View Full Version : Encouraging Spanish - Aztec/Incan wars


McA123
Oct 06, 2006, 07:27 PM
I think that this is a pretty big problem, these 2 civs never die, and end up being a major thorn in the side of America and Spanish, French and English Colonialism. I think a brainstorm is in order to try to come up with some sort of way for them to die!

The only real thing I can think of that hasn't already been tried is for, say, conquistadors to spawn in South America at a certain point if Spain is present in the area. It's not a very good idea, but it's all I can come up with.

Also, setting them as MC's was already tried, to no avail, and the problem isn't that Spain, France, England or America won't declare war, it's that they won't invade.

a1Basco
Oct 06, 2006, 09:39 PM
If it is the Ai player, spawning Conquistadors does sound like an ok idea... but you have to remember that doing so would make it nearly impossible for a human player to defend if they were the Aztecs.

Now that I think about it more, it might not make sense for Spain to spawn Conquistadors if Spain was in a situation were it is defending against France or something.

The only solution I think.. is to make the AI less stupid. Which, to my very limited knowledge, is impossible.

NitroJay
Oct 06, 2006, 10:12 PM
Yes, spawning the conquistadors I think is a bad idea. That would be HUGELY unfair advantage to Spain... If there was only a way to make Spain INVADE... I can't imagine it's all THAT difficult. I know next to nothing about mod making, but if Rhye can make settlers want to go to America, why not conquistadors as well?

MrThing
Oct 07, 2006, 12:14 AM
Plus, the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs was really a fluke.

The Aztecs invaded the Spanish into a temple in which the warrior eliet did not bear weapions and the Spanish took advantage of the situation by slaughtering them.

There is also the whole disease problem. Most of the population quickly died from diseases brought over from Europe.

Not only that, but the Incan empire in particular was already unstable after rapid expansion. Many regions had recenly been added the the empire when the Spanish arrived and so were easily bought off to fight against the Incas.

Tboy
Oct 07, 2006, 01:22 AM
This is a real problem... I'm playing a game right now as the aztecs where virtually no-one has tried to colonize north america (mainly because I attacked anyone who tried :) ) and the Spanish are my best friends, and I have never been to war with them! A little more 'wanting' for Aztec and Incan lands would be good. After all, who wouldn't want all that bountiful land and gold?

SadoMacho
Oct 07, 2006, 01:34 AM
The AI Spain has often no Iron because the iron in spain is allmost every time under Frence cultural controle (by Bordeaux). In this way they cannot build conquestadors. Conquestadors are the key to conquest of the Aztecs and Inca. They can be brought to America befor astronomy.

I allso think the UP of spain is wrong. The Spannish Armada was destroyed because Engish ships were faster and more mobile than the Spannish, witch gave the English the chance of using a new tactic.

The Spannish strenght is the Reconquista and the Conquista. Nobleman gave there lands to the oldest son and there younger ones only got a sum of money. They became an army bent on conquering new lands that they could own. This were the conquestadors that recaputered Spain from the muslims and conquered the Americas. The more land was found in america teh more conqestador came.

Blasphemous
Oct 07, 2006, 05:18 AM
I have an idea then. Maybe the Spanish UP can be that as long as Conquistadores are buildable tech-wise (not resource-wise), whenever a city above size 7 gains a pop point, and whenever a city is founded, you have a 50% chance of getting a 2-XP Conquistador in that city immediately. This vaguely reflects the Conquista and Reconquista stemming from the people's selfishness as opposed to governmental control. It also means that when the government can't get its hands on iron, the people will still saddle up to fight.

Tboy
Oct 07, 2006, 06:18 AM
Blasphemous, you're idea seems good, if a little complicated. Maybe a 25% chance every time you found a city or go up a pop point would be better.

McA123
Oct 07, 2006, 07:28 AM
But couldn't that be easily abused with a small-sized city in an area with lots of food and a granary?

Blasphemous
Oct 07, 2006, 07:44 AM
Well, it can be limited in a few ways. You can get maybe no more than one Conquistador per turn, and maybe one city can never spawn one if it did less than three turns ago. That way even a huge Spanish empire would only get one per turn, and smaller ones would get even less.
Maybe a better and simpler implementation would be that you can draft Conquistadors regardless of your Civics as long as Conquistadors are available tech-wise.

