General discussions that do not fit in other open topics.

Any Warlords plans?

Any Warlords plans?

yea but its gonna take a while:)

Wonder if this one gets 100 pages too :P

:)

Warlords will be coming hopefully in few weeks from now. Right now the CTD debugging is giving us a hard time...back to debugging...

Man ive been waiting since the day i got warlords(which was the same day my civ4 disc went missing)i used to play this mod and rhyes all the time. That was when warlords first came out too,i couldnt wait to make a (lenninist,screw Stalin)soviet union.

im eager to play again, but kind or leary until crash gets fixed. i had a great fun game going but cant continue it do to crash. im sure you will get it fixed. i will wait patiently

im eager to play again, but kind or leary until crash gets fixed. i had a great fun game going but cant continue it do to crash. im sure you will get it fixed. i will wait patiently

yep same here, always crashing in 1954
anyways, patience is it... warlord's sattelite nations + TRmod = :love:

how come there's no "wonder thread"?

i dont know where to put this. so add more ethnic units i think is alwasy more importantly especially since there are now more ethnic units then at any time.

all the latest mods are doing it!!:D

did anyone see this

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=186400

it looks great among the many units that could be added as ethnic units.

Sevomod is using it. You guys have to keep up with the competition.

WarKirby

oh and please, please add.. the unit buttons that come with white rabbit's EDU thing. they look extremely good.

how come there's no "wonder thread"?

Yeah.
I would like to ask why there is no Internet Wonder in TR.
I think that was cool wonder in basic game.
Everything can be found in Internet - why not technologies?

Just awesome, after playing a few games through to CTD, I'm really happy to be picking up those same games where I left off and having no problems at all!

Thanks Houman and Mexico for all the hard work, TR is just so much better than Vanilla it blows my mind, and I haven't even gotten to the modern units yet.


Just waiting to hear more good reports from 2.13 patchers, but I've played parts of both CTD games I sent in and got far past the CTD with no problems, bombarding like mad all along.

Did you guys nerf the assassins this time around, or was this strictly a bug patch?



Thanks again, I went out and bought Warlords today, just because TR is going to beta it.

I abandoned my save after the patch failed to fix it, and started anew.

Strangely, in all the hundreds of games of Civ I've played, I've only ever completed one.

Never finished a hotseat game.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4564846#post4564846

a modern palace..

Yeah.
I would like to ask why there is no Internet Wonder in TR.
I think that was cool wonder in basic game.
Everything can be found in Internet - why not technologies?
Really? I've never got that far in. It seems pretty strange to not have the internet. :confused: Without the internet, TR would not exist:lol:

How about an upgrade for the fort, maybe with industrialism, that makes it into a more modern defensive improvement- ie. instead of an actual fort, which is too vulnerable to modern bombs and artillery, it should be a series of bunkers, trenches, tank traps and razor wire. This would provide all round protection against just about anything (nukes not included:) )

Units entrenched within should also be granted an air interception chance, due to AA turrets.

WarKirby

Obligatory internet joke:

The fish market gives you 7 tuna...
The rock'n'roll deal gives you 7 hit singles...
the internet should give you 7 units of pr0n! :P haha

I think we need a way of transporting food. I like to build a city in the hills and surround it with mines to create a brilliant industrail center. The problem with this is that such sites rarely have adequate food provision to support a population of sufficient size to exploit said hills.

In civ II i would solve this with regular food caravans from one of my more plentiful cities. Civ IV has no such option.

We should add food caravans, and in the industrial era, food lorries. Also cargo planes to transport food fast would be great.

Yep. I miss the ability from the earlier Civ games to build settlers (which ate a pop point back then) and use that settler to transfer population to smaller cities because you could tell the settler to settle in a city square, adding 1 pop point to the new city.

Yeah. That's another good point. You should be able to manually redistribute population.

What do you think, Houman?

WarKirby

Yeah. That's another good point. You should be able to manually redistribute population.

What do you think, Houman?

WarKirby


I think that is violating the spirit of "Total Realism", if it is just giving the player the ability to distribute population where he sees fit.

Maybe if this was tied to State Property civic(or Police State?), and also caused unhappiness in the town your population is leaving and the town in which they settle.

In real life governments have little control over where people end up living, and in the states that do have that kind of control, they don't usually make people very happy when they force them to leave their homes.

I'm thinking, Three Gorges Dam or forced reloactions under Soviet rule are some of the few examples of large scale population relocation at the order of a government (not because of disease or war...), it's not a common thing, and in most free countries, the government can do things to encourage people to settle in some places (land grants, tax credits), but they can't just pick them up and move them very easily.

I think that is violating the spirit of "Total Realism", if it is just giving the player the ability to distribute population where he sees fit.

Maybe if this was tied to State Property civic(or Police State?), and also caused unhappiness in the town your population is leaving and the town in which they settle.

In real life governments have little control over where people end up living, and in the states that do have that kind of control, they don't usually make people very happy when they force them to leave their homes.

I'm thinking, Three Gorges Dam or forced reloactions under Soviet rule are some of the few examples of large scale population relocation at the order of a government (not because of disease or war...), it's not a common thing, and in most free countries, the government can do things to encourage people to settle in some places (land grants, tax credits), but they can't just pick them up and move them very easily.

I agree with you to an extend but, remember you have to ellaborate on concepts... the government has more control over the populace than you think, they control influence, popular thought and expression etc. ever most subtly... its a simple enough ideal and worth a thought anyway... besides here is a historical account to counter your thought, it became quite popular in ancient Rome for the generals ie Caesar amongst others to promise land and where do you think most of this land came from? from conquered lands of course so the soldiers would persuade their families to move to new lands for whatever reasons...
to enact this ideal could be ellaborated by saying the settler (citizen populas) was manipulated to move here for whatever reason lower taxes, gold rush, free plots of land to promote culture and dominance etc...
I agree I think this is a useful and simple enough concept to advocate.

If you had a mining town badly in need of workers, getting people to move there would be easy, because of all the jobs.

Gainful employment is an incredible tool to redistribute population.

WarKirby

how bout introducing some new "buildings/wonders" like ie "Gold Rush" (can only be built by city that has gold in its radius). Building it, would resault in a % chance (dependent on the distance) that each turn your cities will loose population and the city that has bulit the "wonder" will gain pop.. imigrants from rival cities migh also want to join your city, but the % should be smaller then from your own..

If you had a mining town badly in need of workers, getting people to move there would be easy, because of all the jobs.

Gainful employment is an incredible tool to redistribute population.

WarKirby


I agree with you, but sometimes, most of the time, the government has little control over where this gainful employment shows up.

I don't argue that you shouldn't have any way to induce population to move, like the "gold rush" wonder mentioned above, but in some way it needs to have a cost that would insure you can't just relocate 10 pop points from your biggest city to some other city you would like to be your biggest.

That is what isn't realistic. Being able to induce a relatively small amount of population to move isn't a big deal, and is more in line with what we see in reality. Tax credits, Land grants and Jobs, certianly can move population, but cost something. Also, no one is going to move from say, Chicago, to some mining town in the middle of nowhere just because you created a job there, they probably already have a job in Chicago, and like living there for other reasons.

Maybe only cities with more population than workable tiles could see population leave to try and find work somewhere else, I don't know the answer really, I just don't like the idea of easily moving population around with little cost.

There's no great people thread. So I'll post here.

EDIT: I moved this post to the great people thread.

WarKirby

Introduction

First of all: English isn't my native language ... plz, don't search to eager for mistakes.


I have played three games of TR until now (the Civ4 Version, not the Warlord Version). With the difficult settings noble and prince on the TotalRealism World Map.

In normal Civ 4 I try sometimes to stay peacefull a long time. In Total Realism i dont see any way to do it. Because the research is kind of slow, i cant build enough buildings in my cities. And the "production to research points"-option in a city is available later in game.

