Is english version working fine ?
By me no. Is not copm. whit 161...

com'on we don't give a damn to what Egyptians referred what with which names. We are speaking on this forum and it's the year 2006 A.D.
I was referring to ancient precedents from one of the world's great civilizations. It is historically based that the Middle East and Asia Minor were all referred to as being part of Asia. It seems kind of funny that you are stating that this is 2006 and yet you are playing a mod that is supposedly based upon the political, moral, religious and economic ambience of the ancient world. You kind argue from both sides of the argument simultaneously. And as to whether you give a damn or not is really not at issue. My post was not made in an inflammatory nor immature manner. However I find your response to be somewhat less than respectful of viewpoints that you do not share. I have been a part of the TAM forum since CIV III (when this forum was part of the CDGroup); and it is unfortunate that I do not have the time to spare to be a large part of the development process in Civ IV But you can rest assured that whenever I post it concerns historically based issues that can be independently verified. Sorry if I offended your sensibilities by pointing something out from the historical record.

That has nothing to do with the French version. I assume you installed the mod into the wrong directory. You have to extract the MOD into you MAIN civ folder.

@Psycadelic:
see above. Otherwise, what language version do you have?

I was referring to ancient precedents from one of the world's great civilizations. It is historically based that the Middle East and Asia Minor were all referred to as being part of Asia. It seems kind of funny that you are stating that this is 2006 and yet you are playing a mod that is supposedly based upon the political, moral, religious and economic ambience of the ancient world. You kind argue from both sides of the argument simultaneously. [...]

Uh ? Nope I don't argue any sides, it is someone else who goes to dig 3000 years back to find a reason to justify the sentence "Alexander was very successful in Asia". If you prefer we can assume we are living in Egypt 3000 years ago, although as I already stated, ancient Persia is still in the Asian continent nowadays, it didn't move away. The story doesn't change though, Asia is huge and Alexander was only successful in the Middle East, he failed when he entered India and he never got to the other 80% of Asia. Can we please acknowledge this fact in whatever language and age you prefer and move on to some more useful discussion (for example about the mod) ? Thank you all.

By me no. Is not copm. whit 161...

v. 1.61 is what is causing the problem I think. People are having the same issues with FFH... Kael solved the problem, so maybe Shqype will want to ask him how :P

Version 1.61 (French) an Tam : got a major problem, since no character can be seen as soon as you load sceanrio...

Is english version working fine ?

English version behaves the same way. Text on menus is invisible. I tried this with TAM 1.6 (haven't installed 1.7 yet). Tried fresh install of TAM 1.6 after the 1.61 patch, same result, no visible text on menus.

-Mettius

Im on english, and ive re-installed twice into the MAIN civ4 directory...

English version behaves the same way. Text on menus is invisible. I tried this with TAM 1.6 (haven't installed 1.7 yet). Tried fresh install of TAM 1.6 after the 1.61 patch, same result, no visible text on menus.

-Mettius

I had the same problem with stock Civ4 after upgrading. I uninstalled the game and all directories, then re-installed and updated.

Problem gone.

Well, I've fixed the problem, and will be uploading the v1.61 fix for TAM shortly...

great work Shqype !

Yep, it's done, I just need a place to upload it. I uploaded to the FTP but I don't think normal users have permission to access it...

http://s48.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=04YCMGU6G33PL36HKUEZ1QQ71Z

That is a quick-link to the fix for TAM until Thamis can get online and provide an FTP link for us all. Changes I've made for TAM v1.71:
-Now CIV v1.61 compliant!
-Removed Plato's Academy Project
-Papyrus now doubles the production speed of Library, Great Library
-Clay now doubles the production speed of Granary
-Timber requires lumbermill to give any type of bonus, and then gives 2 production, 1 gold
-2 timber resources removed from Germany
-Tin can now be mined (and coupled with copper it rightfully yields bronze weapons)
-Charcoal can now be mined (and coupled with iron it rightfully yields steel weapons)
-Grove now can only be built on Fruits / Olives resources
-Workers now work at 75% their original speed

Other fixes will be addressed in v1.8, enjoy until then!

While playing the Germans, I have noticed that their UU (the berserk) is underpowered for the time that it appears. The armored spearman is stronger than the berserk which becomes available later. The berserk is also less powerful than the swordsman which it replaces which makes it seem less valuable. I would recommend that either the berserk should be available earlier, or it should be more powerful. I also don't think that the swordsman should be replaced. The swordsman unit just seems like it belongs as part of the Germanic military.

The woodsman is already available early, so perhaps the best fix would be to make the berserk more powerful and available later in the game. Having two early UU might be one of the reasons that the Germans become powerful so quickly in the early game. Maybe it could replace the infantry unit and have a higher strength.

http://s48.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=04YCMGU6G33PL36HKUEZ1QQ71Z

That is a quick-link to the fix for TAM until Thamis can get online and provide an FTP link for us all. Changes I've made for TAM v1.71:
-Now CIV v1.61 compliant!
-Removed Plato's Academy Project
-Papyrus now doubles the production speed of Library, Great Library
-Clay now doubles the production speed of Granary
-Timber requires lumbermill to give any type of bonus, and then gives 2 production, 1 gold
-2 timber resources removed from Germany
-Tin can now be mined (and coupled with copper it rightfully yields bronze weapons)
-Charcoal can now be mined (and coupled with iron it rightfully yields steel weapons)
-Grove now can only be built on Fruits / Olives resources
-Workers now work at 75% their original speed

Other fixes will be addressed in v1.8, enjoy until then!

This is a great Easter present Shqype !

http://s48.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=04YCMGU6G33PL36HKUEZ1QQ71Z

Danke. thnks:)

Regarding v1.70....

At the end of the game, the Armored Infantry unit seems overpowered relative to all other unit types. Since it has 12 strength, it dominates all other foot units (the 2nd strongest unit is a Bowman with only 8 strength). It might be worthwhile to drop the Armored Infantry to a strength of 10 and also raise its production (shield) cost by 20%.

Bowmen and Armored Javilineer upgrade options do not include collateral damage. Given that this type of unit was used to soften up the enemy prior to an attack, showering enemy troops with missiles to cause some casualties but also to disrupt the formations, it seems that these units should come standard with withdrawl and collateral damage and have an upgrade path for those abilities as well. (The civilopedia says these units cause collateral damage but they did not seem to do that in my game; only carthaginian elephants and fire galleys and catapults successfully caused collateral damage). The direct combat strength of these units should be secondary to their ability to harass the enemy.

Regarding the tech tree, it has been mentioned before that the research costs could be increased. I finished researching all techs at least 150 years prior to the turn limit ending the game.

Just got the popup that the v1.71 download is complete. Now it's time to waste my Easter Sunday playing TAM....

I noticed another thing that should be addressed. I was playing the Illyrians and had a fleet of their UU boats. When I got the upgrade first strike (x4) it gave me additional first strike and +25% vs. cavalry. Maybe this should be changed to naval units or something since cavalry units do not fight on the sea.

We decided to give skirmisher units not collateral dmg upgrades, as that would make them too strong. The idea is that they have a small amount of collateral dmg, and that's it. It seems that this low collateral dmg doesn't work, and we'll address it in the next version.

How do I get this mod to work? I extracted to my Civ IV Directory and nothing.

I'm dumb at this type of stuff, someone care to help me?

Just finished a massively long game as the Phoenicians on 1.6.
I now know that this civ is a little buggy, and that they are going to be reduced in future versions - at least the timber resources.

I ended up conquering Egypt, Babylon, Lydia, Hittites, Kolchis, Greece. Quite easily as well. In addition, I built all wonders save for 3 (which were all built by Germany). Most were built at my 3-timber city, which really was the production powerhouse of my world.

I finished the tech tree with about 200 turns left. While I think this is a little flukey (because I built so many wonders and really focused on trade), this seems to be a recurring problem. I think it is the single biggest issue that needs to be dealt with. Essentially, the game became boring for the last 100 turns and I didn't even finish it. The Phoenicians just picked off the smaller civs one-by-one. (Greece was defeated in only two turns.)


Bowmen and Armored Javilineer upgrade options do not include collateral damage. Given that this type of unit was used to soften up the enemy prior to an attack, showering enemy troops with missiles to cause some casualties but also to disrupt the formations, it seems that these units should come standard with withdrawl and collateral damage and have an upgrade path for those abilities as well.
I agree. As Thamis mentioned, this should be fixed in the future. I wouldn't mind seeing this role increased (especially for the javelineers). But, if I had my way, these units would be able to bombard one tile away - and I don't see that happening.

Re: Armoured Infantry. I don't mind them being so overpowered. It definitely means that the late age is one of attack - not defense. I like this. But, all of my attacks were successful, often without losing a single man. (For example, although Kolchis had also completed the tech tree, I lost very few soldiers. My cats wiped out the defenses and my 3-city-attack infantry moved in with 98% probability. That is a bit much, especially when attacking an advanced nation.)

Regarding the endgame. Could we add some late-classical age techs/wonders/etc? The historical end of this game would be the dark ages and sack of Rome, correct? So, could we make it possible to achieve this?
What about a wonder that spawns a powerful invader? Or some kind of spaceship-replacement? Essentially, it should be possible for the player to:

a - conquer the world, leading to the dark ages
b - create a powerful and lasting world empire that spans the Med.
c - unify the remaining nations through diplomacy


We need another warless victory condition anyways, in my opinion. Many players don't like war to be the focus of their game, and having peaceful options for victory make the game so much deeper. I would suggest a UN-type victory, a spaceship-empire building victory, and a barbarism-conquering victory. This final victory could be achieved in a similar way to the fall of Rome scenario for civ3. This way, the player/AI could actually decide how the classical age ends, and would make the endgame much more enjoyable. What does everyone else think?

