Questions & Answers

[onedreamer]

As far as I remember, the new Greek settler map isn't substantially different.

well the AI always seems to build Pella now, while it never used to do it before. Since this is one of usually 3 cities, and since it's an awful choice, I'd say it's a substantial difference. Incidentally, I think it also affects Roman's settler map, I've seen Neapolis, Tarentum and Vibo Valentia, never seen before in RFC.

 

[Panopticon]

The underlying settler map hasn't changed, though. Other AI changes might make Greece build Pella. But Rhye hasn't encouraged Greece specifically to value the tiles differently.

Similarly, Rome has had only minor changes to its settler map preferences, but if the AI now has different priorities in other things, that will encourage different settlement patterns.

 

[Rhye]

never seen Pella in the last year. Always Byzantium

 

[Walliard]

I saw Pella once when going for the Roman UHV in 1.182. Had to found Constantinopolis myself.

 

[Tullius]

What if I conquer an enemy city that's within my settler map? Do I need to raze it and found a new one to avoid the negative modifiers that come from controlling cities in another civilization's cultural area?

 

[sk8er AG]

Very interesting. I would say that Syracuse should be dark red rather than purple, ditto for N. Egypt, which was heavy Hellenized. I've seen some of the other settler maps and it seems they're more favorable to settlement patterns like that (e.g. Germany having parts of N. America as its pseudo-homeland province). Just sharing my thoughts. I love the mod and it's definitely got me playing Civ IV again.

i agree ive never seen ai syracuse or kyrene, both of which i think have more of an importance to ancient greek culture than some of the others. i assume any city in sicily switches to rome in this version (i know it did before) however, i think it would be an interesting idea to have syracuse (if founded) not switch, or if possible sometimes want to switch, a city in sicily from carthage would be interesting as well, though it would take a toll on Qart hadasht.

 

[dragodon64]

Hi, I love this mod and its historical accuracy. It feels like every event has a flow in this game instead of stagnation and turbulence set only by the player in normal CIV.

Have a few questions, too.

1. When a new civ is "born" within you (eg. Spain, France, Germany from Rome) and you declare war on them, you're units keep switching over to them. Even when you completely kill them ("Spanish civilization has been destroyed") some of your units keep rebelling and giving them new vigor. But this stops after a while. Is there a pattern to this? Like only 5 turns after their spawn date? Or is it a unique per civ?

2. The Apostolic Palace almost never has votes anymore... is it a set number of turns (it'd have to be a pretty large number) or are the dates historically set?

3. Once you declare war on an independent, is there no way to go to peace with that independent? Also, since there are only two independent "countries," are some cities in china/india/middle east on the same with other geographically distant cities.

4. Are some "victories" in the early days of civs like Rome and Mongolia (cities flipping over) scripted or are they based on chance?

5. Are declarations of war based on real history? This could be in various forms: Arabia declaring war on Egypt would just be normal expansion, but what about France and England in the hundred years war? And this is pretty unlikely, but would the Europeans start major wars in the 1910s and 40s?

 

[deanej]

1. Probably a set number of turns. There use to be an exploit where you could kill a civ when it spawns by taking out all of its units before it had a chance to found a city. This fixes that exploit.

2. That's a bug with BtS; after 3.17 the palace votes come in much less frequently.

3. Peace automatically happens after a few turns of no combat.

4. Each civ has a spawn zone where cities/units will flip.

5. No, but the AI behavior for declaring war has been altered and they will now fight wars for territory.

 

[blizzrd]

1. When a new civ is "born" within you (eg. Spain, France, Germany from Rome) and you declare war on them, you're units keep switching over to them. Even when you completely kill them ("Spanish civilization has been destroyed") some of your units keep rebelling and giving them new vigor. But this stops after a while. Is there a pattern to this? Like only 5 turns after their spawn date? Or is it a unique per civ?

It's a fixed number of turns. I thought it was 8 but I don't usually find myself in this situation (if I can help it) so it has been quite a while since I actually played through the desertions.

2. The Apostolic Palace almost never has votes anymore... is it a set number of turns (it'd have to be a pretty large number) or are the dates historically set?

It does, but there was a bug in the code of the latest patch that affected congresses (which failed to show) and perhaps AP votes also? Rhye posted a way to edit/fix the bug in another thread but I think also plans to rectify this issue with another patch very soon.

