• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Realism Invictus

Great, thanks for looking into it. đź‘Ť
By the way, as reported earlier, even some random event adds 4 production to the coal plant which is quite a nice bonus that changes the balance between the power plants. Hard of course to take random events into account.
 
Re.: # of civilizations (nations): thanks! These were not barbarian cities / nations, but rather actual civilizations (whether playable or not by us, I do not know). Looks like "RI World Map scenario large" requires 50ish civilizations to be playing. (and that may be the primary point of RI - that, yes, all these folks are there, deal with it!)
Kinda. I'd rather recommend playing a random map instead, whether with one of the bundled map scripts (Totestra / PerfectWorld / PlanetGenerator) or even with one of the stock ones. Though some people love scenarios too. If you want few players on a real Earth map, use EarthEvolution3.
 
Whoever's playing SVN - I just pushed an update with some AI changes that really need playtesting. I'd love some feedback on whether rebel slaves still go sightseeing, on whether AI is now better with ranged artillery fire, on whether you still see stupid one-tile-away-from-the-shore city placement, on whether AI is now properly dealing with poorly defended barbarian cities in scenarios.
 
Gladly, once I finish my second game on it. :lol:

Spoiler :

- Major Bug: I don't know what triggered this (whether it was a civic combination or something else, I'm not sure), because it eventually stopped, but in a game as Transoxiania, food was not functioning as a production input for settlers, workers and irregulars. In the ancient era, this was quite debilitating, but at some point later I noticed that it wasn't replicating. I don't know what caused it or if it was a true edge case anomaly, but that constitutes a massively broken feature however it came about. See the attached save for reference.

- This is more of a suggestion for aesthetic consistency than anything functional or gameplay-impacting, but I recall reading that the tech tree was divided such that all vertical rows of techs would belong to the same era. Meditation is uniquely (and I believe the only example of this) in a row of all classical techs but is itself ancient. Is this intentional? I also recall in the official release one of the arrows leading between techs running through the listing for the tech itself but could not find this in the SVN, so perhaps this is the result of fixing that.

- I had a worker stop building an improvement randomly but there was no enemy in sight. Rightly, it turned out, I judged that it detected a 2:move: barbarian scout that was poised to kill it the next turn even though it was in the fog. I moved the worker away and sure enough, a primitive scout showed up out of the unexplored land onto that tile. Should workers be able to "wake up" when detecting a unit the player should have no knowledge of because it is in unexplored land?

- This is in favor of a "rebuff" following the original nerf that it got years ago, but I feel that The Great Library should provide a scientist slot or two, even while it retains its more bland +10%:science:. The former +2 free scientists (and the GP points that they accrue) is rather more powerful in RI given the great works of science, I'd agree, and a nerf was probably in order, but having the ability to run more scientists seems entirely natural (seeing as how they literally kidnapped itinerant scholars in real life, anyway) since you will have to pay an opportunity cost with your population for it and it would require surplus :food: to make full use of, and that additional scientist slots beyond the 1 from the library are virtually nonexistent until renaissance. The static bonus is kind of lame on its own.

- What is the reason for incense as a resource only providing :) via a religion, when its aromatic properties seem like they would constitute an ancient luxury on their own in the absence of one, much as several other luxuries in the game that provide :) independently? Especially since RI softly models an effect from more informal religious practices with both paganism and animism, it seems appropriate to me that incense should either provide happiness through pagan temples as well or simply do so through the market as with most of the other unfinished luxury goods that aren't metals and already do so through the jeweler.

- I believe this is a documentation gap, but I was somewhat surprised to see an interesting looking cavalry unit for Persia called the Zhayeda, which I then found was a national unit that wasn't referenced in the national unit list for Persia in the Pedia. I am not sure if there are other NUs that didn't get linked to their main civ page, but this seems to be the case here. I might have tried Persia again more recently had I seen something to recommend them outside of the very early game. :lol:

- For Transoxiania, why is the Nogai Rider classified as a range mounted unit when it wields a lance? I had founded the chivalry doctrine intending to promote them alone that path, and was surprised to find that they were ineligible for it, until I found out that they were another ranged mounted unit just like the late horse archer I was intending to pair them with. Is this for balance reasons, or is there some historical argument for this? Visually, it seems like melee light cavalry (well, for its high :move: anyway, even though it is powerful), which should be charge mounted.

