1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Realism Invictus

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Modpacks' started by Walter Hawkwood, Feb 13, 2011.

  1. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    I can't expend population to rush production under Slavery; is this intended? EDIT: oh seems I was wrong, I can, but the pop costs are just too high for me. Like 6 population to rush a building that costs 160 hammers. So that would make for example Egypt with all it's excess food from floodplains suitable to expend some population if say 2/3 of the hammers had been produced?
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2017
  2. DSChapin

    DSChapin Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    I do think it's a serious problem - though it doesn't happen every game - that the new logic makes civs on remote islands vastly ahead in terms of science. Literally centuries ahead in many cases. In current RI terms, the indigenous Australians would have had spaceships when the Europeans first arrived there.

    I like the idea of constraining large civs' tech, but perhaps trade/neighbors need to be a bigger part of it to compensate.
     
  3. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    Right... I just started a standard sized pangaea game with 14 (I like my maps crowded) civs. Before starting though, I scanned everything with worldbuilder. Lots of marble, not a single limestone. Regenerate map. Same. Regenerate map. Same. After doing this about 8 times, a single limestone appeared. Just to be sure, I went back to main menu, selected the same kind of map again, and checked if things were different. They weren't. Most of the maps didn't have a single stone.

    I don't get this behaviour. I checked and atm marble and stone have the exact same stats regarding their spawning, except marble can go on tundra. Well, it makes sense that this makes a difference since there's lots of it in pangaea maps and tundra isn't crowded for other resources. But despite this, marble was often found on plains and deserts.

    Is it their mutual ordering? They are put on the map in the same priority category (third, I think), but perhaps marble gets put first and that makes all the difference.
     
  4. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    The National Sports League event now bizarrely requires a christian cathedral for the golden age "in honor of Zeus" option.

    EDIT: The Aztec special building Sacrificial Altar still reduces anger from sacrificing population -- which no longer can be done under slavery. It does have other benefits compared to courthouse though, it's cheaper and helps prevent espionage so it doesn't necessarily need a buff.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2017
  5. plasmacannon

    plasmacannon Emperor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,677
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orlando, Florida
    Looks like it's been around a year and half since version 3.3 came out. Are we looking at a version 3.4 soon?
     
  6. Walter Hawkwood

    Walter Hawkwood RI Court Painter

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,449
    Location:
    London, UK
    Well, the solution you're suggesting doesn't actually solve the problems you outline. Even smaller civs very rarely are confined to a single city. If it's the World Map one-city "City States" you have in mind when outlining this, then the reason they're ahead in tech is that they get a straight bonus to their research instead.

    Yeah, AI trading logic is almost impossible to change. As for stone, I generated some maps to check for it, and it seems to be quite enough being spawned. Also, limestone is no longer exclusively used for roads and most buildings, as there are alternative ways to get masonry materials.

    Not that I know of. Though I'd actually say razing someone's capital instead of keeping it across the continent would be the smart thing to do for AI, and generally currently AI is pretty smart when it comes to deciding whether to keep or raze cities.

    Thanks! It is more easily fixed in XML without modifying the actual sound files. If you come across any other music-related stuff, please notify me, as I usually play with music off and can't notice those.

    That's definitely not a thing I could do easily, sorry.

    Meh, I just reverted them to the way they were before. There's no reason for them to not work. I liked them better the new way, but since I couldn't reproduce the problem myself, it would take too long to solve it, so I took the easier way out.

    Small is also relative. Like, a 1-city civ and a 10-city civ are both "small" compared to a 40-city monster. Should they be equally viable? I don't think so. We already have two systems in place to mitigate the difference in size between civs - escalating unit costs and research costs per city, but make no mistake, bigger is almost always still better in the long run, and I'm not sure we can/should punish it more without crippling people's actual ability to expand and win military victories.

    That is a good observation, and I will probably lower them, but again, they often serve as a suggestion of a minimum size you should be to be a viable contender at that appropriate age.

