New Beta Version - February 1st (2/1)

[bigcat88]

Something strange with spies in this version. My spy only travel, start establishing survival(robbed a treasery by 43 gold!) and I at that turn get -20 diplo penalty(your spies was caught -20).
It was not caught! It even not established in a city!

 

[BiteInTheMark]

When they steal technological secrets it's just siphoning science from your net science output.

When they steal technologies, it actually outright says: "Arabia has stolen X".

My spy needs 4 turns to travel to their capitol, not even starting surveilance, but they made 2 spy actions in the turn their spy reached my city????
Sorry, but this is imbalanced crap.
Does anybody feel the same priorizing by AI? I have now 4 spies in my capitol detected after 8 turns with only 5 other civs in game.....

 

[Moi Magnus]

@Gazebo Is there any log for spying, or any way to access the hidden infos of how spying works?
(I don't even really know which file in the code I'm suppose to look for that)
Even if you don't plan to rebalance it, as a player, things we don't know how it works always feel "unfair" and "unbalanced".

 

[BiteInTheMark]

This AI..... I will never understand their logic:
Ramkhamkaeng offered me an alliance against russia ive accepted (I had already gathered my troops for a solo attack) ,but after conquering the russian capitol, I got this:

Edit: after 6 turns I conquered a second city of russia and made it to my vassall, he denounced me, while hes still friendly to me....

 

[Gazebo]

@Gazebo Is there any log for spying, or any way to access the hidden infos of how spying works?
(I don't even really know which file in the code I'm suppose to look for that)
Even if you don't plan to rebalance it, as a player, things we don't know how it works always feel "unfair" and "unbalanced".

EspinonageLog.

 

[Txurce]

@Gazebo Is there any log for spying, or any way to access the hidden infos of how spying works?
(I don't even really know which file in the code I'm suppose to look for that)
Even if you don't plan to rebalance it, as a player, things we don't know how it works always feel "unfair" and "unbalanced".

I shrugged it off at the time, but I do recall an unusually quick spy action in a game against me -- the turn after we all go spies, if I recall correctly.

 

[pza]

This AI..... I will never understand their logic:
Ramkhamkaeng offered me an alliance against russia ive accepted (I had already gathered my troops for a solo attack) ,but after conquering the russian capitol, I got this:

Edit: after 6 turns I conquered a second city of russia and made it to my vassall, he denounced me, while hes still friendly to me....

long-time civ and VP players know: never trust an allied, but non-vassal AI. Though I wish it was different. Oh, the possibilities...

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I dunno what I do wrong.
Playing now King difficulty with ottomans. I have 2 additional trade routes from wonders, using half for external, half for internal, choosing only trade routes with around 25 turns time, my UA alone increases my science output by 40% and culture output by 33%.
None have more cities than me, I have 25% more population than the second in pop, have build every specialist building available, working ALL available non-engineer specialists except one merchant, have 2 CS alliance and a vassal.
And still.... it isnt enough. Iam not the tech leader nor the social policy leader.
My capitol is working 2 writer, 2 musician, 3 civil servants and all specialists except 2 engineers. Ive build everything available.
And still, I have 2 unhappiness by boredom 2 from illiteracy.
Yeah, I am missing the Zoo and public school, but even with zoo, it will be not enough.
Iam forced to build everything, only for the reason not falling into the unhappines death spiral.....

 

[Blue Ghost]

This AI..... I will never understand their logic:
Ramkhamkaeng offered me an alliance against russia ive accepted (I had already gathered my troops for a solo attack) ,but after conquering the russian capitol, I got this:

Edit: after 6 turns I conquered a second city of russia and made it to my vassall, he denounced me, while hes still friendly to me....

They wanted a little help in resolving an international dispute, not for you to march in and conquer and massacre everyone. They want to know that they don’t approve of your overly violent methods, while not cutting ties with you completely.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

They wanted a little help in resolving an international dispute, not for you to march in and conquer and massacre everyone. They want to know that they don’t approve of your overly violent methods, while not cutting ties with you completely.

Pulling others into a war is the solution for an "international dispute"?

 

[Tarkhax]

If I recall right, the bug disappeared for me when using only the "Mod" folder from RCI in your MODS folder (I think I created a new folder named RCI there and copied the folder from the RCI DLC there, then removing the RCI parts in the DLC folder) and using RCI as a mod and not as a DLC.

That did the trick, thanks, Grabbl!

 

[Gothic_Empire]

Pulling others into a war is the solution for an "international dispute"?

Sure. Look at US and Russia's proxy war in Syria.

 

[bigcat88]

Anyone see that new antiwarmonger buff? In my game I fight against Persia that conquer almost 50% of the world and my troops doesn't have any positive modifiers. Where to see them?

 

[Gazebo]

I dunno what I do wrong.
Playing now King difficulty with ottomans. I have 2 additional trade routes from wonders, using half for external, half for internal, choosing only trade routes with around 25 turns time, my UA alone increases my science output by 40% and culture output by 33%.
None have more cities than me, I have 25% more population than the second in pop, have build every specialist building available, working ALL available non-engineer specialists except one merchant, have 2 CS alliance and a vassal.
And still.... it isnt enough. Iam not the tech leader nor the social policy leader.
My capitol is working 2 writer, 2 musician, 3 civil servants and all specialists except 2 engineers. Ive build everything available.
And still, I have 2 unhappiness by boredom 2 from illiteracy.
Yeah, I am missing the Zoo and public school, but even with zoo, it will be not enough.
Iam forced to build everything, only for the reason not falling into the unhappines death spiral.....

