New Version - December 13th (12-13)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gazebo

Lord of the Community Patch
Supporter
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
18,399
Location
Little Rock
Hey all,

New version inbound. Changelog:

General
  • Github bugfixes and feature requests
  • Fixed some targeting issues for units in some situations
  • Fixed defense process bug
Balance
  • Trade
    • Trade Route yields now scale with distance - closer routes are worth less.
    • Cannot send trade routes to a foreign city if a trade route from a another owned city is already targeting that city
    • These nerfs to TR power (which were, admittedly, getting a little too potent) limit the ability of a player to 'game' trade routes by piling them all on a safe, lucrative destination. Will also result in a broader spectrum of routes overall for all civs (variety is the spice of life!)
  • Civs
    • Morocco
      • New UA - +1 to all Yields in Capital per unique Trade Route partner, scaling with Era. Trade Route yields to or from Moroccan cities are not affected by distance. Can plunder Trade Units connected to unowned cities without declaring war.
      • UI changes - +2g to adjacent fishing boats; +1c to adjacent coastal tiles
    • Germany
      • Votes per CS alliance now 3 (was 2) - yield bonuses for alliance now +2 (was +3)
  • Units
    • Experience required for leveling units now scales with gamespeed

Online as of 12:45am EST. Not savegame compatible.

Link: https://mega.nz/#F!DMsxkDYI!zSpR9CHpmAfWyIvMXaN3pw
 
Last edited:
The trade route thing is surprising. For trade heavy civs, it will be a challenge.

Pillaging trade routes without war seems neat. A nod to Barbary pirates?
 
Rip Ottomans, rip Marathon (how much faster is Quick level up?)

So, TRs require strategy now, in particular Venice with double amount

Who will be a more annoying neighbor, Morocco, America, Zulu, Shoshone or Greece?
 
Last edited:
Units
Experience required for leveling units now scales with gamespeed


This means that the first promotion would take 15 on epic right? That might be a bit too much, it should probably scale slightly less than gamespeed. Either way this is a cool patch
 
Units
Experience required for leveling units now scales with gamespeed


This means that the first promotion would take 15 on epic right? That might be a bit too much, it should probably scale slightly less than gamespeed. Either way this is a cool patch

Scales based on the 'unit train speed' modifier in the speed settings. If it feels to painful we can adjust, but it is worth tinkering with.
 
The Trade Route thing....doesn't that have an impact on religion spread?

Correct me if I'm wrong but spamming routes into 1 city is a way to push a lot of religion into the city, so that is one thing that will change from this.

Also, it may limit how much trade is available early. Depending on the map if there aren't a lot of cities close by in the early game you can't do your full trade routes to foreign cities. But there is also internal routes so maybe that is not a big problem.

Its a very interesting change, we shall see!
 
Units
  • Experience required for leveling units now scales with gamespeed
G, do you have a rough estimate of how effective this would be in reducing the human advantage in war on epic/marathon game speeds? I'd like to play a slower speed for more immersion and time spent in all eras, but I've been playing standard instead for the additional challenge.

Maybe a wonky breakdown, but in a nutshell, does this change (in theory; I guess we'll find out in due time through game play) reduce the meta of slower game speed = easier game enough so that the challenge of say standard and epic are pretty comparable?
 
  • Cannot send trade routes to a foreign city if a trade route from a another owned city is already targeting that city
There are mechanics in the game that encourage building cities that are good trade destinations. Separate entries in Buildings table for incoming TRs. E.g. East India Company is a good example. I also have seen mods that use this concept.

Blocking this is too harsh imho and totally opposite to RL. Cities grow into big trade and comm hubs. The bigger they are, the more new routes go there. That applies to seaports, and airports. The game simulates this well, i dont see what is the problem here? Why would I be forced to choose a worse deal?

If you want to stimulate more diverse TR paths, etc. maybe implement diminishing returns mechanism. E.g. each new route would be 20% worse. Eventually other destinations will be better, and both humans and AI will send routes there.
 
Cities with east india companies are probably the worst TR targets :D But i see this will make cultural victory again a way harder since you actually can not send all possible trs to nearest possible city.
 
Does this work now with YGAEMP? meaning of course focusing on does it work with 43 civ...?

Have to set up a github...

Nope same issue opens empty civs in wrong places no luxuries.
 
Last edited:
Who will be a more annoying neighbor, Morocco, America, Zulu, Shoshone or Greece?

England! Of course.

Cannot send trade routes to a foreign city if a trade route from a another owned city is already targeting that city
Yay! Now a lot of thinking has to be put in trade routes.

Does it affect internal trade routes?
 
Thanks for the changes to trade routes. I should make choices more interesting. It should also indirectly nerf Venice which is at least a difficulty level easier to play than other civs.

Blocking this is too harsh imho and totally opposite to RL. Cities grow into big trade and comm hubs. The bigger they are, the more new routes go there.

Good point but civ is abstract. Think of it like this. One high value trade route in the game is symbolic of many trade routes in the real world. Big commercial cities should still see relatively more routes in any case.
 
So, two initial questions I have about the XP change:
- Is the XP from military training buildings affected? If not, I think it should scale as well.
- Is the amount of XP required for GG/GA birth in epic and marathon changed? Since there is less XP at slower speeds now, perhaps a change is needed?
 
.
Good point but civ is abstract. Think of it like this. One high value trade route in the game is symbolic of many trade routes in the real world. Big commercial cities should still see relatively more routes in any case.
You can only send 1 route from A to B, it’s like this in vanila even, so yes, it is abstract.
Explain pls why this would prevent you from sending route from C to B?
 
rip my current playthrough :) could the defense process bug be fixed for older games by just editing the 100->10 typo or need to start a fresh game with this new version?
 
Can plunder Trade Units connected to unowned cities without declaring war.

This seems too gamey in my view, considering that if it was an mp game, you'd declare war on anyone who did that. I like the thinking, and the creativity but I don't love it.

No big deal, just a general thought.
 
New Morocco sounds really fun to play, it'd be hilarious plundering everyone's trade routes. I imagine there's a diplomatic penalty for this?
 
- Is the amount of XP required for GG/GA birth in epic and marathon changed? Since there is less XP at slower speeds now, perhaps a change is needed?

I think the XP gained is the same, it just takes more XP to acquire a promotion. So Great Generals should be unaffected.
 
Morocco's ability goes with Americas as the most annoying, aggressively gross ability. Morocco should pillage every trade route they can as the AI.

Thus, they should never be given open borders by any civ. They should be attacked by any civ. Just like America, it's just instant war to remove them from the game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom