Realism Invictus

[JDCP]

Challenge is a nice seasoning for a game, but as with food, overwhelming amounts of it can ruin the dish.

haha I can feel very identified with this analogy and I tend to use it a lot for this kind of topics where "no more, no less, just the enough" applies, you don't know how many times this has happened to me, both in the game and cooking "What the hell was I thinking???" And yes, proper balance is certainly the pinnacle of everything. You can do without it and have fun, but in the long run everything crumbles.

Of course, there’s no one-size-fits-all — everyone looks for something different in games, that’s pretty obvious It was just a thought of mine, I definitely didn’t mean to start a poll

Yes indeed, but still difficulty is something we all look forward to. Of course, not always as the main scope of our games, but something that must be there otherwise it happens what you said: The game gets boring, it stales.

I've been playing many CIV4 games in high difficulties for the past months, but decided to switch back to lower difficulties (Prince, to be precise) after feeling a bit exhausted. It's pretty nice, specially because I'm pretty bad lol, but I can see why someone wouldn't want to play this way as it might feel a bit too easy, rather forgettable. It's not the sense of accomplishment at all but rather, the struggle to get there... makes it memorable. Still, it's not what interests me the most, specilly when talking about old games, I prefer diversity (hehe there's a CIV4 mod called like that) and content. You could put me alone in a map just fighting barbarians and I'd still have fun, for an hour at least

If there is a reason for me to play games this old, hell some even older than me, it's simply because there is no present equivalent to them. Some nearly 30 year old games somehow manage to give me more freedom to play than 2025 games. Besides, trying out a new game and mastering it takes a hell lot of time, and if it turns out to be a disappointment then it feels like I wasted all my time. I'm already comfortable and enjoying CIV4, or to name something else: HOI2, so I prefer that to say CIV7 or HOI4, they're probably good games that can be enjoyed if given the effort... But I already have a nice crib, why buy another?

 

[[Y]]

When viewing the civics/finance advisers, the civic maintenance costs there already reflect the savings from Legislator, yeah? Is there any chance of showing the exact savings, or making a note on those pages that Legislator (or Populist) is affecting the civic costs?

I've been playing Phillip II a lot lately to test out Legislator (and see how it compares to Seafarer for scalability). Some thoughts on France:

• Cultivating grapes feels like it comes pretty late relative to what it allows. It's a very similar feature to Carthage cultivating Dye, but Carthage can cultivate Dye as soon as it researches Water Pump in late classical, whereas France (and Ethiopia with Coffee) has to wait until Pharmacy and Botany in the late Medieval. Carthage's and France's unique improvements are almost identical: both can cultivate a resource and build a unique improvement on that resource that gives extra commerce and +1 happiness in nearby cities. Dye is actually better than wine (+1 happiness with no building requirement, additional +1 with theater, an early classical building, while wine requires an early classical building for any benefit, and requires two wine to produce alcohol for a second happiness, starting in the late medieval). Is this difference intentional? Should France and Ethiopia be allowed to cultivate at the same time as Carthage? Should Carthage similarly be delayed until Pharmacy and Botany?
• The Carolingian Paladin national unit also feels pretty late for its use (targeting cavalry when attacking). I like the unit, but it arrives at a time when cavalry are at a low point, so the utility is somewhat wasted. Cataphracts dominate the field in the mid classical when they first arrive, but by medieval era we start seeing 7-strength swordsman, crossbowmen, pikemen, and longbowman, which largely reduce the cataphract to an aid-granting unit, since the (non-civic locked) upgrade doesn't come until much, much later. It might be handy against the Feudal cavalry unit, but I don't see them often in games. Paladins would be much more impactful if they unlocked earlier, or maybe had 9 strength, allowing them to be a powerhouse throughout the early medieval.

 

[JDCP]

• The Carolingian Paladin national unit also feels pretty late for its use (targeting cavalry when attacking). I like the unit, but it arrives at a time when cavalry are at a low point, so the utility is somewhat wasted. Cataphracts dominate the field in the mid classical when they first arrive, but by medieval era we start seeing 7-strength swordsman, crossbowmen, pikemen, and longbowman, which largely reduce the cataphract to an aid-granting unit, since the (non-civic locked) upgrade doesn't come until much, much later. It might be handy against the Feudal cavalry unit, but I don't see them often in games. Paladins would be much more impactful if they unlocked earlier, or maybe had 9 strength, allowing them to be a powerhouse throughout the early medieval.

