RFC Classical World
- Thread starter srpt
- Start date
in my current Roman Republic game the Parthians are in first place and hold Damascus, Babylon and Susa but the Seleucids are still alive in Seleucia and the Antigonids have he rest of Syria in 80BC.
I'm not sure how to make Parthia stronger. they already start with a pile of units. perhap a different leaderhead personality.
Thrace has been added to the Mediterranean province list for the Roman Republic 1st goal (dominate the Mediterranean)
I'm not sure how to make Parthia stronger. they already start with a pile of units. perhap a different leaderhead personality.
Thrace has been added to the Mediterranean province list for the Roman Republic 1st goal (dominate the Mediterranean)
Wessel V1
Emperor
Carthage's second goal of destroying the Romans is set to failed, I think due to this:
It's a pity it failed, because I was doing pretty well with Asia, Libya Thrace, Greece, Northern Italy, Southern Gaul and Southern Italy all under my control by 111BC. I think I would have gone for Egypt next. Does having a civ control a green area of yours result in a stability penalty? I was amazed to see the large amount of stable areas Carthage has so I wonder if that might be the reason why Carthage always collapses in the BCs. It's an interesting game so far: Ptolemy controls Antiochia, Tyre, Damascus and Jerusalem (!), Parthia has Aleppo and the other Seleucid cities. I'm not sure if the Parthians need a buff, sometimes they win the war with the Seleucids and sometimes they don't. Seleucia is still alive though with Pattala and Taxila as their cities.
It's a pity it failed, because I was doing pretty well with Asia, Libya Thrace, Greece, Northern Italy, Southern Gaul and Southern Italy all under my control by 111BC. I think I would have gone for Egypt next. Does having a civ control a green area of yours result in a stability penalty? I was amazed to see the large amount of stable areas Carthage has so I wonder if that might be the reason why Carthage always collapses in the BCs. It's an interesting game so far: Ptolemy controls Antiochia, Tyre, Damascus and Jerusalem (!), Parthia has Aleppo and the other Seleucid cities. I'm not sure if the Parthians need a buff, sometimes they win the war with the Seleucids and sometimes they don't. Seleucia is still alive though with Pattala and Taxila as their cities.
the way I read it that Carthage goal you work. it shouldn't go negative after 50BC if you've already destroyed the Romans because of the 1st check "if sd.getGoal(iCarthage, 1) == -1:" this will not pass after you destroy the Romans it will be "1" not "-1".
I'd like the Parthians to be a bit stronger. I think a leaderhead personality change is the best idea.
about provinces and stability: the "Broader Areas" have no effect on stability but the AI is allowed to hold cities there. outside of those areas the cities will revert to barb if conquered. so Carthage's safe zone is just their core plus Baetica, Libya and all the islands.
the other province categories are "Target Areas" which have no stabilty effect (except that they may also be normal areas for the civ in question) but are treated as core by the AI for war declaring purposes, and "Special Areas" which flip to the AI to give some imperial civs a head start. the Qin flip a couple of cities, Rome gets Masillia and Syracuse, Parthia gets Mesopotamia, but only cities controlled by barbs or indys.
a million thanks for all the testing thats been done lately. I feel like we are getting very close at least having all the UHVs working properly. once that is done I'd like to do a major stability survey, figure out whats happening to the major civs and start tweaking them for better performance. this will be a bit of a major thing as I need to come up with a series of print statements that will tell me what is happening. once that is done everyone will be able to read the logs of their games and make suggestions.
I'd like the Parthians to be a bit stronger. I think a leaderhead personality change is the best idea.
about provinces and stability: the "Broader Areas" have no effect on stability but the AI is allowed to hold cities there. outside of those areas the cities will revert to barb if conquered. so Carthage's safe zone is just their core plus Baetica, Libya and all the islands.
the other province categories are "Target Areas" which have no stabilty effect (except that they may also be normal areas for the civ in question) but are treated as core by the AI for war declaring purposes, and "Special Areas" which flip to the AI to give some imperial civs a head start. the Qin flip a couple of cities, Rome gets Masillia and Syracuse, Parthia gets Mesopotamia, but only cities controlled by barbs or indys.
a million thanks for all the testing thats been done lately. I feel like we are getting very close at least having all the UHVs working properly. once that is done I'd like to do a major stability survey, figure out whats happening to the major civs and start tweaking them for better performance. this will be a bit of a major thing as I need to come up with a series of print statements that will tell me what is happening. once that is done everyone will be able to read the logs of their games and make suggestions.
Wessel V1
Emperor
Okay, well I'm no python expert, actually I don't know anything about it at all except for a few minor things.
Is it possible to alter the code to let me continue this game with the goal set to 'not yet' (or yes, because I already completed it)? I tried to convert 'elif iGameTurn >= -49:' to 'elif iGameTurn >= getTurnForYear (-49) but that didn't work, presumably because goals are inrevertable.
