RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[AbsintheRed]

What if manor houses and such buildings were not capturable? It would force the conqueror to rebuild them normally.

Yep, that's what I wrote 2 posts before

On second thought, maybe it's not that bad what MessageMan said
But only owning these buildings counts (there is no extra stability for building them), and we reduce the stability penalty on letting a city conquered. You will get a hit anyway for losing these buildings in it.

 

[Ambreville]

Yep, that's what I wrote 2 posts before (...)

I managed to miss that. Looks like we're on the same track. Cheerio!

 

[Caliom]

Yep, that's what I wrote 2 posts before

On second thought, maybe it's not that bad what MessageMan said
But only owning these buildings counts (there is no extra stability for building them), and we reduce the stability penalty on letting a city conquered. You will get a hit anyway for losing these buildings in it.

The side effect is that, when you capture a city that has some of those buildings, you end up with a stability boost.

After i thougth about it i think it is ok if you "loose some potential stability points" when you capture a city with those buildings already built. Such a city is highly evolved and therefore harder to hold. Therefore i vote for "stability upon building"

Regardless of which way we go, i think spawning and respawning civs should get the full bonus for all buildings that are already built.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Yep, but for an evolved city it wouldn't be too hard to rebuild them either, so why should we take away those potential stability points?
Thus I'm getting to think that stability per buildings owned is the best way to go.
Would solve all these issues when a civ spawn, respawn

Also, cities in civil disorder should never count, so:
- You won't get an immediate stability boost when capturing cities, just a couple turns later
- You can mess up your enemies stability with spies by putting some of his/her cities into revolt

 

[MessageMan]

Both shouldn't be in
If you build a manor house in a city it's +1 stability, you lose the city, and when reconquering it it's another +1 stability for owning that manor house?
This is easily exploitable

If you build a manor house you receive +1 stability because you own it, not because you build it. So if you lose that city then the +1 bonus goes away.

This would be solved if you take extra stability hit when losing your city with stability buildings
But if you lose a core area city with manor house+courthouse+castle, then the overall stability hit may be too huge, so I dislike this solution too

Wouldn't a core area city with all those buildings be a major and important city to your civ? So if you lose it, shouldn't it have a large effect on your stability?

 

[The Hyper Duck]

Wouldn't a core area city with all those buildings be a major and important city to your civ? So if you lose it, shouldn't it have a large effect on your stability?

I agree completely. If you can't protect a city with all of that stuff in it, then you are spread too thin and deserve to become unstable.

 

[AbsintheRed]

If you build a manor house you receive +1 stability because you own it, not because you build it. So if you lose that city then the +1 bonus goes away.

AFAIK right now you get the stability bonus for building it
It was this way a few betas ago, and i didn't see anywhere that it was changed...

Wouldn't a core area city with all those buildings be a major and important city to your civ? So if you lose it, shouldn't it have a large effect on your stability?

Check my later comments, I changed my mind since

 

[civ_king]

I'm really trying to figure out why the Ottomans should be Muslim and not Orthodox, but I can't come up with any, the units are already cheap so that isn't a boost, the massive diploboost with Muslims (1/10) is irrelevant because there are no more Muslims, and the faster growth doesn't really matter (now if it added a percent to food produced that'd be good). OTOH Orthodoxy gives a stability boost which allows massive empires which you'd acquire with cheap units inherent to the Ottomans and also it can massively cut down on civic upkeep (city maintenance is cheap for Ottomans). Also if you are Orthodox no need for inquisitions, conquering cities boosts your faith instead of decreasing it and you don't have to build missionaries!

EDIT: More comments on playing Ottomans

The Ottoman UHVs are somewhat unfun, the deadline is historical, but tight since you need to smack the Byzantines, the Bulgarians, the Venetians, any allies the Venetians bring in through defensive pacts (Germany...), any mercenary allies the Venetians (Burgundy), then of course you have to fight the owner(s) of the Holy Land (Germany and Spain) with of course any vassals or allies they have (Portugal). Then after you get to enjoy that you have to enjoy the Austrians who are frequently a vassal of Hungary or Poland (plus any people they bring in with Poland usually bringing Lithuania). Furthermore in the process you manage to piss off almost every Catholic country which means DoW from Genoa and France aren't uncommon so you basically wind up fighting most of Europe!

tl;dr the UHV consists of beating the crap out of five to thirteen (or even more) civs in a tight space of time...

PS Wallachia should be okay for the Ottomans along with North Africa (Cyrenaica, Tripolitania, Ifriqiya, Algiers, Oran)

 

[Lark]

Contrary to the Civilopedia entries, the Knights Templar and the Hanseatic League are mutually exclusive.
edit: My mistake, it turns out Hansa are boats and I was trying to start them inland. Sorry.
And a lot of info just isn't there. I know, it's a Beta.

