In my first game as the jotnar, they have the civ-trait: Agnostic but the pedia suggests RoK. Is this intentional? (I am working off a fresh install with the latest patch 8.02)
I merged them from FF, not Rife. The biggest feature of Jotnar are 1-radius cities and powerful units which make up for a quite unique gameplay.
haven't merged the age promotions yet, Jotnar look quite strong already and removed the xp promotions for Jotnar citizens. Other changes are making them agnostic (they were already blocked from allmost all religious units), moved traditions civic to a seperate civic category. Jotnar Hill giants are melee instead of Animals unitcombat. Will modify the Jotnar pedia
they didn't have access to all the religious units (not just priests, but also the military units like diseased corpses). basically gave them agnostic to reflect that they don't gain much from religion anyway but also to compensate for allowing them a government civic.Why make them agnostic? They actually had a unique priest that could spread religions. The Mouth, think it's called. They're designed to follow religions, they just get a single priest unit so they can avoid having to upgrade countless citizens just to spread their religion.
I think forcing the player to take a particular civic is bad. Atleast in the current system that doesn't offer so much choice anyway.Moving Traditions is also a bit... off. The whole reason AC put it in Government was to block all other government civics. Not that we're necessarily keeping it in RifE (just need to add the ability for traits to modify the amount of food consumed by citizens), but still.
I still disagree about the 1-radius cities... I really can't see giants living that close together. It also encourages playing against the lore... A fading race, which spams cities every two tiles? I like the mechanic, I just don't like it for Giants. Have ideas to use it elsewhere.![]()
they didn't have access to all the religious units (not just priests, but also the military units like diseased corpses). basically gave them agnostic to reflect that they don't gain much from religion anyway but also to compensate for allowing them a government civic.
I think forcing the player to take a particular civic is bad. Atleast in the current system that doesn't offer so much choice anyway.
In civ population in cities in exponential. A 18 size city has a lot more population than several 8 size cities. I think having no grand cities fits a fading race. I wouldn't even consider them cities, more a larger kind of settlement.
Founded a new city with bad squares throughout the first square, but in the BFC there is a forested grassland tile (2F 1H) accessible due to my existing culture. That tile was the default tile worked by the new city, and I get the benefits of that tile. Since the Jotnar are prevented from working those tiles, I can't change from that tile.
I played Jotnar a bit and they seem really, really weak to me. Their units might be a bit stronger but the huge upgrade costs for even the most basic of units means that just about any other civ can overwhelm them in the field. Hill giants cost like ~250 gold to upgrade? In the time it takes to accumulate that much in the early game without completely freezing research, the AI could easily have massed a dozen+ axemen. It gets even worse from there.
can you "solve" the ring issue by temporarily using specialists?
[to_xp]Gekko;9119708 said:I remember FF used to have that issue, so it could be good to ask there about if and how they fixed it![]()