The Ancient Mediterranean MOD [Archive] - Civilization Fanatics' Forums

Spirit_Viriato

Nov 30, 2005, 09:52 AM

First, sorry for me English, I know as native two languagues ( Spanish and Catalan) but English is difficult to me.

This mod seems to me very good because I'm adict to the history of the Pre-Roman cultures.

For my knowledge of the civilization that you called Iberian, I must to correct a bit of things and aport new ideas. I hope that this ideas can help you and do a better MOD.

"The first in being conquered, the last ones in being dominated"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my opinion the first thing that you should change is the name of the civilization: Iberian. This name are incorrect. In my opinion the correct name that you can put are Celtiberian Tribes ( In spanish Tribus Celtíberas). ¿The reasons? This:

- In Iberia land, never the inhabitants were united, were a lot of tribes, with internal conflicts among them, a lot of them with no-connection of the other tribes ( remember that Spain is the second bigger country ( the first are France) of European Union and (Spain+Portugal=Iberia) are more bigger than France. Part of this tribes is the cause of the great diversity of actual Spain ( for examples : the Basque tribe or Astur (Asturias) tribe or Lusitans ). A legendary tribes are : Turdetanos, Lusitanos (in English i supose that Lusitans) (another name for actual portuguese people are Lusitanos), Basque tribe, Astur's tribe, Ilergetes ( in Catalonia), Vaccuos, Vettones, Arevácos ( the people of Numantia) and a large etc...

Is clear, that Iberian ( A name that the Romans gave him to the inhabitants of these earth, obvious did not know the peninsular reality as they could verify in the following wars.. ) are incorrect.

- The area code \"celt \" to whatever it has studied pre-Roman History seems obvious to him. Celtas has been the only strangers in all the history of the Iberian Peninsula that has been received with a relative enthusiasm, not with the opened arms, but either with bellicosity as here were (and still it is) habitual. This gave rise to a fast occupation of territories and the mixture of original inhabitants. This map represents the Iberia of then (so that you have left clearer).. Celtas=Celts, Iberos=Iberian, Celtiberos=Celtiberian. http://www.galespa.com.ar/historia_espanha_celtibera.jpg

The importance of celts in the south of the Iberian Peninsula was very important, thanks to them, was able to develop flourishing industry of the metal (concretely of copper) that got to compete by all Mediterranean, being destroyed later by the Phoenicians. With the passage of time near 80% of Iberia, that is to say, everything except the most Eastern part of this one, mixed of a way or another one with celtas, can be said then, that all the different tribes who inhabited the Ibería at that time, had Celtíbera blood, in special all the north of the Peninsula.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The second point are the characteristics of the civilization:

Spiritual, communicative.

These are the characteristics of Spanish Empire that does not have anything to do with celtiberian them, these were along with the Gauls and the germanics tribes the most warrior civilization of all Europe. In fact with the great ones you develop of Viriato (the celtíbero leader for excellence), or Numantia, of you develop them of the tribes of the North, the resistance of ilergetes etc... arrived at its moment to make shake the Empire Roman, incapable to conquer a territory with its powerful army..

In my opinion the real characteristics are warrior and extremely millitant and violent. A comunicative celtiberian is a big joke. The other characteristic is industrialist civilization ( The powerful arms of the cavalry and infantry were very famous in the old world. )

-----------------------------------

It is guessed right in initial technologies to maintain the fishing, to add the hunting, and if possible military one..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The third point: The leader.

In this point there is no possible error, the image of Viriato is necessary to replace the image of Isabel Catholic (I believe that in English or Latin Viriatus is called to him) (speculating on a little, and with the image that has always occurred in Spain and Portugal on him, it is the image of viking with the long black hair, very similar to which exhibits Mel Gibson in Braveheart)..

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The four point : The colour.

In my opinion the perfect colour is a dark green, symbol of the peculiar nature that there is in this country, country of valleys and pines, adorned everything with multiple mountains that cause that it is very easy the ambushes..

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The five point: The Units.

The conqueror it's not valid.
It is considered historically that the celtiberan infantry has been of the best ones of the ancient world, the facts therefore they prove it, when wars finished to pacify Spain (there were parts that never was conquered and never pacificates others absolutely), sons of Iberia, quickly were used like mercenary troops in the armies of the time: Carthaginians and Romans (being the main base of these). At the time of implementing this fact in the game, I should to give an ample advantage them in attack (they were a species of bersekers), an advantage in movement (always wear very slight shields similar to the Gallic style ) and a great penalty in defense:due to his bellicosity they brought into the battle without taking care of never type of discipline [ often rebelled themselves with his superior ], which repelled at the time of making formation battle serious..

"As far as the arms some celtiberian use slight shields as the Gauls and other circular (...) Their swords have double edge and are made with excellent iron, also they have daggers of a handspan of length. They follow one practices special of manufacture of its arms because they bury you laminate of iron and they leave them thus, until with the course of the time I oxidize has eaten the weak being left but resistant parts but (...). to the made weapon of this described form short everything single what can find in its way, because there is shield, helmet or no bone that can resist the given blow the extraordinary quality of the iron (..) Diodoro of Sicily 5, 33.

"The celtiberian consider an honor to die in the combat and a crime to burn the corpse of a soldier thus dead, because they think that its soul overcomes to the Gods of the sky when devouring the yaciente body the vulture" Silio Itálico "Punics" 3, 340,343.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The six point: The cities.

It is almost one obligation to put the most important advantage in defense to the city of Numantia..

"The resistance of Numancia in front of the Romans is a universal symbol of the fight of a town by its freedom.."

A list of Celtiberian cities :

Numantia ( Legendary),Uxama, Termes, Intercatia, Bracara, Asturica, Segede, Palancia, Osca, Ilerda, Calagurris, Intercatia, Ocilis, Segontia, Bilbilis, Mundobriga, Contrebia, Volux, Nertobriga, Clunia, Burado, Atacum, Vareia.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 10:02 AM

@Johnny: Thanks, I know the page, that's where most of the research for the Dacians in TAM-CIV3 came from. I don't see any symbol apart from a head, though. How about a wolf?

@Spirit_Viriato
Thanks for your comments. I am very aware of most of these things, as I have done extensive research on the Celtiberians for TAM-CIV3. Let me quickly reply to a few points:

- I know Celtiberian is more correct, but I chose Iberian because it is a) the Roman term, and I usually go with Latin and Greek terms in TAM due to the fact that our main target audience is European/US players, and b) Iberian is shorter and more easily recognizable than Celtiberian

- Leader & traits: I know it's Viriato, and he will be in the final version. This is really the first draft of TAM. The Scythians have Elizabeth as their leader now, so... I will change this. The traits I will think about once I have included all the civilizations that I want to include. I will decide the traits according to a) historical accuracy and b) gameplay - no duplicates.

- Units: TAM will have completely ancient units and a completely ancient tech tree, so the Conquistador won't even exist in the final version. Right now the Scythians have the Redcoat as UU, which is obviously silly.

- City list: Thanks for that, I will put that into the next version.

Spirit_Viriato

Nov 30, 2005, 10:50 AM

- You can put then "Iberian Tribes" ( is a term recognizable and more or less historical correct).

- Remember when you develop in mod the diplomacy, the friendship between Gauls and iberian people (in the north have the same routes of scape and share war information about Romans) and of the total no-friendship between almost all the tribes (always it has traitors in all the sides) and Rome.

The east iberian tribes ended up maintaining a friendly attitude with the Greek colonies in Catalan coast (present Emporion ( Empuries) [ actual place of summering for tourists ]) and one actidud totally hostile with the Phoenicians, who devastated the south of Spain imponiendo their commerce.

- What is your opinion about the charateristics ? I posted it in the other post.

- Apart of the infantery, in the Balearic Islands ( Ibiza, Mallorca etc...) were a unit in the past very famous of a type of archers.

- The religion in ancient Iberian were druisdim and primitive cultures with the sun or the moon as central.

And the mod map are incorrect, the river "Ebro" the east river of all, don't born in this these mountains, born in Cantabria, left of Basque Country.

wolfman1234

Nov 30, 2005, 10:57 AM

I agree with Viriato in almost all that he has written.

Two points:

-The balearic light infantery, used in almost every roman army, were the balearic slingers i think, not archers.

-And most of spanish mediterranean coast were not much influenced by celts, more by greeks, phoenician (Carthago) and native civs like Tartessos.

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 11:00 AM

- Iberian Tribes sounds good
- I'm not going to pre-set any diplomacy in the main mod. It's going to be an epic game without any pre-set cities, wars, etc. I might make scenarios later.
- To me any characteristic sounds good. Militaristic... ok, but that would apply more to other civilizations. There are civilizations who waged very extensive aggressive wars, they deserve the militaristic trait. Industrious? Umm... the Celtiberians didn't build any wonders of the world, so I don't see industrious as justified.

It's really hard to define any traits for small civilizations of which we only have the records of the conquerors.

Regarding religions: Druidism will be one of the researchable religions.

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 11:03 AM

Please check the first thread for updated goals and aims of this MOD, to clarify some points. I think some of you don't know what I'm aiming for.

Spirit_Viriato

Nov 30, 2005, 11:07 AM

Wolfan1234:

1.- Yeah, is a different type of archer, like the instrument that use in the bibble David with Goliath, i don't know de name in English.

2.- I put the map before, except the east coast, all Iberia were Celt.

3.- Tartessos lived in the South of the Spain near Gades ( actual Cadiz) near of Gibraltar if you are English.

Thamis:

Indostrious in the area of war, all the minery and copper were very famous. Iberians have a lot of preocupations to war and to eat, they didn't do any wonder, as you say xD.

Correct the map of the river Ebro, take this map, it doesn't born in the Pirineos, it born in Cantabria near ( in the left) of Basque country.

http://www.icold-barcelona2006.org/img/mapa_tour5.gif

PD: I'm lookin Iberian Flag, it's very difficult.

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 11:11 AM

I'm not going to place any cities except for the capitals, so there is no need to clarify who lived where. :)

I will fix the river Ebro.

Regarding civ traits, I will distribute them once I have all civilizations set. It is more important not to have any doubles than to have correct ones. It's quite vague anyway.

Spirit_Viriato

Nov 30, 2005, 11:42 AM

I have been consulting books and watching webs, and the iberian tribes did not have any type of flag thing that is obvious (because they were all divided). The symbols that appear more and that it would be possible to be said that they are those that in the MOD could represent the celtíbera civilization are "triskel ", "tetraskel " and the svastic (I suppose that by political reasons it will not be possible to be put, but at those moments they did not have the present meaning). With respect to symbols animals it used to be the vulture, or I say to you that never they had flag and is dificult to found a symbol or flag that represents them..

Te pongo imágenes de los tres:
http://www.lefinnois.net/fond_celtic/1024/triskel_metal.jpg <<<<TRISKEL
http://www.telecable.es/personales/iissaa/celta/Serpenteante.jpg <<<<< TETRASKEL ( more common in the north)
http://celtiberia.net/imagftp/im244368725-esv%E1sticass.jpg <<<<< svastics

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 11:48 AM

The Triskel and Tetraskel look very much like a Celtic Knot, which I was going to use for Gaul... Swastika doesn't work of course. Vulture you say...? That might work. I know most of these civs didn't have any flags, so we gotta be a bit creative here. ;)

wolfman1234

Nov 30, 2005, 01:25 PM

Vulture you say...? That might work.

Viriato, now all the world will see us like vultures, lol.

The name of that weapon is sling.

Come on ppl, join the discussion, seems only spanish here.

Scytale

Nov 30, 2005, 01:43 PM

I loved your mod for Civ3 and I'm very happy I get to play it with Civ4 too. But what happened with the British? I remember they were included in the Civ3 version. Anyway I think it would be a great loss to the mod. I was looking forward to conquering England as the Romans.

JamieCiv4Files

Nov 30, 2005, 02:05 PM

mirroed this file for you at http://civilization4.filefront.com/ thamis :)

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 02:20 PM

Spirit_Viriato

Nov 30, 2005, 03:08 PM

In fact, the vulture is not the most important animal in the iberian thought, which happens is that to make a flag a vulture is easy. The vulture was the one in charge to take to the warriorfallen in combat to a species of Valhala/paradise.

A iberian picture of this found in the IBERIAN city of Uxama :

http://www.celtiberia.net/imagftp/im197935740-tiermespeque%F1a.JPG

The most important animals were:

- the HORSE, authentic veneration, for a celtiberian the maximum in the life was to see itself represented with a horse.

- the WOLF and the JAGUAR Ferocity, cleverness etc....

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 03:13 PM

Ok, I think it's going to be some kind of vulture then. The Horse is DEFINITELY Scythia, and I thought about the wolf for the Getae.

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 03:16 PM

mirroed this file for you at http://civilization4.filefront.com/ thamis :)

Just remember to update it whenever I do. ;)

JamieCiv4Files

Nov 30, 2005, 03:40 PM

will do :)

thamis

Nov 30, 2005, 06:06 PM

Updated to v0.4.

Ankenaton

Nov 30, 2005, 06:10 PM

EdCase

Nov 30, 2005, 10:31 PM

Great! I need units! All you need to make units is a good 3D program, like Maya. The SDK has nothing to do with the unit graphics.

I own and use daily 3ds Max5 & 7, Poser 6 , Motionbuilder, deep exploration and deep paint.;)

I need the SDK for the exporter (which will hopefully be for Max)..I have modded (models/anims) for many games most recent being Dawn of War.....I a enjoy animating more than modelling itself though.

I never bothered with Civ 3 units as it seemed stupid to take a 3D unit then turn it into a 2D unit.

(incidentally..am wondering what will happen regards Maya since Autodesk are purchasing Alias)

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 03:00 AM

Hey Thamis, whatever happened to Pi-Ankhi? I am quite sure he would have come up with something interesting for Nubia. I guess maybe a flag with reminiscent of the vulture headed crown worn by the Pharoah's consorts? Hopefully the Sea Peoples, Phoenecians and other old favorites. Talk to you later.

Good to see you back! :)

I'll include Nubia again, not sure about the Sea Peoples. I'd like to include some different civs this time, but I need to think a bit about that...

With Python we can now also have events, such as the Phrygian invasions, the Hun invasions, the eruption of Vesuvius, etc... That might be cool. But that'll come last.

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 03:02 AM

I own and use daily 3ds Max5 & 7, Poser 6 , Motionbuilder, deep exploration and deep paint.;)

I need the SDK for the exporter (which will hopefully be for Max)..I have modded (models/anims) for many games most recent being Dawn of War.....I a enjoy animating more than modelling itself though.

I never bothered with Civ 3 units as it seemed stupid to take a 3D unit then turn it into a 2D unit.

(incidentally..am wondering what will happen regards Maya since Autodesk are purchasing Alias)

Ok, I don't know anything about 3d modeling really, so I'll leave that up to you. Once we get into the unique units, that will be very handy.

For now, are you good at skinning? I thought that we could change the skins of units a bit because that'd be much easier. Gaul for example will get a better swordsman, which needs some kind of different skin. Babylon will get its archer, needs a different skin too. ;)

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 03:07 AM

PS: Rate this thread! It looks kinda lost among all those excellent ratings on the list. ;)

Spearthrower

Dec 01, 2005, 03:36 AM

onedreamer

Dec 01, 2005, 05:02 AM

wohooo TAM with Civ4, it's great to see you are willing to start it all over again. I am confident it will be as addictive as its predecessor.

I'll try and look into the italian translation when I have a bit of time.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 05:41 AM

JamieCiv4Files

Dec 01, 2005, 05:50 AM

Mirrored latest version at http://civilization4.filefront.com/ :)

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 06:45 AM

Don't worry about the rating Thamis, this will surely become one of the longest and most sought after threads!! :goodjob:

I stopped playing C3C about a year ago and only played TAM from then on. I absolutely love the ancient ages; as an anthropologist, I have spent a number of years studying the roots of humanity, ancient cultures and languages etc etc and therefore find this the most interesting part of the game and your mod the best on the market! ;)

I have been lurking here for years, but rarely post (about once a year!). I am changing that habit solely to offer help in any area that you think you may need the support. I can offer help in modelling and animating (with the release), historical write-ups, general spell-checking (I'm an English teacher :lol: ), game-play civ and terrain balancing issues..... wherever you feel like you have too much to do and too little time to do it! :cool:

Mail me at spear_thrower at hotmail dot com if you need assistance.

