RFC Classical World

I'm torn between changing cottages and not changing them.

On the one hand, taking away one food and removing the non adjacency restriction gives a lot more flexibility in areas such as France. China and India, where you have plenty of grassland and food, and often find all you can do with the grassland you can't cottage is endless workshops, which is not very realistic either. It would also mean you could make proper suburbs, with some cottages next to each other rather than just two or three around cities which don't have flat land in the right position. Also you don't find yourself having to raze a cottage that the AI has built in a suboptimal position, which always strikes me as being a bit stupid.

On the other hand, taking food away from cottages will make them next to useless in areas with little food, and will mean that plains become almost worthless - either they take up two food with a cottage or workshop, or they only just feed the person working them with a farm. That said, it is quite realistic to have relatively barren areas of the map not having many cottages, and they should arguably be much less populated with cottages than areas with lots of grassland.

Personally, I think the move to take one food away from cottages works as long as they get a commerce boost to make up for it (by adding 1:commerce: at hamlet level) and also if irrigated farms get +1:food: (perhaps as a bonus with crop rotation or horticulture). That would make it even more realistic, with fertile flood plains and river lands providing lots of food to support the cottages and workshops. It would also make players think about where they put things, rather than just alternating farms and workshops once all non adjacent cottage plots have been used up.
 
I should have the internet at home again late next week

turns out the Romans and Carthage have been having a love-in since the Tocharian start date was moved (due to misplaced attitude modifiers) and I think that might be why they (the Romans) have been all over the Levant lately.

I will give Judah extra units in case of starts where they are surrounded by Rome.

embryodead has reduced the size of the leaderhead art by half. that will be in the next update and should help performance.

I gave some thought to cottages and related terrain/improvement issues and I have decided that I'm happy to go back to regular CivIV mechanics and stats. all of my changes were attempts to get the AI to build a more natural-looking map since I find their normal behaviour kind of immersion-breaking and this map seemed to accentuate that somehow. however, I realise that I am more of a role-player than most and many of you would be happier with a more "normal" mod and others may be hesitant to try it due to this weirdness.
 
I gave some thought to cottages and related terrain/improvement issues and I have decided that I'm happy to go back to regular CivIV mechanics and stats. all of my changes were attempts to get the AI to build a more natural-looking map since I find their normal behaviour kind of immersion-breaking and this map seemed to accentuate that somehow. however, I realise that I am more of a role-player than most and many of you would be happier with a more "normal" mod and others may be hesitant to try it due to this weirdness.

Personally I would like to see something different with cottages, other than the usual CivIV mechanics where cottaging is largely the default choice for grasslands and plains due to the commerce benefits. I think the current non adjacency restrictions work fine, and a food restriction on cottages could also work with a boost to cottage commerce and the food production of irrigated farms. That would make it a real choice whether to farm, cottage or workshop a grassland tile depending on what benefit you want to get for your city.
 
The status quo (without the cottage nerf) is fine, in my opinion. It helps differentiate the mod, and we might end up with some balance issues reverting the tile yields.
 
I think that the system in effect version 1.10 was working very well, although I would give towns +1 commerce.
 
Again, agree with Jusos. On top of that all your cottage rules and hills rules, sprt, though at first seem little strange in really create a new feel for Classical World. I remember mod not only by civilizations they offer but by the different things you do to keep your economy going. Old BTS mechanic is used and reused in so many mods. Just give Towns an extra commerce please and don't change anything :)
 
ok I'm happy with that. I'm glad my approach has met with some approval.

why don't we give the extra town commerce to the Trade civic? would that be OP along with its current +1 trade route per city? that could be changed to +50% from trade routes maybe.

I made the silkworm stealing limited to 1 attempt per civ, so if you lose the spy after stealing the silkworms you are out of luck. I couldn't find anything else that wasn't exploitable and didn't require too many checks.
 
why don't we give the extra town commerce to the Trade civic? would that be OP along with its current +1 trade route per city? that could be changed to +50% from trade routes maybe.

What about with wage labour, like I originally suggested? That would make WL more desirable to research rather than just sticking with slavery. I think adding +1:commerce: to the trade economy civic would make it a bit OP, and the economy civics don't really need balancing right now.

I made the silkworm stealing limited to 1 attempt per civ, so if you lose the spy after stealing the silkworms you are out of luck. I couldn't find anything else that wasn't exploitable and didn't require too many checks.

Can you put an exception in for Byzantium? It'll be massively frustrating to play 100 turns or so of building up the Byzantine Empire, only to lose the UHV because of luck with the silkworm stealing.

And do you know yet when you'll be able to add all the new changes into the SVN? I'm still on v72.
 
I think that RFCE can show us the light here.

