Realism Invictus

[Alekseyev_]

Did you write that with ChatGPT?

 

[AspiringScholar]

Did you write that with ChatGPT?

No, why?

 

[[Y]]

No, why?

'cause none of us know what concomitant means

Without any denial that they are lucrative and potent bonuses well-competitive against many opportunity costs, a key and unique drawback for Great Works of Science relative to any other great person usage is that they expire, and do so on the basis of a shelf-life which ends up being a modest fraction of the whole game. Their concomitant bonuses are also often quite compelling, and for this reason it's often the best use of a Great Scientist, but, scaling the question of opportunity costs back a bit, there is also the weighty factor of "Great People Pollution" inherent to Civ 4 to consider as well: choosing to prioritize and go for scientists will make it harder to get any other desired category of great person; increasingly and permanently, since your pool of GPP is immutable and experiences no reset - so, while it makes sense that as long as we're talking about what can be done with an individual great person, it's more relevant to consider that the use of any of them entails an opportunity cost against not just the actions that can be done with that one, singularly, but against the use of the full range of this entire game mechanic, throughout the whole timeline.

Contrarily, the economic great works are permanent, which is to my mind a huge advantage. Likewise, settling the scientist never expires, nor does establishing the academy. As one who often crests and finds a stride later in the game, I also find that the key resources produced exclusively by the Great Merchants to have enormous value, and deliberating for scientists only creates a drawback at this stage of the game, when technological advantages can indeed outstrip "hard power" when one lacks any bottleneck of an increasingly complex network of critical resources, raw or finished.

These points are all technically true but don't actually prove much.

Great works of science expire after 2-3 eras. That's a long time! And when you consider that most of the great merchants works aren't available until the last 2-3 eras, it's not that big a difference. They effectively "expire" along a similar timeline. Working Class and Free Market come along roughly on par with Physics, who's great works of science last until Rocket Science. Rocket Science might not be the very end of the tech tree, but it's not far from it. Totalitarianism and Consumerism come even later than that--There are only four tech columns between Consumerism and Future Tech!

Civ is a game about snowballing. Getting X of something early on and X of something later on is not equal amounts of X. The earlier you're able to get an advantage, the more you're able to leverage it for greater late game advantage. And that's especially true of science, where advantages help you get better military early, better economy buildings early, and of course, access to world wonders before other civs have access to them (including great works of science). So even with the early expiry of great works of science, they're able to have much more of an impact on your game than okay-ish great works of merchantry that last forever (and that don't even improve your economy most of the time).

And most of them aren't *really* permanent. The glasswork is, yeah. But the other resource works are so late game that if they weren't permanent, they'd hardly exist at all. And the civic ones are only permanent as long as you stay in that civic, which you probably won't for Craft Guilds, Merchant Families, or Protectionism. It might be true for the later ones, but as mentioned above, they come very later, and even then might not be your end-game civic (eg moving from Free Market to Planned Economy).

Move the +1 happy & health & -1 epidemics all to Arthashastra, (optionally keeping the worker rate as well) which seems a suitable place for such a thing according to its description, and the very same effect would have a much more valuable impact if given to that civic and coming at that stage of the game.

Forgot to mention this in the last post, but keep in mind that there is Notre Dame, a world wonder that gives +1 happiness and +1 health to all cities on the continent (so less than the effect listed above and with some restriction), and the wonder comes at the opposite end of the medieval era. I think the effect above being available at Guilds is far too strong.

 

[AspiringScholar]

'cause none of us know what concomitant means

Oh, I'm not trying to be pedantic. I just write whatever sentences form in my mind when they seem apt to what I am thinking.

These points are all technically true but don't actually prove much.

Great works of science expire after 2-3 eras. That's a long time! And when you consider that most of the great merchants works aren't available until the last 2-3 eras, it's not that big a difference. They effectively "expire" along a similar timeline. Working Class and Free Market come along roughly on par with Physics, who's great works of science last until Rocket Science. Rocket Science might not be the very end of the tech tree, but it's not far from it. Totalitarianism and Consumerism come even later than that--There are only four tech columns between Consumerism and Future Tech!

