?
 
Personally, if that ivory resource is added, I think one of the three UHV conditions should change to, "Sack Rome". This would require controlling Medilodium and Roma.
I agree that this would be more fun and historical as a replacement for the dye requirement. Destroying Rome was one of Carthage's great objectives historically, much more so than reconquering their Phoenician homeland.

Of course the current dye objective is certainly not awful. It wouldn't be a disaster if no change is made.
 
Well there's also the consideration that historically no dye resource deserves to be there. It would just be weird.

Also, removing Wine now causes happiness problems for Rome. IIRC, Rome does not start with Calendar.
 
I belive the Ideia of America a Vassal of England is wonderful!!

But, in normal warlords i think the player can't be a vassal... and this can be dificult to change ( or not =D ).

Vassals can build Settlers?

Really sorry if this is Off-Topic but I'd love to see Australia in the game as a vassal of Britain.. they could spawn about 1770 AD. Otherwise the great southern land could be taken by anyone (India, Japan etc. :eek: )
 
I am not sure if they would have a big enough inpact on the rest of the civs (compared to how they are now) to justify the extra loading times. Although I would support the idea of a minor civ and along with the further reduced times due to the embassy system I might be pursuaded, I just dont know if they did much that would warrent a full civ is all, that and thier late start...
 
Back
Top Bottom