Suggestions and Requests

@Leoreth - a suggestion for the Chinese/Mongol core and spawning areas...is there any chance you could extend the Chinese core by 1 extra row to the north? I like to found Beijing 1 tile north of the conventional spot (still Beijing, according to the city name map), to reduce crowding with Chang'an, however, that leads to two problems
1. It's not counted as part of the core for population
2. It flips to the Mongols

Even if you don't want to extend the entire core of China and reduce the Mongol flip zone by that entire column, could you at least change it around those tiles so that Beijing is always considered core and never flips to the Mongols?

Also, I have two suggestions to boost the Firelancer a little, but I think these are less important than the flip/core issue with Beijing.
1. Since it's only 90% the strength of the Arquebusier that it replaces, it should only be 90% the cost
2. Giving it a 10% bonus vs mounted could really help vs the Mongols

In my current China game, I beat the first 2 UHVs, but declared war on Mongolia after they flilpped Shenyang and Mukden...of the 35-unit army I sent to liberate Beijing, only 5 remained the next turn...they were mostly firelancers and a few heavy spearmen. The Mongols are way stronger in 1.16.6 than they were in the earlier versions, I think they're a little too strong.
 
I guess you are defending Mongols. That's a totally wrong strategy because they cause collateral damage. Also I suggest you build Cho-ko-nus or Lancers with two promotions. They have 60% chance to kill a Keshik while firelancers only have 30%.
 
Unless you have overwhelming military advantage it's a bad idea to refuse a flip. Either don't put cities in their flipzone, or agree to the flip then take the cities back (either when they collapse or when their birth protection expires).
 
AI (even as a human, too, actually) gets stupidly large armies when you declare war on them while they have birth protection. I've seen some civs get almost 30 siege weapons just for a flip being refused.
 
When has the AI declared war on you while you are still birth protected?
 
AI (even as a human, too, actually) gets stupidly large armies when you declare war on them while they have birth protection. I've seen some civs get almost 30 siege weapons just for a flip being refused.
I think that birth protection should be toned down a little.
When has the AI declared war on you while you are still birth protected?
I think he means the human gets too large of an army when someone declares war on them during birth protection (i.e. the human flips a city, the AI declares war in response)
 
Some suggestions regarding Egypt:

The eastern portion of the arabian península should have more conquest value to Egypt AI, just like the Levant. The reason is that this region was for a long time under the influence of the egyptian dynasties (fatimid, ayyubid, mamluk) and that would put more conflict in the region, since its more dificult due to most of the civilizations have the same religion.

Memphis should turn into Al-Fustat or Fustat after flip or captured by Arabia. When Egypt reborn as a islamic nation, the name should change to Al-Qahirah. I suggest this because Cairo was founded only after the Fatimid Caliphate conquest of Egypt. Before that, Fustat was the administrative center of Egypt during Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates.
 
From the git update log:
"prevented placing Slave Plantations during advanced start"
This will again make the Brazil UHV close to impossible, unless you make a huge campaign over independent civilizations in Africa (if you are lucky they are still some there).
Kongo almost never have more then 2 slaves.

I agree, but on the other hand with advanced start slave plantations enabled, that goal can be accomplished in the first turns. I think that warrants rethinking it entirely. Something like this, perhaps?

Brazil 1 - Have over 50 gold-per-turn from selling sugar to other civilisations and harvesting the plots. (Still based around sugar. Slave plantations would make it easier by having additional gold on the plots.)

While on the topic of UHVs, I find the current Italian gap between its Renaissance goals and its 1930 conquest goal to be a bit boring. I think folding the first two goals into one ("Build San Marco Basilica, Sistine Chapel and the Leaning Tower and have three cities with Influential culture by 1600 AD") and introducing an intermediate goal would give the player something more interesting to do. In earlier stages when designing the civ, there were discussions of a tech goal simulating various Italian discoveries, that sounds appropriate.
 
I agree, but on the other hand with advanced start slave plantations enabled, that goal can be accomplished in the first turns. I think that warrants rethinking it entirely. Something like this, perhaps?
The UHV still contains 4 pastures goal, which is a bit more difficult since is basically means you have to invade Argentina.
 
My suggestion for new civs for the new map (sorry if this isn't the right thread for this, I'm new here)

Africa
Boers - I wrote some suggestions for them in the map suggestion thread, I can copy them here if you would like
Swahili - I have no suggestions for this civ's gameplay or unique elements, but I think it would be good to have, both to fill up coastal East Africa, and because it could have interesting interactions with Arab, Persian, Ethiopian, Indian, and Portuguese civs
Islamic Egypt - I know it shows up as a respawn of ancient Egypt, but it was a very different culture and civilization, and it would be nice if it was playable and had its own UHVs

Asia
Manchu - they could take over China in the 17th century, and have new UHVs that are different from China, they could provide interesting gameplay as well as making 1700 AD China a civ that can win UHVs (although in this case, China wouldn't be present as a civ in 1700 AD, only Manchus would, China could spawn again in the early 20th century if the Manchus are unstable)

Europe
Sweden - Scandinavia shouldn't really be represented by just one civilization - the Vikings can become Denmark-Norway once Sweden spawns
Kyivan/Kievan Rus - now that Eastern Europe has more space, they can fit in, and can be an interesting rival to Poland and Russia, they can respawn as Ukraine if Russia collapses to core in the modern era
Celts - it would be nice to have a playable Celtic civilization, it can respawn as the Kingdom of Scotland in the Middle Ages and as the Republic of Ireland in the Modern Era, although a color change would likely be necessary (Scotland is blue, Ireland is green, or you could split the difference and make them some greenish-blue intermediate color)

Australia - the only major post-colonial civ that is missing other than the Boers, it would be nice for Australia to be an actual civ instead of just staying a British colony for the entire game

Those are the only civs missing that I think are really essential

Some others, like Nubia and Israel, might be nice to have, but are probably too small to even include on the bigger map.