Civ is a game about snowballing. Getting X of something early on and X of something later on is not equal amounts of X. The earlier you're able to get an advantage, the more you're able to leverage it for greater late game advantage. And that's especially true of science, where advantages help you get better military early, better economy buildings early, and of course, access to world wonders before other civs have access to them (including great works of science). So even with the early expiry of great works of science, they're able to have much more of an impact on your game than okay-ish great works of merchantry that last forever (and that don't even improve your economy most of the time).

And most of them aren't *really* permanent. The glasswork is, yeah. But the other resource works are so late game that if they weren't permanent, they'd hardly exist at all. And the civic ones are only permanent as long as you stay in that civic, which you probably won't for Craft Guilds, Merchant Families, or Protectionism. It might be true for the later ones, but as mentioned above, they come very later, and even then might not be your end-game civic (eg moving from Free Market to Planned Economy).

Good points! Bear in mind please, as well, that I was not making an argument against Great Works of Science, just trying to caveat their unique drawback, and to contextualize their utility in the bigger picture of all types of great people and what you can do with them. With respect to orchestrating that, I am claiming no special wisdom, but there are interesting "early vs. late" considerations to be made (aptly to the point of your "appreciating value" snowball contention, as in this case, it is often inverse with GP application): for instance, I have found that settling great prophets in the very early game is rather effective and can be a reliably viable means of financing an aggressive early expansion; but eagerly pursuing that means that you'll be drawing prophets later in the game when you want merchants, scientists and engineers, and when prophets have become more or less a pittance.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

OOOH LITTLE MAN YOU WANNA EXPAND? ITS JUNGLE TILES, FORGET ABOUT ROADS AND STUFF AND ALL TO MODERN ERA. BUILD SLASH AND BURN FARMS AND ENJOY YOUR SMOL SETTLEMENT
(it would also prevent jungle civs to be top world civs - Incas dont tried expand to jungle and they can build nice mid-empire, aztecs and mayas - all what they afford it city states and human sacrfices)

I do not explicitly disagree that can be a viable approach. It's more that, for it to be a viable approach, one has to redesign a lot of things from the ground up to not leave half of civs unplayable in any given game. Civ 4 was never designed around jungle that were unclearable to modern era. It'd take more than just (said "just" a titanic work in itself) rebalancing the actual effects, as, for instance, the logic of assigning starting plots and AI for choosing city sites would need to basically be re-written from scratch.

Hooly sh.t! Maybe I can do it and make it useful. Anyway - if I mess it up, then it's not worse than I can download a fresh copy of Realism and try again.....

Cacti are separate objects in the nif, so it should be trivial to remove just them.

Arthashastra - Very narrow effect, and I probably wouldn't give up a great person for it. Odds are by this point in the game, most of my tiles are improved, and improving what's left faster isn't solving any problem or opening up advantages. My tiles will get there sooner or later as it is. On top of that, Craft Guilds is a relatively short-term civic, helping out during the medieval era but getting switched once I get Free Market in the Renaissance (if not to Merchant Families sooner). I think I would rather just settle the merchant for +4 GPT that'll last the rest of the game. Curious to hear other player's thoughts.

I feel the effect suffers from being too hard to quantify meaningfully and somewhat boring. Depending on one's situation, getting an improved tile earlier, in, as you mention, a snowballing-heavy game, can be quite powerful. It's also meant to be a bit of a tongue-in-cheek callback to vanilla India, which had "fast workers" as the UU. But I hear you, and I made a mental note to consider if something more interesting can be done here.

Discourses on Salt and Iron - Feels awkward. 2 extra commerce on mines feels like it should be a huge win, but realistically, the only cities I have operating mines heavily are military production cities, and the bonus commerce there won't be leveraged effectively. The cities where I would want a commerce bonus (cities with buildings for +% to research or gold) are shifting over to windmills by now. And the military cities will be following suit soon after. So adding commerce to mines isn't very tempting compared to just settling the merchant in a city where the extra gold can be maximized.