Is it possible to alter the code to let me continue this game with the goal set to 'not yet' (or yes, because I already completed it)? I tried to convert 'elif iGameTurn >= -49:' to 'elif iGameTurn >= getTurnForYear (-49) but that didn't work, presumably because goals are inrevertable.
Wessel V1
Emperor
On my way to the first goal of the Roman Empire I knew I had to somehow tackle Carthage. The other provinces are not hard to obtain (although I almost forgot to built the settlers in time), but Carthage has that massive army. It always spawns on the same hill so I thought, let's put a unit there, expecting them to spawn on the hill NW of that pass. However, Hannibal spawned on the dense forest north of Mediolanum. Being a) so many turns away from getting anywhere and b) completely immobile because of the surrounding forests, they made no impact. I'm not sure if they would have otherwise, because I blitzed Carthage, Lpqy and Qart-Hadasht in one turn. Gadir got conquered by the barbarians and Carthage was gone.
Carthage really is too weak IMO. I'm not an expert on them so I can't give my view on how Carthage could have developed without the intervention of Rome, but from a gameplay point of view they could use some more strength. Gadir and Qart-Hadasht take some time to develop without a religion and worker and Lpqy is a waste of a city in the early game so Carthage itself is the only city they depend on. Rusadir is already much better, maybe the AI should be stimulated to settle there in stead of Lpqy.
Carthage really is too weak IMO. I'm not an expert on them so I can't give my view on how Carthage could have developed without the intervention of Rome, but from a gameplay point of view they could use some more strength. Gadir and Qart-Hadasht take some time to develop without a religion and worker and Lpqy is a waste of a city in the early game so Carthage itself is the only city they depend on. Rusadir is already much better, maybe the AI should be stimulated to settle there in stead of Lpqy.
Wessel V1
Emperor
I loaded some Saba starts, it look like it's just a feeling I had. Rusadir and Lpqy are about equal, Iol is rare. Still, Lpqy is a really bad spot for them to start so maybe it should be valued 1 level lower. I'm not sure what else could help them. Maybe tone down the barbarian pressure on Baetica a bit. That said, I also don't know what the AI should aim for. A more expansive strategy would be good for them I think but I don't know if they are supposed to be like that or not.
ok I think I found an exploit 
playing as the Antigonids, and generally as every Greek civ, my strategy is to let Jerusalem get caught by the barbs just before Judah spawn, to get rid of an unnecessary war!
in my last game, a couple of turns before the jewish spawn, barbarian jerusalem offered itself to join my empire! I refused and the city was ruined! then when the jewish spawned they had no city to attack and they roam around the sina desert not knowing what to do!
playing as the Antigonids, and generally as every Greek civ, my strategy is to let Jerusalem get caught by the barbs just before Judah spawn, to get rid of an unnecessary war!
in my last game, a couple of turns before the jewish spawn, barbarian jerusalem offered itself to join my empire! I refused and the city was ruined! then when the jewish spawned they had no city to attack and they roam around the sina desert not knowing what to do!
Wessel V1
Emperor
However, it also loses it's status as being the holy city of Judaism so I think it won't be beneficial in the long run.
Something I remember from a game a few weeks ago, if the human player controls Jerusalem, Christianity also gets autofounded in Jerusalem. Is that intended?
Something I remember from a game a few weeks ago, if the human player controls Jerusalem, Christianity also gets autofounded in Jerusalem. Is that intended?
ok I think I found an exploit
playing as the Antigonids, and generally as every Greek civ, my strategy is to let Jerusalem get caught by the barbs just before Judah spawn, to get rid of an unnecessary war!
in my last game, a couple of turns before the jewish spawn, barbarian jerusalem offered itself to join my empire! I refused and the city was ruined! then when the jewish spawned they had no city to attack and they roam around the sina desert not knowing what to do!
Now why does that sound so familiar....
Wessel V1
Emperor
The first Roman empire goal doesn't trigger: it says not yet in 69BC even though I have all the requested provinces.
I looked over the Roman goal but I can't find a problem. the code is really simple and identical to the 1st Armenian goal from SoI, which obviously works.
perhaps the Maccabees as AI should have a conditional and dynamic spawn, dependent on the civ controlling Jerusalem, stability, religious civic etc. this would occur any time between the Maccabean revolt and the 70AD revolt. reading the history of it it always seemed to me that if the occupying powers have behaved more reasonably the agitators would not have had nearly so much ammunition to get the rebellion going.
I will at least make it so the Jews refound Jerusalem as the Jewish holy city in cases like Sitalkas' exploit.
