[Modmodmod] RFC:Europe Extra Civs

[ViscountJoe]

LOL, I wasn't complaining, in fact, I was arguing that the performance of RFC:E++, while not great, is certainly more than acceptable. And the gameplay as it stands now is awesome.

 

[3Miro]

The original RFC has the world map with lots of water and huge deserts and tundra. RFCE has a continent map with tons of cities and units and about 30 players. There is some desert, but it isn't much at all.

RFCE++ has another 10 or so players ... I would only expect it to be about 30% or so slower.

 

[Tigranes]

I haven't had as much time or energy to spare since the semester started. Both the new civs are in, sans UU, UB or UHV. I want to make one of the Bohemian UHV's centered on the Hussite Wars. Do you know of any unit graphic that could pass for a Hussite war wagon?

Charlemagne scenario has wagon train unit. It can do it, if nothing else comes across.

I was actually trying to propose this unit for RFCE in the same capacity it was used in Charlemagne. Perhaps you could consider it? Remove Medic promotion from general units and allow for more realistic logistics and war planning. I was reading about 30 Years War the other day and was struck by the line -- "Imperial Army had 33,000 troops but 120,000 people of all kind were following them..."

Dutch 1st UHV would need some increase to be challenging with 10 extra civs. Also would not you agree that Dutch should start at war with Spanish? It lasted 80 years and was a major straggle. At least make Philip to be Furious, like Crimea towards Moscow.

 

[Tigranes]

The original RFC has the world map with lots of water and huge deserts and tundra. RFCE has a continent map with tons of cities and units and about 30 players. There is some desert, but it isn't much at all.

RFCE++ has another 10 or so players ... I would only expect it to be about 30% or so slower.

30% and only For some people its a difference between playing later civs or not playing them... For some reason SoI was running rather fast and it has comparable stats with RFCE... I was just wondering -- if we make the code to check for UHVs of the human player ONLY, would it speed up the process? Who cares if AI scores historical victories?

 

[dragodon64]

I was just wondering -- if we make the code to check for UHVs of the human player ONLY, would it speed up the process? Who cares if AI scores historical victories?

I think Tigranes is onto something here. The AI almost never scores even 2 of its UHVs, would this speed this up enough to make it worthwhile?

 

[Morholt]

The difference would be minimal - most of the UHV's are fairly well-coded (not mine) and most check only on one turn.

 

[Sian]

noticed that Scotland doesn't have a greeting (at least not when i sailed over there to Capture Mercia as Denmark)

 

[AbsintheRed]

noticed that Scotland doesn't have a greeting (at least not when i sailed over there to Capture Mercia as Denmark)

I added a couple generic first contact texts to RFCE a couple weeks ago
It will be there when Morholt updates RFCE++ to be based on the next version of RFCE

 

[AbsintheRed]

30% and only For some people its a difference between playing later civs or not playing them... For some reason SoI was running rather fast and it has comparable stats with RFCE... I was just wondering -- if we make the code to check for UHVs of the human player ONLY, would it speed up the process? Who cares if AI scores historical victories?

As 3Miro already said, RFCE has way more useful land (tiles) than SoI or RFC (thus more cities, buildings and improvements)
Also, we have more added art - mainly leaders and ethnic units - than those mods
These are the main 2 factors of slowness, those extra couple UHV checks mean almost nothing

And yeah, if RFCE runs only 30% slower, then it's an only
The useful tile number is almost double of SoI's

Having said that, every suggestion/help in further speeding the mod is always appreciated
The CAR modcomp was already added long ago, so I'm not sure parts of this newer version would still be an improvement or not
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=382389

 

[Tigranes]

Morholt, will you eventually nerf Barbary States at some point? They keep leading the score table every game I load. Nerfing them tech-wise is not enough, AI Dutch gives them some free techs I suspect, because when I was playing Tunisia my tech rate was very realistically slow. And Oran went independent with my full army in it -- I was about to declare on Marroco (to my shame I just gave up after that, ).

Also I hope Ottomans will be buffed in RFCE so they will arrive stronger in RFCE++... Those areas are collapsed most of the time. The union system in case of Ottomans and Tunisia often go the wrong way. I mean I don't mind to see the Scottland took over the England, but Tunisia over Ottomans is a little sci-fi to say the least. Perhaps Seljuks, Egypt and Arabs could be the only unions Ottomans can get, while you could force vassalisation of Crimea and Tunisia to Ottomans sometimes in 1600s ?..

To keep everything in the same post here are my questions about so far:

1. Barbary Coast -- let's force vassalisation, not unions.

Eventually the Bey of Tunis became the sole ruling authority. The Beys of Tunis always kept well apart from any Ottoman attempts to compromise their political grip on power.

and also

Algeria ... was the principal center of Ottoman Empire power in the west north Africa and the west of the mediterranean. With a big autonomy in politics and diplomacy it was also a base from which attacks were made on European shipping

. What do you think about this?

2. Every civ should feel some barbarian harassment evry now and then. I really liked the idea of Barbarian Ushkuiniks in Russia. Perhaps if we let Bedouins to harras Tunisia she will not grow so strong. Plus Spain historically attacked Tunis -- is this reflected in Spanish war maps?