Vishaing
Oct 07, 2006, 08:50 AM
Perhaps this attribute in the CIV4LeaderHeadInfos.xml file should be upped;

<UnitAIWeightModifiers>
<UnitAIWeightModifier>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_ATTACK_SEA</UnitAIType>
<iWeightModifier>100</iWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifiers>

I'm not sure what it would do, but it looks like it might help. Unfortunately I cannot test it right now as I am working on something else.

kairob
Oct 07, 2006, 09:42 AM
The way I see it when the europeans arrived we wiped out most of them without fighting them, why not just give them a plague (like from civ 3) when we arrive that loses them lots of population and units? because thats basically what happened in real life IRC...

Tboy
Oct 07, 2006, 02:11 PM
Plagues... that's interesting. I've just posted something about them in a different thread (use this link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4616053#post4616053)), and they'd make a good addition to the mod, if it was possible (I've no idea how to script or anything).

Prestidigitator
Oct 07, 2006, 03:02 PM
Bit too late am I not ;)?
But yeah, I agree, I don't really fancy the fact that the Incans and the Aztecs are immortal, but take this, maybe we can make them fall to the Spanish, but then regain control after a while?

This would symbolize Mexico and Peru, just like Egypt symbolizes the modern country etc...


EDIT: and I have to problem with the ideas sparked by you guys :thumbsup:.

NitroJay
Oct 07, 2006, 04:12 PM
Blasphemous's idea is excellent with the spawning of the conquistadors in new Spanish cities... That way, when the Spanish settlers get to America, they'll have an attack force already there. I'm just wondering if the AI ever uses the conquistador's ability to ride onboard a caravel, I don't think I've ever seen the AI use that... But the spawn idea is excellent.

I also think the plague's should be put in from the civ3 version of this mod. I loved the plagues... And Kairob's idea of plagues in the New World when then Eurpoeans arrive sounds awesome.

The only other idea I came up with, after being reminded of the old civ3 mod, was the use of wonders. I remember there were wonders like the Knights Templar that spawned crusaders every few turns... There were also wonders that could only be built in the Americas... I was wondering if the two could be combined in the civ4 version to encourage more European conquest in the Americas... After typing this out though, I think changing Spain's UP to help spawn the conquistadors is a much simpler solution...

I do miss the knight's templar though...

McA123
Oct 07, 2006, 05:05 PM
I do miss the knight's templar though...


:lol: That was always my favourite wonder.

Crayton
Oct 07, 2006, 07:45 PM
I've read that upwards around 90% of the native American population died between 1500-1700! This is reason #1 why the civilizations in the New World collapsed. The Spanish never fought an extended war with the Azteca or Inca as she did with the Almoravids. How many Conquistadors did Pizarro bring to Peru?

Elhoim
Oct 07, 2006, 09:11 PM
How many Conquistadors did Pizarro bring to Peru?

180 soldiers and 37 horses, with muskets and cannons. Then about 100 musketeers joined later.

Tboy
Oct 08, 2006, 02:54 AM
Yeah.... disease killed a lot of them. One heck of a lot.

NeoT
Oct 08, 2006, 05:36 PM
Yeah.... disease killed a lot of them. One heck of a lot.
Two thirds of the population, whitout the diseases, The Aztecs and the Incas would have lived a loooooot more time (like in RFC, whitout deseases they will not die at all)

dc82
Oct 08, 2006, 07:51 PM
It wasn't just the diseases as well, although that did turn the tide significantly. At the same time, the Spanish were able to receive support from neighboring "civs" that were willing to support the Spanish. Tlaxcala, for example, supported and helped provide refuge for the Spanish against the Aztecs.

captain beaver
Oct 09, 2006, 09:07 AM
I have played with the Inca a couple of times and I can say it is fairly easy to become friend with Isabella. In fact, she is one of the few civs that never declared war on me. Other civs, mainly the non christian one and most of the time Asian civs, were more aggresive with me, but they only sent caravels and sometimes empty galleons against me to plunder my fishing boats.
I believe one the main reason why the Incas are so well protected against land invasion is that there is no direct way to their cities. The northern breach, which allows Incas units to leave their lands through one single land tyle, is covered with jungle and since jungle under the cultural influence of a civ cannot be crossed by its ennemies, no ennemy units can cross there. To the south lies only mountains which are uncrossable. Essentialy, you can only arrrive by boats. And on the wrong side for the Europeans.
Consequently, I don't believe that spawning conquistadors in Spanish colonies will help as they will only be able to conquer incan cities outside of their original lands. The 6 or 7 seven cities in that second category are out of reach even for the biggest military force roaming South America. A solution might be to remove either the jungle tyles to the north, enough to allow a landing party coming from the Carrabean to attack the Inca homeland, or a mountain tyle to the south, making it more likely that conquistadors (if this becomes their new UP) will go toward that breach.
Of course, if there are any ways to make the AI more effective at naval invasion, this is the way to go. Otherwise, I'll continue to keep 2-3 archers (not even longbowmen) in my homeland cities as I know they are safe from arm.

