Realism Invictus

There is a health/epidemic wonder available almost at the same time. But I see your point and agree with it. Let's turn it into an agriculture-improving wonder instead...

Indeed, i noticed that too but as i'm always playing with a huge lot of civs, having 2 of that kind wouldn't be bad. But your suggestion is fine too. As long as building a wonder doesn't put my empire in unhapiness, i'm will be glad ^.^

You attacked probably the most powerful flavor trireme with a simple galley. Results are predictable. All in all, galley is not a military unit and should not be treated like such. It's a transport. At this point in tech tree, one either has a military fleet or doesn't.

Frustrating, but it makes sense.

It's definitely not normal, but couldn't you just have clicked "yes" to a prompt asking you to switch without noticing it?

Definitively not. I was writing my let's play so i was going very slowly to take note of everything that happens. Maybe it was the switch between windows and the game that pauses problem... As i usually don't take a religion before late, i will keep alert to see if it happens again or not.

Well, it would be pretty stupid to make them immortal, wouldn't it? ;)

Ah, agree ! Was just a misunderstanding on my part then, and i'm glad so. Invincible workers would have been weird indeed.

On the other hand, in such a situation, why not declare a war on someone on the other side of the planet? You don't really have to actively participate.

Short answer : trauma.
Long answer : did that a few years ago on vanilla, ended up having a stack of doom coming in my way like a hundred turns after the war was launched. Not sure if R:I AI would do something so risky and with so little benefit, but still i'm reluctant to accept war request since then.

As always, thanks for your time and your replies ! :)
 
I frankly have no particular opinion regarding that. To me, espionage always felt tacked-on, without any real place in the game.

This is exactly a side effect of making them visible to barbarians, and I feel it is a reasonable trade-off. Again, to be fair, removing spies altogether would probably be a reasonable trade-off to me as well. :rolleyes:

The main issue isn't even exploration, but rather stationing them around your cities to fogbust, preventing barbarian spawns. Generally speaking, risk-free fogbusting is too much of a gamebreaker to leave in - and since espionage isn't too deeply integrated into other gameplay elements, it does not feel like a great loss to me if it becomes a bit dysfunctional.

That's a very interesting question that I have no answer to myself. Since comparing GP-centric strategy to cottage spam is a bit of apples/oranges issue, I don't have a firm position on this matter. My own feeling is that since specialists are more powerful in RI than in vanilla, cottages are probably weaker by comparison. Not sure if this needs fixing of any kind though.

Since the end result is capped at 1 tech anyway, I don't think it's unbalanced. From huge cities, you just get an almost-guaranteed tech - and only one your opponent already knows.

Since there was someone a couple of pages ago asking for a buff of Progressive, I feel now that the balance is right. :lol:

Fair points. I still suggest calculating how much Progressive trait actually saves money in the long run though. It's difficult to estimate but I have a feeling that it could be at least 5% of the whole income depending on the situation, which is quite a lot considering that the same trait also gives you flat 5% tech boost. I think Progressive was pretty balanced before the scaling unit costs were added, but now it feels too powerful. Not game-breaking-powerful, but still. Checked the last few pages but didn't find any comments asking for a buff, just one stating that the current balance is fine.

Oh, and for those wondering why I'm updating a lot of existing art each update, here's a pic:
Spoiler New/Old :


Note that the units shown have the same polycounts and the same texture resolutions.

That's pretty damn impressive! Dude's face went from something out of a horror movie to Average Joe, small details like that can really make a difference in how well-made something looks.

I've felt the same way. I've been making a point of making sure there's at least one or two cottages around my capital, if possible, which I tend to so they'll be towns eventually. Plus if I have the financial trait and lots of rivers, I sprinkle a lot more of them here and there where they won't block irrigation routes. But it's really hard to evaluate their usefulness. My gut says that they are better than they seem. I can't remember enough of the numbers to do the math properly, let's just say a riverside town late game gives you +8 commerce. If you've managed your empire well and you can run at least 80% science, and there's some buildings that straight up modify your commerce bonus (instead of straight gold) this translates to 7-8 science before libraries' and universities' bonuses kick in. So with the base terrain bonus I'd say that it's comparable to a settled Great Scientist, or maybe slightly better even. And when you're running 100% gold for a short burst to gain money for upgrades, the town acts like a Great Merchant.

