Realism Invictus

Hi!
I've recently picked up RI - thanks a lot for the great work, this mod has been an excellent 4X experience so far.
I've noticed an issue with the recent mechanic of changing leaders in-game: when picking up Industrious leader, craftsmen don't receive +1 hammer output. Encountered this when choosing Mutsuhito on the Huge Earth map on turn one, will test some more and report back.
 
Hi!
I've recently picked up RI - thanks a lot for the great work, this mod has been an excellent 4X experience so far.
I've noticed an issue with the recent mechanic of changing leaders in-game: when picking up Industrious leader, craftsmen don't receive +1 hammer output. Encountered this when choosing Mutsuhito on the Huge Earth map on turn one, will test some more and report back.
Did you download the 3.71b? The issue with some trait effects on leader change has already been reported and fixed.
 
Poll: It's turn 134 on Realistic speed, year 2160, classical techs remain at +100% for another 16 turns. Verc is researching the classical tech Mining. Is Verc being silly, or is the AI chasing strengths I don't understand? Yes or no.

Tangentially, the era research rate screen has some texts incorrectly indented:

Spoiler :
Screenshot 2025-02-13 at 3.11.15 PM.png


Edit:

For contrast, same game: It's turn 218 on Realistic speed, year 1320, classical techs remain penalized for just another 12 turns. Suleyman Kanuni is researching the ancient tech Early Metalworking. Is Suleyman being silly, or is the AI chasing strengths I don't understand? Yes or no.
 
Last edited:
AI has not been taught to anticipate era tech cost changes. They assess techs on their current merits, which basically means if they research something penalized, that's the cost they're comfortable with whether it changes soon or not.
 
AI has not been taught to anticipate era tech cost changes. They assess techs on their current merits, which basically means if they research something penalized, that's the cost they're comfortable with whether it changes soon or not.
That's what I figured, but I still found it funny, and wondered if there was a method to the madness. Or benefit to the madness, I guess. It wouldn't be the first time I scoffed at the AI's choices only to try it and realize that hey, they're onto something. Especially if pushing down the military route lets me parade an army through barb cities, and using the spoils to push past the research penalties. Maybe getting +1:hammers: to mines and slavery in the mid ancient era is actually the ideal play...
 
Howdy y'all. Haven't posted much on here recently but I still enjoy RI when I can. I do play with barbarian settling and revolutions on - and while I know these aren't "recommended" settings or actively being balanced I would appreciate some guidance for my modded mod if anyone can help.

  • Scenario A: An AI civ conquers a city far away with an established culture. Something happens (maybe trade routes get broken) and that single city revolts, spawning a one-city civilization that has no realistic hope of becoming a global power.
  • Scenario B: A single, well-established barbarian civ settles into a new civ. Even with the initial bonuses such civs get, again, one city isn't likely to become an important player.

Now I'm not directly concerned with over-balkanizing the world, but in long games on large maps I do eventually run out of viable civilization choices and then when some major event happens, half of a civ somehow declares itself to be barbarian. So what I would like to do is limit the two "civ spawning" scenarios so that they would only occur if a minimum threshold of cities is met - let's say three. In other words, a revolt that only one city partakes in wouldn't make a new civ but would just become barbarian. And a barbarian civ wouldn't settle unless at least three cities were reasonably close together to give them a fighting chance.

If my feedback makes the main branch so much the better! But I'm happy to just make changes locally if anyone can point me in the right direction. Thanks!
 
RI is generally geared mechanically towards requiring fewer units, not just from AI standpoint, but across the board.
This is a great feature of RI, despite having more diverse roles for units compared to the vanilla game, combat has been redesigned to the point that despite having such a diverse cast of options to choose from you will do good with few but specialized units trough all ages, by late game the things stir a bit but in general the game keeps this pace. it's more about landing a succesful blow, playing around with AI and luring it rather than just throwing whatever you have in your arsenal. You gotta pick the best doctrines/traditions early, get the right aids and choose the best directions to attack... those 15 units defending an enemy city ain't going down easy.