3. Moscow is often collapsed while at least in one game "illigitimate" Kiev re-spawned in mid 1600s collapsing "ligitimate" Crimea. These issues call for your attention By the way, do we have any union between Moscow and Novgorod?

4. In my current game there was no union between Austria and Hungary (its mid 1600s), same goes about Poland and Lithuania, and also France and Burgundy. Spain took over the Portugal by brute force but never merged with Aragon and remained the Crown of Castile. How determenistic unions are?

5. Will future Bohemia be included in any sort of union, with Austria perhaps? Austria never grows big mostly staying as a 3 city civ -- Vienna, Salzburg and, you've guessed it -- Prague. That is -- before Bohemia...

6. Have you ever considered Malta as a one island challenge civ (instead of Lombardy or Bohemia)? Players will be provided by very unique and exciting experience. Italy and Danube region are already crowded as they are.


Just finished my Dutch game -- it was very uneventful, nobody came after me, except for Scottish Britain:

Spoiler :

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[Morholt]

Yeah, Tunisia might be nerfed. I originally gave them a bonus to unit production since they didn't seem to build enough Corsairs, I might just make an AI hack to force them to build Corsairs instead. From what I hear Ottomans are massively more powerful in the next version of RFCE.

1. With the possible exception of Tunis itself most of the Barbary states would probably qualify for a union. I think it's close enough.

2. There might be some more Bedouins in Tunisia. In the current version the AI is just not capable of amphibious invasions at all, so Spanish war maps don't matter that much.

3. Kiev respawn in the 1600's is a feature, although their flip area might have to be reduced. No unions between Moscow and Novgorod as A: Novgorod was a republic, and B: Moscow conquered them by force.

4. Most of the possible unions will not happen in any given game. Expect to see ~4 unions per game. If you're curious, look in Unions.py, the fourth to last number in each union list is the base AI chance. The chance of a given AI-AI union happening is that number, plus or minus diplomacy modifiers, squared. Also unions can never happen if the civs are at war with each other or one is a vassal of a third civ.

5. There will be an Austria-Bohemia union. I agree that Austria is way too weak in the current version. HRE + more agressive Ottomans should fix that.

6. It was actually one of the very first civ suggestions, but there's no way in my mind they could add anything to the game that would justify putting them in, having them clutter up the interface and slowing loadtimes. There is an independent Valetta spawning with some Knights Hospitallers and that's all the representation Malta will get.

 

[Tigranes]

Sometimes your new civ can influence the old RFCE civ in very undesired manner. I am Spanish and just finished to fight Cordoba. I got Toledo but not Cordoba itself -- and was happy aboput AI putting a decent fight (they hired 5 ultra-promoted troops at the very last minute and I run out of steam). Then fellow Muslim Almoravids spawn -- those who suppose to help Cordoba after they lost Toledo. Instead they flip their 2 African cities, Muslims go to fight each other. When I declared on them -- all the units left capital so I got it unopposed. Illasmakande

Are you totally opposed to conditional spawns? Perhaps if Cordoba is alive and kicking -- Almoravids don't flip the north of Morroco? Or they unite upon spawn? Or something along those lines, but not overlapping RFCE maps with yours -- since Cordoba was supposed to represent Morroco in vanila RFCE.

 

[CrossRFC]

Ah, these recent posts about the Morrocan flip zone flipping Cordoban cities reminded me of something rather important: when Cordoba respawns, it flips almost all of Tunisia...from the Tunisians. Both Tunisia and Cordoba end up collapsing within a few turns, effectively killing that entire area for the rest of the game.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Ah, these recent posts about the Morrocan flip zone flipping Cordoban cities reminded me of something rather important: when Cordoba respawns, it flips almost all of Tunisia...from the Tunisians. Both Tunisia and Cordoba end up collapsing within a few turns, effectively killing that entire area for the rest of the game.

I guess Morholt didn't change Cordoba's respawn.
In plain RFCEurope, Cordoba respawns as the Hafsid dinasty of Tunesia

 

[CrossRFC]

I was aware of this, but assumed it had been changed for RFC++. Cordoba's respawn should probably be changed to flip the southernmost tip of Spain.

 

[AbsintheRed]

I was aware of this, but assumed it had been changed for RFC++. Cordoba's respawn should probably be changed to flip the southernmost tip of Spain.

Agreed. Maybe with an even souther capital on the peninsula. Sevilla?
Also the northern part of Morocco

 

[Morholt]

I could've sworn I fixed the Cordoban respawn already, but I guess not. If anything they would respawn at Granada, as the Nasrids.

 

[The Turk]

Out of curiosity, are there plans for the release of Alpha 5 anytime soon? Especially with updates from regular RFCE?

 

[Sian]

I seem to remember morholt allready once stating that it'll able when RFCE is updated

 

[The Turk]

I seem to remember morholt allready once stating that it'll able when RFCE is updated

Whats that supposed to mean lol??? RFCE is being updated weekly, so as it stands RFCE+ is far behind regular RFCE, especially in terms of regional mercs which are missing?