Yes it is intended that Christianity is autofounded even if the Human player controls it. I'm happy to give the Armenians an extra way to get their goal since their empire goal can be tough depending on the situation among the Greeks and Parthians and often getting just one more city can be challenging if it belongs to a powerful civ. holding it also increases your exposure in the never lose a city goal. I don't think it really impacts anyone else's goals too much, but I could easily be missing something. the safer strategy for Armenia is to befriend the Maccabeans and send pilgrims.
also added 2 new UPs:
Antigonids: faster unit promotions
Gojoseon: all military units start with discipline (+50% v barbs)
and gave Gojoseon 2 more units at spawn
perhaps the Maccabees as AI should have a conditional and dynamic spawn, dependent on the civ controlling Jerusalem, stability, religious civic etc. this would occur any time between the Maccabean revolt and the 70AD revolt. reading the history of it it always seemed to me that if the occupying powers have behaved more reasonably the agitators would not have had nearly so much ammunition to get the rebellion going.
I will at least make it so the Jews refound Jerusalem as the Jewish holy city in cases like Sitalkas' exploit.
Yes it is intended that Christianity is autofounded even if the Human player controls it. I'm happy to give the Armenians an extra way to get their goal since their empire goal can be tough depending on the situation among the Greeks and Parthians and often getting just one more city can be challenging if it belongs to a powerful civ. holding it also increases your exposure in the never lose a city goal. I don't think it really impacts anyone else's goals too much, but I could easily be missing something. the safer strategy for Armenia is to befriend the Maccabeans and send pilgrims.
also added 2 new UPs:
Antigonids: faster unit promotions
Gojoseon: all military units start with discipline (+50% v barbs)
and gave Gojoseon 2 more units at spawn
I thought the Judea spawn was conditional? When I played a Seleucid game and Jerusalem traded between me and Ptolemy 2-3 times Judea never spawned.
Also I played a Kalinga game. They're rather a meh civ. Neither here nor there. They're not well placed to really conquer the subcontinent like Satavanha and Maurya/Gupta are and they're not really a naval civ either. I did alright by conquering Pandya but it more or less was just me supplanting their position. I think they need a bit more purpose or they should be cut because I don't think they really add anything to the game. As NPC's they're a 1 city civ since Amarvati that city to the south of their capital flips to Pandya so they're punished if they take that early. They're just taking up space in a crowded area I think.
Also I played a Kalinga game. They're rather a meh civ. Neither here nor there. They're not well placed to really conquer the subcontinent like Satavanha and Maurya/Gupta are and they're not really a naval civ either. I did alright by conquering Pandya but it more or less was just me supplanting their position. I think they need a bit more purpose or they should be cut because I don't think they really add anything to the game. As NPC's they're a 1 city civ since Amarvati that city to the south of their capital flips to Pandya so they're punished if they take that early. They're just taking up space in a crowded area I think.
in the sort run though, i couldnt afford fighting the Seleucids, the Nubians and the Jewish all together, so one holy city less was a fine deal for not having maccabees near my cities!
Yes I was thinking that it might be possible for an Auto-found Jerusalem event to occurs ,even the same turn that Judea spawns
I disagree about Kalinka, for the following reasons:
gameplay
this is a crowded mod. the eastern mediterranean is crowded and I think India should be just as crowded. I added Kalinka and Gojoseon when I added Pontus to preserve regional balance. I have also found them quite fun to play, trying to play cat-and-mouse with the Mauryan elephants. also quoted from Wessel_V1:
"Now trying Satavahana. Kalinka is the most opportunistic AI (= smartest AI) I have seen so far. Every time I try to conquer the Pandyans that Kalinka guy declares war on me just when my army is out of position (in multiple games!). They managed to take my capital this way."
thats exactly what I want in India
historical
Kharavela is, afaik, the only guy who ever tried to conquer all India in the name of Jainism and Kalinka was alive and independent for almost the entire timeframe of the mod. also the Mauryan/Kalinka war is one of the most famous in Indian history.
I agree about Carthage needing to be more dynamic. not sure how to make that happen though.
playing Kalinka has brought up another issue though: the Mauryan - Sunga transition. I think it might be simpler and less disruptive to the other civs to just have the name change occur when the Mauryans convert to Hinduism, which they usually do. I don't think the human player Mauryan really needs the challenge of the barb spawn. the conquest goal is hard and could easily be made harder by including south India. as a safeguard to an ahistorically long lasting Mauryan empire there could be a check on piety that could trigger the change. the way it is now the only sensible thing for Kalinka to do is wait til its all over and thats a bit restrictive.
edit: changed the 1st Kalinkan goal (conquest) to acquire horses by 150BC. so you either conquer Mathura or go naval and try to get them in overseas trade. although I can't seem to find it on the internet right now, I'm sure I read somewhere about the overseas horse trade happening, because thats what gave me the idea. anyway it offers some flexibility although you will still need to conquer a few cities for the 7 Jain buildings goal.
