RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[dmitrytrue]

By the way, I tried a game on emperor today. What can I say... I simply couldn't get enough stability to conquer my neigbours, only Burgundy and Germany, Spain took back Pamplona, and Germany declared independence soon due to instabilty. Units dying on 70-80 and even 90%, just one genoan guisarmier killed 3 my heavy lancers, I just didn't get enough units to send some in England :C
Seems like emperor much harder, and obviously much more barbs there. And it is much more interesting ofcourse.

 

[civ_king]

Burgundy's UHV setup is wonky, the provinces show up in the culture one

 

[dmitrytrue]

Nice Kievan Empire on screenshot( it is year 1150-1200~, difficulty is monarch):

 

[DC123456789]

Yep, that's exactly why I've been saying that the barbarian tendency to raze cities really needs to be toned down.

 

[gilgames]

Burgundy's UHV setup is wonky, the provinces show up in the culture one

what do you mean exactly?

Teach the barbs how NOT to raze a city! Combat odds are balanced on viceroy only. on monarch its common to lose a 60-70 even 80 % chances and I lost a battle ArmLanc vc archer with 95%!!!

 

[dmitrytrue]

Yep, that's exactly why I've been saying that the barbarian tendency to raze cities really needs to be toned down.

Let them raze cities in Anatolia, they are terribly placed(except Smyrna). And mostly they are useless. I giving away them to arabs usually. And they protects me from barbs, meanwhile I expanding into europe. After barbs razed cities, you can built 2-3 decent ones, instead of 7 useless.
--
But, what I meant in previous post?
I meant, Kiev is too weak now, in each second game, they are collapsed or razed long before mongol invasion. They usually have not more than 2-3 cities, OMG! And all barbs running into Moesia :C
After I lost 3 knights vs 1 tiny mongol, I deleted the game to hell, and don't going to play it, before they wouldn't be nerfed, or Kiev wouldn't be a buffer for mongols ;D
(for example, iron, without woods on it, eh? or flipping Kursk, it is a core area at last)

 

[Wessel V1]

what do you mean exactly?

Teach the barbs how NOT to raze a city! Combat odds are balanced on viceroy only. on monarch its common to lose a 60-70 even 80 % chances and I lost a battle ArmLanc vc archer with 95%!!!

That's nonsense and not how statistics work. Combat odds are fixed for each play level so there obviously is no 'balance' or difference between each level. Also, if you have 60% chance to win you have 40% chance to lose. So, when you have 5 battles you are likely to lose 2. If you have 20 battles on 95% you are still likely to lose one. Also, even if there would be some balance, it's on monarch level. Viceroy level exists but isn't meant to be played.

 

[dmitrytrue]

...some balance...

cannot even imagine balance in this... battle system? I still remember, how i lost tranport full of marines vs galley on 99,9 in vanilla civ 4.
If about this mod, first strikes are too infinite power. I conquered with 4 cataphracts whole Germany in recent game on 30-40%, without saving before battle, and did the same with same cataphracts in France and Burgundy after (on monarch.) Also hungarian hussars are have "ultimate" withdrawal chances too, I don't know how it works exactly, but they are winning on ~30% almost always, and not only on attack in some reasons, as Hungary i had 5-6 highlevelled hussars with 50%str ++(they simply got tons of xp for winning on low %), and I didn't even improved that stack to knights, hussars are obviously much more useful. With pistolers the same, winning on 20-30%, like it were 80. On monarch ofc. I found this in another mods too, any cavalry with withdrawal chances winning 2-3 times more frequently. And I think anothers know it too.
Some nerfing for at least mongols required, even without 2 first strikes they are will be hard to beat, at least for AI. As they are light cavalry.
edit: actually there is 1 first strike, but anyway it is too many ;D Loosing 3 knights vs 1 keshik - madness.

 

[gilgames]

@: Dmitrytrue
(for example, iron, without woods on it, eh? or flipping Kursk, it is a core area at last)

They do have uncovered iron south to kursk! And Kursk is only 1 square next to flip zone, imo they should in it!
-
Sadly I dont have so good exp. with husszárs even a lvl4 can kill a mongol, but only 2-3 times (/w full healt) then it must die, regardless of odds. I've never saw first strike so powerfull.

