Rome

[Stalker0]

+40% Bonus city damage is no joke though compared to 2CS Bonus, Cover 1, and Pilum.

I don't necessarily disagree here, but we should remember that with the horseman nerf, the legion is actually incredibly tough for its era. Throw a cover II on that bad boy and it stands up against any other unit quite handily. The legion is a very solid UU, its just not the most amazing thing ever.

 

[pineappledan]

I am aware that I’m being a bit dramatic, yes, but I wouldn’t say anything I’ve said is hyperbole.

When is a civ a different civ? Probably when it gets a new, large, global effect. If you get something like 2 extra trade routes, or 5XP for every GWW, is that not a big enough, global effect to make you play differently? Are you still playing the same civ? So, what was once a sort of secret add-on bonus feature for Rome could end up defining a playthrough, if you snag the right component.

These are fringe cases in base VP, yes, but they are fringe cases which can affect your game is a very real way. They also cease to be fringe cases with 4UC. 11 of the 43 base civs have UNWs there. For my part, 3 of the 4 custom civs I have made compatibility patches for VP have UNWs. So, there’s also the matter of future-proofing, so that Rome doesn’t get out of hand if people start playing with modmods.

Re Legions, I just have terrible luck with my starts with Rome; I never get much iron. The last 3 games, I had to fight my way through 2 civs before I could get more than 2 iron. By that time, I was building legions and upgrading them to longswords

 

[Minh Le]

Legions are amazing. In my current game they stand up to berserker nicely. I almost alway play strategic balance so 6 legions are guaranteed.

 

[Stalker0]

Re Legions, I just have terrible luck with my starts with Rome; I never get much iron. The last 3 games, I had to fight my way through 2 civs before I could get more than 2 iron. By that time, I was building legions and upgrading them to longswords

Hehe was doing a test of Rome and had the same problem. But that said, at some point strategic balance was set as the default standard that G balances by (I believe). So we can't blame the balance if we aren't using the standard settings.

 

[Der_Zorn_gottes]

I must say that I don't like the pilum promotion. Not that it's not good, quite the opposite, but there is something else that irks me:
But the Legion and the Impi represent infantry that throws javelins before charging into melee. I would like to see both having the same ingame mechanic to represent that (maybe to legion with a bit lower power, but the same "additional damage before combat"). It would add a nice piece of consistancy.
Furthermore, the awesome pilum mechanic could be given (at another name) to a ranged unit - there are quite a few boring ones which could benefit from that.

 

[Minh Le]

I must say that I don't like the pilum promotion. Not that it's not good, quite the opposite, but there is something else that irks me:
But the Legion and the Impi represent infantry that throws javelins before charging into melee. I would like to see both having the same ingame mechanic to represent that (maybe to legion with a bit lower power, but the same "additional damage before combat"). It would add a nice pease of consistancy.
Furthermore, the awesome pilum mechanic could be given (at another name) to a ranged unit - there are quite a few boring ones which could benefit from that.

I totally agree, it would fit the theme Legion more.

 

[Stalker0]

But the Legion and the Impi represent infantry that throws javelins before charging into melee. I would like to see both having the same ingame mechanic to represent that (maybe to legion with a bit lower power, but the same "additional damage before combat"). It would add a nice piece of consistancy.

Why do we need consistency, one of the major reasons to change Rome in the first place was to make it more distinctive compared to other civs. The pillum does exactly as you describe, its a way to deal damage before combat (representing ranged attacks). Its strong and efficient. I don't see any reason to change it.

I will say one thing in my recent playthrough with Rome is just how strong the Mayan Atlatist really is. I thought my Cover II legions would wipe the floor with them, but the Atlatist is holding up surprisingly well.

 

[pineappledan]

Complete non-starter anyways. The ranged attack/melee attack ability is tied to the Impi unit model. Pilum is unique, and I like that it is unique, and I like that it makes obvious synergy with their ability to build forts.

 

[Gazebo]

Plus the pilum is used differently in Roman legionnary combat than the Zulu assegai. They have different roles.

G

 

[pineappledan]

One last point on this: Civs with UNW civs being stealable means that capital sniping gets you 100% of the benefit. Capturing 1 city gives you the same effect as if you had captured all their cities, and built their UB in all your original cities too. People were talking about the variance between capturing cities with/without UBs in older patches causing spikes for Rome. Capturing UNWs just makes it worse, because you’re either capturing a capital and getting ALL the building, or you’re capturing a satellite city, and getting NONE of the building.

To me arguing about reducing variance sounds like an argument for Rome to not capture UBs at all; it is not an argument to retain UNWs, because UNWs make that situation worse

 

[tu_79]

A civ whose strength depends on the strength of its neighbours seems pretty unique to me. If Rome overperforms, I'd rather have a nerf in other parts of its uniques.

