State of the Mod: 2019

[Aristos]

Civ4's is more punishing, but the model was also built around wholly different numbers in terms of food, production, etc - I think they're a bit too different to attempt a 1:1, and I'm not sure it would benefit VP to do so.

G

Me neither, but perhaps it is worth trying... is such a milestone still too far away from where the code is right now (in happiness terms)?

 

[swapoer]

The best by which measure?
The civ4 system pushes you to use the Slavery civic in the first phase of the game - sacrificing people for production - which from an immersion point of view is not necessarily everyone's cup of tea.

Slavery is just a part of human civilization. Most ancient civilization has been slaver. I dont think this break immersion.

 

[swapoer]

I would give some of my thought about the VP mod too.

I might be wrong, since I rarely play the vanilla Civ 4 and Civ 5. I believe Civ 5 is a big step down from Civ 4 in term of role playing a civilization. Civilizations often change and reform as time goes on. Civ 5 replaces the dynamic civic system of civ 4 with a policy system. In this policy system, your choice of polices picks stick and never change. You can never advance from slavery into fiefdom or republic anymore in Civ V. VP doesn’t improve in this regard. There is a mod trying to bring the civic system of civ 4 into civ V. So I believe it is more of design philosophy instead of technical difficulties.

VP is very balanced and sometimes it does this at the cost of immersion. Maybe my historical knowledge is not good enough, but the tech requirement for wonders and free buildings given by wonders strike me as quit bizarre. The tech tree is clearly redesigned no based on the thought of civilization advancement but the easiness to balance. The same can be said about the bonus from building and policies too. Many bonuses from policies don’t ring a bell for me. For example, it never makes sense for me why the imperium policy of authority gives a free settler. What the heck? Why my civilization would get a free settler just because its culture is mature enough to get a new policy? It seem to me policy trees are there just to encourage different play style. We can rename tradition as tall skill tree, progress as wide skill tree and authority as military skill tree for better understanding. For me the difference between VP and FFH is similar to the difference between Diablo and DND.

In short, VP makes Civ V more war game like and less civilization simulation like.

 

[Gothic_Empire]

Why my civilization would get a free settler just because its culture is mature enough to get a new policy? It seem to me policy trees are there just to encourage different play style. We can rename tradition as tall skill tree, progress as wide skill tree and authority as military skill tree for better understanding. For me the difference between VP and FFH is similar to the difference between Diablo and DND.

A specific sort of wanderlust mixed with unrest that leads to moving to a new colony.

Why would hoarding enough food cause a settler to appear? That's not what food does.

Why can cities only build one building at a time? That's not how cities work.

You can take this kind of grognard argument in any direction. Civ IV exists, and is quite lovely to play if you want to play it; you don't need our permission.

 

[Gazebo]

VP is very balanced and sometimes it does this at the cost of immersion. Maybe my historical knowledge is not good enough, but the tech requirement for wonders and free buildings given by wonders strike me as quit bizarre. The tech tree is clearly redesigned no based on the thought of civilization advancement but the easiness to balance. The same can be said about the bonus from building and policies too.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But to accuse me of having designed the mod with no basis on the thought of history, but rather balance, is a baseless ad hominem attack. We're better than that around here.

G

 

[swapoer]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But to accuse me of having designed the mod with no basis on the thought of history, but rather balance, is a baseless ad hominem attack. We're better than that around here.

G

I don’t have that intention as I have said in my post “My historical knowledge may be not good enough.” I really appreciate your work in this mod.

 

[Gazebo]

I don’t have that intention as I have said in my post “My historical knowledge may be not good enough.” I really appreciate your work in this mod.

Glad you enjoy the mod. We're always looking for constructive feedback.

G

 

[tu_79]

In short, VP makes Civ V more war game like and less civilization simulation like.

Every game, and mod, has a set of goals, the ideals that lead the design. Some developers might prefer realism: I've seen an Europa Universalis III mod that especifically focused on bringing realism over any other consideration. It was not more enjoyable than the base game, but it was different enough to merit some gameplays. Some developers might prefer cutesy: games that focus on feelings as if they were artistic works. I'm thinking on Journey.

Here, the motu is 'balance'. It's explicitly said in the mod's name. We focus on balance, but at the same time we don't forget that the game still needs to be enjoyable, and if not realistic (there are too many abstractions in a game of this scale), at least some care to plausability is there. Maybe you missed all the long discussions, but things like Oracle giving a temple because, well, it was a temple in real life, comes from the historical knowledge of our developers and testers, and if you stop to look at this, the game is full of historical references, more accurate than what the base game was.

I agree that policies are designed to encourage some play styles, but I don't think this is a bad thing. I actually improved a lot my play style when I dip into Authority style. The lessons I learned in this policy tree can still be used with the others. For example, I almost never demanded tributes with the other trees. Now I know that even Tradition benefits from extorting a city state or two, just not that much as Authority.

Civ IV mods might be more focused on 'roleplaying', which is fine. Sometimes I want to play a good RPG game, sometimes I want a chess match, sometimes I just want to see a movie.

 

[displayer]

Slavery is just a part of human civilization. Most ancient civilization has been slaver. I dont think this break immersion.

And some not-so-ancient civilizations, too, shamefully enough.

 

[swapoer]

Every game, and mod, has a set of goals, the ideals that lead the design. Some developers might prefer realism: I've seen an Europa Universalis III mod that especifically focused on bringing realism over any other consideration. It was not more enjoyable than the base game, but it was different enough to merit some gameplays. Some developers might prefer cutesy: games that focus on feelings as if they were artistic works. I'm thinking on Journey.

Here, the motu is 'balance'. It's explicitly said in the mod's name. We focus on balance, but at the same time we don't forget that the game still needs to be enjoyable, and if not realistic (there are too many abstractions in a game of this scale), at least some care to plausability is there. Maybe you missed all the long discussions, but things like Oracle giving a temple because, well, it was a temple in real life, comes from the historical knowledge of our developers and testers, and if you stop to look at this, the game is full of historical references, more accurate than what the base game was.

I agree that policies are designed to encourage some play styles, but I don't think this is a bad thing. I actually improved a lot my play style when I dip into Authority style. The lessons I learned in this policy tree can still be used with the others. For example, I almost never demanded tributes with the other trees. Now I know that even Tradition benefits from extorting a city state or two, just not that much as Authority.

Civ IV mods might be more focused on 'roleplaying', which is fine. Sometimes I want to play a good RPG game, sometimes I want a chess match, sometimes I just want to see a movie.

My OP is just to say that VP is more balance focused. Since resource are always limited, there is always a priority and main goal when developing project. I don't mean VP does not take other elements into consideration. And many problems are left over from the original Civ V game.
In short, I totally agree with you.