- I find it somewhat strange that resource trades do not trigger a mandatory peace treaty as some other deals do. Why is this the case, when signing open borders (which, I would think a sanctioned and predetermined flow of goods across borders is effectively the same in this regard) already does this on its own? I think this could have a good gameplay effect as well. Have you considered implementing this?

- Likely bug: I had a pirate trade ship (not transoceanic) cross an ocean tile and start pillaging my seafood. It didn't have a promotion enabling this, so I don't know how it managed this. (Save provided.)

- I think it's kind of silly that generic explorers get a rather immense bonus defending in the desert, especially when their predecessor (the skirmisher, outside of civ-specifc flavoring) doesn't. I can see the reasoning for forests and jungle (and skirmishers have one of the most uniquely long shelf-lives and depreciation arcs of any unit in the game, so their long-awaited replacement being effective makes sense to me) but a +50% defense bonus in desert doesn't really make sense to me. They're already an 8:strength: unit with great mobility for lacking horses, and deserts are supposed to be inhospitable for everyone. I would suggest modifying this to oasis or flood plains exclusively, to make it more plausible that any amount of standing military forces could meaningfully operate in such an environment to receive such a bonus.

- Why is the holy palace not listed in the Pedia page for each respective religion? It is documented in the prophets' great works page, but it would be more natural if it was linked to each religion, as well. Also, it might be a good idea to verbally tag each holy palace as a holy palace instead of only with its exclusive religious name (much as with the new 3.6 unit name scheme), since the tech unlocking the holy palace only refers to this generically and each specific example is not explicitly labeled as a holy palace.

- Along the lines with the comment about incense above, why are dyes unique in providing :) without any additional infrastructure in addition to more with the theater, when other luxuries only provide any alongside some kind of building? Are they meant to be more potent or valuable somehow, by design? I don't mind this being the case, but am simply curious why they're an exception in this regard. As it is, spices (providing dual :health: and :) with the relevant infrastructure) and dyes (providing double :) ) seem to be the "premium" goods for much of the game's timeline. That could make sense, but I don't know if it's intentional that luxury goods be stratified.

- Likely bug: the Pedia states that rocky islands provide a 10% defensive bonus, which should be on top of the existing 10% defensive bonus provided by coast itself, but the tooltip only identifies a total of 10%. Is this not summing correctly or otherwise broken?

 

