RifE 1.20 Ideas, Requests, and Feedback

[Oranos]

Well, +4 if you count that one hero from DIAL.

I don't think the lore specifically mentions Chalid being at a council meeting though, so it would be fairly easy to rectify that. It would also make him more of the Empyrean Hero whereas the Patriarch becomes the Overcouncil hero. Alternatively, we could make it so that whichever is built first gains the Councilor status and the +1 vote. Just food for thought, really.

Seems logical sir.

 

[Ilyes]

The only one I really want to use it for is FoL, honestly, as like I said, needs to be useful for all FoL civs. Which are: Elves, Doviello, Bezeri. So standard terrain, tundra, and ocean. Quite diverse.

Except those are the civs that gain the most synergy with FoL, but not its only users. How about the desert-dwelling Malakim?

Don't know if its possible, but consider a (major?) modification in FoL working: every disciple unit gets a minor promotion, mainly useless, based on the building city's terrain : desert, marsh, tundra, normal, coastal. When upgraded to Patriarch, the promotion blooms into full bonuses et cetera.

Or, at least, include desert into the list of possible terrains for the avatar.

 

[Valkrionn]

Except those are the civs that gain the most synergy with FoL, but not its only users. How about the desert-dwelling Malakim?

Don't know if its possible, but consider a (major?) modification in FoL working: every disciple unit gets a minor promotion, mainly useless, based on the building city's terrain : desert, marsh, tundra, normal, coastal. When upgraded to Patriarch, the promotion blooms into full bonuses et cetera.

Or, at least, include desert into the list of possible terrains for the avatar.

All standard terrains/features (so excluding Haunted Lands, Wasteland, and Hell Terrain) would be in the list of effects.

Desert would likely have something to do with dunes, unless on Scrub.

 

[Ilyes]

It's standard art would be that of a treeant... But it would change if in jungle/coast.

And this is how it will appear while in desert.

Spoiler :

Why a treant? Wouldn't an animal be better?

 

[Valkrionn]

And this is how it will appear while in desert.

Spoiler :

Why a treant? Wouldn't an animal be better?

Treeants are a better representation of a nature spirit IMO. Won't necessarily be one everywhere, however.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Well if you truly want a nature spirit linked with the desert would it not be more logical to go with some sort of sand spirit? Something akin to the Illian blizzard that can turn opposing lands into desert or something?

 

[Valkrionn]

Well if you truly want a nature spirit linked with the desert would it not be more logical to go with some sort of sand spirit? Something akin to the Illian blizzard that can turn opposing lands into desert or something?

Like I said a few posts up, in desert it would likely be something to do with dunes. Unless on Scrub or Oases, in which case the dominant form would come from them... Feature will always be dominant.

 

[joemag]

Optional event choices were discussed for the D'tesh in another thread, so I thought that the Mechanos may need some options for events where the only good/non-bad outcomes require a specific mana type.

 

[Oranos]

Optional event choices were discussed for the D'tesh in another thread, so I thought that the Mechanos may need some options for events where the only good/non-bad outcomes require a specific mana type.

I've been thinking the same thing for a while. The Mechanos have made up for their lack of magic with advanced medicine etc., so plagues and hauntings should be less effective.

 

[Mufus]

While there are a few small advantages to being "Neutral" as opposed to "Good" or "Evil" there are some severe balance problems with random events, especially in the starting period of the game.

Why? Both Good and Evil leaders get random events where for a small amount of gold they can get a Great Prophet (or a sizeable boost to research). Neutral leaders don't get this and so are at a severe disadvantage from both the shortage of Great Prophets or the boost to research.

Also, why does RiFE stick to the daft D&D'ism where only "neutrals" can be Druids? You can be a good or an evil person and still like to tend the garden! Neutrals would obviously need some form of paladin, etc replacement but it shouldn't be a druid (which should really be available to anybody who wants to tidy up their garden).

 

[PPQ_Purple]

tidy up their garden?

Druids are all about being one with nature and natures balance as opposed to paladins and those demon things that only want to burn each other. Druids fit neutral quite well IMHO.

