Plans for DoC 1.16

[HNation]

5. More content for the late game era

Have you considered adding new types of events as well? Terrorist attacks and hostage situations have had a huge impact on geopolitics for the last 40 years, and could make interesting late game events. But I definitely agree that there's not enough to do in the late game, especially if you're not a militaristic civilization. Often, I'll have built all the buildings I can in all my cities, have all the troops I need, so I'll just spend 100 turns building research, culture, or wealth.

 

[Leoreth]

If someone can write them (requirements, choices, their outcomes, plus all texts) I can add them to the game. In general I do not think they are a worthy investment of my time to create out of whole cloth.

 

[Edmund Ironside]

The other 3 civs; my guess is it will be from the following possibilities:
Hittities
Assyria
Sweden
Olmecs
Manchu Dynasty
Malay
Splitting Russia into a Kievan and Muscovite civs

 

[1SDANi]

We NEED a Central Asia civ and more African civs. Those two areas are so barren.

NOTE: Barren when it comes to civs with their cores in the area.

 

[Leon Michiel]

Central Asian civ - yes.

Africa? Not sure. Africa is mostly very barren because it's mostly desert or jungle, as it should be. Morocco, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mali and Kongo fill up the remaining habitable space quite nicely

And Kievan Rus? Also not sure. Poland really needs that space, and historically Kiev was part of Poland for quite a while. Also, while Kievan Rus was definitely the spiritual and cultural 'mother city' for Russia, it was the Muscovite principality which was the origin of Russia as a political entity.

I 'd argue the balance of Civs is pretty much complete when it concerns historicity and balance.

 

[1SDANi]

Africa? Not sure. Africa is mostly very barren because it's mostly desert or jungle, as it should be. Morocco, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mali and Kongo fill up the remaining habitable space quite nicely

@merijn_v1 's Swahili and South African civs immediately come to mind as civs in areas with fewer Core civs.

 

[star15389]

As far as Africa goes, I would think harder about deleting Congo than adding more civs

 

[Leon Michiel]

South Africa as a post-colonial Civ like Argentina, etc., I can get into. The reason I didn't mention it before is because I do appreciate space to expand into during the mid game. Filling up the entire map with civs is probably not a good idea from that perspective.

 

[1SDANi]

South Africa as a post-colonial Civ like Argentina, etc., I can get into. The reason I didn't mention it before is because I do appreciate space to expand into during the mid game. Filling up the entire map with civs is probably not a good idea from that perspective.

I'd rather we look at and fix the issues with fighting rising nations than decide to leave Africa barren. Heck, why don't we take a page out of that South American civ whose name I forget and make it so that cities don't flip if you're stable, but instead the rising nation just gets more soldiers?

AND CAN WE GIVE CONQUERED CITIES THE FREE BUILDINGS SETTLED CITIES GET? IS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK FOR A REPRESENTATION OF REBUILDING INITIATIVES?

I mean, why not a 5 turn rebuilding initiative build that grants all of the buildings that come with newly settled cities?

Actually, this rebuilding initiative might be a good addition for CMC. I'm going to look into it. As for the rising nations thing, I'm not sure how easy it will be to implement.

 

[Lokki242]

We've had some good talks about the Sioux and Iroquois so I reckon one of those could be there, probably the latter.

 

[Leon Michiel]

I'd rather we look at and fix the issues with fighting rising nations than decide to leave Africa barren. Heck, why don't we take a page out of that South American civ whose name I forget and make it so that cities don't flip if you're stable, but instead the rising nation just gets more soldiers?

AND CAN WE GIVE CONQUERED CITIES THE FREE BUILDINGS SETTLED CITIES GET? IS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK FOR A REPRESENTATION OF REBUILDING INITIATIVES?

I mean, why not a 5 turn rebuilding initiative build that grants all of the buildings that come with newly settled cities?

Actually, this rebuilding initiative might be a good addition for CMC. I'm going to look into it. As for the rising nations thing, I'm not sure how easy it will be to implement.

Can I report your caps lock key in bug reports and technical issues?

I do agree on the conquered city and razing aspect. I wonder if the razing penalty can be offset by expansion bonus of settling perhaps? Or through the increased commerce from it? Just brainstorming here to be honest. Possibly whipping and purchasing is already a sufficient mechanic for this.

