Realism Invictus
- Thread starter Walter Hawkwood
- Start date
Walter Hawkwood
RI Curator
Nope, too many changes. It will likely just crash. So for everyone who are fond of their current game, finish it before updating.
Erfeo
Chieftain
- Joined
- May 18, 2010
- Messages
- 58
Thanks for answering questions!
The reason I asked about Cinema's is because they discontinue, which usually means they're meant to be replaced.
As for Naval Supplies, I was going to say that you still need them to build Ships of the Line for Shore Bombardment. But aren't Armoured Cruisers supposed to fulfill that role? They're the only Capital Ships that don't inflict Shore Bombardment.
Also the AI will try to sell you Naval Supplies even if you can't use them, which is slightly annoying but no big deal.
The reason I asked about Cinema's is because they discontinue, which usually means they're meant to be replaced.
As for Naval Supplies, I was going to say that you still need them to build Ships of the Line for Shore Bombardment. But aren't Armoured Cruisers supposed to fulfill that role? They're the only Capital Ships that don't inflict Shore Bombardment.
Also the AI will try to sell you Naval Supplies even if you can't use them, which is slightly annoying but no big deal.
Walter Hawkwood
RI Curator
Yeah, maybe we'll remove the discontinue from cinemas. They arrive late enough that they needn't be discontinued.
As for Armored Cruisers not bombarding, this is definitely a bug on our side, thanks for pointing out. Unfortunately, now you'll likely only see it fixed in 3.3, which will take quite some time...
Ambassador
Peacemonger
Thanks for the new version! What are your plans/ideas for 3.3.?
sjodster
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2010
- Messages
- 96
The EarthEvolution3 mapscript was definitely bugged. I managed to squeak a fix for it into the 3.25 release at the last second. I'm not 100% sure that it will work everywhere, so let me know if it works for you now.
I still haven't been able to reproduce any problems with the CommandingHeights mapscript. I play it regularly and I think it produces some very nice ocean areas with the "Many Oceans" setting. I originally created it because I wanted a highlands map with some oceans, and it is in fact derived from the stock highlands script
And as Walter noted, you can use almost any of the standard map generators.
-Josh
Have you disabled background on scores display? After starting new 3.25 game i noticed that scores display have no background and civ/player names just blend with the environment. When i want to read something i need to scroll my screen so that scorer will be displayed over fog of war. If it was intentional then is it possible for me to enable it?
Some feedback on 3.2 stable version :-
Chinese workers can't build workshops.
Gunpowder units completely obsolete archers immediately. This is historically inaccurate. Perhaps reduce arquebus hammer cost and make them take some defence penalties + weak against archers. Once fusiliers arrive then these penalties should go away as by that time gunpowder units almost replaced archers completely.
Militancy is weak. Too many penalties. The research penalty is a bit too much.
Chinese canal is kind of weak, windmills are worse. They rarely get boosts from techs unlike farms & mines.
Pistolier benefit from archery training doctrine.
Sent from my One V using Tapatalk
Chinese workers can't build workshops.
Gunpowder units completely obsolete archers immediately. This is historically inaccurate. Perhaps reduce arquebus hammer cost and make them take some defence penalties + weak against archers. Once fusiliers arrive then these penalties should go away as by that time gunpowder units almost replaced archers completely.
Militancy is weak. Too many penalties. The research penalty is a bit too much.
Chinese canal is kind of weak, windmills are worse. They rarely get boosts from techs unlike farms & mines.
Pistolier benefit from archery training doctrine.
Sent from my One V using Tapatalk
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
Militancy is a situational civic that comes to be useful when starting to pump units out for a short period in order to take out a neighbour. It's not something to be into long term. In fact, the science/gold maluses are rather irrelevant compared to the problematic of having many religions within one's cities. Especially trying to get some religions out with inquisitors will lead to huge diplomatic drawbacks. Triggering the ire of neighbours is far more dangerous and annoying than the small science/gold neg. modifiers.
Windmills are weak: I give you that. Originally, in the base game, windmills were strong in two cases: riverside hills accompanied with FIN or a golden age or to make a very very hilly terrain food neutral. Sadly, in RI, if you don't start with a city with special hill improvements like the Celts, Incas or Armenia, hilly regions can be dismissed because it is not food neutral with the present 3
per citizen.
Sheesh.
Windmills are weak: I give you that. Originally, in the base game, windmills were strong in two cases: riverside hills accompanied with FIN or a golden age or to make a very very hilly terrain food neutral. Sadly, in RI, if you don't start with a city with special hill improvements like the Celts, Incas or Armenia, hilly regions can be dismissed because it is not food neutral with the present 3
per citizen. Sheesh.
