merijn_v1
Black Belt
I know it's a small thing, but the UP of the Venetians is: the power of tade. There must be an "r" between the "'t" and the "a".
RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread
- Thread starter st.lucifer
- Start date
Wessel V1
Emperor
Yay, my first RFCE game. First I want to congratulate anyone who has worked on the project, never expected it would make it to the bèta-stage.
So, I started my first game as Cordoba. Noticed some odd things:
- Germany was destroyed within 25 turns: their capitol was destroyed, the didn't have other cities and there isn't an enemy unit near
- My cottage has a very strange growing pattern: it actually became smaller. However, the next turn it grew to a hamlet.
- Crossbowman are more powerful than Maceman. Available earlier, cheaper to build, stronger because Crossbowman have a free strike, and last but not least, some units have a bonus against melee-units, while less units, if any, have a bonus against archery units. Probably this needs some balancing. I suggest to weaken the crossbowman to 7.
- Islam spreads very slowly. Arabia had only 2 cities with Islam, while I had to build missionaries to convert my own cities.
- The Viking AI is very weak. Cities of size 6 are unhealthy and unhappy. Result: less production, and no expansion.
EDIT: December 27 version
Oh, before I forget: Does anyone know how to make full-screen screenshots? Thanks in advance.
So, I started my first game as Cordoba. Noticed some odd things:
- Germany was destroyed within 25 turns: their capitol was destroyed, the didn't have other cities and there isn't an enemy unit near
- My cottage has a very strange growing pattern: it actually became smaller. However, the next turn it grew to a hamlet.
- Crossbowman are more powerful than Maceman. Available earlier, cheaper to build, stronger because Crossbowman have a free strike, and last but not least, some units have a bonus against melee-units, while less units, if any, have a bonus against archery units. Probably this needs some balancing. I suggest to weaken the crossbowman to 7.
- Islam spreads very slowly. Arabia had only 2 cities with Islam, while I had to build missionaries to convert my own cities.
- The Viking AI is very weak. Cities of size 6 are unhealthy and unhappy. Result: less production, and no expansion.
EDIT: December 27 version
Oh, before I forget: Does anyone know how to make full-screen screenshots? Thanks in advance.
Attachments
This modmod is fantastic, especially so considering how much hard work has gone into it. It's down right fun.
Anyways a bug:
I was playing as the French recently, and I captured Frankfurt. Problem is, upon capture, the city named changed to Mayence, the French name for Mainz. Looks like there might be a few problems between the French and German city maps.
Anyways a bug:
I was playing as the French recently, and I captured Frankfurt. Problem is, upon capture, the city named changed to Mayence, the French name for Mainz. Looks like there might be a few problems between the French and German city maps.
Hitti-Litti
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2006
- Messages
- 3,767
It's creepy that you find this modmod fun already, they haven't released even a beta version of this, still too many bugs and crashes... 
Well, okay, if I included the fact that this modmod crashed a lot, it wouldn't be nearly so fun. But I've gotten a lot of fun out of it otherwise, and since this will be getting much more stable, I ignore the instability (so long as this modmod doesn't descend into civil war...)
Playing as Venice on Monarch. It's a fun game, I like the use of mud to make Venice almost impregnable and I'm a big fan of the Venetians historically. I'm just wondering what sort of third objective you all are planning to make it less than a cakewalk.
I achieved my two objectives in a short amount of time, even after taking a detour to conquer Rome for the gold income. Tirana apparently counted as a city in mainland Greece and although I got war declared on me by Arabia and Cordoba upon founding Nicosia in Cyprus, it seemed like I didn't need to hold those Crete/Greece/Cyprus cities, merely have them and the Dalmatian coast all at once. If the Byzantines declared war I would have been slightly screwed, but they didn't.
Rhodes was protected only by two archers and I took it easily... should it be a tougher nut to crack?
Also, the Galleas is a replacement for the Cogge, but requires a later tech and does not seem to be clearly superior save for the bombard ability. Is this intended?
I achieved my two objectives in a short amount of time, even after taking a detour to conquer Rome for the gold income. Tirana apparently counted as a city in mainland Greece and although I got war declared on me by Arabia and Cordoba upon founding Nicosia in Cyprus, it seemed like I didn't need to hold those Crete/Greece/Cyprus cities, merely have them and the Dalmatian coast all at once. If the Byzantines declared war I would have been slightly screwed, but they didn't.
Rhodes was protected only by two archers and I took it easily... should it be a tougher nut to crack?
