Suggestions and Requests

[AbsintheRed]

I often see Catholic Bulgarian Empire. Anyone else?

I might have encountered it once or twice. It doesn't feel as very often to me. What do you consider often?

Yeah, Catholic Bulgaria is quite (too) common.

I think so, too.

Quite a few times tbh. I think Catholicism spreads quite frequently in Bulgaria so that triggers it.

I've seen Catholic Novgorod and Kiev as well on occasion, as they don't start with missionaries so Catholicism can get there first.

Yeah, none of my tweaks seem to improve it enough :/
So I'm getting more and more certain that I have to switch to province based religions spread.

 

[gilgames]

Sounds good, but every provine should have a base chance for everyreligion. If france can not be islam whatever he do is bad, but should be catholic in most of the game (90%+).

 

[Force44]

Sounds good, but every provine should have a base chance for everyreligion. If france can not be islam whatever he do is bad, but should be catholic in most of the game (90%+).

I also like the possibility for events to turn out unhistoric.

But keep in mind that 10% to deviate for one civ can be quite a big number.
It implies 0.9^n to be historic when taken all civs into account.

With 1 civ that isn't too bad. But with 3 civs it is already 72.9% (n=3 => 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 100%) to be historic.
With 7 civs it is already less than 50% chance to be historic.

I like my games to be historical about 1/3 of the times.
There are currently 28 civs in the game.
(n^28=0.33)
That would amount to chance of approximately 4% for one civ to differ from its historical religion.

But that may still be a bit high compared to the preference of others.

 

[gilgames]

My number wast meant an order i could wrote x too. But i prefer exact values.

 

[Swarbs]

I also like the possibility for events to turn out unhistoric.

But keep in mind that 10% to deviate for one civ can be quite a big number.
It implies 0.9^n to be historic when taken all civs into account.

With 1 civ that isn't too bad. But with 3 civs it is already 72.9% (n=3 => 0.9 x 0.9 x 0.9 x 100%) to be historic.
With 7 civs it is already less than 50% chance to be historic.

I like my games to be historical about 1/3 of the times.
There are currently 28 civs in the game.
(n^28=0.33)
That would amount to chance of approximately 4% for one civ to differ from its historical religion.

But that may still be a bit high compared to the preference of others.

That's not entirely accurate, as the vast majority of civs start with missionaries and / or state religion set to their historical equivalent. This mechanic is aimed at civs who start without any religious influence - civs like Arabia, Byzantium, France, England and Spain will still start with / flip some units and cities aligned with their historic religion.

Off the top of my head it is only Bulgaria, Novgorod and Kiev who start without missionaries and a state religion, and who do not easily flip / conquer a city without a state religion. So under gilgames' proposal you would have those three become Orthodox around 70% of the time, if random religion spreads in their core regions are 90% likely to be Orthodox.

Although we have to be careful when defining the cores, as it wouldn't be great if we ended up exacerbating the problem of Cordoba often turning Catholic by making Catholicism too prevalent in Spanish core regions for example.

 

[gilgames]

Although we have to be careful when defining the cores, as it wouldn't be great if we ended up exacerbating the problem of Cordoba often turning Catholic by making Catholicism too prevalent in Spanish core regions for example.

Well i meant that it could happen regardless of your religion. I intended to suggest about random religion spread. I.e. in Aquitania 90% catholic chance 8% islam and 2% orthodox. These numbers can varies in each province. After printing press we can add protestantism to the list. It does not affect your state religion but gives the player a chance if want fo do something different and bulgaria and novgorod would have high rate to be orthodox. It could help scandinavia too.

Imo cordoba ends up with catholicism in 60-70% of games anyway. Idk how historic it is, but seens realistic to adapt it this way. Cristian north africa is more problematic. Also never saw that cordoba used any prosecutor or even missionary as Valencia is with catholic+jewish in 1400ad while Cordoba is islamic.

 

[Force44]

After some feedback of Swarbs on my recent game as Venice I figured Merchant republic could use a boost for small/beginning civs.

...As for stability, I rarely stay in MR as Venice as I find it a fairly underwhelming civic. If you are small enough to use it stably you generally won't need a high gold slider, so the 25% to gold is of limited use. In fact, once you take Constantinople, the Hagia Sophia with a market and weaver will usually fund maintenance and upkeep for all six cities you gain during the first and second UHV, so the gold slider will be close to zero. Feudal Monarchy ends up superior as the reduced cost of the units needed to defend a dispersed coastal civ, the increased happy cap from barracks, and the reduced maintenance and stability bonus from Feudal Law will outweigh the gold gained from MR. ...

