Please vote. Let's see if it's just a few nuts who still want years to be displayed or a majority.

To me it seems to make more sense and is more realistic that once you have "invented" a calendar you use it. :crazyeye: Maybe I'm crazy but that's the way I see it.

Ahhh, but the point is which one... Because the game uses the gregorian one, but it is not the only one... Why don´t use the the jewish one, or the persian, or the ethiopian, or the CE one, or the ancient Roman one (Ab Urbe Condita)... There are many calendars, and they all show very different numbers... That´s why I think that a full era system is the best, as eras are more common to all the world, and they are more logical because they are tied to the tech progress of our game instead of a number that is burdened by the facts of reality. I feel more free when I don´t have to be by America by 1490, or knowing than the next turn the Arabian are going to appear and invade my Roman Empire. So...

- More representative.
- You are not predetermined by the facts of history.
- Makes civilization apparitions more difficult to foresee.

The only "con" is that we are accostumed to the years. That´s all. They been there since the first civ, and we grew attached to them. But I think it is time to let go...

I think taking away the years actually IMPROVES the sense of immersion and timeline realism. You no longer say things like:

Wow, I can't believe that war took 600 years.
How the heck did it take me 300 years to move some units across my empire?
But the Macedonian Empire rose and fell in 30 years! That was two turns!
Man, I guess the modern era came early again.

When you remove the years and just display eras, you let the player *feel* the time.

And the turn counter is still there to keep track and to race against.

I would like to know the reasons of the people who voted for years... I remember some, but I would like them posted here.

I think taking away the years actually IMPROVES the sense of immersion and timeline realism. You no longer say things like:

Wow, I can't believe that war took 600 years.
How the heck did it take me 300 years to move some units across my empire?
But the Macedonian Empire rose and fell in 30 years! That was two turns!
Man, I guess the modern era came early again.
When you remove the years and just display eras, you let the player *feel* the time.

And the turn counter is still there to keep track and to race against.
Extremely well said. The year system is a thing of the past. It doesn't make sense in such a dynamic game where almost anything can happen at any time.

But Eras are related to tech not to time. In the real world if we never progressed from how advanced we are now the year would continue to go up but the era would never change. Eras are about changes in technology, the natural world or scoiety.

We all live in the "Modern Era" (or whatever we are supposed to call the present) Are Aborigines also in the same era or a different one?

Each civ moves through the eras at their own pace but time moves the same for each.

I would like to know the reasons of the people who voted for years... I remember some, but I would like them posted here.

Sure, Elhoim. I simply like to see the progress of the years, and compare the development of my world to the historical one. The aim of the mod is IMHO not to simulate history, but try to change it on the basis of some realistic events (i.e.: rise of civs and barbs). And then, I have diffent views on things like these:

Wow, I can't believe that war took 600 years.
Why not? Egypt and China, for example, were in permanent state of conflict with the surrounding barbarian tribes for more than millennia, Rome for centuries. And there were 100 years war and 30 years war also...

How the heck did it take me 300 years to move some units across my empire?
It's the same ridiculous that in modern times your fastest ship can travel for not more than 1/8 of the map in most of the cases, when the turn lasts 1 year. The same for terrestrial units.

But the Macedonian Empire rose and fell in 30 years! That was two turns!
So? Maybe the history of the M.E. if happened in a RFC game would have been an exception... and remember that our game doesn't deal with nations or empires, but with civilizations, CULTURES... the Greeks of RFC, keeping this example, represent IMHO not only Greeks and Macedonians, but also Myceneans and Hellenistic kingdoms, if not byzantines and modern Greeks also.

Man, I guess the modern era came early again.
It means that I have been better than historical england, don't you agree (if the techs cost is balanced correctly and I am the tech leader)?

Moreover, the script of the Rise of civs is linked with real dates, I think we should be coherent with this.

IMHO we should leave all the things as they are now, and a little patch should let people like me to get the years from the beginning.

But Eras are related to tech not to time. In the real world if we never progressed from how advanced we are now the year would continue to go up but the era would never change. Eras are about changes in technology, the natural world or scoiety.

We all live in the "Modern Era" (or whatever we are supposed to call the present) Are Aborigines also in the same era or a different one?

Each civ moves through the eras at their own pace but time moves the same for each.
You got it all exactly right. Eras are about changes in the actual game world - not changes in our own history. Don't you find it at least a bit ridiculous to count years in relation to the birth of Jesus Christ in a game where Christianity can be founed pretty much anywhere in the world, as early as BC 500 or as late as AD 200?

It's the same ridiculous that in modern times your fastest ship can travel for not more than 1/8 of the map in most of the cases, when the turn lasts 1 year. The same for terrestrial units.