My two cents. Keep up the good work.

How do I get this mod to work? I extracted to my Civ IV Directory and nothing.

I'm dumb at this type of stuff, someone care to help me?

I normally extract it to my desktop.
Then, I put my "The Ancient Mediterranean" folder in my Civ4/Mods folder.
Then, I put my "The Ancient Mediterranean 1.7.wbs" file in my civ4/public maps folder.

To play, run civ4
go to advanced, load a mod, Ancient Med.
Then when it reloads go to single player, load a scenario, and choose the The Ancient Mediterranean 1.7 wbs(worldbuildersave).

Good luck. :)

We need another warless victory condition anyways, in my opinion.

I suggest for one option; a Universal Religion. To win this, the religion that you founded early in the game would have to become, at any time in the game, the religion of all surviving civilizations.

It is unlikely that you could accomplish this peacefully, since a few religions would have been founded by others who would be unlikely to give them up peacefully. This would really enhance the idea of religious war, for which there is no real motivation in the game.

One problem is the existence of Free Religion. I would suggest that this be eliminated, especially since it never really came into existance until much, much later in world history. The Romans may have allowed free practice, but they still had a state religion.

Another problem is that a player (AI or human) should be wary of taking up a religion not founded by them as it might lead to their defeat in this way. A way around this would be that the civilization which dealt the final blow to a founder of a religion would be able to take over the "Caliphate" and the possibility of winning with this method.

All kinds of cool complications arise out of this.

I suggest for one option; a Universal Religion. To win this, the religion that you founded early in the game would have to become, at any time in the game, the religion of all surviving civilizations.

It is unlikely that you could accomplish this peacefully, since a few religions would have been founded by others who would be unlikely to give them up peacefully. This would really enhance the idea of religious war, for which there is no real motivation in the game.

One problem is the existence of Free Religion. I would suggest that this be eliminated, especially since it never really came into existance until much, much later in world history. The Romans may have allowed free practice, but they still had a state religion.

Another problem is that a player (AI or human) should be wary of taking up a religion not founded by them as it might lead to their defeat in this way. A way around this would be that the civilization which dealt the final blow to a founder of a religion would be able to take over the "Caliphate" and the possibility of winning with this method.

All kinds of cool complications arise out of this.

I like the idea of having a religious victory, but unlike you, I think this would be too easy. I have had (at least) two games in v 1.7 where more than 75% of the world followed the Greek religion and evey civ had it as their state religion (accept me because I had free religion). To accomplish this I just rushed the polythesim tech. I always do this unless I am playing a civ that starts with nature cult in which case I try to get the Mesopotamian or Druidic religions. If that fails I can still fall back on polythesim. I try to found at least one religion becasue the gold produced by the shrine (especially when everyone converts) and the ability to open up the map without exploring are such great benefits.

I also agree that the free religion is broke. It is often the first religious civic that I unlock so I go from no religion to free religion in a single turn. This often happens because I rush to philosophy for the benefit of the extra tech (I also ruch the oricle for the same reason). Perhaps the free religion could be changed to a different civic which keeps a state religion, but reduces the negative effects of secondary religions and increases happiness (and reduces war weariness) at the cost of the state religion benefits.

Just my two cents.

This might be more difficult to accomplish, but it would be cool if each state religion option could give a benefit in addition to the various civic options. If there were a concern that additional benefits could unbalance the game then there could also be a cost for each state religion as well.

For example:

Druidic Religion could increase the production of forest tiles but reduce the effects of libraries (since they did not have a written language).

Mesopotamian religion could increase trade (money, resources, map and tech sharing, etc.) but reduce production.

Greek religion could increase the production of military units and/or provide an experiance bonus to newly produced units but lower diplomacy options with AI (thus promoting the use of the military units!).

Egyptian religion could allow faster building of wonders but cause increased attacks by barbarians.

These are just a few ideas...two more cents...

I have had (at least) two games in v 1.7 where more than 75% of the world followed the Greek religion and evey civ had it as their state religion (accept me because I had free religion).

Maybe set as the winning requirement a certain percentage of the world poplulation following your religion. If it turns out too easy, just raise the percentage until we get it right.

This would also be good because your opponent's can not necessarily control their people's religion. They might have a state religion, but a population that follows another.

And as the world's people converge on one religion I can see a mad rush to seize the caliphate. Almost like an ancient space race, which is what we are looking for.

(Instead of having to destroy the entire civilization of the founder, you should only have to sieze the religion's holy shrine to claim the caliphate)

If you set the threshold for religious victory too high, it would require an inquisitor unit (to remove unwanted religions from cities) to be successful. Without this feature, a city would have to be razed to eliminate unwanted secondary religions.

Sorry for the slowing translation, but I had and have got exams in the university, I'm working and I was in Greece in this Eastern.

When I can I proceed with the translation.

See ya!

I normally extract it to my desktop.
Then, I put my "The Ancient Mediterranean" folder in my Civ4/Mods folder.
Then, I put my "The Ancient Mediterranean 1.7.wbs" file in my civ4/public maps folder.

To play, run civ4
go to advanced, load a mod, Ancient Med.
Then when it reloads go to single player, load a scenario, and choose the The Ancient Mediterranean 1.7 wbs(worldbuildersave).

Good luck. :)

Someone help me with the map. I've done what you've told me to do and I can load the mod. It has the Civs, the special units, etc.

But the only problem I have is the map. I put it in the "civ4/public maps" folder and I do not have the option to use it.

What am I doing wrong.

@Immortal

You were probably trying to select the map from the custom game screen, where it won't show up.

To play the map, you need to go to single player, then "load a scenario".
All of the scenarios you place in /publicmaps are loaded this way.

Try loading it using this method. It should work.:)

If you set the threshold for religious victory too high, it would require an inquisitor unit (to remove unwanted religions from cities) to be successful.

NOBODY expects the Inquisitor Unit!

Cool idea. And very historic.

NOBODY expects the Inquisitor Unit!

:lol: :lol: :crazyeye: :lol: :lol:

nice.

I think that this might be a good unit to add anyways. Perhaps it could be linked to massive unhappiness?

I think that this might be a good unit to add anyways. Perhaps it could be linked to massive unhappiness?

I don't know about that. It seems to me that people who belong to the religious majority were quite happy when minorities were persecuted. (Did I say, "were"?) The happiness decrease should only apply to the percentage of the population who are being persecuted. (they may actually be the majority in some cities)

@Immortal

You were probably trying to select the map from the custom game screen, where it won't show up.

To play the map, you need to go to single player, then "load a scenario".
All of the scenarios you place in /publicmaps are loaded this way.

Try loading it using this method. It should work.:)

That is what I was thinking...and since it's the case...I'm screwed. Maybe I'm blind but I do not see a "Load a Scenario" option.

NOBODY expects the Inquisitor Unit!

Cool idea. And very historic.

As much fun as it would be to have an inquisitor unit, it is not very historically accurate for the time period of this mod. There should be a way to remove unwanted religions though if we want a religious victory option...suggestions?

Awesome mod! :)

I was wondering, why isn't the limit of civs 18 on this mod too?

That is what I was thinking...and since it's the case...I'm screwed. Maybe I'm blind but I do not see a "Load a Scenario" option.

Single Player/Play Scenario. That option better be there.

As much fun as it would be to have an inquisitor unit, it is not very historically accurate for the time period of this mod.

I'm betting there were some inquisitors working for Ankhenaton whose job it was to suppress the old Egyptian religion after he introduced the Sun God cult. And then again, after his death, there must have been inquisitors rooting out anybody who still harbored monotheistic beliefs.

Then you have the example of Romans persecuting Jews and Christians and, after Christianity became the state religion, the Christians persecuting the pagans and Jews.

And Sunnis vs Shiites vs Zoroastrians vs whoever.

These all fit in our time period.

We don't have to call them "Inquisitors", since that recalls the Inquisition of a later time.

dido ZXE.

Pax Romana (or however it's spelled) could be a UN type win or even some kind of wild wonder or even space ship called "The Fall of Rome" that once launched increases the probability of cultural conversion by 3000%. Of course I guess if your playing as the Romans and you use this wonder to win the name wouldn't make much sense but you get the drift.

I am amazed at all the work that went into this Mod, its incredible and very fun!! Thank you!

Now to my question :) Ever since upgrading to CIV 1.61 and TAM 1.71, I have noticed that chopping produces no hammers. I can still cut the forest square, but I get no hammer increase from it. I have tried forest (not dense forest) squares right next to my cities and even squares connected by roads, but the end result is always the same, no hammers.

Has anybody else noticed this? Any ideas on what might be wrong or what to do to correct it? Thanks!

That is what I was thinking...and since it's the case...I'm screwed. Maybe I'm blind but I do not see a "Load a Scenario" option.
You can try a slightly different approach. Save the The Ancient Mediterranean 1.7.wbs file in Civ4/Mods/The Ancient Mediterranean folder. Then open Windows Explorer, find the wbs file, and double click on it. That should launch the mod.

Great mod guys! :goodjob: Much more fun than standard Civ4.

