Stability Guide v1.12

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Swarbs]

I think he meant the issue should be addressed in more creative way rather than just modifying the UU/UP of the respective civs. That would made the game more interesting. He also meant that Mughals UP could have some change. That's what I get.

I think he meant that UPs should be something more obvious and positive, rather than something which sits in the background and only affects stability. It's also a bit less unique when so many civs have some variation on a stability theme - back in vanilla it's only Persia, IIRC, which has a stability UP, whereas now there seem to be four or five civs with one.

It also seems a bit less balanced (not the best word I admit) when for example the Turks get extra conscripts, the Prussians get free upgrades, but the Polish UP is avoiding a stability penalty which will max out at seven, for a civ which in my experience has never had any real stability issues.

Maybe now the stability engine is a bit more developed and has so many variables, each civ could get two UPs - one which is stability related and one of which is gameplay related? The stability related one wouldn't even need to be unique - for example the rule about core population counting double in expansion checks could just be made the UP for Portugal, Tibet, Netherlands and the other civs in that situation (or even triple for ones like Portugal and the Dutch who will control large populations with a small core).

 

[cudfather]

Kievan Rus in RFCE has a UP that gives each city +2 . Maybe that would work for Poland?

 

[NKN]

I think the expansion penalties threshold is too low. In the Modern Era, you can have a core population of 50 and a periphery of 350 without any penalties at all.

On the other hand, the razing penalties are too strong; razing five cities dooms your empire.

Look at it this way: Razing one size-1 city is worse than controlling an empire eight times your core in the late game, and razing three cities is worse than controlling the entire world at any time, by any civ. Something seems wrong here...

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

When you raze a city, think of it as the genocide of entire section of a country. With a huge periphery of population outside your core, it makes sense that people would generally be peachy about it; especially when you think about colonial empires.

No, although at first something seems wrong, in the end I think it's good.

 

[Leoreth]

I agree though that controlling large empires has become too easy. I'll revisit the modifiers soon.

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Noooo

 

[Daedwartin]

So economic isolation. This value clearly is not working in a intuitive manner. How doI end up being considered economically isolated when I am the one who am exporting the most of any nation on earth? Playing Japan, though i do mention all cities but Manira are exporting to China. Manira goes between trading with Tamil and China, depending on if contact with Tamil is currently existing.(i can see china at all times, but Tamil i lose contact every so often due to LOS). I have the SVN you last posted on the 16th.

 

[Leoreth]

I'll look into it.

 

[calad]

I like this quide very much.

 

[Leoreth]

Then it was worth the time!

Some corrections for the recent commit:
- the core population multiplier is now [current era]+1 instead of [current era]+2
- the lower bound for the periphery population modifer is -1 instead of -2 now

 

[Leoreth]

Minor correction to reflect the recent commit:
- AI civilizations are immune to collapses triggered by a declaration of war from a human player

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

That definitely sounds more reasonable.

 

[cudfather]

How about preventing the AIs from collapsing on a trade with the human?

 

[Leoreth]

Don't ... trade ... with them?

 

[ezzlar]

Trading. Is that because they acquire a technology that prompts a stability check? Then they were having it coming their way anyway...

 

[baseballpie]

Maybe this new knowledge prompted revolutionaries to rise up in its name? Which seems realistic when it is Liberalism, but silly when it is Aesthetics.

 

[Leoreth]

Trading. Is that because they acquire a technology that prompts a stability check? Then they were having it coming their way anyway...

Exactly.

 

[Raroyo]

Are there penalties for giving a city away (trade/liberate) or losing one due to culture or congress?

 

[Leoreth]

Removed a reference to the old Polish UP in the description of religious tolerance criteria.

Are there penalties for giving a city away (trade/liberate) or losing one due to culture or congress?

Sorry, I must have missed that. The answer is no, unless it's a city in your core, which may then affect your expansion stability.