The research bar turns estimate is routinely out by a couple of turns either way.

The first French UHV -11 provinces by 840 - seems like it might be remotely possible. At easy difficulty, I had 1 (non-UHV) + 5 (UHV) provinces and my 7th city right at the turn and thought I was doing well. I am in the mid-1000s now and could get the few provinces I don't have if I wanted to.

I am enjoying this a lot more than I did the Sword of Islam mod; it doesn't feel like I'm being jerked around as much. Or, I'm playing it rather than it's playing me. Of course, that could be because I'm not doing all of the things that it turned out were stupid to do in SoI. That said, there are some nice features in SoI.

 

[civ_king]

Contrary to the Civilopedia entries, the Knights Templar and the Hanseatic League are mutually exclusive.
edit: My mistake, it turns out Hansa are boats and I was trying to start them inland. Sorry.
And a lot of info just isn't there. I know, it's a Beta.

The research bar turns estimate is routinely out by a couple of turns either way.

The first French UHV -11 provinces by 840 - seems like it might be remotely possible. At easy difficulty, I had 1 (non-UHV) + 5 (UHV) provinces and my 7th city right at the turn and thought I was doing well. I am in the mid-1000s now and could get the few provinces I don't have if I wanted to.

I am enjoying this a lot more than I did the Sword of Islam mod; it doesn't feel like I'm being jerked around as much. Or, I'm playing it rather than it's playing me. Of course, that could be because I'm not doing all of the things that it turned out were stupid to do in SoI. That said, there are some nice features in SoI.

It is possible, I'm currently in a game and I accomplished it. The trick is to use your axeman on Bordeaux to get some xp and use each of archers on it too. After your axeman gets 10xp promote CRI, II, III and attack Tours, Lyon and Marseilles, since they are independent you get xp. Work on some mounted sergeants and use them against Augsburg while the Axeman goes for Milan and Florence.

I accomplished the first UHV and had enough units to stomp Burgundy and Germany, France's reputation as a cheese-eating surrender monkeys is a tarp.

 

[Andrrew]

The first French UHV -11 provinces by 840 - seems like it might be remotely possible. At easy difficulty, I had 1 (non-UHV) + 5 (UHV) provinces and my 7th city right at the turn and thought I was doing well. I am in the mid-1000s now and could get the few provinces I don't have if I wanted to.

I've also done the French on Monarch, it is not easy but definitely doable. I mass produced swordsman to capture the indies, thus I only had to to build 1 settler for Champagne.

 

[Sian]

tricky part of French first UHV is that you both have to send an army towards Lubeck and down to Tuscany

 

[Veshta]

Pfft, unless something drastic has changed since Beta10, a righteous Mounted Sergeant spam does the trick nicely. Minimal hassle and super speed.
Use the horde as scouts after the UHV check and/or smash the wine lovers when they spawn!

 

[civ_king]

tricky part of French first UHV is that you both have to send an army towards Lubeck and down to Tuscany

WHo needs an army when you have a CRIII, CI axeman backed with a couple Mounted Sergeants?

 

[Barak]

Playing a game as Poland, and while there have been many improvements to the resources and starting situation of Poland, I still feel that they are backwards in terms of Tech and Units. By the time my cities are big enough to train a unit of 2, I am overrun by the Germans and their Armored Lancers.

And since Poland starts with archers an axe and a sword, I cant upgrade them in time of hire enough mercs.

Looking at Germany in WB I wonder where they got all the units from!

 

[ezzlar]

If the french barb cities were independent cities it would be much harder since you cant exploit the free wins!

 

[Morholt]

In the current beta (11) France seems to settle cities like Bale, Aix-la-Chapelle, and Hambourg, which makes Germany very weak. Maybe tune their modifiers or change their settlermaps?

 

[AbsintheRed]

All the settlermaps will be updated before 1.0

 

[AbsintheRed]

And finally the horse archers the Arabians start with are completly ahistorical. Even just importing the vanilla Arabian UU would be better
I would suggest though, something like an "Arabian Shiekh" unit, something like the Omani UU in SoI, since I know you've played it. But again its up to you, but having horse archers is just strange frankly.

Exactly what starting units should the Arabs get?
Right now they have 2 settlers, 2 archers, and 6 horse archers
And I also dislike the horse archers there

 

[Michael Vick]

You could give the horse archer camel archer art? Other than that I already mentioned adding a second set of UUs in the Beta 11 thread.