Suggestions and Requests

[Publicola]

Well if you're Portugal, Ponta Delgada is surrounded by 2F3C tiles which isn't the worst I'd say.

Not to mention, you can always start as Phoenicia, plant a city on the Ponta Delgada tile ASAP, build the Great Cothon there, then wait until you're allowed to switch civs.

 

[JHLee]

Yeah, I disagree with the civ6 style ecology grandeur too. Too over-dramatic, and we already have volcanic eruptions, hurricanes and global warming in the game.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

human impact on global climate is negligible, folks. the entire amount of all our pollutants combined amounts to sligthly more than 1% of the atmospheric composition and has virtually no impact on it whatsoever.

It doesn't matter that our pollutants are so little of the atmosphere by mass/volume/whatever.
Similarly to how, when someone farts and it's absolutely horrible, you're not breathing in pure fart. They let out a tiny amount of gas. It's just dispersed, and a tiny concentration of it will affect you greatly.

The amount of energy entering Earth and the amount of energy escaping Earth are the main issues. And some chemicals are very good at absorbing the energy that the Earth emits. They then reemit this in all directions, not just towards space. Without them, we'd be freezing, so we do need some. And so, small changes in their quantities will have small changes relative to their total effect (~30-35˚ of warming). The issue is that those changes aren't small to life on Earth.

Imagine your thermostat is at 20˚. What happens if you increase the temperature by 1%? You don't get 20.2˚, because 0˚ is not 0% heat or whatever you want to call it. 0˚ is still 273.15 degrees above absolute zero. A 1% increase at 20˚C is an increase to almost 23˚—almost fifteen times as much.

And as for "That number is a falsified statement", here's an open-access paper. Noticeably not a blog post.

I agree that climate change is handled poorly in Civ 4—in fact, I have GLOBAL_WARMING_PROB set to 0 because I dislike the mechanic—but let's not decide that one specific aspect of modern science is completely wrong because it's nicer to think we're not changing things and everything's fine and massive societal change isn't necessary.

 

[TJDowling]

I think your system there is too complicated but the general thought is right. Civ 3 had caravans that could provide hammers when disassembled in other cities.

Finish a wonder in 1 turn? Easy, just build 10 caravans and send them to your city right when the new tech comes out...
Which is NOT what I want. So they need to decay if not used, and they need to be national units, like missionaries.

But let's say that for the cost of x hammers, you can build product shipments that are worth half x hammers. (with guilds: enabled, cost 100 worth 50. With logistics: 150 to 75. Machine Tools: 200 to 100. Assembly line: 250 cost for 150 worth. Final stages could be with robotics/automation.)
For each turn these shipments are underway, they lose 5 hammers of their worth. Using them to build a wonder makes them only half their worth.
So they could both represent colonies supporting core as well as the other way around.

Also, food shipments. You have to build a shipment for say, 50 hammers (surplus food goes right in), and then fill it with 50 food from the cities granaries. Off it goes to feed your starving cities elsewhere. I never understood why we "open our foodstores" to help other civs, but our own cities are left starving. And Rome grew big on grain shipments from Egypt. That said, maybe enable a 20 food version for ye olde classical times and the 50 food version with refridgeration.

And for what it's worth, trade shipments could also be nice. Enabled with economics, you build a 100 hammer unit that conducts a trade mission like a 1/10th great merchant, or something. (is it just me? I am never using GMs for trade missions if I can use them for stock exchanges)
This could be implemented in UHV goals of trade orientated civs as well. The Tamils come to mind, who could get their unique unit with that ability.

That certainly seems an easier way to model what I'm suggesting and adds the element of longer distance/less efficiency. It also seems sufficiently difficult enough to manage in game that it wouldn't be too appealing to just flood your core with food from your colonies. Also providing the ability to give food/hammers to the colonies is good. The Caribbean comes to mind. It's difficult to get anything built there so it would be nice to be able to send over some hammers once in a while. I also never use GM for trade missions unless it is a UHV to get X thousands of gold and I'm coming up on the deadline quick. So a trade mission unit would be cool. Maybe that could fall under the function of a future diplomat unit.

 

[JHLee]

Just started a Persia game, a hurricane hit Parsa on turn 2 and killed one of my 2 pop.
Thank you Earth.

 

[Leoreth]

@bismarck_ Get your anti-science political rhetoric out of here, thanks.

@everyone else: I would prefer if you don't give these 30 year old talking points a platform by pretending they are legitimate arguments that need to be refuted for the 100th time. It can be safely assumed that anyone still pushing them is either willfully ignorant or deliberately poisoning the debate.

Regardless, this clearly political and not scientific discussion triggered by an antiscientific statement has no place in this forum and I will moderate accordingly from here on out.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Just started a Persia game, a hurricane hit Parsa on turn 2 and killed one of my 2 pop.
Thank you Earth.

