RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[yogiebere]

Feedback: Playing as England I seemed unable to catch up technologically (tried two games, I don't know if that was intended (or possibly that I did something completely wrong, didn't have that problem with Venice though) but it's annoying. Also kinda annoying London wasn't built yet meaning I couldn't build the shrine of Upsala there (don't know if it would be a good idea but it's kinda odd that London, which I'm quite sure was part of the Roman Empire at some point so it must be rather old, can't build thing because it's too new). Also the reformation doesn't seem to work, I was catholic, got a message about the reformation going on somewhere (I didn't know where) and I didn't get a chance to convert (no AIs I knew converted).

Ah yes I feel your pain. The first is a balancing issue for sure. The problem is that a lot of England's tile is marginal at best (LOTS of moorland and a decent amount of marsh) so getting enough towns is difficult, in addition their UB and UP don't help much at all. I've been suggesting that their UP be changed from affecting workshop to towns and villages (would encourage players and AI to build cottages to boost economy)

The second is a frustrating and well known bug, unfortunately there's not much we can do about it now. For the time being I create my own pseudo reformation.

 

[HockeySam18]

I hope it's ok if I give feedback here as this topic seems to have gone to another subject.

Bug?: After conquering Constantinople as the Venetians in 1125 I checked to see if it was marked as 1/3 of my UHV already and I saw it was slightly greyed meaning I somehow failed a goal, I'm quite sure the wonders aren't built yet (I'd hope so because an ultimate date of 1500 would be odd if the AI can screw it up before 1125) and for both the other goals I still have timeas they finish in 1200 and 1500.

Feedback: Playing as England I seemed unable to catch up technologically (tried two games, I don't know if that was intended (or possibly that I did something completely wrong, didn't have that problem with Venice though) but it's annoying. Also kinda annoying London wasn't built yet meaning I couldn't build the shrine of Upsala there (don't know if it would be a good idea but it's kinda odd that London, which I'm quite sure was part of the Roman Empire at some point so it must be rather old, can't build thing because it's too new). Also the reformation doesn't seem to work, I was catholic, got a message about the reformation going on somewhere (I didn't know where) and I didn't get a chance to convert (no AIs I knew converted).

I have experienced the same bug as Venice, where you fail the Constantinople objective in around 1120-1130. Also, when I played as Burgundy, if you are not chosen to lead the 1st crusade, then you automatically fail the "Capture Jerusalem in 1300 AD" objective. Also, when playing as France, I had Augsburg, Frankfurt, Lyon, and Marseilles. Germany and Burgundy spawned on different turns but demanded their respective cities on the same turn. I said yes to both, but only lost the German cities.

I also agree on the idea that there should be more independents. I say this for reasons. First, with very few independent cities that actually flip, the ai spams settlers and puts their cities in awful spots, killing their stability and leading to collapse (due to underground code penalties, as well as that the ai never builds the buildings that give a + to stability). Second, many civs have objectives that are along the lines of "control...[territory]". This is done simply by spamming settlers, especially with civs like Genoa, Poland, and Kiev. I have yet to play a game where Kiev survives the massive keshik invasions, Poland is not dogpiled by Germany and Austria, and Venice always beats Genoa to Cyprus, Crete, and sometimes even Milan. Byzantium should start with Constantinople and flip the cities in Asia Minor, Greece, Palestine, and North Africa, as well as Neapolis, Belgrad (Singidunum), Tripoli, Croton, and a city in the Crimea. That way, they do not immediately start losing cities to instability. Third, the game is more interesting when there are independent border cities that cause wars between civs that were rivals in real history, such as Hungary and Venice.

Here is my suggested list of extra independent cities by region:

Iberia: La Coruna, Oporto

France: Brest, Mont Saint Michel, or Caen (only one). Otherwise France founds Caen as a second city and doesn't capture Bordeaux or Toulouse until the 1100s. Brussels or Liege should also be added.

British Isles: Londinium Inbhir Nis or Wick, Belfast, Cork, or Limerick. Orkney, Shetlands, Hebrides, Faroes, and Isle of Man should be settled by Norse.