But again, I'm just throwing these numbers out of my hat based on vague memory. I'm not even sure if commerce-boosting buildings exist? Maybe those could be the key to making towns more relevant, since raw commerce would become more valuable whereas straight up "refined" commerce specialists usually provide (ie. gold, science, culture, espionage) would not be affected.

Another thing about towns, though... In vanilla civ spamming cottages was a viable strategy so I guess the F5-class tornado that regularly shows up and destroys a town wasn't that much a pain, but if you only have a handful it can really bum you out. This needs to change. Either reduce the odds, or if possible, change the event's nature somewhat. It sounds realistic to say a tornado destroys a town, but in civ, especially later in the game, "towns" are more like major cities where "cities" are major metropolitan areas. Maybe the tornado could at most destroy a village, or best of all, simply downgrade the improvement.

Then there's the volcanoes... I try to avoid placing cottages next to a mountain whenever I can.

This pretty much sums up my experience with cottages as well. Sometimes I feel like I should build more of them but in the end I just spam farms instead. It really is difficult to evaluate their usefulness, which is actually pretty nice since it makes you at least consider trying new strategies.
 
On the other hand, in such a situation, why not declare a war on someone on the other side of the planet? You don't really have to actively participate.

this has an obvious backfire, such as 10+ civ getting unhappy with you for declaring on THAT guy across the globe, and some of them maybe your immediate neighbors...
 
The war spam ultimatums are probably the one thing that annoys me the most about AI diplomacy. The AI is really stupid when it comes to searching for potential allies - basically anyone will do.

this has an obvious backfire, such as 10+ civ getting unhappy with you for declaring on THAT guy across the globe, and some of them maybe your immediate neighbors...

In my experiences you usually only have a few civs that constantly harass you to go to war with them (others will of course ask from time to time), but how I choose to deal with this is by declining requests from the really spammy civs thereby avoiding all the heat I'd catch for declaring war on everyone's friends. Yes, you make an enemy, but at least this way I get to choose who my enemies are.

Also if I declare war on someone I try to make sure I'm in it for the long haul. There's no point making peace after 10 turns only to have the same two civs go to war again then spam you the following turn with more war requests.
 
My solution to people pestering me about going to war against someone else is to ignore them. Occasionally even when I'm planning to declare war on said civ in a few turns anyway. :D
I find that the occasional minus I take to relations from refusing to help someone this way is forgotten far more quickly than my declaring war on someone. There's the occasional madman/idiot that decides that I'm their worst enemy for refusing to fight their previous worst enemy, and it does bug me, but on the whole my relations are generally fine throughout the ages using this strategy.
 
My solution to people pestering me about going to war against someone else is to ignore them. Occasionally even when I'm planning to declare war on said civ in a few turns anyway. :D
I find that the occasional minus I take to relations from refusing to help someone this way is forgotten far more quickly than my declaring war on someone. There's the occasional madman/idiot that decides that I'm their worst enemy for refusing to fight their previous worst enemy, and it does bug me, but on the whole my relations are generally fine throughout the ages using this strategy.

You took the words right out of my mouth.
 
Small request to include in the upcoming 3.4 update: civilopedia texts for the different specialists could be updated to represent their current state. More experienced players already know how they work, but there might still be some newcomers who wonder what craftsmen are supposed to do, etc. and go first to the civilopedia for info.
 
Hi all. Really looking forward to new 3.4 release :)

Yeah, Walter. River Port and Harbor have same benefits and cost same right now.
From my perspective and gameplay River Port comes very early in contrast to Harbor. This results in a very weak River Port Building at that time, because your cities dont produce much :hammers: for a rather expensive building with more or less minor benefit (+1 traderoute). I think i would be more encouraged to build it, because it costs less. Later on when you have larger cities, harbor can be built rather easy in big cities.

In my current game, i've experienced a minor bug with shortcuts for Mine (shortcut "M") and Precious Mine (shortcut "M", too). Maybe shortcut Shift+P would fit for the latter.
 
Hi! A bunch of question here ;)
1) What is a "favorite religion" in a leader's description? Does it mean that the person was a zealous follower of that religion? Or does it mean that the religion was practiced by most of the population while the leader ruled the country? Or does it mean that the leader was just formally religious?
2) What are the probabilities to grant a resource for mines and special improvements like lovischche or grazing grounds? How are they calculated?
3) Is it possible to increase the density of rivers on random maps made by the RI_planet_generator? How is it done?
4) All recon units except skirmishers, several land unique units (for example, Portuguese Bandeirantes) don't reduce revolt chances when the city is culturally pressed. "iCultureGarrison" for them is zero. Is this intended?
5) Where and how the value of a city AI decides to found is determined?

