Revolutionist_8
King
To celebrate the return of G , I placed a holy site so holy that even a cloud appeared above it
(yes, I put it there solely for this reason)
(yes, I put it there solely for this reason)
I'm usually happy to found in an alternate city with a religious natural wonder. These are also the only times I've ever experienced a prophet spawning outside my capital. The flavor feels like Mecca and Medina or Kyoto and Edo or something. Plus, it's usually a relief to know I can build my religious wonders there rather than add another thing in the queue of my capital.
May you elaborate why is it "interesting"? It feels like a clear disadvantage the vast majority of times.
Diplomacy
- Additional finetuning of aggression
- Improvements to city liberation logic
AI Autoplay
- Fixed AI acting hostile to observers in the leaderhead screen for no reason
- Observer can now make share opinion requests of the AI to get their true approach towards other players, for debugging
- Enabled additional notifications for observers: war, peace, vassalage, Wonder construction
Diplo Debug Mode
- Diplo debug mode now actually shows the AI's true approach (instead of "1"; blame Firaxis's localization); thanks to psparky for helping me figure this out!
- When enabled, player now has Intimate knowledge of all AI civs' World Congress desires, regardless of ideology/diplomats
Bugfixes
- Fixed Roman Forum and Summer Palace not having a MaxStartEra
- Humans now have Intimate knowledge of AI teammates' World Congress desires, regardless of ideology/diplomats
- Fixed bugs with previous changes
Diplomacy
- Players can now denounce each other while at war
AI taught to do this too
Disabled if "Permanent War" or "Permanent War or Peace" are enabled
Rationale: Players don't need the agreement of the other leader to badmouth them
- Share Opinion now works even if at war, but AI will only share their opinion if debug mode is enabled or if they're at war with the player you ask about
Now you can always hear the leader's lovely voice say something other than "You're joking, right?" or "My armies cannot be stopped." :)
This is mostly intended as a debugging feature for modders/players though!
Bugfixes
- Fixed observer interaction with leaderhead screen (can no longer demand, denounce, etc)
- AIs now show up as "NEUTRAL" towards observers, not "Emotionless"
- Fixed a bug with the button to request that the AI move their troops
Cleanup
- Removed "MOD_DIPLOMACY_AUTO_DENOUNCE" option as this change makes it obsolete
Hrm. I just experimented with this in my current game, and with Production focus, my cities are still preferring floodplains to horses and riverside grasslands to multiple sources of hillside copper. If modders want to weigh in on whether this unintentional, I'm happy to big report and share saves on GitHub.@ChefBRD , I may be imagining things, but I feel that the choice of city tile manager (governor) affects which tiles will be targeted next by the border growth algorithm. I normally lock tiles that I wish to have worked and then set the governor to "Production". The border growth algo then seems to go preferentially after hills and plains instead of grasslands, but again, I could be imagining things
- Players can now denounce each other while at war
First off, many many thanks for all the effort for those involved in the production of VP, past, present and future. You have breathed life into the game in a manner which Firaxis should take note and start paying a wage for.
In the latest version of VP (Which is truly amazing after updating from a version dating back a few years) I have been consistently out-performing the AI in regards to settlement expansion, often having the advantage of 4 or more cities by the time half of the AI civs have settled their second without really focusing on settler production.
I have noticed for some civs the AI has a tendency to push to 6 population in their capital before they push a settler for their second city, even for expansionist civs.