Well, you gave us more reason to make the modern times an era and not years ;) The point he made was unrelated unit movements and years, whether should they be in the past or in the present.

The difference lies in that you want to compete with history, whereas we want to make a new one without the burden of it.

I think a switch option would be the best option, as this is a very close votation, almost without middle ground (no abstain votes!).

Well, you gave us more reason to make the modern times an era and not years ;) The point he made was unrelated unit movements and years, whether should they be in the past or in the present.
My point is that I don't care so much about unit movements, a game can't be perfect and totally realistic.

I agree about the switch option as the best one.

My point is that I don't care so much about unit movements, a game can't be perfect and totally realistic.

Of course it can, and I don´t strive too much for realism, but for ease of mind when playing. The eras system give me the peace of not having to live up to history. Realism is an added bonus.

I hope Rhye would find a way to make it a switchable option. Perhaps we should investigate in this matter, seeing how the Hall Of Fame mod was done...

I agree with both Red Threat and Elhoim, actually. I've never really gotten my panties in a bunch because my army takes 75 years to cross the Roman Empire. But I know a lot of people DO complain about this, and this would be the most elegent way to fix it (and shut them up ;) ). Even as someone who doesn't care too much, I do enjoy the idea of greater immersion.

The year clock is more dead weight to me than an actual turn counter.

unfortunately the change affects both python and the SDK.
If it were just python, I could have added a variable for a quick switch. But not with the SDK, where you must recompile the whole DLL

unfortunately the change affects both python and the SDK.
If it were just python, I could have added a variable for a quick switch. But not with the SDK, where you must recompile the whole DLL
And what about two little patches - when the mod is in final - respectively with no years at all and years from the beginning, with the involved files changed only?

It shouldn't be terribly hard to shift the year display based upon your civilization's state religion, rather than the "alternate" birth of Christ.

I voted for the current system (+ maybe the above suggestion). However, I don't like the centering of the map that Civ4 uses once Calendar is discovered. I like the civ-centered mini-map. Maybe we should put that to a vote :).

EDIT: for civs with No State Religion we can restart the calandar with months like Thurmidore :)

unfortunately the change affects both python and the SDK.
If it were just python, I could have added a variable for a quick switch. But not with the SDK, where you must recompile the whole DLL

I have an idea! The present system works with the era system until the discovery of a tech, in this case calendar. Could you make a tech (called, for example, calendar foundation) that costs 1 point to research and has no prerequisites, that activates the years? So if you want years, chose that tech and you will have them, if you do not want it, just don´t research it... Make it a tech only the player can activate, in a recondite place in the tech tree. What do you think? Is it feasible?

Actually, last time I checked, v.1.01, the Eras: Bronze, Iron, etc... are activated by the Game Year and not by technology. Is there any truth to this in the later versions?

Any opinions on my idea above?

I would like a combination of years + era display. But I guess most people who voted for era only, want to get rid of the years.

@Elhoim: Wouldn't then a pop up be possible: "Do you want years? yes, no". If yes the tech will automatically gifted to you and if not it won't.

It´s a good one, the problem is that people that want it with calendar, which is the mayority, won´t have a middle ground. That´s why I did it that way, so they can research it right after calendar if they want it.

It´s a good one, the problem is that people that want it with calendar, which is the mayority, won´t have a middle ground.

I'm quite happy with that middle ground and I want years. I think Surtur's idea is fine. Just have a pop up that says "Eras or Years" If you pick years then all would function as now and if you pick eras then you get eras even ater you discover calendar. Seems fine and logical to me, if it's possible to implement.

Unfortunately for folks like us, Elhoim, the people who like the Calendar system ARE the middle ground. The people who want NO years at all, and the people who want nothing BUT years... they repesent the edges of the spectrum.

I responded for this idea:

Wouldn't then a pop up be possible: "Do you want years? yes, no". If yes the tech will automatically gifted to you and if not it won't.

I said that was a good idea, but it won´t offer a middle ground for the mayority, that is, the people who want the calendar system.

My original idea was:

The present system works with the era system until the discovery of a tech, in this case calendar. Could you make a tech (called, for example, calendar foundation) that costs 1 point to research and has no prerequisites, that activates the years? So if you want years, chose that tech and you will have them, if you do not want it, just don´t research it... And if you want it after calendar, you can research it . Make it a tech only the player can activate, in a recondite place in the tech tree. What do you think? Is it feasible?

Well the pop up could also appear twice. At the beginning and when discovering calendar.

Well the pop up could also appear twice. At the beginning and when discovering calendar.

An if the player chose eras. If they chose years that pop-up souldn´t appear... If Rhye could mod it it would be neat ;)