On a side note, I have never waged a real war in the modern world with the Inca, so I do not know if the AI is better with his naval landings with the new technologies.

Tboy
Oct 09, 2006, 11:25 AM
That's a good point captain beaver: in my current game, where I'm playing as the aztecs, when I tried to invade the inca it was almost impossible and took ages. I only managed to invade once I got biology, so I could use my workers to chop a path through. Having to wait until biology seems too long to me, and I too think some of the jungle should be removed, but only in the south. It might not be geographically correct, but for once I think we should allow that.

Elhoim
Oct 09, 2006, 12:08 PM
Remember that Conquistadors can cross jungle ;)

rishubhav
Oct 09, 2006, 12:47 PM
this might be improved in warlords tho with the better war AI

captain beaver
Oct 09, 2006, 02:24 PM
Remember that Conquistadors can cross jungle ;)
They actually can :eek: !?! Well since I have never seen any conquistadors in South America, it may explain my ignorance. Spain usually only brings 2 longbowmen per colony initially, and tend to keep its offensive units in Europe.
A gap in the southern mountain range might still be usefull though, as all spanish colonies are in Argentina in every game. It would take time for an army based over there to cover the entire non roaded trip from Buenos Aires to Columbia and then into Incaland.

Elhoim
Oct 09, 2006, 09:08 PM
There was one, but Rhye closed it becomes sometimes they had colonies in Argentina. But they end up having them anyway without the pass...

Uber Warrior
Oct 10, 2006, 01:07 PM
Ive got to agree with the idea of the aztecs getting spanked along with the Inca, but then the problem is the American Historical victory becomes even more difficult. Its a good idea to have them dropped by plague, but they really should be allowed a chance to come back. The idea of Rhyes and Fall is to be as 'real' as possible so that means that the colonial empires should be very hard to sustain for the Europeans, because they are trying to control such radiclly different people.

Also is there any chance of making it so the Inca are smaller? Smarter barbarian tribes to represent the wide variety of people in the area?

McA123
Oct 10, 2006, 01:20 PM
Making them barbs or MC's wouldn't change anything.

SilverKnight
Oct 10, 2006, 09:18 PM
I'm just wondering if the AI ever uses the conquistador's ability to ride onboard a caravel, I don't think I've ever seen the AI use that...
They can ride on caravels? I usually only build them for early sea exploration. Seems like it's time for a Spain game!

SilverKnight

Surtur
Oct 11, 2006, 04:23 AM
Yes they can. But I think this should be changed if it's not possible to force AI to do this. It is just another feature which gives human player an advantage over AI.
A bit off topic but I would also like to change Caravels in a way that they only can cross Ocean after you discovered Astronomy. At the moment you can circumnavigate by 1100 AD or even earlier.

Blasphemous
Oct 13, 2006, 04:48 AM
It seems to me this discussion brought up a missing collapse condition without anyone noticing: civs should collapse when they rapidly lose population. This makes starvation a potentially devastating weapon, and mass conscription a dangerously double-edged sword. It also means once major plagues are added, they will actually cause civs to collapse.

McA123
Oct 13, 2006, 06:34 PM
That would be a change, but still wouldn't really solve the problem. Sure, they'd die, but then instead of unconquered civs it would just be unconquered barbs.

NitroJay
Oct 13, 2006, 08:07 PM
Yeah, I agree... I still think the solution to the Aztec/Inca not being killed problem is the inability of the AI to mount sea invasions... Maybe this will be fixed when this mod goes Warlords and the better war AI is in play... We;ll have to wait and see.

The best solution I've seen so far, I think it was Blas's idea maybe, was to have Conquistadors spawn in newly created Spanish cities. Even if Spain only builds a few cities in South America, the few conquistadors created should be able to capture or kill a few Aztec/Inca cities... In the long term though, I'd rather Rhye throw his efforts into Warlords than deal with this pesky little issue... It may just solve itself that way...

Surtur
Oct 14, 2006, 04:59 AM
Making them barbs or MC's wouldn't change anything.

Are you sure? I don't think so. In my last game noone declared war on Inca or Aztec. Making them minor civs would at least solve this problem. In combination with spawning Conquistadors or better AI this might work.

