Suggestions and Requests

[Leoreth]

The cultural borders thing is intriguing, actually.

 

[Panopticon]

Or tech trade requires trade network.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

TBH I don't like both ideas. Completeing 100% of UHV goals is better.
As for the east-west trade, units shouldn't be able to explore outside cutlural borders. So China can still reach Byzantium, but through India, not Siberia.

Hold on, wouldn't that make it impossible to build new cities?

 

[citis]

Hold on, wouldn't that make it impossible to build new cities?

Yes, some modification needed here. Maybe make settler a project, or give a radius from nearest city.

 

[ImNotHere]

Maybe make it so that military units can only go 3-4 tiles away from cultural borders until some tech, maybe compass. Civilian units should be able to either ignore this rule or be able to go farther from cultural borders, since settlers, workers, and missionaries can be considered more pioneer-like than the military. Maintaining a small camp of workers or settlers is something that happened all the time in the past. Sending soldiers into the wilderness was more rare.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Couldn't we just increase barbarian pressure and upkeep for units outside cultural borders until some Industrial tech?

 

[Leoreth]

I think Panopticon's suggestion is actually the most effective and most accurate solution. Exploring Siberia as China might be weird looking, but doesn't really impact the game. The main reason to do so is establishing contact with Europe to trade techs, so the motivation to do so would disappear with such a change as well. Tying tech trade to trade routes could also increase the importance of the silk route.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

Tech trade requiring trade network seems pretty logical. Additionally, maybe Scouts and Explorers could have increased visibility to make them better explorers? I think that that would be better than not allowing military units to go outside of borders, which is imo both unfun and unrealistic.

 

[NerfCothons]

Perhaps eliminate the scout unit altogether and position some barbarians or modified cape mechanic at the choke points created by the marshes and the lakes north of Kashgar.

 

[NerfCothons]

On an unrelated note. I still think that guilds is almost always preferable to mercantilism and thus mercantilism needs a buff. Possible buffs could include:

1. Moving the naval dominance custom house build speed buff to mercantilism.
2. +1 happiness with custom house.
3. Moving the slavery plantation commerce buff to mercantilism.
4. +1 hammer with plantation to mercantilism.

 

[ozqar]

About Mercantilism, how about providing some significant commerce (and happiness?) bonus to "Metropolitan" cities? (ie, those in the same continent as the capital), perhaps at the expense of higher maintenance (and unhappiness?) (representing increased trade costs) in colonial cities? Of course, the bonus for one single metropolitan city would be more than the cost for one single colonial city.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Why don't we move the removal of city distance maintenance costs from Totalitarianism over to to Mercantilism? Wouldn't that make sense considering it's all about widespread global empires?

 

[citis]

The problem with mercantilism is that it kills foreign trade routes. Nothing can balance this. Moreover, implying the latest route-tech mechanism (which I find good), it will kill foreign tech trade.

The best solution IMO is an effect similar to free market:
+1 DOMESTIC trade route per city
+30% in capital

As for the guilds, decentralisation is often more preferable than guilds due to high maintainance cost.

Mercantilism would be sometimes preferable if it really protected from plagues.

Why don't we move the removal of city distance maintenance costs from Totalitarianism over to to Mercantilism? Wouldn't that make sense considering it's all about widespread global empires?

Then players would use mercantilism to keep mega empires, especially fascist ones.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

I have been wanting to play this modmod for years, but for a variety of reasons I have never managed to. In the other hand, here are my suggestions:

My ideas for new civs:

Spoiler :

CELTS:
And I mean the Celts from the British Isles, and replacing those in France with Gauls (I know those are Celts too, just so the Romans can take them as they wish). And by introducing them, Scotland and Brittany should be removed from France’s and England’s core areas until the Celts die.
Spawns at either 50 BC or 400 AD in Edinburgh, with settlers throughout Scotland, Ireland, and Britanny.
UP: Druids: Religious buildings give XP to units.
UU: Pictish Warrior (renamed Gaulish Warrior), and Gallowglass (Longswordsman, extra hill attack and movement).
UHV:
-Do not loose a single city before 1300 AD.
-Control England and France by 1500 AD.
-Kill 50 enemy units.

