Suggestions and Requests

[Imperator Knoedel]

Knoedel's Back!!!

No, I'm not, I'm just taking a break that was supposed to be five minutes long but has now been going on for an hour. Oy vey.

 

[1SDANi]

No, I'm not, I'm just taking a break that was supposed to be five minutes long but has now been going on for an hour. Oy vey.

Oh, okay.

 

[Leoreth]

Have you looked into Civ4Reimagined's mechanics regarding resources? Imo it's the best and most innovative feature of their mod, and that's saying a lot. Basically, the effects of resources diminish the more population you have, so at some point you need to have more than one instance of the same resource to get the same benefit a smaller civ would. The exact threshold can be modified by civics and technologies.

Yes, that influenced my thinking about this. But I would prefer if I could come up with a transparent system in which only some cities get happiness from resources depending on how many you have, instead of a global modifier.

 

[merijn_v1]

Yes, that influenced my thinking about this. But I would prefer if I could come up with a transparent system in which only some cities get happiness from resources depending on how many you have, instead of a global modifier.

Reading this I immideately envisioned the resource manager screen, in which you can manage the distribution of the resources. What I envision looks good in my mind.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Yes, that influenced my thinking about this. But I would prefer if I could come up with a transparent system in which only some cities get happiness from resources depending on how many you have, instead of a global modifier.

Hm, perhaps core cities followed by historical should always be prioritized, and everything else only gets the scraps if anything is left over?

 

[Leoreth]

Reading this I immideately envisioned the resource manager screen, in which you can manage the distribution of the resources. What I envision looks good in my mind.

I think an automatic rules based distribution is better though. If you give the player control the AI will lag behind.

Hm, perhaps core cities followed by historical should always be prioritized, and everything else only gets the scraps if anything is left over?

In principle yes, however here is where I want the trade system to come in. A city's trade income depends on what it produces and in turn determines how many resources it can import for happiness. Colonies cannot produce trade goods and instead funnel their resources back to the homeland.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Food for thought: Britain's colonization UHV could also include controlling X number of railroaded tiles by the year 1900.

 

[star15389]

I think that would result in a lot of tedious clicking. English UHV is won or lost by 1730 anyway since the other conditions are so easy

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

The colonization deadline should be moved into the 19th century anyway, it's ludicrous how you have to colonize the world a century before the real British Empire did.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

I agree with Knoedel. 1730 AD is too soon for England's UHV.

On another subject, I still see no way for Brazil to get 10 Slaves. Pombo/Impi raids should be intensified so France, Congo and Portugal have some to trade.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

It just randomly occurred to me yesterday that Legends of Revolution has a better Franz Josef leaderhead than the current one. Maybe someone should look into that?

 

[Leoreth]

This mod doesn't use Franz Josef.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

As both an Austrian and a historian, I'm like 90% sure Austria only had emperors named Franz Josef.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Could the Maya be moved from 60 CE to between 500 and 1000 BCE? There were numerous Maya polities in those times, and an earlier start would allow the Maya to actually expand to historical levels by the time of their current spawn. Monte Albán could appear around 1000 BCE as San José Mogote, to prevent the Maya from heading that way too soon.

 

[Leoreth]

I considered that, but I think they work best with their current spawn date.

 

[Tickytoe]

That actually gives me an idea: Have some "fun"/"sandbox" options included in the game setup.

- Instant Start. No matter what civ you pick you start out at 3000 BC and can build and grow without hidden modifiers. Could end up with situations like the Sunset Invasion DLC in Crusader Kings II where the Aztecs conquer Europe.

- All areas are core areas (or historical).

- Random Civs. All the spawn dates and hidden modifiers and core areas etc. are all the same except any civ could spawn in place of another.

Just some stuff like that. Definitely don't think it should be a priority, and may be more trouble than it's worth (And obviously isn't helping to make DoC a more historical game), but I think that could be a neat, different thing to try out.

 

[Leoreth]

RFC RAND had these kind of options. I floated the idea for DoC RAND before and these kinds of options could be a part of that. But as you said, other unneeded aspects of the mod have priority at the moment.

 

[mccp77]

@Leoreth

In most of my games now I've seen Brazil become one of the top 5 strongest powers in the game behind Russia, America, and often 1 European power. Sometimes it even takes control of some cities in Africa. I think their tech progress should be slowed down a little or maybe more jungle should be added to Brazil.

If any South America civ should grow in an ahistorical way it should be Argentina given that it was the 7th richest country in the world in 1929. Maybe make Brazil the south american russia in terms of tech + size while argentina has a european tech rate but is smaller? I think that could work better.

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah let me look into their modifiers.

 

[Ogi123]

Ideas about resource distribution looks interesting.Does this mean that resources will wary in quantity? Anyway sometime ago I promised analysis of unit list, so I guess here it is.

Main problems as I see it are that unit list and they distribution in tech tree are still feel very unfinished. I will try to point what I think are problems, why I thought that and possible fixes. For start some parts of unit list are crowded so units get little use because they are obsoleted very quickly, some are really unhistorical and others simply useless or OP.

-Light sword: this unit is rather useless despite cost reduction, it's replaced by swordsman really fast and it's utility is questionable. +25% attack vs spear is situational at best. Solution: either remove this unit completely or make bonus more relevant +50% vs. spear?
-War elephant: with reduction of spear bonus to 75% this unit become utter terror on battlefield, there is no viable counter until horse archer and this only on open ground. Solution: 8 no bonuses or penalties, cost reduced to 55. If no changes to spear or horse then 7.
-Catapult: still to strong in non siege situations, probably even stronger than vanilla thanks to withdrawal chance. Solution: 3 and +100% city attack.
-Horseman: to weak without flanking. Solution 6 +25% open terrain attack.
-Spearman: should return to +100%vs heavy cav if changes to horseman will be implemented.
-Horse archer: my main problem is that even empires that don't have access to steppe tribes can produce this unit. Would it be possible to limit this unit to owners of some provinces only?
-Overall light/heavy cav split it's very unsatisfying currently. They are basically same units that you will build interchangeably, only light cav is stronger because it's need not to fear counter. There must be some better way to differentiate them.
-No more axeman even as barbarian! Just replace them with sword... please?
- Heavy swordsman, and swordsman I guess, should get city attack bonus. HS should loose melee mod. This would perhaps lead to some players building them instead going full cav + skirmish route.
-Some unit between bombard and cannon,
-Musketman loses terribly to cuirassier on open terrain. Perhaps some mod against cavalry would be warranted here(+25%?)?
-Artillery and Howitzer are to close together.
-Cavalry destroying rifleman on open terrain make me twitch, this is not how second half of 19th century looked...
-Perhaps Tank/modern armour could utilise same mechanics as heavy cav? Less but open terrain attack str.

And some other thing that I probably forgot. Thoughts, opinions, criticisms?