Scandinavia: Stavanger, Lund, Jonkoping, Lulea, Helsinki, Abo, Vaasa. Norse should use second settler to found Viborg, Reykjavik, or Isle of Man. This will ensure trade and competition in the Baltic, and allow the player to enjoy the Norse rather than rush the objectives.

Germany and Poland: Basle, Leipzig, Hamburg, Warsaw, Marienburg/Malbork, Szczecin, Vilnius.

Italy: Croton, Genova, and Venezia. Genova was a Roman city that existed long before 1020AD, and Venezia was founded by the the survivors of Attila's eradication of Aquilea in 452AD. This will also ensure that Genoa and Venice use their settlers to try to achieve the UHV.

Balkans, Greece, Macedonia, and Hungary: Targoviste, Patrae, Mistra, Bolhorod, Skopje, Zagreb.

Ukraine: Kherson, Chisinau, Kryvyy Rih + 2-3 cities settled by the Norse along the Dneiper Cataracts.

Historical Corporation founding should be scripted to correspond with the historical date if not already founded, much like the religions in regular RFC.

Islamic Jihads should take place if Crusaders arrive and take a city, and maybe Orthodox Crusades aimed at fighting the Turks or restoring the Byzantine empire. Otherwise Byzantium and Arabia are too weak.

Whether or not you make these changes is completely up to you; they are mere suggestions geared towards enhancing gameplay and the historical experience. If you want, I can post WB saves or saved games. I may also write short reviews after I have playtested all civs on monarch. I hope I do not incur angry replies as this is all meant in good faith and I am a newcomer to civfanatics, but a longtime fan of the Civilization series.

HockeySam18

 

[civ_king]

I have experienced the same bug as Venice, where you fail the Constantinople objective in around 1120-1130. Also, when I played as Burgundy, if you are not chosen to lead the 1st crusade, then you automatically fail the "Capture Jerusalem in 1300 AD" objective. Also, when playing as France, I had Augsburg, Frankfurt, Lyon, and Marseilles. Germany and Burgundy spawned on different turns but demanded their respective cities on the same turn. I said yes to both, but only lost the German cities.

I also agree on the idea that there should be more independents. I say this for reasons. First, with very few independent cities that actually flip, the ai spams settlers and puts their cities in awful spots, killing their stability and leading to collapse (due to underground code penalties, as well as that the ai never builds the buildings that give a + to stability). Second, many civs have objectives that are along the lines of "control...[territory]". This is done simply by spamming settlers, especially with civs like Genoa, Poland, and Kiev. I have yet to play a game where Kiev survives the massive keshik invasions, Poland is not dogpiled by Germany and Austria, and Venice always beats Genoa to Cyprus, Crete, and sometimes even Milan. Byzantium should start with Constantinople and flip the cities in Asia Minor, Greece, Palestine, and North Africa, as well as Neapolis, Belgrad (Singidunum), Tripoli, Croton, and a city in the Crimea. That way, they do not immediately start losing cities to instability. Third, the game is more interesting when there are independent border cities that cause wars between civs that were rivals in real history, such as Hungary and Venice.

Here is my suggested list of extra independent cities by region:

Iberia: La Coruna, Oporto

France: Brest, Mont Saint Michel, or Caen (only one). Otherwise France founds Caen as a second city and doesn't capture Bordeaux or Toulouse until the 1100s. Brussels or Liege should also be added.

British Isles: Londinium Inbhir Nis or Wick, Belfast, Cork, or Limerick. Orkney, Shetlands, Hebrides, Faroes, and Isle of Man should be settled by Norse.

Scandinavia: Stavanger, Lund, Jonkoping, Lulea, Helsinki, Abo, Vaasa. Norse should use second settler to found Viborg, Reykjavik, or Isle of Man. This will ensure trade and competition in the Baltic, and allow the player to enjoy the Norse rather than rush the objectives.

Germany and Poland: Basle, Leipzig, Hamburg, Warsaw, Marienburg/Malbork, Szczecin, Vilnius.