Therefore Total Realism force me to build a mass of military units. And because of the upkeep costs i have four options:

Use my military strength to start an offensive war. But because of the limited numbers of cities, i will capture only up to around 8 cities and burn the rest.
Start to create a mercenary army ...
Kill the units i just created
Getting killed some dozend turns later, because i dont have the money to do research


Of course the best option i see is option no. 1. If i start in europe, i wipe some civics out and got some nice cities.
If i start in Asia i get some babarian towns to wipe out and burn them down.
Yeah, it is fun to fight from the start. And most time i enjoy fighting with limited ressources.

But at all I miss a peaceful and senseful solution. It is realistic that the civis do a lot of war in history - yes. But NOT because they have to build a mega-sized army.
They started war, because they want power, ressources or just dislike each other.

To be realistic in a long war every involved nations get economical down. But in TR i need the war to get my research (... and in the long run my economic) running.


The other part i have some ideas is the promotion system.
In some parts i dislike the promotion sytem of TR. I like the change from Civ3 to Civ4 that units have only one combat value instead of an attack and defence value. I don't see the big difference between an attacking swordsman on open field and the defending one. While should the attacking (or defending) swordsman get any bonus?
Ok, now we have one combat value and the tactical deepness we get mainly trough special boni vs unit types. Spearman is strong vs mounted units, weak against other infantry ... and so on.

The current TR promotion system give boni that doesnt make sence. Again my example with swordsman. How can a swordsman getting better with defending plains but dont get any abilty to attack an other swordsman on plains.
That a unit hidden in a forest get a defensive bonus is already part of the game. But if your archer learns to lure in forest, the archer dont recieve any bonus on attacking in forest?

I think u have to know both sides - attacking and defending - to get realy stronger. Maybe you will specialize in one way, but the other exists.

I post my current suggestions about a promotion system in the "Promotion" Thread.


Ok, enough introduction. Let's get to the real part.


Early Game: Peace?


I give thought to this "problem".
The main problem is, that a city can only build military units. Therefore we need other options for the city.

The ways i see:

Increase the time for construction buildings.
More available buildings.
Get a non-productive option, like "research" much more earlier.



Increased production time for buildings

If we increase the building time we got a way for a peaceful TR. But now the war-based way got trouble. If the barracks, granary, libary, ... takes 200-300% more time, you just cant train any military units without getting backward with your cities.
The advantage of the war must be worth to risk this. But in the current TR Version u just cant control over around 8-10 cities without proper technologies.
The way to get money with burning cities isnt working. Mostly u will get around 100-200 gold pieces. If u need 20 units to get the city down (4 defensive units with wall) only the upkeep from this units will consume this money in 5-10 turns. You need more time to get the army to the enemy town ...
To finance an army with pillage cities, u need more money. And it is realism, that an army just consume every city on it's way because supply reason. I think this pillage city should give you around 100 + 50 * city-size gold pieces (additional to the normal amount of gold).

But increasing this amount of gold will only get u money for research (or for your army and let your money from towns for research), it will not build up your cities. I think in the long run you will be backward.
Therefore to simply increase the production time will crumble the whole gameplay and getting the game even more one-sided. Now i see only the way to get around 7 cities near the capital - maybe rush one civic - and then start to defend and buil up your economic.
In the current version of TR this doesnt work. There are times you dont manage to overrun your enemy and there are times you did, but even after you have the cap of 8 cities you have to build military.

Conclusion: Increased production time will most probably only destroy the game-feeling.


More available buildings

If i talk about more available buildings i dont talk about 100 new buildings. This would be cool, but i have only two legs, can only do little steps and i know that this cant be done in a proper amount of time.
I just talk about some buildings with high construction times. The time should be relative to the effect high. It should be possible to build up your civi without these buildings, but it shouldn't be just waste of time build them.

Naturally i have some buildings in my mind:


Hunters Network
(Construction time like oracle - available with hunting)
Provide +1 food on every forrest title. In early times of mankind the forrest was an important food ressource and not only important for production. Maybe civilization starts a little bit after that time ... but hey, we can also get the wheel before agricultur. (Agricultur starts some thousends year earlier)
Hunters Network will work until irrigation.
Archery Ground
(Construction time double Barracks - available with tech Archery, require Barracks)
Provide +3 exp for archer. The idea is the same as stables: Getting a bonus for specilization of cities.
Training Ground
(Construction time double barracks - require barracks)
Same as archery, but for melee units.
With a modified promotion system the archery, training ground - and later "military training area" - this can be some kind of realism military specialisation of cities. See Promotion Thread for more details.
City Center
(Construction time like oracle - available with Pottery)
+1 Happy Face. Might be too strong.
Even in the beginning there were some kind of music and culture. Build a city center to let everyone of your citizen share this.


Because these buildings are not as important as normal buildings are, an offensive player can live without them. He can attack other civics. If one of these try to get all buildings very soon, this civic will certainly have a bad defence...

Conclusion: Some work to do, but a nice way for more peaceful nations.


Non-productive city mode

The most simple mode will be just "doing nothing". But then i can build units and kill them afterward ... i got nothing.
Giving the research or money mode earlier in game will take away parts of the techtree. I don't like this either.

My idea is to add a little bit worser research and money mode for the cities. I think about instead of 50% of production for research or money only 25%. In this periode of development it will be around 1 to 4 gold pieces / research points. In my opinion this is an alternative option to build military, but it isn't too strong. Maybe the Mysticism can be the requirement for this two modes. You can call the money version "Ware Offering" - i hope the native speaker will find a better word :)
Also thinkable to but the money mode in Mining.

And - of course - one of these Modes would be enough... i suggest to chose the one, who fits better in historical background.

Conclusion: An easy solution to get a peaceful way in TR. But it might be a little bit boring for the player.


Conclusion / Suggestions:



Getting a pillage from burning a city down. I tought about 100 + 50 * size.
Add a small version of "production-to-research" and/or "production-to-money" in early game. 25% of production will do it. Available with Mysticism or Mining.
Stable-Like-Buildings for the other units.



hope anyone will read it :)

Hi guys. Just posted in the Mercs area of the forum.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. It's not realistic to have mercs with anything over than Level 5, with promos that those units can actually have, (eg no tanks with Defence etc).

No merc unit ever existed that had a skillset 20 times better than the best regular unit of it's day.

Additionally, there needs to be some way to ensure that a Civ can't hire a unit if the unit requires tech that civ doesn't have.

The mercs part of TR is really letting down the rest of an otherwise excellent mod.

@Exerior: I assume you're playing with lots of civs, or on the earth map in europe?

This seems to be a big problem. There is not enough land in places like europe for all the big civs that are there. I always play in asia where there is plenty of land, and usually flourish as a result.

These ideas you have really won't help much. Civs are too close together and cannot establish and economy, thus stagnation results.

The only real solution, would be to make the world map bigger. Much bigger. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that it is possible to make it big enough and still have a playable speed. I doubt modern processors are fast enough, or people are patient enough to wait several minutes between turns

A while ago, someone suggested a distorted map where more populated areas (like europe) would be bigger, and less populated areas (central asia, the americas) would be smaller.

At the time I thought this sounded stupid, but as I play more, I realise that if we cannot seriously scale up the main map, this distortion is the only option to prevent europe stagnating.

In the meantime, I usually play randomly generated maps, where civs are evenly distributed.

Well, that's my $0.02

WarKirby

Could we please change english empire to british empire. Victoria and Churchill both presided over a unified Britain. Only Elizabeth was ruler of just England.

I've jut spent past half hour reading biography of Churchill. Did you know he authorised use of poison gas on iraqis, and machine guns on striking welsh miners. Seems he wasn't so nice in the early days. Thankfully, neither actually happened.

WarKirby

I think the map size is just fine even for the more populated areas. Why do you think nations such as Rome went to war? to conquer? no to expand into another nations land or into barbarian lands completely realistic and those nations are never as bad off as you think albeit perhaps sometimes the French or the Spanish and even times the Romans who can't compromise that particular game and expand but they always are a force enough to compete with any of the other nations the actually have more room to expand in. IMO the map size is fine, realistic enough and the AI can be competive enough especially against the various AI civs... not all empires flourish at the same time

Could we please change english empire to british empire. Victoria and Churchill both presided over a unified Britain. Only Elizabeth was ruler of just England.

