You could say so. Let's just say that I've been lurking semi-regularly since before the departure of Rhye, albeit lately I hadn't check anything CIV related in about 6 months or so. About a year ago I tried to create an account in here just to report that very same thing: however after the tenth or so failed attempt (It kept saying: that user-name already exist, not an approved username, too long, wrong email... mainly the first 2.) I gave up. But well, I finally made it.
Nice. It's flattering that you have 100% of your posts in RFCE
About the texts: Well, I can try. Some seem straightforward enough (the corporation spreading units for instance, it uses the same as BTS), but I'm not a native speaker: There may be some weirdness on my text. Do I simply upload the edited file, post the lines changed, or provide the text and you do the formatting? Either works for me.
Probably the best would be if you provided the texts here.
This way everyone else can further improve it.
I'm not a native english speaker myself, so it's great if there are some additional checks
Kiev didn't collapse instantly. In fact, it's still there by 1206 instead of dying early on against the barbarians. No idea if something was changed, it's just a fluke or if the actual barbarian invasion happens later; but I got happy to see them around for a change.
Yeah, Kiev shouldn't collapse because of the early barbs.
I try to make it very likely that they make it until the mid 13th century.
Mongols should collapse them though in the majority of the games.
Arabia collapsed, as always. Then respawned, got a crusade that very turn against them, lost Jerusalem (In a weird Arabia-independent-Bulgaria fashion) and is about to collapse again.
Arabia's starting situation will be improved soon.
There were some posts about it one of the other threads.
There have been crusades against independent Jerusalem. In fact, only 2 of the 5-6 crusades so far have been against an actual civ (Arabia).
That's intended, Crusades can start against independents too.
Arabia can't be around in most of them due to gameplay limitations - respawns are already quite common for them.
Catholics are dominating the map. For most of the game the only Muslims were Arabia and Norway (!), one collapsed and the other converted. There are 2 Orthodox civs: Kiev and Byzantium. Novgorod is pagan/atheist. This leaves me with very few possible target for a Crusade
(BTW, I must be on the 6th or so by now)
Religion spread is an issue.
Will have to rewrite the mechanics soon enough.
Catholics should dominate most parts of the map though,
There are 3 Iberian Union (Albeit you are already aware)
Yep, the fix will be up as soon as I finish balancing my plague revision.
The pope seems really passive now. It's almost as if he were locked on the Vatican, afraid of the world. If it weren't for the frequent crusades and the magic spread of Catholicism, I would have forgotten about him.
What else should he do?
He spreads Catholicism when possible, adds gold and builds buildings to their favourite/most faithful Catholics.
Other than the Crusades and that, the Papal States doesn't have any role ATM.
Ireland is a barbaric island. Literally. I can't remember if it was like that before.
Indeed, that was changed very recently. Just before the release of 1.4.
It's experimental, it will be changed (most likely) to 1 random of the 3 new ones.
The Bizantines lost a few cities against barbarians but it doesn't seem to affect them much. They are slowly getting Anatolia back, meanwhile the barbarians are building the cities up.
This is a good thing, is it not?
Unless it was in the 15th century or later
The AI keeps asking me to join wars while I'm quite bussy myself, but that's expected.
Well, yeah. No real changes from BtS in that regard.
I hate Poland. Either they DOW me and I have to deal with a 2 front war, or I kill them and stability becomes an issue (killing denmark and burning cities didn't help). And now that they respawned, I have to deal with the poles on Pozen. And I even intended to ignore them this time, but they keep taunting me...
I find this great. Sry
For some reason, razing 3 cities in the same turn increased my stability a little. First a city size 1, got -2 (-3 for the action, +1 for free castle). Then a size 2, got another -2 (-4 total) . But the third time with a size 3, my stability didn't change. Checking, the swing was -9 (expected) but the second section (event based part?) of cities had increased by 3. This increase didn't disappear on the next turn either. (The city-size is before my troops moved in, as I was testing if the no-permanent-penalty for razing cities applied before or after conquest). The barbarians controlled the cities, if that makes any difference (Homz, Antiochien, Tarsus). Also, the third time the stability bonus for the castle wasn't applied (but at a 3 for 1 ratio, I don't complain).
I would need a savegame right before these things happened.
Otherwise no real chance to find any possible bugs.
Also, the mainscreen stability counter is not always up-to-date.
Only the stability in the F2 screen, that refreshes every time you enter it.
I still can't decide if building Kazimierz is a good idea or not.
Kazimierz got to be much better recently.
Was rather controversial before, as spreading Judaism cost you way too much stability-wise.
Now with Jewish Quarters reducing instability from Judaism it's much more friendly, so it more than feasible in some situations with the huge boost to your economy.
Also this makes it greatly in line to real life and history IMO.
BTW, is the auto-play supposed to stop at -1 turn?:
Ehh, that's a very old bug I cannot find for the life of me.
AFAIK it appears in all RFC-style mods.
I might be absolutely wrong in this, but sometimes I tend to think it's a limitation in the engine.