This said, any word on when we can get the next version? I am tired of the game crashing on me and animals destroying half the civs before turn 50.

 

[Mufus]

tidy up their garden?

Druids are all about being one with nature and natures balance as opposed to paladins and those demon things that only want to burn each other. Druids fit neutral quite well IMHO.

But that's the D&D simplistic way of looking at it. For example, the evil elves have no more interest than the good or the neutral elves in turning the world into terrain hell and setting fire to everything. They may be cruel, heartless and evil but they like their trees and lands pristine.

This said, any word on when we can get the next version? I am tired of the game crashing on me and animals destroying half the civs before turn 50.

Turn on "timid animals" in the latest patch. That prevents the str 24 tigers wiping out civilizations...

 

[Valkrionn]

While there are a few small advantages to being "Neutral" as opposed to "Good" or "Evil" there are some severe balance problems with random events, especially in the starting period of the game.

Why? Both Good and Evil leaders get random events where for a small amount of gold they can get a Great Prophet (or a sizeable boost to research). Neutral leaders don't get this and so are at a severe disadvantage from both the shortage of Great Prophets or the boost to research.

Also, why does RiFE stick to the daft D&D'ism where only "neutrals" can be Druids? You can be a good or an evil person and still like to tend the garden! Neutrals would obviously need some form of paladin, etc replacement but it shouldn't be a druid (which should really be available to anybody who wants to tidy up their garden).

Druids are neutral because they represent the sphere of Nature, which is ALSO neutral. In the lore, heavy use of any one sphere will make you represent that sphere more and more... It's why Evil magic is (in the lore, at least) typically avoided by the Amurites.

tidy up their garden?

Druids are all about being one with nature and natures balance as opposed to paladins and those demon things that only want to burn each other. Druids fit neutral quite well IMHO.

This said, any word on when we can get the next version? I am tired of the game crashing on me and animals destroying half the civs before turn 50.

No idea as yet. Depends on how fast I can work on things... Lots of changes left to do, but most of them are done at this point.

But that's the D&D simplistic way of looking at it. For example, the evil elves have no more interest than the good or the neutral elves in turning the world into terrain hell and setting fire to everything. They may be cruel, heartless and evil but they like their trees and lands pristine.

Turn on "timid animals" in the latest patch. That prevents the str 24 tigers wiping out civilizations...

Again, Druids are neutral because of the sphere they represent. You can actually expect MORE alignment-specific units, btw... The Law/Chaotic axis will be getting a few in 1.5.

 

[Torugu]

This has probably been answered before but since the forum search proved useless and it really bothers me I'll ask again: Why are the Kahdi going to be removed?

I have never played them, so I can't say that I know what I'm talking about but from what I've read in the civilopedia both their lore and their gameplay seemed pretty interesting... (Would have tried them out but I tend to choose all civs including my own randomly and I haven't got lucky yet.)

 

[Valkrionn]

This has probably been answered before but since the forum search proved useless and it really bothers me I'll ask again: Why are the Kahdi going to be removed?

I have never played them, so I can't say that I know what I'm talking about but from what I've read in the civilopedia both their lore and their gameplay seemed pretty interesting... (Would have tried them out but I tend to choose all civs including my own randomly and I haven't got lucky yet.)

The Kahdi are being removed because they are a bastardized hybrid of the Amurites and the Sheaim.

There simply isn't enough there to give all three civilizations a unique playstyle... The Kahdi step on the toes of both of the others.

They'll live on (sorta) as an Amurite-specific event. Think something along the lines of the Koun event.

 

[sylvain5477]

Would it be possible to make all climate-related functions visible through python (on plots) ?
I would like to make something relating to dynamic climate

 

[Valkrionn]

Would it be possible to make all climate-related functions visible through python (on plots) ?
I would like to make something relating to dynamic climate

I'm planning to expose the necessary tags for that, yes.

 

[Mufus]

No real idea how others play religions in RiFE, but I've found that they're mostly useful for their bonuses (mana and effects/special techs/units) rather than for a religion as such. Only on the very rare occasion have I've only bothered with restricting to a single religion and using the Theocracy Civic rather than just foisting as many religions and temples as possible in every city. Theocracy really doens't offer any real advantages compared to rushing to get the holy city of every religion possible.