WarKirby

Hi,

It's a scottish wish, guys ! ;) Funny, the scotts fought for a so long time against the "barb" of the South before being "vassels", that's funny to read that...:lol: :lol: :lol:

More seriously, you are right. England is the strongest of the Kingdoms of UK but many GP of UK came from Scotland, Ireland or Wales. As Adam Smith, a Scottish , no ?

The Frog.

Hi,

It's a scottish wish, guys ! ;) Funny, the scotts fought for a so long time against the "barb" of the South before being "vassels", that's funny to read that...:lol: :lol: :lol:

More seriously, you are right. England is the strongest of the Kingdoms of UK but many GP of UK came from Scotland, Ireland or Wales. As Adam Smith, a Scottish , no ?

The Frog.Well, I'd really rather we get a look in as Scotland has contributed lots.

Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone. John Logie Baird played a critical role in the invention of TV. And we gave the world Sean Connery;)
And Adam Smith also.

Since Scotland as a unique civ is out of the window, it makes sense that we should still have our place in civ as part of the greatest empire in the world.

At it's height under George V, the British Empire was the biggest in history. Just surpassing the Mongol empire under Kublai Khan.

WarKirby

I think the mapsize is fine this way.

I play also as Asian Nation (e.g. China) - there i got 3 good and around 1-2 bad city positions. As german i got the same amount of citys ... there isn't that much room, but the Computer Players are a little bit slower, so got Polen and Bosnien.

And to say it again:

It is realistic that Nations like Rome went to war. But not because they have to build up an army. They build an army, because they want to expand ... I just realy hate it, if a player is forced to do something ... then i can play "looking a movie" ...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4581814#post4581814

how about adding some of this to some units(made by the lopez)

multi-building requirements inorder to build units.



http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=186733 (another by the lopez)

Unit civic Prereqs

this could possibly apply to Zealots or the crusaders in the game already and the mujahadeen



And yet another mod component made by the lopez

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=186731

civics that allow certain buildings to be built.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=176016

^above is Sezerth's Library

what about looking at some of these units. This is a library and some will not go well with realism mod at all(as they are meant for warhammer mod).

However some units can go with the realism mod. The units in there like the arquebus and there are some good archer units as well. They can expand the ethnic units in realism mod.

this is the thread where the arquebus that i am talking about. In the library there is a link leading here.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490

Hey guys, I know you have a million other things you are working on, or hopefully even possibly enjoying some time doing your own thing.:)

But, I was wondering if you could explain if there is any way to make maps/scenarios that are compatilble with TR.

Before you mentioned something about the Worldbuilder not having all the TR resources, or something, I could be completely wrong, but is there any way I would be able to make my own Maps or Scenarios with TR?

I wanted to do some detailed maps of different areas, Europe, North America, etc... And possibly some scenarios basd off those maps, but I want to be able to take full advantage of all the resources/units that TR offers, is this possible?

Thanks again, wish I could help with the programming, I never really learned anything after Basic, and that was over 20 years ago on a Commodore 64!

Hey guys, I know you have a million other things you are working on, or hopefully even possibly enjoying some time doing your own thing.:)

But, I was wondering if you could explain if there is any way to make maps/scenarios that are compatilble with TR.

Before you mentioned something about the Worldbuilder not having all the TR resources, or something, I could be completely wrong, but is there any way I would be able to make my own Maps or Scenarios with TR?

I wanted to do some detailed maps of different areas, Europe, North America, etc... And possibly some scenarios basd off those maps, but I want to be able to take full advantage of all the resources/units that TR offers, is this possible?

Thanks again, wish I could help with the programming, I never really learned anything after Basic, and that was over 20 years ago on a Commodore 64!

yea there is way, you just add the necessary resources. Note realism mod i think made some changes with health/happiness provided with certain resources. However if you did try you could probably make a scenario.

you can make the map clean and add any particular civs you want. There is a tutorial somewhere. this you cant do in worldbuilder.

I think there is a generally easier way to make changes to the map you have with a utility, but i dont think it was warlords compatible. If it isnt warlords compatible you might have to do the old fashioned way, editing everything in worldbuilder.

A question to anybody. I like the demolition man and all. But i am curious how does the raze city work. does it occur after a number of turns? or is it suppose to occur at once?

for the previous post, i meant when using a demo man when razing a city, just for clarification..;)

Where is the armor thread? where do i mention tanks?..:dunno:

Oh and what about adding a modern SAM infantry(mobile), i rememebr this being mentioned before by different people.

SAM infantry should upgrade to IFV or mobile SAM infantry.:goodjob:

look closely. There is a tank thread

look closely. There is a tank thread

thanks:thumbsup:

i must have not been in the right stage of mind..:lol: :lol:

Hi! My name is moscovo, and i would like to know why the demolitian man doesn't raze the citys, its a bug? It takes several turns? Or how can i make him to do it.
Another thing, i would like to know if you are thinking im adding to this mod something like the "revolution" mod of jdog5000.

Thanks for your time :)

It does take several turns. This is because it is unrealistic that you can destroy a huge city instantly.

Just be patient.

Well, after all the frustration of 2.12, it was great to play a full game of TR on the World Map to the end. (Diplomatic victory for my Russian/Indian empire on around turn 820!)

First of all, more and more kudos to Houman and Mexico who have worked tirelessly and have put out a must-have mod of Civ IV. My overall impressions are very good, the game plays great, the balance keeps getting better, and I feel like you guys are getting close to what you set out to do with making a Total Realism mod in the first place.:)

Used the fix for Lindbergh's flight and didn't enounter any other fatal bugs along the way, and after buying Warlords in anticipation of Beta 2 coming out, I can only imagine how good TR will be with a much more stable engine underneath it.

So really just wanted to say great job, and I was going to post my specific thoughts about units and gameplay aspects in the appropriate threads.

Thanks

Hello everybody!

I am quite new in here, having just registered after months of carefully reading all posts in the previous thread... and then discovering this new one :crazyeye:

First of all, I would like to thank the crew for this exciting mod, which greatly improves the experience of an already amazing game such is civ4 :goodjob:

One question - suggestion for a thread: is anybody working on language localizations, and in particular on italian translation? Thought I have always been playing the game in english, that wouldn't be bad to spread the mod to the most...

Keep on this great work!

I have just reached turn 80 and the Russian Empire was just wiped out by Barbarians. Maybe the warrior's bonus against barbarians should be increased, to 30% ?

I was lookng forward to seeing them in the modern era too.:(

WarKirby

Hello everybody!

I am quite new in here, having just registered after months of carefully reading all posts in the previous thread... and then discovering this new one :crazyeye:

First of all, I would like to thank the crew for this exciting mod, which greatly improves the experience of an already amazing game such is civ4 :goodjob:

One question - suggestion for a thread: is anybody working on language localizations, and in particular on italian translation? Thought I have always been playing the game in english, that wouldn't be bad to spread the mod to the most...

Keep on this great work!
not yet - but you are welcome to do this if you want :)

The Bonus against Babarian depends mostly of the difficulty you are playing. I think over prince you didn't recieve any bonus.

I garrison my cities with at least two warriors (or archers/huntsmen if the barbarian has these units) and done well. (One with City-Defence Promotion and one with strength promotion) Play most time difficulty prince.

I don't have a problem againt barbarians, it's the AI getting wiped out that I'm worried about. AI civs should have a bonus v Barbarians as well.

WarKirby

ups, sry :)

But i didn't see the BIG problem ... one of 23 nations get destroyed ...

maybe the destroyed civs will leave room for every other civs, the map tends to be really crowded. Did you see the celts?:lol: :lol:

1. What does one do with the demolition unit?

2. After selecting a unit, what does the last option (the hand with the scroll) mean? I understand what it means when you select a mercenary and wish to discontinue the contract.

not yet - but you are welcome to do this if you want :)
yes, I was ready for this kind of reply... :)
which are the files to be translated? I guess the whole xml bunch has to be dealt with, but are there any lines to be changed also in pyton?
And, of course, I am talking about last Vanilla's version, since I haven't switched to Warlords yet...

