Realism Invictus

[Cruel]

I found it an absurd to the human history that a game who claims to try to be as realistic as possible completely ignores the 6 th largest economy of the world to include civs that have made 1/100 of the contribuition to the human civilization than the brazilian people have.

The excuse that you use only original civs is not acceptable, or you should ignore the united states too.

Brazilians have been offended by the so called "realism" that ignores reality and one of the more important civilizations of the world.

Shame on you !!!

Take it easy Souza. Realism Invictus mod is the result of an effort by the whole community. We have years of development and personal effort.

If you are not happy with something I suggest to help in development. All the team are willing to help you at the beginning.

We plan to make a Portugual a full civilization, and Brazil a civilization derived from this. The RI is a mod in constantly evolving, we are not a finished product in which it calls to customer service and speak abusive that something does not work. (As we do in different terrible services that are offered in Brazil.)

 

[Gavagay]

RI team, I really urge you to check a K-mod, if you didn't see it yet. It is a great mod which focuses on improvent of AI and rebalancing of inner game mechanics. I should say that AI is really formidable in this mod, much stronger than in Better AI. If you incorporate it in your mod, it would be awesome.
Also, is there any chance that we will see Advanced diplomacy mod in RI?

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

On the subject of Brazil, if they were a civ in this mod would they start out in ancient times with Tupi units? Or would they have what Portugal had at that time(Iberia at the time).

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

RI team, I really urge you to check a K-mod, if you didn't see it yet. It is a great mod which focuses on improvent of AI and rebalancing of inner game mechanics. I should say that AI is really formidable in this mod, much stronger than in Better AI. If you incorporate it in your mod, it would be awesome.
Also, is there any chance that we will see Advanced diplomacy mod in RI?

Already being worked on, at least K-mod.

On the subject of Brazil, if they were a civ in this mod would they start out in ancient times with Tupi units? Or would they have what Portugal had at that time(Iberia at the time).

That's a good question. We have yet to develop a pattern for colonial civs. I think they will be using European units from the start, and then switch to their own colonial roster.

 

[Palaiologos2]

That's a good question. We have yet to develop a pattern for colonial civs. I think they will be using European units from the start, and then switch to their own colonial roster.

So a classical age Brazil will field Lusitani warriors?

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

So a classical age Brazil will field Lusitani warriors?

Technically yes, but I think a classical age Brazil will just be not possible. We can restrict releasable civs to certain eras. In early ages, most civs with colonial derivatives will likely have some other derivative civ.

 

[Palaiologos2]

Yes but a reinassance age civ is not forbidden from building earlier units. Especially if sulfur is not available.

 

[civman110]

I don't really understand the explanation that colonial civs shouldn't be added because they are not "original" civs, for the fact that hardly any civs would be considered "original" depending how far back in history you want to go.

I think adding some colonial civs would be a great addition. Personally I would very much like to see USA, Canada, Brazil, and Mexico and perhaps one North American Native Group from the west... Apaches? Cree? Cheyenne? added to the World Maps.

I think the reason why these civs have not been represented is due to problems with historical accuracy (not because of disrespect, or because "they aren't a real civ"), however not including them you still face problems with historical accuracy in the later eras. For it to work, early historical accuracy would have to be somewhat compromised in certain situations in exchange for historical accuracy in later eras, but this would also offer enhanced game-play especially in the Americas and late in the game. With some civs that are currently in the game such as Aztec, and the Mayans this situation is reversed, however I believe that they were implemented well and that it does not negatively affect game-play, but actually enhances it.

Some benefits would be that you would be able to experience some of the early wars that took place in the Americas between colonial states (but under their modern names) that would otherwise be impossible to re-create. Also, you could have the added accuracy of the early wars that were fought by these newly independent states among themselves and the Native groups.

I also thought this was a good suggestion for those problematic "early eras":

On the subject of Brazil, if they were a civ in this mod would they start out in ancient times with Tupi units? Or would they have what Portugal had at that time(Iberia at the time).

 

[blue_inStinCt]

hey RI Team, i cant wait until u get Kmod in RI
great job and keep it up
greetings

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

I don't really understand the explanation that colonial civs shouldn't be added because they are not "original" civs, for the fact that hardly any civs would be considered "original" depending how far back in history you want to go.

I think adding some colonial civs would be a great addition. Personally I would very much like to see USA, Canada, Brazil, and Mexico and perhaps one North American Native Group from the west... Apaches? Cree? Cheyenne? added to the World Maps.

I think the reason why these civs have not been represented is due to problems with historical accuracy (not because of disrespect, or because "they aren't a real civ"), however not including them you still face problems with historical accuracy in the later eras. For it to work, early historical accuracy would have to be somewhat compromised in certain situations in exchange for historical accuracy in later eras, but this would also offer enhanced game-play especially in the Americas and late in the game. With some civs that are currently in the game such as Aztec, and the Mayans this situation is reversed, however I believe that they were implemented well and that it does not negatively affect game-play, but actually enhances it.

Some benefits would be that you would be able to experience some of the early wars that took place in the Americas between colonial states (but under their modern names) that would otherwise be impossible to re-create. Also, you could have the added accuracy of the early wars that were fought by these newly independent states among themselves and the Native groups.

