Just an other idea: Plague

[<Nexus>]

Some mods have it as a feature and it is also mentioned several times that AND has too much health sources available.
So the idea is to have something similar cap on cities as Realistic Timescale for techs. If a city grows bigger than a certain threshold (depending on eras), no matter how healthy the city is, it has a chance to trigger a Plague event. It would spread through city connectedness, greatly decreasing the city's health --> decreasing city population.
I believe plagues throughout history had just as much impact on it as wars.
And as human players are better in super-growing their cities than the AI it would affect the human players more
What do you think?

 

[Afforess]

There is already a plague random event. It can trigger a spread to other cities, too.

Anyway, health is not the major problem. Yes, I would argue health is a bit too easy right now, but it's not awful.

Happiness is where it's too easy. Larger empires especially, it's easy to accumulate more resources, and more resources give more bonus happiness.

 

[dbkblk]

I agree with Afforess. While plagues could be "fun", the issue is more with the balance as there is too much happyness and health.
We should try to find something scaled to the total population but which would allow to play small and large empires and which should not be easy for both.

 

[oldnooob]

How about allowing 3,4,or 5 small civs to allay against the largest civ? either as temporary or permanent alliance.

 

[fulgrim66]

thanks alot dbkblk i have access to my saves again. cheers from Paris.

 

[dbkblk]

thanks alot dbkblk i have access to my saves again. cheers from Paris.

Mais de rien

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Actually for the first time I had health problems in medieval era. I was on immortal, but I think it's OK now.

 

[Arkatakor]

There is already a plague random event. It can trigger a spread to other cities, too.

Anyway, health is not the major problem. Yes, I would argue health is a bit too easy right now, but it's not awful.

Happiness is where it's too easy. Larger empires especially, it's easy to accumulate more resources, and more resources give more bonus happiness.

It might be an idea to introduce a happiness penalty based on how many cities you have (a la Civ 5). Since happiness is not global as in Civ 5 one could make an adjustment that existing cities happiness gets impacted on founding new cities. Would take quite a bit of balancing to get it right if you pursue this path though.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

It might be an idea to introduce a happiness penalty based on how many cities you have (a la Civ 5). Since happiness is not global as in Civ 5 one could make an adjustment that existing cities happiness gets impacted on founding new cities. Would take quite a bit of balancing to get it right if you pursue this path though.

If you play with revolution there's already a revolution penalty connected to empire size. I think that adding happiness penalty would simply be a copy of this mechanic, although people could use it without Rev.

 

[Noyyau]

Please don't add any kind of global happiness cap.

 

[45°38'N-13°47'E]

Don't worry, we won't.

 

[philipschall]

Perhaps you could just alter the unhappiness per pop? Like, past 10, you get 1.5 per pop, past 20 you get 2 per pop, and past 30 you get 2.5 per pop? How hard would that be to do?

 

[Afforess]

Perhaps you could just alter the unhappiness per pop? Like, past 10, you get 1.5 per pop, past 20 you get 2 per pop, and past 30 you get 2.5 per pop? How hard would that be to do?

It's possible (Monarchy gives +50% unhappiness from population), but it seems like a poor way to fix balance issues.

 

[dbkblk]

@afforess: Regarding the unhappyness, your recent changes concerning the overpopulation malus have wrong side-effect. If you use Monarchy + Conscription, most of the city will go down to 1 population due to an excessive unhappyness (+22 on my 8 pop city). I'm smart enough to not use this combinaison, but the AI isn't. We should either teach the AI or make the malus less strong.

 

[Afforess]

@afforess: Regarding the unhappyness, your recent changes concerning the overpopulation malus have wrong side-effect. If you use Monarchy + Conscription, most of the city will go down to 1 population due to an excessive unhappyness (+22 on my 8 pop city). I'm smart enough to not use this combinaison, but the AI isn't. We should either teach the AI or make the malus less strong.

I am planning to revert the Conscription changes. So it will not be an issue. You can revert them if you want, it will be a few hours before I am home.

 

[dbkblk]

No I can't work on it at the moment

 

[gram123]

I believe I have seen plague in three different forms in various mods around here.

1. Random event - The simple way, player cant do much to affect it, when it happens and how much. (I believe that is what AND2 is now running)

2. The Rhye And Fall way - Its still kind of random when it happens, its spread like a plague (get the point?) especially between connected cities and inter-nations, it adds a large temporary health penalty and kills/damage units. Its a nuisance in my opinion.

3. The Realism invictus - The hard way but in my opinion also the far more entertaining way. Plague is a constant risk-faktor for your cities. Its a independent factor, but tied to the health of the cities. There are building/techs/bonuses that help you thwarts the risk of plague, either in a specific city or nationwide. When it hits it hits only one city and for a temporary period of time, add unhealthiness and a commence penalty. As you get through the ages you get bonuses against the plague risk in your cities typically in the way of a nationwide bonus when you reaches a new age. This in a way act as a way of making it much harder to have very populous cities in the early ages. I think this add both to realism and fun of the function.

Its a big thing I know, but I would love to see the Realism invictus plague integrated into AND2, possible as a optional gameoption.

 

[masaykh]

Not fully by topic, but:

Happines represent what people have what they want.
so they:
have best food (if you have only rice and your neigbour have wheat,rice, and some sort of meat YOUR people must be unhappy about this)
have best items (clothes\tools etc.)
you as ruler dont press on them (that possible only in tribalism i think)
they have work (unemployment on every era had BAD consequences)

I cant say what of these can be\have been implemented but i see this as "right way to do it"

p.s. i see need on penalty for haveing only grain \ meat \ fruits \ fish - as human need atleast one of each.

 

[<Nexus>]

Regicide

I know that the devs don't really want to introduce any new features, so I don't expect anything

Remember Age of Empires II Regicide game mode? To defeat an other player you had to kill his King unit. I could imagine something similar in RAND too, something like this:

Each civ starts with a special unit: Leader (renamed to the same as the civ's leader) Has 0 and maybe the same promotions could be available for it as for the Great Commanders, could also have a decreased chance of revolt in city.

What happens when you kill an other civ's leader depends on his current civic:

Chiefdom: All his remaining cities will automatically becomes yours ("You are the stronger warchief.")
Despotism: All his remaining cities become barbarian ("There is no successor to rule over the empire.")
Monarchy: The civ is in anarchy. In every turn there is a 90% chance that the anarchy continues, and 10% to end it by finding a successor.
Republic, Democracy and Federal: A "regular" period of anarchy, the same as changing a civic or state religion. ("Some time is needed to elect a new president.")
Virtual: -1 in all cities for some turns. ("Losing the leader saddens the citizens but new elections are immediate.")

 

[Nimek]

That concept exists in Total War mod. You can try it or maybe grab some code.