Joker.ru
Chieftain
Hills are awesome, with amount of food you get from farms, you can easily build production powerhouses from hill cities.
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
I'm definitely not saying hilly cities aren't good. If the number of irriguable flat lands is sufficient, you definitely can sustain the hill tiles.
The problem lies in particular cases where the number of hills enters in the "too much". Tectonics mapscript is one that can lead to this situation quite often for one or two civs each game. With the base game, at least, for grass hills, the windmills were a solution to let the city grow, but in RI, it is not really possible anymore...except for exceptional civs like the Zulu, Celts, Armenia, Incas, etc. Most probably because their World Map counterparts are located in hilly lands where such unique improvements are necessary improvements to make those civs playable. And such implementation proves indirectly hilly lands can be a pain.
==
An anecdote regarding the discusion about "knight" type of units. Initiated by SR-70 about it was found "too strong", again, through experience, I saw the utter opposite. I had one game where the Spanish had over 40 mounted units. Normally, it would be a danger to attack in their lands, especially if the very first moments, our stack must pass through non defensive tiles. Well, I tried something different after looking interesting behaviour from agressor AI's. Often in very very large stacks, even through the defensive AI has better chance to take the stack out through attack, it kept itself from attacking. When the AI definitely has a bias into making more and more mounted units, when retrenching constantly into cities, that means the attacker, having non mounted units, has a overwhelming advantage. Even more if the units have city attacking promos. I had a quite huge stack, but with -35%
, and the number of mounted units, normally, the Spanish could pick on my stack and destroy 3/4 of it. But because how it is coded, it seems to ignore that logistics malus and keeps an eye more on the stack size. Finally, despite the few >80% losses, I was literally wiping him out with very few losses. It was unbelievable. First medieval war that went so easily with such a rather big nation. Thus, despite all the "realism" discussions of the past, here my opinion on changing a unit the AI has a bias for to over-build:
SR-70 probably entirely misplayed, because after that experience and multiple AI-AI observations, an AI with a bias to mounted units can be doomed to lose.
Now, each game I see one AI having both iron and horses and the other just iron, I give all my bets on the AI having just iron because it will stop focusing all its trainings on the damn mounted units. Even during ongoing wars, sometimes, the AI will favor a 2
skirmisher over a nice and cheap archer...with a stack at the door. C'mon, because how the game was coded to favor fast movers over slow units and that -25% to -35% in cities proper to RI mod, it mixes into a deadly combination for the AI having horses. My point is:
to any changes towards mounted units. Not from abstract theoritical argumentations on how realistic it is, but because of the lack of AI adaptation into considering an all mounted units army is bad, changing mounted units into weaker forms would be even worse and leads to even more disbalances.
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
Sure.
I started with fractal, being my typical mapscript for any mod allowing it, then I shifted towards tectonics because, as it was hinted from the hint notes, that mapscript is cool for RI.
In the original BTS, it could be terrible for a third of civs, but because of farm realistic implementation (where plains aren't utter bad for agriculture), it makes that mapscript entirely playable. Combined with raging barbs, it gives a very variable experience.
==
Small notes about newest changes:
1) The new Nazca Lines is: INCREDIBLE! Man, whoever had the idea had it great. Because that wonder goes from bad into the best early wonder. Despite obsoleting, finally, for its early big hammer investment (with Writing+Mysticism as pre-req), the result is systematically useful all games. Even games where we are forced into pastoralism, making farms less weak for the early games where livestock is more abundant. Also, the engineer slot is a nice touch added to the package.
My point: the wonder is perfect as it is now. Very useful, but also not overpowered because at some point, Theology has to be teched anyways, meaning its power must wane through force.
2) New Despotism vs Republic.
That one struck me too. The city number maintenance difference is 75% between those two civics, showing one must choose between a small core empire or a extended one. I see it seems Republic allows one more happy than despotism because that last one can neutralize its +1
with walls at some point and, compared to Republic, despotism allows Imperial Cult, meaning depotism has a not so small advantage compared to Republic. Given it's a whooping +35% city number maintenance for Republic, I think allowing Imperial Cult or any one more resourceless building for happiness would balance those two civics out better, making a new civic fight like Pastoralism vs Agrianism or Pacifims vs Paganism or Rule of fear vs Bureacracy vs Plutocracy. 3) I think Nobility might need some changes more to be comparable to others. The problem mainly lies in happiness building. While Rule of Fear allows Mob Justice, Nobility allows a building that not only kills the main military bonus from Nobility, but also can be built for each three barracks. Huge investment for a non IMP civ, but also quite limited. I think it needs boosts to make a fierce choice to the other choices. I still need to think about what kind of boosts unless someone does it before me...
