Rhye's and Fall RAND: Preview #4

[Rhye]

(Preview #1 here)
(Preview #2 here)
(Preview #3 here)



Preview #4!

As I mentioned, the subject is civ placement, this time.

While we have fixed starting locations in RFC and totally random locations in standard Civ, RFC RAND features some additional code that makes certain terrain types more important than others, depending on the civ.
The Egyptians have high modifiers for desert, rivers and a certain range of latitude (those latitudes are shifted when climate is different than temperate).



There are many other parameters, like the distance from the coast, which all influence not only the starting location placement, but the settlers as well. These modifiers alone, in fact, will form the new settlers maps, which will influence stability. As the Vikings, settling near the equator is a good way to have a low expansion stability rating.

Starting locations are also guided by a system of "attraction and repulsion". As Japan, plots close to China are more highly valued, while plots close to Rome or Egypt, for instance, have its value decreased.



This means that when you're playing, you don't know WHERE a new civ will spawn. As Rome, Germany may spawn next to you, and flip some of your cities, or next to France or Spain, and not affect you at all.
America is a special case, since it is supposed to spawn in America, and close to some European city. Then, the presence of those cities in the surroundings are taken into account:



Just one of the possible places in this already crowded "New World"



The possible degrees of Earth likeliness (high/medium/low) influence the presence of some contraints on starting location placement:
- on high, American civs are forced to spawn on the American continent, and the old world civs are placed in a way that they look like the Earth (Euros at west, Asians at east; same for north/south divide)
- on medium, there is still the American constraint, but placement in the old world may vary (the world itself can be flipped after all)
- on low, there are no contraints of any kind, but just modifiers. So, it's possible to often see old and new world civs mix up.

That's all!

 

[AnotherPacifist]

So are traditionally "small" civs (like Egypt and Babylon) constrained to be small again? And are older civs (like Egypt and Babylon again) going to start out with marble and stone (which are crucial for any survival, since the early wonders depend on them)?

So there's no way to predict which cities will flip to a rising civ? Very disturbing.

 

[Rhye]

1-no
2-no
3-yes

 

[kbk]

Can't wait.

So do you have ancient starts as modern civilizations, or do more modern civilizations only spawn in more modern times?

Also, you do not know ahead of time what cities will flip, but do you know when civs will spawn?

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Then I'm going to found my capital at least 2 moves away from my starting position then (since I don't know where my cities are going to flip, at least I can have some chance of not having my capital flip). This assumes that workers again appear on the 3rd move. No way to squat!

I can already see the Turks are going to be impossibly powerful (full culture of well developed cities flipping to them!) while poor little Khmer is going to be confined to some godforsaken jungleland. And Egypt, well, it's just a nonfactor with its UP.

Are the naval units going to be like BTS or RFC (i.e. more moves)?

 

[Rhye]

1-spawn years are unaltered
2-capitals don't flip, and cities closer to the capital than the new civ's spawn point, neither
3-in my test games, the winner were Netherlands, Spain and Germany (funny how in the game where Netherlands won, Germany, as the world superpower, collapsed right before the end after nuking 3 or 4 civs). Civ strengths seem to be similar to RFC anyway. In low likeliness, native american civs have a boost
4-naval movements are as in RFC

 

[thadian]

wow, keep it coming - i am really looking forward to it. What will i need to run it?

 

[Úmarth]

This is going to be so cool.

 

[Edungeon]

Loving it, just one question:

We are going to have new civs? All the civs from the normal game or just the ones that are already in RFC? o-o

 

[senturus]

Sounds more and more interesting.

Small questions :

1. Is the spawn area influenced by stability? It would make sense to think that when your civilization is unstable you have more chances to have new civs spawning in your borders.

2 Are the spawning years exactely the same as RFC, or they may vary a few? (in order to avoid thinking like "I know that in two turns exactly a new civ will appear").

3. Do maya/Aztecs/incas civilizations are triggered as "new world" civilisations, in case of high earth likeness?

 

[Rhye]

-only RFC civs
-spawn area isn't influenced by stabilty, but may be a good idea for future development
-as for spawn dates, same as above
-with high likeliness, they spawn in the new world, at the west, where they have no horses, elephants or other old world resources. Things change with lower likeliness.

 

[Metal Alloy Man]

I can't beleive I'm about to say this but it looks even better than RFC. All hail Rhye!

 

[Tboy]

Can't wait - this looks brilliant.

So I'm guessing that, as in normal RFC, a historical expansion policy gets the best stability? i.e. coastal for vikings, over land for Russians e.t.c.

 

[Al-Iskander]

Brilliant!

The "New World" map makes me drool, just a little

If the price of Guinness here hadn't tripled in the last year, I'd go get one in celebration.

I have a question though:

Since settler maps / stability regions (or whatever you call the latter) will be random, can we get some kind of warning message on founding a new city like "This location is in your (lower / low / lowest) stability region. Are you sure you want to found a city here?"

Like you said with the Vikings settling the equator, we can sorta guess what the stability impact will be based on distance from the core, but it would still be nice to know exactly what we're getting into as our civs expand.

 

[blizzrd]

Since settler maps / stability regions (or whatever you call the latter) will be random, can we get some kind of warning message on founding a new city like "This location is in your (lower / low / lowest) stability region. Are you sure you want to found a city here?"

Like you said with the Vikings settling the equator, we can sorta guess what the stability impact will be based on distance from the core, but it would still be nice to know exactly what we're getting into as our civs expand.

Indeed, a good request. Perhaps would a stability region overlay be possible, similar to the culture or religion overlays which are available in the Globe view?

 

[thadian]

what happens about 2 civs in the similar region? What if i play as the Sumerians - a friend the babylonions, another friend the turks?

 

[onedreamer]

I didn't understand the question, but Sumeria is not a RFC civ.

 

[Barak]

Rhye is there a chance that in future versions of this mod that we may get a chance to play with the BTS civs that RFC forgot? Like the Byz, HRE, Native American, Sumeria?

 

[Rhye]

Not in my plans for now. Possible "special versions", of regular RFC too, are something I'll possibly do when the patching is COMPLETELY over, as just a way to renew your interest.

 

[mushyman]

Looking very cool Rhye