Also, the Galleas is a replacement for the Cogge, but requires a later tech and does not seem to be clearly superior save for the bombard ability. Is this intended?
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Is there much difference? Anyway, that's Onedreamer's baby. I'm sure he'll explain it.
As far as Venice goes. The first two UHV conditions are easy if you do it early. I'd favour tightening up the timeline of those as I suggested in the report on my Genoa game. The third will be related to luxury goods, colonies, wealth (or a combo of these). The addition of colonial projects and more wonders will make all the civs more interesting and hopefully, more of a challenge.
There's not a whole lot of difference, but I was curious.
Venetian is possibly the most distinct of the "dialects" of Italian, and is now officially recognised by the Veneto government. Italy's linguistic situation is similar to Spain's, except with more variety (the Islamic invasion and reconquista reduced the linguistic variety in the southern two thirds of Spain and Portugal) and far less political contentiousness.
Plus Venetian was the prestige language in the Republic, a lingua franca in the Mediterranean (Galileo wrote in it sometimes), but Tuscan sort of won as a literary language and became the basis for "standard" Italian. I think that was Dante's doing.
sez wiki:
"According to Ethnologue, Venetian and Italian belong to different sub-branches of the Italo-Western branch: Venetian is a member of the Gallo-Iberian group, which also includes Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese and French, among others; whereas Italian is a member of the Italo-Dalmatian group. More precisely, Venetian belongs to the Gallo-Romance sub-branch of Gallo-Iberian, which includes French but not Catalan and Spanish. In that classification, therefore, Venetian is more closely related to French, Catalan and Spanish than to Italian."
It has a /θ/ like Castillian, and they call streets "calle" rather than "via" which weirded me out when I was there.
I did some more investigation and no they aren't in Venetian. Venice is Venesia not Venezia. Oh well!
Venetian is possibly the most distinct of the "dialects" of Italian, and is now officially recognised by the Veneto government. Italy's linguistic situation is similar to Spain's, except with more variety (the Islamic invasion and reconquista reduced the linguistic variety in the southern two thirds of Spain and Portugal) and far less political contentiousness.
Plus Venetian was the prestige language in the Republic, a lingua franca in the Mediterranean (Galileo wrote in it sometimes), but Tuscan sort of won as a literary language and became the basis for "standard" Italian. I think that was Dante's doing.
sez wiki:
"According to Ethnologue, Venetian and Italian belong to different sub-branches of the Italo-Western branch: Venetian is a member of the Gallo-Iberian group, which also includes Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese and French, among others; whereas Italian is a member of the Italo-Dalmatian group. More precisely, Venetian belongs to the Gallo-Romance sub-branch of Gallo-Iberian, which includes French but not Catalan and Spanish. In that classification, therefore, Venetian is more closely related to French, Catalan and Spanish than to Italian."
It has a /θ/ like Castillian, and they call streets "calle" rather than "via" which weirded me out when I was there.
I did some more investigation and no they aren't in Venetian. Venice is Venesia not Venezia. Oh well!
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into the UHV territory condition to make sure it's as described.
As you note, the Galleas does currently come later than the Cogge, but is also much stronger. Cogge is move 5, strength 3. Galleas is move 4, strength 5. Although slower, this gives Venice a decisive edge in naval warfare for quite some time.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Arwon is correct. Once you've captured those territories and held them past the required date they become irrelevant. Exactly the same with the Norse UHV conditions and the Genoa ones too, as I described in my report. Have you seen my post (518) and the suggestions I've made?
EDIT
Just been playing as the Kievan Rus and two questions have arisen.
1. The first UHV condition requires you to control the Black Sea coast east of the Carpatian Mts., which I believe I do. (see screenshot) But in 1502 it says "not accomplished". Is it because I don't control all tiles east of the mts. and I have to capture Bolhorod as well? As there isn't a UHV map to check I can't be sure what's required.
2. When I captured the barb city of Astrakhan it changed to Tchernoyar but later I founded Astrakhan on the correct tile as per the CityName map. I think when st. lucifer put the bay and floodplain on the map, Astrakhan was moved too far north. Geographically, Astrakhan should lie about due east of the Sea of Azov, I believe.
I fooled around with WB just to show how I think it should look, with the mouth of the Volga moved further south.
