RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread

[3Miro]

The key to the Ottoman's success was the very effective "divide and conquer" strategy. They would first negotiate with their rivals, vassalize them, use their armies and conquer them one by one. (it also helped that all Balkan nations were divided, there was no single strong opponent to resist them). Ottoman's UP should help in that respect, they can draft from newly conquered cities, that would give them almost an abuse in terms of fast army growth. I just don't know if the AI would handle it properly.

Good to know that things seem to be getting to work, piece by piece.

 

[sedna17]

I think the biggest obstacle to good playtesting now, in addition to setting up the correct starting units, is the lack of default buildings upon city founding.

That said, I started a few late games just to see the world situation.

Arabia seems almost overpowered, but maybe that's deliberate. When I spawned as the Dutch, they had the highest score with 3,000 points and the next closest was Cordoba with 2,000. Pretty big gap. I think the Ottomans need to spawn with a tougher military and a hyper-aggressive AI or else the Arabs will always keep them totally penned in.

I think the Moscovites should start with three Settlers instead of two.

In my game the Burgundian civ collapsed in 1035.

The religious distribution/spread seems pretty accurate so kudos on that.

When I got the tech that gave me Free Peasantry and Merchant Republic there were some "TXT" stuff in the description of "do you want to switch over."

Oh, and I also got a Cherokee Russian city. See screenshot.

Oh, and a TXT holiday. See screenshot.

More updates as they come.

Thanks for your feedback.

Arabia will probably be toned down somewhat.

Thanks for the TXT reports. That's just a matter of me being lazy when I was first starting to figure out the XML. It's on my to-do list now.

 

[jessiecat]

Just to report I got the first two UHVs as Venice (Monarch level) by 1500 instead of 1600 so it is very doable. Pity the 3rd. UHV hasn't been decided yet. It'd be fun to get my first UHV victory on this mod officially.

BTW I did start a game as Poland but soon realized that the first UHV is impossible. Having the largest population (in Europe?, in the game?) is not doable in the short time span. By 1500 I had about 8% of pop. while the Arabs had over 20%. Either we change that condition or don't count the Arabs in that condition. Or severely hobble the Arabs? Whatever.

 

[3Miro]

Just to report I got the first two UHVs as Venice (Monarch level) by 1500 instead of 1600 so it is very doable. Pity the 3rd. UHV hasn't been decided yet. It'd be fun to get my first UHV victory on this mod officially.

Sorry about that, but I need a list of resources to code it.Since those have not been coded yet, I cannot code the 8 lux-resources.

 

[KaiserBenjamin]

Just to report I got the first two UHVs as Venice (Monarch level) by 1500 instead of 1600 so it is very doable. Pity the 3rd. UHV hasn't been decided yet. It'd be fun to get my first UHV victory on this mod officially.

BTW I did start a game as Poland but soon realized that the first UHV is impossible. Having the largest population (in Europe?, in the game?) is not doable in the short time span. By 1500 I had about 8% of pop. while the Arabs had over 20%. Either we change that condition or don't count the Arabs in that condition. Or severely hobble the Arabs? Whatever.

I have to agree with that - there's no way Poland is going to pull that off. Even doing a Settler spam, I don't think it's possible.

I was thinking maybe going through all the later civs and telling the coders what units they should spawn with. I imagine that would be relatively easy to code and would encourage playtesters by making gameplay a little bit more enjoyable. Would someone with some authority confirm that they would be willing to take the time to code in the units before I start running the various starts for all the civs and investigating the state of the world at the time in which they spawn?

 

[3Miro]

I have to agree with that - there's no way Poland is going to pull that off. Even doing a Settler spam, I don't think it's possible.

I was thinking maybe going through all the later civs and telling the coders what units they should spawn with. I imagine that would be relatively easy to code and would encourage playtesters by making gameplay a little bit more enjoyable. Would someone with some authority confirm that they would be willing to take the time to code in the units before I start running the various starts for all the civs and investigating the state of the world at the time in which they spawn?

Propose a list, people will discuss it, make additional suggestions and when there is some agreement, the list will be coded. We will code the starting units as soon as there is agreement, we need to do that.

8% for Poland is not bad. If Arabia is first with 20%, then the UHV may be doable (eventually). Poland starts later in the game, so they will be given a growth bonus (just like all the late starts in RFC) and Arabia would be given a bonus. Also, remember that resources are not there yet, with some proper resources in their land, the Polish could do better.

 

[jessiecat]

3Miro and Sedna17 are our modding experts and I know they're busy doing a lot at the moment. I think that finishing the UPs and UHVs are the first priority, followed by changes to the map and resources. And finally wonders and projects. I agree that play-testing would be easier with accurate units and buildings but for now we're going to have to use our judgement and add a few extras via Worldbuilder. That's what I do now and is OK if you don't overdue it. Be patient. There's so much to do and too few coders to to do it. We're getting there.

Sorry for the crosspost.

 

[donbot]

Playing as England today, I am fnding that nations cannot vassalize in their first 20 turns, but are doing so almost as soon as the 20 tuns are up. I am also finding in every game at the moment that Frankia are on around 250score as late as 1200 (yet they dont vassalize to anyone!), around a third of the next lowest. I guess once resources are finalised they will do better, but it may be something that requires looking at in the future.

Also, I dont believe Englands uhv condition to reach the industrial age is currently doable, as Arabia, Cordoba and Bulgaria are all teching way too quickly to catch up.

The first UHV condition appears too easy( I control all of Britain, Ireland and 2cities in France with over 100 years to spare. I think this will be solved by putting powerful independants in Scotland and Ireland.