Admittedly, this one was rather specifically designed as "minmaxer bait", as it buffs something you will never think to consciously optimise around. But that kind of thinking aside, this is all but guaranteed +2 base commerce at least in most/all cities, and much more in some, which, taken abstractly, you'd probably consider quite ok of an effect.

The National System of Political Economy - Great effect, but feels weird being attached to a civic that doesn't itself give you hurrying production. Though I guess at this point in the game, unless still running slavery, you'll be using some labor civic that does give you hurrying.

I generally tried making the effects of the works at least somewhat relevant to the theme of the actual work. A fun fact on this one - the most important work on earlier Mercantilism is... the Wealth of Nations. It just so happens that mercantilism was so much of a practical phenomenon that there was virtually no underlying theoretical discourse around it before Adam Smith came around with his critique. And even later in the XIXth century, when lots of countries relied on both of the below, credible economic works that would actually speak in favour of protectionism and economic interventionism are very few and far between.

I think this one's great, but kind of weird to have Das Kapital be created by a Great Merchant. Is there an option to rename Great Merchants to Great Economists once reaching the Renaissance?

I've been quietly sneaking economists into the Great Merchant lists for many years now! But, just as with "Great Prophets" who get their share of philosophers, or the very same Great Merchants who also get explorers, I feel it's an adequate catch-all, as otherwise you'd still get a hard time coining a term that would allow you to lump both Christopher Columbus and Adam Smith together with Warren Buffett.

Now the sorry one: Keynes. It adds to what the civic does very well already (health and happiness), but while WON does the same, in its case it doubles one of the primary effects, and that being one with immediate return. But for Welfare State, surplus happiness and health don't do anything at all until your cities reach these tresholds. And it's only increased a little amount while the civic already does a ton. I propose the following change: Move the +1 happy & health & -1 epidemics all to Arthashastra, (optionally keeping the worker rate as well) which seems a suitable place for such a thing according to its description, and the very same effect would have a much more valuable impact if given to that civic and coming at that stage of the game. And then give Keynes an effect unrelated to the existing Welfare State effects. One potentially very strong that came in mind when reading its effect was a reduced inflation rate. But I don't know if inflation is global or per player. If it is per player, just a low percent less could mean a lot by the time the Welfare State civic comes around.

I agree this one is basically a "win more", and the effect is rather uninspiring. I'll keep an open mind for its effects, but I have to tell people once again that inflation is not a gameplay mechanic in Civ 4. It is not something that players meaningfully interact with at any moment in the game. It's simply a linear adjustment to all costs as the game progresses that could be simply called that ("time adjustment") rather than a name that evokes something much more meaningful and complex.

I have a very minor request for the topic of mod polish: Could the Israeli Fortress be given a unique button? I think it's the only unique building (not distinctive) that has the same button as the building it replaces.

Of course! Thanks for reminding. The button is even already there, I just need to point to it.

Just a small suggestion (and I think others have mentioned it too):

It would be great if the United Nations and Apostolic Palace features could be enabled without requiring the Diplomatic Victory condition.

Right now, I enable Diplomatic Victory and edit the Civ4VoteInfo.xml file to remove the “vote for victory” option.

The problem is that the AI still behaves as if it can win a diplomatic victory, which causes some odd gameplay.

So, it would be nice to have an option to use these features with any set of victory conditions.

Shouldn't be very hard to do, as I mentioned just recently. Given that there's some demand for that, I may look into it before the next release. No promises though.

Forgot to mention this in the last post, but keep in mind that there is Notre Dame, a world wonder that gives +1 happiness and +1 health to all cities on the continent (so less than the effect listed above and with some restriction), and the wonder comes at the opposite end of the medieval era. I think the effect above being available at Guilds is far too strong.