Merchant Republic (labor civic) gives a bonus to gold income (+50% in capitol, +25% in all other cities)
and reduces god cost from corporations (to 75%) (<- this may change with the currently ongoing corporation overhaul)

These are bonuses especially usefull for large civilizations.

Small/beginning civs lack especially in production. (which is why serfdom is so good early on)

To remedy this a boost to production could be applied. I suggest making it related to commerce. (As maxing out commerce is already the way to get the biggest bonus from Merchant Republic)
Also I suggest making it available only in the capitol. (To diminish its effect for large civs.)

(example)

+1 for every 3 in the capitol.

(originally I wanted it to be a bonus similar to bureaucracy (so a bonus of 50% of your commerce added to your production (+1 for every 2) but I figured this was a little too good)

 

[Swarbs]

After some feedback of Swarbs on my recent game as Venice I figured Merchant republic could use a boost for small/beginning civs.



Merchant Republic (labor civic) gives a bonus to gold income (+50% in capitol, +25% in all other cities)
and reduces god cost from corporations (to 75%) (<- this may change with the currently ongoing corporation overhaul)

These are bonuses especially usefull for large civilizations.

Small/beginning civs lack especially in production. (which is why serfdom is so good early on)

To remedy this a boost to production could be applied. I suggest making it related to commerce. (As maxing out commerce is already the way to get the biggest bonus from Merchant Republic)
Also I suggest making it available only in the capitol. (To diminish its effect for large civs.)

(example)

+1 for every 3 in the capitol.

(originally I wanted it to be a bonus similar to bureaucracy (so a bonus of 50% of your commerce added to your production (+1 for every 2) but I figured this was a little too good)

I quite like this idea. Definitely agree that +1 for every 2 would be OP, possibly even for every 3 given how much capitals will generate. I would say:

+1 for every 4 in the capital.

would be balanced - that's +6 for Venice pretty much from the go with the palace (+2) two villages (+2), wine (+1), and fish, iron and wheat +1 combined). More will come later with more towns, trade routes and working the sea tiles. It also imposes a bit of a penalty on an MR for going with serfdom and manorialism, as the slower growth of cottages and loss of a trade route will reduce production as well as commerce.

That change gives MR strong synergies with Mercantilism as the extra from villages and towns increases production further, and the +5 from markets gets the +25% increase across the empire. Maybe even boost this synergy further by giving MR +1 from markets, to balance the Feudal and Divine Monarchy get from barracks and castles?

I think the new production bonus should replace the +25% in the capital.

EDIT: If we do add this bonus to MR, I think its cost should also be increased to high. That will reflect its greater power, and also be more likely to require an MR to push the gold slider to cover the civic cost, hence improving the value of the +25% across the civ.

 

[Force44]

barracks (under Feudal Monarchy) +1 for 75

walls + castle (under Divine Monarchy) +1 for 525 (+1 for 263 with stone)


market (under Merchant Republic) +1 for 150


The cost vs benefit is very different for FM and DM.

Markets are buildings you normally want to build in every city and the cost falls right in between barracks and walls + castle.


Looking at cost vs benefit I would probably recommend to give the +1 under MR to a weaver (+1 for 300) or a brewery (+1 for 240)
No need to make Feudal Monrachy look bad.

But then again, in account need to be taken that you receive FM and DM in very different parts of your game.

 

[Force44]

If a happynessbonus is required for merchant republic then (personally) I feel it should either be applied through something different than a building. (We already have two of those.)

Or alternatively give every government civic its own happiness building.

 

[Force44]

With the SOIesque implementation of corporations I figured the three big pelgrim routes (Santiago, Rome and Jerusalem) could be implemented as corporations.

 

[Force44]

I don't like the recent bonus of mines.

It was implemented because late game mines felt underpowered.

I considered this underpowerment a good thing because (1) it incentivised upgrading your mines to windmills.

And (2) it gave a reward to players who kept their foresthills around to build lumbermills.

___​

The bonus was given in conjunction with a decrease in commerce for resources.