Best regards

Hey everybody.

what do you guys think of adding this. I just seen it right now it looks interesting.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189388
Sevo's "mastery victory"

well off to my brother in law's birthday:bday:

Hey everybody.

what do you guys think of adding this. I just seen it right now it looks interesting.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189388
Sevo's "mastery victory"

well off to my brother in law's birthday:bday:

Hi Spartan117,

Seems very good and very realistic. Some civs were strong 2500 years ago (Greece, Persian,...) and are not among the greatest today whereas others were nothing and are on the top today (USA,...). A good idea to have to "fight" until the deadline.
Have you ask Houman what he think about this ?

The Frog.

it sounds quite good. :)

As long as it's optional, and not a necessity like the 'realistic' timeline

I don't likje the idea as it relies on the game having a designated time limit. I hate time limits. I prefer to play until it is indisputable who wins

WarKirby

I have oft complained about the lack of a ZoC rule several times, and while I couldn't find something which totally satisfied my ideas, I did find this:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=181921

It allows forts to project a Zone of Control, therefore allowing them to be of some use. Currently, forts are absolubtly pointless because the enemy can simply ignore them. With this component, that's no longer an issue.

What say you guys?

WarKirby

I have oft complained about the lack of a ZoC rule several times, and while I couldn't find something which totally satisfied my ideas, I did find this:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=181921

It allows forts to project a Zone of Control, therefore allowing them to be of some use. Currently, forts are absolubtly pointless because the enemy can simply ignore them. With this component, that's no longer an issue.

What say you guys?

WarKirby

Hi man, you are probably right about ZoC. Adding them would be a good thing, fight would become more tactical. Nevertheless, the problem of forts is that they "use" the implementation of their title. It would be better if you don't have to waste a title to build a fort.
IMO, it's not an urgent problem to solve. There is more important stuff to do even if something could be done in the future.

The Frog.

I know that is far from perfect.

I just put a detailed request for a better one in the mod components request thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=174446&page=7). Hopefully someone will take it up. Maybe even Mexico, but I put it there to maximise the chance of somebody picking up on it.

Fingers crossed:please:

WarKirby

JFort isn;t ready yet. He says in his last post, that he will update it around XMas. We still have to wait until its cooked a bit more. TR Warlord has to be a stable mod.

ethnic units from africa. Including infantry, etc...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189492



How come this hasnt been added:(

the model/texture is not good or too many polygons,.... or what?:confused:

the eagle warrior, could replace the Aztec spearmen,.:D

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=172833&highlight=eagle+warrior

SPartan,

Consider them as done. ;)

SPartan,

Consider them as done. ;)

Great:goodjob:

:beer:On a side note. Total Realism was mentioned in the November 2006 issue of Computer Games. Kael has a thread here relating to this.:cheers:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189477

The actual part mentioning Total Realism is here(its just an image though;) )

http://kael.civfanatics.net/images/CW-3.jpg

This is JUST incredible!!!! We made it to a magazine??? haha I can't believe it!!
For the Warlords there is a need for lots more promotion from our side....

This is JUST incredible!!!! We made it to a magazine??? haha I can't believe it!!
For the Warlords there is a need for lots more promotion from our side....

Houman,

Great. Hard work is always rewarded.:clap:

The Frog

Warlors TR will be front page ;)

Warlors TR will be front page ;)


Thanks Az. :) Yeah we really have to promote it better this time. I always get lazy once we are close to the release an I only mention the new features without explaning the old good features. Therefore new players do not know about many things and feel felt alone.

This mod should be for everyone and not only for insiders. So a proper FAQ in HTML, and Mod descrption about the cool new features is a must for the gold version. We are planning to release Beta 3 for this weekend. Hopefully it works out.

Regards
Houmie

You should open a thread that has a link to the "latest version" ala Rhyes mod, and many other mods in the development forum.

I will put Total REalism in my empty signature also.:lol: :thumbsup:
Now every time i post everyone will see the mod.:evil:

Oh and have the Latest download thread "stickied".

Possibly have the mod tested by beta testers before release so that the version released will be generally bug free. Many people after having the game crash the first time playing tend not to want to play again.:)

Thanks Az. :) Yeah we really have to promote it better this time. I always get lazy once we are close to the release an I only mention the new features without explaning the old good features. Therefore new players do not know about many things and feel felt alone.

This mod should be for everyone and not only for insiders. So a proper FAQ in HTML, and Mod descrption about the cool new features is a must for the gold version. We are planning to release Beta 3 for this weekend. Hopefully it works out.

Regards
Houmie

1) Its Anaztazioch, Anetrith or Anzao not Az or Anaz :cry: please stick to it.

2) Your not going lazy, your just defering the release ;)

@ Spartan117

Good idea whith teh sig. Gonna do it me self in all forums accounts i have. Now back to making savegames whith bugs...

Been so long since I've last posted that my old account is dead and gone it seems :(

I've been away but look forward to trying the newest release. I can't help with the beta since I don't have Warlords yet but I'll make it a point to get it next time I'm out shopping. It should be fun relearning my old strategies with your unique combination of changes. Cheers again for all your work.

Pisces

What about adding the graphics from this. Sezerth's midieval units thread.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490


Particularly the arquebusier
Image here
http://img78.imageshack.us/my.php?image=arquebusier2bq.jpg


The longbows(probably for france or something) and Crossbows
Image here
http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=medievalsoldierspack23et.jpg


Pikes and crossbows
Image here
http://img157.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pikemanandheavycrossbow6me.jpg

Replacing some of the foot knights with these possibly
Image here
http://img226.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mfootknightsmenatarms1yt.jpg

Hopefully these will be considered:thumbsup:

@ Spartan117

If WTR would have all graphics, units and building u post here, it would go DVD size.

Keep it up. ;)

What about adding the graphics from this. Sezerth's midieval units thread.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490


Particularly the arquebusier
Image here
http://img78.imageshack.us/my.php?image=arquebusier2bq.jpg


The longbows(probably for france or something) and Crossbows
Image here
http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=medievalsoldierspack23et.jpg


Pikes and crossbows
Image here
http://img157.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pikemanandheavycrossbow6me.jpg

Replacing some of the foot knights with these possibly
Image here
http://img226.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mfootknightsmenatarms1yt.jpg

Hopefully these will be considered:thumbsup:


Hi man,

Great ! Very beautiful ! PM Houman and/or Mexico to have a look at this.

The Frog.

Hi man,

Great ! Very beautiful ! PM Houman and/or Mexico to have a look at this.

The Frog.
don't need PM :) ... but..have you also link to models?

@ Mexico

Spartan117 put this http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490

It has downloads, so i belive everything is there.

@ Mexico

Spartan117 put this http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490

It has downloads, so i belive everything is there.
aahh..first time i missed this...thank

@ Mexico

Spartan117 put this http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=175490

It has downloads, so i belive everything is there.

It was the very first link I gave, silly:crazyeye:

It was the very first link I gave, silly:crazyeye:
yes, i know :) but i read this post from bottom

Hello,
On a previous game as England I had assassins that I could fortify in a rival city (clicking shield icon) and after two turns all hell would break loose.

Current game as Japan, my ninjas fortify in a city but nothing seems to happen except they can spy.

Is this normal?

-j

Hello,
On a previous game as England I had assassins that I could fortify in a rival city (clicking shield icon) and after two turns all hell would break loose.

Current game as Japan, my ninjas fortify in a city but nothing seems to happen except they can spy.

Is this normal?

-j
have you latest version? this bug was already resolved...

have you latest version? this bug was already resolved...

Which is the latest?

