Preview of the new patch
- Thread starter Rhye
- Start date
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,411
Arigatou gozaimasu! 
Numbers are a big step forward towards the transparency. I hate to sound too demanding or spoiled, but even that still is not enough.
What I loved most about Civ4 was not the 3d graphics, but the fact that game became smarter and requires you to be smarter. Roll over mouse infos help to get smarter a big deal. Now we know exactly why Isabella feels angry about my peaceful Portugal -- turned out I refused to accept her favorite civic!
Getting back to RFC, introduction of Stability can be compared to introduction of Religions in Civ4, so RFC really deserves to be called Civ4.5. New concepts are much more fun compared with new units, techs or Wonders. However F2 screen currently is not consistent with the overall transparent phylosophy of Civ4, where most numbers are spelled out, allowing great micromanagement level. I understand that stability system is rather complex and adjusting itself, but nevertheless things need to be spelled out. For example I would love to know how the civic stability value will change before I consider switching to Theocracy for few turns just to please Isabelle, so she would open borders with me. In a word, constantly cited Harrier's guide to Stability needs to become in-game roll-over text. Her majesty Stability deserves it
Numbers are a big step forward towards the transparency. I hate to sound too demanding or spoiled, but even that still is not enough.
What I loved most about Civ4 was not the 3d graphics, but the fact that game became smarter and requires you to be smarter. Roll over mouse infos help to get smarter a big deal. Now we know exactly why Isabella feels angry about my peaceful Portugal -- turned out I refused to accept her favorite civic!
Getting back to RFC, introduction of Stability can be compared to introduction of Religions in Civ4, so RFC really deserves to be called Civ4.5. New concepts are much more fun compared with new units, techs or Wonders. However F2 screen currently is not consistent with the overall transparent phylosophy of Civ4, where most numbers are spelled out, allowing great micromanagement level. I understand that stability system is rather complex and adjusting itself, but nevertheless things need to be spelled out. For example I would love to know how the civic stability value will change before I consider switching to Theocracy for few turns just to please Isabelle, so she would open borders with me. In a word, constantly cited Harrier's guide to Stability needs to become in-game roll-over text. Her majesty Stability deserves it
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
RFCRAND's Financial Advisor only shows you the changes in stability per move.
I still like the mod which shows you absolute numbers, i.e. I can calculate the + and - myself, but if I don't know what 5 stars mean (can be 800 for expansion or 17 for civics), it's not useful to me. Hence I've reverted back.
I still like the mod which shows you absolute numbers, i.e. I can calculate the + and - myself, but if I don't know what 5 stars mean (can be 800 for expansion or 17 for civics), it's not useful to me. Hence I've reverted back.
onedreamer
Dragon
Speaking of this, why not comparing the total amount of square km the Aztec Empire included at the arrival of the Spanish, with the total square km the Spanish conquered in the american continent ? You will realize, by logic and testing, how you are grossly generalizing an RFC mechanic that works for the whole continent speaking only of the conquest of a small portion of it. Why none supporting the OP spoke of Incas, for example ?
Charles Martel
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2007
- Messages
- 244
Well, I was just responding to a gross generalization that somebody had made about historians, which has led me OT.
Returning in topic: the conquerors event is fine to me as it is, but I also do like Perceveal's proposal to replace some of the conquistadores with native units (or even with free mercenaries that are disbanded after a certain number of turns). Either way it's fine to me, I have no strong opinion on that.
blizzrd
Micromanager
Rhye, do you have anything else to whet our appetites?
Some of the French city names need to be corrected. French place names which contain more than one word use hyphens to separate the words rather than spaces:
Port Royal → Port-Royal
Poste de la Baleine → Poste-de-la-Baleine
Teté à la Baleine → Tête-à-la-Baleine (accents are also wrong on this one)
etc.
Port Royal → Port-Royal
Poste de la Baleine → Poste-de-la-Baleine
Teté à la Baleine → Tête-à-la-Baleine (accents are also wrong on this one)
etc.
Ambassador
Peacemonger
Major graphical changes -
How are we supposed to understand this? New graphics for units, terrain, ... or instead new leaderheads per era? Or still something else?
How are we supposed to understand this? New graphics for units, terrain, ... or instead new leaderheads per era? Or still something else?
new sea, trees and leaderhead textures and backgrounds
where can I find the file of that mod? I thought it was the same I did, I'd like to take a look at it
blizzrd
Micromanager
then there is no difference. Pacifist is wrong.
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
What do you mean Rhye? sgrig's mod shows you the absolute numbers and total stability and yours doesn't. It matters a lot because I need to know how much room I can afford to "abuse" (e.g. can I raze another city or occupy another area, do I need to give a city to a vassal, etc).
they show the same numbers, they use the same formula
onedreamer
Dragon
RFC RAND shows absolute numbers...
incidentally, I have played it MP and it appears that at least the expansion value is shared among human players.
incidentally, I have played it MP and it appears that at least the expansion value is shared among human players.
Rod
King
Regd. Conquistador event.
Independently of whether we can or can not prove history there is a more important issue.
The AI is not able to conquer SA despite the event.
Why not to have following change.
Have more Conquistador units but only very few advanced ones together with a mix of Native Warriors.
In this way we could maybe solve both issues :
The mix of a handfull of adventuress Spaniards/Conquistadores (maybe 1 Advanced Mounted Unit, 1 Advanced Artillery Unit, 1-2 Advanced Melee Units) along with maybe 12 - 15 Warriors could prove to more realistic and maybe the AI would use them to better extend ? (I believe that the AI is programmed to wage war only with many units, with too less units they always like to turtle)
Independently of whether we can or can not prove history there is a more important issue.
The AI is not able to conquer SA despite the event.
Why not to have following change.
Have more Conquistador units but only very few advanced ones together with a mix of Native Warriors.
In this way we could maybe solve both issues :
The mix of a handfull of adventuress Spaniards/Conquistadores (maybe 1 Advanced Mounted Unit, 1 Advanced Artillery Unit, 1-2 Advanced Melee Units) along with maybe 12 - 15 Warriors could prove to more realistic and maybe the AI would use them to better extend ? (I believe that the AI is programmed to wage war only with many units, with too less units they always like to turtle)
blizzrd
Micromanager
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Exactly, that's the main downside to the plague.
I've seen them conquer, i've seen them take one city and turtle. Mind you, I slightly increased the numbers of AI conqustadores.
That happens quite often, in my experience.
Strangely enough, I've seen more conquests in Vanilla and Warlords. That was because the AI in these versions does not use the workboats as explorers, and maybe because the generally good tendency of BTS AI to wait to attack before having somewhat respectable stacks backfires that time.
Re the workboats, maybe they should be modified so that they couldn't leave your borders. That'll fix the Incan Workboat stuff.
Similar threads