Btw, I read the entire thread :mischief: and saw that you guys are lacking music. I've uploaded a file here (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3N49P3SA) (6.65 MB). It's supposed to be the kind of music that was played during Greek religious ceremonies IIRC. Most of it is kinda boring IMHO - unfortunately they didn't have rock & metal back in the Classical Age. ;) But I think the last minute or so, starting from 6:07 could serve well as diplomatic music for some civ. :)

As much fun as it would be to have an inquisitor unit, it is historically not very accurate for the time period of this mod. There should be a way to remove unwanted religions though if we want a religious victory option...suggestions?

Well, the "Inquisitor unit" is nothing but some leader with military power who through his power persecutes and eliminates people with a certain religion. You're right assuming that the "Inquisitor" has not been existing in ancient times. It didn't even exist at all in any other religion than Christianity. :eek: What now?

The Inquisitor ist just a symbol for what I told you above. A persecutor of people with the wrong religion. This did even exist in ancient times. Even in Rome after around 1 AD people called christs have been persecuted and eliminated because of their belief.

Finally the leader that wants to eliminate religions is you. So you should be capable of eliminating religions somehow. You're the inquisitor unit :)

Knowing this, I propose the following: Just add buttons like "Eliminate <religion>" in the city screen for civs having a state-religion for every non-state-religion if military is present. Pressing this button does the following:
- eliminate the specified religion
- burn the related religious buildings
- eliminates a citizen if at least two citizen exist in the city
- cause unhappiness according to slavery.

The unhappiness may be greater and last longer
- for every other non-state-religion in the city (because the other religions fear persecution as well)
- for every religious building that has to be destroyed with the process of inquisition
- The more cultured a city is. Citizen of a city with great culture have a strong belief their city. Religious persecution would have a much larger impact on a city like Rome (people are shocked, public oppinions spreads faster with culture in temples, libraries, etc.) than some military garrison town.

Though some civics like Theocracy may reduce the penalties for "Inquisition" somehow.

Alternatively the "eliminate religion from city" action could be bound to military units (most likely melees), having the same consequences for the city like a button in the city would have. That is you have a button "Remove religion" and a popup asks "which religion, or do you want to cancel", maybe explaining the effects inquisition would have like pressing the whip button.

Now to my question :) Ever since upgrading to CIV 1.61 and TAM 1.71, I have noticed that chopping produces no hammers. I can still cut the forest square, but I get no hammer increase from it. I have tried forest (not dense forest) squares right next to my cities and even squares connected by roads, but the end result is always the same, no hammers.

Has anybody else noticed this? Any ideas on what might be wrong or what to do to correct it? Thanks!

I’m not sure if this is intentional but AFAICT with CIV 1.61 and TAM 1.71 you get no hammers (as mentioned above) for chopping and you can put a lumber mill on EVERY woods tile very early in the game with the early wood working tech?

I like the sounds of your idea publius. My Suggestion:

1. The player must build a "persecution building" (for lack of a better word). This would mean that they would need a required tech.
2. Once the building is built (which would create unhappiness and maybe neg. culture) and the player's civics were in line with religious persecution, they could have access to the aformentioned button.
3. I don't think it should be such a clean sweep, however. Maybe it should depend on the number of religious buildings, the ratio of wanted/unwanted religions, the number of military units present, etc. Kind of like spying in civ3. This way, the persecution could succeed, fail, or even cause a revolt, possibly leading to a breakaway barb city... Because there are examples in history where religions successfully defended themselves against foreign occupation (ancient Judea).

Some other issues:

1. Are we still working on a bigger map? Or adding more civs? Like Numidia, Judea, Macedonia, Persia, etc? It would be nice to see the full 18 civs in the scen, anyways, and I recommend at least 1 more African civ.
2. Is there any way we can allow the player to choose the leaders of opposing civs? ie: have two egyptian leaders, both of whom might be available in the scen...
3. Now that the SDK is out, there is something that has been bothering me for some time. In a recent game, I wiped out the Lydians. They had over 20 naval vessels at this point. When I sacked the capitals, these vessels dissappeared. Does this seem @#$#ing stupid to anyone else? Can we either:

a) Allow a civ to exist so long as a single unit survives?
or
b) convert all remaining unit to barbarians following the last city's destruction? ie: all of those vessels would become pirate ships.

I would prefer the former, just because it would give other civs the chance to harbour exiles, and possibly (if we coded it) gift units to them to retake their empire. This is much more historically accurate than having all of the vessels just dissappear.

Thoughts?

Now to my question :) Ever since upgrading to CIV 1.61 and TAM 1.71, I have noticed that chopping produces no hammers.

Now that you mention it, I noticed this too. I just assumed it was a deliberate change to TAM vs. standard CivIV hopefully not, I miss whacking trees for production.

-Mettius

...you can put a lumber mill on EVERY woods tile very early in the game with the early wood working tech?

Yes that is true, when I first noticed I couldn't chop but could build lumbermills everywhere, I was thinking this was a game balance thing, perhaps being able to do both so early skews gameplay?

This of course assumes it was a deliberate change... off to the changelog to see I go!
Nope, nothing about chopping/forests mentioned.

-Mettius

Well, the "Inquisitor unit" is nothing but some leader with military power who through his power persecutes and eliminates people with a certain religion. You're right assuming that the "Inquisitor" has not been existing in ancient times. It didn't even exist at all in any other religion than Christianity. :eek: What now?

The Inquisitor ist just a symbol for what I told you above. A persecutor of people with the wrong religion. This did even exist in ancient times. Even in Rome after around 1 AD people called christs have been persecuted and eliminated because of their belief.

Finally the leader that wants to eliminate religions is you. So you should be capable of eliminating religions somehow. You're the inquisitor unit :)

Knowing this, I propose the following: Just add buttons like "Eliminate <religion>" in the city screen for civs having a state-religion for every non-state-religion if military is present. Pressing this button does the following:
- eliminate the specified religion
- burn the related religious buildings
- eliminates a citizen if at least two citizen exist in the city
- cause unhappiness according to slavery.

The unhappiness may be greater and last longer
- for every other non-state-religion in the city (because the other religions fear persecution as well)
- for every religious building that has to be destroyed with the process of inquisition
- The more cultured a city is. Citizen of a city with great culture have a strong belief their city. Religious persecution would have a much larger impact on a city like Rome (people are shocked, public oppinions spreads faster with culture in temples, libraries, etc.) than some military garrison town.

Though some civics like Theocracy may reduce the penalties for "Inquisition" somehow.

Alternatively the "eliminate religion from city" action could be bound to military units (most likely melees), having the same consequences for the city like a button in the city would have. That is you have a button "Remove religion" and a popup asks "which religion, or do you want to cancel", maybe explaining the effects inquisition would have like pressing the whip button.

I like this idea. The way that I think it could work well is if a tech were to unlock an upgrade for military units that allowed religious persecution. If you choose to add the persecution upgrade to a unit then it will have a new button that will appear if it is in a city that has a religion other then the state religion. This would be similar to the button that appears on a missionary when it is in a city that does not have the specified religion.

Pressing the persecution button will cause the unit to attack people who are worshiping the upstart religion. There will be a combat phase like any other battle. If you are victorious, the military unit will kill one population and reduce the opposing religion by a comparable amount (i.e. if the city has a population of 10, it will be reduced to 9 and if less than 10% of the population followed the religion it would be eliminated, otherwise it would be reduced by 10%). If you lose the military unit will die. A military unit should also gain experience for this action.

No matter what the outcome of the battle, taking this action should cause unhappiness. There should be a great amount of unhappiness in the city, and a lesser amount in other cities. Cities that have the same religion should have more unhappiness than cities that don't. The holy city of the opposing religion should have unhappiness and if it belongs to a different civ, they should decrease their diplomatic opinion.

I noticed something new tonight.

I usually play on the fast speed setting since I like to play quick games that I can finish in a single sitting. Tonight I played on the slower setting (one notch slower than standard) and the game played a lot different.

I played the Illyrians. On the slower setting, the units were usable for a longer period of time without becoming obsolete. The UU (Kombsor) was very effective and did not become obsolete for a long time. I was able to take out Agamemenon, Decebal, and Caesar early on before they could even get armored spearmen. All three of them cause problems for the Illyrians on the fast setting since they are aggressive and it is difficult to take on all three.

I saved the game at about 0 AD. I already have armored infantry and most of the other civs are just getting armored spearmen. In addition to all of Italy, and central Europe, I also have all of Turkey. The only player who is near as advanced as me is the Germanic Tribes who took out Gaul and built quite a few wonders while I was busy warring. My score is still almost twice their score.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that while the scenario is very challenging and well balanced when the speed is fast, it becomes less so as the speed setting is slowed down. Empires who have powerful UU in the early part of the game have a distinct advantage when the speed is slowed down.

You need not make it too complicated. I don't think that a promotion or wiped out military should be required for this. If you want the unit to be killed optionally anyway the promotion is just a flag you earn in barracks. Nobody would send an experienced unit into this job if the chances are random. And this is the problem with it: We don't want to gamble here, we want game decisions: Should I keep the religion or not? And if I decide against the religion am I ready to suffer the resistance?

It should be expensive to remove religions, but not too expensive for a true game decision. So killing military units randomly is no option, city resistance is.

Another penalty could be that, if you want a persecution to be failable, the state religion is severely damaged or removed from the city instead. If there is no state religion in the city it should be impossible to remove a non-state religion.

To stress this religion issue even more, maybe just to add more conflicts because of religions, city religions could have an impact on true combats. That is, if you have a certain state religion that is a non-state religion in a city (not valid for free religion) you are actually attacking, you receive an attack bonus like +15% "we want to join our brothers and sisters of the faith" and +25% for "we want to join the holy empire of our faith" if you even are the founder of this city religion. This means that you receive a military advance through soldiers that desert because of religions.

