1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Rhye's of Europe Civ Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall: Europe' started by Squirrelloid, Nov 8, 2007.

  1. st.lucifer

    st.lucifer King

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    799
    Location:
    the unfortunate land of texas
    There are some universals, and we should strive to use those wherever possible - but there are some colonies that were named after people, and we can't rewrite history to make it universal. It would be an interesting flavor touch if the colony was renamed in the language of the civ that built it, (i.e. if the Dutch built Quebec, it would be named Neeu Amsterdam *I recognize that these were different locations, but they would have both been fur trading colonies*), but I'm not sure how difficult that is to code.

    My compromise suggestion is to use regions named after people rather than distinct settlements - i.e. Virginia rather than Jamestown. Virginia in Dutch is still Virginie, right?


    Actually, I really like this idea. I'm sorry that I misunderstood it before; this seems like a good solution. Anyone else have an opinion on the conquests?
     
  2. 3Miro

    3Miro Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Knoxville USA
    Change in colony names would b hard to code at this time. It is for now out of discussion. Just pick one name for each colony, that name should be appropriate and I like st lucifer's approach on generality.
     
  3. jessiecat

    jessiecat Divine Monarch

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    Cornwall, somewhere near England
    I'm not really that fussy about what name we use for a colony. My greater concern when I commented on Cornelios list (which I mostly agree with) is we choose the right colony for each resource in the period before 1800. For example, that coffee mainly came from Ethiopia and Arabia but not from South America until very much later. Or that sugar came mostly from Cuba, Brazil and the Caribbean and much less so from the East Indies. Though I also agree with st. lucifer that names should be general and location-based rather than on peoples names. Whatever is chosen is fine with me as long it has some historical accuracy.
     
  4. 3Miro

    3Miro Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Knoxville USA
    I think I fixed the crash bug, it was associated with the AI for building Inquisitors. It appeared later in the game since the Inquisitors only appear after Divine Right. I also completely removed Forest Fire, those were unbearable even after I decreased the frequency of the event. Will post the next version soon.
     
  5. Algeroth

    Algeroth 8 and 1/2

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,466
    Location:
    Прага
    Oh, it seems that i cancelled. my comments on the UP/UVH/so on instated of sending them and that's why no-one responded to them. Oh, well...

    And regarding the conquests why not do it like it was in EE III? Make them colonial projects requiring appropriate number of barracks.
     
  6. 3Miro

    3Miro Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Knoxville USA
    Next version is up, please report bugs and other stuff.

    In reporting bugs it helps if you can: provide a savegame one or two turns before the crash, and the file My Games/BtS/Logs/PythonErr.log (if not empty)

    It helps me find the problem.
     
  7. Cornelio

    Cornelio Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    32
    Location:
    Nederland
    Perfect :)

    1 more thing I guess I do not understand. Does a "Far Eastern Treaty Port" not count as a colony but as a "national"? It thought there were Global colonies (World Wonders) and National colonies (National Wonders).
     
  8. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    well, even completing a national wonder is a quest... so we have to see how actually is this quest in practice.
     
  9. jessiecat

    jessiecat Divine Monarch

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    Cornwall, somewhere near England
    Just tried a test game as Cordoba and played until 1203AD. I used Worldbuilder to add an Islamic missionary so they could start with a religion. Also 2 workers and 2 Berber cavalry for exploring. A couple of observations.
    1. It takes 65 turns to research Feudalism which I think they should have at the start.
    They need it to change civics. Same with Civil Service.
    2. Its very hard to generate wealth without beelining to Courthouses and Markets ASAP,
    before building any new cities. I ended up with 7 cities by the end but money always runs
    out with your units on strike no matter what you do..
    3. Stability is a big issue for everybody except the Byzantines. I survived as
    Cordoba but got fairly unstable at the end.
    4. Everybody else just collapses very early, even the Arabs and Bulgarians who barely
    survive until 1000AD. And Portugal still becomes Cordoba's vassal on the first turn.
    5. The Byzantines are incredibly powerful. The no-collapse UP gives them an enormous
    advantage. And they are very aggressive in attacking their neighbours. What I can't
    understand is where they get the money to build all those units and still be miles ahead
    in technology.
    Here are the final screenshots.
     
  10. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    Honestly, I can't believe you gave that UP to Byzantium. Apart the strategic considerations on such a UP, I really think Byzantium is one of the least appropriate candidates historically for this UP. The Byzantine Empire resurrected a bunch of times from the dust, but this also means that it definitely "collapsed" an equal amount of times, plus a final and definitive one which is at half the timeframe of the mod. This considered, I wonder why Byzantium has been made such a stable Empire in the mod. I think the UP, if connected to stability, should have regarded its ability to recover from collapse, but not prevent it alltogether.
     
  11. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    Civ colors:
    I find most colors not suitable to their civs. Are they placeholders or... ?
     
  12. 3Miro

    3Miro Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Knoxville USA
    Good points:

    Tech cost has not been decided yet. Also unique tech rate, unit building cost and so on has not been decided upon yet.

    Markets are available from the start (with Map Making), however, it takes time to build without the whip.

    What does the stability screen shows. Is it complaining about cities/economy/expansion... Some of those are modifiable. Also Byzantines should have very poor stability and cities outside the core do flip away, but the core remains intact.