I don't agree, before the inclusion of the new UU the paladins were MY favorite heavy cavalry UU by far (still are as I haven't tried the new one, but I'm confident they will be as they seem to be no more than a better Paladin), I've been saying it since I played this mod for the first time (I'm a big France fan, go figure). I use them in EVERY game I play as France with ridiculously good success. No, seriously, it's right when I train them that my world conquest really starts. Until then it's all little skirmishes here and there with little gains.

F*ck I'd go as far as to say they are a bit too overpowered. combat and flank for free is a HUGEEEE bonus, just get stables+traditional customs (actually ditch that, get the doctrine [Art of War it was?] that grants +1 XP or just find someone to kill)+that one religious civic that grants extra XP (sorry, can't remember it now)+proper aids, and you got an excellent cavalry with flank 3 that WILL withdraw from most, if not all, fights while dealing MASSIVE damage They are without doubt one of the pillars of all my France strategies in the medieval period, no ****, two full stacks of them can bring down ANY city given you provide the necessary assets (siege, skirmisher aid bonus and a few shocktroops), no matter how well defended it is. I take good care of my Paladins, specially with their special aid that gives me enough confidence to charge in battle. Couple that with the cavalry tradition and doctrine and well, what the f*ck else should I say? Game over man, game over.

And that's just an UU, a meager part of your army, your actually supposed to be using the Capetian cavalry for this task but NO, the paladins are just too good to leave them at home.

For reference, most of my games are in Monarch, so it's not a matter of difficulty either btw Phillip II great leader, my fav after De Gaulle .

Maybe it's just that we have different approaches with cavalry, I rarely use heavy cavalry to achieve direct success in a fight, that's the role of foot soldiers and cavalry's lighter, more agile counterpart. For me heavy cavalry is a means to disorganize and find weaknesses in enemy stacks making best use of collateral damage. Sure, you can use them to beat enemies easily (in fact the paladins are pretty good at this task, remember the free combat I?) but even then that's not what I specialize them for. Under that definition cavalry is never at a low point for me, it's always useful as long as you use it as intended.

But who knows? Maybe I'm wrong in that regard, hopefully you prove me wrong... There's always a new thing to learn in the war room that this forum is

 

[[Y]]

Spoiler :

I don't agree, before the inclusion of the new UU the paladins were MY favorite heavy cavalry UU by far (still are as I haven't tried the new one, but I'm confident they will be as they seem to be no more than a better Paladin), I've been saying it since I played this mod for the first time (I'm a big France fan, go figure). I use them in EVERY game I play as France with ridiculously good success. No, seriously, it's right when I train them that my world conquest really starts. Until then it's all little skirmishes here and there with little gains.

F*ck I'd go as far as to say they are a bit too overpowered. combat and flank for free is a HUGEEEE bonus, just get stables+traditional customs (actually ditch that, get the doctrine [Art of War it was?] that grants +1 XP or just find someone to kill)+that one religious civic that grants extra XP (sorry, can't remember it now)+proper aids, and you got an excellent cavalry with flank 3 that WILL withdraw from most, if not all, fights while dealing MASSIVE damage They are without doubt one of the pillars of all my France strategies in the medieval period, no ****, two full stacks of them can bring down ANY city given you provide the necessary assets (siege, skirmisher aid bonus and a few shocktroops), no matter how well defended it is. I take good care of my Paladins, specially with their special aid that gives me enough confidence to charge in battle. Couple that with the cavalry tradition and doctrine and well, what the f*ck else should I say? Game over man, game over.

And that's just an UU, a meager part of your army, your actually supposed to be using the Capetian cavalry for this task but NO, the paladins are just too good to leave them at home.

For reference, most of my games are in Monarch, so it's not a matter of difficulty either btw Phillip II great leader, my fav after De Gaulle .