    The rate at which you generate great people is currently in no way, direct or even indirect, tied to your number of cities, as GP points aren't pooled across the civ, but rather tracked individually on a per city basis. I see no reason to have it otherwise. Smaller civs, at least early on, have an indirect advantage when it comes to GP, as they can more easily run Republic with its GP bonus.

    That's a good idea that I was also considering. It will probably happen in some way.

    1) Yeah, that is a clear balance issue that I will be looking into. Later in game money should be harder to come by.
    2 and 3) Not very realistic to expect at this point, especially 3, since it would require an almost complete re-write of all the AI logic when it comes to warfare.

    Pop-rushing under Slavery was removed as AI was way overzealous in using it, depopulating its cities (and usually just rushing more units it would expend in pointless wars anyway).

    Yes, there is a problem, and yes, I'm looking at ways of containing it. But the main problem here is that it doesn't really come from the actual game balance, but rather from the fact that AI behaves differently in isolated starts, smarter, better at managing resources. Punishing AI for smart behavior is not a thing I'm glad to do. :)

    Likely because you're overcrowding the map. Remember, lots of resources have their numbers tied to the number of players. By the time the map script reaches limestone (not just after marble, but after lots of things like copper and iron and stuff), it might be out of map space to place those.

    Thanks, I'll look into those.

    You should hope you're not, as the only way it could happen with so much unfinished stuff is that I decide I no longer want to work on RI and release it as it is.
     
  7. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Ah, I see; well yes I didn't actually try it, shame on me, just thought it was possible after all, but expensive. Thanks for that explanation.

    I think that's a good idea too. How about also adding zones of control to block enemy movement so they would have to waste moves going around your warships? Or perhaps instead of a right out block if an enemy unit moves through zone of control they they will receive 10-50% damage per move? Is this at all possible?

    Do you know if it is possible to entirely remove the limit to xp gained from killing barbarians? is it just an easy line to change in an xml file? Thanks for your time!

    Here's something I just noticed: I have serfdom (so not slavery anymore) and I destroyed a Tribal Fort belonging to Iroquis. That made me capture a slave (?), then in the next turn that slave unit disappeared and I got the message "Slaves in your empire is free". So what was that all about, is it a bug that I capture a slave in the first place since I don't have slavery anymore?
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2017
  8. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    Yes.
    Assets/XML/GlobalDefinesAlt.xml
    Search for Barbarian_max_xp_value
    I'm guessing setting it at -1 removes the limit. Do note that doing this makes the anti-barbarian promotions slightly worse (they allowed for a total of 100XP).
    Hmm... Some units have a chance of turning into slaves when captured (workers & settlers, obviously). Then, if you don't run slavery, they have a 50% chance next turn of either turning into a worker or disappear, which also happens to your slaves if you switch out of slavery. It might be barb forts have a chance of turning into a slave too (which would make sense, since they're basically barbarian settlements), or maybe the unit you used to kill the fort has an "enslaving" ability, not sure if that's a thing.
     
    Jayman1000 likes this.
  9. arizzi

    arizzi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2016
    Messages:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I would reiterate the need to buff republic. Currently, it feels inferior to despotism in basically every situation. The senate building, from which most of the value of republic comes from, appears much further down the line than despotism. The increased maintenance alone will usually off put most of the benefit that the extra great people provide. You also get more happiness from despotism overall anyway. Happiness from barracks, imperial cult, walls = 3 > 2 = largest cities, senate.

    I would also reiterate my previous points about the late game civics (specifically pertaining to the communist/totalitarian civics.)

    On a separate note I think that the slave/serf revolts should be removed. I recognize that they allow for civs to gain military experience, however, the constant slave/serf revolts are really annoying, to the point where I generally forgo using those civics altogether despite that putting me at a disadvantage. They also tend to make my games drag on much longer than they normally would. One could claim that it is realistic, but realism is no excuse for bad gameplay. Are there any other ways to implement a revolt penalty that does not involve units popping up every other turn?
     