Indeed, it needs something more tangential. I was thinking maybe of a military benefit even? A problem with this one is that the original work is so broad, it offers no real direction for an in-game effect.

I just write whatever sentences form in my mind when they seem apt to what I am thinking.

When I had a small kid in my life I suddenly had to talk to, I found that even in one's native language, the "whatever sentences form in my mind" is often counterproductive, and the process one normally uses when starting to speak a foreign language (rolling a phrase in one's head and thinking whether it's the best way to phrase it) is actually applicable to far more situations in life. Not necessarily simplifying (though in the case of the kid, that's exactly what was needed - using a simpler, clearer language that would drive the actual point rather than impressing him with my broad vocabulary ), as, for instance, talking to a potential business partner one would want to avoid sounding overtly legal so as not to be perceived as too standoffish, even if substituting the language can muddle the meaning somewhat. While there is a singular language in everyone's head, my experience suggests there shouldn't be a single language that one speaks to everyone around them, and an ability to find the right medium to deliver the message is always important.

And on a more philosophical note, this is something that plagues modern humanities - striving to be perceived as seriously as the "hard sciences", they often borrow the language constructs from those as a kind of a cargo cult. It results in an impenetrable wall of neologism jargon, which tends to produce the exact opposite effect to the one I describe above: making the person using it sound smart, while at the same time obscuring the actual point (which, if I'm allowed to be a bit malicious, seems very intentional and desirable for many academics in the humanities ). While it is obviously an oversimplification, the gist of "if you can't explain your field to a 6-year-old, then you don't understand it yourself" holds true - or worse than that, "you're afraid that if you explain your field adequately to a 6-year-old, both of you will clearly see there isn't much of a field".

 

[PKSRoman]

Would you consider switching Great Merchants from +4 to +10%?

Its too powerful. i had a games when i had 6-8 great merchants - putting them in one city who is gold-harvester would be so op
The only thing that comes to mind is a special building that gives 10% more gold in the city BUT for 100 turns, after which the building would be removed from the city.Useful in indrustal / modern era (some kind of "Invest Holding" or "Specialised Corporation" )

It'd take more than just (said "just" a titanic work in itself) rebalancing the actual effects, as, for instance, the logic of assigning starting plots and AI for choosing city sites would need to basically be re-written from scratch.

oooh, what a shame.

Animism can be so OP with this slash and burn farms spared btw

 

[RezerCuid]

Cacti are separate objects in the nif, so it should be trivial to remove just them.

No need to remove cacti

 

[[Y]]

Oh, I'm not trying to be pedantic. I just write whatever sentences form in my mind when they seem apt to what I am thinking.

And I encourage it. It's just a bit of feedback on what communications translate well to other people and which don't. It's always an evolving process for all of us.

Good points! Bear in mind please, as well, that I was not making an argument against Great Works of Science, just trying to caveat their unique drawback, and to contextualize their utility in the bigger picture of all types of great people and what you can do with them. With respect to orchestrating that, I am claiming no special wisdom, but there are interesting "early vs. late" considerations to be made (aptly to the point of your "appreciating value" snowball contention, as in this case, it is often inverse with GP application): for instance, I have found that settling great prophets in the very early game is rather effective and can be a reliably viable means of financing an aggressive early expansion; but eagerly pursuing that means that you'll be drawing prophets later in the game when you want merchants, scientists and engineers, and when prophets have become more or less a pittance.

I've had the same journey of discovery. I used to maximize great prophet generation for all that early gold, the value of a gold coin drops so hard around the midgame that using all my GP points for the gold bonus stopped being tempting. Especially as I've found other ways to optimize my empire for early expansion without a dependency on prophets. It's why I'm currently experimenting with minimal GP generation in the first half, putting off the great work of literature, adopting Caste System, and switching from Elisa to Taejo (what a perfect trade off!). In my current game I just recently finished building all my universities, switched out of caste system, and built the work of literature, and went from a GP every ~150 turns to a GP every ~20 turns, but I need a round of GP generation to eliminate all the great prophet/merchant points I've built up so far. Waiting to see if the tactic pays off...