And thanks...... very big thanks, mahoosive great stonking thanks for a year of enjoyable moddage! :goodjob:

Thanks for your kind words and the offer to help. I think the best help you can give me is:
- Correct any errors that are evident in any city list or pedia description (there's no TAM pedia yet, but there will be).
- Any ideas on unique units.
- Any ideas on the tech tree
- Any ideas on religion (not quite sure if I want to keep the political correctness of CIV4 with all religions being equal... we're going to be dealing with ancient religions here, so no damage done I assume. ;))

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 06:46 AM

The river Ebro continues being a bad, I attach a map very badly done in paint in order that you see it better.
Certainly, how might I collaborate in the mod? I am a total newbie, and have not idea modificate nothing, but I am curious and learn rapidly, with a simple tutorial to do units I might try to do some Iberian units, I have a little time for the university but I am charmed with this.

PD: I see that Iberian civ, don't start with misticism ¿How is posible? In theory (¿or you modificate this tec?) spanish civ starts with misticism. ¿Is a bug?

I know the river Ebro is longer than I drew it on the map. I didn't want such a long river, because rivers are very powerful in CIV-terms. I'll keep the correcting of the river on my list, but not as a high priority.

I haven't changed anything about any techs, and I haven't even LOOKED at starting technologies. All this will come later!

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 06:57 AM

¿and you can write a simple tutorial to do the units?

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 07:26 AM

Sure I can. I can write a little program that does it. :)

davbenbak

Dec 01, 2005, 07:52 AM

Batvanio

Dec 01, 2005, 08:15 AM

hi thamis - just some of my thoughts on the project:

I enjoyed a lot playing the ancient scenario that comes with the original Civ4 and you can take some ideas from there mainly:

- the circle around the map - it is a nice touch as the the sea/ocean and mountains were made in such a way that you get to certain areas after you research technologies for sea/ ocean passing. You must play it to see the advantage of refusing easy access to asia/africa at first point from strategic point of view. This gives more strategy to seafaring also and as we know it was very important for mediterranean civs. Also I dont think a circle is incorect as it is not much more incorrect than a rectangular cut on map edges.

- in that scenario you already have some religions and technology settings setuped which you can use.

- I liked the idea of constantly spawning barbarians in stacks of 7 units. It kept the game active and my units fighting and upgrading. The only thing was that script spawned units within my territory which is inccorrect and makes defense hard, but outside the borders lots of barbarian stack spawn made the game huge fun.

- I enjoyed in that scenario having less technologies but researching them harder and longer. This was also in the spirit of the times where a technology or a change mattered a lot. It also allowed me to have some type of units from start game till end game with me - without having to upgrade them and reaching 8+ promotions which was very fun and a little bit RPG flavoured. Imagine special upgraded units - Hector, Ceasar etc. Individual heroism mattered at that time.

Hope my thoughts were helpful. I do recommend you to play the scenario several time to get my ideas better.

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 08:20 AM

Batvanio

Dec 01, 2005, 09:10 AM

I know the Greek World scenario quite well, as Rhye had a little bit of help from me when he made it.

I am not in favour of the round edges. That was a cool idea for that mod, but I prefer a real map.

oh sorry - was not aware that you took part in that nice scenario. :)

btw - to make a real map would it be better to be an enourmous map of earth but with impassable ocean/land terrain at some point, instead of a rectangular shape?
I still think those "land edges" of a rectangular map give you an advantage

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 09:13 AM

Land edges actually give you a disadvantage because you cannot expand in that direction.

A huge earth map would make the game unbearably slow. I've been modding CIV3 and CIV4 for the last 3 years, this is the best way to do it, believe me. ;)

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 09:25 AM

I know the Greek World scenario quite well, as Rhye had a little bit of help from me when he made it.

I am not in favour of the round edges. That was a cool idea for that mod, but I prefer a real map.

I will restate once more, there will be many, many, many technologies in this scenario that are ONLY in the ancient times. You will have the same research speed as in the normal game.

There will be some barbarian spawn events according to historical events, but that's the last thing I'll work on.

You're the ****in boss. (el puto amo)

I'm preparing a list of iberian units, i'm looking a lot of information and pictures, for example, now I know that the basic iberian infantery, the real name are "Scutarii". With his history for a future civilopedia.

Gaias

Dec 01, 2005, 10:26 AM

Must... have... TAM mod... for Civ4... :twitch:

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 11:15 AM

This is an advance of my work:

Celtiberian Units

Not can be considered an iberian army in general because are different depending on his characteristics (celts, iberian and celtiberian). But do posible the mod we have paid attention to the most common characteristics and have considered the most peculiar units.

Infantery

Scutarii (Basic Infantery):

http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/paginas/anibalWEB/entrada/hispano1.jpg

IMPORTANT: The inclusion of a black CAPE characteristic of these íberos. To replace the wild sows by "falcata" (the iberian sword).

A better vision of Falcata:
http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/paginas/anibalWEB/articulos/FALCATA.gif

Description: The scutarii's, it is the basic unit of íbera infantery, were used like mercenaty by the Carthaginians and to a lesser extent by the Romans, being crucial in the battles of Aníbal in Hispania. Most famous and fierce they came from north of Iberia, being the most famous Cantabrians. They dressed in long black layers, as far as the arms, carried light shields in circular form, in its legs and shinbones they had braids of hairs and they covered its heads with helmets with bronze. They also carried the traditional falcatas: forged swords of double edge with excellent steel, as complement used daggers of small stature for the hand-to-hand combat.

Turdetans Lancers:

http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/paginas/anibalWEB/articulos/ibero2.gif

Description: Very important against the enemy cavalry, the iberian lancers and in special the turdetans. They were characterized by its red crest upon its helmet of bronze. When it touched fight hand-to-hand used their "falcata"

Lusitans Warriors.

ftp://fern9508:mod@ftp.jazztel.es/lusitanos.JPG

Important: To the being guerrilla they must have some species of advantage in attack (the ambushes always are by surprise) and another advantage in concealment (the ambushes usually become in a land previously studied and very hidden). They would have to be able to defeat to units of superior force, in zones like forests, hills and mountains and if reason why outside they are losing in these lands must have a lot of possibilities (surroundings to 70%) of scape (the forest was its natural land). On the other hand they would have almost null to attack cities and very good to sack villas, farms etc... IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO CONSERVE THE WILD SOW THEN WAS THE MAIN INSTRUMENT OF THE GUERRILLA. THE SHIELD IN THIS CASE IS NOT OF BRONZE BUT OF OF LEATHER. LINEN ARMORS ALSO TAKE, (TO SEE AN ARMOR OF MESH IN A GUERRILLA ERA VERY LITTLE COMMON).

Description: Coming from inner Iberia, greater part was the basic troops of great leader Íbero Viriato.La take to linen armors, single few take mesh armors and helmet of three plumes, the others use leather helmet. The infants also use grebas and each one takes several wild sows. Some take lances for estoque with bronze ends. With the great mobility and great ability of concealment they were the nightmare of the Romans in Iberia, who suffered new tactics single-breasted uniform jacket, the call guerrilla, this tactics consisted of hiding in recondite valleys, mountains, passages etc... to attack the enemy by surprise and with a very favorable tactical advantage. Thus with few troops one was able to infringe great losses. The tactics consisted generally of unloading a pile of projectiles the wild sows and next to hide, debilitating little by little to the enemy for in the end, with the enemy already decimated, to present/display battle hand-to-hand.

Northern: Scutarii Heavy.

ftp://fern9508:mod@ftp.jazztel.es/astures.JPG

Important: They were the element celt of the íberos is more important that they are blond, and with that so special helmet, by the other heavy levels of mesh, and great shields. IT IS NECESSARY TO ADD To the GREAT FALCATA THAT ARE IN The IMAGE TWO LANCES (IN The WAIST) A LIGHT One And ANOTHER HEAVY One. They must be a powerful unit in hand-to-hand, weak against cavalry (this unit is very slow), with little mobility (great penalty in forests), and good in attacks against cities (they must have a great life).

Description: Proceed of the north of Iberia, was the element more celta of íberia, were in its majority asturs, vascons, arevácos or cantábros . Their armors consisted of two lances, light and a other heavy one, and a falcata. The shield whereupon was defended was great and heavy, model evolved of celta. The íbera striking power.

Coming soon the other units

------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Spanish to correct translations errors:

No se puede considerar un ejército íbero en general pues son diferentes dependiendo de sus características ( celtas, íberos y celtíberos). Pero para hacer posible el juego nos hemos fijado en las características más comunes y hemos tenido en cuenta las unidades más peculiares.

Infantería.

Scutarii: Importante : La inclusión de una capa negra característica de estos íberos. Substituir las jabalinas por una "falcata" espada íbera.

Para tener una mejor visión de la falcata:

Descricpión: Los scutarii, es la unidad de infantería íbera básica, fueron usados como mercenarios por los cartagineses y en menor medida por los romanos, siendo cruciales en las batallas de Aníbal en Hispania.
Los más renombrado y fieros procedían de norte de Iberia, siendo los más renombrados los cántabros. Vestían con unas largas capas de negro, en cuanto a las armas, portaban escudos lígeros en forma circular, en sus piernas y espinillas tenían trenzas de pelos y cubrían sus cabezas con cascos de bronze . Portaban también las tradicionales falcatas: espadas de doble filo forjadas con excelente acero, como complemento usaban unos puñales de pequeña estatura para el combate cuerpo a cuerpo.

Lanceros Turdenatos: Para una visión íntegra:

Descripción: Muy importantes contra la caballería enemiga, los lanceros íberos y en especial los turdenatos, se caracterizaban por su cresta roja encima de su casco de bronze. Cuando tocaba pelea cuerpo a cuerpo usaban su "falcata" pegada a su cuerpo.

Guerrilleros Lusitanos:

Importante: Al ser guerrilleros tendrían que tener alguna especie de bonificación en ataque ( las emboscadas siempre son por sorpresa) y otra bonificación en ocultamiento ( las emboscadas suelen hacerse en un terreno previamente estudiado y muy escondido). Deberían ser capaces de derrotar a unidades de fuerza superior, en zonas como bosques, colinas y montañas y si por lo que fuera van perdiendo en estos terrenos deberían tener muchísimas posibilidades ( entorno al 70%) de huír ( el bosque era su terreno natural). Por otro lado tendrían que se casi nulos para atacar ciudades y muy buenos para saquear villas, granjas etc... ES MUY IMPORTANTE CONSERVAR LA JABALINA PUES ERA EL INSTRUMENTO PRINCIPAL DE LA GUERRILLA. EL ESCUDO EN ESTE CASO NO ES DE BRONCE SINO DE DE CUERO. SE LLEVAN TAMBIEN CORAZAS DE LINO, ( VER UNA CORAZA DE MALLA EN UN GUERRILLERO ERA MUY POCO COMÚN).

Descripción: Procedentes de la Iberia interior, fueron la tropa básica de gran líder Íbero Viriato.La mayor parte llevan corazas de lino, solo unos pocos llevan corazas de malla y casco de tres penachos, los demás usan casco de cuero. Los infantes usan también grebas y cada uno lleva varias jabalinas. Algunos llevan lanzas para estoque con puntas de bronce. Con una gran movilidad y gran habilidad de ocultación fueron la pesadilla de los romanos en la Iberia, que padecieron una nueva táctica guerrera, la llamada guerrilla, esta táctica consistía en esconderse en recónditos valles, montañas, pasajes etc... para atacar al enemigo por sorpresa y con una ventaja táctica muy favorable. Así con pocas tropas se conseguía infringir grandes bajas. Generalmente la táctica consistía en descargar un montón de proyectiles con las jabalinas y seguidamente esconderse, debilitanto poco a poco al enemigo para al final, con el enemigo ya diezmado,presentar batalla cuerpo a cuerpo.

Norteños : Scutarii Pesados.

Importante: Eran el elemento más celta de los íberos es importante que sean rubios, y con ese casco tan especial, por lo demás cotas de malla pesadas, y grandes escudos. HAY QUE AÑADIR A LA FALCATA GRANDE QUE HAY EN LA IMAGEN DOS LANZAS ( EN LA CINTURA) UNA LIGERA Y OTRA PESADA. Deben ser una unidad poderosa en cuerpo a cuerpo, débil contra caballería ( esta unidad es muy lenta), con poca movilidad ( gran penalización en bosques), y buenos en ataques contra ciudades ( deberían tener una gran vida).

Descripción: Prodecedentes del norte de la Iberia, era el elemento más celta de la íberia, eran en su mayoría astures, vascones, arevácos o cantábros .Su armamento constaba de dos lanzas, una ligera y otra pesada, ademas de una falcata. El escudo con que se defendían era grande y pesado, modelo evolucionado del celta. La fuerza de choque íbera.

EdCase

Dec 01, 2005, 01:17 PM

@EdCase: If you could do some skinning, how hard would it be to make more primitive types of ships? Remove the sail and dragon head of the galley for a coracle or just the bow and stern for a trireme? I've been modifying the "Greek World" mod that came with the game (have to play something until TAM is finished) and the Phoenicians need a UU. I'm sure Thamis would find it useful as well.

I haven't really looked into the skinning aspect yet..but if Firaxis used alpha channels in their art ..I might, repeat might be able to "alpha-edit" details out of objects/units .
I have a day off work tomorrow I will investigate it then.
@Thamis...Celtic swordsman...hmm got any reference images you can post ?
of how you would ideally like it to look and i'll go from there.

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 01:38 PM

@EdCase: Just put a celtic knot on the shield maybe?

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 01:39 PM

@SV: Thanks for the Iberian info. I think this will come in handy when we get to making the units.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 02:02 PM

When I have more time I will post the calvary units and others.

See you!

EdCase

Dec 01, 2005, 02:53 PM

Ok...well "alpha-editing" is out ..anything made transparent on the alpha channel appears to assume civ specified color...interesting but not what I was after.:(

Celtic knot..okey dokey will do so.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 01, 2005, 02:56 PM

@ED yo live in Florida, then you must know spanish. ¿can you compare the two texts (in the large post) and then view any mistake?

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 04:16 PM

Celtic Knot that I'm going to use:
http://www.welshartsarchive.org.uk/galleries/images/Christina_Scurr/Celtic%20Knot.jpg

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 04:36 PM

Hmm... something is wrong with the rivers in v0.4... gotta fix that.

dreamcrusader

Dec 01, 2005, 06:09 PM

were do I put the mod folder at?

EdCase

Dec 01, 2005, 06:11 PM

@ED yo live in Florida, then you must know spanish. ¿can you compare the two texts (in the large post) and then view any mistake?

:lol: Born in England matey......my spanish is non existant.

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 06:12 PM

were do I put the mod folder at?

Extract the whole ZIP into your CIV4 folder.

So it should look like this in the end:

CIV4\PUBLICMAPS\TheAncientMediterranean.0.4.CIV4Wo rldBuilderSave
CIV4\MODS\The Ancient Mediterranean

dreamcrusader

Dec 01, 2005, 06:13 PM

Extract the whole ZIP into your CIV4 folder.

So it should look like this in the end:

CIV4\PUBLICMAPS\TheAncientMediterranean.0.4.CIV4Wo rldBuilderSave
CIV4\MODS\The Ancient Mediterranean

thanks.

Im going to try it out

edit:

Once I boot up the mod I dont know were to actually play the game. I can only load

EdCase

Dec 01, 2005, 06:28 PM

Is this close to what you desired Thamis
105939

Image has been contrasted more to highlight design.....hair is also redder

Dreamcrusader...it is classed as a Scenario...look under Scenarios ;)

dreamcrusader

Dec 01, 2005, 06:49 PM

Is this close to what you desired Thamis
105939

Image has been contrasted more to highlight design.....hair is also redder

Dreamcrusader...it is classed as a Scenario...look under Scenarios ;)

I know that.

I mean whats I have actually rebooted the game in the mod mode how do I play? I cant choose anything but load

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 06:56 PM

Try double-clicking the map in your CIV4\PublicMaps folder. That should automatically launch the game.

And yes, it's load scenario.

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 06:58 PM

EdCase: Yea, looks good. Have you also changed the coat colours? Would be cool if maybe the white part would be slightly more greenish. The more difference to the original the better!