 

[Gazebo]

One last point on this: Civs with UNW civs being stealable means that capital sniping gets you 100% of the benefit. Capturing 1 city gives you the same effect as if you had captured all their cities, and built their UB in all your original cities too. People were talking about the variance between capturing cities with/without UBs in older patches causing spikes for Rome. Capturing UNWs just makes it worse, because you’re either capturing a capital and getting ALL the building, or you’re capturing a satellite city, and getting NONE of the building.

To me arguing about reducing variance sounds like an argument for Rome to not capture UBs at all; it is not an argument to retain UNWs.l, because UNWs make that situation worse

National wonders aren’t required to be built in the capital.

 

[pineappledan]

National wonders aren’t required to be built in the capital.

pettifogging. It would be more respectful if you would reply concerning the actual content of my post, rather than minor factual errors.

I’m aware NWs aren’t locked to the capital, but that’s where they are built more than 90% of the time, so pointing this out is needlessly pedantic.

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I like Rome as it is now.

 

[Gazebo]

pettifogging. It would be more respectful if you would reply concerning the actual content of my post, rather than minor factual errors.

I’m aware NWs aren’t locked to the capital, but that’s where they are built more than 90% of the time, so it’s pointing this out is needlessly pedantic.

No fog. No fog. You’re the fog.

I guess I don’t see the issue. Unless you have spies you won’t know where a national wonder was constructed, or even if they’ve constructed x national wonder. So it isn’t as easy as wonder sniping is now.

G

 

[pineappledan]

I guess I don’t see the issue. Unless you have spies you won’t know where a national wonder was constructed, or even if they’ve constructed x national wonder. So it isn’t as easy as wonder sniping is now.

The big difference I guess is that it’s a form of wonder sniping that only Rome can do, and the wonders in question are all 2-3 times more powerful than an equivalent world wonder.

Assyria’s library is like a triple Brandenburg, but it’s XP is given globally and it boosts libraries instead of giving a ton of military supply.

Cothon is like a double-colossus that also boosts lighthouses and harbours.

It just... *ugh*, I hate this so much. In the 2 of every 100 games you play where Caesar can manage to get one of these, this kind of thing would make games trivial for him. I guess I’m in the minority though, so i’ll Just modify my local install and shut up now

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

You can manually select civs (and not choose Assyria/Carthage). You can choose which civs cannot be randomly selected (via advanced setup mod). If you have Assyria or Carthage in the game, you can avoid capturing their capitals, and even if you do, you can later, after you have vassalized them, return them.

So I don't think that's an issue.

 

[pineappledan]

You can manually select civs (and not choose Assyria/Carthage). You can choose which civs cannot be randomly selected (via advanced setup mod). If you have Assyria or Carthage in the game, you can avoid capturing their capitals, and even if you do, you can later, after you have vassalized them, return them.

If I block Rome from being randomly selected as an AI, and I don't want to play Rome, that's not meaningfully different from me just deleting the civ entirely.

I would rather just play with a Rome that doesn't have the ability to steal things like this, than have to manually set the civs I'm playing against every game, and ensure I keep AI Rome separated from Carthage/Assyria/America at all times. It keeps the mystery in the exploration phase if I don't know what civs I'm playing against.

UPDATE Traits SET KeepConqueredBuildings = '0' WHERE Type = 'TRAIT_CAPITAL_BUILDINGS_CHEAPER';
UPDATE Traits SET CapitalBuildingModifier = '20' WHERE Type = 'TRAIT_CAPITAL_BUILDINGS_CHEAPER';

Easy peasy

Edit: As a side note, @Gazebo, I noticed that the old text in vanillaleaderchanges.sql suggests that the old Flavian colosseum gave instant yields on city conquest. I haven’t come across that table while looking through the mod before. Does a Building_YieldsOnCityCapture table still exist?

 

[tu_79]

If I block Rome from being randomly selected as an AI, and I don't want to play Rome, that's not meaningfully different from me just deleting the civ entirely.

I would rather just play with a Rome that doesn't have the ability to steal things like this, than have to manually set the civs I'm playing against every game, and ensure I keep AI Rome separated from Carthage/Assyria/America at all times. It keeps the mystery in the exploration phase if I don't know what civs I'm playing against.

UPDATE Traits SET KeepConqueredBuildings = '0' WHERE Type = 'TRAIT_CAPITAL_BUILDINGS_CHEAPER';
UPDATE Traits SET CapitalBuildingModifier = '20' WHERE Type = 'TRAIT_CAPITAL_BUILDINGS_CHEAPER';

Easy peasy

There are some anti-runaway mechanics around. If Rome gets that scary in a few games, it should be easier to make alliances against her.

 

[pineappledan]

There are some anti-runaway mechanics around. If Rome gets that scary in a few games, it should be easier to make alliances against her.

...what? So it doesn’t matter how unbalanced Rome might be, as long as the rubber-banding mechanics are good enough?