___​

I would like the difference in quatily between mines on the one side and lumbermills and windmills (and cottage-hamlet-village-towns) on the other side to be restored.

___​

comparison (after replaceable parts) under spoiler:

Spoiler :

mine

bonus for chopping (1x)
2
1 per turn


windmill

bonus for chopping (1x)
1
1
1 per turn

(+1 after the invention of physics)

windmill with apprenticeship (civic, requires education 8668 detour)

bonus for chopping (1x)
1
2
1 per turn

(+1 after the invention of physics)


lumbermill

2

(+1 after the invention of steam engines)

lumbermill with apprenticeship

3

(+1 after the invention of steam engines)

___​

a suggestion to achieve this would be to double the bonus mines yield on resources after the invention of replaceable parts (from 1 to 2) and remove the bonus from mines without a resource.

An alternative would be to tie the bonus to a civic.

on a sidenote, could lumbermills be improved a bit regardless? (eg. +1 and +2 if next to a river under apprenticeship)

 

[Force44]

request:

could the attatchment of a great general to a merc remove the mercpromotion?

(I'd really like to upgrade the merc and costs for long term mercs (the kind you want to keep around, similar to the unit you attached your great general to) skyrocket (a bit))

 

[saddam_who_sane]

Will you add some new wonders in the future?
What do you think about Kizhi Pogost? For example, it could provide +5 for engineers and great engineers (and require timber resource and orthodoxy as a state religion).

 

[TimGB]

I feel that the starting map is rather empty. What would be people's opinions on having some AI only or minor civilizations present at the start of the game, to represent the large kingdoms present at the time (as opposed to small independent city states)? Going by this map (http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/), the civs could be:

The Kingdom of the Suebi in Gallicia and Portugal (Capital Braga)

The Visigothic Kingdom in Spain and Gaul (Capital Tolosa)

The Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy and the Adriatic (Capital Ravenna)

The Vandal Kingdom in North Africa, Corsica, Sardinia and the Balearic islands (Capital Carthage).

They would inevitably disappear in the early game, but they wouldn't need any uniques or anything - they'd just be there to add some flavour to the early game.

 

[Publicola]

I feel that the starting map is rather empty. What would be people's opinions on having some AI only or minor civilizations present at the start of the game, to represent the large kingdoms present at the time (as opposed to small independent city states)? Going by this map (http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/), the civs could be:

The Kingdom of the Suebi in Gallicia and Portugal (Capital Braga)

The Visigothic Kingdom in Spain and Gaul (Capital Tolosa)

The Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy and the Adriatic (Capital Ravenna)

The Vandal Kingdom in North Africa, Corsica, Sardinia and the Balearic islands (Capital Carthage).

They would inevitably disappear in the early game, but they wouldn't need any uniques or anything - they'd just be there to add some flavour to the early game.

No one's responded, but I certainly wouldn't mind. One of the biggest issues I have with the early game is "suspending my disbelief" that Europe after the fall of Rome could be so profoundly empty. I think it'd take pretty careful calibration to keep these interim civs in their historical roles, but if we can manage that then I'd be all in favor of at least including the Ostrogoths, Visigoths and Vandals: Ostrogoths to cause problems for Rome that friendly neighbors can help solve; Visigoths and Vandals to give a challenge to Arab expansion in North Africa and Spain.

 

[Publicola]

While brainstorming for a Civ VI 'Rhye's of Europe', I had another idea that could be pretty easily implemented here and now.

We have a bunch of colonies representing early modern Europe's expansion into Africa, America, and Asia. We also have one colony project representing the Norse colonization of Vinland.

Considering, however, that we're using 'colonies' to represent Europe's involvement in other regions of the world, I'm wondering if it'd be possible to use projects for more than just imperialism.

Specifically: I'd love to see the Saharan salt trade integrated into the mod, with a 'Sahara Access' resource available in North Africa and Egypt, with a corresponding project or projects to represent the trade routes between Muslim Africa and successive west African empires, especially the Mandinka (Malinese).

Another possibility would be to include an "Indian Ocean Access" resource in the current coastal area that represents the Red Sea, and let that resource enable construction of the East Africa colony (to represent the Ottoman slave trade).

Perhaps we could also include a "Mesopotamia Acccess" resource, which would give bonuses to help Arabia deal with its small core, but might also enable construction (by both Arabs and Byzantines) of a "Silk Road" project, with additional options for trading with China or India. There are a lot of possibilities for 'projects' beyond the borders of the European map.