Italy: Croton, Genova, and Venezia. Genova was a Roman city that existed long before 1020AD, and Venezia was founded by the the survivors of Attila's eradication of Aquilea in 452AD. This will also ensure that Genoa and Venice use their settlers to try to achieve the UHV.

Balkans, Greece, Macedonia, and Hungary: Targoviste, Patrae, Mistra, Bolhorod, Skopje, Zagreb.

Ukraine: Kherson, Chisinau, Kryvyy Rih + 2-3 cities settled by the Norse along the Dneiper Cataracts.

Historical Corporation founding should be scripted to correspond with the historical date if not already founded, much like the religions in regular RFC.

Islamic Jihads should take place if Crusaders arrive and take a city, and maybe Orthodox Crusades aimed at fighting the Turks or restoring the Byzantine empire. Otherwise Byzantium and Arabia are too weak.

Whether or not you make these changes is completely up to you; they are mere suggestions geared towards enhancing gameplay and the historical experience. If you want, I can post WB saves or saved games. I may also write short reviews after I have playtested all civs on monarch. I hope I do not incur angry replies as this is all meant in good faith and I am a newcomer to civfanatics, but a longtime fan of the Civilization series.

HockeySam18

This!

 

[merijn_v1]

I have experienced the same bug as Venice, where you fail the Constantinople objective in around 1120-1130. Also, when I played as Burgundy, if you are not chosen to lead the 1st crusade, then you automatically fail the "Capture Jerusalem in 1300 AD" objective. Also, when playing as France, I had Augsburg, Frankfurt, Lyon, and Marseilles. Germany and Burgundy spawned on different turns but demanded their respective cities on the same turn. I said yes to both, but only lost the German cities.

I also agree on the idea that there should be more independents. I say this for reasons. First, with very few independent cities that actually flip, the ai spams settlers and puts their cities in awful spots, killing their stability and leading to collapse (due to underground code penalties, as well as that the ai never builds the buildings that give a + to stability). Second, many civs have objectives that are along the lines of "control...[territory]". This is done simply by spamming settlers, especially with civs like Genoa, Poland, and Kiev. I have yet to play a game where Kiev survives the massive keshik invasions, Poland is not dogpiled by Germany and Austria, and Venice always beats Genoa to Cyprus, Crete, and sometimes even Milan. Byzantium should start with Constantinople and flip the cities in Asia Minor, Greece, Palestine, and North Africa, as well as Neapolis, Belgrad (Singidunum), Tripoli, Croton, and a city in the Crimea. That way, they do not immediately start losing cities to instability. Third, the game is more interesting when there are independent border cities that cause wars between civs that were rivals in real history, such as Hungary and Venice.

Here is my suggested list of extra independent cities by region:

Iberia: La Coruna, Oporto

France: Brest, Mont Saint Michel, or Caen (only one). Otherwise France founds Caen as a second city and doesn't capture Bordeaux or Toulouse until the 1100s. Brussels or Liege should also be added.

British Isles: Londinium Inbhir Nis or Wick, Belfast, Cork, or Limerick. Orkney, Shetlands, Hebrides, Faroes, and Isle of Man should be settled by Norse.

Scandinavia: Stavanger, Lund, Jonkoping, Lulea, Helsinki, Abo, Vaasa. Norse should use second settler to found Viborg, Reykjavik, or Isle of Man. This will ensure trade and competition in the Baltic, and allow the player to enjoy the Norse rather than rush the objectives.

Germany and Poland: Basle, Leipzig, Hamburg, Warsaw, Marienburg/Malbork, Szczecin, Vilnius.

Italy: Croton, Genova, and Venezia. Genova was a Roman city that existed long before 1020AD, and Venezia was founded by the the survivors of Attila's eradication of Aquilea in 452AD. This will also ensure that Genoa and Venice use their settlers to try to achieve the UHV.

Balkans, Greece, Macedonia, and Hungary: Targoviste, Patrae, Mistra, Bolhorod, Skopje, Zagreb.

Ukraine: Kherson, Chisinau, Kryvyy Rih + 2-3 cities settled by the Norse along the Dneiper Cataracts.

