I genuinely think DOC could be a fun basis for a "Next War" RFC mod, with all the UHVs turned into the objectives (known or predicted) of the current empires. Maintaining or usurping global hegemony (USA vs China), clawing back relevance (France and Russia), just trying to survive the coming climate crisis (the collective global south)... But it would require a rework of the absolutely nonsensical global warming mechanic.
@Leoreth I saw your comment about trading company representing the outsized importance of certain small islands in their economic role in Early Modern Europe. It's a good point. I also saw the Portugal Thread, where people discussed city locations there - and how some very important cities IRL don't really give the bonuses they do in game.
Therefore, could the trading company map potentially be expanded for any of those major waystation ports?
eg...
- Cape Town, Falklands for Atlantic-Pacific-Indian Ocean crossings
- St Helena, Ascension, Seychelles, other small islands (not sure what's in game or not, don't have it open) for resupply stations.
- Singapore, Hong Kong/Macau, Ceylon, Hormuz, for their key locations as world trade nodes.
- Suez/Panama, for canals??
Thanks for the consideration but please hold on to your dollars for better uses. Also I hope you all make it through the current mess you are dealing with.
With so many older civs now, 3000 BC starts for later civs can have your territory covered in improvements. This is especially so for civs like France, which on the 3000 BC start (500 AD) will often have a lot of improvements alreadh, whereas its 600 AD start is pristine.
I remember Leoreth saying something about not giving the player too many preset improvements at start to give them more choices, but it feels like something could be done to limit the discrepancy, like:
- Advanced Start for pre-existing civs on the later maps, same as new civs,
- When a civ collapse or when Barbarians conquer a city, some of the nearest improvements are destroyed. Potentially this could also apply to a flip if that isn't too crippling/annoying.
Yeah, I agree with this. My stop gap answer to address the problem is to pick the scenario that suits your preferences - if you like the headstart, pick 3000 BC, if you like the freedom, challenge, and feeling of transforming the area, pick 600 AD. It is never going to be the goal for scenarios to exactly reflect what autoplay would produce or to balance the game so that it would produce the situation of the scenarios at their start dates. That's both not really possible and would also defeat the purpose of having different scenarios.
That said, I also want to have some kind of mechanism that destroys some improvements on collapse, maybe even some reforestation. However, it is not that easy to determine what exactly should happen. Only downgrading cottages is too little, destroying all improvements would be too much, and randomising it would be too punishing or ineffective. It probably also should be more expansive in early eras compared to later ones.
The idea is to convert the central bank into the museum of the argentine decadence. They say is the only way to stop the next president to print money and put us again into the number one country with most inflation in the world
Yeah, I agree with this. My stop gap answer to address the problem is to pick the scenario that suits your preferences - if you like the headstart, pick 3000 BC, if you like the freedom, challenge, and feeling of transforming the area, pick 600 AD. It is never going to be the goal for scenarios to exactly reflect what autoplay would produce or to balance the game so that it would produce the situation of the scenarios at their start dates. That's both not really possible and would also defeat the purpose of having different scenarios.
That said, I also want to have some kind of mechanism that destroys some improvements on collapse, maybe even some reforestation. However, it is not that easy to determine what exactly should happen. Only downgrading cottages is too little, destroying all improvements would be too much, and randomising it would be too punishing or ineffective. It probably also should be more expansive in early eras compared to later ones.
Make it so that cottages can not be built until a certain technology, it would even be logical, after all, in the ancient and classical ages, polis is all we have)
The idea is to convert the central bank into the museum of the argentine decadence. They say is the only way to stop the next president to print money and put us again into the number one country with most inflation in the world
Make it so that cottages can not be built until a certain technology, it would even be logical, after all, in the ancient and classical ages, polis is all we have)
Maybe lock cottage upgrades behind specific techs? Something like Hamlets behind Law, Villages behind Crop Rotation, and Towns behind Urban Planning? Doesn't stop your territory from being covered by improvements but it would help limit the disparity in the power of 3000 BCE and 600 CE starts.
Maybe lock cottage upgrades behind specific techs? Something like Hamlets behind Law, Villages behind Crop Rotation, and Towns behind Urban Planning? Doesn't stop your territory from being covered by improvements but it would help limit the disparity in the power of 3000 BCE and 600 CE starts.
Rise of Mankind did this, limiting cottage upgrades at techs. Let me just say, I really dislike the idea. Cottages are already usually the inferior choice behind farms, pre Printing Press/Individualism. It’s hard enough to grow and mature your cottages with all the invaders and barbarians and plagues running around. I don’t think early game cottages need another nerf, my 2c.
Maybe like in vanilla? Towns, village downgrades with plague?
So we can get back civs devastation from plague? Most ancient civs will collapse, I think))
Yeah, I agree with this. My stop gap answer to address the problem is to pick the scenario that suits your preferences - if you like the headstart, pick 3000 BC, if you like the freedom, challenge, and feeling of transforming the area, pick 600 AD. It is never going to be the goal for scenarios to exactly reflect what autoplay would produce or to balance the game so that it would produce the situation of the scenarios at their start dates. That's both not really possible and would also defeat the purpose of having different scenarios.
That said, I also want to have some kind of mechanism that destroys some improvements on collapse, maybe even some reforestation. However, it is not that easy to determine what exactly should happen. Only downgrading cottages is too little, destroying all improvements would be too much, and randomising it would be too punishing or ineffective. It probably also should be more expansive in early eras compared to later ones.
Maybe you could counter that problem by increasing the spawn chance forests have, especially outside cultural control of any civ, so forests in independent /native /barbarian will recover untill conquered by the nexxt civ.
Or you could lessen the problem by puting more trees on default map, on the regular landmass, but also especially on islands, because no one ever bothers to send workers there to chop them down.
In my opinion forests are also visually important, so protecting some on islands could help the vibe.
Maybe some more could be added to the mediterranean, Caribbean, east asia, British isles.
Just some of my ideas
Maybe mines shouldn't take out forests in the first place?
They could lose their effect on the tile, but retain the visuals, and recover their effect if left for X turns without an improvement on them.
You could build a nature reserve instead of a mine, and then after X turns the forest is back.
Leoreth was looking for a "thinned forest" graphic a few weeks ago, probably so improvements could be built without visually removing all the trees and creating the barren wastelands you see in Europe by the industrial age. To be fair, that's kind of what happened in real life, but even IRL there were still pockets of woodland at the peak of deforestation.
I know almost no one plays to the digital era endgame, but it would be cool to have a mechanic that allows for reforestation. The increase of urbanization and retreat of agriculture in Europe, Russia, and North America in the last few decades has allowed for forests to actually start advancing for the first time in hundreds of years.
Yeah, that's true. I would like to have my laborers (re)plant a forest in a sufficiently habitable tile with a modern tech, though, maybe Ecology. Things to dream about.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