In middle ages normally I attack with 3 stacks, one for siege, one for cavalry and one for shocktroops and they work in that order, with the siege clearing units if shocktroops fail to eliminate remaining ones, of course provided with one or two units for countering enemy attacks or aiding and rarely do they go over the logistics limit, specially shocktroops and cavalry which means my army will usually not be over 18-20 units around there.

No that the good old ''doomstack'' strategy doesn't work here, but it's less intuitive and much prone to failure than a well organized assault.

When this is best appreciated is in the ancient age, if you go around just building stuff and less units you will have to deal with an invasion of superior strength, so you gotta quickly assemble an army with what you have to both stop the invaders from taking your cities and to drive them away, you have to push it just a tiny bit so they are harmed but your units don't die, or if they die, the remaining ones pose enough threat for the enemies to not dare to attack. Like defending from barbarians but noticeably harder.

That's the fun I get from this game, to be ingenious and make the best out of my army even if it's an inferior force. Lots of patience are needed, but it's hella fun :D
Poll: It's turn 134 on Realistic speed, year 2160, classical techs remain at +100% for another 16 turns. Verc is researching the classical tech Mining. Is Verc being silly, or is the AI chasing strengths I don't understand? Yes or no.
Hey this has nothing to do with your comment but I was wondering... how does your game looks so bright and colorful? The picture you sent looks like it has an high contrast and saturation and that's very cool honestly:) mine lacks that cheerfulness and I would love for it to look just like that.
 
Hey this has nothing to do with your comment but I was wondering... how does your game looks so bright and colorful? The picture you sent looks like it has an high contrast and saturation and that's very cool honestly:) mine lacks that cheerfulness and I would love for it to look just like that.
Do you mean the terrain? That's the old terrain style, which I strongly prefer to the current one. You can still download it at the link below. In your local files, replace the "RealisticTerrain.FPK" file in mod's Assets folder with the one from here:

 
I was looking through ancient and classical era power ratios and saw that skirmishers have a power rating of 3, putting them alongside axemen, swordsmen, and composite bowmen. Archers, militia, warbands, and even spearman and chariots have a power of 2. Meanwhile horseman and horse archers have a power level of 5, which is quite a lot more than both 2 and 3, and very close to elephants at 6. Cataphracts have a power of 4, less than light cavalry. I wonder if this is why the AI builds so many skirmishers and light cavalry, and why civs that build them in flocks tend to show as immensely more powerful than other civs, even if in practice it turns out not to be the case.

I'm sure there's a lot I don't know about power and how the AI works with it, but are these the intended balances?

If my ignorance can be forgiven and I be allowed to theorize with the assumption that the number impacts are simple enough to understand, I'd envision it something more like:

PowerUnitsSpirit Salad Item
1WarriorIceberg lettuce
2Militia, Archer, Warband, SkirmisherSpinach, Arugula (aka Rocket), Kale
3Chariot, SpearmanTomato, Cucumber, Green Pepper
4Horse Archer, Horseman, Axeman, Composite BowmanOnion, Radish, Red Pepper
5Swordsman, CataphractAvocado, Chicken, Salmon, Hardboiled Eggs
6ElephantRed Chili Flakes
 
I wonder if this is why the AI builds so many skirmishers and light cavalry
I believe the best way to beat heavy cavalry is with light, so it makes sense for AI to prefer them as that is what you'll use the most to attack. I of course see them using mostly heavy rather than light, but they do love Skirmishers which are excellent for early game terrain (less worked and grants more bonuses=chances)

At first I had my thoughts regarding light cavalry, I wondered... why should I use someone weaker if I've got an stronger option? But once I looked into the bonuses and used them on the battefield I realized they were noticeably stronger under the right circumstances.

Still, rarely have I had to fought them as defenders of an enemy's land, it's mostly cataphracts (which might be best option in that case).

