Suggestions and Requests

[AOS9001]

It's a unique building, so shouldn't it be destroyed when the owner of the city changes?

(But yes, Candi is one of the best UBs, it's so useful and flavorful!)

 

[Dracosolon]

I thought UB reverted to their normal version upon conquest? Though buildings have a chance of disappearing so maybe you were unlucky?

 

[SOVNARKOM]

Can we allow the core areas of the England to expand into Great Britain in the later stages? The current core of the England often has only one city, London, which means they are very fragile

 

[Bickerstaff]

Can we allow the core areas of the England to expand into Great Britain in the later stages? The current core of the England often has only one city, London, which means they are very fragile

This would be great. Aside from effects on the AI, it's been bothering me that London is a bad city to found as a player. This would help with that a lot.

 

[migck]

Seeing how preplaced wonders have their original builders set up in Scenario.py, I'd make the following suggestions:
-Salsal Buddha should be Kushans
-Shwedagon Paya should go to Burma
-Saint Sophia is set as Russian with 1031AD build date, before they even spawn. Should be Rus/Kievan
I'd also propose placing the city of Cuzco and the Machu Picchu wonder in the 1700AD scenario. Hopefully it's obsolete for the Spanish by then so no extra gold but it's still a cool wonder you can visit even today.
And as a stretch, the Spanish could also have Guadalupe Basilica preplaced in Ciudad de México in 1700AD. Initial construction went from 1695 to 1709 or so.

 

[Dracosolon]

Minor UHV suggestion:

The USA have a lot of wonders in this game. Personally I think it would be cool if the UHV ditched the two bridges in favor of even more iconic wonders - that way we could have wonders that are popular symbols of the Americans' self-conception of their own achievements:

- Political: the Statue of Liberty,
- Cultural: Hollywood,
- Economic: the Empire State Building,
- Military: the Pentagon,
- Diplomatic: the United Nations,
- Scientific: Lunar Landing (which would push the deadline to "by 1970").

 

[Enyavar]

From 1920 onwards, the Textile Industry Corporation became "obsolete" and stopped spawning in new cities. And coincidentally, the period in which this decline occurred is when an automotive industry began to emerge, which then developed.

So if there were an Automobile Industry Corporation, it could use ...

Sorry for being late: The "Textile Industry Corporation" is not obsolete. It is still very much around in fact, just moved to other countries.

Rather than tying the corporations to a fixed date (1500, 1700, etc) I suggest to tie them to a technology level. That way, while the industrial forerunners can produce computers and automobiles, "less advanced" nations will still house the textile sweatshops.

 

[manio curio]

A couple of suggestions for Rome:

1- Legion is the English name, in Latin it would be legio if referred to the group of soldiers (the size of a legion changed with time but always more than 1k soldiers), legionarius to the individual soldier.
2- Ballista is not very useful during the game and I would also say it is not that iconic in terms of Roman military units. I would suggest to replace it with the auxilia (it is a plural noun) which would replace a spearman, I would grant them a strength promotion by default as bonus. Alternatively it can replace the horseman with the same strength promotion. Another option would be: if a Roman unit kills a barbarian unit it can 'produce' a foederatus, it would be an infantry unit slightly weaker than the legion, maybe 7 of strength with no bonuses. Foederati were very popular from Constantine onwards.
3- If no suitable unit replacement for the ballista can be found I would suggest introducing a second unique building instead: castrum. It would replace the barracks and provide twice the experience.

 

[Dracosolon]

I think one problem with the Ballista is that the Legion (perhaps should be Legionary then) is so good that you don't strictly need siege weapons for your conquests, and if you're traveling by boat, or building additional units, then it might be more efficient to have two Legions instead of one Legion one Ballista.

 

[1SDANi]

I think one problem with the Ballista is that the Legion (perhaps should be Legionary then) is so good that you don't strictly need siege weapons for your conquests, and if you're traveling by boat, or building additional units, then it might be more efficient to have two Legions instead of one Legion one Ballista.