Aside from any wider arguments about Theocracies vs more liberal regimes (in RL, this is a game after all), the real strength in a religion in RiFE is from owning the holy city and once this has been taken by an opponent there's often little real value in pursuing one religion over aiming to establish another. Apart from frustrating this really devalues religious influence and the prospects of religions factionism... so...

No idea if this is possible (classic get out phrase), but would it be possible to put in place a scheme where if you don't start the religion you can start a strong sect of it instead. With work this sect could eventually become the dominant factor in a religion and in effect sieze control of the "holy city" status (and any special bonuses this may bring). No real idea on the dynamics, but this would prevent one civ from starting every religion possible with no intention of keeping most of them. If they want to keep a holy city of a religion then they have to work on it. It would introduce a whole new dynamic and largely prevent holy-city hogging.

Expanding on the religious side and producing more religion specific (but not overpowered, possibly just averagely better than normal) UUs would be nice as well. It would mean more to having a religion and would mean that even if a civ doesn't have the holy city of a particular religion they could still get useful UUs out of it. Currently there's usually just one UU per religion and these can tend to be "used" quite quickly.

I love the changes in RiFE where AV and Order can be in the same city, but tend to cause trouble. More effects like this would be nice as well

 

[Valkrionn]

No real idea how others play religions in RiFE, but I've found that they're mostly useful for their bonuses (mana and effects/special techs/units) rather than for a religion as such. Only on the very rare occasion have I've only bothered with restricting to a single religion and using the Theocracy Civic rather than just foisting as many religions and temples as possible in every city. Theocracy really doens't offer any real advantages compared to rushing to get the holy city of every religion possible.

Aside from any wider arguments about Theocracies vs more liberal regimes (in RL, this is a game after all), the real strength in a religion in RiFE is from owning the holy city and once this has been taken by an opponent there's often little real value in pursuing one religion over aiming to establish another. Apart from frustrating this really devalues religious influence and the prospects of religions factionism... so...

I find Theocracy in RifE very useful. Bonuses to all Disciple units, ability to pump out disciples in return for pop, ability to fund a massive army of disciples...

Granted, it's better for the Scions than most other civs.

I also find religions useful for more than the holy city. I still want it (and will go to war for it), but typically I will go for a religion even if it's been founded.

No idea if this is possible (classic get out phrase), but would it be possible to put in place a scheme where if you don't start the religion you can start a strong sect of it instead. With work this sect could eventually become the dominant factor in a religion and in effect sieze control of the "holy city" status (and any special bonuses this may bring). No real idea on the dynamics, but this would prevent one civ from starting every religion possible with no intention of keeping most of them. If they want to keep a holy city of a religion then they have to work on it. It would introduce a whole new dynamic and largely prevent holy-city hogging.

Eventually I'd like to have something like that. Lots of work though, and we have enough mechanics planned for now; It will have to wait.

Expanding on the religious side and producing more religion specific (but not overpowered, possibly just averagely better than normal) UUs would be nice as well. It would mean more to having a religion and would mean that even if a civ doesn't have the holy city of a particular religion they could still get useful UUs out of it. Currently there's usually just one UU per religion and these can tend to be "used" quite quickly.

I love the changes in RiFE where AV and Order can be in the same city, but tend to cause trouble. More effects like this would be nice as well

Religions have 2 UU's, not one. As well as the entire priest line.

 

[Mufus]

I find Theocracy in RifE very useful. Bonuses to all Disciple units, ability to pump out disciples in return for pop, ability to fund a massive army of disciples...

What bonuses to all Disciple units (if I'm missing something here, the Civolapaedia really needs to be updated!

Ability to pump out disciples in return for pop? (I need to check Theocracy again sometime).

Religions have 2 UU's, not one. As well as the entire priest line.

Yep, I guess they do! Stand (sit) corrected there. Always feels like a lot less though as they're often a long way apart on the tech tree.