Suggestions and Requests

Could the free Estates bonus from Versailles be restricted to cities on the same continent as the wonder? In the 1700 AD scenario, San Juan frequently ends up flipping to France due to cultural pressure whenever another civ gets it in congress.
 
A note from playing Spain again. After 1600:
  • 3 silver in Inca Empire (including one on the other side of the Andres in Bolivia in that Incan city on the stone's third ring)
  • 1 gold in Inca Empire
  • 1 gold in Columbia
  • 1 silver in Central America
  • 3 silver in Mexico
  • 1 gold in Mexico
  • 1 gold in Philippines
That's 11 silver and golds. The Hispaniola gold made for 12, but it despawns in 1600, preventing Spain from achieving the UHV without doing something ahistorical like settling Vancouver or Elmina or conquering Sumatra or Celebes. Is this intentional, or could Hispaniola's gold be programmed only to disappear after 1650?
 
A note from playing Spain again. After 1600:
  • 3 silver in Inca Empire (including one on the other side of the Andres in Bolivia in that Incan city on the stone's third ring)
  • 1 gold in Inca Empire
  • 1 gold in Columbia
  • 1 silver in Central America
  • 3 silver in Mexico
  • 1 gold in Mexico
  • 1 gold in Philippines
That's 11 silver and golds. The Hispaniola gold made for 12, but it despawns in 1600, preventing Spain from achieving the UHV without doing something ahistorical like settling Vancouver or Elmina or conquering Sumatra or Celebes. Is this intentional, or could Hispaniola's gold be programmed only to disappear after 1650?
Iberian Union, my man! Just be gentle and try to induce capitulation without conquering Lisbon. Killing all but one unit usually does the trick. Gift techs and maps and they're sure to found at least El Mina (Nikran currently) and maybe Ilheus/Porto Seguro. Also be aware the deadline is "by" 1650 so it can be achieved before 1600. I too am maybe too attached to historical behavior but there's merit to be found in the aspirational element of the game. A simple tweak to your head cannon can make pursuing alternate timelines palatable if not interesting. We can pretend say, in a given game Rodrigo Borgia fails in his bid for the Chair of St. Peter and no Tordesillas happens and thus Africa is fair game.
 
Could the free Estates bonus from Versailles be restricted to cities on the same continent as the wonder? In the 1700 AD scenario, San Juan frequently ends up flipping to France due to cultural pressure whenever another civ gets it in congress.
I'd insist you think about what's being asked for here: nerfing a wonder into the ground for the sake of a one-tile settlement. Map culture in general isn't yet working as intended so these inevitable fixes alone might solve your little problem.
 
Iberian Union, my man! Just be gentle and try to induce capitulation without conquering Lisbon. Killing all but one unit usually does the trick. Gift techs and maps and they're sure to found at least El Mina (Nikran currently) and maybe Ilheus/Porto Seguro. Also be aware the deadline is "by" 1650 so it can be achieved before 1600. I too am maybe too attached to historical behavior but there's merit to be found in the aspirational element of the game. A simple tweak to your head cannon can make pursuing alternate timelines palatable if not interesting. We can pretend say, in a given game Rodrigo Borgia fails in his bid for the Chair of St. Peter and no Tordesillas happens and thus Africa is fair game.
I had a vague hunch that the implication of the UHV is to force vassalize Portugal to get access their resources... I'm hesitant to settle any Spanish cities in foreign stability zones, the core is so small and infertile.
 
1 - Settling the Canary Islands is even less appealing than it used to be. The Moroccan crabs are now completely out of reach and its coastal tiles don't count towards the Indian trade objective. The surrounding coasts should at least count towards the Indian trade objective.
You mean Madeira, right? It aint great but even on previous map getting the crabs wasn't a reasonable expectation anyway. Even the self-styled Portugal Guy (me!) doesn't think adding its sea area to the Indian Trade Route is justified either for historical or gameplay reasons (challenge=good). New UP and Thassalocracy have bolstered it a bit especially if settled during Renaissance and decent with a slave or two. Of course the Sugar needs to be accounted for as well.
 
#GitGud hehehehehe
I razed Bordeaux three times so Santander could get the clams and an extra grasslands tile, that gave me two mediocre cores cities plus Toledo. Jails + fortress + colonialism will have to carry the rest. Cordoba is the big problem, the Moors are so supercharged right now that you have to carry the war to Morocco and raze cities there too if you want any hope of keeping cultural control of anything south of Toledo. And now that Cordoba is inland you don't even have a good production city to build galleons with. Spain is just not in a good position right now, especially now that player's core doesn't expands in the Renaissance (it does for the AI though...).

Spoiler from a 1580 Dutch start :

Yeah that's right, they're still in the middle ages in 1580.
sad spain 1.jpg


Spoiler The strangest things happen when Spain's not a colonial power :
said spain 2.jpg
sad spain 3.jpg


Has anyone else noticed AI Inca refuses to farm those potatoes or chop that savanna on the silver? I might make a bug report about this, I've seen it in every single game.
 