WTH is a spirit salad item though? :lol: and why is it so funny? more importantly, why is spinach so low? :yumyum:
Do you mean the terrain? That's the old terrain style, which I strongly prefer to the current one. You can still download it at the link below. In your local files, replace the "RealisticTerrain.FPK" file in mod's Assets folder with the one from here:
Not really, I mean how the game graphics and interface look so saturated in color, civ4 as far as I know does not let you modify such screen settings but maybe I should try some software that applies visual shaders, I've heard of some of them. Thanks anyway, the old terrain does look good might pick some assets from there to try them out:)

Spoiler example :
Here's an example of what I meant:
Compare this picture of my game with yours
1739508295596.png

Less colorful right?
 
I was looking through ancient and classical era power ratios and saw that skirmishers have a power rating of 3, putting them alongside axemen, swordsmen, and composite bowmen. Archers, militia, warbands, and even spearman and chariots have a power of 2. Meanwhile horseman and horse archers have a power level of 5, which is quite a lot more than both 2 and 3, and very close to elephants at 6. Cataphracts have a power of 4, less than light cavalry. I wonder if this is why the AI builds so many skirmishers and light cavalry, and why civs that build them in flocks tend to show as immensely more powerful than other civs, even if in practice it turns out not to be the case.
Hi, I do not understand what you mean by power rating with the above figures? they do not match with the strength value of the units you refer to...
 
That's what I figured, but I still found it funny, and wondered if there was a method to the madness. Or benefit to the madness, I guess. It wouldn't be the first time I scoffed at the AI's choices only to try it and realize that hey, they're onto something. Especially if pushing down the military route lets me parade an army through barb cities, and using the spoils to push past the research penalties. Maybe getting +1:hammers: to mines and slavery in the mid ancient era is actually the ideal play...

I can say that I'm also a culprit in the "researching a tech from next age a few turns before the age switch happens". In my case it was for acessing a worldwonder-enabling tech and favors my odds in building it.
As for Mining, I can assure you that an Industrious leader with a lot of mines will see it as a real game-changing tech. Mining & Slavery will enabled your Industrious trait to activate, and you will go from 2 :hammers: Mine (on my desertic hills, at least) to a whooping 5 !
That's huge, at least for me :lol:
 
hmm modern world should look that way?
I'm still wondering if there shouldn't be +2 to the relationship on the Democracy / Totalitarianism axis (and -2 when the form of government is oppose) and +2/ -2 to the relationship for free trade / communism
1739519949869.png
 
Communists and non-communists already get a relationship malus; a bonus is generally unneeded at this point as lots of civs late game already have established friendships. I am thinking about an additional way for inter-communist bonding, but not just a freebie relation bonus. As for democracies and dictatorships, I don't think it's warranted historically, as that was always far more situational, and better described by other factors. I agree that in your screen there is a disproportionate love for collectivism and planned economy and disproportionate hate for dictatorship, so I may adjust some AI weights there when I run some test games myself to gather additional statistics. One should also remember that civic choices are quite dependent on leader personality (not just favourite civic) so civic makeup in any single given game might be quite skewed.
 
Hi, I do not understand what you mean by power rating with the above figures? they do not match with the strength value of the units you refer to...
I do, and I got the message loud and clear - it is indeed high time I cleaned up the schizo that are power ratings. Combined with the tweaks I made to war declaration AI, it should make AI much smarter (or at the very least not quite as moronic) when picking enemies.
 
How does Schizo affect unit strength?
What is it?
Ramsess, why does an elephant have 6 powers instead of 8?

I have a great idea, for example, with fertilizer technology, you can build farms in the desert and in the tundra, not by the river.
 
Last edited:
I believe the best way to beat heavy cavalry is with light, so it makes sense for AI to prefer them as that is what you'll use the most to attack. I of course see them using mostly heavy rather than light, but they do love Skirmishers which are excellent for early game terrain (less worked and grants more bonuses=chances)
Always interesting to hear other people's experiences. In my games the AI loves making stacks of skirmishers and light cavalry and sending them to conquer cities. I like them as counter units/scouting/field control, necessary and practical support units, but the AI tends to see them as their primary military body.