EdCase

Dec 01, 2005, 07:01 PM

dreamcrusader

Dec 01, 2005, 07:08 PM

Try double-clicking the map in your CIV4\PublicMaps folder. That should automatically launch the game.

And yes, it's load scenario.

ok thanks for the help

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 07:10 PM

Posted v05

thamis

Dec 01, 2005, 07:12 PM

Can do that...the greenish bits on pic are civ color. will make the tunic/skirt;)
greener..

In fact I can make the "civ color" anyplace you want, or even make it so that it displays no civ coloration at all. Your choice.

Since it's a unique unit, I don't think we need the civ colours. Also, we got the flags. So make the civ colour any kind of colour that fits.

I'm only thinking green because I'm thinking of druidic culture in Gaul. You could also have some blue-ish stuff there. As long as the colours aren't too bright -- only the richest civilizations could afford good dyes. :)

Ok, off to bed now.

Batvanio

Dec 02, 2005, 04:54 AM

Posted v05

did you repair the rivers?
coz on v0.4 rivers were misplaced and strange

edit: sorry I have read that you updated the rivers - great now I can playtest the map

sapon

Dec 02, 2005, 06:10 AM

Thamis, I thought your CIV III mod had a larger norther european map area? It would be nice to see the British Isles and perhaps Germania. Are Civ III maps importable to Civ IV? Cheers.

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 06:15 AM

Thamis, I thought your CIV III mod had a larger norther european map area? It would be nice to see the British Isles and perhaps Germania. Are Civ III maps importable to Civ IV? Cheers.

My TAM-CIV3 did have a larger map in general, and it went up to Scandinavia. I havven't included this part in the current map, as CIV4 is extremely slow, and I want the mod to be playable. Of course I can include a bigger map of Europe later. It's quite easy to make maps for CIV4.

You can't import CIV3 maps.

Spearthrower

Dec 02, 2005, 07:24 AM

Thanks for your kind words and the offer to help. I think the best help you can give me is:
- Correct any errors that are evident in any city list or pedia description (there's no TAM pedia yet, but there will be).
- Any ideas on unique units.
- Any ideas on the tech tree
- Any ideas on religion (not quite sure if I want to keep the political correctness of CIV4 with all religions being equal... we're going to be dealing with ancient religions here, so no damage done I assume. ;))

Ok Thamis, no problem. I will start looking into the things you have mentioned. When you've got a basic pedia, e-mail it to me and I will spell-check and offer suggestions on it.

I am going to take a break out of Civ 4 this weekend and write up some of my thoughts on what could be done with religion in a cIVTAM. I thoroughly agree that it could use a lot more flavour considering the political correctness of an ancient religion is not an issue nowadays...... unless we get a mass of angry Druids crowding the forums, hitting us with their sickles and demanding sacrifices, we should be fine!

JamieCiv4Files

Dec 02, 2005, 07:43 AM

latest version added to http://civilization4.filefront.com/ T :)

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 02:15 PM

jimkirk

Dec 02, 2005, 02:26 PM

i will wait till its finished i loved this mod for civ3 conquest i am sure civ4 version will be just as good

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 02:28 PM

@jimkirk: It might take a while to be completely finished...

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 02:44 PM

Bouncing a few more ideas around here...

Heroes

Heroes would be national units that each civilization can only build one of. They are very expensive and are obviously also very good. Each civilization would be able to build their hero with the technology that the hero would become available.

The Greeks would be able to build Alexander the Great (hmm... that's their leader, would have to find another hero, but let's use him as an example nonetheless) when Heavy Cavalry becomes available. He would have twice the strength of the normal unit, and a few significant upgrades in, say, flanking.

Now, let's think of Heroes, and their abilities... I'm going to use TAM-CIV3 units as suggestions.

- Babylon: Gilgamesh (Warrior or Archer)
- Gaul - gotta look into Caesar for that, but a swordsman
- Greece - Achilles (Phalanx)
- Rome - Scipio (Legionary)
- Scythia - gotta check my Herodotus (Horse Archer, of course)
- Mongolia (will be changed to Huns) - no clue, but some Light Cavalry
- Egypt - gotta read up on that (War Chariot)
- Iberian Tribes - Spirit_Viriato... any ideas?
- Germanic Tribes - hmm... easy to find one (Berserk)
- Carthage - one of Hannibal's generals (War Elephant)
- Lydia - gotta check my Herodotus (Light Cavalry)
- Phoenicia - Dido? (Phoenician Trireme)
- Getae - anyone from Romania here? National hero?
- Persia - Xerxes (Immortal)
- Medes - no clue
- Britons - what's the name of that woman hero?
- Kolchis - no clue

Civs to come:
- Illyria OR Macedonia - Illyria - no clue; Macedonia - one of Alexander's generals (Heavy Cavalry)
- Nubia - no clue
- Berber - some Light Infantry
- Goths - many possibilities (Huskarl)

Suggestions?

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 02, 2005, 03:22 PM

If the leader are Viriato, I think that heroe can be the God "Lug".

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 03:23 PM

No gods as heroes, please. Gilgamesh is as far as I will go towards superhero.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 02, 2005, 03:30 PM

Can be "Túbal" ( due to mithology the first monarch of Iberia). But I ask to people to better answer. Certainly, the heroe are Viriato.

Sisonpyh

Dec 02, 2005, 03:40 PM

Gaul - Vercingetorix ?

wolfman1234

Dec 02, 2005, 04:18 PM

I think Dido was a Godess

Nubia- Heru.
Berber- Antaios.
Illyria- Glaucius, Bardilys.
Scythia- Heracles, yes, he was no greek.
Mongolia- Jangur.
Egypt- Ramses II.
Iberian Tribes- If Viriato is the leader, perhaps then Quintus Sertorius, or Sertorio in our language(a renegade roman who fought at iberian side).
Phoenician- Cadmus.
Getae- Zalmoxis.
Medes- Medus.
Britons-Britomart.

I think some of them like Hanno, cadmus, zalmoxis, and perhaps more of them are in the game as Great People.

EdCase

Dec 02, 2005, 04:43 PM

For Britons..do you mean Boudicca? Female chieftan of the Iceni tribe

And I guess I can take the list as "EdCase we need models for......." ;)

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 05:22 PM

Dido: Dido was the (semi-mythical) woman who founded Carthage. She was the daughter of a merchant in Tyre or Sidon (don't remember).

Gaul: Vercingetorix is already the leader, need someone else

Iberia: Quintus Sertorius is good, I remember him.

Britons: Yes, Boudicca. National hero until modern times. Perfect one.

@Ed: Well, we can do with the default units for a while, but maybe get some different skins or even different models later... ;) Boudicca would need a female model, for example.

thamis

Dec 02, 2005, 07:45 PM

Updated to v0.6.

There is a problem with the Germanic Tribes XML. I've checked it five times now, made sure everything is correct... nothing. No chance. I have no clue what's wrong. Please look into it.

Ankenaton

Dec 02, 2005, 09:16 PM

Don't worry about the rating Thamis, this will surely become one of the longest and most sought after threads!! :goodjob:

I stopped playing C3C about a year ago and only played TAM from then on. I absolutely love the ancient ages; as an anthropologist, I have spent a number of years studying the roots of humanity, ancient cultures and languages etc etc and therefore find this the most interesting part of the game and your mod the best on the market! ;)

I have been lurking here for years, but rarely post (about once a year!). I am changing that habit solely to offer help in any area that you think you may need the support. I can offer help in modelling and animating (with the release), historical write-ups, general spell-checking (I'm an English teacher :lol: ), game-play civ and terrain balancing issues..... wherever you feel like you have too much to do and too little time to do it! :cool:

Mail me at spear_thrower at hotmail dot com if you need assistance.

And thanks...... very big thanks, mahoosive great stonking thanks for a year of enjoyable moddage! :goodjob:
Well a journalist...a school teacher... and a therapist...can the world or at least TAM/Civ4 stand the combination!

Ankenaton

Dec 02, 2005, 09:24 PM

Thanks for your kind words and the offer to help. I think the best help you can give me is:
- Correct any errors that are evident in any city list or pedia description (there's no TAM pedia yet, but there will be).
- Any ideas on unique units.
- Any ideas on the tech tree
- Any ideas on religion (not quite sure if I want to keep the political correctness of CIV4 with all religions being equal... we're going to be dealing with ancient religions here, so no damage done I assume. ;))
Yes I agree with you on the religion thing. Other than a generic polytheism using Hinduism as the base, I think the only other religions worth keeping as they are would be Judaism...and perhaps Christianity. Since old TAM ended around lets say 600AD, Islam appears too late within the proscribed timeframe to be included. Hopefully this won't be taken out of context. ;) ;) ;)

Ankenaton

Dec 02, 2005, 09:44 PM

EdCase

Dec 02, 2005, 10:59 PM

@Ed: Well, we can do with the default units for a while, but maybe get some different skins or even different models later... ;) Boudicca would need a female model, for example.

I have a low poly male, female and..................horse already made..just got to finish rigging them for animation. Adding spears,shields, swords armor etc is easy enough after that.
Boudicca would also need a chariot I believe.

But for now when the list comes together..I will adjust "suitable" in-game models skins as placeholders.

Achilles for greece..hmmm then blackish armor it will be

sapon

Dec 03, 2005, 12:20 AM

sapon

Dec 03, 2005, 12:21 AM

I have several suggestions for religions. Greek Mythology (Roman gods were essentially Greek gods renamed.); Zoroastrian (http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/zorast/zorast.html); Norse Mythology; Eternal Return (Summarian). Here is a nice website I found: http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Ancient_religions/ancient_religions.htm

Spearthrower

Dec 03, 2005, 12:41 AM

On the subject of heroes.... something from Civ3 conquests springs to mind...... remember the Shogun style scenario where developments in technologies allowed for upgrading of your solo Hero troop. In this way you could perhaps avoid the concern of say Alexander being both the Leader and the Hero as you could have the hero troop from the start (i.e. named the same as your Leader) but he/she would only get powerful later on with advancements in techs. You could set it up as a National unit with a limit of 1, therefore if it dies you can rebuild it (although it would be expensive)

wolfman1234

Dec 03, 2005, 01:34 AM

About religions...why dont use some of the Greek World scenario ones? plus Zorotraism. No need to go with 7.

thamis

Dec 03, 2005, 04:16 AM

See the updated hero list on the front page.

I will use some of the religions from the Greek World scenario, as the icons are pretty cool. What I want is something like Judaism +2% interest, Zoroastrianism +2% science, etc... Some fairly minor adjustments.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 03, 2005, 05:24 AM

Sorry for this lot of information Thamis.

I have found possible iberian heroes, also very famous, they are the leaders (they fought together) Indibil and Mardonio of the Íbera tribe of ilergetan and Ausetans. I leave imagenes of statues that are to the entrance of LLeida (one capital of province of Catalonia)... We have more information about this two guys, and are Iberian people not Romans.

http://www.xtec.es/~mroman/indibi1.jpg
http://www.xtec.es/~mroman/indibi2.jpg

Description for civilopedia:

Iberian leaders (second half of century III to C.). Both distinguished in the fight by the independence of their kingdoms as opposed to the invasion of Carthaginians and Romans, during the years of the Second Punic War (218-201 to C.). Indíbil belonged to ilergetans, established Iberian town between the Pyrenees, the Ebro, the Segre and the Gállego, around its capital, Ilerda (the present Lérida). Mandonio, on the other hand, belonged to the ausetans, established around Ausa (the present Vic)..

Both fought like allies of the Carthaginians against Rome, when this one attacked the Iberian Peninsula to resist the advance of Aníbal in Italy; Indíbil participated with Asdrúbal in the battle against Publio Escipión in which this one died (212). But, while Asdrúbal Boat prepared a new campaign against Italy, Publio Cornelio Escipión convinced to Indíbil and Mandonio of which the Carthaginians had betrayed to them and attracted to them the Roman side; ilergetans and ausetans collaborated with the Romans in the campaigns that took to them to snatch the Iberian Peninsula to the Carthaginians.

Soon they would discover that the Romans had not come to give back their independence to them, but to put under to them its dominion, reason why they continued its fight against Escipión. This one won to them and put under in years 206-204 to C., although Indíbil survived and continued fighting during some time..

In Spanish for future translations and for error translations

Caudillos iberos (segunda mitad del siglo iii a. C.). Ambos se distinguieron en la lucha por la independencia de sus reinos frente a la invasión de cartagineses y romanos, durante los años de la Segunda Guerra Púnica (218-201 a. C.).

Indíbil pertenecía a los ilergetes, pueblo ibérico establecido entre los Pirineos, el Ebro, el Segre y el Gállego, en torno a su capital, Ilerda (la actual Lérida). Mandonio, por su parte, pertenecía a los ausetanos, establecidos en torno a Ausa (la actual Vic).Ambos lucharon como aliados de los cartagineses contra Roma, cuando ésta atacó la península Ibérica para contrarrestar el avance de Aníbal en Italia; Indíbil participó con Asdrúbal en la batalla contra Publio Escipión en la que éste murió (212). Pero, mientras Asdrúbal Barca preparaba una nueva campaña contra Italia, Publio Cornelio Escipión convenció a Indíbil y Mandonio de que los cartagineses les habían traicionado y les atrajo al bando romano; ilergetes y ausetanos colaboraron con los romanos en las campañas que les llevaron a arrebatar la península Ibérica a los cartagineses.

Pronto descubrirían que los romanos no habían venido para devolverles su independencia, sino para someterles a su dominio, por lo que continuaron su lucha en contra de Escipión. Éste les venció y sometió en los años 206-204 a. C., aunque Indíbil sobrevivió y siguió combatiendo durante algún tiempo.

Caledorn

Dec 03, 2005, 05:37 AM

This mod actually made me go from a regular lurker into registering a fully fledged account, just so I could post my interest to help! I'm fairly good at the XML editing stuff, even though it is horrendously dry and boring to do manually ;), so if you want some help in that dep thamis, please let me know some specifics and I'll be most happy to help! This mod is a great initiative!

thamis

Dec 03, 2005, 05:40 AM

@SV: Good info, great.

@Caledorn: I'm pretty good with XML, too. But I have one problem with this version: When loading the mod, I get an error on Gemanic_Tribes.xml... I have NO CLUE what's wrong, I've checked everything but just can't find the problem. Can you look into it?

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 03, 2005, 05:49 AM

There is a TAM-Wiki as well.

¿What is this Thamis?

http://modiki.apolyton.net/index.php?title=The_Ancient_Mediterranean#The_Anci ent_Mediterranean

thamis

Dec 03, 2005, 05:57 AM

This is a wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki

The TAM Wiki will be for putting all the information there, and I made it into a Wiki so that everyone can add stuff, and I'm not the only one who has to do it. ;)

thamis

Dec 03, 2005, 05:58 AM

BTW, in English you don't put the initial inverted "?". Just one at the end. :)

Caledorn

Dec 03, 2005, 05:59 AM

CIV4GameTextInfos_Germanic_Tribes.xml

Line 8

<Civ4GameText xmlns="http://www.firaxis.com">,

The comma at the end there is the reason for the error :)

Caledorn

Dec 03, 2005, 06:11 AM

@Caledorn: I'm pretty good with XML, too. -snip-

You would almost have to be - I'm very impressed by your XML files - they are excellently structured, and have a strong neatness to them. Working with you, if you want my help, is going to be my pleasure :)

Errors like that comma error are so annoying when they occur - after working with PHP for a couple of years now, I am all too familiar with the kind. One of the lifesavers I found to help me with that kind of errors for PHP was the Zend Development Suite - however, XML is a lot more difficult to create a similar environment for, giving the fact that the XML designer creates his own tagnames etc. In sorts, XML is both a blessing and a curse.

I've been following the development threads on the various XML tools for Civ4 in the Tools forum section, and I most sincerely hope that one or more of them are completed one of these days. Of course, I could probably sit down and program my own, but I'm not so sure PHP is the best tool for it, and I'm not all _that_ familiar with Python and other languages yet, even though I admire Python as a programming language very much. Learning Python is definitely on my todo list. ;)

The real bummer, though, would be if Firaxis actually has their own tool for editing all the XML files, which they just haven't released. I think quite a lot of the modders would feel like slowly castrating some Firaxians with whatever spoons and other various cutlery they might have available in that case. :goodjob: The XMLSpy comment tags does suggest otherwise though.:crazyeye:

The Last Conformist

Dec 03, 2005, 06:30 AM

Boudicca ought be a charioteer, not a axewoman.

