RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

For the Polish UHV, I will have to do reading on Polish history, but I have a feeling it is totally unrelated.

On the Poish UHV: I'm not sure on historical accuracy either.
But what I can say: It's fun to play

Anyway, if we find something what is more accurate for them, we should rather go in that direction
 
For the Polish UHV, I will have to do reading on Polish history, but I have a feeling it is totally unrelated.

It's very related actually... if we're talking abount Poland after 15th c., we had as much Orthodox people as Catholics, or more, and then accepted Jews, heretics (i.e. Hussites), Protestants and Islamic Tatars, when they were persecuted elsewhere. Counterreformation strengthened Catholicism, but still, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth included modern-day Belarus, Ukraine and parts of Russia, where Orthodox Christians were the silent majority.

Based 1618 population census there were about 5-5.5m Catholics+Protestants, 5m Orthodox, 0.5m pagans and 0.5m Jews. Another figure gives 40% each to Catholic & Orthodox churches and 20% to Jews & Protestants (1).
 
It's very related actually... if we're talking abount Poland after 15th c., we had as much Orthodox people as Catholics, or more, and then accepted Jews, heretics (i.e. Hussites), Protestants and Islamic Tatars, when they were persecuted elsewhere. Counterreformation strengthened Catholicism, but still, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth included modern-day Belarus, Ukraine and parts of Russia, where Orthodox Christians were the silent majority.

That is interesting. I knew Poland was tolerant (compared to everyone else), but I didn't expect so many Orthodox Christians, especially considering that Russia is the Polish archenemy.

In this case, we should probably adjust Polish UP, otherwise they will get no benefits from faith points. They cannot generate them, since all the non-state religion drives faith low.
 
Poland's UP is religious tolerance right now IIRC
No instability or unhappiness from non-state religions
How do you want to change that to have positive effect on faith points?
 
Poland's UP is religious tolerance right now IIRC
No instability or unhappiness from non-state religions
How do you want to change that to have positive effect on faith points?

Add no loss of Faith Points for non-state religion spread and buildings. Or maybe only reduced loss of faith points.
 
That is interesting. I knew Poland was tolerant (compared to everyone else), but I didn't expect so many Orthodox Christians, especially considering that Russia is the Polish archenemy.
Remember that the PLC controlled quite a lot territory that one would label "Russia" today, at least a large area that is "natively" Orthodox. From what I know, Poland proper was still predominantly Catholic (or Protestant respectively, depending on which period in reformation and counterreformation you observe).
 
Add no loss of Faith Points for non-state religion spread and buildings. Or maybe only reduced loss of faith points.
That sounds fine, althouh we can perfectly live without those faith points. (see my screenshot from today)

About poland there is another issue: the polish UP “No unhappiness or instability from non-state religions” works fine normally, but when I adopt the Civic Religious Law, I get unhappiness from the religions other than the state religion.
Religious Law is giving +1 unhappiness per non-state religion in my cities, in spite of the UP.
In my opinion, even with the Religious Law, there should be no unhappiness from religions for the polish cities. Religious law is the key if Poland ever wants to found a corporation. (I was hoping for teutonics)
 

Attachments

  • Nova imagem.JPG
    Nova imagem.JPG
    201.2 KB · Views: 99
Bulgaria: Holy crap, I've never seen a civ so rigged in this game before.

I'll upload three pics, to show the huge extent of their empire, from greece, all the way up to the core borders of austria-hungary. They had more than 200 points more than any other civ (me) and were building many wonders. This needs help big time.


