Version 2.5beta patch

Why do i feel catapults are soooo useless?? They miss half chances and when they dont, they just reduce umm 3% ???
 
Why do i feel catapults are soooo useless?? They miss half chances and when they dont, they just reduce umm 3% ???
Siege units reduce city defense by percentage from the current city defense amount. So if city has 20% defense left and your single catapult does like 10% bombard damage, city defense is reduced by 2% (20*0.1 = 2) to 18%. If city has say 200% defense rate, then your catapult would reduce defense from 200% to 180%. So siege units become less effective if city defense bonus gets low. Correct promotions do make them more useful for bombardment. ;)
 
But anyway isnt it really useless to discuss the names of the civics as one could name them Politics: prehistoric, ancient, old, classical, reformed neoclassical, new renewed...
Its just a name for a bonus or malus. As long as I am fighting Spearmen with Marines I really dont care that much about realism in naming of civics. Especially if it works the way Big Heb explained.
Greetz
Well said. :) In civic mini mod discussion thread I argued that in my language Aristocracy and Patrician mean exactly the same thing (I almost merged them at that time) and I did argue bit about some other names (like Laissez-Faire and Keynesian) and now in v2.502 those economy civics are named differently. What I want is that regular player (who might not have degree in history or economics or in politics as the player could be some 12 year old kid...) understands all the civics just by glancing them so if people feel that aristocracy name should be replaced by Nobility (I've thought about this earlier) and if Patrician should have different name then speak up! :) I think I've already know new civics inside out since I've been editing them and reading about them so much lately. :rolleyes: Anyway I'm satisfied with the current set up for civics (can't make everyone happy with them ;)).
 
We do find that Barter is quite strong - seems there is little reason to change to most of the others, too much of a hit. Just a thought. :)
 
We do find that Barter is quite strong - seems there is little reason to change to most of the others, too much of a hit. Just a thought. :)
You mean still too strong in v2.502? As I changed a bit between the versions 2.501 and 2.502 (see release notes).
 
You mean still too strong in v2.502? As I changed a bit between the versions 2.501 and 2.502 (see release notes).

I find it useless, and skip to slavery as soon as i have the chance as you need as much science as possible.. and -75% on gold from trade routes makes it worthless as soon as you have two or more cities and open borders with another civilization.
 
Aye, the rebalance to barter was good, but by reducing the gold to 25%, plus closing off international trade, most routes will generate hardly anything at all - as they're rounded down to zero - so its probably gone a little too far. If I were going to tweak it, I'd move the commerce back up to 50%, and keep the production and food at 25%. Keep the ban on international routes though :)

So slavery is now potentially more potent than barter because it doesn't penalise trade at all? Not sure if that's such a good idea - mind you, I always thought having slavery on the economic line is a bit dodgy anyway.

One interesting idea to address the above is, how about introducing a Currency civic to correspond with the Currency tech, and replacing slavery with it? It would be a 'vanilla' trade civic, if you like, featuring the possibility of international trade, no additional routes, and no bonuses or penalties. You could then move Free Market back from Banking to Economics - where it probably belongs :)

If you move slavery to one of the other civic lines, you would then either be running slavery with barter or currency (or not, depending on your preference).
 
Please help! I install this mod. Instal patch 2.502 and begin new game but i don't see interface :confused: I can't play without interface :sad:
 
Well said. :) In civic mini mod discussion thread I argued that in my language Aristocracy and Patrician mean exactly the same thing (I almost merged them at that time) and I did argue bit about some other names (like Laissez-Faire and Keynesian) and now in v2.502 those economy civics are named differently. What I want is that regular player (who might not have degree in history or economics or in politics as the player could be some 12 year old kid...) understands all the civics just by glancing them so if people feel that aristocracy name should be replaced by Nobility (I've thought about this earlier) and if Patrician should have different name then speak up! :) I think I've already know new civics inside out since I've been editing them and reading about them so much lately. :rolleyes: Anyway I'm satisfied with the current set up for civics (can't make everyone happy with them ;)).

In the beginning of the Roman Republic, the patricians were the landowners and the plebeians were the laborers. Thus, Patrician is meant to be essentially the same as a Plutocracy (rule by the wealthy) but a more flavorful name. Aristocracy is similar to Patrician in that it is an elite social class with power, but Aristocracy is based on hereditary succession of people related to the leader's family or warriors who served the leader. Aristocracy is closer to Vassalage than to Patrician, except Vassalage is more autocratic.
 
In the beginning of the Roman Republic, the patricians were the landowners and the plebeians were the laborers. Thus, Patrician is meant to be essentially the same as a Plutocracy (rule by the wealthy) but a more flavorful name. Aristocracy is similar to Patrician in that it is an elite social class with power, but Aristocracy is based on hereditary succession of people related to the leader's family or warriors who served the leader. Aristocracy is closer to Vassalage than to Patrician, except Vassalage is more autocratic.

Patrician status itself was based upon whether you could trace you lineage back to those original land owning families present at the founding of the Republic, not simply upon wealth. Yes, you are correct that it is somewhat similar to a plutocracy except that as I said earlier, the word Patrician itself describes a caste within a specific society, not a structure or social system itself. It is also dis-similar from a plutocracy in the sense that one could not just become a patrician (that is until much later when emperors began selling the title), it was a hereditary status. In a proper plutocracy wealth trumps all. It is pure capitalist rule, with the richest members ruling over society regardless of who their parents were. Under a plutocracy, birthright may help you or grease the wheels but it is not a barrier to those without it.

