Suggestions and Requests

[Imperator Knoedel]

Stop trying to troll me.

I am not, you are just paranoid.

Knoedel's back, yay!

Not really, not in the sense of doing any heavy modding work, just lurking in the forums.

 

[Leoreth]

I've been thinking about this a lot, and I was wondering, do holy shrines have an advantage on faster speeds? It seems to me a 20 gold cap on marathon is more useful than a 20 gold cap on normal.

Why? The overall number of cities is the same with every speed. On slower game speeds you have more turns to collect the shrine income.

I am not, you are just paranoid.

Then drop the Shafer stuff.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

I have a question and four requests:
1. How do you create unique units that don't belong to your civ with the World Builder? For example, I can't find a way to place a Huluganni.
2. Ethiopia should be playable or at least existent in the 600 AD and 1700 AD scenarios.
3. There are some UHVs that seem undoable as for today: Tibet (hard if not impossible to spread Buddhism to 30% of the world, should be reduced to 25 or 20 per cent), Carthage (Hard to conquer Italy, which somehow includes Melpum, and no hay of getting 5000 gold in 200 AD)
4. Why is Saigon important enough to take space from Cambodia? could we move Angkor/Phnom Penh 1 tile east and have Hanoi be removed or placed south? Especially in the 1700 AD scenario, as it seems odd that Khmer and Thai switch places once one collapses.
5. I once tried this myself, but for some reason some windows were popping up in the late game (something about an error, but the game could still kind of work): More pre-placed independent cities near other civ's spawning areas, so they can start a little more developed or not being alone. My ideas were:
-Ninua, Ur, and Niwt-Rst/Waset (Thebes) in 3000 BC. Ninua and Ur would be Babylon's neighbours that they would conquer either militarily or through culture flip. Egypt's capital would be moved to Ineb-Hedj (Memphis) as Thebes would not be the capital until the Middle kingdom.
-Pyongyang in either 2333 or 100 BC.
-Knossos in Crete in 2000 BC. This would represent the Minoans, and some islands, and resources could be placed around Crete, as well as a metal (Iron or copper) on the eastern tile of the island.
-Kyouto in either 660 BC or 270 AD, representing pre-Buddhist Japan, or moving Japan's spawning date there.
-Koumbi Saleh in 300 AD. This would represent the pre-Malian kingdom of Ghana, and they would have a pre-built city upon spawn.
-Great Zimbabwe in 1200 AD.
-Honolulu in 1795 AD.
-Pre-placed Ulanbaatar in the 1700 AD scenario.
-Ulundi in 1800 AD (Native).

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

-Ninua, Ur, and Niwt-Rst/Waset (Thebes) in 3000 BC. Ninua and Ur would be Babylon's neighbours that they would conquer either militarily or through culture flip. Egypt's capital would be moved to Ineb-Hedj (Memphis) as Thebes would not be the capital until the Middle kingdom.
-Pyongyang in either 2333 or 100 BC.
-Knossos in Crete in 2000 BC. This would represent the Minoans, and some islands, and resources could be placed around Crete, as well as a metal (Iron or copper) on the eastern tile of the island.
-Kyouto in either 660 BC or 270 AD, representing pre-Buddhist Japan, or moving Japan's spawning date there.
-Koumbi Saleh in 300 AD. This would represent the pre-Malian kingdom of Ghana, and they would have a pre-built city upon spawn.
-Great Zimbabwe in 1200 AD.
-Honolulu in 1795 AD.
-Pre-placed Ulanbaatar in the 1700 AD scenario.
-Ulundi in 1800 AD (Native).

I like some of those ideas. Let me rephrase; I like all of those ideas, but some of them are impractical. For instance, independent cities on islands are very hard for the computer to take. For that reason, Knossos and Honolulu are best settled, not conquered.

I don't like the idea of Kyoto spawning independently, as I think the current spawning time and progression best mimics Japanese history.

Pyongyang being independent has my vote, simply because Korea does not found the city enough.