In RFCE if you switch to Manorialism you get -1 trade routes per city, but you get commerce from farms and gold from manor houses.

So, you can get one food away from cottages but you can give one or two bonus food to farms through a civic. A civic that will be helpful to all civs with few or none grass tiles in their territory. Agrarianism gives a bonus food but it is really hard to discover it at the moment !

Or maybe a building can also give a bonus food ..
 
Compared to other Specialists Priests are having the smallest yield. BTS had it that you always yield at least 3 units of something with a :gp: producing specialist. Many discoveries were done because of some religious incentives, like Astronomy in Babylon. Can priest yield 1 :science: 1:gold: 1:hammers: ?
 
Also, can you buff Great People again, at least back to the default BTS levels? At the moment they aren't particularly useful other than to bulb techs (which I rarely do), rush wonders, and the trade mission. Especially since normal specialists were buffed.
 
new version up. the biggest change is greatly reduced leaderhead art. hopefully memory allocation failures will be less frequent. other changes in the changelog in the 1st post.

btw I'm very confused about city art in this mod. none of the artstyles seem to look like what they are supposed to look like and even different cities of the same civ look different. I will figure all this out soon but if anyone can shed any light I'd be grateful.

as I said, svn should be back late this week.
 
I should have the internet at home again late next week

turns out the Romans and Carthage have been having a love-in since the Tocharian start date was moved (due to misplaced attitude modifiers) and I think that might be why they (the Romans) have been all over the Levant lately.

I will give Judah extra units in case of starts where they are surrounded by Rome.

embryodead has reduced the size of the leaderhead art by half. that will be in the next update and should help performance.

I gave some thought to cottages and related terrain/improvement issues and I have decided that I'm happy to go back to regular CivIV mechanics and stats. all of my changes were attempts to get the AI to build a more natural-looking map since I find their normal behaviour kind of immersion-breaking and this map seemed to accentuate that somehow. however, I realise that I am more of a role-player than most and many of you would be happier with a more "normal" mod and others may be hesitant to try it due to this weirdness.

It's nice from a role-play perspective, but it also keeps civs some doing some steamrolling "cottage economies", which shouldn't be a mechanic in the RFC universe where resources are extremely abundant. I much prefer the RFC model of tile exploitation (more resources, less spam) than the civ 4 model. I've never really been vexed by the new cottage rules, since the places where you can cottage spam are often great waterways like the Indus and the Nile which shouldn't be left going "out of control" in commerce production.

I wouldn't let cottages/towns/etc take away from food production, as in civ we can't do things like import food from fertile cities into less fertile ones (e.g. Egypt/Tunisia being Roman breadbaskets). Thus, it's not quite fair to take food production away from certain tiles because we can't balance it.

When the svn is next updated, I'll probably run a few games to test the infamous Mediterranean balance in the 320 BC start. I'm guessing I'll probably end up recommending the Romans be buffed and the Sassanids be buffed in turn to pose a threat and secure their East, unless really surprising outcomes happen.

edit:

This has nothing to do with what was said above, but I have an idea regarding the Egyptian (Ptolemaic) wonder UHV: have a wonder in Athens providing "Greek Classics", much like the Hit Single resources of civ 4. If you have a "Greek Classic" (which provides +1 :) ), the Great Library is produced at 50% speed. This is to reflect that many works of the Great Library were original copies of Greek works stolen from Greece (they asked for the originals to make a copy, but then sent back the copy).
 
I miss SVN so much :) It is amazing how firmly one gets attached to comfort of more advanced technology, and then it is hard to go back to regular downloads :)

Will you upload map changes (both northern cuts and portion of lake Baikal?)
 
new version up. the biggest change is greatly reduced leaderhead art. hopefully memory allocation failures will be less frequent. other changes in the changelog in the 1st post.

btw I'm very confused about city art in this mod. none of the artstyles seem to look like what they are supposed to look like and even different cities of the same civ look different. I will figure all this out soon but if anyone can shed any light I'd be grateful.

as I said, svn should be back late this week.

The city art is probably a leftover from SoI.
In the vanilla game, the city art is connected to a civ. So if you conquer a city, the city style will turn into the style your civ has.
SoI has a region based art system. So cities in Egypt will always have the same art, no matter which civs it controls. Byzantium can have Indian city style when it has a city in India.

I think the problem is a misconnection between the city art map and the city style types.
 
I'm updating the SVN to v0.1.2 now.


@ srpt
When you have SVN back, you only have to update to rev 73 to get v0.1.2. It contains all changes you made. (And a red bulb unit art fix by me)

You do have to update the gamecore files yourself, as they weren't included in the regular version.
 
Top Bottom