Also another issue - building the imperial diet as the brits. I have a new city bordering germany and i want to expand its borders via culture from the imperial diet wonder. I have an idle great engineer, but it wont let me build the imperial diet. I have a courthouse, and other cities with courthouses can build it (those without say get a courthouse and i can build it) But as you see, its not even an option there and i have no idea why
 

Attachments

  • Civ4ScreenShot0011.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0011.JPG
    314 KB · Views: 118
  • Civ4ScreenShot0012.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0012.JPG
    280.6 KB · Views: 118
  • Civ4ScreenShot0013.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0013.JPG
    92.6 KB · Views: 74
  • Civ4ScreenShot0014.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0014.JPG
    167.4 KB · Views: 130
  • Civ4ScreenShot0015.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0015.JPG
    191.1 KB · Views: 115
Bulgaria: Holy crap, I've never seen a civ so rigged in this game before.

I'll upload three pics, to show the huge extent of their empire, from greece, all the way up to the core borders of austria-hungary. They had more than 200 points more than any other civ (me) and were building many wonders. This needs help big time.


Also another issue - building the imperial diet as the brits. I have a new city bordering germany and i want to expand its borders via culture from the imperial diet wonder. I have an idle great engineer, but it wont let me build the imperial diet. I have a courthouse, and other cities with courthouses can build it (those without say get a courthouse and i can build it) But as you see, its not even an option there and i have no idea why

1. On Bulgaria: is that you playing or the AI? This is too much for the AI, but historically Bulgaria did control almost all of this in two periods (once with Simeon and once with Ivan Asen II) Constantinople is the exception and the south borders went to Olimpia not Athens. However, it is a bit ahistoric to have this at the Ottoman invasion (maybe the Plague killed the guardsman in Constantinople or something).

2. Imperial Diet requires Catholicism.

Try another game to see if Bulgaria would get that large, I often generate Dutch starts and this is the first time I see the AI that strong. If this is happening only in rare occasions, there is no need to fix anything. Ahistoric things will be happening all the time.
 
1. On Bulgaria: is that you playing or the AI? This is too much for the AI, but historically Bulgaria did control almost all of this in two periods (once with Simeon and once with Ivan Asen II) Constantinople is the exception and the south borders went to Olimpia not Athens. However, it is a bit ahistoric to have this at the Ottoman invasion (maybe the Plague killed the guardsman in Constantinople or something).

2. Imperial Diet requires Catholicism.

Try another game to see if Bulgaria would get that large, I often generate Dutch starts and this is the first time I see the AI that strong. If this is happening only in rare occasions, there is no need to fix anything. Ahistoric things will be happening all the time.

Ah thank you that makes more sense

It is definitely the AI, I was playing England so I couldn't have had an impact on them

The problem is, unlike history, they are very technologically advanced, and they have numerous wonders: see this page, they have 3 of the top 5 cities, a great feat for a mod with like 30 civs!

Like others are talking about, the Ottomans are overpowered in my opinion, they only have turkey (which is fine) but are very tech advanced and are building quite a few wonders as well, following in bulgarias footsteps

My Experience playing as England (France and Burgundy are taken out because I conquered them)
Overly Powerful Civs:
Bulgaria (wayyy too powerful here)
Ottomans (historic, but still they are better tech advanced than even Germany)
Norse (Until Sweden they had about 14 cities, they completely expanded in all of Scandinavia including finland)
Kiev (weren't even dented by barbs, had a huge empire pushing on the borders of Poland, Moscovy, and Bulgaria, I'm guessing at least 15 cities)

Weak Civs
Arabia (collapsed very early - first crusade)
Genoa (as always)
Spain (Cordoba collapsed and they failed to conquer the lower half of the country)
Venezia, Hungary, Austria (mostly because of Bulgarias strength, so I'm not too worried)

New Surprises (this may just be the particular game, but civs that aren't as bad as before)
Poland, Portugal, Moscovy, Burgundy
 

Attachments

  • Civ4ScreenShot0016.JPG
    Civ4ScreenShot0016.JPG
    232.4 KB · Views: 64
No gifts from the Pope then. However, how's your stability.

Anyway, I will fix the UP thing.

Very bad stability, even with Ocupation, castles, and manor houses. Ryga declared independence.

About the British: didn't France respawn during your ocupation? I once tried and they respawned twice, taking Paris, Chalons, Tours and Bordeaux automatically (without that independence chart with the options).
 
