Realism Invictus

Much lower skill level player here, but for what it's worth, the alternative orthodoxy of a worker first approach does suffer from the diminished immediate utility of improvements in RI (making the passive terrain yield, especially in terms of production, relatively more potent) while food tends to be cheap and have less use pre-Bronze Working before irregulars can take it as an input, if not for settlers which can simply be built first instead of paying a sunk cost for the worker to accelerate them later. This may be an objectively superior approach to the start.
Well, the first thing I build in the 2nd city is a worker. And yeah, they're pretty useless for a while, usually only able to build mines and chop down forests, but that's still handy. The thing to avoid is having to build a worker while being pressured to build militia or other defenses.

Downside of rushing settlers is making it even tougher than usual to compete for the early game wonders, if that's important to you. I used to go for Pyramids/Stonehenge pretty often, looking for great people and doubling up on the state religion/pagan temple bonuses. But after great people generation has been nerfed, and pagan benefits were made mutually exclusive with religion benefits (a good change!), I stopped caring. They're nice to haves, but not worth the pursuit, especially chasing a religion.

On the subject of early game wonders, I actually got Moai Statues recently. It was a funny situation: I misclicked and built the statues by accident, didn't notice until there was about 10 turns left, and then got it still before any AI civ completed it. In retrospect, a waste of 10 turns. I had no use for the hammers on water tiles and the great person generation is too slow to be worthwhile.
 
Huh, my starting build order is almost always the same,
-> Worker to improve nearby Food (and eventual production or Jungle tiles)
-> Warrior (to be upgraded into milita
-> Warrior (same)
-> Scout

At size 3 build settler, most often the first worker is done in capital to go to the 2nd city. The first new cities always build a story teller hut for science and culture.
Afterwards queue some militas to fog bust settle spots and fill with 2 more settlers. I'll try settler first sometime.

On another note, I'll do think Confederation is a bit too strong, with their new -50% num. of cities maintenance. If you want military you go for Autocracy sure, but esp. Monarchy is sidelined by it, because almost always with a decent civ size (not overextended mind you) you save an enormous amount of money, which can be easily used to pop up the culture slider as needed, and that happiness can also be used to work more hammer tiles to even out the -25% military build speed.

Well maybe Monarchy is more suited to smaller empires, but that niche is also filled by Republic.
 
P.S. A small question: do you think it's worth to play with Revolutions active this time, or it's still a headache?. Thanks
It add a bit spice to game, i personally very like it

meantime:
on another mod for such a thing I would have a religious victory (65% of people follow one faith)

“The number of people adhering to one faith is already so large that no one can stop this faith from completely dominating the globe.The virtues and the principles it promotes will become imprinted in the way of thinking and will be inseparable from the human species.Being a follower of this religion and being a human now mean the same thing.”
rel.jpg
 
Last edited:
I know it's February already, but I got a bit carried away adding a certain feature (SVN users, see the latest main branch revision); I believe especially if you're a World Map aficionado, you'll forgive me for taking a bit longer with 3.71! ;)
what's in store for the world map? :)
 
"Map scenarios (as opposed to historical: Deluge and Crusades) now offer an option to choose your leader and randomize AI leaders (you still have to choose the fixed leader first when starting, you get a popup after the scenario has loaded)"

Woohoo! :goodjob:
 
Walter, you are a genius. Here I was just about to report that this new feature didn't seem to be working correctly since there are no leader selection options when opening the scenario, then the game loads and I am confronted with this:
Spoiler :

1738466847895.jpeg

1738466878846.jpeg



Plus, this new terrain looks absolutely gorgeous. I cannot wait until my last part arrives for my new PC and I can finally play this beautiful game seamlessly in 4K.
Spoiler :

1738466930980.jpeg
 
Cool feature, indeed :thumbsup:
And thanks for fixing the mini-map problem, I tested it this morning and it seems to works fine now !

A little less convinced about the darkened desert. Looks fine when you have only a tile or two, but for the Sahara and a whole screen of desert, it's... really dark (taste and color, I know I know :lol:)
Specially for flood plains, in fact : they don't give a feeling of lush anymore, the green portion around the river doesn't have quite the same contrast with the rest of the tile. I can only speak for myself, but I doesn't have the same "lot of food indeed" feeling from this new visual.

Also, I'm a bit worried about the increase in epidemics chance for trade route. I usually opens trade route for Ewuare as it's nice to be able to explore the jungle and change the scenery a bit when playing Egyptian (and the bonus gold is handy :D).
But as he is lost in the jungle and can't really research tech, he is usually drowning in epidemics. The +6% almost permanent did put some weight on my cities, but if it's even higher, I'm not sure it will be viable to keep trading with him...

On that point : isn't it a bit weird that you are able to do Open Border contracts with a Civ that doesn't know how to read ? Would it makes sense to be able to sign Open Border only if the other Civ also know Writing ?
 
Walter, I don't understand why the chances of an epidemic from the City's trade routes were increased at all, it's veeery interesting to have 4-5 residents in the city FOREVER
If the city is on a flood plain or in the jungle
Or should I wait for the modern era?
Maybe the epidemic will kill only 1 citizen?
 
