New Beta Version - September 25th (9-25)

[Enrico Swagolo]

G

 

[ryanmusante]

 

[bigcat88]

Does anyone know when the new stable version will come out?

This version is VERY stable, currently in Information Era on Large Continents map... all works fine in stability.
Almost always in Late Information Era something happens, but maybe now I will end game without any CTD )

Edited: I forgot, a year ago I played game when AI start to pick policies after full Ideology tree.
But now, when culture are cutted it will be much harder, but currently I am trying )

 

[CppMaster]

"Stable" is not just about lack of CTDs, but also relatively good balance and lack of other bugs.

 

[Rojorover]

Is there a way to use this in MP with a friend? Been playing whatever the patch version is in the pinned thread for months now. If there is any MP modpacks that are safe even within the last month or two would be great just have no idea where to look. Don't know if its a matter of replacing a file or making a new pack altogether. Thanks.

 

[ElliotS]

Is there a way to use this in MP with a friend? Been playing whatever the patch version is in the pinned thread for months now. If there is any MP modpacks that are safe even within the last month or two would be great just have no idea where to look. Don't know if its a matter of replacing a file or making a new pack altogether. Thanks.

You'd need to make a whole new modpack. I'll make one of the next version and upload it if you remind me though.

 

[matlajs]

You'd need to make a whole new modpack. I'll make one of the next version and upload it if you remind me though.

Can you do just a pure VP with EUI?

 

[ElliotS]

Can you do just a pure VP with EUI?

Yeah sure. I'll make one of those in addition to my personal mix.

 

[matlajs]

I want point out on that volunteer vasslage once more. AI seem to not understand, that it needs to DoW a master for actually being able to fight with their vassal. I have seen plenty of War-peace-war-peace turn after turn.

 

[pza]

 

[anl93]

I feel bad to ask but does CTD mean "community patch dll"?

 

[Questdog]

I feel bad to ask but does CTD mean "community patch dll"?

Patch starts with a P, not a T.....CTD means Crash to Desktop

 

[matlajs]

So i have recently lost a game with Inca really great rush of nerves here. I should have turned it off once i saw that stupid 2 volunteer vassalas sitting in comfort,sending Iroques to the undisputed finalle. Well, it was disputed as i have passed that proposal about ceasing all the vassals. But like i have pointed out above, the game could be much more balanced if AI knew how to attack those, which they desired to. Playing for CV, also with science lead, Iroques got almost every culture wonder and very quickly reached tourism increasing technologies. But in the end, they weren't capable of influencing me, so nice Hiawatha turned onto diplomat. And because everyone was stupid democrat, he passed Freedom WI for free. In the end, he betrayed their, so long best friends India, and captured Westminster from them. I balanced on the edge of the sword, have launched invasion on, yet weakened, unwalled puppet city containing Westminster and i succed. But i lost because fuking vassalized Siam voted for them with 16 votes...... May i ask two things? 1) Why following WI grants so many votes? 2) Why vassals are able to vote against you for sanctioning you, yet they vote for their master to helping them win? 3) How can 2 crapp city Siam have 16 votes? Shouldn't a votes granted by this and that also be dependant on seize of empire?.

To adittion. Seeing again that decision making AI willingly serve to another AI(while this ofcourse would never be possible for player, even far behind average), this also leads a little to questions, why should i play peacefully when it leads only to loss

I must admit, that i admire how flexible AI became. But then i don't understand that completely.

 

[pineappledan]

crash to desktop

 

[CppMaster]

2) Why vassals are able to vote against you for sanctioning you, yet they vote for their master to helping them win? 3) How can 2 crapp city Siam have 16 votes?

They are forced to vote for their master for World Leader, but can vote for sanctions freely.

3) How can 2 crapp city Siam have 16 votes? Shouldn't a votes granted by this and that also be dependant on seize of empire?.

Here is a mod mod that does that among other changes: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/the-reformation-of-the-world-congress.557864/ however, IMHO it gives too many votes from population, especially on high difficulty, when AI have many more citizens.

 

[tu_79]

So i have recently lost a game with Inca really great rush of nerves here. I should have turned it off once i saw that stupid 2 volunteer vassalas sitting in comfort,sending Iroques to the undisputed finalle. Well, it was disputed as i have passed that proposal about ceasing all the vassals. But like i have pointed out above, the game could be much more balanced if AI knew how to attack those, which they desired to. Playing for CV, also with science lead, Iroques got almost every culture wonder and very quickly reached tourism increasing technologies. But in the end, they weren't capable of influencing me, so nice Hiawatha turned onto diplomat. And because everyone was stupid democrat, he passed Freedom WI for free. In the end, he betrayed their, so long best friends India, and captured Westminster from them. I balanced on the edge of the sword, have launched invasion on, yet weakened, unwalled puppet city containing Westminster and i succed. But i lost because fuking vassalized Siam voted for them with 16 votes...... May i ask two things? 1) Why following WI grants so many votes? 2) Why vassals are able to vote against you for sanctioning you, yet they vote for their master to helping them win? 3) How can 2 crapp city Siam have 16 votes? Shouldn't a votes granted by this and that also be dependant on seize of empire?.