I'd go some Persian general or satrap over Xerxes as hero - Pharnaces, Mardonius, Tissaphernes are some names that come to mind.

I think Theodericus (that's the usual Latin spelling, IIUC) deserves to be LH, not a mere hero. Possible replacements as hero include Alaricus, Teias - the last Ostrogoth king, supposedly a truly exceptional warrior -, and Ermannaricus.

Achilles as a phalanx makes no sense at all. But I suppose you know this.

Maybe replace Berber with Numidians or Mauretanians? More of a Classical feel to it, I think.

@Spirit_Viriato: Jaguars? You must mean some other animal, since jaguars never inhabited Iberia.

Indibil

Dec 03, 2005, 06:47 AM

@Spirit_Viriato: Jaguars? You must mean some other animal, since jaguars never inhabited Iberia.

[/lurk]
He must have wanted to say Iberian Lynx.

Darn, this made me delurk.
[lurk]

wolfman1234

Dec 03, 2005, 06:58 AM

That is, lynx, hmmm....Indibil, there is a picture of you some posts above.:D

The Last Conformist

Dec 03, 2005, 07:36 AM

@Indibil: Welcome to CFC! [party]

EdCase

Dec 03, 2005, 10:09 AM

Boudicca ought be a charioteer, not a axewoman.

Achilles as a phalanx makes no sense at all. But I suppose you know this.

Once the SDK arrives I should be able to oblige(Boudicca).
Phalanx model is the currently the only one in-game thats fits as a placeholder at least.(Achilles)

thamis

Dec 03, 2005, 10:57 AM

@Caledorn:

Thanks for fixing that. That was a typo when I copied & pasted...

Regarding the tools. I know for a fact that Firaxis works with the professional edition of XML Spy (a mere $400 per copy). I use the home edition of XML spy (free), but it lacks the good grid view. It's just a better text editor with XML checking. ;)

I'm going to write a few more PHP tools like the city list generator. Unless someone comes up with a great editor first. ;)

@TLC:

It's hard to decide who is more important, Theoderich or Alarich. One of them is leader, the other hero. I think that fits just fine. I use the Germanic spelling, because they are Germanic people (just as I use the Greek spelling for Greek cities whenever possible). As long as the name is still recognizable...

Achilles as Phalanx: Well, he was a Greek warrior, and he fought with spear and shield. Thus, the Phalanx model is great.

Berber: Yes, I did look into Numidians or Mauretanians, but I didn't find any info for TAM-CIV3.

Boudicca: You are right. War Chariot.

@Indibil:

Welcome!

sapon

Dec 03, 2005, 05:19 PM

Hero could be Sargon, here is a website: http://www.crystalinks.com/assyrian.html

Indibil

Dec 04, 2005, 06:46 AM

It might be too late, but I thought it also could be useful, if only for Civi or reference reasons.

It's taken from Bosch-Gimpera's 'La ETNOS IBÉRICA'. Núm. 25, enero-febrero 1947, de los Cuadernos del Exilio. Editados en Coyoacán (México)'.

I wouldn't take it for 100% reliable and I sure will check its accuracy in following days.

The 5 greatest tribal agrupations in Hispania

1.- The "Pirenaics"

Basques

"We need to make clear that the pirenaic tribes, who stretched from Cantabria to the Western Catalan Pyrinees, are the descendants ... of the ancient franco-cantabric tribes that can be traced back to the Paleolitic. Their character is formed around and because of the territory they inhabited, the Pyrinees...Their Eastern tribes (Aragon Pyrinees and Catalan Pyrinees as well as their Cantabric counterparts loose their roots in the following periods, but they're in fact very similar in their origins to the basque country tribes. However, there's some tribes amongst those de-naturalised zones that keep most, if not all, their pirenaic traits: The Andosins (Andorra) and the Arenosis (Aranese Valley)" (page 82)

[It must be stablished that] "The actual inhabitants of the Basque country aren't in any way the descendants from the Iberic tribes, as Humboldt's classic theory states and somebody echoes. It is from the tribes originated in Almería that we must search the roots of the Iberic tribes." (Page 83).

The Ceretan tribe (Spanish and French Cerdanya) was basically a Pirenaic tribe, though heavily influenced by the Capsian tribes.

2.- The Celts

Castellano-Leoneses

The Celt invasion waves:

The First Wave: (rejected by the Iberic tribes)

[They start their invasion] "Through the mediterranean coast (Tarragona and Salou) and make their way through the Iberic settlements in the Urgell Valley ... Until they reach the Ebro (El Molar), stablishing in all this area."

"Their arrival in those areas can be traced to 900 B.C. approximately and they stay in those areas until the Southern Iberic Tribes (Valencia, Almeria, Murcia) exterminate the Celts from their 'National Territory' in 650 B.C."

The Second Wave: Gets into Hispania through Navarra and stablishes in Castilla-León.

"The period of maximal influence of the Celt tribes in Hispania stretches from VIth C B.C. until IInd C B.C. They manage to subdue the Galassos (Galicia), Lusitanos (Portuguese) and the Pirenaic (Basque-Navarre), though they fail in their attempt to completely dominate the 'peninsula', as the Tartessos in the South and the Ibers in the Eastern Mediterranean Zones reject them. About the indigenous tribes that settled the Castilla-León zone little is known as they were completely exterminated by the Celts."

"The Lussitan tribes, although being heavily influenced by the Celt tribes, finally manage to break their dominance in IInd C B.C. and stablish their control in the Portugal and Extremadura zone."

"Although dominated as well by the Celts, the Pirenaic tribes didn't subdue to them and their culture and traits didn't suffer much from this period of dominance." (Page 135)

"It is believed, that although under heavy influence by the Celts and having their culture heavily 'Celticised' by this period of dominance, the Lussitanos and the Galassos didn't mix up with the dominant classes, mantaining the 'tribal' traits unchanged, even if they didnt manage to keep their original cultural traits". (Page 136)

3.- The Tartessos

Andalucia

"The Tartessian tribes managed to create a big confederation during the VIth C B.C in which they formed an alliance with some Southern Iberic tribes: The Bastetans, Deiatans and Mastiens. This later tribe was the dominant one amongst those Iberic Tribes.". (Page 148)

Mastiens, Bastetans and Deitans were the Iberic tribes that inhabited Almeria and Murcia. Although Iberic in their origins, those tribes were so heavily influenced by the Tartessians to make the first Greek scouts label them as Tartessian Tribes.

"This group of tribes in the Tartessian Confederation (Mastiens, Bastetans and Deitans) are Iberic Tribes in the sense that they are descendants from the ancient 'Almerian Tribe' [1st vestige of what today is called Iberic Culture]. Iberic Tribes in their strictest sense (Gimnetes-Contestans, Edetans and Ilergetes-Ilercavons with several other groups towards Nort-East Catalonia, stretching as far as the Roussillon and Montpelier) are the secondary expansion of this originary 'Almerian Tribe' towards the North.

The originary 'Almerian tribe' Group had strong commercial ties with the Tartessos. Those ties were strengthened during the Tartessos flourishment and thus the unification of those three Iberic Tribes under the Tartessian Confederation.

"The most ancient records (the Greek 'Periplo', Hecateu, VIth C BC) distinguish between Tartessos and Iberic Tribes, mentioning that some of those Iberic Tribes are under the Tartessos Confederation and others aren't."

"It is not until Herodor, 430 BC, that Tartessos are comonly labelled as 'Iberic Tribes'."

4.- The Iberic Tribes

The Catalan Speaking Zones in nowadays Spain and Southern France

The great cultural focus of those tribes and the place where they originated is in Alicante-Almeria.

Differences Between Iberic Tribes and Tartessos

Politic and Social: "Tartessia had a quite more advanced culture and refination than the Iberic Tribes. The later remained in a state that we could compare to that of the Bereber tribes: little agrupations around a village or a city, practically independant amongst them, that were only intertwinned with other [Iberic] tribes by Militar alliances when they felt threatened by others.

Their basis was quite democratic and equalitary, having a council formed by the 'Eldest' amongst each tribe (very much like the Bereber 'djemaa'. It is only under great threat that higher organization appears and kings and under-kings come to exist and reach hereditary rule (During the Roman conquest: Edetans (Edecó) and Ilergetes (Indibil and Mandoni)". (Page 160).

Tartessos, in contrast to that organization, had a very marked social class: Aristocratic landlords, Aristocratic merchants, peasants, sailors, slaves); creating Monarchies formed by several cities. Those cities were under the rule of families of Princes. It was from the Confederation of those Monarchies that the Tartessian Confederation was born.

5.- Lusitans and Galessis

Portugal and Galicia

[Bosch-Gimpera thought previously to this book that the Lusitan tribes where indeed Iberic Tribes, though he rectifies this in this work] (page 164) There is really no suggestion in my investigation that supports this claim [them being Iberic Tribes]. Everything suggests that Lusitans would rather be an indigenous tribe that can be traced back to the Paleolitic whose culture was heavily influenced by the second Celtic wave. Their area of dominance would comprehend nowadays Portugal (except the northern provinces) and Extremadura.

Galessis: Northern Portugal and Galicia. Ethnically very simmilar to Lusitans and also heavily influenced in their culture by the second Celt Wave.

[Edit: Sorry for the umpteen typos, as it's a translation from a catalan text badly translated to spanish that I've rushedly translated into English. If the text is needed for whatever reasons I can devote more than the 70 minutes I've used to make this rough translation.]

thamis

Dec 04, 2005, 07:03 AM

Thanks for the info. I think we could do a pedia entry out of this.

thamis

Dec 04, 2005, 02:14 PM

Updated to v0.7

Karhgath

Dec 04, 2005, 03:27 PM

Hey Thamis, how have you been? been a while =)

I've been wanting to work on TAM again since CIV4 came out, so that's good, heh. Don't mind if I join in the fun?

I've mostly thought about the units/promotions and military progression, not much else. I've nearly done a version with all the new promotions, but I kept the standard civ units with updated class type for promotions. I'll probably create all the new units soon and map them to vanilla civ4 techs, since I haven't thought about the tech tree either.

I also nearly finished a map, but I didn't have tons of time lately and I didn't really go further than making the bmps to convert it to civ4 format. It's 128x60 and covers less desert in the south and more land to the north and east, including the british islands. It is much more similar to your original TAM map, but I did rotate it a bit more.

I can send the BMPs to you, I think only the forests overlay BMP needs work, it was done in an hurry. I'll probably try to finish it during the holidays. No resources or wnything like that tho.

I'll probably use the wiki to add units, promotions and such if you don't mind. A couple buildings too since I've been wanting to try something new with civ4:

Instead of units requiring copper/bronze/iron/etc., I want to allow everyone to build any kind of units. However, each available metal gives you +XP when building units. So if you don't have any copper, tin or iron, you can still build swordsman. However, someone with iron would maybe get +4/6 XP when building swordsman.

To get the effect, maybe have a building "Blacksmith, Copper" that requires copper and gives +2XP, "Blacksmith, Bronze" +4XP, "Blacksmith, Iron" +6XP or something like that. Or maybe just edit it when the SDK comes out and only requires a generic Forge that chooses which XP bonus to give depending on available metals.

Oh, and the most important question....

Where are *my* Assyrians?? :mad: :p

Sword Dancer

Dec 04, 2005, 06:27 PM

Damn Thamis, you've done it again!

I remember putting Civ III on the back shelf until I saw TAM, and it rapidly became my all-time favourite game to play. I found it incredibly well balanced, and a pure joy to play, not to mention being awestruck about the historical accuracy and work that went into the proper placement of natural resources.

I only wish that I was able to assist you with XML and graphics. As it is, most of my own historical focus has been on Eliz. England and Republican Rome -- the first is unsuited to this project, and the second is so widely known as to make me just another voice in the crowd.

One thing I would like to ask though -- are there any plans for alternate leaders to throw a little variation between games? If so I'd like to suggest Gaius Marius as an alternate for Rome. His traits would most likely be Aggressive and Organized.

-Mike

Sword Dancer

Dec 04, 2005, 07:11 PM

I was thinking re: Quintus Sertorius (and the legion) as an Iberian UU.
You may want to change Iberia's UU to some form of cavalry, since that region was known for its horses and provided Rome with much of its cavalry forces until the conquest of Sarmatia.

Zuul

Dec 04, 2005, 10:31 PM

So if you don't have any copper, tin or iron, you can still build swordsman.

Looked at my promotion mod?

So if you don't have any copper, tin or iron, you can still build swordsman.

Maybe they should be built slower too if you don't have the resource as someone else suggested.

Skeeder

Dec 05, 2005, 01:37 AM

Nemovadit

Dec 05, 2005, 06:58 AM

This looks quite promising, thamis.

Two words about the Gauls, first of all, a golden torque (http://jfbradu.free.fr/celtes/burdigala/torque.jpg) or a boar or boar head might be a better symbol than your otherwise very nice celtic knot. The torque was a symbol of royalty/chieftains, the boar was one of the war symbols like the eagle and S.P.Q.R. for the Romans. Though the knot is nice, it's more Celt than Gallic.

I think you could use Brennus as a hero. I'm sure you remember how he threw his heavy iron sword on the scales weighting the gold the Romans were about to give out for peace, yelling 'Vae victis'.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 05, 2005, 07:30 AM

I am going just a little bit to contribute of light on the personage of Sertorio and reasons for which it does not have to be leader of any Iberian faction, in any case like Roman special unit. His biography in a better english: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sertorius

1. - This man killed many Iberos. When by order of blunt the pretor Didio was sent to Spain along with, they lodged in a celtíbera city called "Cazlona" (Thamis another city more), where their soldiers incurred offenses to the inhabitants of the city which requested aid to the neighboring city "Orisia " (Thamis another city). Secretly the soldiers of Orisia and Cazlona entered the city and marries according to house went assassinating the Romans who as much had offended to them. Sertorio escaped and its revenge was received assassinating to all the inhabitants with age to take arms of the two cities.

2. - He was a politic man, simply settled down in Spain to have a refuge for his political friends in Rome (where its situation was very difficult). Let us remember that it was in favor of "Carbon", and was "Sila" the one that governed in Roma.Arrived here and rearmed the Romans.

3. - One became general of the Lusitanos, when these requested military board to him, since Iberian didn't have generals. Their ruses to gain the esteem of these (not very contentments with having a foreign general) widely are known, is famous their ruse with red deer:

One Iberian called Espano, who lives in the field, meet with a baby deer that fled from the hunters; and to this one it let it go; but to the musk deer, astonished at its color, because it was all white, it persecuted it and it reached it. Was accidentally Sertorio encamped in environs, and as it received with affability to which they took some present to him, or were of hunting, or of the fruits of the field, compensating with generosity to which therefore they did flattery to him, this one also appeared to him to give the musk deer to him. Accepted it , and was not great in the beginning the pleasure that declared; but with time, having itself made so tame and docile, that it went when called it, and it followed to him anywhere that it went, without being frightened of the bustle and military noise, little by little was divinized, we say it it thus, making think that that deer had been a present of Diana (a God), and scattering the voice of which revealed the hidden things to him, by knowledge that the Barbarians are naturally very inclined to the superstition. In order to credit it more, it was used this means: when reserved and secretly it got to understand that the enemies were going to invade their territory, or tried to separate of his obedient to a city, he pretended that deer had spoken to him in the hours of the dream, coming up to him that he had the troops to point. On the other hand, if warning of which occurred him some of its generals had reached a victory, hid to which it had brought it, and presented/displayed to deer crowned like announcer of good new, exciting them to be glad and to sacrifice the Gods, because shortly fausta had to arrive one the news..

4.- Since we have commented Sertorio were a politic man and it used to the íberos in the internal Rome fights (winning its affection with gold and ruses). The battles disputed against other Roman factions are multiple. It died assassinated..

kevin2350

Dec 05, 2005, 11:30 AM

Updated to v0.7
Where can i download the mod please?
It is my favourite Civ 3 mod so can't wait.:crazyeye:

thamis

Dec 05, 2005, 11:35 AM

Download in the first post (where else?).

thamis

Dec 05, 2005, 11:38 AM

Is the only way to play this mod with the map included, is to manually load the map from the world-builder once you start a normal game? Then it lets you pick a civ? Because thats the only way i've been able to use the map. Seems kind of non intuitive..