Yeah, this planet sucks. Recently I accidentally dropped a candy wrapping on the ground. I tried picking it up, but the wind blew it away. Then I went after it and tried picking it up again, only for the wind to blow it even further away. That's when I decided that if nature was trolling me like that when I was trying to help it I might as well hurt it on purpose as a form of petty revenge. And so I'm now pro-global warming. Just burn this whole damn place to the ground!

 

[Leoreth]

did you know that only 1% of all dropped candy wrappings come from humans

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

If we count cats constantly picking them up and then dropping them again I'll certainly believe those numbers.

 

[Tigranes]

Can we please go back to suggestions and requests. I suggest to grant immunity against total collapse to AI England, France, Portugal and Spain until at least Canadian spawn. Only collapse to the core should be possible for those civs. We have many New World civs (indigenous and european) who totally depend on colonizing activity of those big 4. Western Hemisphere just looks completely strange when, say, England or Spain check out.

 

[Leoreth]

What I'd rather do is have the game enforce these things based on who you're playing (while autoplay is running), because otherwise I think it's good if alternate history is possible, provided that conditional spawns etc. account for this. You could then combine this with a game setting that controls how strictly this is applied, depending on your preferences for alternate history.

 

[LacsiraxAriscal]

Apologies if already mentioned, but I did a quick search through and couldn't find anything. What's the reason for the Inca UP being removed when respawned? While terrace farms aren't as widespread as they were in the Inca era, they do still exist; more to the point, Lima is one of the largest and most economically significant cities in South America and this kinda kills its potential under Peruvian rule.

 

[Leoreth]

In my opinion Peru was ahistorically strong with that effect.

 

[LacsiraxAriscal]

I suppose you're right. I just worry they'll now be ahistorically weak! I guess it's all a balancing act. I probably also peg Chile as being represented by post-revival Peru and Santiago is another mammoth city that gets pretty heavily nerfed without the Inca UP. Though I haven't played enough games recently to know if Santiago usually ends up in their hands or Argentina's anyway.

 

[Tigranes]

What I'd rather do is have the game enforce these things based on who you're playing (while autoplay is running), because otherwise I think it's good if alternate history is possible, provided that conditional spawns etc. account for this. You could then combine this with a game setting that controls how strictly this is applied, depending on your preferences for alternate history.

Will it be always possible to determine "on who I am playing"? Because, yes, I agree with you, different people might want different things. Some are happy to start as America and see no predetermined English cities so that they can settle the way they want. Others just hate it when they expect some infrastructure in place and inherit virgin landscape. And also some are like me, who rage quit long lasting Aztec game because after killing every single conqueror I got zero slaves (bad luck maybe) so I sent my forces to North America waiting to kill some Brits -- but they we collapsed (probably got stack fighting wars of roses instead of being prey in my flower wars). Basically players count on some traditional activity in the New World. When actors don't exist in the Old World to begin with -- things can get frustrating...

 

[Leoreth]

Why would it be difficult to determine who you are playing?

 

[JHLee]

I think he means he would prefer somewhat railroaded AI behavior when he is playing as some civs and more free/random situations while playing others.
For instance he would want European AIs to actively colonize the New World whenever he is playing as the Aztecs,
while he wouldn't mind as much when he is playing, say, China.

 

[Tigranes]

Why would it be difficult to determine who you are playing?

Sorry, I did not make myself clear.

I think he means he would prefer somewhat railroaded AI behavior when he is playing as some civs and more free/random situations while playing others.
For instance he would want European AIs to actively colonize the New World whenever he is playing as the Aztecs,
while he wouldn't mind as much when he is playing, say, China.

Yes, exactly, thank you very much.

 

[Tigranes]

It is nice to see Greece gaining independence from Turkey in 19 century. When we play 3000 BC scenario very often Independent Greece starts with 2 cities (Sparta and Athens). But in 600 AD and 1700 AD it is hardly possible, AI does not build cities in Greek core. How about we pre-place a city on Crete (Heraclion). It is cool to see island city, always requires different tactics to capture it (need for fleet). Arabs can flip it in 600 AD scenario. Independent Greeks will start with 2 cities in 1700 scenario (when they re spawn). We have this 2 tile landmass in very strategic place of the world (Mediterranean) but most of time it is wasted. In 1700 AD scenario Ottoman culture does not even cover entire Crete making it look odd, honestly. 1 culture free tile in the age of completely established empires.

 

[Leoreth]

I think he means he would prefer somewhat railroaded AI behavior when he is playing as some civs and more free/random situations while playing others.
For instance he would want European AIs to actively colonize the New World whenever he is playing as the Aztecs,
while he wouldn't mind as much when he is playing, say, China.

Sorry, I did not make myself clear.

Yes, exactly, thank you very much.

Oh, yeah that's why I said I would preferably combine this with a game option you select at the beginning of the game together with the difficulty etc. Something like "railroad everything" vs "railroad civs related to me" vs "railroad in autoplay only" vs "no railroading", obviously with better names. I suspect different people have different preferences here for different civs.