Ah thank you that makes more sense

It is definitely the AI, I was playing England so I couldn't have had an impact on them

The problem is, unlike history, they are very technologically advanced, and they have numerous wonders: see this page, they have 3 of the top 5 cities, a great feat for a mod with like 30 civs!

Perhaps you should try another game to see if this is a pattern. I guess the question is, who too Constantinople. If Plague or something kills the Constantinople defenders, then Bulgaria can take that and it will become superpower. I haven't seen it in practice, but it is a possibility.

Tech level is overall fast. Also, do you have corporations, with Medici Bank you should have little trouble out teching anyone.
 
Religion is probably your major contributing factor.

Well, I think there is no other choice. One UHV requires 8 cathedrals, which means a minimum of 12 cities. The other UHV requires 12 cities outside Poland's core area. I guess stability is the chalenge for the Poles. :king:
 
Religion is probably your major contributing factor.

But how could this be? It's not totally clear for me right now...
Doesn't the UP mean that you get no instability from multiple religions?
Or having multiple religious buildings (thus low faith points) contribute that much to stability?
 
Well, I think there is no other choice. One UHV requires 8 cathedrals, which means a minimum of 12 cities. The other UHV requires 12 cities outside Poland's core area. I guess stability is the chalenge for the Poles. :king:

I guess tha main question: Is it doable on monarch?
It's perfect if it's hard and real challenging, but you can still win by completing your UHVs every now and then.
 
England UHV:

1. It's not too difficult to get the territory by 1452. I think the two key things are early military (I'm talking first 10 turns) to keep your Normandy possessions (Caen and Calais) and focusing on military after your cities are established. I wouldn't say beeline to chivalry but put importance on this. You need knights to take out the french. This isn't too hard for a human player to do if they focus. For the number 2 and 3 to be possible, you need to be aggressive in taking cities of both France and Burgundy (I was forced to go to war with Burgundy because of vassal) even if it means low science for the short run. Also theres an element of luck involved. I was able to vassalize Genoa, Spain, and Portugal. I had control of England, France, and Dutch atlantic access and with vassalage, force Iberia to give me theirs, so number 2 became very easy all of a sudden.

2 and 3. These kind of go hand in hand. The key here is cottages and watermills (watermills when appropriate otherwise just cottage spam). I had serious I mean SERIOUS issues getting technology before about 1500. Until then I was seriously in debt due to Normandy possessions. It took about 30 turns after that to catch up in tech some of the civs, I never caught up to the top civs. Don't expect to get any wonders until the late ones.

England review: I would say England can be very hard unless you play the right way. I took Amsterdam at the start, which I think was a good move for the gold and resources. I think their UP could be altered, cus its kind of useless, but not necessary to beat it on monarch.
The moorland is just stupid. I'd reccomend getting rid of all of it except in Northern Scotland and Ireland. It just sucks having barley on moorland - it becomes completely useless
 
England review: I would say England can be very hard unless you play the right way. I took Amsterdam at the start, which I think was a good move for the gold and resources. I think their UP could be altered, cus its kind of useless, but not necessary to beat it on monarch.
The moorland is just stupid. I'd reccomend getting rid of all of it except in Northern Scotland and Ireland. It just sucks having barley on moorland - it becomes completely useless

That is exactly how we want the game, hard, but not too hard.

When you say English UP is useless, doesn't it help the colony building as well as the early military? With the moorlands there aren't that many places for mines and such.
 
That is exactly how we want the game, hard, but not too hard.

When you say English UP is useless, doesn't it help the colony building as well as the early military? With the moorlands there aren't that many places for mines and such.

I understand the difficulty but it leads to an England that is very backward compared to its neighbors. It will be unbalanced when the AI is playing as English because they build a workshop on every tile! so there is absolutely no gold coming out of london when it should have at least 5 or so towns
 
Back
Top Bottom