The reasons why Spain doesn't train Conquistadors are:

- no iron (as someone mentioned before)
- Guilds not researched before ~1400 AD

Another problem I see is that these native Americans have a kinda strong but outdated army. When you compare them in power with European nations the difference is often very small. Another reason for Spain not to declare war on them.

Hitti-Litti
Oct 14, 2006, 06:08 AM
I find often many Old World nations declaring wars to Aztecs/Incas, but only few times they managed to capture any cities. The most succesful invasions I have seen was Japan's when they took 2-3 cities from Incas.

Elhoim
Oct 14, 2006, 07:51 AM
Are you sure? I don't think so. In my last game noone declared war on Inca or Aztec. Making them minor civs would at least solve this problem. In combination with spawning Conquistadors or better AI this might work.

The reasons why Spain doesn't train Conquistadors are:

- no iron (as someone mentioned before)
- Guilds not researched before ~1400 AD

Another problem I see is that these native Americans have a kinda strong but outdated army. When you compare them in power with European nations the difference is often very small. Another reason for Spain not to declare war on them.

Thatīs right, but also Rhye tried making them barbarians and MC and it didnīt work either...

McA123
Oct 15, 2006, 11:04 AM
Yeah. The problem isn't to get the AI to declare war (although that doesn't happen too much either), it's that they won't invade over sea.

qdm
Oct 15, 2006, 02:48 PM
Summarizing this thread, here is the direction to go, I think :

At the first contact of Aztec and Inca civilization with a non-american Civ, they should experience a severe shock. Civil unrest outside the capital (next turn) and afterwards a plague should start at the contact point with the non-american Civ. It should eventually propagates to the whole empire. The effects should be modeled in a way that if the outsider is ready to exploit the situation, Aztecs/Incas have a good chance to crumble in 2/3 turns. Military units should have their potential decreased by 90%, population should shrink...

If Aztecs and Incas survive the initial shock (which is very unlikely except if this was just a scouting for example by a Chinese ship), they can fight back and the shock will not be repeated when they encounter a second civilization.

For the secession of states like Mexico or Peru, it should be a general rule. Territories on a large continent far away from mother country are more and more likely to secede beginning with discovery of Nationalism by any civ.

Phallus
Oct 16, 2006, 12:43 PM
I'm not a fan of this idea. The only accurate part is where smallpox drastically reduces the population. From what I can see, invasion is where the problems lie, so it might help if the AI were given the means and an incentive to greet these new civs with an army.

SadoMacho
Oct 16, 2006, 01:32 PM
Plagues were very important in history. Most Native American peoples were decimeded by plagues. Europe had it's plagues during the so called 'little ice age' in the 14th century. Many vilages lost a lot of it's people. So I think plagues should be in the game again.

An other thing that would be nice to see again is the 'bloodcult' form CIV III.

Lord Ainsbirth
Oct 17, 2006, 03:39 AM
Hello all!
My last game is with the spanish in monarch difficult.
First, in order to not allow any french or english colonies I decided to DESTROY them. I first conquer France with my macemen, and now I'm conquering England with my "conquistadores" and cannons...
Second, I'm going to conquer "las americas" with my conquistadores...I think this is not going to be difficult, as they can cross jungles.
I support the idea of plagues, not only for americans civilization but for all. It's quite historical and realistic.
One more thing. I never like the spanish UU. The "conquistadores" didn't exist as unit. They were just a few adventures with nothing to loose but their lives, not a regular unit (like knights). What I propose is to change the spanish UU to "los Tercios" which ruled the battleground in 15th and 16th centuries. The "conquistador" should be just an explorer.
Regards,

Hitti-Litti
Oct 17, 2006, 08:12 AM
Conquistador could be explorer, who can attack, and has a big retreat chance.

kairob
Oct 17, 2006, 11:53 AM
If the was plagues and it killed units too though (but the europeans were emune) it would make an invasion really easy for the AI, then with the spawned conquistadors it should take over land fairly rapidly.

I really dont see a problem with the UU personaly.

Phallus
Oct 17, 2006, 02:49 PM
Tercios make more sense but the (currently nonexistent) conquest of the Americas just wouldn't be the same without Conquistadors.

qdm
Oct 17, 2006, 03:14 PM
While at it, The Great Plague should also be a mandatory event for European powers in the XIV-XVth century. It should have a random impact. The historical effect should be the medium value. There could be be lower or higher effects (as in The Years of Rice and Salt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Years_of_Rice_and_Salt)). European players should then be able to play another country if they are wiped out.