This would be solely to put players into a conflict: I want to defend my city against this nation so I have to remove the religion from the city to prevent too many deserters. Am I ready to take the risk of the penalty for this?
The other motivation for religious persecution would be a religious victory you're already discussing actively.

ack, i feel like a noob (although i suppose civ4 reduced every civ3 expert to that) but i can't get the Ancient Meditteranean map to show after I load the mod...i see there is a WorldBuilderSave in the Mod folder so i copied that over to public maps but it still didn't show
anyhelp would be appreciated, thanks

Double-click that file (The Ancient Mediterranean.WorldBuilderSave) and it will load the mod with the map.

Well, the "Inquisitor unit" is nothing but some leader with military power who through his power persecutes and eliminates people with a certain religion. You're right assuming that the "Inquisitor" has not been existing in ancient times. It didn't even exist at all in any other religion than Christianity. :eek: What now?

The Inquisitor ist just a symbol for what I told you above. A persecutor of people with the wrong religion. This did even exist in ancient times. Even in Rome after around 1 AD people called christs have been persecuted and eliminated because of their belief.


The inquisition did not exist in the ancient times, and it shouldn't belong to TAM. What you describe is a particular situation that does not relate to religion in the way that inquisition does. Christians were persecuted because more than a cult, theirs was seen as a "order" whos aim was to destabilize power. Don't forget that the ancient polytheist religions were used to justify decisions taken by mortal rulers, sort of a control over public opinion. "Mars said that we should make war to Carthage" ;) Christ didn't exactly preach things that married roman philosophy... so him and his successors were seen as rebels , or modern terrorists. But otherwise, there was pretty much a freedom of religion throughout the roman empire, for example if you visit Pompei you will see a temple dedicated to an egyptian god. Also, outside the roman empire I don't know of episodes of religion persecutions...

3. Now that the SDK is out, there is something that has been bothering me for some time. In a recent game, I wiped out the Lydians. They had over 20 naval vessels at this point. When I sacked the capitals, these vessels dissappeared. Does this seem @#$#ing stupid to anyone else? Can we either:

a) Allow a civ to exist so long as a single unit survives?
or
b) convert all remaining unit to barbarians following the last city's destruction? ie: all of those vessels would become pirate ships.

Thoughts?

option a) is a standard option introduced by the new patch. But I don't know how to activate it when you play a scenario (TAM's case).

As much fun as it would be to have an inquisitor unit, it is not very historically accurate for the time period of this mod. There should be a way to remove unwanted religions though if we want a religious victory option...suggestions?

My suggestion is to just forget about the religious victory, since it is itself not very historically accurate.

That is what I was thinking...and since it's the case...I'm screwed. Maybe I'm blind but I do not see a "Load a Scenario" option.

the option for single player (in english language) are:

- play now
- load game
- custom game
- play a scenario

The last one is the one you should choose.

I have downloaded 1.7 yesterday and just played until I had a crash to desktop when discovering the calendar.
I have noticed during the game (I played as Kolchis) that resource icons were not shown properly in the city screen (and also on the map iirc) ie. they did not match with the appearingly correct text tooltips. The resources themselves displayed alright on the map though.
Is that a general problem or do just I have this confusion?

My suggestion is to just forget about the religious victory, since it is itself not very historically accurate.
What about cultural victory ?

My suggestion is to just forget about the religious victory, since it is itself not very historically accurate.

In my most recent game I used the Illyrian Kombsor (probably misspelled) units to complete destroy the Roman Empire (along with most of the Eastern part of the map). How historically accurate is that???

People are not trying to recreate history here...they are playing a game. If adding a religious victory makes the scenario more fun for people to play, why not allow it???

In my most recent game I used the Illyrian Kombsor (probably misspelled) units to complete destroy the Roman Empire (along with most of the Eastern part of the map). How historically accurate is that???

I believe the purpose of this mod is to recreate history, but in moderation. We have created civilizations of the time and given them historically accurate starting positions. We have given them leaders and units of their time. We have given civilizations without empires not spanning their own territory 1 starting technology, civilizations with empires 2 starting technologies, and rome 3 starting technologies to try and influence who comes out on top.

However, we still give the option for the player to do whatever he can possibly do, which civ is famous for. No, the Illyrians didn't conquer the whole world using their Kambsors... but if there was no possible way for this to happen in a game of civ, then who would play the Illyrians? Everyone would pick Rome, which, historically, was doomed to fall anyway.

In history, the Illyrians were very warlike and strong; in fact, they comprised a significant portion of Alexander the Great's army, and were amongst the strongest soldiers in the Roman armies. What they lacked throughout history was unity, and often fought amongst themselves; the Romans, and others, successfully went to "divide and conquer" the disunited tribes.

Civ does not solve for disunity or political stability, but it can represent units. And, since the Illyrians were strong (which is represented in civ), but disunited (which isn't represented, especially as a player of any civ you have Human Intelligence and throughout the whole carreer of the game you will be "politically stable"), any faction can theoretically conquer the world, including the Illyrians.

On a side note, why do you spell it "kombsor?" Komb = nation, Kamb = foot.

On a side note, why do you spell it "kombsor?" Komb = nation, Kamb = foot.

I just couldn't remember how it was spelled and was too tired to load up the game to check. I wasn't trying to knock the your proud Illyrian heritage either. I was just trying to point out that since it is a game, being fun to play and having a variety of options available for the player is more important than being 100% historically accurate.

I can't even spell in my own language most of the time...please don't knock me for not being able to spell in a foreign language.

BTW...according to the Oxford Albanian dictionary the correct spelline is kembesor. Each of the "e" letters has two dots over it like a German umlaut...kembe meaning foot.

No man, don't get me wrong, I'm sorry if that post came out as "aggressive" or something. I like you and I appreciate your knowledge :) I'm not knocking you or anything, I was just curious. Look to my PM for more info.

The inquisition did not exist in the ancient times, and it shouldn't belong to TAM. What you describe is a particular situation that does not relate to religion in the way that inquisition does. Christians were persecuted because more than a cult, theirs was seen as a "order" whos aim was to destabilize power. Don't forget that the ancient polytheist religions were used to justify decisions taken by mortal rulers, sort of a control over public opinion. "Mars said that we should make war to Carthage" ;) Christ didn't exactly preach things that married roman philosophy... so him and his successors were seen as rebels , or modern terrorists. But otherwise, there was pretty much a freedom of religion throughout the roman empire, for example if you visit Pompei you will see a temple dedicated to an egyptian god. Also, outside the roman empire I don't know of episodes of religion persecutions...

As I said: There was no "inquisition" in ancient times. Your right as well. But there has been religious persecution.

Why? Because Rome feared Christianity could destabilize their system. Isn't this the whole point about religious persecutions in history? It was all about gaining power, trying to keep power, eliminating those who try to seize or endanger your power etc. Isn't this the whole thing about war as well?

But I would be fine with it: The mod is interesting enough without it. There's no need for religious persecutions in TAM, if you define religion in ancient times not important enough (because clashes of religions actually didn't play that role). But then there should be no need for a religious victory as well. If there's nothing to fight about, there should be nothing to win.

I hope this religous inquisition debate is not embedded in the mod (yet atleast). I think there is more importen issues to attend before something like this that feels rater uninportent atm.

One of the major things that bug me is the tilt improvements that swamp every single tilt later on in the game. I know that worker improvements where made more time-consuming but this will not keep the map from beeing completely overworked later on.

Looking at ancient maps and games such as Rome total war you cant see roads on every part on the land, hills or windmills on every single hill and so on.

On complicated workaround would be programming worker actions to be linked with a gold cost, for ex a stretch of road would cost 1-5 gold to produce and so on.

Or like with the northern forest some tilts might be “unworkable” to attain a better historical feel for the game.

Both are time-consuming, and perhaps impossible to implement. Just my 2c

One of the major things that bug me is the tilt improvements that swamp every single tilt later on in the game. I know that worker improvements where made more time-consuming but this will not keep the map from beeing completely overworked later on.

Looking at ancient maps and games such as Rome total war you cant see roads on every part on the land, hills or windmills on every single hill and so on.

On complicated workaround would be programming worker actions to be linked with a gold cost, for ex a stretch of road would cost 1-5 gold to produce and so on.

Or like with the northern forest some tilts might be “unworkable” to attain a better historical feel for the game.

Both are time-consuming, and perhaps impossible to implement. Just my 2c

Another work around would be to reduce the numner of tiles that are worked by each city. This could be accomplished by either limiting the growth of each city or allowing more than one worker to work an improved tile.

While we are on the suybject of workers and tile improvements, there is something that I noticed and never brought up before. Why do workers not build cottages in this mod? The option is there, but if you automate a worker they will never build a cotage. The AI does not build them either. In vanila it seems like every tile was turned into a cottage (and later a town etc.). Has the usefulness of the cottage improvement been dumbed down for this mod?

one more solution would be to make workers "uniqe" and only alowing 1-3 workes per civ. This would force the player and AI to use the workers wisly and for example only building roads where they are needed and not on every singel tilt.

This one is my own personal favorite of the 3 solutions I presented for the "Tilt spam problem". Dunno how it affects the AI.

On cottage subject, Im not sure I like them. They way I see them is extentions of cities (suburbs). For the most time I make cottage in every grassland tilt. This makes the impression of a very larg city ranging a vastyl greater area than the historical cities would.