Warlords Total Realism beta 2.0
3.0 is soppoused to come thi weekend (translation: next weekend) :)

Warlords Total Realism beta 2.0
3.0 is soppoused to come thi weekend (translation: next weekend) :)
ehm..small correction:
for vanilla civ:
Total realism 2.1.3

for Warlords
Total realism 2.0 Beta2
next release will be beta3

u mean Warlords Total Realism 2.0 beta3 :)

what about including some of these units into the game as ethnic units.

The units are from WW1 to present. There are many the realism mod hasnt put in. This mod hasnt came out yet as it is only a preview but is what brought together by snafusmith(who is an excellent designer)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=191047

Since it is a preview there are tons of images in there. Not all the units shown though can be used because that would result in the creation of whole units into the game.

what about including some of these units into the game as ethnic units.

The units are from WW1 to present. There are many the realism mod hasnt put in. This mod hasnt came out yet as it is only a preview but is what brought together by snafusmith(who is an excellent designer)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=191047

Since it is a preview there are tons of images in there. Not all the units shown though can be used because that would result in the creation of whole units into the game.
interesting post - may be used as unit library :)
anyway most unit is already added:
light tanks: markV, whippet, renault, a7v -already in game
armored cars: hmm..maybe used as later replacement for scout/explorer (can only defend, but can use enemy roads..)
tanks: because we don't have different category for tanks, we are using mix of them - each which is typical for nation: ie t-34 for russia, tiger for germany etc...most of presented units is already in game (imaybe not in beta2, most unit i was added in last few days for beta3)
mobile artilery: hmm..unique units as howitzers
modern tanks: all units included
APC: already in queue
ww1 aircraft: fokker already presented
fighters: all included (us have P-51 instead of P-40)
bombers: most of them included
modern aircrafts: we have more units in game :)
battleships: we have bismarck and yamoto
nuclears sub: already in game

so result: we have about 80% of this units already presented in game (compared to beta3) and also we have some other units

but i found some units which i don't know about

The mod that was included in the warlords patch was a "Blake creation" except that the patch included the older version. This is the newer version.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=191685

This allows for better ai.


Fix to irrigation chaining bugs which would result in the AI farming excessively and flip-flopping between farms and cottages.
- General worker unit AI improvements to make them more flexible, they will also stack.
- Auto workers now come back and road up resources which had been built before roads were available.
- Workers are now less fearful of enemy units, they should only run away if they are in actual danger of dying.
- Tweaks to auto workers to achieve a better balance of hammers, they should build more mines now.
- Code to add awareness of jungle chopping when choosing research.
- Great People usage improved, the AI should be less Golden Age happy, only starting one if it’ll actually pay off compared with lightbulbs/settling.
- Great Prophet Shrines valued a little more accurately.
- Great Merchant cash bomb logic added.
- AI's will now spend gold to perform deficit (100%) research and will decline to trade gold reserved for such research, enabling them to make better use of gold boons from huts, plunder, refunds, great merchants, etc.
- AI Missionary code adjusted - both when choosing destination and when determining the number needed.
- Awareness of freebie promotions (such as Aggressive Combat I, or Red Cross Medic I) when choosing which unit to train.
- The AI will now chop Wonders and will chop to assist a war effort.
- The AI will no longer pillage Barbarian Cities.
- City Founding logic has been improved, a bug was fixed which could "force" the AI to found on top of resources that it otherwise wouldn't, the AI is also aware of existing culture (it's own) making tiles workable.
- City Founding logic has been diversified, Creative leaders are more "Greedy", grabbing as many resources as possible per city, Organized leaders are the opposite, being more inclined to found cities right next to resources and founding more cities overall.

The mod that was included in the warlords patch was a "Blake creation" except that the patch included the older version. This is the newer version.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=191685

This allows for better ai.


Fix to irrigation chaining bugs which would result in the AI farming excessively and flip-flopping between farms and cottages.
- General worker unit AI improvements to make them more flexible, they will also stack.
- Auto workers now come back and road up resources which had been built before roads were available.
- Workers are now less fearful of enemy units, they should only run away if they are in actual danger of dying.
- Tweaks to auto workers to achieve a better balance of hammers, they should build more mines now.
- Code to add awareness of jungle chopping when choosing research.
- Great People usage improved, the AI should be less Golden Age happy, only starting one if it’ll actually pay off compared with lightbulbs/settling.
- Great Prophet Shrines valued a little more accurately.
- Great Merchant cash bomb logic added.
- AI's will now spend gold to perform deficit (100%) research and will decline to trade gold reserved for such research, enabling them to make better use of gold boons from huts, plunder, refunds, great merchants, etc.
- AI Missionary code adjusted - both when choosing destination and when determining the number needed.
- Awareness of freebie promotions (such as Aggressive Combat I, or Red Cross Medic I) when choosing which unit to train.
- The AI will now chop Wonders and will chop to assist a war effort.
- The AI will no longer pillage Barbarian Cities.
- City Founding logic has been improved, a bug was fixed which could "force" the AI to found on top of resources that it otherwise wouldn't, the AI is also aware of existing culture (it's own) making tiles workable.
- City Founding logic has been diversified, Creative leaders are more "Greedy", grabbing as many resources as possible per city, Organized leaders are the opposite, being more inclined to found cities right next to resources and founding more cities overall.


Hmmmm I am going to have a chat with the team. Maybe we should still bring a Beta 4 before Gold and implement the even more improved AI, Pagan temples; a secret idea designed in our team ;) and few more units.

Regards
Houman

Hello,

I know that this question was already asked and i am sorry if this is the wrong thread. I would like to have some continet maps, so i dont have to play on world map alone.

Especially a europe map with north africa (carthage, egypt, middle east maybe) would be very nice.

Maybe some other player have the same suggestion.

Thanks

Check World Map threat arround here.

Guy named Temujin_Khan is converting maps to TR. Ask him for help as TR team is quite busy making beta4 and preparing gold edition (bug free release).

I would not give them boring and time stealing work like map making to do. Atleast at this time.
Making/converting maps are not only putting resoueses, but also making sure you will have enought food to have stagnant population (no growing and than starving becouse you dont have enought food) and also game ballancing +making resource trade possible.

Hey found new seige units, canons, I mentioned them a while back as well, but just recently remembered about them.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=180486&highlight=bombard

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=180321&highlight=bombard

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=182956&highlight=bombard

I believe the last link had animations for them. I was playing Dale's Scenario and seen one of the seige units, looked really good. Maybe they can be added to soem civs?

I'm half way through, what is probably my most enjoyable game of Civ .
It's taken me a few games of Total Realism to adjust , it really does play differently.
In my first few games, I was one of those who ran out of things to build. This game i'm Monte and have founded a religion. I've also curbed my instinct to spread out too quickly.
3 cities is my limit untill some income starts coming in. Markets are much more valuable in this game. The temples do fill in the early build period.

I'm playing huge lakes map and it feels like it is a survival of the fittest with all civilizations struggling to get established. Brennus is allready gone via the barbarians and i've come across barb cities called Beijing and St Petersburg , so I guess I won't be coming across any Chinese or Russians . They are forming more city states it seems.

There is a lot to like about this mod :
the no tech trading , now that i'm used to it.
the ethnic units
the replant the forest
especially the AI game play

what I do find odd is the informant , it doesn't feel right to have a unit that can wander around invisible to every one else .
Also , a question, is it possible to run the Blue Marble terrain graphics with this mod ?
cheers

Hey!
I remember that in Call To Power, and CivII was the possebility of a rebellion ending in cities revolting and making a new civ, or "reinventing" an old one, if you had conquered any... (in call to power it was in combination with a wonder with AI)
I think it gave it a very realistic touch.
I havn't noticed anything like that accurring in CivIV, though.
Is such a thing possible to implent in the gameplay?

@Seth145

Blue Marble mod is already included. Within installation it should have asked you if you wish to install the Blue marble or not. (If it didn;t ask, it was probably that Mexico was in rush, since he was very late for work, and didn't write the installer script to do this. In this case Blue Marble is always by default active. You should be able to see the difference. Don't you?

