Suggestions and Requests

[ezzlar]

Random requests:

1. The Sengoku mod features a distinction between Open Borders for trade between the civs and Right of Passage which gives military units right to enter. I would really like this!
2. The Sengoku mod again. Having a crucial resource like Iron gives a boost to build units requiring that resource. But the resource isnt required to build the unit, you just miss the production bonus. I feel this is more realistic. You could almost always get the units you needed historically, it would just be so much more expensive. Different resources could give different bonuses, copper could give a small boost while oil could give a huge boost.
3. The SoI mod. Allow passage over water on foreign territory. No one was able to block the Mediterranean by building a city in southern Spain 2000 years ago.

 

[Leoreth]

The penalty for declaring war lasts also after making peace again, right?

Yes.

Was anyone else confronted with the United Nations not being able to successfully get a secretary general because none of the two candidats were able to get enough votes?In my China-game the nations of the world are meeting the 5th time now and wasting their time because both candidates are too unpopular so all the weaker nations abstain. One of the available candidate has already been exchanged by an other but still the UN stucks.

The new rule to give the smaller nations more power in the UN was a good idea. Maybe you should be able to vote for one of three candidates instead of 2 and decrease the necessary number of votes so there are not so many abstains because the chanche is higher that for more nations there is at least one popular candidate.

Not sure if that would help, more candidates could also split up the vote even more.

I have a small observation, I noticed that the original Hanging Gardens wonder is working as a Floating Gardens one that requires corn, and since that guy (can't remember who it was) renamed them to "Chinampa" in his improved civilopedia modmodmod, I just realized they're meant to represent the Aztec ones. The best name for them would be "Xochimilco" (the way we call them) or "Xochimilco Gardens" (if you want to be more precise). I get that "Floating Gardens" is more generic, but that doesn't ring any bells. In any case, it's not very relevant, just a minor detail.

Also, thanks for the previous and very detailed reply, by the way.

I generally use English names if available, because they are more widely known and usually more evocative if you haven't heard of the wonder before. Otherwise you don't know what you're dealing with with all the Tzecoteopocs and Azacahuitls. It's why it's called the Great Library and not Megale Bibliotheke.

If Rome is alive and not German vassal, then Germany should be called "Kingdom of Germany" and not "Holy Roman Empire".

Good point.

 

[Atreju]

I noticed that the votes from independent nations also count to the total number of votes although the independents aren't allowed to vote in the United Nations. Maybe we should substract the votes from independent nations from total votes or allow them to vote for a candidate.

In my game for example it says to become general secretary of the U.N. at least 66 of 166 votes are required but if I add all the votes of the members together I count a total of 109 votes instead of 166. This means you have to get at least about 63% of the votes instead of 40% to become secretary general what is more than normally needed for a diplomatic victory.

 

[Leoreth]

Okay, I will correct that.

 

[need my speed]

Tzecoteopocs and Azacahuitls

Could you tell me what they are and how you know of them? Google literally has only one result for me; this very thread.

 

[Leoreth]

I just made up some Nahuatl sounding words. Fairly convincingly as it appears

 

[need my speed]

I just made up some Nahuatl sounding words. Fairly convincingly as it appears

Ah, I suspected so. Too bad, as I like Nahuatl - but good job!

 

[ozqar]

I just made up some Nahuatl sounding words. Fairly convincingly as it appears

Yes, your nahuatl was rather convincing.

 

[ozqar]

I was thinking about the civ slot problem you mentioned. As I understand it, Italy is considered a civ separate from Rome (and thus occupying a different slot, right?), while Iran is occupying the same slot as Persia as they're a respawn, same as for the Aztecs/Mexico, and the Mayan/Colombia.

Is there any advantage in granting Italy and Rome two different slots? Because, if there isn't, a couple of slots could be saved by putting together these two; I'd guess that the Byzantines and the Greeks could also share a slot. I can't really imagine a worthwhile situation where both Italy and the Roman Empire are both alive, nor where both the Greeks and the Byzantines are alive. I can't think right now of another couple of civs that would be in this same situation. All that said, I have no idea whether that would be too much work to change and would anyway produce a minimal advantage.