To adittion. Seeing again that decision making AI willingly serve to another AI(while this ofcourse would never be possible for player, even far behind average), this also leads a little to questions, why should i play peacefully when it leads only to loss

I must admit, that i admire how flexible AI became. But then i don't understand that completely.

Siam can produce quite a lot of great diplomats. Add the embassies to their inclination for allying city states, plus a few delegates from following WI. Surely they took Statecraft, which helps with delegates.

 

[Questdog]

So i have recently lost a game with Inca really great rush of nerves here. I should have turned it off once i saw that stupid 2 volunteer vassalas sitting in comfort,sending Iroques to the undisputed finalle. Well, it was disputed as i have passed that proposal about ceasing all the vassals. But like i have pointed out above, the game could be much more balanced if AI knew how to attack those, which they desired to. Playing for CV, also with science lead, Iroques got almost every culture wonder and very quickly reached tourism increasing technologies. But in the end, they weren't capable of influencing me, so nice Hiawatha turned onto diplomat. And because everyone was stupid democrat, he passed Freedom WI for free. In the end, he betrayed their, so long best friends India, and captured Westminster from them. I balanced on the edge of the sword, have launched invasion on, yet weakened, unwalled puppet city containing Westminster and i succed. But i lost because fuking vassalized Siam voted for them with 16 votes...... May i ask two things? 1) Why following WI grants so many votes? 2) Why vassals are able to vote against you for sanctioning you, yet they vote for their master to helping them win? 3) How can 2 crapp city Siam have 16 votes? Shouldn't a votes granted by this and that also be dependant on seize of empire?.

To adittion. Seeing again that decision making AI willingly serve to another AI(while this ofcourse would never be possible for player, even far behind average), this also leads a little to questions, why should i play peacefully when it leads only to loss

I must admit, that i admire how flexible AI became. But then i don't understand that completely.

I always turn off Vassalage, because it is wonky.

 

[matlajs]

Siam can produce quite a lot of great diplomats. Add the embassies to their inclination for allying city states, plus a few delegates from following WI. Surely they took Statecraft, which helps with delegates.

He was 2 city in the end, terrorized all the game by neighbour Spain,weak and with 2cs allies at best all the time, because India and Iroquis took them for themselves. After Hiawatha won UN project, he was unstopable.

You know, that i am not totally against vassalage, even volunteer if it works like some kind of ,,aliance''. But right now, what it only does is, that AI master being fed for doing nothing. And it confuse other AI which desire to attack one of vassals but can't do that, It also caused that, that Ai playing for CV and is such ahead, giving no chance to other AIs protect their own ideology choice and cause single-voiced WI voting. Plus for me personaly it is horribly unfair. AI which should have all those minus modifiers for disputed borders, stealing CS,etc etc. I have awaited, at some point that they will divide and go their own path, when Iroques were such ahead( somewhat for me, a lot for the others), but they didn't untill forced to do so thanks to WC.

 

[FoxOfWar]

Not certain if it is just me, but...

...has the AI increased its' tendency for forward-settling right to your border? I feel like most games these days start with the expectation that before I feel I have big enough capital to start pumping out settlers, I will have to start my expansion by beelining Spearmen and Archers, then removing couple of forward-settled second-or-third cities from right next to my capital, basically on anything except Large or Huge maps (and with bad luck, even there).

Sure, I can (and will) capture and probably raze these cities (setting the AI back and making me the world's warmonger from the get-go) but it does kind of force my hand into early warfare every game. Is it the expectation that to get anywhere in the game, you start by wiping your nearest neighbour off the map?

 

[Grabbl]

Not certain if it is just me, but...

...has the AI increased its' tendency for forward-settling right to your border? I feel like most games these days start with the expectation that before I feel I have big enough capital to start pumping out settlers, I will have to start my expansion by beelining Spearmen and Archers, then removing couple of forward-settled second-or-third cities from right next to my capital, basically on anything except Large or Huge maps (and with bad luck, even there).

Sure, I can (and will) capture and probably raze these cities (setting the AI back and making me the world's warmonger from the get-go) but it does kind of force my hand into early warfare every game. Is it the expectation that to get anywhere in the game, you start by wiping your nearest neighbour off the map?

In my experience, the AI always did that. You don't have to wipe them out, but blocking and capturing (if possible) their settlers usually seems necessary to me unless in special situations like an isolated island, mountain ranges between the two civs or if a civ chooses to expand in another direction first. You don't need to wipe out anybody, but crippling them might be necessary (and while extreme forward settling an opponent is a gamble, it can pay out as if you are able to defend the city, the neighbour will be much weaker, and even if not, you forced him to use early production on military which also delays early-game development, at least for Progress and Tradition civs).