As I said: There was no "inquisition" in ancient times. Your right as well. But there has been religious persecution.

Why? Because Rome feared Christianity could destabilize their system. Isn't this the whole point about religious persecutions in history? It was all about gaining power, trying to keep power, eliminating those who try to seize or endanger your power etc. Isn't this the whole thing about war as well?

But I would be fine with it: The mod is interesting enough without it. There's no need for religious persecutions in TAM, if you define religion in ancient times not important enough (because clashes of religions actually didn't play that role). But then there should be no need for a religious victory as well. If there's nothing to fight about, there should be nothing to win.

I repete that it wasn't religious persecution as we intend it. A religious persecution is when people are persecuted because their religion is different, but the reason why christians were persecuted was not this in reality.
Also, it's one isolated case, how can we say that the whole classical world should have persecutions of this kind for just one case (that btw was at the end of this age) ?

And I agree with you, there shouldn't be a religious victory (I posted it in another post). Also, as I proposed to the staff, I think there shouldn't even be missionaries except for the christian religion, although only if it's possible to script that religions can spread in cities that already have a religion.

In my most recent game I used the Illyrian Kombsor (probably misspelled) units to complete destroy the Roman Empire (along with most of the Eastern part of the map). How historically accurate is that???

People are not trying to recreate history here...they are playing a game. If adding a religious victory makes the scenario more fun for people to play, why not allow it???

well, Kambsor did exist, so did the Illyrians and the Romans. In reality, we know that Illyrians did not win the Romans, but you made it happen in the game. It's ok. But religious wars are middle age and modern age stuff, not classical age. They didn't exist... so why should we allow it ? It would be like allowing the discovery of gunpowder in TAM because well, it's fun for people to play it...

well, Kambsor did exist, so did the Illyrians and the Romans. In reality, we know that Illyrians did not win the Romans, but you made it happen in the game. It's ok. But religious wars are middle age and modern age stuff, not classical age. They didn't exist... so why should we allow it ? It would be like allowing the discovery of gunpowder in TAM because well, it's fun for people to play it...

I don't think it's quite the same, and I disagree with your assessment that religion did not play such an important role in the ancient world. In the Egyptian empire, the ruler was recognized as a living encarnation of God (or Ra) on Earth and ruled by devine right. Rulers from the Greek city states sought out the advise of the Oracle so that they could do as the gods willed. Many ancient wars were declared to be the will of the gods. Philip II and Alexander claimed to be decendent of Heracules and Achilies and destined to "liberate" the Greek cities captured by the Persians.

Religion has always been a way for people to explain that which they could not understand (day and night, the seasons, stars, etc.). Personifying deities as a human form made them seem more tangible. Rulers of every age have used religion as a means to sway the opinion of the masses (or plebs).

So no single religion ever dominated the Ancient world, this is true. Why does that mean that one could not? If the entire Ancient world believed in the Egyptian pantheon, would this not make Pharoah the ruler of the world? If Pharoah had the military might to do so, do you really think that he would not spread the belief of his devinity to every land under the sun?

Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.

And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we.

Exodus 1:8-9

And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.

Exodus 1:22



...I don't know about you, but this sounds like religious persecution to me...

...I could be wrong, but I think this is in the Ancient times...

..I could be wrong, but I think this is in the Ancient times...

If someone doesn't want a religious victory, that's fine. But it is very strange to argue that there was no religious persecution in ancient times. Ankhenaton persecuted the Egyptian polytheists who then, upon his death, persecuted the Egyptian monotheists.

According to the Bible, the Hebrews dealt out death and destruction to anyone worshiping other gods. The Roman pagans persecuted the Jews and Christians when they refused to worship the Emperor as a god. Roman Christians persecuted anyone they could get their hands on.

Sure, a religous victory never happened. But if we want something like a space race to end the game we should consider it as a possiblity.

I don't think it's quite the same, and I disagree with your assessment that religion did not play such an important role in the ancient world.

would you kindly quote where I stated this ? Thank you.

So no single religion ever dominated the Ancient world, this is true. Why does that mean that one could not? If the entire Ancient world believed in the Egyptian pantheon, would this not make Pharoah the ruler of the world? If Pharoah had the military might to do so, do you really think that he would not spread the belief of his devinity to every land under the sun?

Exactly this is the problem. Ancient religions were not universal religions like Christianity. The God of Sun was the God of Egyptians. Athena was protector of Athens, Mars the god of Romans... etc. So the question that arises is simple... why would these people want to impose their religion on other people ? It was a matter of pride for them to be the only one favoured by these gods. "God" as intended in the Christian religion instead is the God of all mankind.

Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.

And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we.

Exodus 1:8-9

And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.

Exodus 1:22



...I don't know about you, but this sounds like religious persecution to me...

...I could be wrong, but I think this is in the Ancient times...

I wonder where you read religious persecution in these lines. I also wonder how can you believe what is written in a book that is full of scientific and historically biased errors.

oh great, now my insightfull and wise input (j/k irony) gets lost in the flood of the "great religion debate"... I shoulda posted them later. :)

Nope Drogear your important input doesn't get lost :)
Problem with it is I personally don't think you came out with a definite suggestion yet because what you proposed would only slow or obstacolate the process of tile improvement, but it still won't stop it.
Personally I couldn't come out with a decent idea about this yet.

My post got flooded as well. No interest in a little music? ;)

@Maniac: I would love to see some unique music for the mod. And a nice front-screen.

@Drogear: I couldn't agree more. What about some kind of maintenance cost associated with improvements. Ie: 10 tiled roads = 1 gold? And maybe civics could make this cheaper/more expensive?

Great mod guys! :goodjob: Much more fun than standard Civ4.

Btw, I read the entire thread :mischief: and saw that you guys are lacking music. I've uploaded a file here (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3N49P3SA) (6.65 MB). It's supposed to be the kind of music that was played during Greek religious ceremonies IIRC. Most of it is kinda boring IMHO - unfortunately they didn't have rock & metal back in the Classical Age. ;) But I think the last minute or so, starting from 6:07 could serve well as diplomatic music for some civ. :)


Just so no one misses it!

Don't worry M@ni@c, I'll download the file and give it to the design team if one of us hasn't already done so. It is not copyrighted is it?

I'm a Civ4 newbie, so sorry if I ask a stupid question, but I'm wondering about city networks.

I'm playing as Greece currently. A while ago I sent a settler to Cyprus to found a new city. Recently it struck me: that city is connected to my trade network! Yet I don't have the technology which enables coastal networks (Astronomy IIRC). So how come I still get all my resources on that isolated island?

Which leads me to another question btw: Why do coastal networks come so late in the game?? And (while fortunately still stronger than standard Civ4 :goodjob: ) why are navies so weak? Surely the most determining characteristic of the mediterranean world is that there's a sea in the middle, land all around it, which makes trade, communication etc between all the bordering civilizations so much easier than over land. So personally I would argue in favour of a stronger naval aspect, and an elaborated naval tech tree. In the meanwhile, I would suggest that coastal networks are moved to Boat Building, as well as the Galley, to allow early transportation. (It kinda sucked for Greece that I had to wait so long to found overseas colonies.) Also I'd suggest giving ships 4 instead of 3 movement points. Naval movement should be significantly faster than land movement!
I have lots more ideas btw, if the mod is still open for change. :)

It is not copyrighted is it?

Not that I know. It was included on a self-made CD our teacher gave us to guide ourselves through Delphi, on our last-year school vacation to Greece.

@Maniac: I would love to see some unique music for the mod. And a nice front-screen.

@Drogear: I couldn't agree more. What about some kind of maintenance cost associated with improvements. Ie: 10 tiled roads = 1 gold? And maybe civics could make this cheaper/more expensive?

if this maintenance thing could work I think It would be cool, but main thing is that the AI can handel the change.

It's hard enough to work tiles as it is now, I think gameplay > realism on this particular issue. I had to double my ammount of workers last time just to meet my needs early on.

I'm a Civ4 newbie, so sorry if I ask a stupid question, but I'm wondering about city networks.

I'm playing as Greece currently. A while ago I sent a settler to Cyprus to found a new city. Recently it struck me: that city is connected to my trade network! Yet I don't have the technology which enables coastal networks (Astronomy IIRC). So how come I still get all my resources on that isolated island?


Astronomy is for ocean trading.

@Drogear: I couldn't agree more. What about some kind of maintenance cost associated with improvements. Ie: 10 tiled roads = 1 gold? And maybe civics could make this cheaper/more expensive?

This isn't a solution IMO, the AI won't build less roads because it would make it save money...

@onedreamer: I agree. However, I believe/hope that our resident SDKers might be able to change the AI. That is the major difference between III and IV modding, correct? AI-Editing?

@Dux: Really? I found that the opposite was true for me. I had too many workers and ended up automating them, just to give them something to do. All of my cities were at max production already. This was a defining characteristic of all three of my games, 2 of which were played to completion. And almost the entire map looked like a modern highway system. (Speaking of which, can we please call the railroad an "Imperial Road" or something?)

@Religious Debate: I would like to see the new names utilized. (Cult of the Sun, etc.) As well, I wouldn't mind seeing some type of endgame scenario regarding religious expansion. BUT, I would like to see at least two peaceful endgame options created - Diplomacy Victory, and Spaceship-Style Victory. All three would be even better.