You can just double-click the map in the PublicMaps folder, that is the easiest way.

You can also load civ, load the mod, and then select "load scenario" and choose the map.

thamis

Dec 05, 2005, 01:41 PM

@Kargath:

Hey old chap! Good to see you back. Good to hear that you're working on units and promotions. I will create a new tech tree, though, so don't bother with mapping them onto the current one. The blacksmith buildings idea is cool, but I think having the resource should give a *significant* advantage.

A bigger map is also cool, since a few people have complained... I'm just afraid that it won't be able to run on a normal PC.

@Sword Dancer:

Thanks for your kind words on TAM-C3. I hope TAM-C4 will be even better.

I won't be adding new leaders until very late in the project, because each leader has 19 XML references spread over several files. It's a pain...

Iberia was most known for its slingers, so that'll be the UU. There were many good cavalry civs back then, slingers are just so... special.

@Nemovadit:

Thanks for the Boar suggestion. Now I just have to find a nice and simple boar relief. Brennus would make a good hero indeed.

@SpritiViriato:

I won't use Quintus Sertorius, but one of the brothers mentioned earlier.

Lorteungen

Dec 05, 2005, 03:40 PM

Heroes would be national units that each civilization can only build one of. They are very expensive and are obviously also very good. Each civilization would be able to build their hero with the technology that the hero would become available.

First of all your mod looks fantastic, I can't wait to play this. The ancient age has always been my favorite historical era and also the era that's the most fun in civ :goodjob:

Now about the heroes, I like the idea but not the notion of them being super units with double strength. I didn't play your civ3 mod so I don't know how it worked out there. My suggestion would be to make the hero very weak instead (basically 0 strength) but give him/her the ability to add certain promotion(s) to units in the same stack (and maybe somewhat weaker promotions to units in adjacent squares). I know nothing about modding but I figure this would be possible since it's already in the game in the form of the Medic promotions. For example, Attila would give a stack increased movement or superior flanking and Alexander could get a bonus against elephants (or mounted units). It should be relatively small bonuses so as not to throw off the balance of the game. It's not a new concept by any means of course, I remember Warlords having something like this and I always thought it was a great concept. Anyway, just a suggestion, keep up the good work :king:

davbenbak

Dec 05, 2005, 03:45 PM

Didn't see this as part of the V.07 update but when I played V.06 as Rome I started with no known techs. Was this your intent?

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 05, 2005, 05:39 PM

Indibil sounds good no? More iberian name than Mardonio.

I'm agree with you in the slingers, cavalry and infantery Iberian were good, but the mod must to be with diversity and different units and strategy's.

Soon, i put you the second part of iberian units and information about Balearic Slingers.

wolfman1234

Dec 05, 2005, 05:58 PM

Would be great if with v1.0 the mod could be played in mp, each of us here in the threat playing a civ. :D

thamis

Dec 05, 2005, 06:49 PM

It can already be played in MP. Simply all load the mod, click on "back" until you get to the main screen, select MP, and load the scenario.

Karhgath

Dec 05, 2005, 10:05 PM

The blacksmith buildings idea is cool, but I think having the resource should give a *significant* advantage.

I'm working on more generic units and putting the emphasis on promotions, they'll play a much bigger role now. So yeah, we need to make Iron give a significant XP advantage, I was just giving an example of the application, it will probably be a much higher XP bonus.

I dunno if I'm trying too hard to make it different tho, but it usually turned out good in TAM when I tried, so...

Units are going to be divided in new types/classes:
Light (Archer, Javelineer)
Medium (Swordsman, Axeman)
Heavy (Spearman, Pikeman)
Light Mounted (Chariot, Horse Archer)
Heavy Mounted (Cavalry, Knight)
Siege (Catapult, Balista)
Naval (Galley, Trireme)

I need promotions/tactics ideas in 6 categories, it can include warfare tactics (Shock, Flank), formations/stance (Turtle) and such:
Offense
Defense
Support
Mobility
Artillery
Naval

Overall I'd like 6 proms in each category, split in 3 tiers that gives generic modifiers(Offense 1, Offense 2, Offense 3). Most units will have access to 2 categories, so that means about 18 possible promotions (category + tiers) plus some generic/special ones. For example, maybe Archer will have Support/Defense and Javelineer Support/Mobility.

I'll post what I have soon, this was just a preview, I just need to compile everything and I badly need some free time =)

Sword Dancer

Dec 06, 2005, 01:24 AM

@ Karhgath:
Is there any way to bring back the old Civ III concept of 'Enslave'? I can see foot and horse units becoming Workers, while naval and siege units would be captured, where the unit is merely transferred to the capturing civ's forces intact. Yes, this could result in one civ gaining a UU of another or a ship that is currently beyond the tech level of the capturing civ, but without the ability to replace that ship, should it be sunk.

Perhaps for this ability to work, the civ must have slavery enables as a civic?

Just a random, sleep-deprived musing...

onedreamer

Dec 06, 2005, 09:50 AM

I think Theodericus (that's the usual Latin spelling, IIUC) deserves to be LH, not a mere hero. Possible replacements as hero include Alaricus, Teias - the last Ostrogoth king, supposedly a truly exceptional warrior -, and Ermannaricus.

I agree with you, although the spelling in latin is Teodoricus.

@Thamis

What about Androkles as heroe for Lydia ? He isn't lydian, but still...
Or else King Ati or King Tyrsenoi.

For Phoenicia, it's hard to find a hero that is not Hiram or Dido.
I would use Dido as hero for Phoenicia and Hannibal as leader fo Carthage.

I wouldn't use Sargon II as a hero for Babylon as he wasn't exactly Babylonian. There are many Babylonian kings you can choose as heroes... or eventually Gilgamesh.

In the end I wanted to point out that you probably missed something in the to-do list:

- add a list of ancient only Great People

thamis

Dec 06, 2005, 01:26 PM

Ubik Liryc

Dec 06, 2005, 06:34 PM

Great map ! I just finish my first Noble game on it !

But there are no "modern ressources" (oil, coal, uranium, aluminium). Is it on purpose ?

Node

Dec 06, 2005, 07:37 PM

TAM was the best modification/scenerio in Civ3 by far. I hope you live up to the same amount of polish and completeness that it had.

thamis

Dec 06, 2005, 08:24 PM

@Ubik: Yes, because the final game won't include the modern age.

@Node: Thanks. I'm doing my best.

Karhgath

Dec 06, 2005, 08:57 PM

@ Sword Dancer

Obviously, with the SDK, creating new ability like capture/enslave will be possible. Now, would that be a good and fun mechanism? Probably for ships, I dunno for the rest.

It could be a promotion or unit ability. You could upgrade the % of chance of enslave maybe?

I'm pretty sure I'll be able to create lots of new mechanism with the SDK, or so I hope. Having modded other games and done total conversion with SDKs (Half-Life 1, Quake, etc) it's usually pretty powerful, but MUCH more complex and requires tons of planning and such. We'll see when they release it.

sapon

Dec 07, 2005, 01:16 AM

@onedreamer:

There is Sargon of Assyria, and Sargon II of Babylonia. Of course we could use someone else though.

Thamis: Reading the history of the ancient Tigris Eurphrates valley, it seems that Assyria was much more influential on the world stage than Babylonia. Have you considered replacing Babylon with Assyria?

thamis

Dec 07, 2005, 07:33 AM

I used to have both in TAM-C3. The problem is that Assyria is very close to the Hittites, while Babylon is in a perfect spot gameplay wise. I will add the Assyrians later though.

davbenbak

Dec 07, 2005, 10:12 AM

I turned the tech research rate down to 150 and it's pretty close. I'll probably go with 125 when I dl the next version. When did you plan on adding some more ancient techs and all ancient eras? Unitl then you might concider adjusting the tech rates so we don't get to the industrial age quite so quickly, especially since there are no modern resources. Not meaning to complain, just a suggestion. I know this is still a work in progress.

Fireb

Dec 07, 2005, 10:46 AM

Looks very interesting Thamis. I'll bookmark this page :)

I'm currently making a Roman mod. It might make sense to collaborate on some of the Roman/Etrurian graphics, leaderheads, decals, units, etc. If you are interested?

A quick note on leaders:
Pontus/Bithynia had several famous (for wars against the Romans) kings called Mithridates. Perhaps a different king of Colchis would be better?

In terms of TAM, Julius ceasar is almost 'modern'. TAM was almost entirely Roman (except for Parthia) by the time of his ascendancy. Perhaps a more appropriate leader would be Caius Marius or Cnaeus Pompeius Magnus? As for the heroes: Marcus Claudius Marcellus - who has often been likened to a Roman Achilles, winning the spolia opima (killing an enemy king single handed in battle). Scipio Africanus was just an extraordinary general.

Sword Dancer

Dec 07, 2005, 12:33 PM

Even Gnaeus Pompeius (Magnus) was only a generation earlier than Gaius Julius Caesar (55-44 BCE). Lucius Cornelius Sulla bridged the time between Gaius Marius' generation and Gnaeus Pompeius', but all of these men were part of an evolutionary (revolutionary) process that saw the Roman armies reorganized from a volunteer force comprised of the nobility, to a standing army of professional soldiers from the head count (or unpropertied classes) who owed loyalty to their generals, who ensured that they got a share of campaign spoils.

All of these leaders are Late Republic in era, and Rome had expanded a great deal by the time these men had appeared on the scene. An earlier suggestion is Cincinnatus.

thamis

Dec 07, 2005, 04:44 PM

@davbenbak: It's a good idea to slow down the tech rate. Can you just send me the necessary XML files and I'll include it? It would be cool if you could slow it down so that we don't get into the industrial age in TAM for now. The new techs will be the next thing I'm going to work on.

@Fireb & SD:
Thanks for the suggestions regarding leaders. I'm going to stick to Mithradates, because he's just the most famous one. For the Romans I think your suggestions are good. I'll research a bit more into Republican Rome.

And yes, we should collaborate on graphics and so on. There won't be any new units until January (when the SDK comes out), only new skins. I'm going to make flag decals and promotion icons for now.

thamis

Dec 07, 2005, 04:52 PM

I haven't updated for a while. Just to let you know on the progress:

I'm very busy writing an essay on nuclear weapons strategy of the Eisenhower administration (a more interesting topic than one might think, which made me think that I should do a Cold War scenario... ;)), so that's my priority now.

BUT: I have been to the King's College Library today (great source for history stuff) and dug up some ancient atlas books from 1901 or so and got some more inspirations for civs and cities, which will flow into TAM one day or another. Also, I've been looking into potential flag decals and found some good stuff.

onedreamer

Dec 07, 2005, 05:42 PM

@onedreamer:

I'm going to stick with the German "Alarich" and "Theoderich", they were Germanic people after all.

There is Sargon of Assyria, and Sargon II of Babylonia. Of course we could use someone else though.

I'm going to find some Phoenician hero who is not Hiram or Dido. ;-)

I fully agree with the germans :)
Do your heroes have to have gained their fame on the battlefield ? You could use Dido's husband, but he was "only" the richest guy in Phoenicia. There is also the god Malqart, who placed the famous columns of Gibraltar and is probably the origin of the legend of Herakles. But he's a God... or a demi-god.

Scipio Africanus was just an extraordinary general.

He wasn't "just" a general, he was also a skilled politician.
If Thamis wants to use early roman figures as leader, then why not Romulus ? ;)
I don't really agree with the thought that J.Caesar came too late in terms of TAM, if we consider the original TAM for Civ3, he wasn't late at all. But I do agree with the choice of Marcellus as hero, very good pick IMO :)

thamis

Dec 07, 2005, 05:54 PM

What's Dido's husband's name?

Sword Dancer

Dec 07, 2005, 06:02 PM

Hopefully not Eminem! ;)

Rhianni

Dec 07, 2005, 09:09 PM

Been playing quite a bit of this. I like it so far. Please forgive these comments if they have already been addressed in the 8 previous pages. I havent read through all of them.

1: Is the goal of this mod primarily historical, play balanced, or a mixture of both? Every game so far as the French/Gallic winning easily. They dont have anyone near them to slow them down. The germans have been taken over by them 4 out of 4 times. I think this is due to their lack of rare resources and too many forests stifling their city growth. The germans always have small towns vs the 11 and 12 size for France. On the other hand the Romans and the Eturians are so close together they bump heads quickly.

2: Is there a new map coming? I dont see enough room for the britons to play on. If so then disregard 3 and 4 :)

3: No elephants? Carthage would need them.

4: Gold for Egypt. Not only realistic in how wealthy they were but I had a hard time playing them without any luxary items nearby.

Yestin

Dec 07, 2005, 09:45 PM

Having both Etruscan and Roman civilizations seems strange. I don't know if this is possible, but how about making Rome a barbarian town that starts the game in play. Could it be scripted that if the Etruscan civilization conquers Rome and builds a Palace there to change their capital, the Etruscan civilization changes into the Roman civilization? There could be the message "After years of warfare and intrigue, Rome rebels against Etruria and turns the Etruscan city states against each other. Although the Etruscan legacy continues in the form of the Roman culture, Rome becomes the ascendant Latin nation.". This would give the player the Roman UUs, but wouldn't change the leader traits or anything.

thamis

Dec 08, 2005, 03:08 AM

@Rhianni:

I agree on the Etruscans headbumping problem. I am still thinking on what to do about it. Also, I think Gaul will get more forests.

New map is coming by Kargath, there will be Britons, Persia, Media, and Nubia in there.

No Elephants? Gotta fix that. I can also put the gold for Egypt.

@Yestin:

Well the Romans defeated the Etruscans, not the other way around. Your idea is intriguing, still... I might remove the Etruscans.

onedreamer

Dec 08, 2005, 04:01 AM

actually romans and etruscans DID co-exist for a period of time (during the roman monarchy and a few years after).

Dido (the legend):
her original name is Elissa, or Elisha. She was daughter to Belo II (or Belus), also known as Muto, king of Phoenicia. When he died, Elissa and her brother Pygmalion II raised to the throne, but Pygmalion didn't like to share murdered her husband Sychaeus, the richest guy in Phoenicia and Priest of Malqart, and managed to keep his involvment secret. One night Sychaeus appears in a dream and tells everything to Elissa. I don't know well the rest of the story, but in short Elissa fears for her life too and runs away changing her name. She will then found Carthage.

Fireb

Dec 08, 2005, 06:55 AM

Karhgath

Dec 08, 2005, 06:57 AM

Actually, no Nubia. I've done the map so that the sahara is, mostly, cut out of the map. I didn't want a big map, so I had to cut somewhere. Here's the height map:

woodelf

Dec 08, 2005, 07:06 AM

The Last Conformist

Dec 08, 2005, 08:06 AM

Breunor

Dec 08, 2005, 04:27 PM

What's Dido's husband's name?

Thamis,

Unfortunately, the answer iis 'it depends on whom you believe'.

In the Aeneid, the best known stroy now, her husband was Sychaeus. Dido is usually associated with Elissa (Greek sources) -- Justin calls her husband Sicharbus I think.

Timaeus (the 'offocial' historian who gives 814 BC as the founding date of Carthage) had her married to one of the founding kings, not sure his name, I think it was Zorus.

Her brother is usually King Pygmalian.

Best wishes,

Breunor

Breunor

Dec 08, 2005, 04:44 PM

Regarding Romans & Etruscans...

They (mostly) coexisted for a while, during the first 200 or so years of Roman history.

From about 616 to 509 BC Rome was subject to Etruria, and had Etruscan kings.

'Etruria' was not a single nation-state. It was more of a collaboration of associated tribes, with a common culture and language, against common enemies.

Rome often allied with some Etruscan tribes (Caere), even though it was hostile to most Etruscan tribes.

Etruria as an independent quasi-nation was pretty much destroyed when the Gauls (under Brennus) attacked in force from the north, and Rome attacked from the south.

Whether Etruria as a playable nation should be removed...should be a question of gameplay :)

And as to choosing Romulus as an early Roman leader: He was, after all, the son of Mars, and a God in his own right, which more or less disqualifies him.

Right now I'm looking into re-skinning early Roman hoplites, and various other italic units. I'll post here once I've got something worth showing :)

Good work FireB!

Most historians view that Etruscan power was broken at a naval battle (usually called the Battle of Cumae) in 474 BC. 509 is absolutely correctly the 'official' date the Romans overthrew the Etruscans, although most modern historians think that Etruscan influence continued longer. Once they lost the battle to Cumae and Acragas, they no longer controlled the seas and they were no longer a world power.