Historical Corporation founding should be scripted to correspond with the historical date if not already founded, much like the religions in regular RFC.

Islamic Jihads should take place if Crusaders arrive and take a city, and maybe Orthodox Crusades aimed at fighting the Turks or restoring the Byzantine empire. Otherwise Byzantium and Arabia are too weak.

Whether or not you make these changes is completely up to you; they are mere suggestions geared towards enhancing gameplay and the historical experience. If you want, I can post WB saves or saved games. I may also write short reviews after I have playtested all civs on monarch. I hope I do not incur angry replies as this is all meant in good faith and I am a newcomer to civfanatics, but a longtime fan of the Civilization series.

HockeySam18

First, welcome to CFC.

Second. If all those independent cities are places (some of them already are, but doesn't spawn at the start), you don't have any space left for building your own cities. But I agree a bit more independent cities could be added.

EDIT: Your idea of more indies is good, but you proposed realy too much.

 

[ezzlar]

I like the idea. For all those objectives like settling this and that meaning just to spam settlers would be more interesting if the area in question was ind. cities.

 

[3Miro]

@HockeySam18: good feedback.

At one point in time we did have a lot of independent cities flipping, but this was bad because it ended up removing the player's ability to make their own choices. There is such thing as having too many indy cities. Look at how many you are suggesting for Britain, there is hardly enough room for that many cities without the player making anything additional. Also, capitals should not start as indy cities (code limitations).

Kiev should be about spamming cities and the AI is supposed to collapse to the Mongols. The challenge as the human would be to survive.

Genoa is underpowered. When it comes to water and navy, the AI is really dumb, but little can be done about that. There are other ways that perhaps can help Genoa (maybe spawn them with settlers in Corsica) .

Some UHV would be easier than others. There is no way to make all of them challenging. Maybe France needs a buff.

Islamic Jihad is in the game (not like a Crusade, but it is there). There were never anything like an Orthodox Crusade in history, nor could there be one in practice. This is just not how Orthodoxy was organized.

How is flipping cities to the Byzantines going to help them with stability. They will end up losing cities anyway, especially if you give them more than what they have already.

You also mentioned a bunch of bugs (like UHV not registering properly). When you see something like that, can you please post a savegame from one or two turns before the bug and/or a PythonErr2.log file from right after the bug (it is in MyGames\Beyond the Sword\Logs).

 

[3Miro]

Double post

 

[HockeySam18]

@HockeySam18: good feedback.

At one point in time we did have a lot of independent cities flipping, but this was bad because it ended up removing the player's ability to make their own choices. There is such thing as having too many indy cities. Look at how many you are suggesting for Britain, there is hardly enough room for that many cities without the player making anything additional. Also, capitals should not start as indy cities (code limitations).

Kiev should be about spamming cities and the AI is supposed to collapse to the Mongols. The challenge as the human would be to survive.

Genoa is underpowered. When it comes to water and navy, the AI is really dumb, but little can be done about that. There are other ways that perhaps can help Genoa (maybe spawn them with settlers in Corsica) .

Some UHV would be easier than others. There is no way to make all of them challenging. Maybe France needs a buff.

Islamic Jihad is in the game (not like a Crusade, but it is there). There were never anything like an Orthodox Crusade in history, nor could there be one in practice. This is just not how Orthodoxy was organized.

How is flipping cities to the Byzantines going to help them with stability. They will end up losing cities anyway, especially if you give them more than what they have already.

You also mentioned a bunch of bugs (like UHV not registering properly). When you see something like that, can you please post a savegame from one or two turns before the bug and/or a PythonErr2.log file from right after the bug (it is in MyGames\Beyond the Sword\Logs).