Obviously, Civ is a chance to recreate history. But I think it is important that we emphasize events which were possible, if not probable. Under the proper leadership (the player), what could any of our chosen civs have accomplished? For me, this should be the goal of playing a game like Civ. Winning the civil war as the Confederates. Conquering the world as Ghandi. etc. I don't expect Civ to be a recreation of historical reality (if that even exists), but it should at least be a recreation of historical possibility. But, everyone plays games for different reasons - and this is just my opinion.

Re: Roads...

The more I think of it though, the more I'm not sure. Because Civ3 rewarded players who were utilizing roads - it didn't punish them.
Maybe, there could be a curtain of roads. ie: 6 roaded tiles/city? Much like units? And if players go beyond the curtain, they will have to pay maintenance?

Thoughts?

At the end, you always end up with too many workers, but now I have to wage early war just to get that couple of extra workers:p

As for the name on religions, I would like to keep semi-generic names (Cult of Ra, etc, as it's been sugested). as opposed to the very ambigous (spell?) of Cult of the Sun God.

I think the road-concept of Civilization is one of the most disturbing features of the game. It does not look good with the entire screen covered with "highways" and it's not historically accurate when land provides faster transportation than searoutes. However, Firaxis took a huge step forward with civ4 and it's river-connected cities, and there are ways we could improve the concept even more:

Change design. Make smaller roads that blend more with the surrounding landscape.

Move technology. Make roadbuilding available much later than it is now. If it's possible to program, resources should be provided as soon as the tile is improved with the right improvement, and within nationborders.

New units. I'm working on a scandinavia-scenario at the moment where I'm planning to implement a new boatunit (knarr) that can sail river-tiles. I'm new to modding so I don't know if that's possible, but it ought to be! :) If so, there should certainly be riversailing boats in TAM as well.

However, Firaxis took a huge step forward with civ4 and it's river-connected cities
Pardon my ignorance, but what's so special about river-connected cities?

Also, worker speed was changed to 75 (from 100) so that they do everything slower ...

Pardon my ignorance, but what's so special about river-connected cities?

It is only in the last few hundreds of years, that landtransport have become faster (and more often used) than seatravelling (generally speaking). Trade and travels along coasts and rivers is the most important reason for citygrowth throughout history.
The fact that two cities along the same river will enjoy extensive trade with each other is so obvious, that it's hard to figure out why it hasn't been implemented in Civilization before. :)

If/When a bigger map is implemented I would love to see different quality roads.

For this suggestion a bigger map is essential for the higher detail level.

1st road type: “Dirt road” that gives very little move bonus (+1) due to the low-tech approach to making it.

2nd road type: Ordinary road: +2 move

3rd road type: Paved road/Roman highway. Need “late-game” tech, long build time. +2 or +3 Movement + Commerce bonus due to better infrastructure access for traders (subjective).

3rd road type: Paved road/Roman highway. Need “late-game” tech, long build time. +2 or +3 Movement + Commerce bonus due to better infrastructure access for traders (subjective).
Would be interesting, but this one (not the standard ones) should have a maintenance cost. It could be shield and/or gold from closest city, but i would find it very nice to have degradations on these roads.

Sample of the scheme :
- paved road gives a commerce bonus instead of production bonus (ie : +1 commerce for a tile with yet at least 2 commerce, much like financial trait)
- construction is 1.5 or 2 times longer than "railroad")
- movement is same as actual railroad
- after X (50 ?) turns it becomes ordinary road

The "maintenance" is simulated by degrading the improvement, needing workers to back to the tile and rebuild it.
This way we won't have a map with thousands railroads everywhere, and workers would have something interesting to do.


This would allow to have smaller productions, i find that prouction is very very high at this point with the very strong workshops and commerce quite low because of the very long time to upgrade cottages. It could maybe rebalance this point.

I think the road-concept of Civilization is one of the most disturbing features of the game. It does not look good with the entire screen covered with "highways" and it's not historically accurate when land provides faster transportation than searoutes. However, Firaxis took a huge step forward with civ4 and it's river-connected cities, and there are ways we could improve the concept even more:

Change design. Make smaller roads that blend more with the surrounding landscape.

Move technology. Make roadbuilding available much later than it is now. If it's possible to program, resources should be provided as soon as the tile is improved with the right improvement, and within nationborders.

New units. I'm working on a scandinavia-scenario at the moment where I'm planning to implement a new boatunit (knarr) that can sail river-tiles. I'm new to modding so I don't know if that's possible, but it ought to be! :) If so, there should certainly be riversailing boats in TAM as well.

I like what you are saying about rivers being used as a means of transportation. This is both historically accurate and more realistic. I think instead of creating units for the rivers to illustrate this concept, it would be cool if little boats could be seen traveling on the river (or along the coast) between cities in a little annimation. They could be kind of like the walkers in Pharoah/Caesar series (only not as numerous...just one or two small boats going back and forth between two connected cities). River traversing military units would be a nice addition to the game too.

Move technology. Make roadbuilding available much later than it is now.

I agree. :b: The Wheel should have Pottery as a prerequisite for example.

If it's possible to program, resources should be provided as soon as the tile is improved with the right improvement, and within nationborders.

I agree too. If it's not possible to program, a workaround could be to just let roads start with no movement bonus at all, and then let the wheel give +1 road movement.

New units. I'm working on a scandinavia-scenario at the moment where I'm planning to implement a new boatunit (knarr) that can sail river-tiles. I'm new to modding so I don't know if that's possible, but it ought to be! :) If so, there should certainly be riversailing boats in TAM as well.

Agree here too. :goodjob: Again, if not possible to mod, perhaps there could be a third kind of road, which already starts the game placed on both sides on big rivers. That river-road could have increased movement on it with the development of the sail.

Astronomy is for ocean trading.

Are you sure? :confused:
Below is a screenie of the TAM tech tree.
What tech enables coastal trading then?

I like what you are saying about rivers being used as a means of transportation. This is both historically accurate and more realistic.

Historic, certainly. But not only historic. The amount of goods transported on rivers today is HUGE.

And I really like the suggestion of deteriorating roads and an upkeep cost for keeping them in shape, as well as the three levels of quality.

Is TAM only balanced for 'Normal' gameplay speed? Just played a game on Epic where I finished the Tech with 250 turns or so to spare...wasn't much fun there at the end.

Also:

1) Is a new map on the horizon? I would like to play as a Briton.

2) When are Heros being implemented?

3) Any plans for Civ specific wonders? Like there was in the Civ 3 version.

1) Is a new map on the horizon? I would like to play as a Briton.

Oh, yeah. That reminds me. There needs to be a pass though the Alps. Preferably at that little jog just south of Lake Geneva (the St. Bernard Pass).

The way it is now, it is much too difficult for Romans to move north or for Germans to move south.

Hey,

I'm sorry for such a basic question, but how do you use merchant ships? I can't figure out how to get the money for using them. Anyone else having similiar problems?

Andrew.

You take the merchant ships to another civ's city and tell them to do a trade mission that's how you get the gold

Is it intended they always only give a meagre 48 gold btw, regardless of city size and distance?

I think that the best use for the merchant ships and the traveling merchant is to explore. They can both travel through rival territory which allows you to explore without entering into an open borders agreement. The little amount of money that is gained when you place them in an AI city and hit the merchant route button is of little value for the time that it takes to get to a distant city. I think of it as recouping my expense at the end when I retire the merchant in a foreign city (after they have explored the map for me).

Oh, yeah. That reminds me. There needs to be a pass though the Alps. Preferably at that little jog just south of Lake Geneva (the St. Bernard Pass).

The way it is now, it is much too difficult for Romans to move north or for Germans to move south.

I kind of like how the Alps are situated now. When I play the Germans, I usually have my third city on the norhtern tip of the Adriatic between northern Italy and the Balkans. I think that the divide between northern Italy and the France/Germany territory is good from a game play stand point.

How did you make the leaderheads? It looks like you found some stills from movies and, using some image-editing program like Photoshop, and made them look "mosaicy" with some effect.

What program did you use. What name does the effect go by?

Suggestion: how about using these paved road graphics to replace the railroad graphics?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3262213&postcount=8

I really like this mod, but I want to echo the others who are talking about improving the naval aspect of the mod. One simple thing which I thought was weird is that early ships for Greece and Phoenicia can't carry units. They should be able to at least carry one settler. Historically civilisations around the med colonised by boat. the Bosporus, Marseilles, Carthage, etc. As it stands with the map that is impossible. At the moment that doesn't ever happen, you get the ships that can carry units too late, and also the ships can't get through cultural borders in time. Ship colonisation should be far more common.

Here's the plan for v1.8. I read all the posts up to here and have taken them into consideration. Any other suggestions?

Additions:
- Hero Units (very good units, can only be build 1 at a time)
-- I'm starting posting about hero units in the thread now
- Music

Balance:
- Reduce worker speed on forests
- Lumbermill can only be built on timber resource
- All ship movement increased by 1
- All health reduced by 1
- All unhealthiness in buildings reduced by 1, if more than 1
- Remove all missionaries except Christian ones
- Slow tech speed for 3rd and 4th age techs (I suggest slow down 3rd age by 15%, 4th age by 25%)

Fixes:
- Forests should give hammers when chopped
- Replace snow forest graphics with normal forest graphics
- Remove railroad completely
- Give Road Building tech +2 road movement

On hero units:

I need suggestions. The idea for a hero unit is that it is a national unit (can only build 1 at a time) which is a lot stronger than any normal unit.