Best wishes,

Breunor

onedreamer

Dec 09, 2005, 04:35 AM

And as to choosing Romulus as an early Roman leader: He was, after all, the son of Mars, and a God in his own right, which more or less disqualifies him.

Romulus son of Mars ? :eek:

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:05 AM

Re: Etruria:

Well, I guess I'll remove Etruria and use that CIV slot for something else, such as the Goths (to be featured on Kargath's excellent map).

Re: Dido

Sychaeus and Sicharbus etymologically suggest that they're the same person, just different ways of writing (Sychaeus is a Romanized Greek form, while Sicharbus is a Latin form). I'll go with Sychaeus.

Sorry for not updating much recently, lots to do. :(

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:07 AM

Re Dido (2)

Cool story, onedreamer. Where did you read it?

davbenbak

Dec 09, 2005, 07:12 AM

Thamis,

Instead of attaching the file, I'll just tell you (and anyone else who wants to adjust the tech rate) how to do it. Just go to the Assets\XML folder of the mod and open the 'GameInfo' file. You don't have to scroll down far and you will see <ResearchPercent>100</iResearchPercent> amongst the other similar lines. Raising the number slows the tech rate. Lowering it speeds things up. At a setting of 150 I was just discovering Knights, Macemen and Caravels in the last 20 turns or so. It did make very slow going at first because I didn't start with ANY free techs! I'm not sure if that was intentional or if any of the competing civ's were in the same boat.

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:15 AM

Thanks.

I now know why Rome didn't start with any techs. There was an error in the XML which I have fixed for the next update.

Breunor

Dec 09, 2005, 09:19 AM

Re Dido (2)

Cool story, onedreamer. Where did you read it?

This is the story reported in Justin, who wrote it about 200 years later than his source Trogus. You can find it in mythology compilations.

Its a little more detailed. Pygmalion wanted her brother in law's money. Elissa has it put into bags and thrown into the sea to avoid its capture. When found though they are filled with dust.

There is a lot of mythological mumbo-jumbo there, which is very controversial. If you are a Golden Bough fan, you can see some of the theories. For Robert Graves fans, you have Elissa as the goddess representative, Pygmalion as the tanist who kills the sacred king Sicarbus, but then puts in a patriarchy as usual with the early pre background mythology.

There are more stories here too!

Breunor

Breunor

Dec 09, 2005, 09:35 AM

Romulus son of Mars ? :eek:

Almost all of our knowledge of ancient Rome is semi-mythological. Indeed, the 'official' year for the founding of Rome (753 BC) is probably too early.

The sources for the Romulus stories are Livy and Plutarch, writing hundreds of years later. Most of the sotries associated with them are clearly mythological, setting up importnat backgrounds. He and his twin Remus come from Alba Longa. The eventually found a city but abduct the Sabine women to take as wives. This story is made to explain why Rome had long wars with the Samnites and the hill people of central Rome for centuries.

Being the son of Mars also sets up their military strength. According to legend Romulus established the first legion of 3000 men (highly unlikely). So, his father was a god (and his mother a vestal vergin).

For a more historic leader of early rime, you can try Camillus, who was given credit byt he romans for drving the Gauls off after the sack (also unlikely) but also for rebuilding them. I've always found it odd that Rome reestablished intself as the principle power in central Italy by about 340 -- 330 BCE. Obviously, this was a critical period. Livy reports Camillus' influence.

Of course, after that are the Samnite Wars, and then the Punic Wars. And then ....

Another reasonable choice is Marcus Junius Brutus, who was given credit for overthrowing the kindship and establishing the Roman Republic in 509 BC.

However, for a game, and a popular one, sticking with Romulus is OK with me!

Breunor

Breunor

Dec 09, 2005, 10:15 AM

Re: Religion:

Judaism and Christinity could be a problem. But, to be honest. I don't care. Whoever takes his or her religion THAT seriously has lost all credibility in my eyes, and should go back to his religious mind and contemplate the deeper meaning of the word "game."

I am open to suggestions, as long as nobody flames me though.

It may be hard to get the CIV IV religion concept into an ancient game.

Religion in ancient times is complex stuff. Religion rarely cauused the kind of divide it did and does in later times. As polytheists, most of the world viewed other religions as largely converted versions of their own. So, the famous quote that the Gauls worship Mercury shows how people thought -- the Romans knew the Gauls had their own pantheon, but the characteristics of their dieties were different to some degree. So the Romans and Greeks (whom I know best) matched them, viewing them as worshippping in differnt incarnations.

Having said that, there were tremendous differences in the actual practices and in major differences. Zoroatrianism can't be reconcilied with, for instance, a Greco-Roman religious system. Greece and Rome had different views of religion in daily practice. The Egyptians were more religious in terms of how much energy was placed on religious observance (Herodotus claims they are the most religious people in the world).

The religious class was very powerful in Egypt. In Rome, the Pontifex Maximus was viewed as effectively a secular power given his ability to 'interpret' religion, which Fabius Maximus used essentially to remain as general throught the second Punic War. Greece never had a powerful religious class, although the key oracles, especially Delphi, were important.

In Mesopotamia, the religious class was powerful but also served useful social functions as scribes and the like. Zoroastrainism was differnt, whcih did lead to more follwoing, organization, and cultural development.

Anyway, I don't have a lot of guidance to give you. My view would be that religion doesn't have quite the cultural power that it has for the religions in the main game like Christianity and Hinduism, but much of the literature comes from religion. (Greek drama from Athens were from plays given in honor rot he god Dionysus). They also didn't cause the political divides with other Civ's that they do now. Nonetheless, religious CIVICS were clearly improtant, and how the religion tied to the government wsa crucial -- there was no Egypt or Babylon without their religious functions.

Anyway, just my opinion.

Breunor

Breunor

Dec 09, 2005, 10:25 AM

Re: Sargon, there where three Mesopotamian personages of that name: Sargon of Akkad, famous as the founder of the world's first empire, an early Assyrian king of whom little is known beyond the name, and Sargon II, founder of Assyria's last and most famous dynasty, the "Sargonids", and king both of Assyria and Babylonia. None of them would make too much sense as a Babylonian hero, methinks.

A more worthy candidate might be Nabopolassar, the king who together with the Medes destroyed Assyria, and who founded the Neobabylonian empire.

Sorry Last,

I wouldn't use them. The 'Neo-Babylonians' were the Chaldaens. The ancient Babylonians represented for msot of the game, like Hammarabi, were the original Amorites. It was really a different civilization in a lot of ways.

Breunor

onedreamer

Dec 09, 2005, 01:08 PM

Rhianni

Dec 09, 2005, 01:17 PM

Actually, no Nubia. I've done the map so that the sahara is, mostly, cut out of the map. I didn't want a big map, so I had to cut somewhere. Here's the height map:

If I may offer a suggestion. I noticed the Caspian goes north off the edge of the map. What about having 1 or 2 land strips to allow marching back and forth? While unrealistic it would open up the chance of units marching around it from the north. As it is now the northeast corner is well protected by mountains to the south. None of the civs back then had huge caspian sea navies that I am aware of to move their armies westward.

Breunor

Dec 09, 2005, 04:25 PM

Romulus was son of Mars in the roman legends/tales only to justify the fact that the romans called themselves the favourite of Mars... but in the mythology he wasn't connected with Mars AFAIK. Anyways I wouldn't choose Romulus as leader, Camillus is rather a hero than a leader and I think that Julius Casar is a fair choice because he is the "bridge" between republican and imperial Rome. TAM lasts way beyond the birth and death of Rome's Republic, so I don't agree with the fact that the choice of a leader should be bound to the early Republic only.

Yes,

I thought you were talking about a hero, that's why I said Camillus. I wouldn't use him for the 'Big' leader since he is too obscure. (if I were picking the best leader and not the most famous I would change a lot of them). For overall leader Romulus and Numa are good legendary guys. But I would stick with Caesar or Augustus.

Breunor

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:00 PM

Here is the First draft of the TAM tech tree (http://www.jan.vandercrabben.name/tam/civ4/tam-tech-tree-1.jpg). I need comments.

Ankenaton

Dec 09, 2005, 07:45 PM

@onedreamer:

I'm going to stick with the German "Alarich" and "Theoderich", they were Germanic people after all.

There is Sargon of Assyria, and Sargon II of Babylonia. Of course we could use someone else though.

I'm going to find some Phoenician hero who is not Hiram or Dido. ;-)
What about a guy by the name of Hasdrupal (Barca). Not Hannibal's close kin, rather a Phoenician who led Khemet's (Egypt's) foreign legion (e.g. Medjay= made up of Nubians, Libyan, Phonecians, Greeks from the Decapolis, Arabs and Judeans) against the Persians. He does not get one percent of the press that other ancient generals get, but other than for the Pharoah's cowardice (unlike his father he had never witnessed battle up close and personal) at Pelisium the Egyptians probably would have won this battle and repulsed the Persians.

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:49 PM

I'll post the next version in a few minutes.

I need some volunteers, as I don't think I'll get a lot done until the 16th. Too much work right now.

So, how about we divide this up into smaller units that can work independently. We'll discuss everything here, but I give authority to each of these work units to whoever signs up for them. They would be:

Civ Colours
The current colours are sometimes pretty awful, especially to combinations on the flag decals. Here are my suggestions, let's discuss them. The XML files to be edited for this task are
XML\Civilizations\CIV4CivilizationInfos.xml
XML\Interface\CIV4ColorVals.xml
XML\Interface\CIV4PlayerColorInfos.xml

(Civilization: Background/Decal)
Carthage: Dark Brown/Yellow
Babylon: Dark Cyan/White
Lydia: Light Cyan/White
Phoenicia: Dark Orange/Black
Egypt: (default Egypt)
Scythia: Light Green/Grey
Gaul: Dark Green/Gold
Germanic Tribes: Light Grey/Dark Blue
Mycenae: (default Greece)
Hittites: Dark Purple/White
Britons: Light Red/Light Orange
Media: (default Persia)
Kolchis: Dark Grey/Gold
Etruria: -- will be deleted anyway
Persia: Dark Blue ("Lapislazuli")/Gold
Rome: (Dark Red/Gold)
Getae: Light Brown/Light Green
Iberia: Light Orange/Dark Red

Hmm... this is just from the top of my mind without any historical considerations (well, some, for Persia or Rome for example).

Flag Decals

The following files need to be modified:
Art\Interface\TeamColor\*.dds
XML\Art\CIV4ArtDefines_Civilization.xml

There is a DDS converter in the utilities programs forum here on CFC.

We need flag decals for:
- Iberia (vulture)
- Getae (wolf)
- Germanic Tribes (bear paw?)
- Goths (elk head)
- Kolchis (no clue, a golden fleece?!?)
- Britons (how about a simplified green man (http://www.freewebs.com/leighsherbal/green%20man%20brown%20image.jpg)?)
- Scythians (horse (http://www.looseeart.com/images/Horse_Head_Relief_Nov_2002.jpg)?)
- Lydia (how about three coins?)

Tech Tree
Well, someone to work out the tech tree, maybe from the one that I have suggested. I think this needs a lot of discussion and mainly testing...

Map
The resource placement needs to be edited a bit. Elephants for Carthage, for example. Maybe a gold resource for Egypt and Lydia? More forests in Gaul and Spain. I will email the original map file (either individual bmp's or one psd) to whoever sings up.

For XML editing, I suggest downloading XML Spy Professional or Enterprise edition (free trial available on the website).

Ankenaton

Dec 09, 2005, 07:50 PM

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 07:51 PM

Updated to next version 0.8.

Ankenaton

Dec 09, 2005, 07:54 PM

Actually, no Nubia. I've done the map so that the sahara is, mostly, cut out of the map. I didn't want a big map, so I had to cut somewhere. Here's the height map:
Hopefully you will be able to include Nubia soon, as they were more involved in the TAM environment then lets say the Britons or some other northern states.

thamis

Dec 09, 2005, 08:09 PM

As a consumate Leftist I must say that I have the utmost respect and admiration for the policies of both Eisenhower and believe or not Nixon. Both of them helped in keeping the nuclear genie well bottled. I would love a cold war scenario!

Their policies behind the public's back were less peaceful than you might think... Eisenhower was seriously convinced that the "evil commies" were to attack the US by 1961 or 1963 ("at the very latest"). He really planned to nuke all of Russia in that case (killing at least 35 million people within an instant)... Throughout the 50s, strategic thinking was still very old-school (Clausewitzian) in believing that there was no victory but destruction of the enemy's possibility to resist, and thus no war but toal war.

In addition, Curtis LeMay, commander of the Strategic Air Command (the guys who got the bomb) had his "private war plan", which meant that he always had bombers in the air near Russia, ready to deliver a hundred megatons or so.

Dr. Strangelove wasn't really that far-fetched...

Ankenaton

Dec 09, 2005, 09:23 PM

I hear you...Curtis LeMay was a real creep class A nut job. I guess what I was trying to get across was that their public policies were much less openly hawkish than some other presidents. However when it all comes down to it, they were and all are ready to let the megatonage fly! I believe that most if not all of the ruling classes throughout history are Malthusians at heart. Whats a few less hundred million or so anyway...as that particular mindset goes. I really enjoy reading your essays...your dissertation was top notch. Ciao for now.

EdCase

Dec 09, 2005, 11:11 PM

The Green Man
106993

Why simplify? ;)
(Image is greener in game , contrast altered for forum clarity)

Flags do not have to be two color. As far as mods go I would say better they are not in fact..after all it is a mod

Sword Dancer

Dec 10, 2005, 12:10 AM

Here is the First draft of the TAM tech tree (http://www.jan.vandercrabben.name/tam/civ4/tam-tech-tree-1.jpg). I need comments.

Can I possibly suggest either spinning each religion off into its own 'tech, with the first civ researching it being the founder, or assigning the religions from the game start?

If this is to be a 're-creation' of what could have logically been, then we would see a few distinct traditions: Zoroastrianism (Babylon, etc.), Greco-Roman pantheon (Greece, Rome), Animism (Germanics), Druidism (Gauls, Britons, Iberians), the Egyptian pantheon (Egypt, Nubia), the Phoenecian pantheon (Phonecia, Carthage) and Judaism (Israel). There is nothing that says that these faiths, if they exist from game start, have to belong to only one nation or have a 'holy' city. Christianity should still be researched, and would have a founding city as per normal rules though.

Just a few cents' worth...

onedreamer

Dec 10, 2005, 04:50 AM

Here is the First draft of the TAM tech tree (http://www.jan.vandercrabben.name/tam/civ4/tam-tech-tree-1.jpg). I need comments.

- I would invert Map Making with Sailing, not really for realism but for gameplay purpouse. E.g. your civ doesn't have access to sea hence it doesn't need Sailing but will still need Map Making. Of course invert the prereq. for Seafaring.
- I would add in the first line Fishing to work in the same way of the epic game and make it prereq. for Sailing.
- I would make Pottery lead to Mysticism rather than Agriculture, and maybe to compensate Agriculture to lead to Cuneiform.
- Chariots should need Animal Husbandry, but I guess this is implicit if Chariots will need horses.
- I would change name from Alphabet to Writing.
- Lastly I think Architecture sorta needs Mathematics, unless you want those 2 main branches to stay indipendent from each other for gameplay reasons.
- I will stay away from the religion discussion, though for gameplay balance, the first religion seems to come in a bit too early.

The Last Conformist

Dec 10, 2005, 05:08 AM

Sorry Last,

I wouldn't use them. The 'Neo-Babylonians' were the Chaldaens. The ancient Babylonians represented for msot of the game, like Hammarabi, were the original Amorites. It was really a different civilization in a lot of ways.
The kings were of Chaldaean descent, but they achieved power by convincing the traditional (Akkadian-speaking or at least Akkadian-writing) élites of the Babylonian cities to chose them over the Assyrians, used Akkadian for official inscriptions, and called their kingdom "Sumer and Akkad". I think there's about as much continuity one can ask for over the relevant times.

Oh, and Nabopolassar certainly was more of a Babylonian than Sargon II was!

Now, if Thamis prefers, I can certainly dig up hero-names from the Amorite and Kassite periods too.

The Last Conformist

Dec 10, 2005, 05:14 AM

- I would change name from Alphabet to Writing.
I wouldn't - having Cuneiform as a prereq for Writing would give me a migraine.

