Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded

[Blasphemous]

Quick notes (and I'm paying for this in sleep time. ><)
It's not a good idea for Republic and Monarchy to be on the same branch even if it makes sense... In the past there was the religious branch for warring nations that want monarchies, and there was the academic branch for peaceful nations that want republics. This required a general choice of players, with the propoesed tech tree, they could just research and see what they need when the time comes - too simple.

Medieval tech tree should be set up so cannons are avialable before musketmen, as it was in history. (Cannons took a long time to be refined enough for simple hand rifles to be creates.)
Proposed Medieval tree may be problematic, the whole thing fuses into basically two big research paths with a couple different possible orders of research... I would elaborate if I had the time and power, but I'll leave that for tomorrow.

Industrial age has the same problem but a worse case of it... It needs to somehow be constructed so you have to choose between a few good end-goals, and not just between a few different paths to the same ones.

Modern seems good at a glance, I'll see if I ahve any complaints to add tomorrow.
Good night.

 

[Rhye]

What is Imperialism doing after Enlightenment...? Wouldn't that be tied to Naval Tactics?

With Imperialism I mean the end 19th century - belle epoque period.

RE Rome being 6 on the power scale, I see this as a good thing...

I don't see it as a good thing.
In this mod there are stronger civs and weaker civs, but inside certain bounds.
If they are too strong, there's no way they can be crippled later. When half of Europe is conquered the game is over: no one can stop them, and there's no fun.

I like this idea, but I still think the Romans should be powerful enough to rise to historical empire or something near it... And btw, why do they get the Ballista AND the War Wagon?

War Wagon is Persian

Just had a thought (as I'm reading through the thread)... Romans could have a different Warrior than usual, same as the rest stat-wise, but upgrading to Legion which replaces Spear and Sword at Iron Working (if you wanna keep Legions in Sword line, then give the romans a seperate Spearman that upgrades to Legion while the rest upgrade to Pikeman, if you wanna move it to Spear line then there's no problem.)

The problem is already solved, making them replace spearmen (and come later)

 

[Aeon221]

Im not a very good visualizer in this stuff, so I will leave it to you technophiles to fight this battle ;p

 

[Rhye]

Medieval tech tree should be set up so cannons are avialable before musketmen, as it was in history.

This seems better removing Chemistry

 

[Khift]

Also, Rhye, is there any chance you might move Espionage to back in the Ancient times? Spies have been around forever - even the Sun Tzu, written near 2000 BC, has an entire chapter on them. To say that they first appeared in the Industrial age is fairly arrogant, I'd think.

 

[Rhye]

I removed the tech. So basically I can assign the building to any tech I want.

 

[Aeon221]

C'mon. If you put spies in the ancient era, tell me youre gonna plop drafting there too.
At the very least, it belongs in the Middle Ages, during which time period it became essential, with mass hordes of conscripted soldiers backing up the well trained primary group.

 

[Asclepius]

My opinions:

- The Early Aircraft Carrier sounds like a good idea. Definitely a big difference between modern and WW1 carriers.

- The SAM Destroyer sounds redundant to me.

- The Cruise Missle Destroyer is brilliant, although personally I think Destroyers and Cruisers should naturally be able to hold one Cruise Missile and Battleships two.

- The Assault Ship sounds great.

- The Modern Infantry sounds redundant with the TOW Infantry, although I guess it might not be. Maybe Modern Infantry would take the stats of TOW Infantry, then we bump TOW down a little and make Guerillas upgrade to it?

- Of all the 1960's units you mentioned, the only ones I really cared for were the SP Artillery and Flak. The rest sound redundant.

Personally, though, I would like to see America's second UU be the B-52. It was a bad-ass crazy bomber, and is definitely UU material as opposed to the A-Bomb Rhye talks about. I'd also like to see the Ironclad scrapped and replaced with the Dreadnought, the ship that sparked the pre-WW1 naval arms race. It was a huge step in naval technology, completely outdating it's predecessors and giving all countries a hope to catch up and build a new navy.