 

[Publicola]

Related to the above, this was one of my first proposals in the thread. AbsintheRed, what are your thoughts?

Here's another proposal, for a minor map change.

I've been researching the period of the Crusades, and came across several references to Byzantine silk that I didn't understand. On looking it up, I discovered that around the year 550 AD, itinerant monks discovered in China how silk was produced, and later smuggled silkworm eggs or larvae out of Central Asia to be brought to be brought to Constantinople. The resulting silk production was in fact a critical part of the Byzantine economy from that time until the fall of Constantinople almost 1000 years later.

The Byzantine monopoly was ended during the Second Crusade around 1150 AD, when silk weavers were captured and brought to Sicily, spreading silk production and trade further into Western Europe. The same occurred during the Fourth Crusade (around 1200 AD) when Constantinople was sacked and the silk factories were brought to Venice and other cities in Italy.

All that is context for my suggested proposal:

1) If silk isn't a luxury resource in RFCE, it should be added.
2) There should be a silk resource placed near Constantinople, preferably in the province of Thrace (on the European side of the Bosporus strait).
3) Alternately, if RFCE allows resources to be added to the map after the game starts, then the silk in Thrace should appear around 550 AD (or as close to 554 AD as the turn clock will allow). Likewise, to reflect the spread of silk production to Italy, another silk resource should also appear in Sicily around 1147 AD, and potentially near Florence (on the west side of the Apennines, as close to the city of Lucca as the map will allow) around 1204 AD.
4) Alternately, instead of manually adding silk resources to these tiles, you could create a new 'Project' that becomes available very early on that provides on completion one or two silk resources. The prerequisite for this project should be "Own a city in the Byzantine core" -- which would allow the Byzantines to start working on the project immediately and complete it at the proper historical time, as well as enable the Italian states to work on the project as long as they conquer a Byzantine city (per the historical method). The project should have 2-3 slots, like some of the later colonial projects.

Finally, this is slightly unrelated, but I'd really encourage there to be another project or wonder or bonus for the Byzantine Empire related to the Silk Road. Considering how vital that was for the Byzantine economy, it really feels ahistorical for that not to be reflected in the game. You could even make the 'Silk Road' into multiple projects, that expire periodically and must be rebuilt. The prerequisite for building the project would be owning a tile on the far eastern edge of the game map, so it would be impossible to rebuild if the eastern part of the Byzantine Empire was overrun. The Arabian civ would still be able to build it, which should make it easier to play and win as that civ.

 

[merijn_v1]

I feel that the starting map is rather empty. What would be people's opinions on having some AI only or minor civilizations present at the start of the game, to represent the large kingdoms present at the time (as opposed to small independent city states)? Going by this map (http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/500/), the civs could be:

The Kingdom of the Suebi in Gallicia and Portugal (Capital Braga)

The Visigothic Kingdom in Spain and Gaul (Capital Tolosa)

The Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy and the Adriatic (Capital Ravenna)

The Vandal Kingdom in North Africa, Corsica, Sardinia and the Balearic islands (Capital Carthage).

They would inevitably disappear in the early game, but they wouldn't need any uniques or anything - they'd just be there to add some flavour to the early game.

I do agree they add flavour. But I think too little to be included. Only the early starting civs will have some interaction with them. But that will be very little. Later civs won't even see them. I think this will add flavour that will hardly be noticed by the player. So I don't think it's worth the effort.

And many of these kingdoms are already represented by the independent cities.

 

[Publicola]

I do agree they add flavour. But I think too little to be included. Only the early starting civs will have some interaction with them. But that will be very little. Later civs won't even see them. I think this will add flavour that will hardly be noticed by the player. So I don't think it's worth the effort.

And many of these kingdoms are already represented by the independent cities.

Perhaps they could be represented as unplayable minor civs, like the Celts in the original RFC, or the Seljuks in DOC, or Buyids in SOI. A bit of flavor, and an extra challenge for the very early game, without the necessity of the extra effort of adding as much detail as a normal civ.

I do think the a big part of my issue with the empty map has been fixed with 1.3 adding so many cities, with variable locations no less. Still, the addition of any or all of these would add quite a bit to the challenge of early civs trying to establish a foothold.