Preview of the new patch

[BurnEmDown]

Maybe a city which has a national wonder shouldn't be able to be gifted? (not through congress aswell, if a nation cares about a city so much to build a national wonder there why should another nation get it back?) that way the exploit is gone, and you'll have to think a little bit before building a national wonder in a city, without it getting too annoying. For example if spain conquered 2 cities from aztec there shouldn't be a reason for them to build a national wonder in one of those cities anyway, so if they'd like to give them back to aztec (after capitulating them or something) this feature wouldn't force them to hold on to these cities, unless they really did claim them as a part of their nation due to building a national wonder there.

 

[kairob]

I thought no tech brokering, favours those with few contacts like china...

I don't think stopping you from trading cities is the answar as its too restrictive.

 

[onedreamer]

I thought no tech brokering, favours those with few contacts like china...

indirectly... since brokering is not allowed, civs with many contacts can trade less techs than they did before. In this sense, civs with few contacts are favoured compared to civs with many contacts IF compared to the previous situation, BUT not actively, IE they are still disadvantaged compared to civs with many contacts because if Civ A researches Tech 1 and has four contacts, it means it has a chance to trade said tech with four civs, while if China researches Tech 1 and has only contact with India, it can trade that tech with one civ at most.

 

[kairob]

indirectly... since brokering is not allowed, civs with many contacts can trade less techs than they did before. In this sense, civs with few contacts are favoured compared to civs with many contacts IF compared to the previous situation,

Thats what I thought!

BUT not actively, IE they are still disadvantaged compared to civs with many contacts because if Civ A researches Tech 1 and has four contacts, it means it has a chance to trade said tech with four civs, while if China researches Tech 1 and has only contact with India, it can trade that tech with one civ at most.

But thats just tech trading though, not tech brokering, so it works exactly the same with tech brokering on or off.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

What I meant before when I said no tech brokering favors those with more contacts is:
indirectly it helps them because the more civs that know a tech, the lower your cost. If you had few contacts to start with, you have to actively seek out those contacts and even then the same tech is not known as much as before. To get the same level of research and trading that you had before, you have to maintain contact more actively if you're Japan, China or Mali.

 

[blizzrd]

Why is it an exploit?

Because repeated Golden Ages are not supposed to be a feature of the game. Definitely an exploit from my viewpoint.

 

[kbk]

Maybe a city which has a national wonder shouldn't be able to be gifted? (not through congress aswell, if a nation cares about a city so much to build a national wonder there why should another nation get it back?) that way the exploit is gone, and you'll have to think a little bit before building a national wonder in a city, without it getting too annoying. For example if spain conquered 2 cities from aztec there shouldn't be a reason for them to build a national wonder in one of those cities anyway, so if they'd like to give them back to aztec (after capitulating them or something) this feature wouldn't force them to hold on to these cities, unless they really did claim them as a part of their nation due to building a national wonder there.

Not a viable solution. It would be fairly easy to just make sure all your cities that might be asked for have a small wonder.

AP: I've always considered it an exploit because you're effectively granting yourself infinite golden ages. Yes, it requires a lot of set-up, and has a cost, but the power of GAs on stability is too great. And with a large enough empire, the bonus in hammers and coins may easily outweigh the cost of building another park. Other small wonders don't have a benefit when you have to rebuild them: You LOSE the benefit. With an Olympic park, you now have a benefit for losing them: A chance at another golden age.

 

[JujuLautre]

One possibility would be to change the park from a national wonder to a project. It's not elegant, I know, but at least it solves the problem.

 

[onedreamer]

there are two parks national wonders
I would just eliminate this feature from the wonder, if not the wonder all together, especially because it doesn't make a lot of sense. Just tie the GA to the discovery of Nationalism maybe.

 

[BurnEmDown]

I don't think its possible to have golden age for being first to tech, but maybe it's possible to make nationalism create a great person called "great nationalist" who's only ability is to make a golden age by sacrificing only himself, without enlarging the cost of the next GP-spawned GA, so if civ A needs 3 GPs for its next GA, and is the first to research nationalism, a GP will be born, if civ A chooses to use it it will have a GA, while the next GA will still require only 3 GPs.