In trying to alleviate this to have a little more emphasis in the early expansion, the only variables I have found that seem to be noteworthy for alteration (My knowledge of lua/sql is quite poor these days, basic at best unless I sit down for longer periods of time to recap) appear to be as follows:
Located in Sid Meier's Civilization 5\MODS\(1) Community Patch\Core Files\Core Changes\CoreChanges.xml
<AICityStrategy_Flavors>
<Row>
<AICityStrategyType>AICITYSTRATEGY_LARGE_CITY</AICityStrategyType>
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_EXPANSION</FlavorType>
<Flavor>30</Flavor>
</Row>
<Row>
<AICityStrategyType>AICITYSTRATEGY_ENOUGH_TILE_IMPROVERS</AICityStrategyType>
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_EXPANSION</FlavorType>
<Flavor>40</Flavor>
</Row>
<Row>
<AICityStrategyType>AICITYSTRATEGY_CAPITAL_NEED_SETTLER</AICityStrategyType>
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_OFFENSE</FlavorType>
<Flavor>100</Flavor>
</Row>
</AICityStrategy_Flavors>
Out of curiosity, what is defining of a 'large city' and is the need_settler variable supposed to be flavour_offense instead of expansion?
Are there any other variables that I need to be aware of to fine-tune without upsetting later than early gameplay?
Editing these variables have not produced any meaningful results to date, though I still need to do a lot more testing...
Note in edit: Sorry for size of post, not sure how to insert a code snippet on these forums.
I, too, really think AI is expanding too slow. I do not know if it is due to the inefficiency of creating too many cities (reduced research/tourism/culture) or lack of happiness or settlers being too low in the production priority or AI choosing Tradition a lot but I am looking to play with some variables to change that. Too bad your changes didn't lead to meaningful results in that regards.
I like civ games to be an expansion race like in Civ4 and I am still trying to find which variables to change in order to address this.
I mean what i see here is that u cant go for all the islands which is reasonable, if you just went for 1 or 2 you would be fine.
This has happened consistently in enough games, that I may just have to declare islands untenable....which is a real shame. Anyone figured a good strategic solution to the problem?
On lower difficulties you'd get away with it, but I know you usually play at Emperor+ so that's the main issue.So after several games of trying out island expansion, I may conclude that its still not defendible enough to be worth it.
Spoiler :
Now if it was just me and Portugal, I could hold this. I have the navy. The issue is the dog pile. Denmark has a huge navy in both north and south. Japan also had a sizable navy in the north (thankfully we just peaced out).
So my navy is already spread thin, I am doing well....but I simply can't hold 3 navies with 1 navy. So my islands are forced to fend for themselves. Maybe I could try forts on all my island spots, because g guns by themselves are too vulnerable to the navy on an island, and they get sniped quickly as is what happened here. Then its simply a matter of time.
The tricky thing is...again I think the island is holdable if I can get ships there, but I have absolutely not a single ship to spare.
This has happened consistently in enough games, that I may just have to declare islands untenable....which is a real shame. Anyone figured a good strategic solution to the problem?
So after several games of trying out island expansion, I may conclude that its still not defendible enough to be worth it.
Now if it was just me and Portugal, I could hold this. I have the navy. The issue is the dog pile. Denmark has a huge navy in both north and south. Japan also had a sizable navy in the north (thankfully we just peaced out).
So my navy is already spread thin, I am doing well....but I simply can't hold 3 navies with 1 navy. So my islands are forced to fend for themselves. Maybe I could try forts on all my island spots, because g guns by themselves are too vulnerable to the navy on an island, and they get sniped quickly as is what happened here. Then its simply a matter of time.
The tricky thing is...again I think the island is holdable if I can get ships there, but I have absolutely not a single ship to spare.
This has happened consistently in enough games, that I may just have to declare islands untenable....which is a real shame. Anyone figured a good strategic solution to the problem?
I think you just executed poorly by misreading and trying to force the situation; although you didn't technically overexpand, there's no real justification to settle so close to Portugal (a naval flavoured civ) considering your positioning between Japan and Denmark should've left you anticipating being spread thin due to inevitable conflict with your direct neighbors. You probably should've just disregarded that area and instead turtle for Denmark while focusing on vassalizing Oda.
Why should a small island be strongly defensible in a world war?
I agree, I'm not really looking to make the island stronger per say...honestly I'm not even really sure what to do about this....I'm just commenting on the fact that island colonies seem extremely questionable at the moment because of the sheer effort to defend them.