Maybe it's just that we have different approaches with cavalry, I rarely use heavy cavalry to achieve direct success in a fight, that's the role of foot soldiers and cavalry's lighter, more agile counterpart. For me heavy cavalry is a means to disorganize and find weaknesses in enemy stacks making best use of collateral damage. Sure, you can use them to beat enemies easily (in fact the paladins are pretty good at this task, remember the free combat I?) but even then that's not what I specialize them for. Under that definition cavalry is never at a low point for me, it's always useful as long as you use it as intended.

But who knows? Maybe I'm wrong in that regard, hopefully you prove me wrong... There's always a new thing to learn in the war room that this forum is

I've only got the few games with France, so I'll defer to your opinion! The above was my experience, but I'm likely not optimizing their utility.

A few other considerations:

Archery units and gunpowder units sharing increased costs (Ranged Support) is a serious handicap to civs without longbowmen. Once you secure access to black powder and research Arquebus, the arquebuesiers can immediately have astronomical hammer costs, and there's no option to upgrade any existing units to the arquebusier. Not a big deal for civs with longbowmen, who have decent defenses, but for other civs, they've already been at a military disadvantage for most of medieval era (worse city defenses and lesser power rating), and are now stuck with those weak defenses while having an extremely slow process to build modern defenses for their cities. If I were to do it again, I would avoid building crossbowmen in the first place and simply rely on pikeman for all my defenses, so that when I get arquebusier access and I can train them rapidly. Crossbowmen simply don't offer enough utility to be worth the hassle. Will you consider giving archery ranged support and gunpower ranged support distinct categories? Seems appropriate since the former can't be upgraded to the latter (except through irregulars, which I won't consider a real option).

I also suggest reconsidering this France flag... or at least turning it upside down (spoilered to keep SFW):

Spoiler :

 

[JDCP]

I also suggest reconsidering this France flag... or at least turning it upside down (spoilered to keep SFW):

I love it.
My only problem with it is perhaps how polished it looks, I wonder where it comes from... I don't even know what it's supposed to portray. doesn't have anything to do with the discussion but I love how the confederacy flag for ancient/classical looks, that spiral is sooooo cool. Most French flags are so boring compared to others like Spanish, German or Russian flags. Just a thought, not that I really care much about it to be honest

but I'm likely not optimizing their utility.

yes, perhaps, see what you can use them for in the battlefield and look for new opportunities and strategies with them. Hopefully you find the right path, but the way I described I do it might be a good place to start. One of the tips in the loading screens mentions that UUs are meant to be used as precisely as possible, specialized and well thought, if you don't plan ahead what objectives they will fulfill then they won't be of much use than your average warrior

I've mentioned many times how frustrating it can be to siege and conquer cities in this mod, but when I look back at it it's a pretty well rounded system. It requires patience and a clever strategy, you can't just throw all your units to the gutter and expect an assured victory. Sure some exceptions exist, but it's not the norm

I used to feel fear and uncertainty when approaching enemy cities, usually because I didn't knew what was expecting me ahead or if even my army could take a city down. But as I learn more and more about combat that sensation has gone, and now I'm very confident on the capabilities of the many efficiently (or that I feel are efficient, being honest there are still some deficiences here and there, critical weakspots that I need to cover somehow) designed stacks I charge into war. And that sensation made me think that some units were absolute dogsh#t because I could never get the best out of them... after some thinking and practice/testing I eventually found their best approaches.

It's about that, you have to get to know better those men fighting for you, what they do best and they CAN'T do, or they won't give a damn about your desired outcomes when they fight leading to a defeat that could have been prevented. You surely knew all of this already, but I do enjoy saying it regardless of that haha!

Archery units and gunpowder units sharing increased costs (Ranged Support) is a serious handicap to civs without longbowmen.

Yes you're right, but I think that's the intended effect... irregulars and foreign units exist for this purpose I believe, to help weak civs not carry on the big expenses of a fully updated army, the cost is of course a sh*tty defense, but that might be enough if used well.

And come on it's supposed to be a serious handicap! You've fallen well behind everyone if you're so poor you still hold to composites when people are already rolling cannons around. Stop neglecting the military and get some crossbows at the very least!

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

When viewing the civics/finance advisers, the civic maintenance costs there already reflect the savings from Legislator, yeah? Is there any chance of showing the exact savings, or making a note on those pages that Legislator (or Populist) is affecting the civic costs?