And a pair of annoyances :mischief:
1) There is a typo in civilopedia: it states that Tiridates III reigned 285–330 BC. BC here is wrong. The wikipedia also shows another date: 287–330.
2) Great Bombard can only defend yet it has a 50% attack bonus vs cities.
 
Last edited:
Hi! A bunch of question here ;)
1) What is a "favorite religion" in a leader's description? Does it mean that the person was a zealous follower of that religion? Or does it mean that the religion was practiced by most of the population while the leader ruled the country? Or does it mean that the leader was just formally religious?
I think it is an indicator for AI game play on how much effort is put in researching specific religion first. Possibly there are other AI variables on how much civs with same religion like each other, but i'm unsure about this.

There is a bug with playing on Linux for me (untested in windows):
After building Stonehenge wonder wohl map turns black and i can't do anything about it except exiting game. I realised this is due to centering world map feature (turned it of via `<bMapCentering>0</bMapCentering>`).
 
I think it is an indicator for AI game play on how much effort is put in researching specific religion first. Possibly there are other AI variables on how much civs with same religion like each other, but i'm unsure about this.

No, I meant IRL)
 
Since the work on 3.4 is finished, and the installer is not yet built, as per tradition, I present to you the updated manual and changelog.

Indeed, i noticed that too but as i'm always playing with a huge lot of civs, having 2 of that kind wouldn't be bad. But your suggestion is fine too. As long as building a wonder doesn't put my empire in unhapiness, i'm will be glad ^.^

The main concern is, even in a huge map with lots of civs, is that if one civ is ahead of others at that time, it will still hoard both wonders for itself.

Definitively not. I was writing my let's play so i was going very slowly to take note of everything that happens. Maybe it was the switch between windows and the game that pauses problem... As i usually don't take a religion before late, i will keep alert to see if it happens again or not.

Keep your eyes open for that please then, as I've never seen anything like this before.

Fair points. I still suggest calculating how much Progressive trait actually saves money in the long run though. It's difficult to estimate but I have a feeling that it could be at least 5% of the whole income depending on the situation, which is quite a lot considering that the same trait also gives you flat 5% tech boost. I think Progressive was pretty balanced before the scaling unit costs were added, but now it feels too powerful. Not game-breaking-powerful, but still. Checked the last few pages but didn't find any comments asking for a buff, just one stating that the current balance is fine.

Well, in 3.4 upgrades are generally not wildly expensive anymore. It was much more of an issue in 3.3, so you can consider it an indirect nerf to Progressive between versions.

That's pretty damn impressive! Dude's face went from something out of a horror movie to Average Joe, small details like that can really make a difference in how well-made something looks.

Not claiming any credit for the quality improvement myself, BTW. This (and many others added recently) are unit models from EU4, and indeed made by very talented people. My work is almost entirely technical, as I have to lower the polycounts on the models and lower the texture resolution to keep them from impacting performance too much and convert them to use Civ 4 animations. But the end result is definitely a huge aesthetic improvement. I am very thankful to EU4 in general for a lot of visual improvements in RI 3.4.

Small request to include in the upcoming 3.4 update: civilopedia texts for the different specialists could be updated to represent their current state. More experienced players already know how they work, but there might still be some newcomers who wonder what craftsmen are supposed to do, etc. and go first to the civilopedia for info.

And it made it into 3.4! The last change to make it in on my side, actually.

Yeah, Walter. River Port and Harbor have same benefits and cost same right now.
From my perspective and gameplay River Port comes very early in contrast to Harbor. This results in a very weak River Port Building at that time, because your cities dont produce much :hammers: for a rather expensive building with more or less minor benefit (+1 traderoute). I think i would be more encouraged to build it, because it costs less. Later on when you have larger cities, harbor can be built rather easy in big cities.

So the only problem is that it becomes available too early? I frankly don't see it as a problem, as not everything has to be immediately useful. I also don't build river ports until I'm fairly advanced.

In my current game, i've experienced a minor bug with shortcuts for Mine (shortcut "M") and Precious Mine (shortcut "M", too). Maybe shortcut Shift+P would fit for the latter.

Noted. Didn't make it into 3.4, but will be fixed later.