3Miro-
Thank you so much for clarifying. I understand what you are saying about the capitals as indy cities, as I have seen all sorts of bugs that have to do with squatting in RFC. What you say about Kiev makes since, but since they were a confederation of settlements by swedish vikings, then the vikings should spawn at least one city there plus Kharkov.
The reason I wanted all the indies in England- I have always been intrigued by the vikings, and I propose that instead of the third UHV (raze 10 cities), because its too easy to raze indies in the mediterranean, the UHV should be specific and say "raze x cities in this region, x cities in this region," etc. I was envisioning a situation where the vikings have a tight grip on England and Ireland for a time, like in real history, and a brutal war between the English and vikings should ensue. This feeds into my wish for a city in normandy or brittany to be indy other than calais, as england fought the vikings, not the french, at the start.
You bring up a good point about the Jihad and Orthodox crusading. However, I find the Jihad pointless because when I get a crusade, I take Jerusalem and Sour and the AI collapses. Orthodox nations such as the Byzantines did not lead their own crusades but often gave naval support, as did most maritime powers in the mediterranean. I personally find it odd how a group of soldiers spawn by Jerusalem without ships to bring them there/take them home.
Also, right after western Rome fell, Byzantium entered an age of expansion where they annexed southern Italy, most of north africa, and much of the balkans and macedonia. If the AI could be coded to expand to there and build the buildings that give a + to stability, they would be a much better civ.
In all of my games, Cordoba collapses before 1100. They should receive a buff.
Bug: When playing as the arabs, I had open borders with most of europe. When a crusade came, troops spawned next to jerusalem but didnt declare war. As per history, Arabia should not be able to acquire open borders with any civ other than Cordoba and Turkey.
Turkey needs a buff. They are supposed to be the end of the Byzantine empire, but have yet to take Constantinople and always lose Edirne, ending their presence in Europe. It could be as simple as coding the AI to use siege units to bombard the 235% bonus in Constantinople...
In all of my games, poland sucks, partially because Poznan is their westernmost city, but also because of the slow tech rate and the weak start. They should have more than two soldiers when trying to take Tvanksta, Minsk, Prague, and even Lubeck. They should be able to emulate the medieval superpower that they were in real life.
The tech rates need to be adjusted so as to accomodate newer civs and penalize the older civs with a lot of land. Im tired of watching France, Byzantium, Arabia, and even Germany complete the tech tree before 1400.
I will test some more games on viceroy at first to root out basic problems and be able to provide you with WB saves that demonstrate these problems.

HockeySam18

 

[3Miro]

You expect way too much out of the AI.

The Vikings are already expected to "colonize" parts of England, so a war is expected. To avoid Vikings pillaging the Mediterranean, we can make it so that only cities owned by non-indy players count (or maybe even count only Northern European nations like France and England).

In the case of the Byzantines, Justinian's push to the west lead tot he loss of most of the Balkans. By the time Bulgars came, most of it was populated by slavs and it was hardly under Byzantine control. The Byzantine AI would never be able to handle an Empire that spans 2/3 of the map.

The Crusades did lead to a collapse of Arabia. As for the soldiers spawning right next to Jerusalem, there is absolutely no way or whatsoever to code a competent enough AI to use ships to sail to Jerusalem, land and then take it. Spawning is the best that we can do. Byzantines and Arabs should be at war most of the time anyway. Also, Arabian AI shouldn't OB with any non-Muslim nations. Human Arabia gets a large religious penalty, so it should be hard to OB. Maybe I can make it so that Muslims and Christians hate each other even more.

Turkey is the biggest problem right now and on top of my "todo list". Also, tech rate does need re-balancing, it was adjusted some time ago, but it needs to be fixed again.

One more thing: We only balance Monarch difficulty. Whatever happens to Viceroy and Emperor doesn't matter (unless it is a bug of course).

 

[HockeySam18]

You expect way too much out of the AI.

The Vikings are already expected to "colonize" parts of England, so a war is expected. To avoid Vikings pillaging the Mediterranean, we can make it so that only cities owned by non-indy players count (or maybe even count only Northern European nations like France and England).

In the case of the Byzantines, Justinian's push to the west lead tot he loss of most of the Balkans. By the time Bulgars came, most of it was populated by slavs and it was hardly under Byzantine control. The Byzantine AI would never be able to handle an Empire that spans 2/3 of the map.