 

[ezzlar]

Flipping cities should give the owner a stability hit based on the number of cities that flip. The effect will decrease over time.

 

[Leoreth]

I was thinking about the civ slot problem you mentioned. As I understand it, Italy is considered a civ separate from Rome (and thus occupying a different slot, right?), while Iran is occupying the same slot as Persia as they're a respawn, same as for the Aztecs/Mexico, and the Mayan/Colombia.

Is there any advantage in granting Italy and Rome two different slots? Because, if there isn't, a couple of slots could be saved by putting together these two; I'd guess that the Byzantines and the Greeks could also share a slot. I can't really imagine a worthwhile situation where both Italy and the Roman Empire are both alive, nor where both the Greeks and the Byzantines are alive. I can't think right now of another couple of civs that would be in this same situation. All that said, I have no idea whether that would be too much work to change and would anyway produce a minimal advantage.

Sure, I could do that. But the whole slot sharing is basically a crutch solution that is very clunky in many ways. In particular, only at most two civs can share a slot, the latter cannot have autoplay, civs that live in shared slots cannot have dynamic cores ... there's probably more.

I want to move to a situation where we have X slots and Y civilizations (where X < Y) so that whenever a new civilization is about to spawn it just takes the next free slot. If all slots are occupied, either a civilization would be foced into collapse or the new civilization would fail to spawn. This would of course require a prioritization of civs so that certain civs which are more relevant for a proper course of the game have precedence for slots. If there are many slots free we could even have additional unplayable civs as more flavorful independents.

 

[sebzilla]

Hmm. I guess that would end up manifesting as a hard limit to the number of active civs at any one time. Should help with late-game turn times!

 

[Leoreth]

My current idea is to aim for 40 slots, which is about 10 less than currently. Subtracting independents, barbarians and natives that makes 36 active civs at most. That rarely happens in my games.

 

[Atreju]

They hate you because you are their enemy, I think this is fair in any situation. And yes the AI does take DPs into account (it's just sometimes rather reckless in general).

That AI hates you because you are at war with them is already represented by the diplomatic penalty "This war spoils our relationship"

I mean how can they hate me even afterwards if they were the aggressor of the war and not me? The defensive treaty is public. I should be angry because they actually declared me war by declaring war to my treaty partner...

There are already diplomatic penalties when the AI wants you to stop deals with your treaty partner(including defensive pact) and you reject. It's like Germany would be angry because France and GB declared war to them although they knew about the defensive treaty with Poland. France and GB weren't the aggressors.

I don't see how it makes sense that the diplomatic penalty "You declared war to us" also applies for fullfilling defensive treaties wich also are treaties to guarantee a system of peace.

 

[Atreju]

Okay, I will correct that.

I'm sorry if I said the mistake is that votes of independent nations are counted. Even without any independent city worldwide the number of total votes is still way too high. The bug is caused somehow else.

 

[Leoreth]

Maybe I took the square root of the sum instead of the sum of the square roots?

 

[ales_]

I want to move to a situation where we have X slots and Y civilizations (where X < Y) so that whenever a new civilization is about to spawn it just takes the next free slot. If all slots are occupied, either a civilization would be foced into collapse or the new civilization would fail to spawn. This would of course require a prioritization of civs so that certain civs which are more relevant for a proper course of the game have precedence for slots. If there are many slots free we could even have additional unplayable civs as more flavorful independents.

In this case, will autoplay work for all civs?

 

[Leoreth]

In this case, will autoplay work for all civs?

Yes, but depending on how flexible the system is it might end up in a way where you can only select 36 different civs in the scenario start screen. Since that does not cover all civilizations (especially in the 3000 BC scenario), I might have to create different versions of these scenarios.

 

[ales_]

The only difference between which would be the civs available for choice, right?
What about the civs that are currently sharing one slot? They will be like all other civs, right?

 

[Leoreth]

The only difference between which would be the civs available for choice, right?
What about the civs that are currently sharing one slot? They will be like all other civs, right?

Yes and yes. That's another reason why I want to make the change, to get rid of all the problems with slot sharing so that you can have Iran or Mexico in autoplay. This doesn't impact performance because civs sharing a slot are never meant to be alive at the same time anyway (except maybe Maya and Colombia).