HUNGARY:
Spawns at 1000 AD in Budapest. If it collapses, its territory is handed over to Austria HRE.
UP: Nomad Heritage: Cavalry units cost -75% maintenance.
UU: Huszar (Knight, has the strength of a Cuirassier).
UB: Vegvar (Castle, +1 Culture).
UHV:
-Be the strongest civilization in Europe by 1400 AD.
-Do not loose a single city before 1700 AD.
-Build five Vegvars, five Stables and two Cathedrals before 1700 AD.
Scratch that if Hungary’s existence would crowd Central Europe.

SWEDEN:
Make Sweden a separate civilization from the rest of Scandinavia:
-Spawns at 1050 AD in Stockholm.
UP: Nobel Prize: Number of Great People required for Golden Ages is reduced by half.
UU: Hakkapeliittaa (Or however it is written), replaces Cuirassier, earns experience 100% faster. Carolean (replaces Musketman, see below), +25% when attacking or defending cities.
UB: Borg (Castle) Does not become obsolete with Economics.
UHV:
-Control or vassalize Denmark, Norway, and the whole Baltic Sea by 1750 AD.
-Have 20000 culture by 1900 AD.
-Be the most technologically advanced civilization in 1900 AD.
(I would have suggested doing the same with Norway but that would leave little space for Denmark, besides it has spend a lot of its history joined with Denmark or Sweden).

Other ideas I have are Belgium, Canada and Australia but my brain is kind of dry for them.
Non-playable civs I would suggest:
-Armenia, spawning at Artaxat in 800 BC (it could be a playable civ anyway).
-Manchuria, spawing at Shenyang and Harbin in 1600 AD if China is dead.
-Sioux, spawning at 1850 AD.
-Teutons, spawning at 1250 AD in Königsberg. Most likely they will be absorbed by either the Prussians or the Polish.
-Vietnam, spawning at Hanoi in 250 BC.

-Change the Japanese republican name, I do not recall there being a historical Republic of Japan, even now when the Emperor has no role in politics. I would suggest "Crowned Republic of Japan" "State of Japan".
-Make the AI of certain civs less likely to adopt communist or republican civics. I have seen things like a communist France. Also, some historic republics switching to monarchies, like Rome or the Netherlands. In other words, the AI being likely to adopt civics either they historically had, or were going to have (for example, I think the Second Spanish Republic was communist at its essence, and Mexico had two short lived monarchies).
-Add Shinto as a religion. It spawns with Japan, but the Japanese have both Buddhism and Shinto.
-Also, is it too much to ask for two unique units and buildings per civ?

I am sure you have heard about History Rewritten, because it has plenty of ideas you could borrow besides some that would be out of place in DoC.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

The problem with mercantilism is that it kills foreign trade routes. Nothing can balance this.

Mercantilism would be sometimes preferable if it really protected from plagues.


Then players would use mercantilism to keep mega empires, especially fascist ones.

So which one is it now? If there is nothing that can balance it why do you name two scenarios where it would be useful?

I don't see any problem with that, and in fact I think Mercantilism (maybe if we rename it to Protectionism or Autarky) is the best fit for Nazi Germany's economic system. The whole point of it is self sufficiency and running a huge empire without giving a crap about what the rest of the world thinks about you.

 

[agentxorange]

I have been wanting to play this modmod for years, but for a variety of reasons I have never managed to. In the other hand, here are my suggestions:

Wouldn't you usually want to play a mod before making suggestions?

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Wouldn't you usually want to play a mod before making suggestions?

But where's the fun in talking about something you have any idea of?

 

[agentxorange]

But where's the fun in talking about something you have any idea of?

"I have no idea what you're talking about but I'm going to give you suggestions"

 

[citis]

So which one is it now? If there is nothing that can balance it why do you name two scenarios where it would be useful?

I don't see any problem with that, and in fact I think Mercantilism (maybe if we rename it to Protectionism or Autarky) is the best fit for Nazi Germany's economic system. The whole point of it is self sufficiency and running a huge empire without giving a crap about what the rest of the world thinks about you.

Mercantilism represents the eploixtation of colonies from colonial powers. It isn't autarky, and it isn't meant to be used in industrial era. Nazi Germany run free market, it imported and exported many goods. Moreover, its economy was highly based on corporations, many of them still exist.

 

[AdrienIer]

I have seen things like a communist France.

This is actually a plausible alternate history.