  10. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    You forgot that despotism grants 1 unhappiness to all cities, so it has to build two buildings per city just to get even with a republic that hasn't build the senate. Personally, I think republic is still very useful from time to time (stranded on a small subcontinent, or when your position is easily defended but you don't want to expand and get involved in messy wars yet), especially if you aim for a culture victory right from the start. Which brings me to a suggestion, if a buff is needed: a culture bonus (beyond just the senate's one city -- it's not the capital that needs more culture, usually). Thinking about classical republics they seem pretty well renowned for their culture, no?

    OTOH I very rarely play with bigger than standard maps because my system is slow, and republic obviously benefits from small maps.

    As for slave/serf revolts... I share your sentiment in that sometimes I just don't bother with those civics because of the added micromanagement, especially when aiming for a scientific victory, or a "superior science" military victory before that. And it's not just dealing with the revolts themselves. It's tedious positioning your idle troops on top of strategically important hills and forests to prevent spawning there, especially if you're a large civ.

    But despite all that I'd keep them as they are. I see it is as a minigame, and one I occasionally enjoy. You don't necessarily have to play it, especially since Free Commoners now come with City Rights instead of during the Renaissance, even if there a benefits. Of the benefits, I consider the GG point accumulation the best. The economic ones are not crucial unless you're Roman or Polish. (Or, well, playing a really hard difficulty, but I imagine you wouldn't just coast by by clicking 'end the turn' every few seconds anyway then.)
     
  11. arizzi

    arizzi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2016
    Messages:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    I would disagree. In my games the largest civ generally has the tech lead, or is close to it if there isn't another island civ dominating everything. I understand where you are coming from that bigger is better, however my problem is that the snowballing effect is not curbed. The civs that get large at the beginning of a game are the same ones that become massive 40 city superpowers later on that crush everyone. Essentially the game is determined by the medieval era, if not sooner. What I would like to encourage is that the civs that these large civilizations become stagnant and will be competing with smaller, more technologically advanced/stable civilizations. Think roman empire (not best example, but stagnation was real), ottoman empire, soviet russia, I also like the idea of a greater disposition modifier for declaring war. This would serve to isolate the aggressive civs which are likely already advantaged anyway. (It also helps solve the problem mentioned earlier about civs constantly declaring war irrationally)

    Separately, I think that the medieval era has a few too many technologies. There are some like stained glass and glass working I think could be merged, and others like heraldry that could be removed entirely. I've always felt that the Medieval era is a chore to go through. Nothing really interesting happens and it is not fundamentally any different from classical. The lack of significant change means that technological advantage wont help to offset aggressive civs. These civs will generally consolidate their grasp in this era.
     
  12. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    I like having to deal with the serf/slave revolts. To begin with I thought them too hard, but that was just because it was new for me. But I actually enjoy how I need to think about positioning strong enough units to intercept and destroy them. At times I have to choose whether to take some of these units to the front line to attack another civ; that may tip the scales of war in my favor, but it means I take a risk of a slave revolt to cause havoc at home because I won't be able to deal with it. Granted, it gets a bit repetitive at some point, but that could be resolved with an occasional larger revolt, with additional slave/serf units. That'd be really fun I think. Personally I feel that we even need more barb threat and that there should also be a few "regular" barbarians spawning from from time to time (representing bandit/raiders); I almost never encounter any other barbarian types bar from a few barb galleys on the sea that don't do much and don't carry any units (or at least those that I have encountered have not carried units).
     
  13. arizzi

    arizzi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2016
    Messages:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Also small thing I noticed that workers will often replace farms with the latifundia (slave farm) when they provide far less food. I also think that the general ai for managing cities (for player tile selection/ and for ai in general) would do a much better job prioritizing food and growth. Ai generally is most successful when it does this.
     