I feel the effect suffers from being too hard to quantify meaningfully and somewhat boring. Depending on one's situation, getting an improved tile earlier, in, as you mention, a snowballing-heavy game, can be quite powerful. It's also meant to be a bit of a tongue-in-cheek callback to vanilla India, which had "fast workers" as the UU. But I hear you, and I made a mental note to consider if something more interesting can be done here.

Indeed, it needs something more tangential. I was thinking maybe of a military benefit even? A problem with this one is that the original work is so broad, it offers no real direction for an in-game effect.

Looking at the wikipedia entry for Arthashastra, the the range of subjects make me think it would benefit from a style similar to the Clocktower, a bunch of small bonuses dependent on the buildings in the city. I think that would befit Craft Guilds, too, since it's trademark building does something similar, and Arthashastra could either be a double-up on those to really drive home that advantage, or complement it by buffing other buildings of the time. I'd make more concrete suggestions, but I have to head out in 10 minutes and don't have the time to wait for RI to start up so I can check the existing stats.

Admittedly, this one was rather specifically designed as "minmaxer bait", as it buffs something you will never think to consciously optimise around. But that kind of thinking aside, this is all but guaranteed +2 base commerce at least in most/all cities, and much more in some, which, taken abstractly, you'd probably consider quite ok of an effect.

Ironically, I think I am the thread's resident min/maxer!

It's +2 base commerce guaranteed, but I can also use it for +4 gold and +1 food guaranteed (and that will last longer than the 2 commerce), or I can use it for a golden age that will likely generate more commerce in the next 15 turns than the +2 commerce will generate over the course of my keeping Merchant Families active. +2 commerce for 300 turns (~600 commerce total) just isn't worth expending a great merchant. And that's assuming you have the merchant available as soon as you adopt the civic. If you have to wait 100-150 turns after adopting the civic before getting a Great Merchant, it's a much, much smaller yield.

 

[RamsesII]

Hi folks,

Having so much incredible fun with this immersive mod, it's been a year now, running on latest released version 3.71 (I think).

Quick question : I defied an Apostolic Palace (Zoroastrism) resolution which seeked to stop a war between the Armenians and myself (Hammurabi). The resolution got voted and I now have 5 unhappy faces in all my cities which tanks my entire economy. Holy cow! How long does this effect last? I play Europe map on Monarch, year is 1000AD.

Cheers

 

[TheBirdMan]

No need to remove cacti

Easy now RezerCuid. It was information for me how to make a specific graphical change I wanted for my personal mod.

 

[RezerCuid]

Easy now RezerCuid. It was information for me how to make a specific graphical change I wanted for my personal mod.

ok

 

[sazhdapec]

Is it just me or every distinctive unit of every civ in civilopedia was moved to unique units? (SVN 5529)

Spoiler :

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Looking at the wikipedia entry for Arthashastra, the the range of subjects make me think it would benefit from a style similar to the Clocktower, a bunch of small bonuses dependent on the buildings in the city. I think that would befit Craft Guilds, too, since it's trademark building does something similar, and Arthashastra could either be a double-up on those to really drive home that advantage, or complement it by buffing other buildings of the time. I'd make more concrete suggestions, but I have to head out in 10 minutes and don't have the time to wait for RI to start up so I can check the existing stats.

Yeah, might also be an option.

Quick question : I defied an Apostolic Palace (Zoroastrism) resolution which seeked to stop a war between the Armenians and myself (Hammurabi). The resolution got voted and I now have 5 unhappy faces in all my cities which tanks my entire economy. Holy cow! How long does this effect last? I play Europe map on Monarch, year is 1000AD.

That's a vanilla mechanic for both the UN and the Apostolic Palace. The duration of the effect is dependent on the game speed (and probably map size) and is several dozens of turns.

