Suggestions and Requests

I'm playing a 600 AD Mughals game, it"s 1924, I'm in the Industrial era and still the most powerful civilization in the world. I managed to kick ass of the English invasion force so hard their civilization actually collapsed (only to respawn later quite weak) afterwards. What "modifiers" are so bad about the Mughals? Apart from 93 percent inflation I have good science, great production and control whole India+Bengal, only having to give up Samarkand and Merv due to overextension. Oh, and I won the UHV and play just to see how far I get. I do play Sunset of Civilization instead of basic DoC though.

I'd say the Mughal's sorry state in the 1700 AD start is because they start out in ruins with only a few cities. If you wanna win as Mughals, play an earlier start, they don't need "Westernization", my Mughals are "Westernized" anyways in a way as they run a democracy and are called "Islamic Republic of Pakistan".

 

How high priority is the addition of a Sunni-Shia split at some time in the game?

 

Done. Here's the discussion thread.

Does anyone have a complete list of all the civs in the game? I could try to do it by memory, but I figured it'd be easier to ask.

 

As with every other time this has been suggested, it must be noted the utterly miniscule effect this would have in game. At MOST you would have two Shia civs on the map - Iran and Egypt (under certain Sultanates). And then it needs to be asked - what's the point?

Having just Islam isn't perfectly accurate to history, but given the scale of the mod it's sufficient.

 

Thanks. One thing -- it looks like the new Turkic civilization isn't on the list. I manually added 'Turkic' between Japan and the Vikings (and changed 'Turkey' to 'Ottoman'), but can you confirm that's the right spot for their spawn date?

 

Was it ever discussed giving religions some unique ability ?

 

I don't really feed the need to defend my suggestion from someone who isn't even running a game on the same mod, thank you.

 

Iirc, the differences between the 2 in this regard are minimal, and your response was rude and uncalled for.

 

I have some suggestion for buildings:

Aqueduct could give if the city is next to mountain to differentiate it from granary.
Levee is very powerful, so I suggest that it would give hammers only to those rivers which the city is actually connected so it would also be more realistic.
And the Dike should only give hammers to rivers and coasts, not to ocean and lake tiles.
Star Fort should give to so there would be a reason to built it sometimes.

 

Levee needs to be very powerful, to help simulate modern industrialism and to help scale the production game.

 

Since Levees are being discussed, is there any possibility for them to be buildable so long as there's X river tiles in the BFC? There's some preplaced, non riverine cities on the current map that feel terrible because they have BFCs full of rivers but are 1 tile removed: e.g. Bordeaux, Madrid, Boston, Washington (I think?), Toronto, the city NE of Beijing.

However, it's understandable if you want to maintain the current rules and the distinction between riverine and non-riverine. After all only a few cities are affected by this.

 

Another levee-related idea: Scale the costs according to how many river tiles are covered in the BFC.
Maybe in steps of five. A levee in a city with 6-10 tiles would be current cost.
2-5 would be half cost (1 tile not possible, I suggest)
11-15 would be 1.5 the cost, 15-20 tiles would be 2 times the hammer price.

But, as was said, maybe that discussion is for later.

 

Shouldn't Alsace-Lorrain have hills ? the region is plains in the current map. It would certainly help Paris' productivity if there were a few hills in its BFC. Also in re France, how about giving them a goal for colonizing Africa as well ?

 

What about giving france goals to colonize Africa ?