I've started a new thread here where we can discuss artwork, flags, leaderheads and related topics.

We would actually need art for the leaderheads for the new nations, low priority, but contributions are welcome.

This is where I've transferred the latest list of flags and possible alternatives for the Ottoman, Kievan Rus and Netherlands flags.

This is where I am posting art and files for proposed new World Wonders, like the Alhambra, the Brandenburg Gate, the Basilica San Marco, The Palacio De Pena and the La Scala Opera House. As well I've included a file which adapts Civ3 wonders to Civ4 format.

Found a few interesting leaderheads in the downloads section. Have a look at these. Files are in the next post.

@ Sedna 17. Leaderhead files posted here. Tell me if you can use any of these. When I know you're finished with them I'll get rid of these files as my attachment folder is nearly full.

Edit. Files now saved and deleted from this thread.

Ok, I've grabbed all the file currently in this thread, so you can delete some to free up space.

Do you plan adding the flag soon? It would be a nice flavor addition to the test version!:D

Do you plan adding the flag soon? It would be a nice flavor addition to the test version!:D

That reminds me of one thing, is there a specific leaderhead thread around? I couldn't find one with a quick look and I don't remember leaders or leaderheads being specifically discussed before.

Also, is the RFCE developping team intending to keep on to the RFC tradition of changing leaderheads and are there any doctrines to go by regarding the addable leaders? Any decided number for leaders per civilization?

That reminds me of one thing, is there a specific leaderhead thread around? I couldn't find one with a quick look and I don't remember leaders or leaderheads being specifically discussed before.

Also, is the RFCE developping team intending to keep on to the RFC tradition of changing leaderheads and are there any doctrines to go by regarding the addable leaders? Any decided number for leaders per civilization?

See post 5 for some possible new ones. But there's been little discussion on leaderheads so far as getting the test version to playable beta stage remains a bigger priority. Suggestions are always welcome though and this is the right thread to do that in.

nice job with flags Jessicat. A few comments: change Venice's color to one among blue sky - teal - emerald green (also ingame possibly). Ottoman's flag is a bit missing ;) Bulgaria&England and Arabia&Cordoba are identical, can we find alternatives ? For example, a single lion for Bulgaria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Bulgaria

nice job with flags Jessicat. A few comments: change Venice's color to one among blue sky - teal - emerald green (also ingame possibly). Ottoman's flag is a bit missing ;) Bulgaria&England and Arabia&Cordoba are identical, can we find alternatives ? For example, a single lion for Bulgaria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Bulgaria

Not my job of course but I suggested some of them. Good ideas about Venice and Bulgaria. Arabia and Cordoba do have the same saying on their flags, roughly "There is no other God but Allah" but they do have the appropriate colours. Black for Arabia, esp. for the Rashidun Caliphate. White with black or green inscriptions was the standard battle flag of Cordoba. Islamic war flags typically had quotations from the Koran but never animistic symbols which were forbidden. Those two are distinct enough and as accurate as we're going to get historically.

Also, is the RFCE developping team intending to keep on to the RFC tradition of changing leaderheads and are there any doctrines to go by regarding the addable leaders? Any decided number for leaders per civilization?

Yes, we would like to do leaderheads/leaders which change through time.

I don't think we've had the discussion, but I see no reason to to add pretty much every 1) good quality and 2) period-appropriate leader for each civ we can find. For some civs we'll end up with one at most, for others... well, I suppose we do need a hard limit. How about at most three leaders per civ?

Besides being non-critical for play, there is a good reason for holding off on adding new leaderheads though, which is that they are generally big files and so it would increase the size of all our test versions.

Yes, we would like to do leaderheads/leaders which change through time.

I don't think we've had the discussion, but I see no reason to to add pretty much every 1) good quality and 2) period-appropriate leader for each civ we can find. For some civs we'll end up with one at most, for others... well, I suppose we do need a hard limit. How about at most three leaders per civ?

Besides being non-critical for play, there is a good reason for holding off on adding new leaderheads though, which is that they are generally big files and so it would increase the size of all our test versions.

As I replied above, there are some suggested alternative leaderheads above (post 5) which we might use to replace the present placeholder leaderheads for the Moscowans, Kievan Rus, Poland, Hungary etc. As a straight swap maybe we could replace several of these. Just for flavour of course.:)

Thread updated for further discussion on art and flags.

I'll experiment to make sure I understand any compilcations in replacing the flags...

I'll experiment to make sure I understand any compilcations in replacing the flags...

Did you succeeded implenting them yet?

Jessie, your new maps are nice (and huge!). There's a nice spot to write the name too, so it might look something like this:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=202702&stc=1&d=1233868129

Jessie, your new maps are nice (and huge!). There's a nice spot to write the name too, so it might look something like this:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=202702&stc=1&d=1233868129

very nice indeed! So, what about the flags?:D

Yes, flags... that needs a little more time. Probably not before next week.

Yes, flags... that needs a little more time. Probably not before next week.

Glad you like the map. Could the start box go in the upper left corner? Hope you can figure out the flags soon. Finishing the UHVs come first though, I think.:)

Thread updated for further discussion on art and flags.

