Suggestions and Requests

[FraggleJock]

It still has the problem it is too close to the core but not in it so the tiles it can work are better off worked by a city further west as the eastern tiles are preferably sent to Cincinnati/Detroit column of Core Cities

 

[Leoreth]

What are examples of cities that would take its tiles that are not in the core?

 

[FraggleJock]

What are examples of cities that would take its tiles that are not in the core?

oops edited my post while you replied. I didn't refresh the forum

 

[StuartKleinsen]

I don't know if it was proposed yet, but could we have a upgrade path from cavalry to tanks, besides helicopter, or even to infantry?
Many cavalry regiments had transitions from horseback to tank or motorized infantry, or were used as mounted infantry.

 

[Tigranes]

I don't know if it was proposed yet, but could we have a upgrade path from cavalry to tanks, besides helicopter, or even to infantry?
Many cavalry regiments had transitions from horseback to tank or motorized infantry, or were used as mounted infantry.

Very much in favor! Knights were called tanks of medieval warfare. When the US War Department eliminated the office of Chief of Cavalry and effectively abolished the horse cavalry, the "cavalry" name was absorbed into the Armor branch as part of the Army Reorganization Act of 1950.

Vietnam War saw the introduction of helicopters and operations as a helicopter-borne force with the designation of Air Cavalry, while mechanized cavalry received the designation of Armored Cavalry. Easy solution for us: heavy cav upgrades to Armor, and later light cav to Helicopters!

 

[Hickman888]

Easy solution for us: heavy cav upgrades to Armor, and later light cav to Helicopters!

I think it's good in theory, but the problem is that both the light and heavy calvary lines coalesce at the end of their line into the "Calvary" unit, who is Light Calvary. So if you are keeping your units up with their tech upgrades, you won't have any Heavy Calvary to promote into Tanks.

 

[Tigranes]

I think it's good in theory, but the problem is that both the light and heavy calvary lines coalesce at the end of their line into the "Calvary" unit, who is Light Calvary. So if you are keeping your units up with their tech upgrades, you won't have any Heavy Calvary to promote into Tanks.

Only Dragoons must upgrade to the (heavy) Cavalry to Tanks. Light cav Uhlans must stay around longer to be replaced with new unit: light cav Armoured Car! Automobile is not represented properly in our game. They can become Helicopters after WW2 era.

 

[AOS9001]

Only Dragoons must upgrade to the (heavy) Cavalry to Tanks. Light cav Uhlans must stay around longer to be replaced with new unit: light cav Armoured Car! Automobile is not represented properly in our game. They can become Helicopters after WW2 era.

Oh, that's a fun idea!

 

[Hickman888]

Only Dragoons must upgrade to the (heavy) Cavalry to Tanks. Light cav Uhlans must stay around longer to be replaced with new unit: light cav Armoured Car! Automobile is not represented properly in our game. They can become Helicopters after WW2 era.

Interesting idea. What stats and prereqs do you think this Armored Car should have? Would it just be a cheaper, weaker tank, or what?

 

[1SDANi]

Interesting idea. What stats and prereqs do you think this Armored Car should have? Would it just be a cheaper, weaker tank, or what?

Could give it Commando and the Cavalry's withdrawal chance and give Cavalry first strike immunity like the Dragoon before it

 

[Hickman888]

With the recent nerf to Redistribution, I think we should consider moving Merchant Trade to an earlier tech. With Redistribution now scaling very poorly as you acquire more cities, and considering how late Currency comes for a lot of civilizations, it can be a real handicap for many civilizations to expand while being locked into Redistribution and getting no trade . China, India, Greece, Persia; It isn't uncommon for these civilizations to grow up to 10 (or more) cities before Currency is even capable of being researched. I propose Merchant Trade gets moved to Contract, to not only help these civilizations stay afloat, but to give the player an alternative Economy civic, sooner.

 

[1SDANi]

With the recent nerf to Redistribution, I think we should consider moving Merchant Trade to an earlier tech. With Redistribution now scaling very poorly as you acquire more cities, and considering how late Currency comes for a lot of civilizations, it can be a real handicap for many civilizations to expand while being locked into Redistribution and getting no trade . China, India, Greece, Persia; It isn't uncommon for these civilizations to grow up to 10 (or more) cities before Currency is even capable of being researched. I propose Merchant Trade gets moved to Contract, to not only help these civilizations stay afloat, but to give the player an alternative Economy civic, sooner.

Honestly, I kinda like the limitations of the current implementation. Redistribution represents early imperialist societies that extracted value from conquered lands back to the capital, this overreliance on the capital inherently limited the benefits a society could gain from conquest, while at the same time being very viable early on in a society's imperialist endeavors. Large multiregional empires only really started appearing around 500 BCE.

 

[Hickman888]

while at the same time being very viable early on in a society's imperialist endeavors. Large multiregional empires only really started appearing around 500 BCE.

But Currency isn't going to be researched until well after 500 BC, typically around 100-300 AD, that's what I'm getting at. The current system handicaps those early empires I mentioned, the Greeks, Indians, Persians, who did have multiregional empires in the first half of the Classical era. But the main problem is there is no way to offset the Redistribution burden as you grow, as it is the first and only economy civic until Currency.