@Xazi
There was a rebellion Mod. But it is not finished yet. (They are working on the idea). It is a bit dangerous though. In the past we had bad experience with including not so well cooked components that caused CTDs to our Mod.

Regards
Houman

@Seth145

"Blue Marble mod is already included. .........You should be able to see the difference. Don't you?"

It didn't ask me , and no I can't see the difference. Not to worry , i'll wait untill the beta testing is finished and deal with it then.

I'm running beta 3 warlords and so far havn't had any problems, very stable and starts first time from your desk top icon , congrats.

A couple of points,
With the Ai , early in the game a barb axeman turned up on my borders, took one look at what was waiting for him, then turned around and went home, how cool is that ?

On the other hand , same game 2000 years later, HC hired a couple of mercenary mechanized infantry (he was fighting the war with grenadiers)
,they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory, basically invaded an obscure corner of my empire and attacked a lumber mill . I would have been asking for my money back.

I really like your larger city graphic, it gives the feel of urban sprawl as the cities get larger. Any plans to ethnicise the cities ? It would be great to have different countries with different architecture. Border cities mix of different cultures ?

Thanks to the team for all your hard work, it's appreciated.

@Seth145

"Blue Marble mod is already included. .........You should be able to see the difference. Don't you?"

It didn't ask me , and no I can't see the difference. Not to worry , i'll wait untill the beta testing is finished and deal with it then.

...

I really like your larger city graphic, it gives the feel of urban sprawl as the cities get larger. Any plans to ethnicise the cities ? It would be great to have different countries with different architecture. Border cities mix of different cultures ?

Thanks to the team for all your hard work, it's appreciated.

ok, screenshot from beta4 installer in attachment - second choice is about install Blue Marble textures

city graphic is problem, so i don't think that we do something in near future

oh, and try beta4 please, it have very smart AI (also city governors is nowe more usable)

ok, screenshot from beta4 installer in attachment - second choice is about install Blue Marble textures

city graphic is problem, so i don't think that we do something in near future

oh, and try beta4 please, it have very smart AI (also city governors is nowe more usable)

Had ranted here about Mercs and the way Warlords' improved has exacerbated the problems already inherent with that component of TR...

Apologies if anyone had the misfortune to read my vitriol. :blush:

Got pre-gold release, looks quite good. Since this is pre-gold, I won't be suggesting any new features, just small issues that kept bugging me. Had to post it here, since it has mixed stuff that would otherwise go to several different threads. All right, this is going to be a large post...

First of all, there goes unit naming. Though TR has significantly improved over time, some units still bear illogical or clumsy names; some of those have been around for quite a long time. First of all, there's still lots of units with national adjectives, resulting in "Persian persian foot knight" or even "Ottoman mongolian archer" (!) in-game. Then, there are some logical inconsistencies with naming and/or appearance of several units. So, some naming suggestions, as two lists for these issues, respectively. First is regarding naming. Keep in mind, that the problem can also be solved by reverting a unit to a generic name (like "Arabian Longbowman" -> "Longbowman"). What I'm offering is just striving for some more flavour. Most of the more ethnic names can be verified by a simple wikipedia search.

Arabian Longbowman/Pikeman -> Saracen Longbowman/Pikeman (can also rename respective swordsman)
Arabian Spearman -> Desert Spearman? (since saracens weren't around yet)
Baneret (English) -> Man-at-arms or Norman Knight (to leave banneret for French)
Chinese Archer -> Qin Archer
Chinese Junk -> Seagoing Junk
English Longbowman -> Welsh/Yeoman Longbowman
German Axeman -> Saxe Axeman
Indian Archer/Axeman/Spearman -> Mauryan? (really no idea on this one)
Indian War Elephant -> strangely enough, has to stay - I guess, Indian Elephant is just a species name :)
Mali Cavalry -> Mandinka/Seré (generally, word "cavalry" should be avoided, as "Cavalry" is industrial-era unit)
Persian Foot Knight -> really dunno
Persian Horse Archer -> Daha(e) Horse Archer
Persian Knight -> maybe some heavy cataphract stuff?
Roman Cavalry -> Equites (see Mali Cavalry above)
Romanum Legionarius -> just Legionarius, he'll be Roman all right :)
Spanish Longbow/Pike -> Castillian/Iberian Longbow/Pike
Zulu Archer -> Tribal Archer
Mongolian Archer -> Steppe Archer (this guy also features with Ottos)

Now for logical list.

Anglo Axeman -> Anglosaxon Axeman might suit him (it was anglosaxon invasion, after all)
Black Knight -> why? It has bothered me as along as he was around. France wasn't famous for her Black Knights (as wasn't any other country)
Cannon (China) -> Hand Cannon
Cataphract (Western) -> the guy is armored right, but Western Europe didn't use cataphracts. He might be armored rider or something.
Cataphract (Rus/Otto) -> cataphracts are supposed to be heavily armored, IIRC. This guy makes me sorry for him, as he has absolutely no armor. I'm not even sure why he needs copper/iron. And he certainly can't be called "cataphract" (Greek - "armor clad").
Cataphract (Mali/Zulu) -> same stuff.
Cataphract (Mongol) -> could be used for Ottos. Could be called steppe rider.
Hussite Maceman -> why?! Hussites were prominent only in Bohemia (maybe Poland), and Germans actually fought against those guys. Could be a good Bohemian UU, if we had the civ.
Phalanx -> Hoplite; phalanx is a formation that any pikemen can take.
Spanish Spearman/Swordsman -> don't you guys think they look too medieval to feature in ancient/classical eras?
Spearman Legionary - no such thing existed. They can be called Auxilia, or Auxilia Spearman.
Zulu Knight -> once more on the armor issue.
Scythian Axeman -> firstly, scythians were much more known as horsemen, secondly, associating Scythia with Russia is a bit strange. He might be Varangian Axeman. BTW, Druzhina looks quite strange.

And now, to some more generic observations. Compared to vanill, unit XP and culture are much more abundant. When we talk XP, there are now many ways to produce hardy veterans without actually fighting. It is quite easy (taken some determination) to whip out frest units with more than 10 XP even if you are not aggressive. I'm not sure if I like it. It surely makes for more varied armies with specialized units and stuff, but it seems to devaluate the very idea of gaining combat experience. Still, I'm not sure if I like or dislike that.

As with culture, I have to say I'm more negative on this. Back in vanilla, if you didn't work to promote your culture, you got no culture (if you're not creative). This is no longer the case, as I sadly found out - even a freshly captured or built city will get +3:culture: (more than most buildings give) if you just have open borders and tech exchange. And +25% :culture: with monuments - don't. Maybe leave it for obelisks, this way egyptians get a very decent UB.

Those two coupled together result in less difference between civs: aggressive civs have less of a military edge (as their bonus becomes less valuable when experience is more abundant), and peaceful civs are less successful at culturally dominating even their most barbaric neighbors, as they are guaranteed to have more culture than before even if they don't put any effort into it.

Phew. That's about it. I can also add that I like the way TR progresses very much. It closely resembles what I'd do to Civ 4 were I determined to make a personal mod (and what I did to Civ 3 back then). Great work guys. Keep it up.

unit naming (like persian persian foot knight) : first Persian is from civivlization name, second is from unit name
when he remove persin from unit name, it will display in civpedia only as foot knight - so problem to find correct unit in civpedia (if you look in civpedia, try look at infantry - there is too much infantry links)
so now make a decision: which way is better?
(...hmm..now i got idea...maybe improve civpedia to show civilization name with unique unit - but what if unit is used for more civs ?)

correcting unit name: i will put your suggestions to internal discussion, i don't see problem to adopt new names

culture problems:
- monument have +25% to culture, right - but if you start game, you have only monument and/or pagan temple to generate culture
- 3 culture at start/capture? it must be bug, we have set only 1 culture pint for newly created/acquired cities, i will look to this
EDIT: uhm, now i re-read your post and found that you mean with tech exchange - maybe not +2 culture, just some +% is better

this is pre-gold release not only for bug fixes, but also for balancing/adjustment - we will collect all player experiences for official release

3culture at start/capture? it must be bug, we have set only 1 culture pint for newly created/acquired cities, i will look to this


Not just 3 :culture:, but 3:culture:/turn. Tech exchange stuff/"building" (+100% research) also gives +3:culture:. Every city, including newly built and captured gets it free, if you're researching a tech already known to your neighbor with open borders. I find it unbalancing, if marginally realistic. By the time you get writing you usually can generate culture only with monuments and pagan temples (+2 total), so that free +3 culture is really a hard hitter. So I think it should either be removed or at least toned down. If going for % it might become overpowered later on.