Legions are also just a lot more versatile, they can attack cities, they can capture cities, they get defensive bonuses, and they can build roads, Ballista meanwhile cost more and can only do one of those.

 

[a pen-dragon]

That depends on what you want to attack, and with how many units. It makes sense to add a few Ballistas in larges stacks for siege, as that will reduce losses.

Additionally I like that the Romans have a unique unit depicting their prowess at conducting a siege.

Adding a melee UU that is weaker than legions makes little sense, as legions are sufficiently cheap to field in large numbers.

 

[IrishDragon]

Part bug / part suggestion

On Rome, I don't think they should take vassals, at least not of civs within their historical empire. Have them conquer the areas outright or settle them instead. They tend to carry vassals (Greece, Carthage) along ahistorically past their sell by date or they do something like this intercontinental Celtic province

Spoiler :

Loaded up a few games (France, Norse, Portugal) to see the new Boru leader for the Celts, but it was still Brennus (Portugal game they were a rebirth). Also haven't seen Rome make it to Britain to found London

 

[Leoreth]

Dynamic names and leaders are not implemented yet.

 

[manio curio]

That depends on what you want to attack, and with how many units. It makes sense to add a few Ballistas in larges stacks for siege, as that will reduce losses.

Additionally I like that the Romans have a unique unit depicting their prowess at conducting a siege.

Adding a melee UU that is weaker than legions makes little sense, as legions are sufficiently cheap to field in large numbers.

You are right, I better come up with something better as a potential Ballista replacement.

However I can only think of Athens defended with 2 hoplites and with walls as a scenario where I would prefer having a ballista rather than a legion. I usually reuse the same legions throughout the whole conquest of the Mediterranean basin and with the right promotions legions have good combat odds in basically any case. If there had to be a very well defended and walled city I can always grab settler and build a city a few tiles next rather than committing too many troops for a siege, which there wouldn't be much time for anyways.

 

[FraggleJock]

You are right, I better come up with something better as a potential Ballista replacement.

However I can only think of Athens defended with 2 hoplites and with walls as a scenario where I would prefer having a ballista rather than a legion. I usually reuse the same legions throughout the whole conquest of the Mediterranean basin and with the right promotions legions have good combat odds in basically any case. If there had to be a very well defended and walled city I can always grab settler and build a city a few tiles next rather than committing too many troops for a siege, which there wouldn't be much time for anyways.

Can you use the sacrifice mechanic to create a Ballista from a legion. Then you'd have a Ballista on the rare case you would prefer them

 

[IrishDragon]

I'd like to see civ births cause more wars, not many civs rose peacefully.

I assumme the 'rise of' mechanic will be untouched for gameplay reasons, but it could be looked at for rebirths, especially in the later part of the game. Remove the restraint that prevents declaring on a newly reborn civ. If the reborn civ is taking cities from an already present civ, increase the liklihood of war between them. Have the newly reborn civ canvas existing civs in the area for support declaring on the former master, and give a +1 diplo bonus of something like "You supported our independence" or the existing "You gave us help" for any civ that declares (If there's a way to tie this into religion or civics all the better). Also have existing civs evaluate the impact of a newly emerging civ on whatever civ is losing cities, and the possibility of taking the land for itself. E.g. a reborn Italian civ throwing off French domination, would cause say Spain or Germany to look at declaring war on France to take advantage of their instability, or declaring on Italy to nab the cities before a more powerful France takes them back. Given they're rebirths, it shouldn't matter massively if they sometimes get crushed relatively quickly after respawning

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Minor proposal to submit for consideration by all: restore Hungary to Ottoman Expansion area. Reason: flavor/variety, potential vibe check for the Poles (they're getting the haughty idea that They Can Into SPACE), an alternative to the now-yawn-inducing semiannual Ottoman Subjugation of Italy. Also: History!

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Would it be possible and not onerous to implement logging that only tracks Civic changes?

 

[Leoreth]

To what end?

 

[SultanRedSnake]

To what end?

Improve tracking for us lowly players testers. The logging I have in mind would write to a file in the logs folder.