RFC Europe: Small bugs/fixes

What about Keshiks and Seljuks? Those shouldn't have such penalties.
I agree Keshiks should not be nerfed. IMHO Mongols are not scary enough as it is. At least in Hungary and Poland the few units that sometimes show up is hardly a threat.

Didn't touch Keshiks are Seljuks, they are the way they were before
The Mongol spawn is not perfect currently, will have to balance it so more units get to Poland and Hungary
 
This seems to be an OK compromise for the early horse archers. Maybe the Hungarian UU might need some similar but smaller nerf.

Since I do not know how scary the AI will be if you fix those passive huge stacks and pacific behaviour, I think it would be wise to not nerf the units to much.

I also like using drill for light cav. Why not open up that line of promotion for light cav with a later tech? The main issue is the cheap early HA drillerkillers. They already start with 2 first strikes and are immune against first strikes, further Drill promos is one othe reasons they are OP. With the all those extra first strikes from drill promos + flanking promos giving 60+% chance of withdrawal + being immune against first strikes they can actually take out longbows fortified behind city walls and castle.

Indeed, light cavalry based UUs also need a smaller nerf for city attack. Maybe 10%?
Agreed on the drill promotions, they are very powerful on light cavalry
As I said none of the light cavalry type units will have access to it, until we find a better solution to balance them
 
Musketman should have enough power to get Pistoliers out in the open (also Knights).

Would it not be more historical correct to make Musketmen much cheaper to build than pistoliers instead of giving them more power? After all the major advantage with gunpowder armies was that you got more bang for the bucks. Just round up your poor people, train/scare them to maintain a close formation, give them a musket each, and tell them when and where to shoot.
 
Would it not be more historical correct to make Musketmen much cheaper to build than pistoliers instead of giving them more power? After all the major advantage with gunpowder armies was that you got more bang for the bucks. Just round up your poor people, train/scare them to maintain a close formation, give them a musket each, and tell them when and where to shoot.

Those are the Abequesers, they are the cheap ones. The Musketman are better trained.
 
just a little sidenote on early gunpowder units that were partially being discussed over the previous pages.
Gunpowder units had one huge disadvantage which (i think) can't be represented in the game. IIRC they were practically useless during rain or when it was too damp in general.
Things did improve with flintlock, but before that just keeping that 'fuse' thing they needed to fire the weapon lit was sometimes 'impossible'. Another problem was moisture which rendered gunpowder useless at times. It was the cartridge that made things allot better. And I think that only really came into widespread/effective use in the 18th-19th century.
Anyway, just my two cents on the superiority of gunpowder units vs. non-gunpowder units in the open field.
But on the other hand, they did have 'rules' for warfare back then, like usually not attacking at night and so on. Maybe they decided to not fight in bad weather :)
I think Longbows/Crossbows had a similar problem with their bows (the sinews, or the bow itself.. not really sure)
 
Could a <HolyCity> tag value be added for the Temple Mount wonder so it can only be built in Jerusalem, rather than in any Jewish city? It's a little strange to see it going up in Krakow or Warsaw. Also, could the "road" in "The road to the Masjid al-Haram" be capitalized, just so it sorts better in the Civilopedia?
 
Could a <HolyCity> tag value be added for the Temple Mount wonder so it can only be built in Jerusalem, rather than in any Jewish city? It's a little strange to see it going up in Krakow or Warsaw. Also, could the "road" in "The road to the Masjid al-Haram" be capitalized, just so it sorts better in the Civilopedia?

I'm pretty sure the wonder was supposed to be about a Polish Synagogue
 
Could a <HolyCity> tag value be added for the Temple Mount wonder so it can only be built in Jerusalem, rather than in any Jewish city? It's a little strange to see it going up in Krakow or Warsaw. Also, could the "road" in "The road to the Masjid al-Haram" be capitalized, just so it sorts better in the Civilopedia?

We can even change the Road to Masjid al-Haram for something more fitting for the mod. The_Turk requested this every other day.
He was saying that there is a the 3rd holiest place of Islam in Damascus, or something similar?
The Civ IV graphic of Masjid al-Haram is not really Masjid al-Haram after all, rather an islamic cathedral
So we would only need to change the name, the graphic can stay

EDIT: Yep, found it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_of_Damascus
4th holiest place of Islam
 
To return to opening art for a minute...

I am having a difficult time really integrating the tapestry into a piece so that it looks great. How about just a simple stationary image? Here is a nice piece of art with our little banner floating on top. The upper-left of the image has stuff on it, so I had to put the banner there.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Venice.jpg
    Venice.jpg
    183.4 KB · Views: 252
I also liked the idea of a scrolling Tapestry :(
I was so sure it will be included I even put in a hint about it :crazyeye:
 
Okay, when you take out the Russian letters so you can have other foreign letters could you please implement þorn (thorn) for English?
PS Afforess figured out how to have some extra TGA things
 
The resolution is great, but those don't seem to be continuous. The original Tapestry is a continuous piece of art, while those are just snapshots from different places.

I am not sure how it would look, maybe it will be OK.

Actually I think they are continuous
(the smaller, double images)
 
Back
Top Bottom