RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[civmademepoor]

Where might one find this pretty atlas?

 

[KaiserBenjamin]

The Atlas is for the Rhye's and Fall, not Europe. That's the one you're asking about, right civmademepoor?

I also wanted to say that I am currently working through the startups of all the civilizations (I've got five left, but they're the five that take the longest to load). I'll post my unit recommendations but I wanted to make a few general notes, as I've now gone through more then a dozen random startups.

Sometimes civs don’t use both Settlers when they get founded. For Venice this seems to be the vast majority of the time.

Franzia and Burgundy seem consistently to be at the bottom of the scoreboard, often by a considerable amount. I don't know what can be done to give them a more sporting chance - maybe it's just the placeholder technologies or units - but right now they're both really sucking it up on the whole.

More specifics later.

 

[KaiserBenjamin]

After spending about three hours playtesting (primarily starting up each civ and poking around the world for a few minutes), this is what I've come up with as far as starting units. No indentation means it's already programmed. Italics means it's currently in place and I believe should be taken out (namely all those Warriors.) Bold means I think it should be added. I'm sure each of these, especially the later ones, will require tweaking but after going through civ by civ, I can tell you that this would be a lot more balanced than it is now. I mean, I know the game is still in the early phases, so I'm not saying that it's bad that it's unbalanced now. I just mean that this would be an improvement and a step towards the actual finalized starting units.

Burgundy 500 AD
1 Settler
1 Catholic Missionary
1 Worker
1 Warrior
2 Archers

Franks 500 AD
1 Settler
1 Catholic Missionary
1 Worker
1 Warrior
2 Archers

Byzantines 500 AD
Assumed they’re fine for now.

Arabs 632 AD
Assumed they’re fine for now.

Bulgaria 640 AD
9 Konniks -> reduce to 4 or 5
2 Archers
2 Settlers
… a few turns later 2 Workers

Cordoba 700 AD
2 Settlers
2 Islamic Missionaries
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 2 Workers
2 Archers
1 Axeman

Spain 720 AD
2 Settlers
2 Catholic Missionaries
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 2 Workers
3 Archers
1 Light Swordsman

Norse 770 AD
2 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 2 Workers
2 Archers
2 Axeman
1 Light Swordsman
1 Galley
1 Trireme

Venezia 800 AD
2 Settlers
2 Catholic Missionaries
1 Heavy Crossbowman –> Crossbowman
1 Pikeman
1 Light Swordsman
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
1 Workboat
3 Archers

Kievan Rus 880 AD
2 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
2 Archers
2 Pikeman
2 Mounted Infantry

Hungary 900 AD
2 Settlers -> 3 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
3 Archers
1 Light Swordsman
1 Axeman
1 Pikeman

Germany 939 AD
2 Settlers -> 3 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
3 Archers
1 Light Swordsman
1 Axeman
1 Crossbowman

Polish 970 AD
2 Settlers -> 3 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
3 Archers
2 Pikeman
2 Horse Archers

Moscow 999 AD
2 Settlers -> 3 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
4 Archers
1 Pikeman
1 Crossbow
2 Mounted Infantry

Genoa 1020 AD
2 Settlers
2 Catholic Missionaries
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
1 Workboat
3 Archers
2 Light Swordsman
2 Crossbows

English 1060 AD
2 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
1 Workboat
3 Archers
2 Light Swordsman
2 Crossbows
1 Galley

Portugal 1101 AD
2 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 3 Workers
1 Workboat
4 Archers
2 Axeman
2 Light Swordsman
2 Crossbow

Austria 1161 AD
2 Settlers -> 3 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 4 Workers
4 Archers
2 Axeman
2 Light Swordsman
2 Crossbow

Turkey 1299 AD
Assumed they’re fine for now.

