Questions & Answers

[Locus Coeruleus]

Thanks AP. I guess I missed that one! Cheers.

 

[monolith94]

Eh, no problem - I reloaded, added a third city to scandinavia, and was fine. Of course, now I have to deal with my Warren G. Harding score... Perhaps because it took me too long to wrap up the tech tree? (1986)

 

[blizzrd]

This is telling me that there should be no anarchy, but there is. What gives? I am sure this has been brought up before, but I don't have time to go wading through pages of this and other threads, which is where a basic search on "Anarchy" in the Rhye's Forum has taken me.

I appreciate any answers.

Cheers.

RFC (on BTS) did at one stage have ith no anarchy during a Golden Age but as AnotherPacifist has listed, Rhye changed this to the way RFC on Vanilla and Warlords had always operated - i.e. still with anarchy during a Golden Age.

The wiki is somewhat outdated (not just on this issue either, but plenty of others too).

 

[Mattygerst]

Question:

#1 - Is this compat. with Solver/Dresden's patch?

#2 - Is this compat. with the Better AI mod?

 

[JujuLautre]

1/ No
2/ No

RFC uses its own dll, and so its own rules.

 

[Mattygerst]

Okay, but, if I have Solver/Dresden's patch running on my BTS - will RFC still work correctly?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Yes, it will.

 

[Kreklewetz]

Is there anyway I can see what city names are attached to each tile? When people say "such and such city is a great place to settle" I'm having a hard time figuring out where it is.

 

[Panopticon]

If you search for it in CityNameManager.py, you can sometimes get an idea of where it is.

 

[Kreklewetz]

Thanks, that worked perfectly.

 

[Mishter Magooh]

What exactly is Siberia? In the real world it is roughly everything east of the Urals. Yet how come I failed this UHV even though I settled Tara. Do I need to expand into the ice around the arctic or what?

 

[blizzrd]

You should check out the RFC atlas for the exact definition of Siberia (or any other UHV condition):

http://civ4.technologyresourcesgroup.com/

 

[Mishter Magooh]

It still doesn't make sense. I had two fully fledged cities inside the uhv area of that map you posted by 1700, yet I still failed the UHV.

 

[deanej]

You need three cities by 1700.

 

[Mishter Magooh]

You need three cities by 1700.

??? Why doesn't it say that in the UHV in game?

 

[Tigranes]

I always enjoyed playing Mongolia, even since Harlan's "Mongols" for Civ2. On some point in that game I created a challenge to myself to conquire every single city no later than it was conquired historically. It was hard but it was very fun and very educational experience. Because in RFC there is such a big emphasise on historical reality its just discouraging to see no vassal Russia or no invasion in Europe amoung Mongolia's UHVs. I read all the strategy guides available -- what a shame (no offence btw)! Everyone gets 10% challenge done by the settler factories and culture slides . This is not exactly what mongols and tatars were known for. Invasion in Europe was brief but in Russia the Yoke was lasting for 2 centuries. Does anyone think, like I do, that UHV's could be modified to include Russia's factor as well as how far Mongols travelled -- Trieste (Venice in our game)?

 

[Tigranes]

And one more question -- razing cities is a by-product of Mongol's UP and will be a part of strategy, why this was elevated to the rang of UHV without a deadline? Is it technically possible to specify which city to raze, like Tatu (Bejing), Baghdad, Moskva (well it was just a village when it was razed)?.. Don't you think that would make more sense?

 

[kbk]

I always enjoyed playing Mongolia, even since Harlan's "Mongols" for Civ2. On some point in that game I created a challenge to myself to conquire every single city no later than it was conquired historically. It was hard but it was very fun and very educational experience. Because in RFC there is such a big emphasise on historical reality its just discouraging to see no vassal Russia or no invasion in Europe amoung Mongolia's UHVs. I read all the strategy guides available -- what a shame (no offence btw)! Everyone gets 10% challenge done by the settler factories and culture slides . This is not exactly what mongols and tatars were known for. Invasion in Europe was brief but in Russia the Yoke was lasting for 2 centuries. Does anyone think, like I do, that UHV's could be modified to include Russia's factor as well as how far Mongols travelled -- Trieste (Venice in our game)?

Those guides are merely one possible way to win. I always got the Mongolian UHV by following a "relatively" historical formula. I would collapse and occupy China first, and then sack Samarkand. Invade Persia and Anatolia. At this point I had about 10% and stopped to go back and raze cities to get the UHV victory.

Remember, the UHV are partially designed with balance in mind and to give you a number of different playstyle options. Greece's UHV could easily be to occupy Persia, Babylon, and Egypt, but instead its a more pacifist one. You can always also completely ignore a UHV and play any way you want. There is a thread somewhere devoted to recreating empires in a timely fashion. Its called something like "whole empire challenge."

 

[blizzrd]

??? Why doesn't it say that in the UHV in game?

There are a number of issues with the ingame text. This is indeed one of them. Other noted problems with the text include the Persian UHV not specifying Holy Cities when the requirement is actually Holy Shrines and that a number of UHVs are actually to be completed at any stage up to a certain date as opposed to on a certain date.

We hope that Rhye might fix some of these ingame text errors.
He has previously posted that one problem though is translation into 5 or more languages (not that I see why this should actually be a critical problem).

 

[blizzrd]

Everyone gets 10% challenge done by the settler factories and culture slides .

As the author of one of those entries in the wiki that suggests settlers are the key for the UHV, I wrote that because it is the easiest way to get the UHV without requiring an inordinate number of lucky combat results to fall your way by taking a more military approach. The settler approach is just simpler and much more fail-safe.

This is not exactly what mongols and tatars were known for. Invasion in Europe was brief but in Russia the Yoke was lasting for 2 centuries. Does anyone think, like I do, that UHV's could be modified to include Russia's factor as well as how far Mongols travelled -- Trieste (Venice in our game)?

This would make the Mongol UHV much like the Turkish UHV conditions though. I agree with your comments but am OK with the way the Mongolian UHV is currently set.

If anything should be changed, I think that the requirement for 10% area is too small and should be raised. 20% would be much more of a real challenge for instance, whereas 10% is not particularly hard to achieve in v1.181. I mentioned this in another thread already too:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=270515