I can't answer that off the top of my head - I'll have to check (and maybe change) that when I'm back.

Cultivating grapes feels like it comes pretty late relative to what it allows. It's a very similar feature to Carthage cultivating Dye, but Carthage can cultivate Dye as soon as it researches Water Pump in late classical, whereas France (and Ethiopia with Coffee) has to wait until Pharmacy and Botany in the late Medieval. Carthage's and France's unique improvements are almost identical: both can cultivate a resource and build a unique improvement on that resource that gives extra commerce and +1 happiness in nearby cities. Dye is actually better than wine (+1 happiness with no building requirement, additional +1 with theater, an early classical building, while wine requires an early classical building for any benefit, and requires two wine to produce alcohol for a second happiness, starting in the late medieval). Is this difference intentional? Should France and Ethiopia be allowed to cultivate at the same time as Carthage? Should Carthage similarly be delayed until Pharmacy and Botany?

France's unique stuff is purposefully relatively weak to compensate for the fact that the civ has no real weakness - its regular unit roster is among the strongest, and it's all in all a very "comfortable" civ to play, without any special hoops to jump through. Also, consider that wine is the only resource that can be significantly buffed via an early wonder.

Lastly, but equally importantly, for purely flavour reasons, I wouldn't want the French to have wine too early. In pre-Roman and Roman times, Gaul was a major net importer of wine, and within the Roman empire it wasn't considered a major winemaking province (even though overall Romans did introduce winemaking wherever they went). Same goes for Ethiopia - historically, coffee isn't that old of a beverage. I don't believe there's any mention of coffee in any sources before X CE.

The Carolingian Paladin national unit also feels pretty late for its use (targeting cavalry when attacking). I like the unit, but it arrives at a time when cavalry are at a low point, so the utility is somewhat wasted. Cataphracts dominate the field in the mid classical when they first arrive, but by medieval era we start seeing 7-strength swordsman, crossbowmen, pikemen, and longbowman, which largely reduce the cataphract to an aid-granting unit, since the (non-civic locked) upgrade doesn't come until much, much later. It might be handy against the Feudal cavalry unit, but I don't see them often in games. Paladins would be much more impactful if they unlocked earlier, or maybe had 9 strength, allowing them to be a powerhouse throughout the early medieval.

I feel this has been covered by JDCP rather colourfully, so I'll only add that they were, in my opinion, indirectly boosted by the (currently SVN-only) change to cavalry vs cities handling, and obviously got a bit of a longevity with a shiny new upgrade.

Archery units and gunpowder units sharing increased costs (Ranged Support) is a serious handicap to civs without longbowmen. Once you secure access to black powder and research Arquebus, the arquebuesiers can immediately have astronomical hammer costs, and there's no option to upgrade any existing units to the arquebusier. Not a big deal for civs with longbowmen, who have decent defenses, but for other civs, they've already been at a military disadvantage for most of medieval era (worse city defenses and lesser power rating), and are now stuck with those weak defenses while having an extremely slow process to build modern defenses for their cities. If I were to do it again, I would avoid building crossbowmen in the first place and simply rely on pikeman for all my defenses, so that when I get arquebusier access and I can train them rapidly. Crossbowmen simply don't offer enough utility to be worth the hassle. Will you consider giving archery ranged support and gunpower ranged support distinct categories? Seems appropriate since the former can't be upgraded to the latter (except through irregulars, which I won't consider a real option).

There is already a bit of an assumption on my part that non-longbow civs should use melee units as their defensive mainstay in the middle ages; crossbow is an ok all-rounder unit, not a dedicated city defender - and, TBH, neither is the arquebus.

I also suggest reconsidering this France flag... or at least turning it upside down (spoilered to keep SFW)

That's a Frankish bee, as good a symbol for pre-Carolingian Franks as I could dig up:

Even though these were pre-heraldic times, the Merovingians widely used the bee as their symbol. I may or may not opt for a less phallic version of the thing when I'm redoing the French flags (alphabetically, we're almost there).

Most French flags are so boring compared to others like Spanish, German or Russian flags.

That's on the French, not on me! Unlike some other civs, I don't even need to rely on obscure or tenuous designs - the French were always so excited about flag-waving (and regime changes) that there's a flag for almost any occasion in the French history.