Sweden 1500 AD
2 Settlers -> 4 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 4 Workers
1 Galleon
1 Galleas
1 Workboat
1 Karolin
2 Maceman
2 Heavy Crossbowman
4 Longbows

Netherlands 1580 AD
2 Settlers
4 Warriors
… a few turns later 4 Workers
2 Galleon
1 Workboat
3 Musketman
3 Heavy Crossbowman
3 Longbows

 

[3Miro]

I will start coding some tome tomorrow, so people can start commenting.

One note: Arabia starts with 10 Ghazi and according to you it is OK, while Bulgaria starting with 10 Konniks is too much

Ghazi is currently second level horse unit, strength of 8. 10 of those can simply mow over Byzantium much more than 10 Konniks (strength 6). I am not sure if Arabia needs more than 3 of those, or maybe even none, just 4 horse archers.

 

[civmademepoor]

One note to the Kaiser is that some of the later civs will have independent and neighboring cities flip to them.

One thing I noticed was that while Byzantium has a bazillion cities, there was zero infrastructure and I've built workers first thing in most of my cities. May I suggest that roads be prebuilt throughout most of Europe (probably exclude Russia, Scotland, Wales, Scandinavia, and northeastern Europe), and some other improvements around Italy, Iberia, Byzantium, the Levant, Africa and southern France? In addition to being more realistic, this will help Arabia with its Africa campaign and Bulgaria with its thing.

 

[3Miro]

Map changes take a lot of time to code, I would rather wait for a more final version of the map with resources and before we put improvement. Otherwise you are right, Byzantium does have an infrastructure problem. Possibly we could patch the problem temporarily by introducing some starting workers.

 

[sedna17]

Where might one find this pretty atlas?

http://civ4.technologyresourcesgroup.com/

 

[KaiserBenjamin]

I will start coding some tome tomorrow, so people can start commenting.

One note: Arabia starts with 10 Ghazi and according to you it is OK, while Bulgaria starting with 10 Konniks is too much

Ghazi is currently second level horse unit, strength of 8. 10 of those can simply mow over Byzantium much more than 10 Konniks (strength 6). I am not sure if Arabia needs more than 3 of those, or maybe even none, just 4 horse archers.

I think Arabia needs to be toned down too now that you've mentioned that. I thought the Arabia - Byzantium two superpower fight was part of the early plan, with Byzantium usually fading out. But if they have that many Ghazi, than a human player could simply bulldoze Byzantium.

Check out my screenshot. I did no unit editing to achieve it, I just attacked with what I started with. I also had enough left over to take at least two more cities while still maintaining defensible borders. It's only 700 AD in that shot - the only time delay from the Bulgaria spawn was the time it took to get my armies to their cities. I don't think we want Bulgaria to be so overwhelming from the get-go. But actually Arabia could probably be weakened as well, while we're doing this. 3 Ghazi as you suggested, would probably be plenty.


As for the civ flipping. I went through and played the spawn points for every civilization from Burgundy to the Netherlands (except for Arabia - clearly a mistake). The only time I had a civ flip was with the Arabia spawn, England spawn, and Turkey spawn. Although you might be referring to in later versions, in which case you're right. In the mean time though, Hungary, Austria, Moscow, Swedes, and to a lesser extent, Germany) really don't get going as much as they need to in order to be able to compete with Byzantium, Arabia, Bulgaria, and the Iberian peninsula civs. This is especially true for Moskovites who get totally outsettled by the Kiev Russians more often than not and for the Hungarians, who get a really slow start relative to their powerful neighbors By the time the Hungarians spawn, the Bulgarians are usually up to 4 or 5 cities.

And since I mentioned Turkey. They start with a MASSIVE army, at least in the iteration I ran. I haven't gone back because they take 30 minutes to load from scratch, but they had easily 20 military units. I don't know if they need to be toned down though, because in most games I've seen Turkey still gets overshadowed by Arabia. That might be the AI not being aggressive enough, though. Not sure what the solution to that problem is.

Oh, and yeah - Burgundy and the Franks are always weak, even when one of them conquers the entire region. I think it might be tech-tree related, but I'm not sure. Whatever the case, their scores are usually half the next-to-lowest in the list, usually with less than one-fifth of Arabia's score, the latter of which is always the superpower in both tech and size from what I have seen.