 

[FraggleJock]

Isn't that the point of Redistribution, My take on it, is it's a civic that Boosts the Nation but sets it on a path to failure. Slavery and ruthless exploitation of your conquests, relying on the Elite (specialists) to exert control and add value.
As a Human you know what's coming so you don't have to fall for the trap if you don't want to. but it also relegates it to early play (or Korea) where limited mobility was a real thing for societies so "Trade" wasn't the foundations for Empire.

 

[Enyavar]

With the recent nerf to Redistribution, I think we should consider moving Merchant Trade to an earlier tech. With Redistribution now scaling very poorly as you acquire more cities, and considering how late Currency comes for a lot of civilizations, it can be a real handicap for many civilizations to expand while being locked into Redistribution and getting no trade . China, India, Greece, Persia; It isn't uncommon for these civilizations to grow up to 10 (or more) cities before Currency is even capable of being researched. I propose Merchant Trade gets moved to Contract, to not only help these civilizations stay afloat, but to give the player an alternative Economy civic, sooner.

From the gameplay side I would agree with this sentiment; from the technology standpoint it makes little sense to even have lots of trade before Currency comes along. Which earlier tech would be associated with Merchant Trade?

Honestly, I kinda like the limitations of the current implementation. Redistribution represents early imperialist societies that extracted value from conquered lands back to the capital, this overreliance on the capital inherently limited the benefits a society could gain from conquest...

Yes, but then there should be more of a benefit to it for larger empires. Redistribution benefits could be made more profitable early on, and the trade malus grows slowly with each technology tier? Or, not only food but also currency in the capital gets a boost?

As a Human you know what's coming so you don't have to fall for the trap if you don't want to.

Before, redistribution was not a trap policy. With high upkeep and halved trade income, it potentially is. So... has something changed and a player can switch back to the "nothing" economic civic (Subsistence, I think?)? Some civilizations start with Redistribution and are locked in that until they researched Currency.

 

[Hickman888]

From the gameplay side I would agree with this sentiment; from the technology standpoint it makes little sense to even have lots of trade before Currency comes along. Which earlier tech would be associated with Merchant Trade?

The Currency technology is a bit of a misnomer, as plenty of currencies were being minted well before 100-300 AD, when Currency is usually researched. But just as important to long distance trade, arguably more so, are appropriate laws that protect the right to trade and commerce and prosecute fraud and theft. I think Contract is a very appropriate technology for Merchant Trade. Currency would still have Markets and building , two "must-haves" for wide empires, and I think this represents the further maturation of trade systems.

Some civilizations start with Redistribution and are locked in that until they researched Currency.

This is what prompted my suggestion, although I was also considering it when I played through Greece. Persia has Redistribution at start, and within 5 turns I am ready to move on from that civic, after acquiring 3-4 new cities.

 

[1SDANi]

But Currency isn't going to be researched until well after 500 BC, typically around 100-300 AD, that's what I'm getting at. The current system handicaps those early empires I mentioned, the Greeks, Indians, Persians, who did have multiregional empires in the first half of the Classical era. But the main problem is there is no way to offset the Redistribution burden as you grow, as it is the first and only economy civic until Currency.

Is Currency supposed to be redearched that late? I thought its column was the column for the classical empires.

 

[Hickman888]

Is Currency supposed to be redearched that late? I thought its column was the column for the classical empires.

Well it's a middle column Classical era, so 100-300 AD is about right. Currency requires Contract and Mathematics, which itself requires Calendar, so you can't exactly beeline it. Pre-Redistribution nerf in my games, I researched it as China in the second century AD, traded for it from the Kushans as India in the second century AD, and barely finished it in the last turn as Greece in 330 BC, while losing 97 /turn at 100% .

 

[Hickman888]

There's not too much to say about the Polynesian Historical game: On the big map, it looks like you have the same amount of islands to settle and ocean to traverse, except now you have many more turns to accomplish it, as well as access to the Thalassocracy civic.

In my two games as Polynesia, I completed:

UHV1) Oceanic Navigators: Settle two out of Hawaii, New Zealand, Marquesas and Easter Island by turn 250 (Completed turn 183 and 190)
UHV2) The Polynesian Triangle: Settle Hawaii, New Zealand, Marquesas and Easter Island by turn 270 (Completed turn 205 and 202)
UHV3) Rano Raraku: Build Moai Statues by turn 290 (Completed turn 222 and 228)

I think if the Polynesian game required a more active and purposeful dedication to producing in order to expand, rather than simply building your pagan shrine and Mala'e and passively waiting for it to produce enough , it would be much more engaging and challenging.

I propose that the Polynesian unique power be changed to "The slider has no technology requirement", so that the player has access to the slider right from the start. Additionally, the Mala'e monument should be changed to only give 2 /turn, but give +50% ", so that it may benefit even more from using the slider. It should keep the artist slot. This way, in order to meet the island and Moai Statue deadline, the player must strike a careful balance between using the slider to research Navigation on time, while also utilizing artists and the slider to keep up a good pace of expansion.

 

[Leoreth]

I don't think the map allows removing the current UP. Seems more like we need to adjust the Polynesian tech rate or maintenance costs.