Here are my suggestions so far:

Rome: Scipio (Legionary, amphibious promotion, +3 str, +10% str for all units in its stack)
Mycenae: Achilles (Hoplite, +2 str, +25% city attack, +1 first strike)
Carthage: Hannibal (Elephant, +4 str, 2 moves)

Ok, these are just examples. I need input!

I kind of like how the Alps are situated now. When I play the Germans, I usually have my third city on the norhtern tip of the Adriatic between northern Italy and the Balkans. I think that the divide between northern Italy and the France/Germany territory is good from a game play stand point.

That's exactly where I build my third city - where the city of Trieste actualy is.

But the Alps still need a pass, if for no other reason than the fact that the real Alps have several.

But there is another reason; there would be some great battles that would take place at such a pass, and holding a town on one side of the pass or the other would be a hugely important strategy.

Quick bug. When I build a grocer in a city, it appears about the size of the Great Library.

Another silly question. I downloaded this mod and am trying to play it, but I can't get a Mediterranean map (it just goes to the select maps screen when I click Play Now). What am I doing wrong?

Load the mod by double-clicking the map file.

Another silly question. I downloaded this mod and am trying to play it, but I can't get a Mediterranean map (it just goes to the select maps screen when I click Play Now). What am I doing wrong?

You can click on the map file as recommended by Shqype. Another method (which I use) is to load the mod and then click on the play a scenario option under the single player menu. If you have the Mediterranean map saved in your public maps folder it should appear as a scenario option.

Nice and simple solution for roads :)


Balance:
- Remove all missionaries except Christian ones


How will Judaism, Zoroastrism and Egyptian cult spread ? When they pop most of the cities are yet religious so these 3 religiions will have nearly no chance to spread, is it volunteer ? (normal speed mode might be different, but with marathon, meso/druid/greek do most of the job and the 2 other do not spread naturally)

Maybe missionaries not able to go into foreign countries but able to convet in owner's borders ?

On hero units:

I need suggestions. The idea for a hero unit is that it is a national unit (can only build 1 at a time) which is a lot stronger than any normal unit.

Here are my suggestions so far:

Rome: Scipio (Legionary, amphibious promotion, +3 str, +10% str for all units in its stack)
Mycenae: Achilles (Hoplite, +2 str, +25% city attack, +1 first strike)
Carthage: Hannibal (Elephant, +4 str, 2 moves)

Ok, these are just examples. I need input!

In my opinion, make Hero Units a bit stronger and add some more passive 'all unit' effects. But if they die, they stay dead.

Maybe add some unique and powerful promotions, so there is some risk (perma death) and reward for engaging battle with the Hero.

Here's the plan for v1.8. I read all the posts up to here and have taken them into consideration. Any other suggestions?


What is the objective of the "greek fire repository" atomic bomb project?

Greek fire should be limited to the Romans. IIRC they were the only ones to use it, and the recipie was lost when Constantinople fell.

Will there be some sort of future tech added?

Scythia: Attila (heavy horse archer, +6 str, +2 move for all units in its stack)

What is the objective of the "greek fire repository" atomic bomb project?

Greek fire should be limited to the Romans. IIRC they were the only ones to use it, and the recipie was lost when Constantinople fell.

Greek fire is said to have been invented by the Byzantines, but it is possible that they got the technology (or developed it) from others. In TAM "Greek fire" is used to represent all forms of flammable substances used in ancient warfare because it is the most famous one (and perhaps the most effective). :)

Oh, yeah. That reminds me. There needs to be a pass though the Alps. Preferably at that little jog just south of Lake Geneva (the St. Bernard Pass).

The way it is now, it is much too difficult for Romans to move north or for Germans to move south.

Alps with no passes is intended by staff.

-- Roads: I might be extreme here but I'd try what happens with no roads at all until road building. Resources should be automatically connected to the city that is working them, while they can be traded once Currency is known.
What do you think about it ?

-- Heroes: this is a complicated matter, on a balance point of view. Rather than making them strong, I would actually make them have some special ability or bonus. Except maybe for heroes like Achilles.

Balance:
- Reduce worker speed on forests
- Lumbermill can only be built on timber resource
What is the premise that "timber" differs from "forest"? Just curious, I think I like the no chop but timbermills potentially in every forest.


- Slow tech speed for 3rd and 4th age techs (I suggest slow down 3rd age by 15%, 4th age by 25%)

I'd go farther than that personally. I think tech advancement is too quick even in the first few ages. Personally I'd do somthing like +15%,25%,40% 50%.

-Mettius

-- Roads: I might be extreme here but I'd try what happens with no roads at all until road building. Resources should be automatically connected to the city that is working them, while they can be traded once Currency is known.
What do you think about it ?

I agree, roads have mainly a military purpose.

The question is if the AI does connect resources at all if no roads are available. Indeed you should tell the AI that resources do not belong to the so called "trade network" that it tries to build up with roads...

Change design. Make smaller roads that blend more with the surrounding landscape.

Move technology. Make roadbuilding available much later than it is now. If it's possible to program, resources should be provided as soon as the tile is improved with the right improvement, and within nationborders.

New units[...]that can sail river-tiles. I'm new to modding so I don't know if that's possible, but it ought to be! :) If so, there should certainly be riversailing boats in TAM as well.

These are my suggestions for TAM, posted earlier in this thread.
Two questions for all you experienced modders out there:

Is it possible to make resources available without roads?

Is it possible to create a boatunit that can sail rivertiles?

-- Roads: I might be extreme here but I'd try what happens with no roads at all until road building. Resources should be automatically connected to the city that is working them, while they can be traded once Currency is known.

Trade exists much earlier than currency.

I'm playing as Greece currently. A while ago I sent a settler to Cyprus to found a new city. Recently it struck me: that city is connected to my trade network! Yet I don't have the technology which enables coastal networks (Astronomy IIRC). So how come I still get all my resources on that isolated island?

I think I found out how it works. As said, unlike the standard game where Astronomy enables ocean networking, in TAM Astronomy enables coastal networking. Yet my city Salamis in Cyprus receives all resources. On the other hand, I have a previously Illyrian conquered city (sorry Shqype ;)) renamed Epidamnos which has a cow resource with pasture in Southern Italy across the sea in its cultural influence. Currently I do not have that resource in my network apparently. However if I open the worldbuilder and give myself Astronomy, I do gain access to the resource. So I guess cities across the sea always receive all resources. It's just isolated resources that are affected by coastal and ocean trading.

***

Re religion, you're all right that the greek, nordic, mesopatamian, egyptian pantheons didn't actively spread themselves abroad, and didn't create serious tension with other religions. Instead of some measures like removing missionaries for most,which hurts gameplay more than it does good IMO, I'd suggest to just reform the whole religion system. Basic guideline is that the pantheons mentioned above simply are a different stage of religion than zoroastrism, christianity... which are more "evolved" forms.

While religion or at least moral systems have always been present in human society, it used to be in the form of magical and mythological thinking. The religions were also very localized. One tribe or (group of) city state(s) could have their own god (or in an already evolved phase: pantheon) to worship, while a tribe a few kilometers further could have a set of others. This didn't cause problems. It was considered normal for everyone to have their own different gods. Or at least, since interaction with other people was limited, it wasn't much of an issue...

This all starts changing in the first millennium BC. In the great cultural areas of those days (Middle East, India, China) large empires started forming and trade increased further and further. In that setting of increasing complexity and interaction, the tribal beliefs no longer succeeding in streamlining behaviour of all the geographically and culturally different peoples in the empires. New religions arose, who all to a certain degree had some characteristics that could appeal to the people living in those new society surroundings, and bind them together. These characteristics are in general (meaning some religions have them more than others):

1. Claim to universality: "Our religion is the one truth, and it applies to ALL peoples, not just the Greeks/Germans/Egyptians... :doitnow!:"

2. Revelation: "These truths are given to me, the holy prophet, by God/The Highest Reality, and I have written them down in these books, which should not be doubted or changed!! :doitnow!:" This gave the prophet's words a higher authority than those of a tribal god or pantheon.

3. Dogmatism: As said above, if the words come from God, you can't change them anymore after writing them down. Opposed to mythology, which was flexible.

4. Salvation: "Man is in a sad situation here on Earth. However by joining our One True Religion^TM, you can escape from this misery! :good:"

Thus you get Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism... the world religions that still exist today. Or Zoroastrism & Manicheism, to give two who didn't make it.


What does this mean for TAM? Recognizing that the local pantheons are a different class of religion than zoroastrism etc, I'd simply remove them as a religions. Simply have them represented by some buildings like a temple etc which provides happiness, like the holy site now. The "universalist" religions should come later in the game, with the accompanying effects of religion spreading to other cities, and religious tensions.

There are plenty of universalist religions that didn't make it which could be used to get to seven, or even more. First of course Zoroastrism. Was that 700 BC or so? IIRC the Jews in Babylon were influenced by the dualist and monotheist characteristics of Zoroastrism, and when they returned Judaism too reformed from a local religion to a universalist one. A couple centuries later Christianity out of Judaism of course. Around the same time the Cult of Isis arose from traditional Egyptian religion, and also gained followers outside Egypt. There are also other offshoots from Zoroastrism which gained some followers in those days: Manicheism and Mithraism. That's already six possible universalist religions. Then there are of course various Greek philosophies: the Stoa, Epicurism, Plato... Problem with these is that AFAIK they were solely popular with the elites, and didn't gain massive popular support. Though of course, we're playing a game and rewriting history. You never know someone could reform one of these philosophies to a religion for the masses. Just like for example out of the Taoist philosophy a popular religion evolved which worships Lao Tzu as a god.

