3Miro
Deity
The only barbs I remember changing were the ones on the Balkans and the Mongols. I will check it out, but only when I come back.
RFC Europe playtesting feedback thread
- Thread starter st.lucifer
- Start date
The only barbs I remember changing were the ones on the Balkans and the Mongols. I will check it out, but only when I come back.
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
Noooo! The Colonialism Civic gives plenty of stability points by boosting your economy greatly. In fact, if you have more than 10 cities, it'll allow you to bring up your science slider a full 10%! The high maintenance actually is justified for once.
rob-art1985
Chieftain
they came with a ship. And they surprised me two times!
...and one other hint. Please replace the fish 888 of Danzig/Gdansk to 88 of Danzig. The ressource is absolutely useless else.
Edit: The new German city-founding-strategy is
In my actual Poland-game they founded Coburg 66 from Frankfurt and Amsterdam. Augsburg has been razed (propably by barbs) and then they conquered Lübeck!
So they have only 4 Cities, two of them rob the ressources from each other, the others are far away!
I like Colonialism as it is. But if you felt obliged to turn it into something with actual projects, you could give trade routs per projects or something.
That said, I think it makes good sense the way it is. The last civic category is not a "stability" category, it is an "expansion" category. Some civilizations expanded through trade. Some civilizations need to run the new and improved Imperialism civic due to there large, mostly European empires.
BurnEmDown
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,718
But with the current way that civic is it is viable for some civs to use it without even thinking of build projects. I think maybe there should be a small benefit specifically for projects as well as the trade routs.
3Miro
Deity
Trade routes should be provided by the Trading Companies (available to everyone). The civic should be expansive. We can give extra boost to stability for each project build, however, +5 is way too much. +2 tops.
Wessel V1
Emperor
I think I'm with AP on this one, the extra trade route is, for large empires, easily a boost of over 80 or 100 raw commerce per turn, which is already a reason for me to choose it. It would also make the stable civs (the colonizers) even more stable.
3Miro
Deity
My proposal is to remove the trade route bonus and replace it with +1 or +2 per colonial project. Then another proposal is to give +1 trade route bonus for the East/West India Trade Companies.
Panopticon
Utilitarian
Would it unbalance too much if you gave a production boost to colony projects when running Colonialism? Possibly balanced with a higher hammer cost before applying any bonus. That would oblige civs to choose between an "inward" and an "outward" orientation about their route to victory, for the colonial period at least.
rob-art1985
Chieftain
I've had funny news in my actual game:
"The barbarian golden age has begun"
"The barbarian golden age has begun"
3Miro
Deity
I've had funny news in my actual game:
"The barbarian golden age has begun"
Did they build a wonder or capture Jerusalem?
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
Here's a wonderful bug: the Philippines, Incans and Aztecs could be conquered multiple times. (in fact my Swedish are on the way too)
The Swedish are way too powerful. Even in emperor I had 5 techs that the other AIs didn't have, mostly military ones. And the much cheaper settlers and workers means that I can basically settle all of Finland (which is on nobody's settler map, BTW), some in Germany and all of Norway/Denmark easily. I haven't even finished this game yet (probably won't since I can't lose).
I would favor increasing the cost for workers/settlers for later civs, but decreasing them for earlier civs.
The Swedish are way too powerful. Even in emperor I had 5 techs that the other AIs didn't have, mostly military ones. And the much cheaper settlers and workers means that I can basically settle all of Finland (which is on nobody's settler map, BTW), some in Germany and all of Norway/Denmark easily. I haven't even finished this game yet (probably won't since I can't lose).
Spoiler :
I would favor increasing the cost for workers/settlers for later civs, but decreasing them for earlier civs.
Attachments
3Miro
Deity
Damn it, the new colonies are national as opposed to global wonders. I will see if I can find time to send a patch, I am out of town. Sorry about that.
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
Actually, it's not a bad idea to have some national projects like North America, South America, Australia and Africa. They are big enough to accommodate multiple colonies. Even Indonesia had Dutch and Portuguese at the same time, although the former eventually foorced the latter out by military and economic means. One can make the generic colonies have fewer resources but allow all civs with Atlantic Access to build it, and let them be a little cheaper than the big projects. A suitable resource would be continent dependent (e.g. Africa gives 1 slave, South America gives 1 gem, North America gives 1 timber)
rob-art1985
Chieftain
Al Quds is still Arabian and the only wonder, that was built in this turn was the Sistine Chapel. I don't know where, but I don't think the Barbarians did it.
So I think, there was a "Great Barbarian" or something like
merijn_v1
Black Belt
Al Quds is still Arabian and the only wonder, that was built in this turn was the Sistine Chapel. I don't know where, but I don't think the Barbarians did it.
So I think, there was a "Great Barbarian" or something like
And if they have done it, the Sistine Chapel doesn't provide a golden age.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
Just a question about the Kievan UHV. You're supposed to have 10 grains (wheat or barley) in 1300. But in my game the last Keshiks arrived in 1290. By then nearly all my grains were unconnected. How am supposed to get them all to count in 3 turns? If the date was 1350 you'd have time to get everything restored. My other question is; do the grains have to farmed or roaded or just be within the BTS. As you can see from the screenshot where I moused over the barley it said "You have none". I don't get it.
AnotherPacifist
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2007
- Messages
- 4,878
I guess one solution to the keshik pillaging problem is to found your cities right on the grain tile. 
It's impossible to defend Kiev in emperor since there's no chokepoint like the swamp around NW Black Sea that the Bulgarian's can use.
It's impossible to defend Kiev in emperor since there's no chokepoint like the swamp around NW Black Sea that the Bulgarian's can use.
3Miro
Deity
Just a question about the Kievan UHV. You're supposed to have 10 grains (wheat or barley) in 1300. But in my game the last Keshiks arrived in 1290. By then nearly all my grains were unconnected. How am supposed to get them all to count in 3 turns? If the date was 1350 you'd have time to get everything restored. My other question is; do the grains have to farmed or roaded or just be within the BTS. As you can see from the screenshot where I moused over the barley it said "You have none". I don't get it.
On Monarch, which is the level of difficulty that we are balancing, the key is to aggressively defend against the Keshiks. When I got the UHV I had a large number of Drijinas and Knights and I was hunting the Keshiks as soon as they entered my land (also a lot of roads help, your units can strike and retreat to heal at the same turn). On Monarch, this is much more difficult, because there are way more Keshiks, but it should still be possible to defnes without letting them pillage all of your countryside.
I am not sure if the Grain has to be connected or not. The function that I use is set by Firaxis and I am not sure how they set it up. You get the "You have none" message, because no barley is farmed and connected to your cities, so you get no resource.
Similar threads