Is it just me or every distinctive unit of every civ in civilopedia was moved to unique units? (SVN 5529)

Just you:

Spoiler big screenshot :

 

[JDCP]

Did you write that with ChatGPT?

hahaha what? I don't think ChatGPT could get so deep into the mechanics of CIV4 and the even less documented of RI besides, I don't think an AI would word sentences like that. Too human, as in unfail-safeable ( hey I gotta prove this isn't written with AI either yknow), if you ask me.

Maybe a top secret Chinese Deepseek build can? the reds also got their secret SVN builds too you know? Makes me wonder how big is the electricity bill in China... I guess nothing to worry about for them, since they got the Three Gorges

TBH, it's something even easier and I long wanted to implement, and you actually prompted me to do it. Since the volcano event is recurring, the game already chooses a mountain tile as a "volcano" the first time it happens - so why not place an actual visual volcano there? Will be added in the next revision.

Hell yeah, now THIS is the realism I look forward to. I had actually thought about that too (quite in fact I think we all have, probably) but I just went like "ah what the f*ck it's just a mountain", glad to see it being featured!

Birdman got very good aesthetical ideas, glad we have so many assets to choose from for our game! Be them from other authors or from past RI builds, it's always nice to have alternatives specially if they're so easy to change and mix!

 

[[Y]]

The Hwacha feels like an odd choice for a Bombard replacement. They aren't siege weapons that tear down walls, so bombarding with them feels inappropriate. Their trademark ability is their causing widespread damage, which should translate to lots of collateral damage in Civ terms, but it only hits 1 unit at a time. And they get a bonus against archery and melee units... but as ranged attackers, doesn't that just mean that melee and archery units are less likely to defend (and take damage) against them?

 

[AspiringScholar]

When I had a small kid in my life I suddenly had to talk to, I found that even in one's native language, the "whatever sentences form in my mind" is often counterproductive, and the process one normally uses when starting to speak a foreign language (rolling a phrase in one's head and thinking whether it's the best way to phrase it) is actually applicable to far more situations in life. Not necessarily simplifying (though in the case of the kid, that's exactly what was needed - using a simpler, clearer language that would drive the actual point rather than impressing him with my broad vocabulary ), as, for instance, talking to a potential business partner one would want to avoid sounding overtly legal so as not to be perceived as too standoffish, even if substituting the language can muddle the meaning somewhat. While there is a singular language in everyone's head, my experience suggests there shouldn't be a single language that one speaks to everyone around them, and an ability to find the right medium to deliver the message is always important.

And on a more philosophical note, this is something that plagues modern humanities - striving to be perceived as seriously as the "hard sciences", they often borrow the language constructs from those as a kind of a cargo cult. It results in an impenetrable wall of neologism jargon, which tends to produce the exact opposite effect to the one I describe above: making the person using it sound smart, while at the same time obscuring the actual point (which, if I'm allowed to be a bit malicious, seems very intentional and desirable for many academics in the humanities ). While it is obviously an oversimplification, the gist of "if you can't explain your field to a 6-year-old, then you don't understand it yourself" holds true - or worse than that, "you're afraid that if you explain your field adequately to a 6-year-old, both of you will clearly see there isn't much of a field".

It's possible that my statement there was misunderstood, as I (hopefully) don't altogether or severely lack a pulse for tailoring communication to the audience/recipient. Being that most of you all are either definitely or plausibly older and more highly educated than myself and that this thread is a place for a lot of enthusiastic historical and strategic dialogue among such people, said "stream of consciousness" writing felt appropriate to me. I'm certainly not trying to be snooty or vapidly verbose, however, and I agree with your/GK Chesterton's point about the deceptively reducible simplicity of true things worth generalizing.

And I encourage it. It's just a bit of feedback on what communications translate well to other people and which don't. It's always an evolving process for all of us.