Attachments

  • Timur the Lame AD-1202 how did this pirate trade ship cross the ocean.CivBeyondSwordSave
    1.3 MB · Views: 5
  • Timur the Lame BC-2515 food input for settlers and workers is broken.CivBeyondSwordSave
    628.7 KB · Views: 3
- Major Bug: I don't know what triggered this (whether it was a civic combination or something else, I'm not sure), because it eventually stopped, but in a game as Transoxiania, food was not functioning as a production input for settlers, workers and irregulars. In the ancient era, this was quite debilitating, but at some point later I noticed that it wasn't replicating. I don't know what caused it or if it was a true edge case anomaly, but that constitutes a massively broken feature however it came about. See the attached save for reference.
Took a look at your save, and everything seems to be in order? The city, its tiles are initially set, has no excess food production, so no food goes into building a settler. Switch from 3 :hammers: to 3 :food: tile, and you see food going in.
- This is more of a suggestion for aesthetic consistency than anything functional or gameplay-impacting, but I recall reading that the tech tree was divided such that all vertical rows of techs would belong to the same era. Meditation is uniquely (and I believe the only example of this) in a row of all classical techs but is itself ancient. Is this intentional? I also recall in the official release one of the arrows leading between techs running through the listing for the tech itself but could not find this in the SVN, so perhaps this is the result of fixing that.
Yeah, I sometimes forget to switch eras around after a reshuffle. After a recent update, there are some more that ended up in wrong eras. It's also not quite aesthetic, as eras have gameplay significance in some mechanics. Will fix.
- I had a worker stop building an improvement randomly but there was no enemy in sight. Rightly, it turned out, I judged that it detected a 2:move: barbarian scout that was poised to kill it the next turn even though it was in the fog. I moved the worker away and sure enough, a primitive scout showed up out of the unexplored land onto that tile. Should workers be able to "wake up" when detecting a unit the player should have no knowledge of because it is in unexplored land?
I believe those are calculated through pathing, without checking if the enemy is visible. I guess it is a mild "cheat", but one of convenience - I feel players would be annoyed for losing workers to threats they couldn't have anticipated. So I could probably fix it, but I likely won't.
- This is in favor of a "rebuff" following the original nerf that it got years ago, but I feel that The Great Library should provide a scientist slot or two, even while it retains its more bland +10%:science:. The former +2 free scientists (and the GP points that they accrue) is rather more powerful in RI given the great works of science, I'd agree, and a nerf was probably in order, but having the ability to run more scientists seems entirely natural (seeing as how they literally kidnapped itinerant scholars in real life, anyway) since you will have to pay an opportunity cost with your population for it and it would require surplus :food: to make full use of, and that additional scientist slots beyond the 1 from the library are virtually nonexistent until renaissance. The static bonus is kind of lame on its own.
I'm all for giving it a new effect, but probably something less bland. Maybe a bonus to the libraries?
- What is the reason for incense as a resource only providing :) via a religion, when its aromatic properties seem like they would constitute an ancient luxury on their own in the absence of one, much as several other luxuries in the game that provide :) independently? Especially since RI softly models an effect from more informal religious practices with both paganism and animism, it seems appropriate to me that incense should either provide happiness through pagan temples as well or simply do so through the market as with most of the other unfinished luxury goods that aren't metals and already do so through the jeweler.
Not a bad suggestion per se, but it'll have to be backed up by a lot of careful AI code review. Pagan temples are mutually exclusive with major religion ones - so I have to make sure AI doesn't tremendously overvalue the resource by "thinking" it'll be useful in all of them simultaneously. I might simply end up giving it either a plain +1 :) or tie it to some non-religious building as well.
- I believe this is a documentation gap, but I was somewhat surprised to see an interesting looking cavalry unit for Persia called the Zhayeda, which I then found was a national unit that wasn't referenced in the national unit list for Persia in the Pedia. I am not sure if there are other NUs that didn't get linked to their main civ page, but this seems to be the case here. I might have tried Persia again more recently had I seen something to recommend them outside of the very early game. :lol:
It's not much of a national unit. If you look at it carefully, you'll see its stats are almost identical to its contemporary Persian cataphract, save for the promos. It basically exists solely to be an upgrade path for Immortals to become cavalry, because that's the unconventional "evolution" that happened to them IRL. If Immortals simply upgraded to Cataphracts, it would make them a very short-lived NU. But I guess I could tag it to be displayed more prominently in Pedia. The same situation exists for Egypt, who now basically have the early game counterpart to the "US Marines" line.
- For Transoxiania, why is the Nogai Rider classified as a range mounted unit when it wields a lance? I had founded the chivalry doctrine intending to promote them alone that path, and was surprised to find that they were ineligible for it, until I found out that they were another ranged mounted unit just like the late horse archer I was intending to pair them with. Is this for balance reasons, or is there some historical argument for this? Visually, it seems like melee light cavalry (well, for its high :move: anyway, even though it is powerful), which should be charge mounted.
I've been planning to revisit that shortly - not just that particular NU, but also the standard lancers, as opposed to hussars. I'll make a cleaner distinction. To be fair to Nogais, they were mostly horse archers though, so it's more the misleading unit model than a historical inaccuracy.
- I find it somewhat strange that resource trades do not trigger a mandatory peace treaty as some other deals do. Why is this the case, when signing open borders (which, I would think a sanctioned and predetermined flow of goods across borders is effectively the same in this regard) already does this on its own? I think this could have a good gameplay effect as well. Have you considered implementing this?
The only trades that trigger a mandatory peace treaty are unilateral ones, where one side demands something. I believe that works with demanding resources too.
- Likely bug: I had a pirate trade ship (not transoceanic) cross an ocean tile and start pillaging my seafood. It didn't have a promotion enabling this, so I don't know how it managed this. (Save provided.)
Works as intended but should probably be indicated better in Pedia. It's also stronger. Since they spawn naturally same as all other barbarian ships, if it were left with regular cog's stats, it would just be free XP at that point in game. Now it's at least a nuisance.
- I think it's kind of silly that generic explorers get a rather immense bonus defending in the desert, especially when their predecessor (the skirmisher, outside of civ-specifc flavoring) doesn't. I can see the reasoning for forests and jungle (and skirmishers have one of the most uniquely long shelf-lives and depreciation arcs of any unit in the game, so their long-awaited replacement being effective makes sense to me) but a +50% defense bonus in desert doesn't really make sense to me. They're already an 8:strength: unit with great mobility for lacking horses, and deserts are supposed to be inhospitable for everyone. I would suggest modifying this to oasis or flood plains exclusively, to make it more plausible that any amount of standing military forces could meaningfully operate in such an environment to receive such a bonus.
Generic ones don't, though? Only hills, jungle and forest. Judging by the save you provided you simply had the only non-generic one that does indeed get a desert bonus.
- Why is the holy palace not listed in the Pedia page for each respective religion? It is documented in the prophets' great works page, but it would be more natural if it was linked to each religion, as well. Also, it might be a good idea to verbally tag each holy palace as a holy palace instead of only with its exclusive religious name (much as with the new 3.6 unit name scheme), since the tech unlocking the holy palace only refers to this generically and each specific example is not explicitly labeled as a holy palace.
Mostly because pedia screens are a pain to alter. :) But that's a reasonable suggestion.
- Along the lines with the comment about incense above, why are dyes unique in providing :) without any additional infrastructure in addition to more with the theater, when other luxuries only provide any alongside some kind of building? Are they meant to be more potent or valuable somehow, by design? I don't mind this being the case, but am simply curious why they're an exception in this regard. As it is, spices (providing dual :health: and :) with the relevant infrastructure) and dyes (providing double :) ) seem to be the "premium" goods for much of the game's timeline. That could make sense, but I don't know if it's intentional that luxury goods be stratified.
They are supposed to be really good early on, yes.
- Likely bug: the Pedia states that rocky islands provide a 10% defensive bonus, which should be on top of the existing 10% defensive bonus provided by coast itself, but the tooltip only identifies a total of 10%. Is this not summing correctly or otherwise broken?
That's just how features work. They override the defensive properties of the underlying terrain (note to self: consistently apply oasis bonuses to units with desert bonuses). That said, it does feel like islands should be a more defensive feature than simple coast. I'll buff them a bit in this regard.
 