3Miro
Deity
I believe the Kiev's Carpatian problem is the exact definition of the geographical territory. I used a simple rectangle and since I had to take into the account for Crimea I also included some tiles where Bolhorod is. Some of the UHV regions are a bit ambiguous when it comes to defining exactly which tile is part of which region.
st.lucifer
King
Arwon is correct. Once you've captured those territories and held them past the required date they become irrelevant. Exactly the same with the Norse UHV conditions and the Genoa ones too, as I described in my report. Have you seen my post (518) and the suggestions I've made?
EDIT
Just been playing as the Kievan Rus and two questions have arisen.
1. The first UHV condition requires you to control the Black Sea coast east of the Carpatian Mts., which I believe I do. (see screenshot) But in 1502 it says "not accomplished". Is it because I don't control all tiles east of the mts. and I have to capture Bolhorod as well? As there isn't a UHV map to check I can't be sure what's required.
2. When I captured the barb city of Astrakhan it changed to Tchernoyar but later I founded Astrakhan on the correct tile as per the CityName map. I think when st. lucifer put the bay and floodplain on the map, Astrakhan was moved too far north. Geographically, Astrakhan should lie about due east of the Sea of Azov, I believe.
I fooled around with WB just to show how I think it should look, with the mouth of the Volga moved further south.
Ok, I'll move the Volga delta and tip of the Caspian further south. Thanks for pointing it out.
If we do move Astrakhan further south, does Kazan need to be moved also? Or do we need to have the Mongols appear in both places to prevent them from crushing Kiev and leaving Moscow basically untouched?
Also, I've noticed that the Mongol invasion pendulum has swung back from impossible to minor.
Some sort of middle ground is probably in order.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Ok, I'll move the Volga delta and tip of the Caspian further south. Thanks for pointing it out.
If we do move Astrakhan further south, does Kazan need to be moved also? Or do we need to have the Mongols appear in both places to prevent them from crushing Kiev and leaving Moscow basically untouched?
Also, I've noticed that the Mongol invasion pendulum has swung back from impossible to minor.
OK. Thanks. Actually I think leaving Kazan where it is and having the Mongols appear in both places is a much better idea. In that last game as Kiev I lost 3 of my ten cities and had to churn out pikemen for about 20 turns to survive as they all attacked me and left Moscow completely untouched.
micbic
Optimistic Pessimist
Perhaps the only viable tactic vs Keshiks to get the Grain UHV (is debatable?) is Settler spam for 5 cities (+Kharkiv which renames unknown why to Kremenchursk when flipping) in the sites to get them till 1050-1100, then Walls+Castles and then Pikes and Crossbows, I will experiment on it and post results soon.
Oh, and Happy new Year to all!
Oh, and Happy new Year to all!
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
Some responses to some comments.
1) We have Germany starting off too weak I think. The problem is that it can't turn into a superpower early on, but needs to remain viable for a long period of time.
2) Units definitely need some balancing. I actually have a grand master plan for this, so you can look forward to some improvements coming later.
3) I think all territory UHVs are currently "Do you control X in a particular year", which no allowance for reaching that point earlier and no caring if you lose that territory later. At least it's consistent this way -- though some of the descriptions may not be. It's also more efficient for the mod this way -- the code only has to run victory checks on one turn, instead of every turn.
4) I agree Mongols should threaten Moscow from a separate spawn point. They are most effective only in large stacks though, so this will raise the number again. Yay.
5) Venice, Genoa, Cordoba (from my experience) all seem to have pretty lax time-scales right now with plenty of time to accomplish goals. I guess it would be good to tighten these up, if that makes any sense historically. Ideally someone could update the wiki with suggested new dates (Add in new suggestions in bold for now, when we integrate into code we'll reset the text to normal).
6) Here are the rest of the territory-based UHVs. We'll release these with the next update, but I'm not sure when that will be.
1) We have Germany starting off too weak I think. The problem is that it can't turn into a superpower early on, but needs to remain viable for a long period of time.
2) Units definitely need some balancing. I actually have a grand master plan for this, so you can look forward to some improvements coming later.
3) I think all territory UHVs are currently "Do you control X in a particular year", which no allowance for reaching that point earlier and no caring if you lose that territory later. At least it's consistent this way -- though some of the descriptions may not be. It's also more efficient for the mod this way -- the code only has to run victory checks on one turn, instead of every turn.
4) I agree Mongols should threaten Moscow from a separate spawn point. They are most effective only in large stacks though, so this will raise the number again. Yay.
