Suggestions and Requests

[pippo84]

Hi everybody.
Don't know if already suggested. It's a long time since a played This mod. I started again some week ago
If possible, could player decide to liberate a group of city (foreign core) and the new cub became automatically his vassal?

I.e. As Spain I conquer France, Germany and Italy, but I start having Shaky stability so I can release Indi city in Italy so Italian Civ rise again but as my vassal...

In a lot of Games I m not able to vassalize enemy because they collapse or they even don't exist.

Thanx for reading.
Great Mod !

 

[1SDANi]

Hi everybody.
Don't know if already suggested. It's a long time since a played This mod. I started again some week ago
If possible, could player decide to liberate a group of city (foreign core) and the new cub became automatically his vassal?

I.e. As Spain I conquer France, Germany and Italy, but I start having Shaky stability so I can release Indi city in Italy so Italian Civ rise again but as my vassal...

In a lot of Games I m not able to vassalize enemy because they collapse or they even don't exist.

Thanx for reading.
Great Mod !

That's actually a really cool idea. Not sure how good it is gameplay balance wise, but I love the flavor of giving a nationality it's core back. Is there any historical precedence for this?

 

[Fresol]

Hi everybody.
Don't know if already suggested. It's a long time since a played This mod. I started again some week ago
If possible, could player decide to liberate a group of city (foreign core) and the new cub became automatically his vassal?

I.e. As Spain I conquer France, Germany and Italy, but I start having Shaky stability so I can release Indi city in Italy so Italian Civ rise again but as my vassal...

In a lot of Games I m not able to vassalize enemy because they collapse or they even don't exist.

Thanx for reading.
Great Mod !

You get some attitude bonus for released civilization, that's it.

If you want to vassalize them you can conquer them 10 turns after liberating their cities, just remember to leave them a core city so they don't collapse.

 

[Akbarthegreat]

Suggestion: Move Khajuraho to an earlier tech. Currently it does not help with the Indian 20-temple UHV as it comes too late.

 

[Leoreth]

The effect is going to change, but not before 1.15.

 

[Ogi123]

There are still massive problems with unit balance. Currently lancer is OP, even after firearms witch should change face of warfare, you still build mostly lancers. Combination of 10 and 2 with access to stables is just that potent.
From light cavalry only horse archer is OK rest basically can be ignored +25% open terrain bonus doesn't recompense low base .
Arquebus is worse in every way than lancer, for only 10 more I get +1 and . It's also much earlier and has access to stables. Currently I only build arqebus sometimes as city defender in border settlements.
Spear and heavy spear have to low to use them as anything but anti barbarian or stack defence roles.

 

[Not_a_bonobo]

With the research of Nationalism by either master or vassal, would it be possible to have a negative stability and/or happiness hit, moderate for master and severe for vassal, as well as an increased possibility of vassals breaking off, nations declaring independence (if this isn't already the case), and cities becoming independent?

 

[Fresol]

With the research of Nationalism by either master or vassal, would it be possible to have a negative stability and/or happiness hit, moderate for master and severe for vassal, as well as an increased possibility of vassals breaking off, nations declaring independence (if this isn't already the case), and cities becoming independent?

Not sure whether you intend to collapse the vassal or its master by destablizing them both. I'd question why you'd even want to do it in the first place. Collapsed civs -> independent cities = up for grab. So are you promoting direct control instead of vassalization?

 

[Leoreth]

Huh, this led me to an interesting idea ... maybe vassal instability should lead to their independence instead (probably while losing all cities except their core).

 

[AtlantaMarty]

Huh, this led me to an interesting idea ... maybe vassal instability should lead to their independence instead (probably while losing all cities except their core).

@Leoreth have you considered changing the Byzantine color to Tyrian purple? I think it represents them better than the current shade

 

[Leoreth]

I have seen screenshots, I think there is too little contrast with Russia.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

I have seen screenshots, I think there is too little contrast with Russia.

It would work if the Russian color was made a little bit darker, but I see your point about the contrast.

 

[Steb]

I was looking at the leaderhead database and found that there is a John A. Macdonald who looks way superior to the current one. The current one doesn't look that much like the actual Macdonald, and his hair is weird, and I cringe whenever I interact with Canada. Can we change it?

 

[Leoreth]

Yes please.

 

[pippo84]

Hi. I'm playing as France and I'm looking at its Historical or contrasted land.
Why there isn't a Contrasted Syria (as it was a French Mandatory) or a Contstated part of Indian sub-continent?
I see that all other territories are showed in the map with historical accuracy...

 

[Not_a_bonobo]

It seems too easy for civs to outright collapse. In the last 3 games I played, I only ever saw Prussia as having >stable stability, besides me. At the moment in my current game, the French, the Austrians, the English, the Vikings, and the Portuguese have all collapsed. The French and Austrians were the strongest civs so there's a great amount of land which is owned by independents, which doesn't seem ideal. The Ottomans collapsed very early on but revived and the Chinese look set to collapse soon as well, which would leave the entirety of modern day China+Mongolia+Korea independent. I'm wondering if collapse could come in several stages, perhaps 3 collapse events being required to 'wipe out' a sim completely and cities becoming independent based on a combination of maintenance costs (low maintenance costs representing control over cities and distance to capital) and net happiness in the cities. This might make the effect of courthouses on stability (it used to give +1 stability per courthouse, I don't know if this is still the case) more natural.

 

[KeeperOT7Keys]

Hi. I'm playing as France and I'm looking at its Historical or contrasted land.
Why there isn't a Contrasted Syria (as it was a French Mandatory) or a Contstated part of Indian sub-continent?
I see that all other territories are showed in the map with historical accuracy...

I think it's because French held these territories for a very brief time. Every civilization in the game have some territories like that which makes them pretty unstable when captured although these places are controlled historically, because in history these places also made these civs "unstable" and thus caused territory losses.

 

[Not_a_bonobo]

An alternative Future Tech that gives a random increase in improvement output would be nice. For example, you research it once and it gives +1 production to pastures. You research it another time and it gives +1 food to farms. Speaking of, how about giving +1 food from farms on genetics or Assembly Line and the ability to clear swamps on Industrialism or Ecology. Right now, the world population stops rising too early.

 

[1SDANi]

With the upcoming removal of the civ cap after the rewrite, would it be possible to implement warring states? Regions like Japan, Greece, Mesopotamia, and Italy among just about every other had periods of war between smaller states for control of what would later become a single nation.

I know that properly depicting this would be very intensive on the turn to turn AI, but with war being such a major part of this game I find it a bit odd how the wars that set up these behemoth nations aren't even depicted.

I'm not too knowledgeable about programming strategy AI, but would some sort of AI trickery like having 3-5 or so AIs represent non-player warring states and have their units only attack nations that control territory in region? I'd imagine this way the same 3-5 nations could be recycled for every major warring states in each region, with minor warring states depicted by independent cities. Perhaps there could be a second menu after selecting the nation to select the warring state of origin, if that's possible and time effective to implement.

Would any of this be feasible to implement any time soon? I'd love to be able to play through something like the Sengoku Jidai from RFCDOC's zoomed out view of the world.

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, I plan to use the new capabilities to implement a civil war feature as well.