Not a bad suggestion per se, but it'll have to be backed up by a lot of careful AI code review. Pagan temples are mutually exclusive with major religion ones - so I have to make sure AI doesn't tremendously overvalue the resource by "thinking" it'll be useful in all of them simultaneously. I might simply end up giving it either a plain +1 :) or tie it to some non-religious building as well.
I think it makes a lot of sense that incense gives bonuses with religions. I like that part. But they don't give bonuses without religion, so when you for instance go freedom of religion, then the resource becomes useless for yourself (you might still trade it).

Slightly more in general, I noticed that some resources don't have a great output as a tile in the late game compared to a farm or cottage. And if you then don't need the resource anymore, then you get in a situation that you might rather build a farm or cottage on an incense tile. That is a bit of a shame compared to the diversity in resources and tile improvements that the game offers. I would like it if these resource specific tile improvements remain worth it late game.

I should maybe be more specific, but I am not behind my home computer with the game installed at the moment. This is just something that I noticed where I was wondering whether I would actually use the resource specific resource at all times. Maybe that is intentional, but it is a bit weird to have a resource tile and just ignore it. Maybe it is a bit more of a civ generic thing where we can't decide what things we plant on certain terrain. (That choice would break lots of game elements and would need lots of rebalancing and restrictions.)
 