I generally agree with most of the talk regarding religions, however the MAIN reason for having religion in the GAME is to facilitate diplomacy and natural alliances. If we eliminate all of the earlier polytheistic religions, then there will be fewer reasons for forming lasting diplomatic bonds...

Is it possible to make resources available without roads?

Yes, but I don't like that.

Is it possible to create a boatunit that can sail rivertiles?

No.

What is the premise that "timber" differs from "forest"? Just curious, I think I like the no chop but timbermills potentially in every forest.



I'd go farther than that personally. I think tech advancement is too quick even in the first few ages. Personally I'd do somthing like +15%,25%,40% 50%.

-Mettius

Lumbermills are very strong, and come into the game very early. Civilizations that are surrounded by forests (such as all the northerners) would become overpowered.

Religions also spread without missionaries, and in TAM they actually spread like a wildfire. I think missionaries aren't that necessary. We can also give each religion a different spread probability. Thus, the later religions would spread more quickly than the earlier ones (with Christianity spreading most).

Is it possible to make resources available without roads?
Yes, but I don't like that.
Ok. :sad:

Is it possible to create a boatunit that can sail rivertiles?
No.
:cry:

Thanks for the info anyway Thamis! ;)

You should keep missionaries, otherwise you could end with a different religion in each city:mad:

I generally agree with most of the talk regarding religions, however the MAIN reason for having religion in the GAME is to facilitate diplomacy and natural alliances. If we eliminate all of the earlier polytheistic religions, then there will be fewer reasons for forming lasting diplomatic bonds...

So there will be more conflict? What is the downside here?

If you are planning to do away with missionaries, you might want to increase the spread of the selected state religion within the national borders. From a game play standpoint the religious civics would be almost useless if the state religion was restricted to one or two cities. Perhaps different religious civics could increase spread the state religion (or even decrease spread of nonstate religion) by different amounts within national borders.

If you are going to do away with missionaries, is it possible for settlers to found a city that already has the state religion?

So there will be more conflict? What is the downside here?

The downside is that you will lose the +8 to -8 diplomacy points. Religion is the single biggest modifier of diplomacy. As a player, you can use religion to accomplish your gameplay goals. By taking religion out, as one of the plans suggested, you would lose access to these modifiers, making it more difficult to make friends or enemies.

We're not taking religion out! Religion spread will be increased, so that there's enough religion, believe me.

If you are going to do away with missionaries, is it possible for settlers to found a city that already has the state religion?

This is what I'm hoping for. It only makes sense, after all.

Interesting idea. I think someone has done it before, so we can look into it.

We're not taking religion out! Religion spread will be increased, so that there's enough religion, believe me.
Does it means that a second religion can spread in a city yet converted to a religion ?

No one interested in more accurate religion? :( Darn. I guess I'll have to found my own Improved Ancient Mediterranean (I AM ;)) mod when I have some more time. Could I use TAM as the basis to work from?

Meanwhile, some more random ideas...

I read that elephants aren't really used for their combat capability, but to scare the enemy. Therefore I thought, how about giving them the ability to give +10% strength to all units sharing the same square as them? Something similar to the Great General and Great Doctor mods?

-- Heroes: this is a complicated matter, on a balance point of view. Rather than making them strong, I would actually make them have some special ability or bonus. Except maybe for heroes like Achilles.


I agree that heroes can cause some balancing concerns and am interested in hearing what TAM’s plan for them are. I tried to look through the thread to see which info I can, but there seems to be very little developed so far other than names and that they are expected to be in 1.8 version. I have my own suggestion as to how they might be used, but it would probably be difficult, if not impossible, to implement (I don't know since I'm not very familiar with modding other than the few forays into the xml and ini).

But what I would suggest is that the hero unit

1. be randomly generated
2. be rare (where a game should pass and only maybe four or so are created)
3. percentages of generating one should favor lower end civs (the weaker the civ, the better the chance...I think this could be a great way to revitalize civs that seem destined to die)
4. should only be generated while at war (unless we're creating peace time heroes, at which point you might as well call them great persons)
5. increase the chance of being generated when in a golden age
6. depending on the role we want for religion, we can increase the chance if the war is against a civ of an opposing religion
7. each civ should only be able to have one per game

One problem with this (other than the already acknowledged coding concern) is how to judge the strength of the hero unit, since it can be created at any time in the game (at hero with 12 str at the beginning of the game would be too strong, and a hero with 6 at the end would be too weak).

This can be fixed by doing what onedreamer suggests and give no strength bonuses, but other unique abilities and/or maybe stack bonuses where all armies on the hero’s tile get xx% increase in whatever.

But I prefer another option, which is having a different hero for each civ for each age, so that if your civ does generate a hero, its strength will be reflective of the current time period. I’m at work so I don’t have the game in front of me and don’t memorize every unit, but lets say the strongest unit of the first era is 5, a hero for that period could be a 6 or 7 with some percentage bonuses, whereas in the last era there strongest is a 12, maybe the heroes would be 14 or 16 with whatever bonuses are deemed appropriate.

There are probably a number of logical flaws in my suggestion, and but I just thought I'd try to throw some ideas out so that this unit can be unique and add a different element to the mod other than just simply another unit you can build.

The downside is that you will lose the +8 to -8 diplomacy points. Religion is the single biggest modifier of diplomacy. As a player, you can use religion to accomplish your gameplay goals. By taking religion out, as one of the plans suggested, you would lose access to these modifiers, making it more difficult to make friends or enemies.

I was actually shooting for sarcasm here. I don't actually think that the game would be better without religion, but more conflict is good (and accurate for the times).

With no religion I would never be able to make enough money to wage war. I usually count on gold coming in from my shrine to finance my expansion.

I think Heros should be quite powerful, but they should have perma death once they are defeated. Does anyone else agree with this?

It seems a Hero unit would be cheapened if you can build him over and over again after he dies.

I would like the Hero to be NOT (edit, damit I forgot that very importen word)to powerfull, would be enuff for me to have a uniqe hero units for flavour with only some edge over ordinary ones.

The downside is that you will lose the +8 to -8 diplomacy points. Religion is the single biggest modifier of diplomacy. As a player, you can use religion to accomplish your gameplay goals. By taking religion out, as one of the plans suggested, you would lose access to these modifiers, making it more difficult to make friends or enemies.

that modifier depends on diff level (I think) and on the charachter of the other leaders, but I've never seen it more or less than +/- 5.
Also, it is NOT true that it is the single biggest modifier of diplomacy. There are other important ones such as the gov. civic. It is also not true that without the religion modifiers it would be impossible to build a lasting bond.
This said, I anyways agree that it wouldn't be good to get rid of religions, since it is also one of the main additions in Civ4. But none ever talked about removing religions...

If you are going to do away with missionaries, is it possible for settlers to found a city that already has the state religion?

Interesting idea. I think someone has done it before, so we can look into it.

I think this idea is not interesting at all. The mods who have included it and are attentive to balance have removed it (for example Ultimate Strategy). My personal opinion is that this is one of the worse ideas that came from the civfanatics community, since it obviously kills 90% of the concept of religion. To have settlers that carry over religions is more or less like not having religions at all.

that modifier depends on diff level (I think) and on the charachter of the other leaders, but I've never seen it more or less than +/- 5.

Yup. In Civ4LeaderHeads.xml you can increase the weight of other attitude affecting stuff.

This said, I anyways agree that it wouldn't be good to get rid of religions, since it is also one of the main additions in Civ4. But none ever talked about removing religions...

Indeed, only delaying them to the midgame. Having religions start somewhat later would also keep the game longer interesting IMHO, as a new element is introduced to focus upon, when the initial settlement phase is over.

No one interested in more accurate religion? :( Darn. I guess I'll have to found my own Improved Ancient Mediterranean (I AM ;)) mod when I have some more time. Could I use TAM as the basis to work from?

Meanwhile, some more random ideas...

I read that elephants aren't really used for their combat capability, but to scare the enemy. Therefore I thought, how about giving them the ability to give +10% strength to all units sharing the same square as them? Something similar to the Great General and Great Doctor mods?

Regarding religions, are you talking about more generic names? Or regarding having certain religions for certain civs?

I want to keep things as simple and non-confusing as possible. Here's my idea for heroes:

- They are a national unit and can only 1 can be around at any given time per civ
- They are an improved version of one of the CIV's unique unit and comes in at the time that the CIV was most powerful (Babylonian hero is their early UU, Germanic hero is their late UU)
- They are slightly stronger than the original unit. That means either brute strength, or several promotions
- They give a small bonus to units in its stack

First of all, good job.
Secondly, i'm having some trouble running the mod.
I've unpacked the file to the Civ4 main folder, then moved the .wbs file to the custom maps folder and the "The Ancient Mediterranean" folder to the Mods folder. I've started Civ4, chose t activate the mod and it starts but I can't see any font/writing in the menu. Here's an image:

http://img264.imageshack.us/img264/8153/bug0wa.jpg

By the way, i'm running 1.52 version.

that modifier depends on diff level (I think) and on the charachter of the other leaders, but I've never seen it more or less than +/- 5.
Well. I'm playing a game right now where one civ (Ghandi) is +8 while another (Monty) is -8...

Also, it is NOT true that it is the single biggest modifier of diplomacy. There are other important ones such as the gov. civic.
Hmmm. Didn't realize that civics had this much effect on things. The highest civic +- I've seen has been around 6...

It is also not true that without the religion modifiers it would be impossible to build a lasting bond.
Hmmm