@: Wessel

I belive you, but expereince does NOT confirme you DDD After all I'm not a 2bit minded pesron, nor can see the matrix's, all i can have is experience on combat odds. and this exp. shows me, the there are strange things beside many normal thing. These are: Archers, keshiks ect...

 

[DC123456789]

Let them raze cities in Anatolia, they are terribly placed(except Smyrna). And mostly they are useless. I giving away them to arabs usually. And they protects me from barbs, meanwhile I expanding into europe. After barbs razed cities, you can built 2-3 decent ones, instead of 7 useless.

No, the point is that barbarians are far too likely to raze cities in general.

And yes, Kiev is really weak right now.

 

[Wessel V1]

It is true that withdrawl chances can be exploited. I experienced the same thing myself. Some units can get so close to absolute invulnerability, you can just throw them at the enemy like catapults and hope they do some damage to the strongest defender. Even worse, when they actually manage to win they earn a huge amount of XP.

@gilgames: that's the danger of statistics and the very reason casinos and lotteries earn billions every year. Experience with statistics is on most occasions based on a rare (usually negative) outcome, or based on the false assumption that every 90% battle or every 99% battle should be won because odds are greatly in your favor. So, experience with statistics is influenced by the human incapability to understand them. Don't worry, no personal attack, just a thing scientists agree on. But it is safe to say that the numbers that are shown is the actual probability of success in battle, there is no fixed adjusting value.

 

[gilgames]

Well, I know! But there is an other thing i forgot to mention aside odds, the result: give 2 kinghts with +20 srt. odds are 50%. One thing that I lost this battle in 60%, (rule of great munbers doesnt work) but its almost common, that my dies and the other knight comes out with FULL hEALTH (13), so I could not even scrach it! Sometimes its appear on an Istambul siege but there are very small odds, however in the ebove mentioned example, it is very annoying. True is used to happen in my faver rarely too. No good, fix it

 

[Bamboozle]

This isn't really related to anything here, but as Burgundy I captured London and most of southern England along with this annoying city called Colchester northeast of London. The city really blows and I'm trying to raze it, but every time I give to England, declare war and capture it again it immediately gives me the city, it doesn't give me the option to raze it. Is there something I'm missing here?

 

[gilgames]

The first time you capture it, you should be able to raze it, also if you missed it, give it back, and wait several tunrs (i.e. 10+) and try then...

Btw whqat the hell are you doung there?

 

[civ_king]

The first time you capture it, you should be able to raze it, also if you missed it, give it back, and wait several tunrs (i.e. 10+) and try then...

Btw whqat the hell are you doung there?

A goal is have a higher score than France, Germany and England, if France, Germany and England are dead or rump states it becomes easy to beat that

 

[Bamboozle]

It was a really weird game, Germany, France and Spain all peacevassalized to me. France controlled a narrow strip of land in northern France, and then it began to conquer Spain (right now it controls 1/3 of Iberia). Since I was surrounded by healthy vassal states I jumped the Channel at Caen and conquered southern England since I had nowhere else to go.

Also, I'm not sure if it's just me, but Paladins do seem overpowered.

Another thing I'm noticing in virtually all my games: Turkey is extremely weak. Arabia, Bulgaria and Hungary are alive and well by the 1550s. The Ottomans really need to be buffed, they barely get out of Thrace and western Anatolia, whereas in real life they also controlled Syria, Palestine, Egypt and almost the entire Balkans.

 

[DC123456789]

No, the point is that barbarians are far too likely to raze cities in general.

And yes, Kiev is really weak right now.

Well?

 

[gilgames]

Oh, I see. did you really needed to regulate english?
Yes Turkey really used to be weak, but Bulgars! usually they are strong and catholic!!! they used to lead the later crusades.

 

[srpt]

about the withdrawal chance xp exploit, perhaps xp gains should be flat and not depend on combat odds? it would also remove that other exploit: gaining extra xp by sending your starting units to attack barbs with bad odds for your free wins.

 

[DC123456789]

Weren't free barb wins at the beginning removed in RFCE?