Place to Compare Notes Among Players About Gameplay, Bugs, or Suggestion & Request Before Asking Leoreth

[Matara]

Try such strategy: Conquer every core city till the last. When their last core city is surrounded by your army, they will much more likely to surrender. I have seen this scripted in c++ files.

 

[Space_76]

Under Gameplay camparison I need som feedback on what I like more and more.

I change the balance under Const.py
Eg. this could be the Congolese I change starting date from 1390 to 1000 and try to win World Domination or I start as Inca earlier to better resist the Europeans and later go for World Domination.

In general I take minor stable civilizations and try to push them forward to becoming a bigger influence.

Does anybody else do that?

 

[MISER SVM]

What's the best way to get rid of the late game super lag? My CPU is about ten years old (Intel 4th gen 4 GHz max), Mobo still has DDR3 RAM but I've got an RX 6600 , however the 19th Century with LatAm rising gets extremely hard to handle turn time wise. What would be the best remedy (I see little point in lowering any ingame settings, unless it is the only solution, apart from well spare cash for getting up to date hardware).

 

[Leoreth]

The issue is that your specs do not really matter. The game is singlethreaded (so having fewer more powerful cores is preferable to having more less powerful cores) and limited to 32 bits of memory, so modern RAM does not add any memory. It does help to have an SSD. If you haven't already, search for the tool to increase memory on 32bit machines in the Welcome to DoC threads. Other than that, I only have generic advice: avoid extraneous strain on your system by terminating memory and processing intensive background tasks. I know this sounds like 2006 but that's where the game is from.

I have also heard some that some people have experimented with emulating their hard drive in RAM, so that when the game runs out of RAM and tries to write to disk the response is still RAM like. But I don't know how successful that was and cannot give any advice on how to set that up, because I haven't tried it myself.

 

[MISER SVM]

Thanks a lot, I tried the tool but have seen little difference so far. (Launched via Steam, after updating the .exe)

 

[brett0007]

What is the hotkey to enter observer mode?

 

[Dracosolon]

What is the hotkey to enter observer mode?

CTRL+Z to see the entire map and CTRL+A to let an AI play your civ.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Wondering if anyone else has thought about the current and future state of England. As a starting point I submit that the UHV lacks for challenge especially compared to England's assets. As a corollary I'd also submit that UHV #2 (AKA Ship Mania) accounts for much of my first point as an outcome of not only what it does or doesn't do well for gameplay but the opportunity cost as well. Therefore, I think The England Game can be easily improved without going far beyond attention to UHV #2. I favor scrapping the concept altogether at this point without failing to acknowledge that at least in principle it was a good and fitting idea by Leoreth to try. I'd have also thought it kinda cursed to not attach something navy-related beyond just a UU. If, however, we agreed that English/British naval prowess be more accurately considered as a means rather than an end, then we'd have to agree that UHV #2 presently has it backwards so is therefore lacking in the historicity department. In the gameplay area it's always had more the feel of a chore than a challenge (again no disrespect to Big L!)

With UHV #2 now blank for our purposes, I propose it be used to present an aspirational challenge to the player. At the very least it would extend the English timeline to the 20th century to better reflect its historical relevance. This alone would necessarily increase the challenge factor mainly vis-a-vis Stability which would now need be maintained longer. Nothing original yet jumps out at me for the particulars of the goal and I confess my mind can't think beyond unimaginative stuff like "make Empire bigger dolla-dolla-bills-yall". Maintaining the England would be a tempting prospect but I've already played past current UHV goals for testing/curiosity purposes and both holding Solid to prevent Canada spawn and annihilating America was comfortably easy. I'm hoping to tap into the latent potential of mostly-unused, underused, or heretofore untried mechanics, situations, outcomes, etc. as a goal condition. For redundancy I'm referring to the structure of goals like "XXX gold by XXX date" "Control XXX by XXX" "Acquire XXX through XXX". I'd petition my fellow DOCsychos to brainstorm a new combination if not a new goal concept entirely. Or an interesting emphasis on an aspect of British history and how it could be implemented. As an example thought perhaps the focus would be on a more concrete representation of Britain as the midwife of the Industrial Revolution and it's role in catapulting ol' Blighty to global preeminence. I can see a place for Manufactured Goods to play a role somewhere as a possibility. Though admittedly this alone wouldn't amount to much more than a reskin of Build 50 ships, implementing required MFG as a relative (think America global GDP share) rather than absolute quantity would maybe help flesh out the concept. How about a darkhorse angle like Britain as a diplomatic power? But, ya know, like different enough from HRE or Russian goals? Something involving government types like No fascists in Europe or Only Monarchies in Europe () - yeah I'll admit the historical case might not be that strong (we all know Churchill loved the idea of democracy and totally wouldn't enjoy holding All the Power ).