I also thought this was a good suggestion for those problematic "early eras":

I agree, especially on the part with more native civs. Currently on the world map the only playable civs in the americas are the aztecs and incans. I'd personally add the Mayans, and I know there is enough out there in terms of fan work and information to make Iroquois, Cherokee and probably Lakota as well into full civs.

The Colonial Civs would add a whole new diamension to the game.

 

[NDU]

hello, shore bombarment doesn't affect island cities? i have the santa anna. i am trying to take an island city with it but it defenses continue to be 100% , the ship sais that it can lower defenses 6% per turn but it doesn't, can it be a bug? .

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

I agree, especially on the part with more native civs. Currently on the world map the only playable civs in the americas are the aztecs and incans. I'd personally add the Mayans, and I know there is enough out there in terms of fan work and information to make Iroquois, Cherokee and probably Lakota as well into full civs.

The Colonial Civs would add a whole new diamension to the game.

We can offer nothing definitive on behalf of colonial civs currently, as it will all depend on where our development takes us. So for now, I think our policy will be to reserve our comments on this for some period of time. We may or may not be adding a lot of civs for the next release, but you'll never know until we're there.

hello, shore bombarment doesn't affect island cities? i have the santa anna. i am trying to take an island city with it but it defenses continue to be 100% , the ship sais that it can lower defenses 6% per turn but it doesn't, can it be a bug? .

I have never encountered anything like this. Would you please provide us with a savegame?

 

[Antmanbrooks]

Does this mod include revolutions? If not is there a way I could add it with instructions?

 

[NDU]

We can offer nothing definitive on behalf of colonial civs currently, as it will all depend on where our development takes us. So for now, I think our policy will be to reserve our comments on this for some period of time. We may or may not be adding a lot of civs for the next release, but you'll never know until we're there.



I have never encountered anything like this. Would you please provide us with a savegame?

sure, but the file its > 3mb , so, where can i upload it?

 

[Sarmatian]

I'm new to the mod and I have a question.

I've switched to serfdom and I had peasants uprising for 10-15 turns now. Is it ever gonna stop or do I have to change to another civic?

Keep up the good work.

 

[NDU]

I'm new to the mod and I have a question.

I've switched to serfdom and I had peasants uprising for 10-15 turns now. Is it ever gonna stop or do I have to change to another civic?

Keep up the good work.

you will have slave/ peasants revolts until you change to another civic. with slavery and serfdom you will always have revolts.

 

[Sarmatian]

Weird.

It isn't historical, it doesn't add anything to the gameplay, it's tedious, demanding, boring and not challenging.

If something had to be done, add unhappiness to the cities or abstract it some other way.

Even if it were THE BEST civic I wouldn't use it - I get enough playing whack-a-mole with rebels in Paradox games... I don't need another game where rebels pop up every turn or every other turn.

Thanks for the info, mate.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

slave revolts aren't historical? Perhaps I should show you to the page here, which has a list of 44 slave revolts? (counting subcategories)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Slave_rebellions

 

[Sarmatian]

slave revolts aren't historical? Perhaps I should show you to the page here, which has a list of 44 slave revolts? (counting subcategories)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Slave_rebellions

Not slave - serf revolts. I wasn't aware that serf were raising in rebellion every year in every city.

But, yes, even slave revolts. If serf and slave revolts are comparable in number, it's also quite ludicrous. Haven't had slavery yet but I assume they are comparable in both size and frequency with serf revolts, if not more numerous.

You showed a list with 44 slave revolts - I've had 20 serf revolts in 15-20 turns and it's only 14% of the world surface. So if I follow a very historically plausible route of slavery-> serfdom until 19th, 20th century, I'd have about 1500 revolts. And that's just one country. The world would have more than 10,000+.

So, yeah, it's very much unhistorical. Furthermore, it's bad gameplay. This is a grand strategy game - the key word is ABSTRACT. Add unhappiness or something and have only a few rebellions, but much larger in size representing those big, empire-threating rebellions a la Spartacus. Don't give me one or two rebel units every turn...

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Does this mod include revolutions? If not is there a way I could add it with instructions?

No, and you can certainly try to, but this work requires the qualifications of a good programmer.

sure, but the file its > 3mb , so, where can i upload it?

Some file hosting maybe, like rapidshare.

Not slave - serf revolts. I wasn't aware that serf were raising in rebellion every year in every city.

But, yes, even slave revolts. If serf and slave revolts are comparable in number, it's also quite ludicrous. Haven't had slavery yet but I assume they are comparable in both size and frequency with serf revolts, if not more numerous.

You showed a list with 44 slave revolts - I've had 20 serf revolts in 15-20 turns and it's only 14% of the world surface. So if I follow a very historically plausible route of slavery-> serfdom until 19th, 20th century, I'd have about 1500 revolts. And that's just one country. The world would have more than 10,000+.

So, yeah, it's very much unhistorical. Furthermore, it's bad gameplay. This is a grand strategy game - the key word is ABSTRACT. Add unhappiness or something and have only a few rebellions, but much larger in size representing those big, empire-threating rebellions a la Spartacus. Don't give me one or two rebel units every turn...

The system itself will stay, but we will indeed rework the chances and localizations to have fewer and larger rebellions. Although for slaves, the figures you give are more or less right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_rebellion. This article cites 250 rebellions in 3 centuries for North America only. So one per year is quite a nice approximation, and one turn takes many years early on. Serf rebellions, OTOH, were much less numerous and more severe ("peasant wars") - and we are going to reflect that.