Suggestions and Requests

[Visard]

Some suggestions to 3000BC start.

Add Silver in Sardinia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_mining_in_Sardinia
"Silver extraction was one of the earliest in Europe, known since the early Chalcolithic."
"The mining production during the whole period of Roman rule was assessed at about one thousand tons of silver."

Change Crete to hills and add Marble or Stone:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30102801
"An Ancient Marble Quarry in Eastern Crete"

Add mine and road to Cypros in 3000BC start, since AI cannot do it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_industry_of_Cyprus
"Copper production can be dated to the fourth millennium BC"

Give AI Greece one random settler in Marseille, Syracuse, Napoli, Cyrene, Ephesus or Halicarnassus to represent the Hellenic colonization.

New effect for Sphinx: Gain a free Great Engineer, to speed up production of the Pyramids (~2500 BC).

 

[Leoreth]

I hereby respectfully plea to swap French and Spanish start dates. Gameplay reason: less opportunities for Spanish humans to raze Indy Bordouex and more fair game for all. Historical immersion reason: Franks were traditionally known as the first Catholic Barbarians. Right now Ragnar elects himself Pope in early 700s...

I think there's going to be some discussion of changing some civs' spawn dates after the release, including France (it should probably spawn in the 5th century).

Already planned for after release.

 

[Lokki242]

Give AI Greece one random settler in Marseille, Syracuse, Napoli or Halicarnassus to represent the Hellenic colononization.

Love love love this idea

 

[1SDANi]

New effect for Sphinx: Gain a free Great Engineer, to speed up production of the Pyramids (~2500 BC).

In my modcomp I made the Pyramids require a wonder in the city it's built in. In my testing if Human Egypt gets the Sphinx they are sure to get the Pyramids.

 

[Leoreth]

I recently ran 10 Persia starts and Egypt had the Pyramids in 8 of them. Arbitrary extra requirements are not needed.

 

[1SDANi]

I recently ran 10 Persia starts and Egypt had the Pyramids in 8 of them. Arbitrary extra requirements are not needed.

But did they also have Sphinx?

 

[Leoreth]

Mostly yes.

 

[1SDANi]

Mostly yes.

How? I can't even consistently get Pyramids and Sphinx!

 

[Cosmos1985]

I don't really have a good solution for this, but it seems a bit silly that if you capture a city in a later era, it sometimes can make sense for you to raze the city and then send a settler to the exact same spot and build a new city there in order to get your free buildings there, as the hammer cost for a new settler is way lower than the hammer cost for all the buildings you get upon building a new city - and the settler can just be built in one of your old cities with major production, so there's that too. Would it perhaps make sense to implement something like a reduced cost for buildings that you've "unlocked" per your era progression? Like, if settling a new city would get you a granary for free, then already existing cities which doesn't have a granary can build it for maybe half the regular hammer cost, or something like that?

 

[1SDANi]

I don't really have a good solution for this, but it seems a bit silly that if you capture a city in a later era, it sometimes can make sense for you to raze the city and then send a settler to the exact same spot and build a new city there in order to get your free buildings there, as the hammer cost for a new settler is way lower than the hammer cost for all the buildings you get upon building a new city - and the settler can just be built in one of your old cities with major production, so there's that too. Would it perhaps make sense to implement something like a reduced cost for buildings that you've "unlocked" per your era progression? Like, if settling a new city would get you a granary for free, then already existing cities which doesn't have a granary can build it for maybe half the regular hammer cost, or something like that?

Maybe if you capture a city you get all of the new city buildings once the Occupation ends? I'm not sure if it makes sense from a historical perspective, but it makes sense to build the bare necessities in cities that you control.

 

[Tigranes]

I don't really have a good solution for this, but it seems a bit silly that if you capture a city in a later era, it sometimes can make sense for you to raze the city and then send a settler to the exact same spot and build a new city there in order to get your free buildings there, as the hammer cost for a new settler is way lower than the hammer cost for all the buildings you get upon building a new city - and the settler can just be built in one of your old cities with major production, so there's that too. Would it perhaps make sense to implement something like a reduced cost for buildings that you've "unlocked" per your era progression? Like, if settling a new city would get you a granary for free, then already existing cities which doesn't have a granary can build it for maybe half the regular hammer cost, or something like that?

That's why unlike vanila game you get a -10 stability hit immediately, which means you cannot always abuse this situation. People who are paranoid about their stability rarely raze cities, but when they do -- sometimes it is worth to replace useless city with something useful. But I do think that starting Renaissance Settle training should reduce the population of the builder city by -1, then -2 for Industrial Era, -3 for global and -4 for digital. This will bring some balance and realism to the world.

 

[Orbii]

Any thoughts on how to make Forts as an improvement more useful? One that I thought of is making it slow down movement, similar to forests and hills. It would reflect how they impose zones of control and would help to slow down fast moving cavalry stacks. The only examples of possible flatland chokes I can think of are the Bessarabian Gap, and some of the plots north of Beijing and between Transoxania and Persia where there's flatland gaps through hills.

 

[Leoreth]

I had once considered to let (defended) forts (and city) block movement between tiles that are both adjacent to a fort or city. This way enemies would be forced to take the fort before being able to push deeper into the territory. This rule itself would be easy to implement, but overall this is more challenging because I have no idea how the AI would deal with it or be taught to do so.

 

[Leon Michiel]

I noticed unit naming options in the bug tool, and it made me wonder - has dynamic unit naming ever been considered? As a quick (and not thought through) example, a English lancer would be named knight, a French lancer a chevalière. There's probably better names but just for the idea.

 

[Leoreth]

I don't even know if the dynamic unit naming in BUG actually works, does it? As for dynamic unit names that come by default, I think it would be confusing too quickly. If you don't know the language/terminology in one language you wouldn't know what is going on.

 

[cmakk1012]

I noticed unit naming options in the bug tool, and it made me wonder - has dynamic unit naming ever been considered? As a quick (and not thought through) example, a English lancer would be named knight, a French lancer a chevalière. There's probably better names but just for the idea.

Realism Invictus intensifies

 

[Leoreth]

That's true, RI is really ... hard to get a hold of.

 

[Not_a_bonobo]

I think the distillery building should be scrapped unless it was added in for a very specific purpose. The fact that it gives more gold than a bank is unrealistic and feels like it was added in just because. It gives off C2C repetitiveness vibes.

 

[Tigranes]

I think the distillery building should be scrapped unless it was added in for a very specific purpose. The fact that it gives more gold than a bank is unrealistic and feels like it was added in just because. It gives off C2C repetitiveness vibes.

Legend holds that the tenth-century Russian prince Vladimir the Great rejected Islam as a state religion for the country because of its prohibition of alcohol. Historically, alcohol has been tolerated or even encouraged as a source of revenue.

In the 1540s, Ivan IV began setting up kabaks (кабак) or taverns in his major cities to help fill his coffers; a third of Russian men were in debt to the kabaks by 1648. By 1860, vodka, the national drink, was the source of 40% of the government's revenue.

You get it? 40%. No bank can do it.

 

[Zaddy]

Currently, Textile Industry obsoletes for all civs after 1920. I don't really feel this is accurate; as we've seen in the real world, the textile industry has moved to developing economies as western nations entered a post-industrial economy. Perhaps instead, tie it's expiry to a tech as opposed to a year. Say, Computers?