 

[3Miro]

One city in France, which usually flips on spawn, just hold on to it. You don't have to build cities in Ireland so long as there are no Indep or Norse cities in the area and you have at least one city in the main Island you will be find.

 

[Elwynn]

Why is the Hungarian capitol Nandorferhervar, which I know is Belgrade. Shouldn't they start in Hungary as opposed to Serbia?
Also this mod is very awesome and I have played as the Venetians and the Byzantines and they both work well.

 

[Verily]

I think I found the root problem with the unusual city names popping up. I figured it out after the Cordobans founded "Kufah" (which is on the Vanilla Arab list) two tiles away from Sevilla.

The city names map contains many names which cover a wide area, often greater than a 2x2 square. Sometimes, particularly if the AI settler map is tight, the AI will try to found two cities within the name range of a single city. In the case I'm citing, the AI founded a second city on a tile for Sevilla after having founded Sevilla two tiles away.

The only solution to this is completely reworking the city name maps so that all names appear at most in a 2x2 square, and therefore a second city can't be founded which would have the same name as an already existing city, which causes the game to default to the old city list (in the case of Cordoba to the Arab list but in the case of Kiev, for example, to the Native American list).

 

[3Miro]

I think I found the root problem with the unusual city names popping up. I figured it out after the Cordobans founded "Kufah" (which is on the Vanilla Arab list) two tiles away from Sevilla.

The city names map contains many names which cover a wide area, often greater than a 2x2 square. Sometimes, particularly if the AI settler map is tight, the AI will try to found two cities within the name range of a single city. In the case I'm citing, the AI founded a second city on a tile for Sevilla after having founded Sevilla two tiles away.

The only solution to this is completely reworking the city name maps so that all names appear at most in a 2x2 square, and therefore a second city can't be founded which would have the same name as an already existing city, which causes the game to default to the old city list (in the case of Cordoba to the Arab list but in the case of Kiev, for example, to the Native American list).

City name maps were supposed to follow the 2x2 city size convention except for very special cases (i.e. pre-build cities and maybe capitols). Another paer of the problem is that part of the map has been changed since many of the city name maps were first made, so not all tiles have names associated with them. When the map is finalized, city name maps would be finalized too (I hope with everyone's help).

 

[jessiecat]

Yea. Some of the areas will have to redone. And one or two haven't been done at all. We'll have to go back to the map and recheck it area by area.

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.

 

[3Miro]

Yes, the Bulgarian one maybe made more clear. Misia is roughly the territory between Danube and the Balkan Mountain, Thracia is the area south between the Balkan Mnt. and Aegean Sea and Macedonia is the area of modern North-West Greece and Macedonia (small part is in Bulgaria). I picked this as a description because the three lions on the Bulgarian coat of arms signify those three regions.

In terms of the game, you need to capture Sofie (Serdica/Sredec), Ardianopolis and Constantinople. Vassals do not count here, Cordoba can vassalize Iberia, Bulgaria has to own every city. I will look at the save later.

EDIT: Nandorfehervar is the problem, everything is described in terms of rectangles and to incorporate the area around Varna I had to include that tile too. Nandorfehervar is right on the border.

 

[jessiecat]

Yes, the Bulgarian one maybe made more clear. Misia is roughly the territory between Danube and the Balkan Mountain, Thracia is the area south between the Balkan Mnt. and Aegean Sea and Macedonia is the area of modern North-West Greece and Macedonia (small part is in Bulgaria). I picked this as a description because the three lions on the Bulgarian coat of arms signify those three regions.

In terms of the game, you need to capture Sofie (Serdica/Sredec), Ardianopolis and Constantinople. Vassals do not count here, Cordoba can vassalize Iberia, Bulgaria has to own every city. I will look at the save later.

EDIT: Nandorfehervar is the problem, everything is described in terms of rectangles and to incorporate the area around Varna I had to include that tile too. Nandorfehervar is right on the border.

Yes but the requirement is 1400AD. It doesn't say NO. In 1404 it just says "Not Yet".

Edit. I could go back and attack Hungary. How do you get rid of a vassal?

 

[3Miro]

Getting rid of vassals is very hard. Part of the problem with Inca and Aztec control for the Spanish, you have to make sure you don't vassalize them.

I will look at the 1400AD problem.

 

[civmademepoor]

In re. the Misia question, it seems the standard English spelling is Moesia, at least as far as Britannica and Wikipedia goes.

For a more global fix to these sometimes ambiguous geographic requirements, how difficult would it be to put in the civilopedia a map detailing what has to be controlled for some of the requirements and what the natural area is for each civ? The joy of discovering what's in your realm and what isn't by watching the stability stars isn't much of a joy for me, and sometimes it's flat out confusing. Burgundy is a good example of this, the lines amongst Belgium, Pas de Calais, Picardie, Holland, Westphalia and the Rhineland is confusing!

For the vassal issue, perhaps a "flip these cities, or else" or "welcome to becoming a full province of the motherland, or else" demand. Perhaps this would also be a good option for the "royal wedding" event.

 

[3Miro]

RFC has an Atlas that can be downloaded separately from the mod. We should either have that or figure how to incorporate the regions into the Pedia (as of right now I don't know how to do such a thing)

 

[sedna17]

As it happens, I did the latest version of the RFC atlas. Unfortunately that system is dumb (in the sense of non-automated), so it would be a bit of work to put together an RFC Europe version. It has capabilities not available in a civilopedia entry though, and it is quite pretty.

 

[3Miro]

So someone knows how it is done