I actually feel it's all right for certain resources to lose their relative worth over time. Salt, for instance, intentionally transitions from fairly rare and valuable to nearly worthless in the modern era. But I agree there might be some nonsense cases, such as when a farm over pigs provides more food than a pasture. These cases I try identifying and fixing, and input on those is welcome.
 
I actually feel it's all right for certain resources to lose their relative worth over time. Salt, for instance, intentionally transitions from fairly rare and valuable to nearly worthless in the modern era. But I agree there might be some nonsense cases, such as when a farm over pigs provides more food than a pasture. These cases I try identifying and fixing, and input on those is welcome.

I agree that some resources should be really powerful during some ages of the world and less so in other times.

But, to understand you correctly, do you want a resource improvement to always be at least competitive with contemporary standard improvements, or you don't really care that much about that and would be ok with farms and cottages being built on top of resource locations?

I'll have a look to, to see if I can see some resource improvements that are a bit weird.
 
Let's say I'm not ruling out that there may be justified cases for that. For instance, farming over dyes once you have synthetic dyes might make perfect sense. But we definitely don't want that for the resources that are supposed to stay relevant into the late game.
 
Whoever's playing SVN - I just pushed an update with some AI changes that really need playtesting. I'd love some feedback on whether rebel slaves still go sightseeing, on whether AI is now better with ranged artillery fire, on whether you still see stupid one-tile-away-from-the-shore city placement, on whether AI is now properly dealing with poorly defended barbarian cities in scenarios.
Wow :thanx: this looks great.


P.s.: Couldn't you also try to take a good look at one of my biggest wishes - a good-looking canal and then "downgrade" the Forts to what Forts are for. Forts(!). I say - you have more-or-less all the code present already in the ChineseCanal. Only major work (I guess) could be the graphic work (see my post from Dec 28, 2023).
 
I find it somewhat strange that resource trades do not trigger a mandatory peace treaty as some other deals do. Why is this the case, when signing open borders (which, I would think a sanctioned and predetermined flow of goods across borders is effectively the same in this regard) already does this on its own? I think this could have a good gameplay effect as well. Have you considered implementing this?
This is to make sure that you don't trigger a mandatory peace treaty by giving an AI a free resource when you see a giant enemy stack near you borders that you can't deal with.
That's just how features work. They override the defensive properties of the underlying terrain (note to self: consistently apply oasis bonuses to units with desert bonuses). That said, it does feel like islands should be a more defensive feature than simple coast. I'll buff them a bit in this regard.
This discussion reminded me I noticed that the Coastal Ship upgrade doesn't give a combat bonus on coastal rocky islands.
 
P.s.: Couldn't you also try to take a good look at one of my biggest wishes - a good-looking canal and then "downgrade" the Forts to what Forts are for. Forts(!). I say - you have more-or-less all the code present already in the ChineseCanal. Only major work (I guess) could be the graphic work (see my post from Dec 28, 2023).
Nope. I'm satisfied with where the canal is now. I may upgrade it a bit in certain ways, but essentially it'll stay the same.
This discussion reminded me I noticed that the Coastal Ship upgrade doesn't give a combat bonus on coastal rocky islands.
Thanks, well caught.
 
This is a real hail mary, but would it be possible to add a custom game option to disable privateers? I only ask because they're fine on most maps, but when I play on earth maps with a very large number of civs, once privateers hit the scene you can basically say goodbye to having seafood until you have battleships because you will get absolutely swarmed. I know the game isn't really designed for such a large number of civs but it would be nice if it was an option for these huge games.
 
Maybe it is possible to make them unable to pillage. They were about stealing cargo and not sinking fishing vessels. But I don't know how that works out with the AI.

In real life, you could in theory turn any ship into a privateer (like a promotion in game). But in modern times, it is impossible to hide the nationality of a ship, so it can't function anymore as a hidden nationality raider.
 
Nope. I'm satisfied with where the canal is now. I may upgrade it a bit in certain ways, but essentially it'll stay the same.

My idea with the proposal was not that "my" canal should replace the Chinese Canal, only that this should be "copied" and used as a template for a new kind of canal, this time for sailing - something similar to what you previously had done with other improvements.

I've had to make it as a replacement, because I have no idea how to graphically make a "new" improvement or for that matter add one - and then make it working.

