New Version - February 27th (2/27)

[Txurce]

Trade route pillaging should make the home front angry, though. Not sure what the issue is here. DOW, seek out their routes, and shut them down. Economic warfare, ho!

Re: trade route pillaging, I framed it from the start for myself as economic warfare, so I don't have a problem with it. The same goes for war weariness. It takes a long time to ramp up. By the time my supply cap's hemorrhaging, I know I have no one to blame (or turn to) other than myself.

Happiness, on the other hand, I have harder time with. In the last patch, it seemed to be due to falling behind in policies. I'm going to focus primarily on that aspect when I start a game this weekend, and see what happens.

 

[ashendashin]

Sure, make them angry, but at who? Me or the evil tyrant that destroyed them?

I dunno you're sounding kinda like a tyrant if you expect the general population to automatically hate your enemy.
Seems like what you want is a period of war fervor.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

The thing with trade routes IRL is that you can immediately "call them home" the moment war erupts, whereas in civ, including VP, you have to wait until they're either finished with their route or they've been pillaged.

So I'm strongly in favour of either all trade routes "returning home" upon declaration of war OR trade routes being pillaged not affecting war score and war mechanics.

 

[glider1]

[QUOTE="Txurce, .....
Happiness, on the other hand, I have harder time with. In the last patch, it seemed to be due to falling behind in policies. I'm going to focus primarily on that aspect when I start a game this weekend, and see what happens.[/QUOTE]

I did an experiment on the 7/7 version. Shaka was steam rolling his section of the continent only competitor to me. I was safe but had big crime unhappiness. I replayed the game but this time poured huge amounts of foreign aid into his regional neighbors slowing his conquest down. With no other changes in build/tech/policy order my crime unhappiness was less but boredom unhappiness went up because Shaka switched from conquest to wonder building.

 

[Sardauker]

Would it be possible to only allow trade route pillaging in neutral or enemy territories? Trade routes are really important to all parties right now, and the AI loves to pillage in a place you can't defend. Seems like you wouldn't allow friends into your country to willy nilly take down any caravans that they feel like.

 

[RAuer2]

Economic warfare, ho!

Economic warfare is underrated! I usually pillage everything in sight before taking a city from an enemy Civ. There are exceptions, sure, but in general I burn everything I can before siege time (including road connections around an enemy capitol). If I can succeed in inflicting it, that kind of devastation can really set an AI Civ back.

 

[Enginseer]

So, I came up with a developmental mod that gave you options when a city was flipped to you. Beta testers needed. PM me for test versions. However they need to be playing within a game that has a lot of city flips (mainly means you and AI will be dipping under happiness for a majority of the game)...

Once a city is flipped, you get many options when you annex/puppet:

Grant it to an allied city-state of choice (For AI, they do randomly/Sphere of Influence allies take priority/Multiple SoI means random again) for influence boost.
Grant it to a random non-allied, neutral city-state to spark a WLTKD and a gold boost for your nation. (Reward only applies once to one player meaning that flipped cities that are re-flipped cannot be earned back)
Create a buffer state (This at the start takes out 20% of your city-state pool meaning 9 out of 41 city-states will not exist until one creates a buffer state out of the flipped city. This buffer states then becomes a Sphere of Influence to your civilization and acquires all of your technologies) [EXPERIMENTAL MAY NOT PASS FINAL RELEASE] {Also requires Printing Press and the World Congress}
Raze it(Not razing, but turn it into a barbarian city [EXPERIMENTAL MAY NOT PASS FINAL RELEASE]).

 

[Questdog]

Economic warfare is underrated! I usually pillage everything in sight before taking a city from an enemy Civ. There are exceptions, sure, but in general I burn everything I can before siege time (including road connections around an enemy capitol). If I can succeed in inflicting it, that of devastation can really set an AI Civ back.

How does pillaging everything and then taking the city hurt the AI more than just taking the city? Seems to me by pillaging everything you are only hurting the new owner of the city (you).

 

[ryanmusante]

If I can succeed in inflicting it, that of devastation can really set an AI Civ back.

How do you feel about sea trade routes in VP? Am I the only one who uses the no ocean plundering mod? Or do most feel that it is too game breaking? I find that the justification for it is very simple. Without it, it is nearly impossible to sustain a connection in late game making it almost a necessity for cargo ships.