But again, that stuff can get fine-tuned out. In the mean time, I really appreciate whoever codes in these units. They'll go a long way towards more balanced play, especially with the extra Settlers.

 

[jessiecat]

Something else to consider in suggesting starting units is the unique nature of the Cordoba start. Historically, it began in 711 with the landing of Tarik's army of Arabs and Berbers from Tangier. I think we decided a long time ago that they should start in both places. One way would be to start them as they are now, flipping Tangier when they found Cordoba, which seems backward to me.
My idea is for them to start with Tangier (swordsman, archer, missionary, worker, 1 Berber cavalry). With a small army of Berber cavalry(4), 2 missionaries, 1 galley on the south coast. On turn 2 an independent Cordoba and Seville flips to them with Cordoba becoming the capitol (1 archer, 1 swordsman, 1 worker in each). The 4 Berbers would then have the choice of conquering either an independent Valencia or Toledo. Spain would then have to start strong enough to prevent being taken over too quickly (ie. 2 settlers, 2 missionaries, 2 swordsmen, 4 archers). To me this would be the best way to simulate history without either side being being too overpowered.
Something like in the screenshots. What does everyone think?

 

[KaiserBenjamin]

Something else to consider in suggesting starting units is the unique nature of the Cordoba start. Historically, it began in 711 with the landing of Tarik's army of Arabs and Berbers from Tangier. I think we decided a long time ago that they should start in both places. One way would be to start them as they are now, flipping Tangier when they found Cordoba, which seems backward to me.
My idea is for them to start with Tangier (swordsman, archer, missionary, worker, 1 Berber cavalry). With a small army of Berber cavalry(4), 2 missionaries, 1 galley on the south coast. On turn 2 an independent Cordoba and Seville flips to them with Cordoba becoming the capitol (1 archer, 1 swordsman, 1 worker in each). The 4 Berbers would then have the choice of conquering either an independent Valencia or Toledo. Spain would then have to start strong enough to prevent being taken over too quickly (ie. 2 settlers, 2 missionaries, 2 swordsmen, 4 archers). To me this would be the best way to simulate history without either side being being too overpowered.
Something like in the screenshots. What does everyone think?

I think it's a cool idea, personally. More historically accurate - a little bit more interesting than a standard start.

A few concerns: From what I've heard, coding the independent civs is pretty time-consuming though so it might have to wait. From a gameplay standpoint, I have a few questions about balance. Cordoba already tends to score better than Spain - letting them start with three cities in comparison to Spain's two would probably make that imbalance even worse. Also that would mean the Cordoban capital would be in Africa, which might not fit the civ's expansion. Finally, does that affect any of Cordoba's current UHV requirements?

 

[jessiecat]

I think it's a cool idea, personally. More historically accurate - a little bit more interesting than a standard start.

A few concerns: From what I've heard, coding the independent civs is pretty time-consuming though so it might have to wait. From a gameplay standpoint, I have a few questions about balance. Cordoba already tends to score better than Spain - letting them start with three cities in comparison to Spain's two would probably make that imbalance even worse. Also that would mean the Cordoban capital would be in Africa, which might not fit the civ's expansion. Finally, does that affect any of Cordoba's current UHV requirements?

I think what we figured when first talked about it was that there would be several independents in Spain ie. Toledo, Valencia, Zaragoza and Barcelona. And maybe a barb La Coruna and Pamplona which would both flip to Spain at the start after several turns. So they'd soon have 4 cities. As would Cordoba after it conquered Toledo for example. I may be wrong but I don't think it would be hard to code a capitol switch from Tangier to Cordoba. I'm sure I've seen that in RFC. But 3Miro can decide if its doable. As per the UHV requirements I don't think it would have any effect IMO.