 

[Cethegus]

I don't think its possible to have golden age for being first to tech, but maybe it's possible to make nationalism create a great person called "great nationalist" who's only ability is to make a golden age by sacrificing only himself, without enlarging the cost of the next GP-spawned GA, so if civ A needs 3 GPs for its next GA, and is the first to research nationalism, a GP will be born, if civ A chooses to use it it will have a GA, while the next GA will still require only 3 GPs.

Nice idea. Too bad it's much easier to include the Golden Age in a wonder, not to mention less confusing and much more practical. I liked the idea about turning the OP into a project though.

 

[kbk]

there are two parks national wonders
I would just eliminate this feature from the wonder, if not the wonder all together, especially because it doesn't make a lot of sense. Just tie the GA to the discovery of Nationalism maybe.

No thanks, it will be nearly impossible to get this golden age on Emperor. You're already losing the Taj Mahal golden age on emperor.

 

[Rhye]

no need of thinking strange solutions, I already tweaked the code to allow the park to be built only once. The only defect is that savegames won't be backwards compatible anymore

 

[kbk]

no need of thinking strange solutions, I already tweaked the code to allow the park to be built only once. The only defect is that savegames won't be backwards compatible anymore

Cheers then.

I hope AP can come up with new ways to still do conquests.

 

[pfried]

Rhye, you should also add the following from RFC Rand if you didn't already:

Spoiler :

def sovietNames(self):
russianCityList = PyPlayer(iRussia).getCityList()
for pCity in russianCityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == 'Caricyn'):
city.setName('Stalingrad', False)
elif (city.getName() == 'Sankt-Peterburg'):
city.setName('Leningrad', False)
elif (city.getName() == 'Tver'):
city.setName('Kalinin', False)
elif (city.getName() == 'Ekaterinburg'):
city.setName('Sverdlovsk', False)
elif (city.getName() == 'Nizhnij Novgorod'):
city.setName('Gorki', False)
elif (city.getName() == 'Samara'):
city.setName('Kujbyshev', False)


def onTechAcquired(self, iPlayer):
era = gc.getPlayer(iPlayer).getCurrentEra()
if ((iPlayer == iChina or iPlayer == iMongolia or iPlayer == iJapan) and era == con.iMedieval):
cityList = PyPlayer(iPlayer).getCityList()
for pCity in cityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == "Chang'an"):
city.setName("Xi'an", False)
break
if ((iPlayer == iChina or iPlayer == iMongolia or iPlayer == iJapan) and era == con.iRenaissance):
cityList = PyPlayer(iPlayer).getCityList()
for pCity in cityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == "Haojing"):
city.setName("Aomen", False)
break
if (iPlayer == iVikings and era == con.iRenaissance):
cityList = PyPlayer(iPlayer).getCityList()
for pCity in cityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == 'Nidaros'):
city.setName('Trondheim', False)
break
if (iPlayer == iJapan and era == con.iIndustrial):
cityList = PyPlayer(iPlayer).getCityList()
for pCity in cityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == 'Edo'):
city.setName('Tokyo', False)
break
if (iPlayer == iRussia and era >= con.iIndustrial):
if (gc.getPlayer(iPlayer).getCivics(3) == 18): #state prop
self.sovietNames()
if ((iPlayer == iTurkey or iPlayer == iIndependent or iPlayer == iIndependent2 or iPlayer == iBarbarian) and era == con.iModern):
cityList = PyPlayer(iPlayer).getCityList()
for pCity in cityList:
city = pCity.GetCy()
if (city.getName() == 'Angora'):
city.setName('Ankara', False)
break
elif (city.getName() == 'Hanseong'):
city.setName('Seoul', False)
break

 

[Cethegus]

Wonderful. Evolving names.

 

[Rhye]

of course, RFC RAND 1.1 in fact contains a few improvements of the main patch

 

[onedreamer]

I don't think its possible to have golden age for being first to tech.

maybe not in the xml, but for sure with python...

No thanks, it will be nearly impossible to get this golden age on Emperor.

why would it be ? Any civ researching this tech would get the GA, not just the first.

 

[-Perceval-]

will the power of Japan finally be reduced like in the real world's story? (srry for bad english, i'm french)

 

[Lone Wolf]

No. Japan, althrough technologically weak, very quickly caught up in technology during the Meiji rule, enough to defeat Russia in 1905.