also added the city of Turpan
edit: changed the Mauryan/Sunga tranisition as follows:
the name change happens if they convert to Hinduism
the Sunga barbs only spawn if the civ is Buddhist with piety below 40 and the spawn is reduced from what it was
and just discovered a backwards "<" symbol in the DLL causing the Mauryans to prefer Buddhism AFTER 180BC rather than before as intended.
gameplay
this is a crowded mod. the eastern mediterranean is crowded and I think India should be just as crowded. I added Kalinka and Gojoseon when I added Pontus to preserve regional balance. I have also found them quite fun to play, trying to play cat-and-mouse with the Mauryan elephants. also quoted from Wessel_V1:
"Now trying Satavahana. Kalinka is the most opportunistic AI (= smartest AI) I have seen so far. Every time I try to conquer the Pandyans that Kalinka guy declares war on me just when my army is out of position (in multiple games!). They managed to take my capital this way."
thats exactly what I want in India
historical
Kharavela is, afaik, the only guy who ever tried to conquer all India in the name of Jainism and Kalinka was alive and independent for almost the entire timeframe of the mod. also the Mauryan/Kalinka war is one of the most famous in Indian history.
I agree about Carthage needing to be more dynamic. not sure how to make that happen though.
playing Kalinka has brought up another issue though: the Mauryan - Sunga transition. I think it might be simpler and less disruptive to the other civs to just have the name change occur when the Mauryans convert to Hinduism, which they usually do. I don't think the human player Mauryan really needs the challenge of the barb spawn. the conquest goal is hard and could easily be made harder by including south India. as a safeguard to an ahistorically long lasting Mauryan empire there could be a check on piety that could trigger the change. the way it is now the only sensible thing for Kalinka to do is wait til its all over and thats a bit restrictive.
edit: changed the 1st Kalinkan goal (conquest) to acquire horses by 150BC. so you either conquer Mathura or go naval and try to get them in overseas trade. although I can't seem to find it on the internet right now, I'm sure I read somewhere about the overseas horse trade happening, because thats what gave me the idea. anyway it offers some flexibility although you will still need to conquer a few cities for the 7 Jain buildings goal.
also added the city of Turpan
edit: changed the Mauryan/Sunga tranisition as follows:
the name change happens if they convert to Hinduism
the Sunga barbs only spawn if the civ is Buddhist with piety below 40 and the spawn is reduced from what it was
and just discovered a backwards "<" symbol in the DLL causing the Mauryans to prefer Buddhism AFTER 180BC rather than before as intended.
Wessel V1
Emperor
The Roman empire second and third goal are also bugged. The third goal failed before the actual deadline though I was on the way to get all required provinces, the second goal still says not yet in 103AD. Now I look into the civilopedia, I recall the third goal failed around 50AD so I presume the game doesn't correctly make a difference between the empire and the republic. That would also explain why it took some turns after 75BC to trigger 'no', around 50BC and why the second goal says 'not yet' after 100AD. However, it's still strange that the first goal triggered 'no', since I was the only civ around in the Mediterranean. In that case I should have a 1/3 nevertheless even though it's the wrong one. I'm sorry that I don't have saves by the way of this game, I'll check if there is any autosave near a failed goal.
EDIT: apparently not. Still, I'm quite certain the dates I remember are very near the turns of the Republic UHVs.
EDIT: apparently not. Still, I'm quite certain the dates I remember are very near the turns of the Republic UHVs.
@Wessel_V1: did you make any python edits in the course of that Roman game?
changed the Hannibal spawn. the stack will not spawn in a bad tile like forest or marsh and it happens when war is declared between Rome and Carthage even if they are both AI (but not if Carthage is human), though the stack is smaller vs AI Rome. also added south Italy and Sicily to the target list.
changed the Roman civil war code. it now has a 50% chance of occurring at 20 stablilty, +/- 1% per stability above or below 20, as long as the Romans have at least 6 cities, and each civil war gives a free pass to the next failed call.
changed the Hannibal spawn. the stack will not spawn in a bad tile like forest or marsh and it happens when war is declared between Rome and Carthage even if they are both AI (but not if Carthage is human), though the stack is smaller vs AI Rome. also added south Italy and Sicily to the target list.
changed the Roman civil war code. it now has a 50% chance of occurring at 20 stablilty, +/- 1% per stability above or below 20, as long as the Romans have at least 6 cities, and each civil war gives a free pass to the next failed call.
Wessel V1
Emperor
I don't think so, at least I can't recall any. I had the python file open for some turns but I didn't touch it. Tomorrow I go to my parents so I have to use the laptop, I'll see if that makes any difference. It shouldn't, but you never know. If my assumption is right I should be able to recreat the situation and in that case I post a savegame just before 50BC.
Similar threads