5) Venice, Genoa, Cordoba (from my experience) all seem to have pretty lax time-scales right now with plenty of time to accomplish goals. I guess it would be good to tighten these up, if that makes any sense historically. Ideally someone could update the wiki with suggested new dates (Add in new suggestions in bold for now, when we integrate into code we'll reset the text to normal).
6) Here are the rest of the territory-based UHVs. We'll release these with the next update, but I'm not sure when that will be.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Some suggestions re: your responses
1. In my experience Germany only needs about 3 more units to go with their settlers so they can defend their opening cities. +3 spearmen and +3 missionaries would be enough.
2. Heavy swordsmen and macemen should be 8. Crossbowmen should be 7. Heavy crossbowmen, 9.
3. Territory UHVs are OK but should be stricter (see 5.).
4. Agree. See previous post re. Kazan and Astrakhan.
5. Agree about timescales. I'll make the suggestions on the wiki.
EDIT Suggested revised timescales for most civs now added to the wiki.
6. Crashes not a problem since prosecutor function disabled. Maybe 3Miro will be able to pinpoint the cause now.
7. Can we please add a few more wonders and make the existing ones later, please. Maybe the 3rd. UHVs could be linked to wonders until we get colonies and projects sorted out?
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
Downloaded the mod and tried out Byzantium, it has progressed alot since I last looked at it. A few things I noticed:
I dont know if it is possible, but Byzantium should start with at least most of Europe known visible (I dont mean activley visible).
A few more independants in Illyria and Italy along with a decent Byzantine force in Italy to show Justinian reconquest. The ramifications were felt for a long time.
The units flipping is really annoying. I dont see why a unit built in COnstantinople would have any reason to side with the Arabs in the 'war of liberation'. Would it be possible to track where the unit was built through promotions and go off of that to see if it would flip? If the unit was built close to where the revolt is occuring, it would make sense for them to have a higher likelihood of flipping.
It might be nice for their to be a city in the space just south of Sinope. It is a large space and most of Anatolia was populated.
The Theodesian Walls should already be built in Constantnople. They were built by Theodosius (early 5th centry) and later reinforced by Anasasius (Late 4th century).
A way of simulating Persia would be nice. It seems a little bland not to be either fighting Persia or having any attacks coming from there. Later on, it might be nice to have some arab attacks coming from there. BEcause there were few border garrisons (Clesurae) near TRebizond and that area, later on Arabs and Seljuks attacked that area alot.
Lastly, Pikemen need to be rethought. They come way to early and are too powerful and are at the height of cavalry dominance.
All in all, good work so far.
I dont know if it is possible, but Byzantium should start with at least most of Europe known visible (I dont mean activley visible).
A few more independants in Illyria and Italy along with a decent Byzantine force in Italy to show Justinian reconquest. The ramifications were felt for a long time.
The units flipping is really annoying. I dont see why a unit built in COnstantinople would have any reason to side with the Arabs in the 'war of liberation'. Would it be possible to track where the unit was built through promotions and go off of that to see if it would flip? If the unit was built close to where the revolt is occuring, it would make sense for them to have a higher likelihood of flipping.
It might be nice for their to be a city in the space just south of Sinope. It is a large space and most of Anatolia was populated.
The Theodesian Walls should already be built in Constantnople. They were built by Theodosius (early 5th centry) and later reinforced by Anasasius (Late 4th century).
A way of simulating Persia would be nice. It seems a little bland not to be either fighting Persia or having any attacks coming from there. Later on, it might be nice to have some arab attacks coming from there. BEcause there were few border garrisons (Clesurae) near TRebizond and that area, later on Arabs and Seljuks attacked that area alot.
Lastly, Pikemen need to be rethought. They come way to early and are too powerful and are at the height of cavalry dominance.
All in all, good work so far.
Arwon is correct. Once you've captured those territories and held them past the required date they become irrelevant. Exactly the same with the Norse UHV conditions and the Genoa ones too, as I described in my report. Have you seen my post (518) and the suggestions I've made?
I didn't even need to hold them, the condition's achievement was triggered in like 1150 when I first built the city in Cyprus.
sedna17
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,091
Ah, yes, I see. I spoke too soon about all UHVs being "in". New maps with the next update will correctly reflect the difference between "in" and "by". Are you objecting to the goal being formulated this way? Do you want this to be a "control in year X" goal?
Good to have you commenting, Ajidica. I've been following your "Armies of the Dark Ages" thread -- some nice looking units. We haven't had anyone really pay attention to the Byzantines for a while. I'll mull over your suggestions.