Edit: And by the way - it looks much, much better than the current one, using Fort as a "waterway" for ship traffic.
 
Last edited:
Why is Mesopotamia a derivative civilization? Weren't they like the first civilization in history? Also why not split them into Sumerian, Amorite (Babylonian), and Assyrian?

Are you implying they were SAVAGES compared to Egypt and Persia? Hittites were also an empire.
 
Why is Mesopotamia a derivative civilization? Weren't they like the first civilization in history? Also why not split them into Sumerian, Amorite (Babylonian), and Assyrian?

Are you implying they were SAVAGES compared to Egypt and Persia? Hittites were also an empire.

To quote the manual:

"Our very approach to what a civilization is was somewhat different from that of the game’s
creators and many fellow modders. Instead of regarding civilizations as fixed to a single
culture/locale/time period, we tried to treat a civilization as a continuum of cultures, influences
and nations that were centred around a particular geographic region from ancient times till the
modern age – which, given Earth’s history, gives almost any place in the world a continuous
cultural heritage.

For example, Romans also include later Italian states like Milan or Tuscany and the modern nation-
state of Italy; therefore, the units you will see for a particular period will not be “fantasy Roman
legionaries of WW2” but actual Italian units of that age. The same goes for leaders – Mussolini is
as much a leader for Rome in our mod as Caesar is. Other examples include Classical Greece /
Macedonian Empire / Byzantine Empire / Modern Greece and Egyptian civ that does not keep
“theme-park” ancient Egypt-like units for later periods but correctly displays Hellenic then Arabic
influences as it progresses through the ages."


While I can't speak for the reasoning for that specific decision, along these lines, Mesopotamia lacks this same longstanding cultural continuity characteristic of the playable civs in RI. In early antiquity alone, they would be represented by Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians - very different peoples, almost all of which were supplanted by conquest rather than mere cultural drift - and then conquest by already playable civs like Persia, Greece, Arabia and so on. They are playable in the Europe scenario, which is deliberately supposed to have more representative scope in the European, North African and Near Eastern regions.
 
Last edited:
To quote the manual:

"Our very approach to what a civilization is was somewhat different from that of the game’s
creators and many fellow modders. Instead of regarding civilizations as fixed to a single
culture/locale/time period, we tried to treat a civilization as a continuum of cultures, influences
and nations that were centred around a particular geographic region from ancient times till the
modern age – which, given Earth’s history, gives almost any place in the world a continuous
cultural heritage.

For example, Romans also include later Italian states like Milan or Tuscany and the modern nation-
state of Italy; therefore, the units you will see for a particular period will not be “fantasy Roman
legionaries of WW2” but actual Italian units of that age. The same goes for leaders – Mussolini is
as much a leader for Rome in our mod as Caesar is. Other examples include Classical Greece /
Macedonian Empire / Byzantine Empire / Modern Greece and Egyptian civ that does not keep
“theme-park” ancient Egypt-like units for later periods but correctly displays Hellenic then Arabic
influences as it progresses through the ages."

Yes but why not do the same with the aforementioned? Sumeria into Kuwait, Babylonia into Iraq, Assyria into Syria.
 
Yes but why not do the same with the aforementioned? Sumeria into Kuwait, Babylonia into Iraq, Assyria into Syria.

Probably because Kuwait's existence is at the tail-end of the game's timeline (which is supposed to run through the Cold War era) and, as I mentioned above, Mesopotamia as a region lacked a cohesive cultural identity for much of Civilization's timeframe. As you likely noticed from your original comment, however, keep in mind that Babylonia can spawn from revolution or from a barbarian city, and they would in fact become Iraq in the modern era. The civs in RI are rather dynamic and content-laden, too, so it's not reasonable to expect literally every polity on earth to be encompassed in some form as a playable civ. There are already 34 playable ones outside of scenarios (which is more than the base game, all enormously expanded and uniquely tailored content notwithstanding), but I think just about every major longstanding continuous culture in human history gets tied into one of them.

Also, if you play the world map scenario, several minor nations and cultures are included, replete with their own unique flavor units and effects, even if they're not playable.
 
Top Bottom