Indeed! Being one who grew up spending a significant (though still not overwhelmingly lopsided) amount of time reading above socializing with peers, my completely earnest use of English at times unfortunately makes it seem like I'm trying to flaunt learnedness or make a statement of intellectual superiority; when really, there's a certain joy for me and draw in the question "How can I precisely put this thought into language?" which makes a well-crafted sentence along those lines something satisfying and which simply seems to me to be an end worth pursuing unto itself, while I rather strongly dislike the self-adulating exclusivity and condescension of this common to academia, and the stuffy, ill-founded pride which often rather conspicuously drips from it.

Ironically, I think I am the thread's resident min/maxer!

I really enjoy reading your feedback, for that reason among others. It's often not aligned with my playstyle, but consequently, I seldom think about some of the less affrontive details that you highlight and it leads to interesting discussions. Keep on min-maxing, please!

 

[JDCP]

It's possible that my statement there was misunderstood, as I (hopefully) don't altogether or severely lack a pulse for tailoring communication to the audience/recipient. Being that most of you all are either definitely or plausibly older and more highly educated than myself and that this thread is a place for a lot of enthusiastic historical and strategic dialogue among such people, said "stream of consciousness" writing felt appropriate to me. I'm certainly not trying to be snooty or vapidly verbose, however, and I agree with your/GK Chesterton's point about the deceptively reducible simplicity of true things worth generalizing.

wanting to be as thorough as possible in that which you passively pursue (to learn and iimprove this mod, and of course socialize in this forum) is a good thing, and you did well, clearly a misunderstood message indeed. Walter is right on his point too, I get where he goes. I personally write in such an outlandish way simply because I find it fun to do, and too much essay writing has also fried my brain. Or even sometimes, I just mix a bunch of words I think are "attractive sounding" and hope it sounds coherent, just for the sake of it.

He is right, the way we approach language can't be universal, certain situations require the right words not a template of some sorts. Sometimes it's just about connecting two dots instead drawing a full diagram. But I figure you already knew this Just a little commentary in my part, it's a very valuable message.

The Hwacha feels like an odd choice for a Bombard replacement. They aren't siege weapons that tear down walls, so bombarding with them feels inappropriate. Their trademark ability is their causing widespread damage, which should translate to lots of collateral damage in Civ terms, but it only hits 1 unit at a time. And they get a bonus against archery and melee units... but as ranged attackers, doesn't that just mean that melee and archery units are less likely to defend (and take damage) against them?

I kinda agree here, excuse that I haven't had a whole game completed as the Koreans (in fact one of my first games was with the Koreans, and I haven't played with them since that long ago) but I still have something to say about it: the Hwacha fired very tiny projectiles as far as I know, so making them inflict more than 1 unit collateral damage feels weird... But I won't deny it sounds very exciting. Also, for what Wikipedia and the mod's Civilopedia say this was more of a defensive weapon than anything too, so I think the bonuses are fitting for the kind of enemy it would have faced.

I would suggest decreasing the bombarding percentage and increasing collateral count just a tiny bit, or directly turning the Hwacha into an UU given it's background as a defensive contraption rather than been designed for assaulting a fort. I read they were used in naval sieges too, but because of this so specialized use I really really support the idea of turning them into a collateral damage based UU, primarily used to defend from enemy invasions, as high collateral damage can repel the AI easily, and I feel players would feel demoralized by this too.

That makes me think, siege units don't receive defensive bonuses... but if they are stationed into a city, shouldn't they? Not all, logically I think the defense percentage of a city counts towards not only the walls but also whatever is there to defend it, but Emplaced Artillery does have these bonuses, and I feel "special" units like the Hwacha should count towards this. Kind of like how the Iron Pagoda (Chinese UU, OVERPOWERED ASF even with the city attack penalty) is among all the mounted units the ONLY with the exceptional property of receiving defense bonuses.

Yeah, I think the Hwacha deserves to be an UU even though that would only make the Koreans EVEN more powerful than I feel they already are. Fighting Korean cities defended by an specialized UU version of these would be HELL (as it probably was back when it was introduced in warfare), specially in the hands of an experienced player. Turning the Hwacha into an UU would give the Koreans a alternative unit representative of their warfare history that shines beyond being a flavor, and also an actual bombard replacement.