  14. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    As Aztecs, on the large world map, I just made the Cherokee capitulate and they me gave all gold and their map at the same. Apparently they had somehow managed to obtain a map of the entire world (bar a few small black spots in the middle of the pacific ocean and near antarctica), so while I certainly made a great "deal" I am disappointed to have the whole world map + civ color territories revealed so soon. I am only in the beginning of medieval era and a few of the european/asian civs have only just reached the americas some 6 turns back. Am I the only one who finds this unrealistic, and immersion breaking? What can be done to alleviate this other than right out remove the ability to trade maps?

    Another thing I noticed on my Aztec game: Under pacifism I got no unhappy citizens from a 12 turn war that I declared (the above war against cherokee, though I didn't break any treaties). I have no wonders or buildings that reduce unhappines from war, and the leader traits give no bonus to this either. The unhappiness in my capital is 13 x "its too crowded" and 2x "We have higher standards than our forefathers". Even in my largest cities, capital size 13 and second largest city size 11, no unhappy faces from war. I am running Republic and Plutocracy, not Theocracy or Rule of Fear, so not getting the -25% war unhappy from those. Is this working as intended, how much war weariness do you need to have unhappy faces from it?
    (And perhaps the -25% war unhappy from Theocracy should be placed under Militancy instead? Especially when you read the Civilopedia entry on Militancy, it really sound like Militancy would make society super acceptant of wars. Just a thought).

    And a question about religion and health: Why does the Christian Temple produces +1 unhealth? As far as I understand Christianity in the Roman Empire contributed positively to healthcare and medical research: I'm no expert in that historical field, but that has always been my impression, so I would be interested in an explanation on the reasoning behind? According to wikipedia for example "The declaration of Christianity as an accepted religion in the Roman Empire drove an expansion of the provision of care. Following First Council of Nicaea in 325 CE construction of a hospital in every cathedral town was begun.". Reading further on that wiki article, it is mentioned that the european medieval worlds hospitals were religious communities, with care provided by monks and nuns. There is also a section talking about of widespread hospital and medical care in the medieval islamic world. So perhaps at least these two religions should actually give some health bonuses? (of course the unhealth for islamic pigs should be kept).


    Wiki article link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_hospitals
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2017
  15. ChaosSlayer

    ChaosSlayer King

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    608
    "Why does the Christian Temple produces +1 unhealth?"

    If I remember manual correctly it is justified by the fact that Christian Churches have this mass kissing of the cross and icons (specially in Orthodox churches), hence unintentional spread of disease.
     
  16. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    RE: Lack of war weariness. 12 turns is a pretty short war as wars go. Also, did you not lose units, or at least not very many? Losing units is the biggest contributor to quick war weariness, in my experience.
     
  17. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Ok thank you, I had 15 units with me losing 5 of them. Yes it was a rather short war now that you mention it. So does this mean that with pacifism you can avoid war weariness as long as you have no casualties?

    Ah the manual.. sorry I didn't check that first. Yes it says "Christian temples provide unhealth due to regular meetings of large crowds". I guess that makes sense, though wouldn't that also be true for most religions?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2017
  18. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    What can Masonry Materials be used for? The civilopedia entry for it has empty space for "Allow", "Improvements" and "Effects".

    EDIT: just found out it doubles production speed of for example castles; don't know of it helps with other than production of masonry type buildings though?

    Screenshot:
    Spoiler :

    upload_2017-7-25_18-43-10.png
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2017
  19. Shuikkanen

    Shuikkanen Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Location:
    Finland
    It doubles the construction speed of about a dozen wonders. It also allows you to build paved roads.

    BTW: Keeping the civilopedia up to date seems to be a low priority, so at best it doesn't tell you everything, at worst it tells you something that was true 5 years ago. :)
     
  20. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Prince

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Is there any way to contribute if I wanted to say update the Civilopedia?
     

Share This Page