3. Once you declare war on an independent, is there no way to go to peace with that independent? Also, since there are only two independent "countries," are some cities in china/india/middle east on the same with other geographically distant cities.

The only way I know to get peace with an independent civ is through the special peace event which only randomly turns up.
Yes, I think independent cities on opposite sides of the globe can be part of the same independent civ.

4. Are some "victories" in the early days of civs like Rome and Mongolia (cities flipping over) scripted or are they based on chance?

Flips are scripted if they are part of a historical spawn of a civ. Flips due to a respawn are based on chance (and also the stability of the occupying nation(s)).
I believe that historical spawn zones and respawn zones can be (slightly) different areas.

5. Are declarations of war based on real history? This could be in various forms: Arabia declaring war on Egypt would just be normal expansion, but what about France and England in the hundred years war? And this is pretty unlikely, but would the Europeans start major wars in the 1910s and 40s?

No they are not based on real history. They are determined by relations ingame, so things like "our close borders spark tension" often trigger declaratons of war by the AI. The AI also automatically declares war on you (the civ to do so is random though) when you enter your 2/3 UHV Golden Age.

 

[Lone Wolf]

The only way I know to get peace with an independent civ is through the special peace event which only randomly turns up.

As said,

Peace automatically happens after a few turns of no combat.

Regards.

 

[LukeUeda-Sarson]

The AI also automatically declares war on you (the civ to do so is random though) when you enter your 2/3 UHV Golden Age.

I don' think that's true. I've had plenty of games when nobody declares war on me when I get my 2nd UHV condition.

Cheers, Luke

 

[sercer88]

I don' think that's true. I've had plenty of games when nobody declares war on me when I get my 2nd UHV condition.

Cheers, Luke

I agree it's not 100% true, but I think that some civs must "get" a bunch of "envy" of your civ when it does complete 2/3 UHV, and has a greater chance of declaring war, or at least it seems so.

For example, in my recent Arabia game, when I entered into a GA from 2/3 UHV, France, with whom I was at least +5 in diplomacy modifiers, and no negative modifiers, declared war on the turn I got my GA...

 

[Hitti-Litti]

Is the AI programmed to declare war to the human player at some point of game? I played as Japan, almost everyone was at least cautious with me, China was pleased. Suddenly, China declared war on me(I had Hangzhou and Guangdong, I conquered them while they were independent, so they had a reason to declare war). I would have understood it if they would have done something to me, but they didn't sent any units except one trebuchet.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Here's the consequences of "limited war" stuff, and RFC stuff dumbing down the AI.

Such things happen in classic BTS too, althrough very rarely.

 

[dragodon64]

Thanks everyone, that really helped. Another question: when it says control, as in Arabia has to control Carthage, Egypt and Spain does it mean control a specific number of cities or just own certain tiles in the area?

 

[Panopticon]

You need to control more cities in the area (e.g. Spain) than the civ which lives there normally. If they don't exist any more, you need to control at least one city there.

 

[Walliard]

You need to control more cities in the area (e.g. Spain) than the civ which lives there normally. If they don't exist any more, you need to control at least one city there.

This is true of any UHV that says "control", with the exception of Rome, which requires 3 in France, 2 in Spain, 2 in Carthage, and 1 in England. And none in Italy, amusingly.

 

[blizzrd]

This is true of any UHV that says "control", with the exception of Rome, which requires 3 in France, 2 in Spain, 2 in Carthage, and 1 in England. And none in Italy, amusingly.

Strictly the Turkish UHV also has specific requirements for numbers of cities.

 

[Mattygerst]

Any answers on where to change the stability rating on "over-extending" traditionally historic boundaries?

I'd just like to lessen the penalty for over-expansion.

Also - any fix coming for the AP voting/Congress voting?

 

[CharlieM]

Two questions: One about BUG/BAT and the other about why my RFC is not working.

The BUG mod works with my regular games, but not when I load an RFC game (version 1.183). Do BUG and BAT mods work with RFC? If so, is there something special I have to do?

Second question: I loaded Greece in an unlocked game mode. I took a couple of turns and founded cities. After my third turn, when I hit Enter, the game crashes back to the desktop. Any ideas why? Is the BUG mod to blame? By the way, before the crash, I noticed that clicking the City was not bringing up the Detailed City View like it should have.