Zetetic Apparat
Oct 23, 2006, 06:33 AM
Religion might fix it. Incas and Aztecs are rarely dominated by a religion when the Europeans arrive. If they were very much not Christian and Isabella was then that would be more likely to provoke a more concerted conflict.

Phallus
Oct 23, 2006, 10:02 AM
It'd be good provocation, but this gets us into the same religion discussions we've had before.

Come to think of it, was anything decided through them?

McA123
Oct 23, 2006, 03:18 PM
Just a bit of clarification;

The problem is not getting the AI to declare war, it's getting them to invade.

If the aztecs and incans had no religion, or a different one than the European nations, then they might be more inclined to declare war, but they still won't mount an offensive.

SadoMacho
Oct 24, 2006, 02:53 AM
They don't invade because they can not build conquestadors because Guilds are discovered to late and the iron in spain is often under Frence control. This gives them no powerfull unit to invade the americas and we also get a medieval era without knigts in Europe.

Perhaps knights should appear with feudalism. Feudalism was developed so some people (the nobles) could train to be elite soldiers and protect the working class (the farmers). This was caused by invasions of vikings, Mayagars, Slavic people and Arabs from 600 to 1000 when Europe was a pillaging area form many people.

Pikeman and longbowman were the answer to knights in the late middle ages (hunderd years wars). This was the begining of the end of knight armies. In 1302 a Frence Knight army was distroyed by a Flemish army of infanrty. At Azincourt English langbowman killed a Frence Knight army in 1214.

The first appearance of heavy cavalry (early knights) was in the battle of Poitiers. The Frankian general Charles Martel destroyed an arab invasionforce in the 6th century. Knights are the core of armies during the crusades era (1100->1200)

In CIV we see knights appear to late. So we don't have a noble warrior class in Europe rulling the battlefield and no conquestadors willing to go to the Americas, willing to conquer land.

Surtur
Oct 24, 2006, 05:18 AM
They don't invade because they can not build conquestadors because Guilds are discovered to late and the iron in spain is often under Frence control. This gives them no powerfull unit to invade the americas and we also get a medieval era without knigts in Europe.

Perhaps knights should appear with feudalism. Feudalism was developed so some people (the nobles) could train to be elite soldiers and protect the working class (the farmers). This was caused by invasions of vikings, Mayagars, Slavic people and Arabs from 600 to 1000 when Europe was a pillaging area form many people.

Pikeman and longbowman were the answer to knights in the late middle ages (hunderd years wars). This was the begining of the end of knight armies. In 1302 a Frence Knight army was distroyed by a Flemish army of infanrty. At Azincourt English langbowman killed a Frence Knight army in 1214.

The first appearance of heavy cavalry (early knights) was in the battle of Poitiers. The Frankian general Charles Martel destroyed an arab invasionforce in the 6th century. Knights are the core of armies during the crusades era (1100->1200)

In CIV we see knights appear to late. So we don't have a noble warrior class in Europe rulling the battlefield and no conquestadors willing to go to the Americas, willing to conquer land.

Yes this is a civ4 problem I see every game. I fixed this by changing AI priorities so that they research Guilds way earlier (around 1000 AD). But I would also support a revamped Middle Age (knights earlier, pikemen and longbowmen later). This would heavily change the balance though.

SadoMacho
Oct 24, 2006, 06:10 AM
Perhaps knights with feudalism, but with attack 8 and they get an upgarde with guilds (+2 attack)

Phallus
Oct 24, 2006, 09:52 AM
Though the overall balance is very well done, I've noticed petty inaccuracies with technology in the late middle ages and the 19th-20th centuries. Would it be worth tweaking certain technologies so that techs like Guilds, Combustion and Radio are quicker whilst techs like Scientific Method and Robotics are slower?

Because it's difficult to recreate a period of rapid development like the second world war, half the civs in the game discover Flight and Medicine by 1990, and though they're petty, they're still inaccuracies. I'd love to see early 20th century techs sped up with future techs slowed down to compensate. :D

NitroJay
Oct 24, 2006, 10:01 AM
I think knights should remain with Guilds, just to not upset the balance too much... However, I agree with Surtur, the AI priority on researching guilds needs to be higher, especially for the more military oriented civs... It's possible now to research guilds before everyone else and have a huge military advantage over the AI...