You might want to change Cuneiform to Writing tho - more generic. Or call it Logograms; fits with leading to Alphabet, and still more generic than Cuneiform.

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 10, 2005, 05:58 AM

Well I comment you a bit of things of the mod.

I'm playing with Iberian Tribes and in the first contact with the gauls appears this message : AI_CONTACT_FIRST_DIPLO_LEADER_GAUL.

PD: I'll edit if y found another strange thing.

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 07:29 AM

Oh, you read my old essays? *blush* Whoops.

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 07:43 AM

@EdCase: Awesome! Can you send me the dds, or can you just put it into the XML and do some other flags, too?

@Sword Dancer: Actually it might be a good idea to assign religions to their respective civilizations. But then, gameplay-wise, there's less of the race for religions... Hmm...

@Onedreamer: The original fishing is a good idea. I prefer to have map making after Sailing, though. My philosophy in the design of the tech tree is that in order to get good stuff, you sometimes have to go down a route that you don't really need. I did the same for TAM-CIV3.

Architecture with Mathematics is good. I think Agriculture as requrrement for Mysticism is better than Pottery. You need to have time to sit down and think to mysticize around. ;)

You're right. Aesir shouldn't come with the first tech. I guess Thing Law would be better here.

TLC: To be honest, I don't really mind who is picked as hero. The most important thing is that he is a known character in history.

Logograms is good.

@Spirit_Viriato

Interesting. I had hoped that this doesn't happen. Please check if that's also the case in the new version. The DiplomacyInfos.XML is very very complicated... :(

Spirit_Viriato

Dec 10, 2005, 08:13 AM

Yeah, in other versions all were good. In this version (0.8) not only are with Gauls, in 3 or 4 four civilizations past the same ( I remember one Kolchi).

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 08:17 AM

Ok, I found the bug. That's gonna be a pain in the a** to fix... :(

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 09:19 AM

Posted v0.9 which should fix the DiplomacyText issue.

EdCase

Dec 10, 2005, 10:04 AM

@ Thamis ...I will e-mail it to you and will continue to work on others as time permits (crazy workload in RL atm:sad: )

Rhianni

Dec 10, 2005, 10:20 AM

Here is the First draft of the TAM tech tree (http://www.jan.vandercrabben.name/tam/civ4/tam-tech-tree-1.jpg). I need comments.

Why does the religions come after agriculture? The Aman Re Cult I can see, its egyptian which was pretty agriculture nile based. But the others werent.

Aman Re Cult and Zeus Cult? Maybe its just me but the word cult throws an image of weaker religious status. Why not Olympian parthenon and Nile Parthenon. Geographical location is a little unrealistic but I dont see the difference if the gauls can found the worship of zeus.

Thing Law? Is this a placeholder for something?

I'd move the anu cult to ceremonial burial if for no other reason then to help prevent 1 state from founding 2 religions in a row and hogging them. I really hate when the computer does that.

The more techs the better and especially since we wont have a lot of the later ones I would like this expanded on more.
Alchemy -> Concrete.
Architecture -> Bridge Building -> Superior Roads (+1 road movement since we wont get the regular tech that does it should be unbalancing)

I'd remove the Ceremonial prereq from Music. Doesnt seem logical.

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 12:12 PM

@Ed: Thanks, got the file.

@Rhianni:Yea, I've been thinking about how to name the religions a lot. Olympian Pantheon is just so long... :(

If I move Anu to Ceremonial Burial, then they can immediately found Zeus with Priesthood. How about Anu with Masonry (requires the construction of Ziggurats)?

Concrete? They didn't have concrete back then, did they?

The Superior Roads are a good idea. I'll call the tech Construction though.

I put the Ceremonial Burial tech because Music was first performed in religious ceremonies, just like dance. Music, singing, and dance were all part of magic in the early stages of human civilization.

Karhgath

Dec 10, 2005, 02:22 PM

Ok, I've modified the tech tree Thamis posted, based on a tech tree I did a while ago.

I've added a bit more techs, especially warfare techs, it was a bit lacking. I also played around with prereqs and such after some research on the net, but some still feels wrong. It's a lot more xomplex to build a tree now with the optional and required techs.

Modified Tech Tree (http://www.3s-studios.com/Karhgath/tam_techtree_karhgath.gif)

Do you have Visio Thamis?

Sword Dancer

Dec 10, 2005, 04:30 PM

@Sword Dancer: Actually it might be a good idea to assign religions to their respective civilizations. But then, gameplay-wise, there's less of the race for religions... Hmm...

Yes it does lessen the impact of religion, but keep in mind that teh majority of religious-based wars occurred after the collapse of the Roman Empire.

Further, it does make Christianity a BIG goal, since it will have a Holy City attached to it, unlike the other religions.

Conversely, if you want to assign holy cities to the pre-assigned (organized) religions, then you should be prepared to grant balance factor bonuses to the other civs practicing those religions -- they will not be able to build the associated religious wonders.

Karhgath

Dec 10, 2005, 05:37 PM

Yes it does lessen the impact of religion, but keep in mind that teh majority of religious-based wars occurred after the collapse of the Roman Empire.

Further, it does make Christianity a BIG goal, since it will have a Holy City attached to it, unlike the other religions.

But, if you have christianity in the game as a religion, wouldn't that be too late to even be useful? At that time, the end of the game is close, so you don't have much time, and desir, to build missionary and such to spread christianity...

Unless you make that a victory condition and make it come a bit early. Thinking about it, near the end of the game, every civs will be connected with roads and have tons of trade routes, so a religion should spread really really fast.

Maybe make the other 'religions' a Civic choice instead and have only Christianity as a true religion? Convert X% of the world to Christianity would be a new victory condition, instead of a diplomatic victory.

haplo888

Dec 10, 2005, 05:38 PM

I bought Civ4 only.. to play TAM. Keep it up Thamis.

Haplo

Karhgath

Dec 10, 2005, 06:59 PM

I cleared up and divided the techs in 4 ages. I made tons of small and large changes, removed some tech because some paths were way too long, or the techs were redundant, etc.

It's also color coded, so that it's prettier. Thamis, let me know what you think, it changed a lot since yours so I dunno if you like it or if I've bastardized your ideas for the tech tree =)

Here's the color coded tech tree (http://www.3s-studios.com/Karhgath/tam_techtree_karhgath_color.gif)

If you like your tree better, I'll just post criticism on yours instead of making up another tree =)

thamis

Dec 10, 2005, 08:40 PM

@haplo:
Wow... that's quite a compliment actually.

@Karhgath:
I really like your tech tree. Just a few changes that I would suggest:
- Stirrups came to Europe after 500 AD. It was a (conscious) historical mistake in TAM, and I want something different now. How about we put in something like "Chain Mail"? Not sure when it was invented, but it could be some other mail too. Or simply call it "Heavy Armour". Tactics would then have no requirement. Chivalry would require Heavy Armour.
- Compass: Not sure that was invented by then. Columbus didn't have a compass, he used this triangular thing that I forgot the name of. How about we rename it "Geometry"? With map making you can trade maps, geometry centers the world map.
- Crop rotation: A medieval invention I think. Gotta look that up.
- Architecture: Where did that disappear? I think it should go like this:
Masonry -> Construction -> Architecture
__________ Construction -> Bridge Building -> Road Building
Architecture would allow the construction of one or two nice wonders.
- Ballistics: Should require Geometry then.
- Literature: Requires Alphabet anyway, doesn't need the extra requirement.

If you agree on this, can you modify these changes in? Oh, and it should be Code of Laws (plural) I think.

I don't have Visio.

@RELIGIONS:
I suggest the following: Religions are founded automatically (via Python) whenever they were historically founded (ie. specific date) in the capitals of all the civs that eventually adopted the religions. They don't have holy cities. Their shrines can be built, but they are normal wonders.
Christianity must be researched and will produce a holy city. Christianity should be a cheap tech. I'm in favour of adding the spreading of Christianity to 50% of the cities of the world as victory condition.

Karhgath

Dec 10, 2005, 09:08 PM

@Karhgath:
I really like your tech tree. Just a few changes that I would suggest:
- Stirrups came to Europe after 500 AD. It was a (conscious) historical mistake in TAM, and I want something different now. How about we put in something like "Chain Mail"? Not sure when it was invented, but it could be some other mail too. Or simply call it "Heavy Armour". Tactics would then have no requirement. Chivalry would require Heavy Armour.

Yeah, that's a good idea. Chain mail were used by some iberian tribes and gallic tribes too, it was incorporated into the roman army around Hadrian IIRC.

For stirrups, it really depends if we have Huns as playable or not. Huns did have something similar to stirrups, although it never spread before later on.

- Compass: Not sure that was invented by then. Columbus didn't have a compass, he used this triangular thing that I forgot the name of. How about we rename it "Geometry"? With map making you can trade maps, geometry centers the world map.

Yeah, I just took compass from the vanilla game, but Geometry would make much more sense and have the same purpose.

- Crop rotation: A medieval invention I think. Gotta look that up.

Actually, there are talk of crop rotation during imperial rome, although it was probably basic.

- Architecture: Where did that disappear? I think it should go like this:
Masonry -> Construction -> Architecture
__________ Construction -> Bridge Building -> Road Building
Architecture would allow the construction of one or two nice wonders.

It depends, architecture as a science really appeared later with cathedral building and increased urbanization and such, construction is much more appropriate to ancient era, but in the end it really comes down to: will architecture allow some specific building/unit/etc. compared to construction? If we find something unique that wouldn't go in construction, let's go for it.

- Ballistics: Should require Geometry then.
- Literature: Requires Alphabet anyway, doesn't need the extra requirement.

Oh, didn't catch that.

If you agree on this, can you modify these changes in? Oh, and it should be Code of Laws (plural) I think.

I will make the changes.

Karhgath

Dec 10, 2005, 09:29 PM

Here's the color coded tech tree (http://www.3s-studios.com/Karhgath/tam_techtree_karhgath_color.gif)

Updated tech tree

marknau

Dec 10, 2005, 10:35 PM

Great mod project. I've been playing v0.8, and am very excited by it.
What is the current train of thought regarding the end of the game? There can certainly be a Hun invasion set to happen around a certain date, and a big part of the game is to try to establish world empire before that happens. Or, failing that, to hold onto as much as you can as the tide washes over you.
The concept of the Christianity Domination win is also interesting, but who would win? The holy city holder? Or would you want to have a way of establishing Papacy, an then the Pope wins?

Rhianni

Dec 10, 2005, 10:58 PM

Concrete? They didn't have concrete back then, did they?

The Romans used it quite a bit actually
"The Romans used pozzolana cement from Pozzuoli, Italy near Mt. Vesuvius to build many famous Roman structures including the Appian Way, the Roman Baths of Caracalla, the Basilica of Maxentius, the Coliseum and Pantheon in Rome, and the Pont du Gard aqueduct in south France. They used broken brick aggregate embedded in a mixture of lime putty with brick dust or volcanic ash by the Romans. Many structures that used stone. They built ~5,300 miles of roads. The current U.S. Interstate Highway System has 4,200 miles. "
There is referance in about a dozen sites by googling history of concrete

Sword Dancer

Dec 10, 2005, 11:20 PM

Concrete? They didn't have concrete back then, did they?

In fact, it was the Greeks who first came up with concrete, but it was of a very slow-setting variety -- in some cases it could take up to 20 years to cure properly.

The Romans took the idea and using volcanic sand from the Na[poli region, improved on it immensely, even coming up with concrete that would set underwater.

CaesarCS

Dec 11, 2005, 01:33 AM

Well... I came out of lurking for this...

I believe concrete was really perfected by the Romans in the second centuryBC, certainly early enough to have an effect on the world of TAM. :banana:

rho

Dec 11, 2005, 06:24 AM

Updated tech tree

A few thoughts:

Mysticism already requires nature cult, so having astrology require mysticism and nature cult doens't make much sense.

I don't think I agree with having epics require alphabet, since many old tales were recounted orally for many generations before being written down. Maybe remove alphabet as a requirement for epics, and then add it back as a requirement for literature?

Ceremonial burial seems to be rather too late on the chart, given that burial mounds tens of thousands of years old are known. Possibly move ceremonial burial to be one of the first techs, with no requirement, then have mysticism require that rather than nature cult? (which would aslo solve the problem of requirement) Then maybe put something like "temples" where cermeonial burial is now?

Monarchy and city states have exactly the same reqs, which seems a little odd. Maybe change monarchy to require something like code of laws and heroism?

Mounted combat -> recurve bow -> mounted archery doesn't seem to make sense to me.

You don't seem to have any either/or advances. Is that intentional? For instance, you could have urbanization requiring animal husbandry or agriculture.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 08:19 AM

A few thoughts:

Mysticism already requires nature cult, so having astrology require mysticism and nature cult doens't make much sense.

Ceremonial burial seems to be rather too late on the chart, given that burial mounds tens of thousands of years old are known. Possibly move ceremonial burial to be one of the first techs, with no requirement, then have mysticism require that rather than nature cult? (which would aslo solve the problem of requirement) Then maybe put something like "temples" where cermeonial burial is now?

Hmmm... Yup, you are right, after checking things out, ceremonial burials were practiced even before 4000 BC. This means it should be a starting tech... Astrology came later, at around 500-400 BC, so it should be moved to the bronze age. I'd add mysticism directly before.

Ceremonial burial could lead to Cuneiform? Mysticism requires Nature Cult and lead to astrology which requires Meditation, a new tech requiring Ceremonial Burial and Mysticism. I'd rename the current ceremonial burial to something representing advanced burial techniques(would lead to pyramids and such), any ideas for a name? Maybe Burial Grounds?

I don't think I agree with having epics require alphabet, since many old tales were recounted orally for many generations before being written down. Maybe remove alphabet as a requirement for epics, and then add it back as a requirement for literature?

It requires heroism OR alphabet. Many were oral, but a lot of greek legends and epics were also written. Don't forget that arrows on the tech trees means "OR".

Monarchy and city states have exactly the same reqs, which seems a little odd. Maybe change monarchy to require something like code of laws and heroism?

Noted, Heroism makes sense.

Mounted combat -> recurve bow -> mounted archery doesn't seem to make sense to me.

Recurve bows were developped for the express purpose of horseback archery, since long bows weren't usable on horseback. Native Indians also used them because of the difficulty of using longbows in forests, but this path doesn't really affect TAM, as only horseback nations developped the recurve bow in the mediterranean. So Mounted Combat must be a prerequisite, unless you see something I don't?

You don't seem to have any either/or advances. Is that intentional? For instance, you could have urbanization requiring animal husbandry or agriculture.

Arrows are "OR", the tech in parentheses are "AND". It's noted about agriculture, I'll add it as a req. to Urbanization.

Ok, related notes:

I've pushed Monotheism earlier, Judaism was founded much earlier than it was on the tech tree.

I think Philosophy should come 1-2 techs earlier, but I dunno where to put it. It should lead to education, and not the opposite. Maybe Epics OR Geometry AND Meditation? It should trigger the classical age, not end it.

Also, the top of the tech tree has too many techs. For example, from masonry, Burial Grounds requires 7 techs, but only 4 if you get it from Meditation. I'm thinking of removing Trade and start directly with The Wheel, and maybe Copper Working requiring Tools instead of Wood Working?

The Last Conformist

Dec 11, 2005, 08:28 AM

Mounted combat -> recurve bow -> mounted archery doesn't seem to make sense to me.
That's indeed odd. Recurved bows predate fighting from horseback, and as far as known, the first mounted fighters were horse archers.

I'd make Recurve Bow require Archery, and merge Mounted Combat and Mounted Archery to a single tech requiring Horseback Riding and Recurve Bow (if that's possible - I'm not too familiar with the whole XML stuff).

You could fill the then empty tech slot with a tech called "cavalry lance" or something, allowing Macedonian-style heavy cavalry.

Neither Epics nor Literature ought, historically, require Alphabet.

It seems odd that Monarchy comes only in the Classical era. In fact, there seems to be a distinct shortage of "political" techs in the first two eras.

The Last Conformist

Dec 11, 2005, 08:33 AM

Recurve bows were developped for the express purpose of horseback archery, since long bows weren't usable on horseback.
Reference?

The way I learnt it, recurved bows date from the 2nd millennium BC - before the advent of horseback fighting. It was the weapon of choice of later bronze age middle-eastern charioteers.