Final Note: Though I held focus on UHV #2 that isn't to imply that the others are without room for improvement or tweaking. UHV #1 could at least probably be expanded and/or have date changed. UHV #3 is currently an afterthought but that would be addressed indirectly if the ambition of my post be realized so I'm not inclined to open that discussion yet if ever. Lastly, I felt confident and comfortable to share my thoughts prior to the new map on the assumption that the factors addressed would be present independent of map changes no matter how comprehensive; for all we know now it could come to pass that the gamestate balance we settle on down the line ends up solving all of the alleged shortcomings of the England game but yous probably also wouldn't think it worth taking into serious consideration either

TLDR; English UHV is too short, too easy, and too drudging. Focusing on UHV #2 would account for most of the desired improvement but other areas are also ripe for reconsideration. Leoreth Rulez.

 

[Dracosolon]

If this is indeed something to be corrected, then:

- Beyond the tech goal, the Industrial Revolution could be represented through great people, infrastructure or being the first to reach certain milestones. Something to do with corporations ("be the first to host X corporations"?) could also work.
- I think there were prior discussions about a "Splendid Isolation" goal, reflecting Britain's role not in conquering the continent but in keeping it divided. Something about making sure no civ control more than X% of Europe's tiles and/or scoreboard?

Still I think it's very likely that Britain will keep a navy-related goal in some form - it's too thematically fitting.

 

[mccp77]

If this is indeed something to be corrected, then:

- Beyond the tech goal, the Industrial Revolution could be represented through great people, infrastructure or being the first to reach certain milestones. Something to do with corporations ("be the first to host X corporations"?) could also work.
- I think there were prior discussions about a "Splendid Isolation" goal, reflecting Britain's role not in conquering the continent but in keeping it divided. Something about making sure no civ control more than X% of Europe's tiles and/or scoreboard?

Still I think it's very likely that Britain will keep a navy-related goal in some form - it's too thematically fitting.

I don't think it's a thing to be corrected, but I do see what you mean by it being redundant since you need a ton of ships to colonize and connect your empire anyway.

I think an "informal empire" UHV would be good since the Brit's always preferred informal empire where possible for the profit. I'd also understand the impulse to keep UHV2 focused on the 1st British Empire (18th century) since the rest of the UHV is 2nd British Empire focused.

But I also think this should wait for the new map, which is why I've been keeping my powder dry on new ideas. The UK in the new map is much smaller than Germany and smaller than France, so I think it'll be much less of a goliath once Europe is more appropriately ratioed.

Addendum: I really like this idea: "- I think there were prior discussions about a "Splendid Isolation" goal, reflecting Britain's role not in conquering the continent but in keeping it divided. Something about making sure no civ control more than X% of Europe's tiles and/or scoreboard?" because it would help to keep Europe more fragmented as long as the "no civ" criteria included England itself.

 

[Dracosolon]

Maybe something like "Splendid Isolation: Make sure no civilization control more than X% of Western and Central Europe* and that no European civilization has more than X% of your score in X AD."

* Excluding Russia.