 

[3Miro]

Once the capitol of a nation is set, it is set. Changing it arbitrarily would be hard to code and would cause all sorts of potential problems. We would have to consider things like "what if Burgundy destroys Cordoba city before the spawn" and so on. RFC convention is that the capitol is the the starting location with the capitol city being founded on turn 1 (i.e. China 600AD).

If we try to be that accurate in terms of gameplay, we should do that for other civs, such as Bulgaria. The problem is that the AI never handles such things correctly. Giving the AI an Army in Africa would mean that they would probably not move that to Europe. Coding specific behavior from the AI cause other problems, mainly the possibilities for abuse. I would leave the Cordoban problem for now, we may come back to it when the game is in a more complete state and we can afford to experiment.

For the starting units, Bulgaria was never meant to start that strong. I put the 10 Konniks there when I was doing some testing and at that time Byzantium had Longbowman.

The massive Turkish army that people mention is actually Byzantine army that flips over to the new nation. It cannot be "toned down".

 

[jessiecat]

What we can do however, is to add units at a later turn. So if in turn 3, a settler appears at Tangier and founds a city or an independent Tangier flips, then the problem is solved. Right? Just trying to make it as accurate as possible. Unfortunately the AI never likes to cross the water and found a city there. I've never seen them found any cities in North Africa.

 

[3Miro]

We can make indep cities in NA and let them flip, that is actually easy. We will do that when we get a list of independents (and code it).

 

[jessiecat]

We can make indep cities in NA and let them flip, that is actually easy. We will do that when we get a list of independents (and code it).

OK. There's always the map of indys on the wiki. I remember we were going to reduce the ones in the East esp. Can we use that? If not I can do one as a World Builder save or on excel micro if you like. Would that help?

 

[3Miro]

It would be better if you make a list:
City name, (x,y) coordinates (get those from excel), year of appearance. i.e.

Belgrade, (40,80), 900 (turn 100). I made the coordinates and year up, but you see the point. It would be the easiest to code later.

 

[jessiecat]

It would be better if you make a list:
City name, (x,y) coordinates (get those from excel), year of appearance. i.e.

Belgrade, (40,80), 900 (turn 100). I made the coordinates and year up, but you see the point. It would be the easiest to code later.

OK. I've started putting them on an excel map for now. I'll send you a list when I'm finished. One question though. Wasn't there some problem a while back about the actual location being 1 tile different from the excel location due to counting 0 as 1 or something? I'm using the excel map from the wiki.

 

[3Miro]

Look at the top row and left most column on the excel file. Those should count something like 0, 1, 2, 3, (left to right for the top row and bottom to top for the left column), those are the correct coordinates and that is what I want you to give me. There was a problem with the city name maps, when people were using some tool to enter them, the results were off by a tile.

 

[donbot]

BTW I've just been trying for a UHV victory as Bulgaria. I got the monasteries and cathedrals very early and thought I had control of all the required area incl. Macedonia and Greece before taking Constantinople. Took me ages to find the name Misia in Wiki as apparently there isn't a province by that name anymore. Only on ancient maps. It looks like it's the area south and west of the Danube. Is that right?
And does control count if your vassal has a city on the border? Anyway, I conquered Constantinople just before 1400AD but in 1404 it was still saying "Not Yet" for that condition. It's not saying I've failed to do it. Is it saying its not 1400 yet? I'm posting an earlier auto-save and a screenshot. Maybe you can figure it out.

I am getting a similar problm with the first English UHV condition- saying not yet after the deadline has passed forcontrol of UK and 1 city in France. Also, somebody(either Arabs or Bulgaria) reached the industrial age around 1550. Save game attached

 

[st.lucifer]

OK. I've started putting them on an excel map for now. I'll send you a list when I'm finished. One question though. Wasn't there some problem a while back about the actual location being 1 tile different from the excel location due to counting 0 as 1 or something? I'm using the excel map from the wiki.

I've always done it by flagging the tile in WB, going into notepad, and searching for the term to get the coordinates. I didn't do any of the settler maps, but I see no reason that this shouldn't work.