Big empires get unhappiness. It's unavoidable. You aren't supposed to be able to remove all sources of unhappiness from all cities (this is, IIRC, even written in the civilopedia).

G

 

[Kim Dong Un]

Big empires get unhappiness. It's unavoidable. You aren't supposed to be able to remove all sources of unhappiness from all cities (this is, IIRC, even written in the civilopedia).

G

So what about domination victories and warmongering civs? The strength and overall point of those civs is to swallow your opponents and become a big empire, but it's impossible to keep up even when playing well due to the inability for puppets to efficiently stave off unhappiness. Combine that with general unhappiness produced by your own civ, and it becomes an insurmountable mess. Are we supposed to just ignore opportunities to weaken and conquer opponents, only to capture the capitals? This is honestly not right from a warmonger standpoint. I've asked this before without response, but is it even possible to sweep a game (even on lowest difficulties) "RISK" style? How many games in testing do you witness AI actually winning domination victories and "taking over the world...". I find most times I have to actively avoid plowing through certain opposition in wars when I have them on the ropes, simply because I don't want to deal with the ridiculous unhappiness snowball, even though the best course of action would be to keep advancing.

 

[Txurce]

I've asked this before without response, but is it even possible to sweep a game (even on lowest difficulties) "RISK" style? How many games in testing do you witness AI actually winning domination victories and "taking over the world...". I find most times I have to actively avoid plowing through certain opposition in wars when I have them on the ropes, simply because I don't want to deal with the ridiculous unhappiness snowball, even though the best course of action would be to keep advancing.

VP isn't Risk. I can't imagine it being possible in RL, so I would want it to be virtually impossible in VP. "Taking over the world" doesn't call for conquering every city on it, in my opinion.

 

[Blue Ghost]

So what about domination victories and warmongering civs? The strength and overall point of those civs is to swallow your opponents and become a big empire, but it's impossible to keep up even when playing well due to the inability for puppets to efficiently stave off unhappiness. Combine that with general unhappiness produced by your own civ, and it becomes an insurmountable mess. Are we supposed to just ignore opportunities to weaken and conquer opponents, only to capture the capitals? This is honestly not right from a warmonger standpoint. I've asked this before without response, but is it even possible to sweep a game (even on lowest difficulties) "RISK" style? How many games in testing do you witness AI actually winning domination victories and "taking over the world...". I find most times I have to actively avoid plowing through certain opposition in wars when I have them on the ropes, simply because I don't want to deal with the ridiculous unhappiness snowball, even though the best course of action would be to keep advancing.

Puppets are a huge drain on unhappiness. You cannot keep every city conquered as a puppet indiscriminately, as you could in earlier versions. If you’re suffering from unhappiness, you need to annex or raze some cities. And yes, you do need to slow your conquest if your empire’s economy cannot keep up with your expansion. But it is still possible to conquer and control a world-spanning empire, if you do so strategically.

 

[tu_79]

VP isn't Risk. I can't imagine it being possible in RL, so I would want it to be virtually impossible in VP. "Taking over the world" doesn't call for conquering every city on it, in my opinion.

Specially now, that the penalty isn't so huge when taking capitals. Domination can focus on capturing capitals.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Big empires get unhappiness. It's unavoidable. You aren't supposed to be able to remove all sources of unhappiness from all cities (this is, IIRC, even written in the civilopedia).

G

It is NOW unavoidable cause you make it unavoidable. Before the increase of the population effect, I never had such big unhappiness problems ever before.
Keep your cities grow needs effort and investments. Ignoring any kind of yields for food to grow hits your ability to get techs, policies, infrastructure and great people, but should be worth in long term.
Now you force players to slow down their growth and build buildings they dont want (constabulary was a spy building, zoo a tourismn building). You take players one of the last chances to overwhelm AI in long term planning, and this feels really artificial.
I cant imagine how hard its now going conquest in industrial age. Ive conquered 2 cities in renaissance, one puppet and one annxed. The annexed was a capitol and has now -9 happiness, the puppet was the second city and has -12.

 

[Moi Magnus]

It is NOW unavoidable cause you make it unavoidable. Before the increase of the population effect, I never had such big unhappiness problems ever before.
Keep your cities grow needs effort and investments. Ignoring any kind of yields for food to grow hits your ability to get techs, policies, infrastructure and great people, but should be worth in long term.
Now you force players to slow down their growth and build buildings they dont want (constabulary was a spy building, zoo a tourismn building). You take players one of the last chances to overwhelm AI in long term planning, and this feels really artificial.
I cant imagine how hard its now going conquest in industrial age. Ive conquered 2 cities in renaissance, one puppet and one annxed. The annexed was a capitol and has now -9 happiness, the puppet was the second city and has -12.

I don't think G denied at any point that it was intended and by design.
If you want to change it, discussing on how it may unbalance some playstyle with regards to the others (tall vs wide, conquest vs culture, ...) has more chances to make G change its mind than just repeating things that G will find either "normal" (nerfing the tools that are better in human hands than AI's), "annectodal" or "subjectives"