Edit: Keegan's A History of Warfare says the recurved bow may have been invented as early as in the 3rd millennium BC, and certainly was around in the mid-2nd. True cavalry - soldiers fighting from horseback - isn't known from before the eight century BC.

Edit2: How come Horseback Riding requires Animal Husb. but Chariot Warfare does not? :crazyeye:

Zuul

Dec 11, 2005, 08:46 AM

What about hieroglyphs and runes as tech?

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 08:59 AM

@Last Conformist

Hmmm... point taken, I'll see how I can place recurve bow earlier in the tech tree. I'll merge the techs in one Mounted Combat tech.

Cavalry Lance doesn't sound interesting, any other suggestion for a name?

As for monarchy, yeah, I realized that, Monarchy should be much earlier, but it's getting crowded. Where should it go?

@Zuul

Well, I think I'll call Cuneiform either Writing or Logograms like someone suggested. I hate the name logograms tho. It would include all forms of writing (cuneiform, runes, hieroglyph, etc.)

The Last Conformist

Dec 11, 2005, 09:14 AM

Cavalry Lance doesn't sound interesting, any other suggestion for a name?
I was trying to think of something more exciting, but didn't have much luck.

Cavalry Charge? Shock Tactics?

As for monarchy, yeah, I realized that, Monarchy should be much earlier, but it's getting crowded. Where should it go?
Somewhere around Agriculture, I suppose.

You should probably move Astrology forward to the Classic period, which would help keep the eras balanced. Mesopotamian astronomy, which was the provide the basis for at least the western tradition of astrology, only really got going in the last millennium BC.

Edit: Concerning the runes, they're technically a form of alphabet, not a logographic or syllabic writing system like cuneiform, hieroglyphs, or hanzi.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 09:28 AM

@Conformist

How about Cavalry Formation? Or simply Cavalry? Mounted Warfare?

Monarchy should require at least Polytheism or something like that. There's usually a strong religous basis for a Monarchy (chosen by the gods). Agriculture is a bit early. How about ... despotism or dynasticism early on?

So, Astronomy is a prereq to Astrology instead of the other way around?

The Last Conformist

Dec 11, 2005, 09:32 AM

@Conformist

How about Cavalry Formation? Or simply Cavalry? Mounted Warfare?
The later two would fit just as well for the "Mounted Combat" tech. Cavalry Formation works, altho I think it sounds about as lame as Cavalry Lance.
Monarchy should require at least Polytheism or something like that. There's usually a strong religous basis for a Monarchy (chosen by the gods). Agriculture is a bit early. How about ... despotism or dynasticism early on?Depends on what exactly we mean by "monarchy", I suppose. But something like the hereditary rulers of early Egypt and Sumer should be avaliable early on.

So, Astronomy is a prereq to Astrology instead of the other way around?I'd think so, yes.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 09:43 AM

For gameplay purpose and to make the tech tree flow better, I'll leave astrology first, after checking a few books, I'm not really sure which one came first. I know Astrology spread to greece at around 400 BC, but it was used before by the babylonians so I say it should come early

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 09:47 AM

Here's the color coded tech tree (http://www.3s-studios.com/Karhgath/tam_techtree_karhgath_color.gif)

Tech tree updated.

onedreamer

Dec 11, 2005, 10:52 AM

- Compass: Not sure that was invented by then. Columbus didn't have a compass, he used this triangular thing that I forgot the name of.

Sextant ? ;)

How about we rename it "Geometry"? With map making you can trade maps, geometry centers the world map.

I don't think Geometry should center the map, but rather Astronomy.

- Architecture: Where did that disappear? I think it should go like this:
Masonry -> Construction -> Architecture
__________ Construction -> Bridge Building -> Road Building
Architecture would allow the construction of one or two nice wonders.

Don't forget Mathematics :P
Speaking of architecture, you're right, Romans (or Greek) did not use concrete. The material they used is not concrete, I don't know its translation in english though (malta in italian). Of course it is something similar but the difference between the two is still huge. Btw similar stuff was still used in the mountains in the beginning of the past century. Lastly, "concrete" had little to nothing to do with Alchemy. Anyone with zero knowledge of Alchemy can make it, that art is already included in Masonry and I don't think you need more (reduntant) techs in TAM, there are plenty already !

@RELIGIONS:
I suggest the following: Religions are founded automatically (via Python) whenever they were historically founded (ie. specific date) in the capitals of all the civs that eventually adopted the religions. They don't have holy cities. Their shrines can be built, but they are normal wonders.
Christianity must be researched and will produce a holy city. Christianity should be a cheap tech. I'm in favour of adding the spreading of Christianity to 50% of the cities of the world as victory condition.

very good ideas.

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 11:14 AM

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 11:22 AM

PS: Architecture should be a branch-off from Construction. You only need construction to bulid bridges. Architecture is about building great buildings, not useful ones. So you need construction to build castles and the Limes, while you need architecture to build the Parthenon and the Pyramids.

The Last Conformist

Dec 11, 2005, 11:29 AM

Monarchy requiring Monotheism seems a tad odd. Otherwise I think Karhgath's latest techtree looks pretty good. :)

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 11:35 AM

Ok, I've made a quick change to make architecture a new path

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 11:43 AM

A little clarification on AND-OR gates and XML.

You can define one tech that is the main requirement.
Then you can define up to three techs which are additional requirements, which are OR gates.

So, on this tech tree, if a tech requires more than two techs, two of these are an OR gate. Monarchy, for example, would require Urbanization. Then you could either use Priesthood OR Monotheism to get it.

Astronomy, though, would require Mathematics AND Astrology (as there is no third tech).

I like the tech tree as it is now.

Oh, that's not how I saw it. In the vanilla game, arrows are optionals(if more than one) and the icons beside the names are the required ones.

So, Burial Grounds would require Masonry AND Dynasticism? In that case, maybe removing the Mining req. for masonry, or else no one will have Burial Ground for a while (10 techs req.)

I'll use colored arrows to denote alternative paths and black ones for required path. That will make it clear.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 12:27 PM

Updated with my views on the required/altern paths. Thamis, correct me if it differs from your vision.

Also, I think it's missing a few (2-3) techs in the classical/imperial age. Any ideas?

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 01:51 PM

Looks good now.

This way, Burial Grounds would require Masonry AND Dynasticism (that's 5 techs). Monarchy, though, would require Urbanization AND [Priesthood OR Monotheism].

Republic should have City States as main requirement.

More techs:
Medicine -> Sanitation (would allow a health building)
Construction -> Irrigation (would allow farm spread away from water)
City States -> Alliances (would allow pacts)
Civil Service -> Vice Royalty (would allow a wonder and a new civic)
Civil Service -> Ius Civile (or Civil Law or Roman Law, a civic, also the civic of free religion)

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 01:57 PM

Monarchy requiring Monotheism seems a tad odd. Otherwise I think Karhgath's latest techtree looks pretty good. :)

I agree. I don't see any other useful way to bring Monarchy in, though. Divine Right certainly requires Monotheism, but Monarchy does not. To reduce confusion between Divine Right (a legal claim) and Monarchy (a de facto claim), maybe we should rename Monarchy to Despotism?

Actually, now I know.

Here we go:
Burial Grounds -> Despotism (end of tech branch)
Code of Laws AND Monotheism -> Divine Right -> (etc., as it is now)

Also:
City States (quite obviously) has to require Urbanization. ;)
Divine Right and Despotism do not necessarily require Urbanization.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 03:18 PM

Updated. I moved city states down after currency. It was too far, and with Republic requiring City States, republic started to be a costy tech. It should, but not that much. Now it requires 3 classical techs, which seems right.

However, you can get to Empire and christianity a lot faster with the Divine Right path... maybe removing the optional req. and make Empire require only Republic and Mil. Training?

Or, change the req of Empire to Republic AND Divine Right? Mil. Training req is removed. We could then move Divine Right to classical. Maybe move Holy Book after Theology and before Christianity?

Sword Dancer

Dec 11, 2005, 03:29 PM

Compass: Not sure that was invented by then. Columbus didn't have a compass, he used this triangular thing that I forgot the name of. Sextant ? ;)

Given the date of his voyage, it is far more likely that he would have been using an astrolabe, which was a circular disc of metal with sliding sighting points along its circumferance to take the angle of the sun.

The astrolabe has been around since about 500 BC.

http://www.crichtonmiller.com/instruments.htm

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 03:32 PM

You put Despotism in wrongly. It should require Burial Grounds, not Polytheism (poly makes no sense, while burial remotely does)

Vassalage is in no way classical. I don't think we should include it at all, even though the Goths had early forms of it.

City States should rather lead to Alliances.

Yea, remove the Divine Right path to Empire. The Caesars didn't legitimize their power with the gods. The first Emperor to do that was the first king of the Goths.

Karhgath

Dec 11, 2005, 03:41 PM

New updated tech tree (new url) (http://www.3s-studios.com/Karhgath/tam_techtree_karhgath_color2.gif)

I played a bit with the tree. Now, there is a peaceful(republic) and military(Alliances) path to Empire. The peaceful path is a bit shorter.

So, in the end, there are 3 paths to Christianity: Military, Government, Religious. The former is longer, the last 2 are equally fast.

Let me know what you think.

thamis

Dec 11, 2005, 04:31 PM

Ok, I love the tech tree. Awesome. :D

Once I got my nukes-essay done, I'll start implementing it (unless someone else volunteers to do it).

Zuul

Dec 12, 2005, 02:13 AM

So no road building at all until the end? Or some simpler road in the beginging and a more advanced later on (highway/stone paved road instead of railroad)?

Karhgath

Dec 12, 2005, 05:33 AM

I think that's the idea, yeah

Zuul

Dec 12, 2005, 06:46 AM

Which of them? Only one kind of road-near the end? Or first some simple and then some more advanced?

thamis

Dec 12, 2005, 07:18 AM

No, of course we mean the road with extra movement at the end. The default road comes with The Wheel.

The Last Conformist

Dec 12, 2005, 08:03 AM

Couple oddities: You can't chose a random civ, and the 'pedia and main menu buttons don't work.

Also, shouldn't the adjective for Kolchis be Kolchian with an 'i' rather than Kolchean?

onedreamer

Dec 12, 2005, 11:13 AM

hmm, I think Civ3 had it right with Writing coming after Alphabet and not the other way around... unless with Writing we intend hyeroglyphs (sp ?).
Another thing, Fishing is 4 techs away from the start. I'm not sure it's a very good idea.

Breunor

Dec 12, 2005, 03:28 PM

The kings were of Chaldaean descent, but they achieved power by convincing the traditional (Akkadian-speaking or at least Akkadian-writing) élites of the Babylonian cities to chose them over the Assyrians, used Akkadian for official inscriptions, and called their kingdom "Sumer and Akkad". I think there's about as much continuity one can ask for over the relevant times.

Oh, and Nabopolassar certainly was more of a Babylonian than Sargon II was!

Now, if Thamis prefers, I can certainly dig up hero-names from the Amorite and Kassite periods too.

Ah, good point Last! I always viewed them as 'distinct' civilizations but I may have been pig-headed!

Yaah, I usually view that you have the Amorites up until their destruction by the Hittities in the 16th century (1595 BC), then the Kassites for about 400 years, and the Chaldeans in about the 7th century. I usually think of the Kassites as differnt, and they made Babylon into a 'world power' as oppsoed to a collection of city-states.

If you think they can be thought of as the 'same' civilzation I'll defer to you.

If we buy that the Amorites, Kassite, and Chaldean Babylonians ar ethe same, I would go for Nabopolassar was the hero.

I guess I'm in the camp that I'd prefer Assyria of the 2. I think more people have heard of Bablyon than Assyria, but in terms of importance, I'll go with Assyria.

Breunor

Breunor

Dec 12, 2005, 04:55 PM

Original Post:

Heroes (not implemented yet)
- Babylon: Sargon II (Archer)
- Gaul - Brennus (Gallic Swordsman)
- Mycenae - Achilles (Phalanx)
- Rome - Scipio (Legionary)
- Scythia - gotta check my Herodotus (Horse Archer, of course) ... Herakles was sugested...
- Etruria - Thefarie Velianas (Swordsman)
- Egypt - Ramses II (War Chariot)
- Iberian Tribes - Indibil (Slinger)
- Germanic Tribes - hmm... easy to find one (Berserk)
- Carthage - Hannibal (War Elephant)
- Lydia - gotta check my Herodotus (Light Cavalry)
- Phoenicia - ? (Phoenician Trireme)
- Getae - Zalmoxis (Falxman)
- Persia - Xerxes (Immortal)
- Medes - Cyaxares (Searman)
- Britons - Boudicca (Axeman)
- Kolchis - Artag (Bronze Swordsman)
- Macedonia - Alexander (Heavy Cavalry) - King will be Philip II
- Illyria - Glaucius or Bardylis (?)
- Nubia - Heru (?)
- Berber - Antaios (Archer)
- Goths - Theoderich (Huskarl)

My opionated choices:

Babylon -- As others have said, I don't like Sargon, since he was Assyrian. Nabopolassar if you count the Chaldeans (see post above).

Gaul -- Brennus is good

Mycenae -- Achilles is fine if you want mythology. I'd give a slight preference for Heracles for a Pelopennesain hero, many historical figures to choose from (Themistocles, Pericles?)

Rome -- Scipio is good, lots of choices

Scythia -- I'm not sure whom you are using as the 'main' leader. Can use Partatus, or Madyes. Heracles is a complex choice, as ancient myths wind in and out of each others.

Huns -- I assume Attilla is the overall leader, can try Ruga or Kama

Egypt -- The best military leader Egypt ever ahd probably was Thutmosis III.
Not sure whom the overall leader is (Hatshepsut was his father's wife but not his mother). Ramses II was probably overrated but not a bad pick if Thutmosis is the 'overall' leader. Amenhotep II was a great ruler!

Iberia -- It looks like you are in better hands here than anything I can add!

Germans -- If you are going to make the Goths a seperate faction, both Theodoric and Alaric should be Goths. For mythology it should be Sigurd or Sigfried (Norse of Gerrman). For real life there are a lot of choices. If you count Franks, Clovis is a good pick. Gaiseric the Vandal may have been the most successful German leader. Not sure who your 'overall' leader is?

Carthage-- I assume Hannibul (Barca) isn't the overall leader? As a general, he is tough to beat!!

Lydia -- I assume Croesus is the ovearll leader? Maybe Gyges, who made them into a military power.

Phoenecia -- If Hiram is the overll leader, maybe Abibel of Tyre as the hero. There are a LOT of great Phoenician scientists (Thales of Miletus, Pythagoras).

Getae -- Zalmoxis is fine if you use mythology (more of a god, though). Burebista was a famous king. If he is the overall king, Dromihete is a good choice, who defeated Lysimmachus.

Persia -- Hmm, not much of a Xerxes fan, he LOST afterall! If Cyrus is the overall king, I'd go with Darius the First. He lost also (Marathon campaign) but was a tremendous military leader.

If you want a 'hero' as oppsoed to a king, its tough to beat Zopyrus. According to Herodotus, when Darius I tried to take the walls of Babylon, Zopyrus cut off his nose and ears, pretended to be an escaped slave beaten by Darius. Babylon gave him control of some of the army, and there was an elaborate plan that the Persians would run away. Of course, he eventually betrays the city to the Persians.

Media -- Cyaxeres was their greatest king. Who is the overall leadser (Dioces?)

Britons -- Well, there are more capable ones than Boudiccea, but she is a good choice

Kolchis -- are we looking at the later period (Artag), or ancient Kolchis, which is ethnically probably Georgians. Artag would be more associated with Easstern Iberia. Maybe have Armenia (Urartu) if we want an ancient presence, but are they too close to Assyria/Babylon?

Macedon -- Hard to argue with Alexander!

Illyria -- Bardyllis is a good choice (he's not the overall leader?) Glaucius is also good, who reformed an Illyrian kingdom against the Diodachi.

Nubia -- ??

Berbers -- ??? (Antaeus I would say is Libyan. If you want to include Libyans, we have Shoshenk who conquered Egypt (is he the overall leader?)

Goths -- Theodoric is good.

Oh, I missed the Etruscans. Lars Porsenna maybe, Tarquin the Great?

Anyway, just my $.02

Best wishes,

Breunor