The fact that it benefits me and the AI is enough to outweigh whatever reasons there would be as a detractor for having it. Also, you can focus more on your actual navy and less on protecting trade routes going in multiple directions in random locations.

www.picknmixmods.com/mods/CivV/Global/No Ocean Plundering.html

 

[pineappledan]

How do you feel about sea trade routes in VP? Am I the only one who uses the no ocean plundering mod? Or do most feel that it is too game breaking? I find that the justification for it is very simple. Without it, it is nearly impossible to sustain a connection in late game making it almost a necessity for cargo ships.

The fact that it benefits me and the AI is enough to outweigh whatever reasons there would be as a detractor for having it. Also, you can focus more on your actual navy and less on protecting trade routes going in multiple directions in random locations.

Well that shuts Morocco down pretty hard, doesn't it?

 

[selph]

First of, as always really appreciate the stuff you have done.

So just downloaded the version to try a new game, am I missing something or is Goddess of Renewal not working properly?

Spoiler :

I'm only getting culture and faith from the buildings despite working 2 jungles and 2 forest tiles.

 

[Stalker0]

The same goes for war weariness. It takes a long time to ramp up.

In my last game Aztecs were bribed into warring with me. By the time the peace button was even an option, I was at -75% due to WW.

I find WW to be Fine, but it’s in no way slow

 

[ryanmusante]

Well that shuts Morocco down pretty hard, doesn't it?

Perhaps you're right about that. But, a small price to pay unless it's your civ of choice.

 

[Txurce]

[QUOTE="Txurce, .....
Happiness, on the other hand, I have harder time with. In the last patch, it seemed to be due to falling behind in policies. I'm going to focus primarily on that aspect when I start a game this weekend, and see what happens.

I did an experiment on the 7/7 version. Shaka was steam rolling his section of the continent only competitor to me. I was safe but had big crime unhappiness. I replayed the game but this time poured huge amounts of foreign aid into his regional neighbors slowing his conquest down. With no other changes in build/tech/policy order my crime unhappiness was less but boredom unhappiness went up because Shaka switched from conquest to wonder building.[/QUOTE]

That's really interesting -- thanks.

 

[Txurce]

In my last game Aztecs were bribed into warring with me. By the time the peace button was even an option, I was at -75% due to WW.

I find WW to be Fine, but it’s in no way slow

Wow!

 

[Frozen In Ice]

Would it be possible to add an option to make a city-state your ally when you conquer it instead of having to annex or puppet it? In a game I'm currently playing, a long-time city state ally got election rigged by the Maya, and then the Maya declared war on me in one or two turns. I conquered the city state assuming returning them to my ally would be an option, much like you can liberate a city state conquered by another player, so I was a bit surprised when it wasn't an option. Flavor-wise it would fit with installing the faction that likes you back into power.

 

[ryanmusante]

Would it be possible to add an option to make a city-state your ally when you conquer it instead of having to annex or puppet it?

In the scenario you're speaking of, that is very unfortunate.

 

[Ziad]

I have always wondered...

Why do we lose all trade routes to a civ if they declare war on us? Why don't they just get automatically recalled?

Is it a hardcoded thing?

 

[selph]

Would it be possible to add an option to make a city-state your ally when you conquer it instead of having to annex or puppet it? In a game I'm currently playing, a long-time city state ally got election rigged by the Maya, and then the Maya declared war on me in one or two turns. I conquered the city state assuming returning them to my ally would be an option, much like you can liberate a city state conquered by another player, so I was a bit surprised when it wasn't an option. Flavor-wise it would fit with installing the faction that likes you back into power.

This is actually thing in JFD's Rise to Power project. Conquer a city-state, install a government loyal to you, bam instant ally. Not gonna get added to VP though, I believe it's past feature freeze already.

 

[skodkim]

@Gazebo

Just started a new game using this and I noticed some weird/new AI settling behavior. I play with other mods so it may be an effect of this but I haven't seen it in previous versions, e.g. 2-7. In one of the mods (personal compilation of small vp tweaks to vp and vanilla) assigns all players 2 settlers from the start.

Using this version AI settles their first city but then don't move their 2nd settler. Tried a couple of games playing until turn ~15 (epic speed), and they just sit there. Don't know if it's intended but patch notes don't seem to imply this. Logs attached if you're intested.

\Skodkim