It might be nice to split Islam into Shia and Sunni, too, but I don't think it's that important, since the only Shia civs in the game would be Iran and Islamic Egypt.
If the Celts do make it in (and I hope they do), this would be good diplomacy music for them in the Middle Ages/Renaissance
 
Here's a good leader head for the Manchu (if they get added), or for 19th century China
 
One of the major concerns of the religion discussion thread was that religions don't feel unique enough, and that there is nothing besides the usual geographical distribution that compels you to play with a specific state religion. At the same time, it has been correctly noted that there isn't enough benefit in sticking to your state religion compared to just spreading everything you need.

Recently I realized that both problems have the same solution which for lack of a better name and in allusion to the unique religious victories I will refer to as unique religious powers.

The idea is that every state religions give specific bonuses if the religion is spread across the whole empire, religious buildings are present, and no non-state religions are present. These factors are aggregated into a score similar to SoI's piety with the following rules:

+5 * percentage of cities with state religion temples
+5 * percentage of cities with state religion monasteries
+20 * percentage of cities with state religion cathedrals (4 cities per cathedral means the maximum value is +5)
+15 * percentage of cities with state religion

-15 * percentage of cities with non-state religions

+5 for controlling the shrine of your state religion
+5 for running Theocracy

-2 for every non-expired wonder that requires Pantheon or a non-state religion

There are three tiers of bonuses which are unlocked with a score of 10, 20 and 30 respectively. The benefits depend on the religion and apply to all cities with state religion unless otherwise noted:

Protestantism
1) +100% settler production
2) +1 trade route
3) -25% gold hurry cost

Catholicism
1) +2 production for monasteries
2) +2 research for monasteries
3) Unlimited shrine income

Orthodoxy
1) +25% city defense
2) +1 artist slot with monasteries
3) +25% espionage

Islam
1) Free missionary for every conquered city without Islam
2) No resistance in conquered cities
3) +1 scientist slot with monasteries

Hinduism
1) +25% food kept on city growth with monasteries
2) +25% culture
3) One less great person per golden age

Buddhism
1) +1 food from monasteries
2) +2 happiness from monasteries
3) No anarchy from civic changes

Confucianism
1) -25% city upkeep
2) +50% worker rate
3) +50% melee and gunpowder unit production

Taoism
1) +2 health from monasteries
2) -50% unhappiness from population rushing
3) +25% wonder construction

Zoroastrianism
1) +2 experience from monasteries
2) -25% unit upkeep
3) +50% enemy war weariness

These are just my current ideas though, nothing is implemented yet. Feedback welcome.
Bringing back this old idea. I think it would be a really nice way to add some more uniqueness to religions. (I thought quoting it here would be better than bumping a 9 year old thread)
 
Bringing back this old idea. I think it would be a really nice way to add some more uniqueness to religions. (I thought quoting it here would be better than bumping a 9 year old thread)
I think one thing that sticks out is that Hinduism's first bonus would have to be different now that Prambanan is a thing, +100% food kept on growth would be a little busted. I'm thinking maybe something related to the significance of the Ganges possibly? My first thought was +1 happiness as a yield on all tiles adjacent to a river that is also adjacent to the Hindu holy city, but that would be both localized and most likely only benefit India. Perhaps, and forgive the rather convoluted wording, +1 happiness in all cities per great wonder in cities adjacent to the river with the most adjacent legitimate city plots that is also adjacent to the Hindu holy city. The point of that weird stipulation is just so that you don't end up with a random river in Tibet also counting as the Ganges. Perhaps there should also be either a maximum number or it should be per x wonders rounded up on the Ganges to keep it from being too overpowered.
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned before but there is something that's been bugging me a bit with the old map for years now.
So Leoreth, I was wondering for the new map - is there any chance that you would adjust resources and tile yields to more accurately reflect realistic population densities in some parts of the world (like this was done next to Pataliputra and Los Angeles on the old map)? There are places with reasonably high populations (like Johannesburg, Lagos, Casablanca etc.) that in game simply don't have enough food to grow to such sizes.
Conversely, there are some coastal cities (St.John's in Newfoundland being the most obvious one) that can grow to very impressive population (St. John's can easily grow to a larger population than Moskva for example), far exceeding what they have in the real world. I don't know if reducing the food of coastal tiles to provide 0 food by default and 1 with Harbor is a good solution though...
 
Last edited:
I don't really think that is a realistic goal to set with the game mechanics this game uses.
 
I don't really think that is a realistic goal to set with the game mechanics this game uses.
I do think that perhaps adding some more flood plains to areas like China, India, the Midwestern US, and possibly some parts of Central Europe might be good. Not covering every river with flood plains, just a few strategically placed ones here and there near large, populous cities.
 
I do think that perhaps adding some more flood plains to areas like China, India, the Midwestern US, and possibly some parts of Central Europe might be good. Not covering every river with flood plains, just a few strategically placed ones here and there near large, populous cities.
Yeah, that is roughly what I had in mind. Or not even adding floodplains, simply increasing the food providing content of the tile as was done in the Ganges region.
 
With that in mind I don't see anymore what the request is. There already are food resources in these locations.
 
Top Bottom