    The power of the Byzantines come from the fact that hey start with a lot of cities and have a lot of buildings in them. They can run a fair amount of merchants as well as some scientists from turn 1. Then they get feudalism quickly and upgrade all their defenses to Longbowman. They can usually do that before the Arabian spawn, leaving both the Arabian and Bulgarian horseman with 6 vs 8 odds (not counting the city defense bonuses that Longbowmans get). Things would have to be reconsidered from that respect. Also the naturally strong Byzantine penalties are not implemented yet.

    @onedreamer: When did the Byzantine Empire collapse? So long as they held Constantinople they were alive and in the game. Byzantines collapses for a short period of time only after the Crusaders conquered the city. That is reflected in the UP, if the Byzantines loose Constantinople they loose the UP and almost instantly collapse.
     
  13. jessiecat

    jessiecat Divine Monarch

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    Cornwall, somewhere near England
    I've just tried another game as Burgundy. See what I mean about stability? I've collapsed in one turn from 927 to 930. As you can see, civics and cities are fine. But economy, expansion and foriegn are poor even though I have just built 2 more cities and my foriegn relations are good. I've included the saved games. Maybe you can spot the problem.
     
  14. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    - Byzantium didn't collapse in the RFC term but did collapse in a less strict term more than once. Let's put it this way: its history doesn't suggest more stability than most other civs in the mod, but rather its ability to recover from instability. By your own statement, the Byzantine Empire "resurrected" even after loosing Constantinopolis, so again the UP is not historically appropriate.
    - Most civs will very likely collapse if they loose the capital. I really wouldn't mention this as a sort of counterbalance to the power...
     
  15. sedna17

    sedna17 Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,091
    On stability:

    I recommend we port the RFC-RAND style Stability screen into RFC Europe. It's very helpful for people to be able to see numbers when we're trying to figure out if things are working as we intend.

    The current stability settings are mostly un-tweaked and appropriate for normal RFC. Our map is substantially bigger (more good/colonizable land area), and so I think we'll have to change the stability penalties for having more cities. That seems to be one of the problems.

    Civ IV generally punishes early rapid expansion with economic penalties. RFC overcomes this on a case-by-case basis for big empires. We will have to do the same.

    On Byzantium:

    3Miro is correct that we haven't yet given Byzantium the massive penalties to research/etc. that we plan to give, nor have we given the later civs appropriate starting units/techs. Thus it is not surprising that Byzantium is still a superpower. Let's finish building the basic structure before worrying about changing things. There was quite a bit of agreement about the Byzantine UP at the time. It may need to be tweaked, of course.

    I have been considering moving longbows to a later technology, and perhaps weakening them a point. Currently they are present for so many years that it's hard to have them be a reasonably balanced unit over that whole stretch. We could compensate by making normal archers a little stronger. Currently they're a little useless.

    Overall, I'd like to have archers be less dominant as city defenders. I only worry about the balance effect this will have and that it will be confusing to new players.
     
  16. sedna17

    sedna17 Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,091
    Oh, and I just wanted to thank 3Miro for his fantastic work on the code. He's added a LOT of really useful comments to the python code which make it a lot easier to figure out how to change things. If people want to see what we mean when we talk about tweaking individual civs, take a look at Assets/Python/RFCEBalance.py for the variety of knobs we have available to make things work out the way we want.

    I didn't run the quantitative tests he asked for (bad me) on speed, but getting to the later starts certainly seems much faster thanks to the porting of UPs into C.
     
  17. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    What kind of reasoning is this ? If Humanity had been thinking like this, we would be discussing all this stuff in a cavern rubbing our hands in the cold Winter.

    Btw, it seems to me that the idea was just taken by the thread on adding a Byzantine Civ in RFC by Jnavy, without much further discussion or thought about it.

    Anyways, mine were just comments, go on with your mod as you wish... I just remembered why I quit discussing about it some time ago.
     
  18. sedna17

    sedna17 Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,091
    Hey onedreamer,

    I'm sorry. My comment was too dismissive of your opinion. We do struggle with the problem of attempting to incorporate everyone's opinion and attempting to get things decided and coded and then ignored for a while so that we can go on to the next area. It may be particularly frustrating to some of our idea contributors to see what the coders actually implement.*

    Our goal is to get to the point where the mod is playable. At that point, we will continue to change things around in order to obtain a really fun and historically interesting mod. You may well be absolutely correct that the UP we've given the Byzantines at this point makes them behave ahistorically. I maintain that we can't really know this yet until more progress is made. I hope we can revisit the decision "later".

    If this approach is not too frustrating for you, I hope you will stick around. We really do welcome all opinions and contributions.

    *Will jessiecat forgive me when he realizes that I didn't give Cordoba their Soria in the current version because I couldn't get that building model working properly?
     
  19. onedreamer

    onedreamer Dragon

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,580
    Location:
    Torino - Italia
    ok, sorry about that. But don't mess with Cordoba or Jessicat will eat you ;)
     
  20. 3Miro

    3Miro Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Knoxville USA
    As far as i remember, I proposed the Byzantine UP and yes I followed the discussions on the RFC Byzantine tread. You can go back on the tread and read the discussion, (which unfortunately may take you a while, due to the size of the tread). The agreement came from everyone who was actively posting at the time.

    Byzantines in RFCE do become unstable and cities do declare independence. The UP gives them the power that as long as they keep Constantinople the Empire would not collapse and the core (Greece) would remain loyal (would not declare independence). I don't see how that contradicts your view of "recover from instability". The only effects from stability in the game are secession and civil war.
     

Share This Page