4) Slash and Burn farms. That new implementation is interesting and weird. Once depleted, the forest lose not only the bonus food, but loses one more
on top of the bonus it gave. My question: is that permanent or just pillaging the slash and burn will put the tile back to how it was before? Because, for the first time, if that is permanent, I prefer to use the slash and burn until one turn from expiration to avoid double-deplete it. An AI won't do that, so I fear that might have bad repercussions.5) This one might be problematic. Because, of all the games I play, I have seen a pattern. Just like TAM mod, it is not good when I see a succesful early pattern. Quite often the early game is quite linear when played optimally. Like Tool Working ==> Archery ==> Mineral Lores ==> Stone Cuttings ==> Story and Tales ==> now it may depends.
The problem lies that path is far more powerful than others early game. Not only Archery is something a must in many high levels games, even more for Raging Barbs games, that tech path gives more advantages than any others. And tool working also allow strong improvements when the resources are there, which is fur, deer and elephants. And, I can say for sure, having those resources is already strong, but on the path of a strong tech path, it quite doubles the situation. Archery is a lifesaver many times. Mineral Lores allow strong mineral resources, allowing to settle cities better and sometimes doubling one's tech rate, Stone Cuttings allow strong wonders for economy, Story and Tales allow science with slider help, which is a natural balance to rough expansion to allow constant teching.
I think other techs should give goodies to counterbalance because even in a No Tech Trading game, I tend to delay everything for those techs before because it is optimal. Someone may say: don't play optimal, but playing higher levels may mean between a win or a loss when playing optimally.
I say this situation is problematic because it is quite harder to re-format that than a small change of a civic, a wonder or a building.
5) This one might be problematic. Because, of all the games I play, I have seen a pattern. Just like TAM mod, it is not good when I see a succesful early pattern. Quite often the early game is quite linear when played optimally. Like Tool Working ==> Archery ==> Mineral Lores ==> Stone Cuttings ==> Story and Tales ==> now it may depends.
You can also go - wheel - pastoral nomadism - build chariots ... or fishing - mining - toolmaking - woodmaking, some civs dont need archery right away. Or ... there is many ways with different civs
.
You can also go - wheel - pastoral nomadism - build chariots ... or fishing - mining - toolmaking - woodmaking, some civs dont need archery right away. Or ... there is many ways with different civs
.Militancy is a situational civic that comes to be useful when starting to pump units out for a short period in order to take out a neighbour. It's not something to be into long term. In fact, the science/gold maluses are rather irrelevant compared to the problematic of having many religions within one's cities. Especially trying to get some religions out with inquisitors will lead to huge diplomatic drawbacks. Triggering the ire of neighbours is far more dangerous and annoying than the small science/gold neg. modifiers.
Windmills are weak: I give you that. Originally, in the base game, windmills were strong in two cases: riverside hills accompanied with FIN or a golden age or to make a very very hilly terrain food neutral. Sadly, in RI, if you don't start with a city with special hill improvements like the Celts, Incas or Armenia, hilly regions can be dismissed because it is not food neutral with the present 3
Sheesh.
So why make militancy even worse by adding science & gold penalties? Aren't religious & relations related penalties enough for extra XP bonus per unit? After all it is competing with other strong religious civics, so it should be strong enough to be used in times of prolonged war of some kind. A flavour change could be to increase crusader & mujahid production rate when you adopt militancy + the usuals bonuses it has currently. And also remove the research & other penalties.
Windmills should get +2 commerce with electricity instead of +1. They could also be given an extra food so that they are more viable. Almost all food based yields were increased so why not windmills...
Also I really like the idea of unique improvements but I think some of them need to be more situational but powerful. Chinampa is a good example, it is rare due to few swamp tiles on random maps but it's awesome for epidemic control. Similarly Chinese canal could be changed accordingly to give them more use.
And one more question. Is there a way to add start bias to civs like we have in civ 5? I mean some civs are designed to have bonuses in certain terrains (Arabia/desert, Aztecs/jungles etc) so why not give them start bias on random maps.
Sent from my One V using Tapatalk
poisonousautumn
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11
The EarthEvolution3 mapscript was definitely bugged. I managed to squeak a fix for it into the 3.25 release at the last second. I'm not 100% sure that it will work everywhere, so let me know if it works for you now.