In practice, this would encourage you to expand and research to inflate your score while also sabotaging the others' colonization efforts as much as possible, which could be facilitated by sinking their transports (and thus, indeed, rule the waves). Alternatively it could be phrased as "make sure the other European civilizations have less than X colonies combined in X AD." but that might be a bit less freeform/more frustrating.

Or even just "Make sure each of the other Western and Central European civs controls less than X cities in X AD."

 

[Kott]

For a UK UHV: start wars with 40 different nations.

 

[CometHalo]

Does anyone know which civics Russia has to adopt to be communist for its UHV?

 

[Dracosolon]

Does anyone know which civics Russia has to adopt to be communist for its UHV?

There are rules, in order of priority:

1) If you have Vassalage, you're not communist.
2) Else, if you have Central Planning, you're communist.
3) If you're not already communist (ie you don't have Central Planning or have CP+Vassalage) and have Totalitarianism, you're fascist.
4) Else, if you have State Party:
- a) You're fascist if you also have Merchant Trade or Free Enterprise,
- b) Communist otherwise.

 

[CometHalo]

There are rules, in order of priority:

1) If you have Vassalage, you're not communist.
2) Else, if you have Central Planning, you're communist.
3) If you're not already communist (ie you don't have Central Planning or have CP+Vassalage) and have Totalitarianism, you're fascist.
4) Else, if you have State Party:
- a) You're fascist if you also have Merchant Trade or Free Enterprise,
- b) Communist otherwise.

Thank you so much! Is this in the pedia somewhere? Or is that just from experience

 

[Dracosolon]

It's been explained a couple of times on the forum, the code itself is in Assets/Python/Civics.py:

def isCommunist(iPlayer):
civic = civics(iPlayer)

if civic.iLegitimacy == iVassalage:
return False

if civic.iEconomy == iCentralPlanning:
return True

if civic.iGovernment == iStateParty and civic.iSociety != iTotalitarianism and civic.iEconomy not in [iMerchantTrade, iFreeEnterprise]:
return True

return False

def isFascist(iPlayer):
civic = civics(iPlayer)

if civic.iSociety == iTotalitarianism:
return True

if civic.iGovernment == iStateParty:
return True

return False

I don't think this is stated anywhere in-game. Maybe it should, though it has zero relevance outside of the Russia UHV and dynamic names.

Speaking of which, if ideological victories are ever implemented, it might be good to identify what makes a civ liberal, for example. I think this could be relatively simple:

1) If you have Vassalage (and maybe other civics like Theocracy), you're not liberal.
2) If you're already fascist or communist, you're not liberal.
3) If you have either Democracy or Free Enterprise, you're liberal.

The last part is important, to represent both regimes supporting capitalism without being democracies, along with democracies with a more interventionist approach to the economy. One could add a fourth rule, like "4) If you have Individualism or Egalitarianism and not Monarchism, you're liberal" to represent edge cases like Napoleonic France as well.

 

[Bernd-das-Brot]

Hi all!

If I try to change the BUG-Option settings the game immidiately crashes. (See screenshot)

It seems as if I am not allowed to change the files and it is not possible to change this (in Windows Explorer file management) even with administrator rights.

At first it looks like a local problem on my PC but it is on both my laptop and desktop PCs after I reinstalled v1.17 (non-svn) after a longer playing hiatus. So I am unsure if it somehow blocked through inherent data settings of the downloaded files.

Any else has this problem or any idea on solving this?

Greetings

 

[Leoreth]

This is definitely some kind of issue with the write permissions on the folder, and/or which user has been used to run the installer.

 

[brett0007]

Does anyone know the exact triggers for the conditional turkish spawn? Im getting a little sick of them trashing my arab/byzantium runs... and im not 100% exactly sure what the trigger is beyond it has something to do with the zagros mountains.

 

[Dracosolon]

IIRC:
1) If the human player owns a city in the Ottoman spawn zone, when the check is made, they'll always spawn.
2) Else they'll only spawn if, at any point, the Turkic civ conquers a town west of Persia.