I don't think Battleships should hold cruise missiles, they would become too powerful. The US only has a few real BB's left and they aren't used as missile platforms.

The Modern Infantry was supposed to be the default infantry unit in the modern era instead of the Mech Inf. I guess you could default to the TOW Inf but that is a different line and has defensive bombard which the infantry line does not. I quite like the fact that Civs can still build guerillas after you have taken all of their rubber and aluminium. Seems quite realistic. So I wouldn't want them to upgrade any more.

I don't think an upgrade to the tank is redundant simply because the stats between Tank and Modern Armour are so large. I also think Modern Armour should be more expensive to keep per turn.

In fact it might be good if some units are prohibitively expensive to keep. That way you could build them for short wars but would have to sell them in peace time because they are too expensive to maintain continuously.

I would definitely prefer something other than the A-Bomb as the second American UU. I'm not too sure about the B52 though. In game terms any nation rich enough to build lots of bombers should be able to have them. Definitely a nice idea though, especially if the range was large enough. America could strike targets far away without getting involved in a ground war. Sort of realistic!

I would go with the Ironclad/Dreadnought replacement - I never have liked the Ironclad graphic.

 

[Asclepius]

So what do you think of B-52 + something else?
Aegis cruiser or A-Bomb or marines.

If everyone likes the B52 idea I would go with that + a Marine unit.

 

[Asclepius]

Also, Rhye, is there any chance you might move Espionage to back in the Ancient times? Spies have been around forever - even the Sun Tzu, written near 2000 BC, has an entire chapter on them. To say that they first appeared in the Industrial age is fairly arrogant, I'd think.

Whatever you do, don't put invisible/spy ground units in the game. I found DyP to be almost unplayable because of the loop your computer sometimes goes into trying to calculate where they are. Waiting twenty minutes between turns on a 2 GHz 1GB RAM PC is pretty ridiculous. Units representing individual spies on a map of this size is also pretty stupid

 

[Rhye]

Whatever you do, don't put invisible/spy ground units in the game. I found DyP to be almost unplayable because of the loop your computer sometimes goes into trying to calculate where they are. Waiting twenty minutes between turns on a 2 GHz 1GB RAM PC is pretty ridiculous. Units representing individual spies on a map of this size is also pretty stupid

Don't worry, I won't do it

 

[Rhye]

If everyone likes the B52 idea I would go with that + a Marine unit.

I'd prefer B52 and AEGIS cruiser. But I'm not sure, I need more information on it (historical and about gameplay) before removing the unit from all civs.

I quite like the fact that Civs can still build guerillas after you have taken all of their rubber and aluminium. Seems quite realistic. So I wouldn't want them to upgrade any more.

I agree on this. Guerrilla warfare will be a tech postponed to early modern age, leaving early form of guerrilla to partisans.
TOW needs a different role, or need to be replaced with modern infantry.

I don't think an upgrade to the tank is redundant simply because the stats between Tank and Modern Armour are so large. I also think Modern Armour should be more expensive to keep per turn.

In fact it might be good if some units are prohibitively expensive to keep. That way you could build them for short wars but would have to sell them in peace time because they are too expensive to maintain continuously.

The tank upgrade is necessary. Right now only 3-4 civs have rubber and can build tanks. Standard modern ground warfare should be made by tanks. And leaving the very expensive modern armor to who can afford it.

I would go with the Ironclad/Dreadnought replacement - I never have liked the Ironclad graphic.

Tell me if the ironclad graphics isn't realistic, I'll replace it. But if this is the only problem, this is all I will do. I think that ironclads are much more important than dreadnoughts.

 

[Rhye]

C'mon. If you put spies in the ancient era, tell me youre gonna plop drafting there too.
At the very least, it belongs in the Middle Ages, during which time period it became essential, with mass hordes of conscripted soldiers backing up the well trained primary group.

urban militia can be drafted

 

[Metatr0n]

On the american UU

I would prefer to see a b52 to an f15. the B52 is probably the worlds most feared aircraft - the fact it has served the US for such a long time really shows its superiority.