1) What is a "favorite religion" in a leader's description? Does it mean that the person was a zealous follower of that religion? Or does it mean that the religion was practiced by most of the population while the leader ruled the country? Or does it mean that the leader was just formally religious?

Well, it's the formal religion that the leader followed for most of their life. It doesn't impact much gameplay-wise, but it brings more variety to games, as leaders generally try founding their favorite religions (but only leaders with high religion flavor actually try HARD to do that).

2) What are the probabilities to grant a resource for mines and special improvements like lovischche or grazing grounds? How are they calculated?

They are calculated on a per-turn basis, and it is a small % chance each turn the improvement is worked. The actual percentage isn't shown in pedia, which is probably something we need to change.

3) Is it possible to increase the density of rivers on random maps made by the RI_planet_generator? How is it done?

I think it is affected by humidity. But I am not actually sure.

4) All recon units except skirmishers, several land unique units (for example, Portuguese Bandeirantes) don't reduce revolt chances when the city is culturally pressed. "iCultureGarrison" for them is zero. Is this intended?

It is not very consistent, as in it wasn't specifically monitored. Will have to review this for all units at some point.

5) Where and how the value of a city AI decides to found is determined?

I am not sure I understand your question. Could you elaborate please?

1) There is a typo in civilopedia: it states that Tiridates III reigned 285–330 BC. BC here is wrong. The wikipedia also shows another date: 287–330.

Noted. Will fix.

2) Great Bombard can only defend yet it has a 50% attack bonus vs cities.

Yeah, city attack should probably be removed. It obviously has no effect gameplay-wise, but it is inconsistent.
No more imperialistic for Rome in huge world map! :(

This reflects my disappointment with them. I have yet to see AI Rome re-create at least Republican Rome! :lol:

There is a bug with playing on Linux for me (untested in windows):
After building Stonehenge wonder wohl map turns black and i can't do anything about it except exiting game. I realised this is due to centering world map feature (turned it of via `<bMapCentering>0</bMapCentering>`).

Since this doesn't happen on Win, there is no way for me to troubleshoot this, unfortunately.
 

Attachments

  • Realism Invictus 3.4 Manual.pdf
    2.9 MB · Views: 454
  • Realism Invictus 3.4 Changelog.pdf
    220.6 KB · Views: 286
What parameters does AI take into account when founding cities? What are their values i.e. what is more important for AI? In what files are all these things determined?

Ah, this is not defined in XML, so I don't know the exact evaluation process. The only value externalized to XML is the minimum value of a spot for AI to consider founding a city.
 
I know that you guys are well aware of this and have tried to curb this, however AI really is incredibly aggressive, attacking incessantly and without regard for diplomatic relations (below friendly at least). On higher difficulties I can't keep up with AI without going negative gold (I had a particularly large empire) so I just get attacked over and over by a new civ every time.

On a separate but related note, would the AI be able to handle caps on how many units per tile? Having a fixed cap based on logistics already implemented could help with the stacks of doom. There is the fundamental problem of defending yourself when you must spread your forces across all of your cities while the aggressor can focus all troops at one point. Also throw in that AI seems to make war declaration decisions based on how well defended a particular city is rather than the overall strength of the civ.

Raising building and unit costs across the board I think would help a lot. I just feel past the beginning of the game, everything is super fast to build, and thats a big reason why there are so many units on the map, as well as the reason why I am constantly having my cities build research due to having built everything.
 
I know that you guys are well aware of this and have tried to curb this, however AI really is incredibly aggressive, attacking incessantly and without regard for diplomatic relations (below friendly at least). On higher difficulties I can't keep up with AI without going negative gold (I had a particularly large empire) so I just get attacked over and over by a new civ every time.

Raising building and unit costs across the board I think would help a lot. I just feel past the beginning of the game, everything is super fast to build, and thats a big reason why there are so many units on the map, as well as the reason why I am constantly having my cities build research due to having built everything.

Not in my experience (especially the relations part - I can't remember a time I was attacked with pleased).
It is possible that you have an option "AI plays to win" on with domination or conquest victory.
Did you try to adapt? Building cottages, using merchants or priests, selling resources... No wonder AI attacks you constantly - you have a large empire and build research instead of military units. Btw, what difficulty are you playing?

Also throw in that AI seems to make war declaration decisions based on how well defended a particular city is rather than the overall strength of the civ.

This is actually quite adequate especially if it is a dogpile war.
 
Top Bottom