 

[cmakk1012]

In terms of Africa, Swahili and South Africa are both great choices for new civs, one as a medieval trading empire and the other as a post-colonial civ like Canada (and hopefully Australia too). The east coast of Africa was certainly developed and distinctive enough to warrant its own civilization and to be perfectly honest Ethiopia regularly settling the region as it does now really rubs me the wrong way.

 

[1SDANi]

In terms of Africa, Swahili and South Africa are both great choices for new civs, one as a medieval trading empire and the other as a post-colonial civ like Canada (and hopefully Australia too). The east coast of Africa was certainly developed and distinctive enough to warrant its own civilization and to be perfectly honest Ethiopia regularly settling the region as it does now really rubs me the wrong way.

Australia would be an amazing addition to the game. I haven't played many games to the end game, but I don't think I've seen more than 2 or 3 cities in Australia. Australia would be an amazing civ to give Australia more representation.

 

[Steb]

Australia would be an amazing civ to give Australia more representation.

Tautological much?

 

[ales_]

Tautological much?

If you mean Australia the civ and Australia the continent, then not so much.

 

[1SDANi]

Tautological much?

As @ales_ stated, it's not Tautological but rather a joke about the redundancy of naming Australia after Australia.

 

[Leon Michiel]

What about a Celtic civilization in Gaul, Spain and Britain? We mostly identity Celtic as a language nowadays but the case can be made that a Celtic civilization was emerging before the Roman smashed it. They shared culture, customs, language, religion and a political system though it was tribal in nature. It did unify to an extend whenever the Romans came along. Take for example Commius, a Belgic king who was commissioned by Julius Caesar as envoy to British Celts. He then fought with the Gaulish Vercingetorix for a Gaulish cause at Alesia against Julius Caesar. He ended up being exiled to Britain after that mishap.

Honestly, how cool would it be to play a Celtic empire and supersede the Romans? Arguably they weren't a united nation-state as we know it, but how unified were feudal HRE, France, England, Japan really? Or the Greeks, Vikings, the Russian principalities in the medieval era... The list can go on.

We can even have it come back as Ireland and joke about representing Ireland with Ireland.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

South Africa as a post-colonial Civ like Argentina, etc., I can get into. The reason I didn't mention it before is because I do appreciate space to expand into during the mid game. Filling up the entire map with civs is probably not a good idea from that perspective.

I'd like to see a lot more conditional spawns.

Byzantium only appears if its core isn't controlled by a solid Rome.

Argentina, Brazil, Italy and Thailand are similar.

What if the stability penalties were increased for controlling an optional civ's core after its earliest possible spawn? If you really wanted to, you could hold on to it, but you'd be punished more severely.

England, France, Germany and Spain could be held off a bit by a powerful Rome, but it would eventually crumble.

The colonial civs could be held off by a determined colonizer, but stability and inflation would probably get them to release them eventually.

The problem with those civs, in particular, is that knowing you're going to lose your cities sucks. I avoid colonizing the flipzones for that reason.

 

[Logoncal]

Byzantium will ALWAYS spawn if Rome is alive and is an AI, even if it's Solid.

ONLY THE PLAYER can prevent Byzantine Spawn by being Solid.

It's similar to Khmer. Only the Player can prevent a Thai Spawn, the AI are doomed.

 

[1SDANi]

I'd like to see a lot more conditional spawns.

Byzantium only appears if its core isn't controlled by a solid Rome.

Argentina, Brazil, Italy and Thailand are similar.

What if the stability penalties were increased for controlling an optional civ's core after its earliest possible spawn? If you really wanted to, you could hold on to it, but you'd be punished more severely.

England, France, Germany and Spain could be held off a bit by a powerful Rome, but it would eventually crumble.

The colonial civs could be held off by a determined colonizer, but stability and inflation would probably get them to release them eventually.

The problem with those civs, in particular, is that knowing you're going to lose your cities sucks. I avoid colonizing the flipzones for that reason.

Why don't we make it so that if you allow a civ to rise, it rises normally, but if you decide to go against them they spawn with more units but zero flips? The less stable you are, the more units would be spawned in this way. That way you could actually defend against rising civs, instead of the current method of don't bother.

Also, I hate how you can avoid flips by moving units out of the flip zone. Breaks immersion.