I don't like the US marines as a UU - America has not been particularly successful in large scale warfare (what ever they might assert - not trying to upset anyone it is true) the marines have always suffered ill discipline, appaling friendly fire casulaties. And to be honest it is very hard to separate any success they have experienced from the tanks, planes etc that support them - they differ very little from anyone elses marine units really. I would prefer B52 and A-bomb.

For military powers it is easy to see dozens of UU's - for example England could have any of: man-o-war; welsh longbowmen; green coats (inveted modern warfare, reinvented camoflage, used weapons with replaceable parts, opperated in small stealth units); ghurkars (cheap and effective modern mercanaries); spitfire; commandos; SAS (arguably the worlds most elite and efective military outfit).

Incidentaly, why is replacement parts where it is in the tech tree? Replaceable parts was what allowed Britain to triumph in the napoleonic wars.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

Spanish frigates and Japanese destroyers use the Aegis radar fire-control system, but the system was designed by the Americans.

 

[Rhye]

I don't like the US marines as a UU - America has not been particularly successful in large scale warfare (what ever they might assert - not trying to upset anyone it is true) the marines have always suffered ill discipline, appaling friendly fire casulaties. And to be honest it is very hard to separate any success they have experienced from the tanks, planes etc that support them - they differ very little from anyone elses marine units really. I would prefer B52 and A-bomb.

I agree

For military powers it is easy to see dozens of UU's - for example England could have any of: man-o-war; welsh longbowmen; green coats (inveted modern warfare, reinvented camoflage, used weapons with replaceable parts, opperated in small stealth units); ghurkars (cheap and effective modern mercanaries); spitfire; commandos; SAS (arguably the worlds most elite and efective military outfit).

Same for France. Once again, I ask what to do: should I replace the problematic Grande Armée with some other units? I put the Grand Battery in the new BIQ, instead of Imperial guard or Voltigeur or Gallic swordsman. Do you agree?

Incidentaly, why is replacement parts where it is in the tech tree? Replaceable parts was what allowed Britain to triumph in the napoleonic wars.

I left it where it was. I don't know....where should it be?

 

[Asclepius]

Tell me if the ironclad graphics isn't realistic, I'll replace it. But if this is the only problem, this is all I will do. I think that ironclads are much more important than dreadnoughts.

The trouble is that the first "iron clads" had masts and prominent chimney stacks and the heavier armoured Dreadnoughts which replaced them looked more like a battleship, but also with masts. So, the little flat graphic with a turret doesn't really look like anything at all!

HMS Dreadnought was still an ironclad, it was just bigger and better and had far better guns and armour than anything before it, thereby rendering everything else obsolete.

Have a look at the image; on the left is HMS Dreadnought and the right is an earlier Ironclad HMS Agincourt.

 

[Metatr0n]

Yeah I'm not sure about Frances UU - I don'd think the grand armee will work, the game engine doesn't seem to like army units at all. I like the sound of the grand battery though.

On repaceable parts: this is a hard area, as that region of the tech tree seems wrong to me already. Like why is industrialisation after steam, when industrialisation came first and was initially water powered.

Replaceable parts were first used in weaponary by the British around 1805 - the baker rifle had all its parts interchangeable.

I don't really know what you should alter in the tech tree, or whether we should just accept these small tech tree perculiarities.

 

[Metatr0n]

The game graphic for ironclads is based on the American Civil War ironclads - like below.

Like the rifleman is based on the ACW Rifleman not the Napoleonic rifleman (that was not only superior but preceeded it by many decades).

 

[Asclepius]

The game graphic for ironclads is based on the American Civil War ironclads - like below.

Like the rifleman is based on the ACW Rifleman not the Napoleonic rifleman (that was not only superior but preceeded it by many decades).

That might explain things. If America was the only nation to build Ironclads like that then the Civ graphic should definitely be replaced as most major Europen nations and Japan built ships that looked like Dreadnought. The US also built Kearsage and Mississippi class Ironclads which also had masts and chimneys.