The Crusades did lead to a collapse of Arabia. As for the soldiers spawning right next to Jerusalem, there is absolutely no way or whatsoever to code a competent enough AI to use ships to sail to Jerusalem, land and then take it. Spawning is the best that we can do. Byzantines and Arabs should be at war most of the time anyway. Also, Arabian AI shouldn't OB with any non-Muslim nations. Human Arabia gets a large religious penalty, so it should be hard to OB. Maybe I can make it so that Muslims and Christians hate each other even more.

Turkey is the biggest problem right now and on top of my "todo list". Also, tech rate does need re-balancing, it was adjusted some time ago, but it needs to be fixed again.

One more thing: We only balance Monarch difficulty. Whatever happens to Viceroy and Emperor doesn't matter (unless it is a bug of course).

Thanks again. Your idea for the Norse is better than I could have hoped for. However, I think you misunderstood me about the maritime part of the crusade. I was simply suggesting that Byzantines, Genoese, and Venetians contribute ships to the crusade instead of units (instead of "Our unit is leaving for the crusade: Knight", it could be "Our unit is leaving for the crusade: Galleas.") and the ships can spawn in a coast tile next to the units. I think that it would add more flavor to a human-led crusade, as I hate getting a crusade against a powerful Arabia and losing the units because they have nowhere to go. Since I now understand that the AI cannot be coded to perform complicated manoeuvers like bringing units back home on ships, at least it gives the human player another option.

Try spawning Ottomans with 5-10 Janissaries, who ignore walls and castle defense bonus. Maybe then it will be possible for the AI to take Constantinople. Can the game be scripted so that the Ottomans receive free units each turn next to Constantinople until it is taken?
Templar, Teutonic, and Hospitaller masters upgrade to pikemen, disabling the spread of those corporations after Professional Armies is researched. Is this on purpose?

I have two more questions:

1. I notice that at times, barb cogs with 2 swordsmen and barb galleons with two muskets spawn near corsica and sardinia. Is there a way that the AI can be coded to have the units disembark, or are the ships doomed to roam the mediterranean until they are sunk?

2. While I was in the worldbuilder, I noticed some units that do not appear in the scenario, like Tagmata, Highlander, and Welsh Longbowmen. What is their purpose?

 

[AOS9001]

Try spawning Ottomans with 5-10 Janissaries, who ignore walls and castle defense bonus. Maybe then it will be possible for the AI to take Constantinople. Can the game be scripted so that the Ottomans receive free units each turn next to Constantinople until it is taken?
Templar, Teutonic, and Hospitaller masters upgrade to pikemen, disabling the spread of those corporations after Professional Armies is researched. Is this on purpose?

I have two more questions:

1. I notice that at times, barb cogs with 2 swordsmen and barb galleons with two muskets spawn near corsica and sardinia. Is there a way that the AI can be coded to have the units disembark, or are the ships doomed to roam the mediterranean until they are sunk?

2. While I was in the worldbuilder, I noticed some units that do not appear in the scenario, like Tagmata, Highlander, and Welsh Longbowmen. What is their purpose?

How would the human player (of Byzantium) deal with Ottoman troops spawning each turn outside his capital? It'd be easy if you were prepared, but it'd get really annoying, and fast. I'd prefer stacks to spawn on the dates the Turks besieged the city, or maybe a few turns before to give them time to bombard. Well, with Great Bombards, you wouldn't need time anyway. They have that insanely good bombard percentage.

The order masters get obsolete to represent the replacement of hardcore military orders with professional armies of the nation, which would lead to nationalism (getting rid of mercenaries too), I suspect.

1: I've never seen those before.
2: They got rid of the Tagmata because Byzantium was too strong or something with them (even though they can never leave the city). They vanished two patches ago, I think. Highlanders and Welsh Longbowmen, I don't know when they went away.

 

[Etienne]

Ah yes I feel your pain. The first is a balancing issue for sure. The problem is that a lot of England's tile is marginal at best (LOTS of moorland and a decent amount of marsh) so getting enough towns is difficult, in addition their UB and UP don't help much at all. I've been suggesting that their UP be changed from affecting workshop to towns and villages (would encourage players and AI to build cottages to boost economy)

I'd guess it's not so much Britain being bad but more the huge advantage other civs (France is particularly annoying) have, I can try to take France but they are far ahead with technology (and therefore have better units) and will probably always be since they can get techs other civs want to trade for.