BUUTTTTT Perhaps Walter or someone else around here knows something we don't, would be glad to hear more about this machine Any of that aside, I don't have much of a problem with it, It's good as it is, those are just my thoughts on how it would be "better" but I'm fine with how it is already portrayed.

"How can I precisely put this thought into language?"

Yes exactly my thoughts, performing anything you enjoy in the most beautiful and detailed way you can convey right at the moment is a very pleasant way to do things, very good for the heart dare I say. I'd like to say it's just that, but being honest I also do it because it makes me feel smarter than I really am, bit of a guilty pleasure there, and a very bad habit. I guess most of the time we aren't trying (or at least I, don't want to generalize here) to impress someone but rather ourselves, perhaps sometimes that's why some people can sound way too elocuent (in a bad sense, as exagerated) for us, because those words aren't directed expressly to whoever they have in front but rather, them to themselves, so they are putting all their soul into that which they'd love to hear instead of what we actually should be hearing.

Geez just look at me, I'm already doing it

Oh yes I almost forget, I was thinking about something... I know corporations will never be a thing in RI and that's something I understand perfectly as it wasn't a good system to begin with, besides some RI mechanics already fit that role as stated in several posts. But I've been wondering... something interesting corporations had was that you could have them in enemy cities, kind of how some American corporations were still functioning in Nazi Germany even after the US joined the war (see Fanta or Ford) and this was a very interesting concept, even how your enemies could profit from them or switching to communism would bring everything down! it was very interesting even if the system lacked polish, is this implemented in RI in some way I'm yet to realize? Maybe it is too much of a hassle, perhaps even unnecesary, but I think it was a very cool thing.

 

[RamsesII]

That's a vanilla mechanic for both the UN and the Apostolic Palace. The duration of the effect is dependent on the game speed (and probably map size) and is several dozens of turns.

Thanks Walter. Also to be noted, cities which house followers of another faith (i.e. other than zoroastrism in this case) get no unhappy faces from having defied the AP resolution. And also, no penalty in international relations with civs that have zoroastrism as state religion...

 

[RamsesII]

It's +2 base commerce guaranteed, but I can also use it for +4 gold and +1 food guaranteed (and that will last longer than the 2 commerce), or I can use it for a golden age that will likely generate more commerce in the next 15 turns than the +2 commerce will generate over the course of my keeping Merchant Families active. +2 commerce for 300 turns (~600 commerce total) just isn't worth expending a great merchant. And that's assuming you have the merchant available as soon as you adopt the civic. If you have to wait 100-150 turns after adopting the civic before getting a Great Merchant, it's a much, much smaller yield.

How about sending a Great Merchant on a trade mission in a far-away city? around the middle-age this can yield ~3k gp which I find enormous. I usually use the gold to upgrade like 20/30 units instantly, which can turn the tide of a difficult war as well as boost the overall power ratio, and this without affecting the science research %. Best use of the GM I find...

 

[[Y]]

I really enjoy reading your feedback, for that reason among others. It's often not aligned with my playstyle, but consequently, I seldom think about some of the less affrontive details that you highlight and it leads to interesting discussions. Keep on min-maxing, please!

Will do! And I'll forward any complaints to you.

---

I'm still occasionally experiencing city spam by AI civs. I just had what felt like a good start spoiled when two not-so-near neighbors (James K Polk and the Transoxianian one, I'm blanking on his name) settle 7 cities by turn 200, and going far enough to settle abutting my borders. And in Polk's case, it was stretching out like an arm from his capital all the way down to me, just 7 cities in a row. And at least of the cities I can see, they were only defended by a single skirmisher, so something from the previous change of defending cities must not have taken with these leaders.

Anyway, at this point I gave up and removed all expansionist leaders from my local game. I'm betting there's more to it than just the trait, and I've got some false positive and false negatives, but .