Attachments

  • sad spain 1.jpg
    sad spain 1.jpg
    890 KB · Views: 32
Once upon a time Legions were able to build forts. Limes Germanicus and stuff. Let's have it back, @Leoreth !
 
Anyone else feel like the ideologies of the 1900s should play more of a role, You often see communist Germany allied with the british empire etc.

Not in the quite bad way CIV v handled it, But perhaps one should be able to choose between ideology similar to religion, And it actually effecting how you play. Dunno, just throwing out ideas.
 
Anyone else feel like the ideologies of the 1900s should play more of a role, You often see communist Germany allied with the british empire etc.

Not in the quite bad way CIV v handled it, But perhaps one should be able to choose between ideology similar to religion, And it actually effecting how you play. Dunno, just throwing out ideas.
I feel like civics mattered more for AI opinion in the industrial/global/digital age in 1.17.
 
Anyone else feel like the ideologies of the 1900s should play more of a role, You often see communist Germany allied with the british empire etc.

Not in the quite bad way CIV v handled it, But perhaps one should be able to choose between ideology similar to religion, And it actually effecting how you play. Dunno, just throwing out ideas.
So let's imagine a religion-kind mechanism?
Suggest that there are three types of ideologies: Liberalism, Communism and Fascism, unlocked by Civil Liberty / Labour Unions / Psychology. They spread like a religion and may affect one's stability (through official ideology popularity), diplomacy and civic preference. They also provide basic modifiers on science / building production / military production etc.
It may add some more fun to late game because you can affect an AI's behaviour or stability by spreading or switching ideologies, and the so-boring American UHV can be replaced with controlling 75% of the world with those sharing liberalism idelogies (and let Russia and China be the rivalry counterpart).
 
Anyone else feel like the ideologies of the 1900s should play more of a role, You often see communist Germany allied with the british empire etc.

Not in the quite bad way CIV v handled it, But perhaps one should be able to choose between ideology similar to religion, And it actually effecting how you play. Dunno, just throwing out ideas.
I feel like civics mattered more for AI opinion in the industrial/global/digital age in 1.17.
So let's imagine a religion-kind mechanism?
Suggest that there are three types of ideologies: Liberalism, Communism and Fascism, unlocked by Civil Liberty / Labour Unions / Psychology. They spread like a religion and may affect one's stability (through official ideology popularity), diplomacy and civic preference. They also provide basic modifiers on science / building production / military production etc.
It may add some more fun to late game because you can affect an AI's behaviour or stability by spreading or switching ideologies, and the so-boring American UHV can be replaced with controlling 75% of the world with those sharing liberalism idelogies (and let Russia and China be the rivalry counterpart).

Leoreth had talked about this a *while* back as an idea for 1.17, don't remember if anything ever came of it though
 
Leoreth had talked about this a *while* back as an idea for 1.17, don't remember if anything ever came of it though
I have vague memories of this, maybe my brain decided it was real? I'd love for an ideology system to be present in the game. Start with monarchism being the default, then liberalism comes along, then communism, then fascism... It would spice up diplomacy a lot more in the endgame, I think.
 
Considering cases like Portugal declaring itself as aspiring towards forming a Communist society while being largely indistinguishable from other Capitalist European countries, perhaps it'd be better if State Ideology was something you picked independent from Civics if possible. Covers those edge cases.

Really like the idea of things like NATO, Warsaw Pact, etc as ideological congresses on top of the World Congress. Would be a much more appropriate place to put those "mandatory civic" votes.
 
Last edited:
The "mandatory civic" shouldn't always be the last one in each column. IMO the General Secretary could impose any of them or at least the one they're currently adopting.
 
The "mandatory civic" shouldn't always be the last one in each column. IMO the General Secretary could impose any of them or at least the one they're currently adopting.
That's what I mean, they'd be rather perfect for ideological world congresses, something like

Capitalism: Individualism, Free Enterprise

Leninism: Bureaucracy, Central Planning

Fascism: Stratocracy, Totalitarianism

Fundamentalism: Depends on state religion

ideally things the ideologies generally universally agree on, for example Despotism has historically not been a deal breaker for Capitalism
 
The "mandatory civic" shouldn't always be the last one in each column. IMO the General Secretary could impose any of them or at least the one they're currently adopting.
Yeah, vanilla Civ IV's UN function reeks of Fukuyama-esque "end of history" mindset. Free market secular liberal democracy is obviously the end state of all human civilization, regardless of their history, culture, or circumstances! Given the spirit of the 90s and early 2000s, I can understand why they were operating on this mindset, but 20 years of hindsight shows us that history is not at an end and neither is free market secular liberal democracy a guaranteed way of organizing a society.
 
Back
Top Bottom