 

[Tigranes]

As a physicist I feel palpable disappointment when I see how Superconductivity does not introduce anything new to the world and only acts as a stepping stone for other technologies. Superconductors have found widespread applications in the military, for example. High-temperature superconducting(HTS) SQUIDS are being used by the U.S. NAVY to detect mines and submarines. And, significantly smaller motors are being built for NAVY ships using superconducting wire and "tape". In mid-July, 2001, American Superconductor unveiled a 5000-horsepower motor made with superconducting wire. An even larger 36.5MW HTS ship propulsion motor was delivered to the U.S. Navy in late 2006 The newest application for HTS wire is in the degaussing of naval vessels. American Superconductor has announced the development of a superconducting degaussing cable. Degaussing of a ship's hull eliminates residual magnetic fields which might otherwise give away a ship's presence. In addition to reduced power requirements, HTS degaussing cable offers reduced size and weight.

I hope all this info will inspire Leo to move stealth destroyers (and stealth bombers) to superconductors tech, while supermaterials would be used for space. Meaning, if you are opting for conquest instead of space, you don't have to tech any further down the tree.

As I did before, I would again lobby for the 3rd type of submarine unit in this game: Ballistic missile submarines. They differ in purpose from attack submarines and cruise missile submarines; while attack submarines specialize in combat with other vessels (including enemy submarines and merchant shipping), and cruise missile submarines are designed to attack large warships and tactical targets on land, the primary mission of the ballistic missile is nuclear deterrence. They serve as the third leg of the nuclear triad in countries which also operate nuclear-armed land based missiles and aircraft. The invisibility and mobility of SSBNs offer a reliable means of deterrence against an attack (by maintaining the threat of a second strike), as well as a potential surprise first strike capability.

 

[merijn_v1]

I have a question and four requests:
1. How do you create unique units that don't belong to your civ with the World Builder? For example, I can't find a way to place a Huluganni.

There is a button called "Hide Inactive", which is enabled by default. Disable it and you will be able to build every unit in the WB.

 

[Alexius08]

I like some of those ideas. Let me rephrase; I like all of those ideas, but some of them are impractical. For instance, independent cities on islands are very hard for the computer to take. For that reason, Knossos and Honolulu are best settled, not conquered.

I'm in favor of spawning Knossos but not Honolulu. Greece would flip the city when they spawn.

 

[Leoreth]

Trafalgar, in my opinion, is simply too powerful, but only for a short time. I would much rather balance that out. How about reducing it to 25+ production bonus, but the experience bonus does not expire?

Are you talking pre or post new tech tree? In case of the latter, it already does not expire anymore. In general I don't think the wonder is too powerful, as the scope of the effect (naval units) is not very widespread or relevant for most games.

 

[mccp77]

I'm in favor of spawning Knossos but not Honolulu. Greece would flip the city when they spawn.

I second this. An independent Knossos would add to gameplay.

A barbarian Nubia would also be cool to threaten Egypt in the south.

In the far east an independent Hanoi starting in 2900BC would be great to represent the Hong Bang dynasty.

China could also start in 2100BC which is historically accurate as opposed to 3000BC.

And then of course, I strongly support the expansion of Mesopotamia by a square and the inclusion of Assyria as playable.

The Bronze age on the whole could use a little bit of work to spice things up before Persia spawns.

 

[mccp77]

Could be something like, "first civ to contact them with rifles researched." If you already have contact when you complete the research, the troops show up immediatly. It could also be tied to tech era.

I like the idea, but railroads and biology should be the key techs. That's when you get the maxim machine gun and the first counter measures to tropical disease. Conquerors could come in 3 waves: Muskets + Astronomy (Americas), Rifles + Economics (Asia), and Railroad + Biology (Africa). Seems historically accurate and mechanically sound.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

I'm in favor of spawning Knossos but not Honolulu. Greece would flip the city when they spawn.

Exactly. Greece would flip Knossos. However, Honolulu also makes sense, as Hawaii was one of the last Polynesian kingdoms to lose independence.