Last edited:
A little less convinced about the darkened desert. Looks fine when you have only a tile or two, but for the Sahara and a whole screen of desert, it's... really dark (taste and color, I know I know :lol:)
Specially for flood plains, in fact : they don't give a feeling of lush anymore, the green portion around the river doesn't have quite the same contrast with the rest of the tile. I can only speak for myself, but I doesn't have the same "lot of food indeed" feeling from this new visual.
It's specifically with bigger deserts in mind I darkened it, as the whole thing was too bright for my taste (and my eyes), a big blob of near-white.
Also, I'm a bit worried about the increase in epidemics chance for trade route. I usually opens trade route for Ewuare as it's nice to be able to explore the jungle and change the scenery a bit when playing Egyptian (and the bonus gold is handy :D).
But as he is lost in the jungle and can't really research tech, he is usually drowning in epidemics. The +6% almost permanent did put some weight on my cities, but if it's even higher, I'm not sure it will be viable to keep trading with him...
Now it's a factor that you have to consider! Which is exactly what I had in mind with that.
On that point : isn't it a bit weird that you are able to do Open Border contracts with a Civ that doesn't know how to read ? Would it makes sense to be able to sign Open Border only if the other Civ also know Writing ?
Whether it is or isn't, I'm definitely not digging around in code to change that, as it wouldn't be an easy change.
Walter, I don't understand why the chances of an epidemic from the City's trade routes were increased at all, it's veeery interesting to have 4-5 residents in the city FOREVER
If the city is on a flood plain or in the jungle
Or should I wait for the modern era?
Maybe the epidemic will kill only 1 citizen?
Stop with the dramatics. It doesn't affect the "city on a flood plain or in the jungle" directly at all, as their direct chances from terrain are exactly the same. It only affects other connected cities when their trading partner is already experiencing an epidemic. I personally didn't ever see epidemics spread from one city to another - which doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen, but it certainly means it wasn't a large enough factor to consider.
 
Plus, this new terrain looks absolutely gorgeous.
looks from different mod to be honest :/
my my thats a large horde of barbarians
Screenshot_4.jpg


Walter, you are a genius. Here I was just about to report that this new feature didn't seem to be working correctly since there are no leader selection options when opening the scenario, then the game loads and I am confronted with this:

call me when leaders or leader traits will be randomised per era because this looks promising!
"Do you want randomize traits of every leader per era in this scenario?"
Screenshot_5.jpg
 
looks from different mod to be honest :/
Yep. Basically totally reworked when I realized I didn't like the previous one I did at all, when compared to other mods, especially on smaller screens (I usually open RI on my home PC, but when I tried on a laptop without a high-contrast screen it was basically unusable).
my my thats a large horde of barbarians
How did that one happen?
call me when leaders or leader traits will be randomised per era because this looks promising!
"Do you want randomize traits of every leader per era in this scenario?"
That thought did cross my mind too. Not for 3.71, but I'll let it stew.
 
It's specifically with bigger deserts in mind I darkened it, as the whole thing was too bright for my taste (and my eyes), a big blob of near-white.

Yeah I can understand that. Perhaps it has something to do with my monitor's setting too : on my primary screen, the desert looks almost muddy, it's disturbing. I tried to put in on my secondary monitor (which is waaaaaay older) and it was a whole different shade of brown, way lighter (still darker than before the change, but not as dark brown as after).
Guess I will just play with the different terrains in the mod files and my own monitor settings until I find the perfect shade for me :D

Now it's a factor that you have to consider! Which is exactly what I had in mind with that.

But, but, but ! My brain ! My poor little brain :cry:

Whether it is or isn't, I'm definitely not digging around in code to change that, as it wouldn't be an easy change.

Fair enough ! I will see if there is an easy way IG to see which Civ has writing unlock or not, and roleplay it like that.
Less gold from Ewuare, but less epidemics. I think it will suits my own playstyle better. I don't like my population goes up & down all the time, and prefers to manage epidemics to have a really low probabilty for them.
 
I personally didn't ever see epidemics spread from one city to another - which doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen, but it certainly means it wasn't a large enough factor to consider.
Could map size be a factor? I play on giant with low sea levels, so the map has an immense amount of cities, and it's not uncommon at all to get an epidemic through trade routes in my game. I'm curious to see how the increased rate affects things. I actually wonder if it'll hit the AI civs more than player civs since their cities tend to be so much more populated and prone to epidemics.

my my thats a large horde of barbarians
Now that's a real stack of doom. Still, I'd take that over Civ 5 and having 188 barbarian units taking up all the tiles and preventing movement. :p

call me when leaders or leader traits will be randomised per era because this looks promising!
"Do you want randomize traits of every leader per era in this scenario?"
Changes based on era don't make much sense to me from a flavor perspective (feels more in line with what Civ 7 is trying to do), but for years I've been thinking about having your leader changed every time you enter anarchy. Or maybe a % chance of it happening as part of anarchy.
 
Changes based on era don't make much sense to me from a flavor perspective (feels more in line with what Civ 7 is trying to do), but for years I've been thinking about having your leader changed every time you enter anarchy. Or maybe a % chance of it happening as part of anarchy.
There wouldn't be nearly enough leaders, whereas all (most?) playable civs have enough leaders to comfortably accommodate a full game on a per era basis. I was thinking of making it a non-default game option.
 
Back
Top Bottom