Stability feedback thread

[Leoreth]

Don't you get a message in the interface that announces the effect?

 

[Akbarthegreat]

Could you post a short guide on civic compatibility, and when they get outdated? I seem to have a problem with it in my China game.

Spoiler :

Republic, Representation, Capitalism, Free Market, Secularism, Standing Army in 1670 AD, Industrial Era.
I've had this since I was in the Renaissance Era since the 1500s.

 

[strijder20]

Don't you get a message in the interface that announces the effect?

Uh, a note on this: the game told me twice 'A minor crisis is imminent' (most likely economic) yet I had no announce on the effect. I might have lost some beakers while not noticing it though.

 

[Leoreth]

Every crisis effect should be announced when it takes place (at least some TXT_KEY ...). The exception are territorial crises which at least have the "City X has seceded" announcements.

 

[ales_]

So, this means that no crisis has occured?

 

[Leoreth]

Unless something went wrong, yes.

That a crisis is imminent doesn't mean that it actually have to occur.

 

[Leoreth]

A question that just came to me while reading the stability poll thread:

Should the difficulty level have an impact on the stability mechanic?

In the old system that was the case in some ways (for example the threshold for controlled tiles), in the current one it is not. I'm mainly thinking in terms of varying thresholds for the different stability levels.

 

[citis]

I think not. First of all, the stability mechanic should be the same from difficulty level to difficulty level. Secondly, there is always a hapiness bonus at viceroy, and a boost to rival attitude, so there is already an indirect stability bonus.
What you could do is adding messages in the viceroy level for the newbbies, i.e: "Settling a city here will cause a stability hit. Continue?" or something like "Make something about unhapiness for your cities, else you will decrease to unstable level."

 

[Chep]

I dont think a "Viceroy starts at solid, Monarch at stable, Emperor at shaky"-approach is useful.

However, I think it could be possible to give Viceroy-Players a permanent +5 stability bonus, while Monarch/Emperor are treated equally.
A more thorough help and dokumentation are really needed but will probably take a lot of time to implement, such a small bonus would help counter 1-2 mistakes while not making stability trivial at the lower difficulty level.

 

[Leoreth]

That's not what I meant. I meant that the threshold of your stability score before you lose one level of stability (and possibly experience a crisis) could be decreased for Viceroy (which is equivalent to a bonus in stability score except then it saves me the trouble of figuring out how to assign this bonus to a category).

 

[citis]

the the threshold of your stability score before you lose one level of stability (and possibly experience a crisis) could be decreased for Viceroy (which is equivalent to a bonus in stability score except then it saves me the trouble of figuring out how to assign this bonus to a category).

Don't you feel that it will change the stability mechanism?

 

[Leoreth]

It would make it easier/harder to remain stable, yes.

 

[citis]

It would make it easier/harder to remain stable, yes.

It applies already indirectly.

 

[Tratatushki]

Hi. I'm not very good at English, and therefore only partially read the topic. With the new system stability I always get the collapse of playing for expansionist civilization (Russia, England, France, Spain). Just comes a time when any study of technology leads to severe loss of stability. Construction of a wonder, or the birth of a great person does not lead to a raising of the level of stability. I tried to run the golden era, vassalize another civilization - positive results is also to no avail. How rapidly improve stability?! In the 18th century have always -15/-30 level, with a further collapse. Sorry 4 stupid question

 

[Leoreth]

You cannot really rapidly improve your stability anymore, and besides its side effects on economic growth, golden ages do not increase your stability, they only make you immune to stability checks.

If your main problem is expansion, you should try to keep the penalty there down. You can do so by building courthouses and jails, increasing your culture in these cities (until you're the majority), avoiding ahistorical tiles, and adopting civics that help with expansion (Totalitarianism and Warrior Code for conquests, Mercantilism for colonization).

 

[Tratatushki]

Yes, I build courts in every city and town have only 1-2 outside "historical" borders. The problem is that at some point I just can not learn \ steal technology (otherwise collapse)
Thanks for the answer. I will try not to ruin my empire.

 

[NKN]

Also, having compatible civics are really important.

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, I build courts in every city and town have only 1-2 outside "historical" borders. The problem is that at some point I just can not learn \ steal technology (otherwise collapse)
Thanks for the answer. I will try not to ruin my empire.

If you can upload a save (please state your current revision), I could give more specific advice or finetune the system better.

 

[Tratatushki]

Usually, i choose: dynasticism+absolutism+agrarianism+guilds+organize religion+standing army (before the opening of communism) I think that combination are good.2 Or not?)

 

[Leoreth]

All of these lose their synergy effects or become outdated after the medieval era.