Carthage isn't that hard. Found Qart-Hadasht as your capital and another city in Spain, research Horseback Riding and Currency and then turn off research. After you build Great Cothon start rushing elephants with gold and with the whip and you should be able to beat the Romans. Make sure to raze Rome and salt the earth or some Legions will spawn there to help the AI conquer Greece. You can get the money with a GM sent to India. Tibet is doable if you start as China in 3000BC and don't found Confucianism or Taoism, though it's harder to find a city a good city to spawn the 5 GPs in.

With Carthage I meant the current tech tree, as it takes even more technologies to build the Great Cothon and unlock war elephants and markets. As for Tibet, that looks like a good idea, but there are regions where Buddhism is now locked. I can no longer spread Buddhism west of Persia, so that UHV's percentage should be reduced.


Alternatively, Ur could spawn as a pre-placed Town rather than a city.

For those that want Assyria playable, sorry but that is not currently available in this mod's state (I have a lot of civs that I would like to see here):

Spoiler :

Armenia, Anasazi, Sioux, Australia, Zulu, Zimbabwe, Boer, Scotland/Celts, Sweden, Kazakh, Vietnam, Burma, Peru, Hittites, Hebrew/Israel, two or three Nigerians.

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Are you talking pre or post new tech tree? In case of the latter, it already does not expire anymore. In general I don't think the wonder is too powerful, as the scope of the effect (naval units) is not very widespread or relevant for most games.

I suppose I'll just stop voicing an opinion until 1.15 is out and I know what I'm talking about

 

[mccp77]

Exactly. Greece would flip Knossos. However, Honolulu also makes sense, as Hawaii was one of the last Polynesian kingdoms to lose independence.

It doesn't make sense for gameplay reasons -- AI America would have a hard time conquering it. Plus, it just wasn't that important.

Alternatively, Ur could spawn as a pre-placed Town rather than a city.

I like this idea. Any historical representation is better than none.

For those that want Assyria playable, sorry but that is not currently available in this mod's state (I have a lot of civs that I would like to see here):

Spoiler :

Armenia, Anasazi, Sioux, Australia, Zulu, Zimbabwe, Boer, Scotland/Celts, Sweden, Kazakh, Vietnam, Burma, Peru, Hittites, Hebrew/Israel, two or three Nigerians.

Then accommodations should be made. I've already argued this point at length on the "what new civs would you like to see thread", so I'm just going to explain this once. Assyria was the single most important civilization in the world for 500 years, and alot of its legacy in terms of imperial organization was passed on to later empires. It's the bronze age historical equivalent of not including Persia or Rome.

It is more important than any of the civs you just listed.

 

[Genghis Khaiser]

Why are slaves no longer able to build improvements? I understand if they can be sacrificed to rush buildings but in the meantime they could also serve as cheap workers (as in real life).

By the way, I'm glad the African War Elephant was changed to suit the new tech tree.

 

[catacau]

Anyone thought about implementing a high to low option? I think i saw this in A New Dawn mod once, not sure though. In the mod you had to play with a Civilization and achieve the first score, when you achieve it, you are relocated to play with another Civilization and, again, achieve first score with her and again relocated to another Civilization. Then you have to win the game with the third Civ.

I was thinking in applying this but with UHV, like you have to achieve 3 UHV (or maybe just 2) with one Civ then go to the next Civ repeat and to the next one. It would be fun to play and find a strategy to win in those conditions.

 

[Fresol]

The current tech tree and starting techs do not allow Vikings to found a city in North America before 1050 AD as they have to resreach alchemy and guilds before compass. Is it possible to loosen the "ocean turns into coast" condition to "any civilization discovers compass" instead? Otherwise we need some alternative solutions.

 

[Tigranes]

Stealth Destroyer and Stealth Bomber now require Superconductors

 

[Ecthy]

I feel like the capacity to buy city improvements has been moved to much too late a point in the current develop. In vanilla BtS it came at the end of renaissance with democracy ("Universal Suffrage" or something like that). In DoC with old techs, same era but different path, with Economic ("Capitalism"). Now it's been moved into global era with some odd tech and civic noone knows anything about (at least I don't hah!).