At first I had my thoughts regarding light cavalry, I wondered... why should I use someone weaker if I've got an stronger option? But once I looked into the bonuses and used them on the battefield I realized they were noticeably stronger under the right circumstances.
They're definitely great units. My question is whether their strength is properly reflected in the civ power ratios, or whether their power level is overblown. That is, do civs with skirmishers and light cavalry come off, on paper, as being strong and more capable than they are (which then leads to them declaring wars, etc), or is it an accurate reflection?

WTH is a spirit salad item though? :lol: and why is it so funny? more importantly, why is spinach so low? :yumyum:
Spinach is great, but it's still just the bed on which the rest of the salad shines. Tomatoes, cucumbers, and green peppers add great body to salads, good flavors that aren't overwhelming. Onions, radishes, and red peppers, while tasty, are very pungent and need to be used more sparingly and with intent, compared to the other stuff where you can't overdo it. Avocado, chicken, salmon, the protein (or avocado fat) pieces which give the salad a weighty substance and build strength. And red chili flakes, a powerful flavor that you do not want to overdo. Too much would unbalance the salad completely.

It's science! Ish. Kinda. I had fun with it.:D

Not really, I mean how the game graphics and interface look so saturated in color, civ4 as far as I know does not let you modify such screen settings but maybe I should try some software that applies visual shaders, I've heard of some of them. Thanks anyway, the old terrain does look good might pick some assets from there to try them out:)
Oh, I see what you mean. Honestly I'm not sure. My graphic settings are "Medium" across the board. I don't think I use anything that applies visual shaders, at least none that were active at the time I took that screenshot.

Hi, I do not understand what you mean by power rating with the above figures? they do not match with the strength value of the units you refer to...
I don't know much about it myself, or how the AI uses it. My understanding is that when you have "0.8" strength relative to another civ, the power ratings of each civ's units are part of what contribute to that power rating. If taken at its simplest possible interpretation, for the sake of example, a civ composed of 3 militia (6 total power) and a div composed of 2 skirmishes (6 total power) would be at the same relative strength (ignoring city count, builds, and all other things that contribute to a civ's strength score). I'm guessing the actual system is more complicated than that.

I can say that I'm also a culprit in the "researching a tech from next age a few turns before the age switch happens". In my case it was for acessing a worldwonder-enabling tech and favors my odds in building it.
As for Mining, I can assure you that an Industrious leader with a lot of mines will see it as a real game-changing tech. Mining & Slavery will enabled your Industrious trait to activate, and you will go from 2 :hammers: Mine (on my desertic hills, at least) to a whooping 5 !
That's huge, at least for me :lol:
I'm testing it out in my current game, and rushing mining might be a valid strategy in general.

In a new game, I first got woodworking so I can build militia, then went into the tech tree and clicked mining, and let the autopilot handle my research from there on out. So far:

* Researching Pottery meant I had access to Potter's Workshop, which helps economy.
* Bronze Working gave access to Autocracy, which reduced maintenance very early on, so easier to research from here on out
* Bronze Working also gave access to skirmishers, which upped my power rating a ton (and is what prompted me to start looking into the power ratings of units, since I was amazed at how big an impact they had on power ratings compared to other units of the era)
* Bronze Working also unlocks the Barracks, so my cities got bigger (so more production/commerce), power rating went up, and my units have the extra experience

I'm currently about 85% of the way to Weapon Smithing on turn 155, so not amazing progress overall. But I'm still in a decent spot in terms of expansion, militry, and city growing, despite not pursuing any of the food, economy, or research techs. Having some Storyteller Circles would definitely help things out, but not necessarily worth taking the 10 turn or so pause from researching Weapon Smithing. I think I might try to get that and a few other early techs between WS and Mining, if I get a lot of tech transfer to make them fast. But right now, overall, while blindly pursuing Mining, I don't feel like I'm lacking in any area of empire management.
 
Back
Top Bottom