As for monuments, I'd say just give pagan temples +2:culture: instead. It will net more culture than +25%:culture: from monument in ancient age, yet less in classical. It already hurts enough to go for calendar! :D

Not just 3 :culture:, but 3:culture:/turn. Tech exchange stuff/"building" (+100% research) also gives +3:culture:. Every city, including newly built and captured gets it free, if you're researching a tech already known to your neighbor with open borders. I find it unbalancing, if marginally realistic. By the time you get writing you usually can generate culture only with monuments and pagan temples (+2 total), so that free +3 culture is really a hard hitter. So I think it should either be removed or at least toned down. If going for % it might become overpowered later on.

As for monuments, I'd say just give pagan temples +2:culture: instead. It will net more culture than +25%:culture: from monument in ancient age, yet less in classical. It already hurts enough to go for calendar! :D

ah, now i understand what you mean (i personaly don't like culture for tech exchange too, but you are first player who reported this, so we don't start discussion about this)

@ Walter Hawkwood,

Hi Man,

You are probably right about the name of the various unit. At that time, it's not our first problem even if i agree with you that it would better to have good names for each unit.
I can't promise that it would be done for Gold. We will try to change some but we are more "hunting" bugs and repairing problems (if any) at first. Note, that i like some of your suggestion. Thanks for them.

Hian the Frog

@ Walter Hawkwood,

Hi Man,

As i told you, some of your suggestions were good. So, i have spent the last two hours to make some changes. Note that not all is changes.
If you want to know the changes, PM me your personnal e-mail, i will give you the file or an answer (as you prefer). If you don't want.... then wait for the next release.

Hian the Frog.

First the eyecandy:

Two city sets. One for aztecs/incas (and, surprisingly, I'd use it for India too), the other is for Vikings and Russia at least, maybe also for some other Western civs.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=197404
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=3622

And a small improvement that requires not adding, but actually removing stuff :D . Warlords has a more accurate model for Mausoleum of Mausolos/Halicarnassos than the old one (pre-Warlords) that TR currently uses.

Now for the ideas. This time they're not actually mine. I just try to highlight some of the better stuff to inspire you guys and give you some ideas.

This component would be nice to have (come on, it was in unmodded C3C already!). http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189053

Nomadism would be a very nice thing to implement, even if I don't completely agree with how it's done here. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=178778

Lots of good civic and leader trait ideas (although the final implementation is, to my mind, too severe). http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=170858

edit: and some flavour units too.

I don't remember if this guy is in, if not he'd make a good knight replacement for african civs (unlike many other horsemen made for Africa, this one is actually armored).
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2664

A very good medieval swordsman. He's quite generic, and could be used as Foot Knight for civs that didn't rely on full plate armor. Russia maybe? http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=3526

This guy is a much better UU knight for France than the black knight. He'd be called paladin and would actually represent France. http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2429

First the eyecandy:

Two city sets. One for aztecs/incas (and, surprisingly, I'd use it for India too), the other is for Vikings and Russia at least, maybe also for some other Western civs.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=197404
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=3622

And a small improvement that requires not adding, but actually removing stuff :D . Warlords has a more accurate model for Mausoleum of Mausolos/Halicarnassos than the old one (pre-Warlords) that TR currently uses.

Now for the ideas. This time they're not actually mine. I just try to highlight some of the better stuff to inspire you guys and give you some ideas.

This component would be nice to have (come on, it was in unmodded C3C already!). http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=189053

Nomadism would be a very nice thing to implement, even if I don't completely agree with how it's done here. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=178778

Lots of good civic and leader trait ideas (although the final implementation is, to my mind, too severe). http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=170858

edit: and some flavour units too.

I don't remember if this guy is in, if not he'd make a good knight replacement for african civs (unlike many other horsemen made for Africa, this one is actually armored).
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2664

A very good medieval swordsman. He's quite generic, and could be used as Foot Knight for civs that didn't rely on full plate armor. Russia maybe? http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=3526

This guy is a much better UU knight for France than the black knight. He'd be called paladin and would actually represent France. http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2429

halicarnassos is updated, thx for info
plague component - we are working on our own version :)
other UU units: lack of time to include this :(

halicarnassos is updated, thx for info
plague component - we are working on our own version :)
other UU units: lack of time to include this :(

Great! I meant both mounted units replacing graphics for existing units - zulu & french knights. Still, of course it can wait until after Gold release. Nice to know 'bout plague. :goodjob:

Hi Guys,

In fact there are many things we want to add (new UU, new mod components,...) but at that time we are ALL very busy with our job. End of the year dead lines...i think you understand the problem.
We hope to release the Gold version for Christmas. Then, in 2007, we will continue to imrpove the mod an the base of this Gold Version. Maybe some new add ons we are working on today....

Hian the Frog.

On the subject of all things Christmassy, I just thought since I won't be on again until after Christmas eve my time that I'd say....

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!!!!

Regardless of what religion you may or may not practice, I hope everyone has a safe and joyous holiday season and New Year.

Cheers, Prost, Santé, Na zdrowie, Salud, Oogy wawa, eH nay'meylIjyIn Dujablu'jaj!:xmassign: :xmascheers: :cheers:

@Uncle Anton

"Na zdrowie". We say that after someon achoos. In English its "blessyou". What it actually means... i never tough about it :lol:. "Na" means "On" and "zdrowie" is "health".So you can make it out your self :D

@Uncle Anton

"Na zdrowie". We say that after someon achoos. In English its "blessyou". What it actually means... i never tough about it :lol:. "Na" means "On" and "zdrowie" is "health".So you can make it out your self :D

"Na zdrowie" is an expressed wish that someone who achoos stays in good health, or returns to it. "Na" means "for/to" here, and denotes direction, not location.

Merry christmas everyone here, even though me being Orthodox christian will have it only on 7th of January. :D

@Uncle Anton

"Na zdrowie". We say that after someon achoos. In English its "blessyou". What it actually means... i never tough about it :lol:. "Na" means "On" and "zdrowie" is "health".So you can make it out your self :D

LOL

That's what I get for using online translators!!! :lol:

Could someone explain how raizing captured cities works ?

I understand that cities can take 3-4 turns depending on the size, but I am regularly getting cities that don't collapse. Thousands of years later they are still there , empty but with my culture and i'm presuming a drain on my resources. Is this a bug or is the game designed that way ?

Tried the demolition man , but that didn't work as I think they are a known bug.

City raze is bugged. Some cities dont get razed. If they dont have ?R? or something at end of their name, this means this city is not in process of razing.
And its 3 population per turn raze speed.

hey whats up guys, havent posted here in a long while. I am glad to see the mod is being worked on still. Well anyway like usual you guys do a great job.

There seems to be plenty of new units I think.......:D

Well I gots to go, I am still very busy. I havent played civ in a few months:(

Spartan117

Make good relationship with your boss, as once we realese new version you will have some absense in job :lol:

Has there been any thought on having the barbarian states slowly develop into rival civilizations? It would add some realism (I think) and would add a twist to the game.

Any progress in modifying the rate of peasant revolts yet? The mod is otherwise excellent, but the way-too-frequent revolts with way-too-many way-too-powerful revolutionaries really reduces the overall experience for me..

We lowered slave revolt chance from 3% to 2.5% and serfdom revolt from 2% to 1.5%. Now they barelly happen, so you still have to build workers with slavary, but rebels tend to kill them easilly the turn they spawn.

