[R&F] Small things you have noticed on playing

Temple of Artemis really isn't popular, so could easily be a wonder you chase for yourself, especially since placing matters, and AI never would place it on the right place.
 
I'm not sure oil is very healthy for polders

Spoiler :
ARo3x9b.jpg
I don't have a screen grab, but it can also mess up a nice golf course. And if it's the only oil on your continent, that's just fine.

Temple of Artemis really isn't popular, so could easily be a wonder you chase for yourself, especially since placing matters, and AI never would place it on the right place.
Yep. Also, if you need the event points as you near the end of an era, it is sometimes around pretty late, in which case it can be a quick build.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Early wars means no alliances.. ever.

I did get an alliance with Macedon in my Mongol game. But of course Macedon is the exception, not the rule.

I don't have a screen grab, but it can also mess up a nice golf course. And if it's the only oil on your continent, that's just fine.

Luckily I have a ton of oil on my Archipelago map, even one land oil. It's actually a nice production bonus for my polder as you can see in the screenshot.
 
After a few test games I am now certain AI's inclination to conquering city states has been changed from likely to certainly. I've observed AI build only holy sites - put 4 envoys and amani into a religious city state and then conquer it.
 
After a few test games I am now certain AI's inclination to conquering city states has been changed from likely to certainly. I've observed AI build only holy sites - put 4 envoys and amani into a religious city state and then conquer it.
And I've seen this backfiring on the AI very badly - he conquered one CS, but the second one almost conquered him instead :) (The CS destroyed two of his cities and I came in to help in order to destroy his capital without warmonger penalties, but the CS refused to do it, just kept standing with horses around his 0-health city :) )
 
And I've seen this backfiring on the AI very badly - he conquered one CS, but the second one almost conquered him instead :) (The CS destroyed two of his cities and I came in to help in order to destroy his capital without warmonger penalties, but the CS refused to do it, just kept standing with horses around his 0-health city :) )
Yeah, CS can't take a capital because it creates a paradox.
 
I've got to stop reading this thread. I've been enjoying my first game and to see all these unresolved defects is harshing the buzz.
 
After a few test games I am now certain AI's inclination to conquering city states has been changed from likely to certainly. I've observed AI build only holy sites - put 4 envoys and amani into a religious city state and then conquer it.
Yeah, I've had a few games where I tired to maximize city states benefits, and so far it feels to me like this aspect has been quite nerfed, as at the end of the ancient age probably 1/3 of them will have been conquered, and almost all of them by the end of the classical age. Only safe investment is in city states that are nested inside your territory, as AIs will just conquer everything else. The suzerainship bonuses become very constraining to use, as usually you'll have to fight a few war to just ensure their survival.
You'll probably have meaningful (peaceful) interaction with only one city state in most games.
Combined with the 3 envoy bonuses requiring buildings, City states are now quite useless. Their only purpose is very early game immediate bonus for first to encounter, the rest is meaningless unless you're going on the war path early on and stay there. Even if you liberate, you'll only ever get 3 envoys back, so not worth more investment in most situations.

I guess they can provide a niche bonus if you find an isolated one later on, but they really lost a lot of their appeal. Papal primacy is quite useless now, and I guess SV through globalization is hit quite hard by this too (though this one was always a bit luck dependent I think, regarding first meets and game start).
 
Last edited:
I've made 8000g in one era liberating city states and then having an emergency called when the city state is taken again. They have no defenses after liberating and can be taken with a single knight at least in the industrial era.

I'm also pretty sure you get a huge reduction in warmongering penalty for liberating a city state in the middle of a regular war campaign. So think of them as free gold and warmonger reduction. If you really want to use them for their bonus you have to protect them.
 
Temple of Artemis really isn't popular, so could easily be a wonder you chase for yourself, especially since placing matters, and AI never would place it on the right place.

Nubia built it in my most recent game.

She was unlucky enough to start next to me in my first game with the Mongols. Also I'm starting to think Mongols are kinda powerful, their early horse rush is nastier than usual.
 
There has been thematic criticism over how random continental boundaries are...and maybe that has been taken on board - at least if this divide is anything to go by. There are other continental boundaries in my game that don't have mountain ranges near; but maybe where there is a decent mountain range, that has been factored in. :thumbsup:

Spoiler :

20180215035612_1.jpg

 
I keep getting a message that I lost suzerain of Geneva, but every time I check, I'm still at 8 envoys and the Suzerain. It's some weird thing going on with foreign Amanis. Even with their governor, I still have enough to be Suzerain, at least according to the city-state screen. I'm getting this message every turn now.
 
They really need to tone down the AI aggression of city states...I can understand they attacking a bordering CS to get more space, but in my most recent game Scythia went through my cities to go attack a CS on the opposite side of the landmass lol
 
Playing as Shaka, denounced by Gilgamesh. Reason stated is.... You are the same sex. Not sure if this is meant to be Alpha-male posturing, Gilgamesh is threatened by Shaka's masculinity or....Gilgamesh is struggling with his feelings for Shaka and is resorting to gay panic to deal with them.
 
Playing as Shaka, denounced by Gilgamesh. Reason stated is.... You are the same sex. Not sure if this is meant to be Alpha-male posturing, Gilgamesh is threatened by Shaka's masculinity or....Gilgamesh is struggling with his feelings for Shaka and is resorting to gay panic to deal with them.

Gilgabro is predisposed to having the Flirtatious hidden agenda. Therefore, he likes ladies and dislikes men.
 
I still like his regular agenda. "He likes people he likes." Yeah that makes sense, I guess.

To be fair, I've been able to declare friendship with Gilgamesh on the same turn we met. He's a bit unusual in that regard.
 
To be fair, I've been able to declare friendship with Gilgamesh on the same turn we met. He's a bit unusual in that regard.

That works almost every time with him.
 
In case it hasn’t benen mentioned yet, getting the circumnavigation era score is indeed possible on non-wrapping maps, and it can be obtained by gaining visibility from a military alliance.
 
Back
Top Bottom