So here's my suggestion: make city structure buying possible with Individualism, that comes with Civil Liberty tech.

Two arguments for that:
(1) It's back to late renaissance. Before industrial corporations, actually.

(2) It'll provide an incentive to switch to Individualism, thus make an actual choice on production civics, for non-cottage civs. Otherwise they'd just stick with Caste System / Manorialism until the far future since the only other incentive for Individualism would be the stability bonus together with Tolerance, Free Market and Republic/Democracy.

 

[Leoreth]

Why are slaves no longer able to build improvements? I understand if they can be sacrificed to rush buildings but in the meantime they could also serve as cheap workers (as in real life).

The AI would use them to build improvements only. Instead of messing too much with the unit AI, I removed the ability.

Anyone thought about implementing a high to low option? I think i saw this in A New Dawn mod once, not sure though. In the mod you had to play with a Civilization and achieve the first score, when you achieve it, you are relocated to play with another Civilization and, again, achieve first score with her and again relocated to another Civilization. Then you have to win the game with the third Civ.

I was thinking in applying this but with UHV, like you have to achieve 3 UHV (or maybe just 2) with one Civ then go to the next Civ repeat and to the next one. It would be fun to play and find a strategy to win in those conditions.

Sounds cool. What I definitely want to do is to enable you to continue the game as a civ of your choice after you win or lose, including those that have not spawned yet. Your idea could easily be a game option for this.

The current tech tree and starting techs do not allow Vikings to found a city in North America before 1050 AD as they have to resreach alchemy and guilds before compass. Is it possible to loosen the "ocean turns into coast" condition to "any civilization discovers compass" instead? Otherwise we need some alternative solutions.

Okay, let me look at the techs.

That was a good suggestion. Superconductors needed effects and Supermaterials had too many, and those two units came too late anyway.

 

[Fresol]

I like the recent git update which introduces the split of mounted units into light cavalry and heavy cavalry, while lowering the overall strength of mounted units. I didn't enjoying seeing strength 8 barbarian horse archers rampaging all over the map.

However, a new problem(?) should be fixed: chariot is considered light cavalry and is not countered by the spearman family. Since chariot can be upgraded into horseman which is a heavy cavalry unit, shouldn't it be also considered heavy cavalry? (They fights in melee. Or maybe they throw spears of something I don't know. Point is shouldn't they be countered by spearmen?)

Miscellaneous:
1. Conquistadors should have +50% attack againt light swordsmen instead of axemen.
2. Keshiks are too squishy against heavy spearmen. Or even heavy swordmen. Keshiks are more like horse archers, so maybe just revert them back to horse archers?
3. Spearmen's v.s. heavy cavalry bonus is too much given the reduced heavy cavalry strength. 50% is likely enough, considering the cost difference between these two types of units. Then again, heavy swordsmen are too powerful, they have 50% chance to win when attacking lancers, even on open terrains. +x% strength instead of attack for mounted units seems more appropriate.
4. The barbarian axemen in Europe should be replaced by lightswordmen or swordsmen or something else. In general, there are axemen barbarians and civ spawn axemen that should be replaced.
5. Is there a general rule about which mounted unit can flank attack against which siege weapon? The attack bonus and the ability to flank attack seems random. (e.g Horsemen get bonus against ALL siege weapons. But they only flank attack catapults (which is reasonable). And after they upgrade into lancers, they lose the attack bonus, while being able to also flank attack trebuchets. So are lancers better at flanking or not? Another example is cavalry has +50% attack against artillery but not cannon, which makes fighting cannons almost harder for them. Of course earlier siege units have much lower strength so even without modifiers they can be easily dealt with.)
6. I don't know anything about military history, but cavalry seems a bit weak compared to contemporary gunpowder units. They should at least have a bit more strength (13 or 14) and immunity to first strikes.
...
n. Mali is miserable.