Also, after viewing the map it seems to me that Atlantic Access is a bit too rare, there isn't one in several places that should logically be easily able to access the atlantic particularly Scotland, Ireland and Norway and/or Danmark (all probably easier places to reach the Atlantic from then the Netherlands) meaning that if the Vikings can't (or refuse to) settle Iceland they won't have it while they had it and would have had it without Iceland too (getting to Iceland would require having access to the Atlantic as it's practically in it).

 

[The Hyper Duck]

I have seen plenty of barbarian Highlanders spawn in Scotland while playing as the Vikings; they are definitely in the game. Don't know about the Welsh longbows though.

 

[HockeySam18]

I dont know about you, but I think moorland is useless and kills England, The Norse, and Poland. You should be able to farm it. I also think that each civ should benefit from city flipping. At the very least, Bordeaux should flip to France, Pamplona to Spain, Ragusa to Venice, Aiaccio to Genoa, Beograd to Hungary, Hadrianople and Bolhorod to Bulgaria, Tvanksta or Prague to Poland, Oporto to Portugal. These flips will help new civs get off to an even start to the older ones, and allow them to evade those dreadful underground code penalties. I mentioned Aiaccio, Bolhorod, and Oporto as indies that should be added. Barbarians ravaged Europe, but they didn't raze all the cities.

 

[3Miro]

Also, after viewing the map it seems to me that Atlantic Access is a bit too rare, there isn't one in several places that should logically be easily able to access the atlantic particularly Scotland, Ireland and Norway and/or Danmark (all probably easier places to reach the Atlantic from then the Netherlands) meaning that if the Vikings can't (or refuse to) settle Iceland they won't have it while they had it and would have had it without Iceland too (getting to Iceland would require having access to the Atlantic as it's practically in it).

Don't think of it as Access, but rather "permission to build colonies". We have put a lot of though and testing into this one in particular. Basically, more access more ahistoric colonies.

 

[merijn_v1]

Templar, Teutonic, and Hospitaller masters upgrade to pikemen, disabling the spread of those corporations after Professional Armies is researched. Is this on purpose?

I have two more questions:

1. I notice that at times, barb cogs with 2 swordsmen and barb galleons with two muskets spawn near corsica and sardinia. Is there a way that the AI can be coded to have the units disembark, or are the ships doomed to roam the mediterranean until they are sunk?

2. While I was in the worldbuilder, I noticed some units that do not appear in the scenario, like Tagmata, Highlander, and Welsh Longbowmen. What is their purpose?

Yes, those crusaders corp executives should become obselete. That's because those corps didn't exist anymore after a certain date.

1. Never seen them too.

2. The Tagmata is removed. (The AI Byzantian deleted them at the start because they were to expensive to maintain.) Those other units are kind of the unique barbarians in England. (Play a game as the English and you'll see.)

 

[ezzlar]

(Play a game as the English and you'll see.)

Yes. Then you hate the welsh bowmen.

 

[HockeySam18]

Are there any changes in spawns, indies, or the UHVs for beta 4, or is it mostly art and xml stuff. Also, under what circumstances do the unique English barbs appear? I played a game as England and never saw a barb after I captured Edinburgh and Dublin.

Also, are we going to see random events, quests, and goody huts soon, or will we have to wait until the final version?

All civs stability should be buffed and respawns should happen more often. I hate having more indy cities on the map than those under control of civilizations in 1500. Yes, I'm looking at you, Spain, Cordoba, Arabia, France, Byzantium, Kiev, and Poland.

HockeySam18

 

[AdrienIer]

3Miro, what do you mean by "code limitations" ? Embryodead did it in SOI...

 

[3Miro]

3Miro, what do you mean by "code limitations" ? Embryodead did it in SOI...

If you flip the capital as opposed to build/settle, you cannot guarantee that will indeed become the capital. Also, you will have some units just roaming around in someone else's territory for 2 - 3 turns until the flip.