As for getting Spain to invade, even with Conquistadors, they just don't load up troops and move them... Even when playing as America, England doesn't invade from the sea either... I'm hoping that the Warlord's AI will do a better job at multi-continental wars when this mod is adapted...

holy king
Oct 24, 2006, 10:12 AM
i#ve seen them invade much better in warlords, so that problem might be solved in the warlodrs version...

for the knights: i'd say make guilds much cheaper and enable knights AND pikemen....

SilverKnight
Oct 24, 2006, 09:06 PM
What would we all say to Knights with Engineering? :mischief:

SilverKnight

Surtur
Oct 25, 2006, 04:22 AM
I don't see a big difference. AI still researches Compass, Optics and sometimes even Astronomy before Guilds and Engineering. These are the changes I did:


TECH_GUILDS: cost 1000 -> 800
FLAVOR_MILITARY 2 -> 10
FLAVOR_GOLD 2 -> 6
FLAVOR_PRODUCTION 5 -> 6

TECH_CIVIL_SERVICE: cost 800 -> 750

TECH_ENGINEERING: cost 1000 -> 800
FLAVOR_MILITARY 2 -> 8
FLAVOR_PRODUCTION 8 -> 6
FLAVOR_SCIENCE 5 -> 3

TECH_COMPASS: FLAVOR_SCIENCE 7 -> 5

TECH_OPTICS: FLAVOR_SCIENCE 8 -> 6

Guilds and Engineering are now discovered between 1000 and 1100 AD. Maybe I should make Engineering more expensive again because now sometimes AI discovers pikemen before knights.
But I still think moving knights to Feudalism and longbowmen to Engineering or Guilds sounds nice. We just need to balance this.

holy king
Oct 25, 2006, 04:36 AM
how would you balance that?
weaker knights?
a horse archer is str 6 right now, so what would a knight get, who faces archers and maybe spearmen as city defenders??
8, making him a fast maceman, that is quicker available than those?
7, making it not much more than a bit advanced horse archer, that isnt worth building???

King Coltrane
Oct 30, 2006, 12:54 PM
i think that the way SadoMacho suggested is a really interesting idea... feudalism IS when knghts should become available, but it is true that the knights of this period were not as strong as those of later eras, so why not give them a strength of 8 (since macemen come later anyways) and then with guilds, engineering, or some other later tech give them +2 strength. this idea of dynamic unit strength really intrigues me. like airplanes/artillery get +X strength with radio... that kind of thing. and back to the knights... why not make a feudalism civic choice (i forget if one exists now) give a knight for each city the player has, ie generate a knight in each city that is controlled. it would make a lot of sense historically, as the feudal gov'ts came around to afford protection to the population (sort of) and would be a very viable option for euro civs so they can get a nice military bonus.

BACK TO SPAIN... i have no idea how to do this, as i dont know enough about civ 4 programming

McA123
Oct 30, 2006, 01:24 PM
Sigh... The AI is selective in who it will and won't invade. A few cases come to mind: I've been invaded as Russia by Spain at St. Petersburg, and at Vancouver by the Aztecs as the English. So I just don;t know why the Spanish won't go to south America.

Rhye
Oct 30, 2006, 05:14 PM
I wonder if iMaxWarDistantPowerRatio has anything to do with this. Unfortunately Isabella already has that value set at 100.
I may try changing it to 200, but I guess it'll just affect war declaration rather than the real war plan

SadoMacho
Oct 31, 2006, 10:36 AM
I once was invaded by Russia went playing with Japan. Russia had no cities in the far east, so they went around the old world to invade.

mitsho
Nov 01, 2006, 09:07 AM
I still would like to ask what about the jungle in mesoamerica? Shouldn't there be a "possible panama tile" there?

Greeting mitsho

kairob
Nov 01, 2006, 09:20 AM
I agree (ten char)

lumpthing
Nov 03, 2006, 07:10 AM
I still would like to ask what about the jungle in mesoamerica? Shouldn't there be a "possible panama tile" there?

Jungles can be removed after Biology right? So a panama canal is possible in the modern era. This is realistic as it wasn't opened until 1914.

holy king
Nov 03, 2006, 07:26 AM
the suez channel wasnt built somewhere around 2000BC either, as it is possible now ;-)

mitsho
Nov 03, 2006, 08:06 AM
Jungles can be removed after Biology right? So a panama canal is possible in the modern era. This is realistic as it wasn't opened until 1914.

1) Suez wasn't too. And it'd simply be good for gameplay (Spanish-inca?)
2) If not, then let me rephrase it to a possible pacific port in mesoamerica!

mfG mitsho

lumpthing
Nov 03, 2006, 08:29 AM
Good points mitsho and holy king. I would be happy either way.