Also, though patricians were the nobility, they were not the only powerful landowners. There were a great many from Rome's equestrian class (and even plebeians) who made substantial fortunes even greater than that of many patricians and owned massive tracts of land and hundreds of slaves. This gave those wealthy equestrians considerable power as well, however they were not treated with the same accords and respects as the "noble" patricians.

As the Republic faded and the Empire rose, the term patrician so too faded. It was at this point that the upper levels of Roman society became plutocratic and many plebeian & equestrian families able to accumulate significant wealth were finally on a more or less even playing field.

Vassalage, although almost exclusively co-existing with aristocratic social systems, is not the same thing as an aristocracy. Vassalage describes a legal system for distributing land and guaranteeing the defense of the state. Aristocracy describes a social system based upon elevating certain citizens above others, which is not always or necessarily a hereditary matter. Patrician describes the hereditary aristocratic caste of a specific society, so in fact, aristocracy and "patrician" are much more closely related in the sense that the patricians were simply the aristocracy of their culture. Aristocracy also lacks a core component of vassalage (service for land) which makes it dramatically different.
 
Please help! I install this mod. Instal patch 2.502 and begin new game but i don't see interface :confused: I can't play without interface :sad:


1st question that needs answered to help you Drago777, Is your core BtS patched to Official 3.17 Patch?

Many ppl that have missing UI have tried to play RoM2.4 and above with the 3.13 patch. This will not work.

2nd You installed RoM2.4Full 1st and then patched to 2.502?

More details will help us determine your problem and help solve it.

JosEPh :)
 
Weird problem here.. in multiplayer game (team of 2) it seems we can't adopt any religion as state religion.. even when founded we can't choose the religion..
Any idea?
 
1st question that needs answered to help you Drago777, Is your core BtS patched to Official 3.17 Patch?

Many ppl that have missing UI have tried to play RoM2.4 and above with the 3.13 patch. This will not work.

2nd You installed RoM2.4Full 1st and then patched to 2.502?

More details will help us determine your problem and help solve it.

JosEPh :)

1. I patched BtS nonofficial 3.17 patch.
2. Yes i install RoM2.4 1st and patched to 2.502

You may asked any qutstions and i answer you
 
I keep on generating less money each turn than what it says I'm meant to be earning - in a late game, I have 3,500+ for the next turn, but my treasury only increases about 500 gold. I have lots of automated workers and automated building governors - do governors rush buildings?
 
I keep on generating less money each turn than what it says I'm meant to be earning - in a late game, I have 3,500+ for the next turn, but my treasury only increases about 500 gold. I have lots of automated workers and automated building governors - do governors rush buildings?

The answer is yes, Sickre. I had the same problem and it took me ages to work it out.
 
Weird problem here.. in multiplayer game (team of 2) it seems we can't adopt any religion as state religion.. even when founded we can't choose the religion..
Any idea?

In the religious civics, some of them do not let you have a state religion, such as folklore.
Change to prophets and this will be solved.
 
Patrician status itself was based upon whether you could trace you lineage back to those original land owning families present at the founding of the Republic, not simply upon wealth. Yes, you are correct that it is somewhat similar to a plutocracy except that as I said earlier, the word Patrician itself describes a caste within a specific society, not a structure or social system itself. It is also dis-similar from a plutocracy in the sense that one could not just become a patrician (that is until much later when emperors began selling the title), it was a hereditary status. In a proper plutocracy wealth trumps all. It is pure capitalist rule, with the richest members ruling over society regardless of who their parents were. Under a plutocracy, birthright may help you or grease the wheels but it is not a barrier to those without it.

Also, though patricians were the nobility, they were not the only powerful landowners. There were a great many from Rome's equestrian class (and even plebeians) who made substantial fortunes even greater than that of many patricians and owned massive tracts of land and hundreds of slaves. This gave those wealthy equestrians considerable power as well, however they were not treated with the same accords and respects as the "noble" patricians.

As the Republic faded and the Empire rose, the term patrician so too faded. It was at this point that the upper levels of Roman society became plutocratic and many plebeian & equestrian families able to accumulate significant wealth were finally on a more or less even playing field.

Vassalage, although almost exclusively co-existing with aristocratic social systems, is not the same thing as an aristocracy. Vassalage describes a legal system for distributing land and guaranteeing the defense of the state. Aristocracy describes a social system based upon elevating certain citizens above others, which is not always or necessarily a hereditary matter. Patrician describes the hereditary aristocratic caste of a specific society, so in fact, aristocracy and "patrician" are much more closely related in the sense that the patricians were simply the aristocracy of their culture. Aristocracy also lacks a core component of vassalage (service for land) which makes it dramatically different.

Good point. I do recall a time late in the Republic when many plebs were richer than patricians and there was a social crisis, and after Augustus the social classes became very fluid like they are today. I would probably change Patrician to Plutocracy and keep Aristocracy the same.
 
We've found something very interesting with the latest 2.502 patch. We tried playing it with Revolutions on multiplayer and have so far NOT had an OOS error in several nights of playing. We do still get the popup for everyone, but try to agree what we will do when we see it coming and everything has been smooth as can be! YAY!!
 
1. I patched BtS nonofficial 3.17 patch.

You Need the Official 3.17 patch before you use Solver's Unofficial 3.17 patch.

2. Yes i install RoM2.4 1st and patched to 2.502

You may asked any qutstions and i answer you

You used the Updater under Options to install the 3.17 patch?

JosEPh
 
Top Bottom