Also theya re weakened. Not its city population/4 instead cypy pop/3. Soyou need city pop 8 to have 2 rebeliants instead of city pop 6.

But were making new rebeliant system, dont know when will it be finished.

Nice to hear! :) Other than that, I'm really loving the mod. So much added depth compared to Walords. :worship:

Spartan117

Make good relationship with your boss, as once we realese new version you will have some absense in job :lol:

Yea hopefully. School and work leaves me with about no time at all. Next release possibly, March 12th is around my 19th birthday (3/25)!!!:D

Wow congratulations on you being part of the realism team. Just keep up the amazing work Houman, Mexico, Hian, Anaztazioch, and I guess the other people who sort of left over time:) :thumbsup:

Just wondering is there a list somewhere of the new features that will likely be added in the new version?

Regards...

Wow congratulations on you being part of the realism team. Just keep up the amazing work Houman, Mexico, Hian, Anaztazioch, and I guess the other people who sort of left over time:) :thumbsup:

You have forgotten our two main 3D, skinner and designer artists: Charly1977 and Walter Hawkwood. A lot of credit also goes to them. The team was never that well balanced and that professional since Feb 2006.

We are now 6 and everyone has done great amount of work:

Houman, Mexico, Hian, Anaztazioch, Charly1977 and Walter Hawkwood



Just wondering is there a list somewhere of the new features that will likely be added in the new version?



We have two surprises....;) Can't tell sorry. Hopefully Monday or Tuesday we can release it.

Regards
Houman

Suprises we can uncover are uncovered on our hompage ;p

http://civ4.houmie.com/

:wow: The vast amount of changes that have been made are incredible and I can't wait for release.I been very busy with work the last two months,haven't posted in awhile.I am glad to see the team is as strong as ever.Great work guys,can't believe there are still some more changes that will be surprises,along with what is listed.Heres to the best mod for CivIV :cheers:

You have forgotten our two main 3D, skinner and designer artists: Charly1977 and Walter Hawkwood. A lot of credit also goes to them. The team was never that well balanced and that professional since Feb 2006.

We are now 6 and everyone has done great amount of work:

Houman, Mexico, Hian, Anaztazioch, Charly1977 and Walter Hawkwood




We have two surprises....;) Can't tell sorry. Hopefully Monday or Tuesday we can release it.

Regards
Houman

hmmm..

Wow lots of units are to be added. :eek:

I am sorry about not mentioning charly and walter.:( Go charly and walter:D


Man, besides the units there are so many new additions and features to be added. National Units:D , new civics, buildings. etc..

Great job!

Has any1 tried to play TR on a tiny/small map? Or Civ4 vanilla at Epic/Marathon speed? Gets boring? Micromanager's paradise? Any thoughts?

I usually play nothing larger than small, I'm starting to wonder if I'm not missing some of the experience. Usually by the middle of the game all is explored.

So here's the second part of the question: how does TR play at the biggest maps with as many opponents as possible? For example, is it at all possible to win the conquest victory (assuming you don't win the domination victory earlier)?

Well, the answers will be of generally philosophical style. :)

1) I don't think that Civ is really made for something less than Large maps. The game has poor scalability, and the bigger the map and number of opponents, the more many features shine. For example, 7 world religions make little sense in a game with less than 7 players, and really start to be cool when there are at least 14 involved. For that sake, as TR is an attempt to enhance the original gameplay, it follows the same pattern. At least for me, more opponents = more fun.

2) The higher is the game speed, the less strategy is involved, and decisions turn from strategic to tactical, eventually turning civ into RISK. Our gamespeed is not for people who like their games fast, that's true. We're more like chess guys, not RISK guys. I understand that it can't appeal to everyone - and maybe (maybe) we will introduce faster gamespeeds later on.

3) Strange as it may seem, I've never won a civ 4 game. I never play to "achieve a win". I just like to watch the things develop and solve the challenges that arise in process. I do like MP, and I mostly play with friends, but, believe me, we've never ever had a PvP war - and that's not a kind of homerule, it's just that we don't really compete. I think playing Civ to win is a kind of sport, and I personally am not a sports kind of guy. But I guess it isn't that harder to win in TR than in vanilla civ (that is, if you don't count better AI - it is generally accepted that it performs one difficulty level higher than default one).

I play Civ4 more to end the game. Not allways as winner, but allways a survivor. Whe im near defeat I wish player could become vassal of AI.
Sometimes i see that i need to quit (saving some time) and sometimes i see that i have lost the war, so im doing as much as i can to leave the war as untouched as possible. Like moving all my army to protect 3 or 4 major cities, where 4 or 5 others are left with draft defenders just to stop AI at borders not near my main cities. I sometimes take time to pillage my own improvements, so AI dont take gold from it. It often end at spot, when i have army and some major cities. And AI ? Conquered cities with unhappiness from draft (dont know if it stays after city will get captured) with low population and no improvements and kick as maintanance. I just rebild my army and make a counter attack, or join other AI in war for some teritory.

I've never won a game either.I never really thought of world domination as a winning strategy myself.Didn't work for any major empires throughout history.I go for a financial/industrial type victory myself,more of a personal goal than a victory condition.Which is why mercenaries are by far my favorite aspect of this mod.There's nothing like being able to hire a few well trained mercs to defend your borders when the enemy comes a knockin'!

I see in the forums that alot of people think mercs unbalance the game,but when I've spent my whole history building gold and shields,the opportunity to buy a profesional army is a saving grace.Bummer that I can't load the mod with mercs anymore.

Mercenary component was found to do strange things to AI. Unfortunately, it is most likely permanently out.

Mercenaries mod bug:

1) AI dont need money to hire one, and dont need money to pay their salary every turn. Unballancing

2) You could hitre mercenary from higher era (musketmans in medival era, tanks in reinesanse, or swordsman and elephants where stronmgest unit available is axeman)

3) It was way too easy to gain money for setting mercs in market

4) If player would build a city in his starting possition it will be capturable. Every time it is conquered it automaticly switches back to player (maybe if it would be his last city it would work). We had reports that AI starting position city was also uncapturable.

What about Privateers?They were super kool in civ3.I think it's neat that you've brought them back,although I don't really see the point if they can't attack without starting a war.

Working on it, more or less, but working ;)

Strange as it may seem, I've never won a civ 4 game. I never play to "achieve a win". I just like to watch the things develop and solve the challenges that arise in process. I do like MP, and I mostly play with friends, but, believe me, we've never ever had a PvP war - and that's not a kind of homerule, it's just that we don't really compete. I think playing Civ to win is a kind of sport, and I personally am not a sports kind of guy. But I guess it isn't that harder to win in TR than in vanilla civ (that is, if you don't count better AI - it is generally accepted that it performs one difficulty level higher than default one).


I play Civ4 more to end the game. Not allways as winner, but allways a survivor.


Have you guys considerred implementing the "Master Victory Mod" by Sevo? :goodjob:

To quote Sevo:

I wanted a new victory condition based on a few basic premises:
Victory should only be judged at the end of the game (time frame)
It should score civs on multiple different factors that require maximum development of the empire
Along that line, it should rank players who score highly across many measures better than players who score very well in one area at the sacrifice of other aspects of the game.
It should allow for a civ that doesn't warmonger to compete more evenly with civs that do while still leaving military battles a central part of the game.
It should balance a historical and unchangeable component of the score with another component that can rapidly change in the late stages of the game.

The mod was designed to meet these objectives.

Although written for Civ4, Thorn has modified it for Warlords 2.08.

It would be great if it could be used on the World Map, playing say 1000 turns to the end of game or maybe more.

With Blakes AI improvements, the last few games I played were over due to cultural victory (either mine (rushed to beat the AI) or the AIs). This was before I or the AIs had finished researching the later techs. So no chance to build the modern units. Using the Master Victory condition would help overcome that problem (as well as me improving my game play of course). :)


Maybe you could also consider increasing the Culture victory condition from 85,000 to 100,000 or more.