I still haven't been able to reproduce any problems with the CommandingHeights mapscript. I play it regularly and I think it produces some very nice ocean areas with the "Many Oceans" setting. I originally created it because I wanted a highlands map with some oceans, and it is in fact derived from the stock highlands script
And as Walter noted, you can use almost any of the standard map generators.
-Josh
I love the look of the perfect world maps to the point where i can't game without them, and have found that mongoose can generate a decent map but you have to regen over and over to finally get one that lacks the huge tundra fields and squiggly continents. About 1 in 5 gives a terra-like map. Also the EarthEvolution map simply generates a large/huge sized earth map every time with proper civ placement. I am using it as a less CPU intensive version of the included Earth scenario with RI.
I also want to add that version 3.2 is very excellent. I love the interface changes and the unit supply bar. This is what civ 5 should have been.
Civ 5 is still an awesome game in its own right & so is Civ 4. The only thing that Civ 5 lacks to some extent is mods with quality level of Realism Invictus.
BTW to expect a level of detail reached in this mod from a vanilla game is a bit absurd IMO. Official versions are made for casual players & they also try to avoid controversial areas (such as religion & controversial leaders which are throughly covered in this mod).
Sent from my One V using Tapatalk
civman110
Immortal
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Messages
- 2,111
Agreed. I find Nobility isn't all that useful either.
Actually, I always used to rush for archery right away, but now with spearmen's advantage vs. archery units I only research archery once I have expanded to about 5 cities and am done warmongering for some time.
With the new changes to spearmen woodworking is way more useful than archery and much more convenient to research, since it's a precursor to all of the useful early techs. Spearmen are the most valuable early unit now by far. They're the strongest early melee unit and have an advantage vs. archery. They're unmatched and I don't have to go out of my way to research woodworking like I do for archery.
IMO, spearmen should only have a defensive advantage vs. archery units.
However, excluding archery now I always take the ==> Mineral Lores ==> Stone Cuttings ==> Story and Tales ==> etc. path too, and have for some time. I do agree with you there, but I haven't seen it as much of a problem.
Sometimes I will throw in Agriculture as well depending on my situation... With the new changes this is also an extremely useful tech if you have wheat nearby. I find it advantageous to build up your city's population before you research Stonecutting to maximize your production for wonder building.
I think Militancy in RI is suppose to represent a Theocratic form of Militancy, which often held back science and stifled trade relations. If you have a holy city with the appropriate wonder the science and gold costs are pretty much offset, if not entirely.
Cult of Personality is another form of Militancy and even though it is a "Religious Civic" I'd argue that in RI it is intended to represent an authoritative governing ideology, rather than a religious one (Theocracy). It's happiness buffs look like they are intended to help offset any extra religions you may have in your cities and it doesn't have a gold or research malus.
For your situation (several religions in your cities) I'd go with "Cult of Personality" rather than Militancy. Functionally, they are very similar, but originate from different sources (religion vs. authoritarian governing ideology) and have the same +10% military production.
IMO, these two are nicely done and cover all angles of a complex situation quite nicely.
---
As a side-note I just played the most vicious game of RI yet (large world map). By 15 AD mostly everyone was dead.
The AI killed:
Germany
Poland
Korea
China
South China
India
Dravidians
Turks
Greece
Zulu
* Armenia & Vikings each have 1 city left.
*I saved France and the Huns from Russia.
I (Carthage) killed:
Mali
Egypt
Israel
Arabia
Ethiopia
Romans
*Both Spain & Nubia attacked me and I wiped them out.
---
Love the music for the loading screen by the way. Whoever added that it was a nice touch.
Well, i tend to have only 2/3 cities early in the game, and being in a populated area of the huge world map, have a lot of wars to win. In this case, i find nobility a little better.
But i agree, to have a real choice on a less populated map, it should have a way to give hapiness (only 1, or it could become too strong) without the military malus and the 3 barracks needed.
civman110
Immortal
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Messages
- 2,111
IMO, the military malus is fine. You get a +15% military production from Nobility and Client Ruler is a -15% so that's not bad at all really. I also understand why the barracks are required. It's so building a Client Ruler isn't a no brainer for every city. For example, Mob Justice is a good trade off +1 happiness for -50% culture when everyone is trying to expand their boarders. If the barracks weren't required there would be no trade off.
I think either Client Ruler should give +10% gold to the city, or the barracks shouldn't be required and Client Ruler should have the -15% military production and some other malus. I don't know what that would be tho...