@ Simon B1er . These are the proposed flags. The Ottoman flag needs a crescent added to it like this one.

proposal for kiew

http://i43.tinypic.com/166eob8.png

Status Report:

Okay, I understand how this system works. It's not a trivial problem assign colors to Civs with the the following constraints:

1) No two Civs can be exactly the same color scheme (game restriction)*
2) Civs which are expected to be near each other should have relatively different colors
3) Some civs have a color which makes sense historically
4) Most of the flag artwork we have is in the form of decals, which constrains the underlying colors. Some (user-contributed) flags are "solid", and it doesn't really matter what the underlying nation colors are.

To illustrate the last point. England's flag is going to be the English coat of arms, which is yellow lions on a red background. The flag we currently have for this is color-less. To get the flag to be the right color requires that England be red with yellow highlights.

Anyhow, the sort of problem is that the number of countries that would ideally be some shade of red historically is large. Judging by flag colors: England, Burgundy (sort of), Poland, Venice, the Pope, Byzantium, Ottomans, Moscow, possibly the Nose (Danish flag). We can't have this, so compromises will have to be made.

This will be an iterative process: a coming together of color schemes that work well on the map with flag art. The flag artwork posted here is fine, as far as it goes, for suggestions. However, these images can't actually be used for the flags, so I have to track something like them down on the internet and covert them to the appropriate format.

The next test version will have a new flag for Poland, and different colors for the Civs, attempting to build toward a diverse and historic palette. Feedback will be solicited.

*The reason to current colors are sort of totally random is because Kiev and Moscow were assigned the same color scheme in the XML. The game randomly chose a new color for Moscow, but this color was assigned to some other Civ, and things cascaded from there.

What format do the flags need to be in? Decals?

Unfortunately I've lost the original files though so if I didn't upload them somewhere that screenshot is all that's left X.x

Hey Umarth,

Thanks for the offer of help, but I think I've actually got most of the flags sorted out now.

Okay no problem.

As a teaser, here are the new Civ buttons I have made (same colors/symbols as the flags). A few more civs are get "new" buttons from elsewhere.

These are: Burgundy, Bulgaria, Austria, Cordoba, Byzantium, Genoa, Kiev, Moscow, Pope, Portugal.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=206947&stc=1&d=1237064130

Hello guys!
Great work so far! Thank you! :)
For the Hungarian flag an idea: (it's from the European Middle Ages mod)

Nice work with the tabs and flags, Sedna. We're nearly there. The only ones that really need work, IMO, are the following.
Bulgaria. OK for a button but could we find a better flag than a horse?
Moscow. I know what it's supposed to be but it's very blurred. I'll look for something.
Arabia. That BTS palm tree is very cheesy. What not the Islamic one I posted above?
Cordoba. OK as a button. But as a flag? Same suggestion as above.
Kiev. OK but there's better art in Umarth's flags above also.
Venice. The button is great. The flag should be the same.
Ottomans. Makes no sense. A yellow crescent as below would be best.

I have been trying to find a good icon for Bulgaria. One of the symbols of Bulgaria (semi-officially) is the Horseman from Madara (Madarski Konnik). It is an image carved on a vertical rock 23m high near the town of Madara, several kilometers from Preslav.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madara_Rider

The carved image has been dated to the early 8th century and around the picture one can find the names of several of the early Khans. Post-Christian Bulgarians associated it with St. George.

One of the interesting facts was that a second image was found in a Thracian tomb dating 9th century BC. Thracian were living in the territory of modern Bulgaria and Romania since before the Greeks. Homer mentions them in the Illiad as allies to the Trojans. From this one can conclude that when the Bulgars made it to the Balkans, found the tomb and the image of the horseman, liked it and then build one of their own, however, there is also a third image. The third image was found in Afghanistan, carved in a rock, the Afghani horseman was called Madara. As of right now, there are thousands of crazy theories and nothing scientific resolving the connection between those three images.

I don't know if any of the pictures that I found could be used by sedna.

Thanks for the feedback.

Hungary: That is a better symbol. The slightly simpler version I used was pre-made, and thus easier, but I can do this one instead.

Ottomans: I would like to defend the current choice, which is from Rhye. It is the Tughra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughra and is a perfectly fine symbol for the Ottomans. The crescent is certainly more recognizable, but sort of boring too. I'm torn.

Venice: The flag should be the same as the button (without the border, which gets distorted in an ugly way). Unless I made a mistake...

Kiev/Moscow: Both the complex symbols for these two cities (Angel/St. George) look better in full color/large than small/two-color. I can do a better job on the Moscow one (I shrank it down too small and then made it slightly larger again, which is never a good idea). I'm not very motivated to switch the Kiev one when the current symbol is nice and simple, displays well as small size, and is perfectly fine for Kiev.

Arabia/Cordoba: Why do you want these two civs to have exactly the same symbol? That seems like a bad idea. I'm ok with giving one of them (probably the Arabs, since you hate the palm) this new symbol -- but again, I worry that it's a bit complex and won't look great shrunk down on unit flags/shields.

Bulgaria: I was thinking of the Madra Rider with the horse (which was pre-made, and thus easy). I'll see what I can do with any of the pictures you post. My other option was this seal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_the_Bulgarian_Empire.PNG but it looked bad small in-game.

Thanks for the feedback.

Hungary: That is a better symbol. The slightly simpler version I used was pre-made, and thus easier, but I can do this one instead.

Ottomans: I would like to defend the current choice, which is from Rhye. It is the Tughra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughra and is a perfectly fine symbol for the Ottomans. The crescent is certainly more recognizable, but sort of boring too. I'm torn.

Venice: The flag should be the same as the button (without the border, which gets distorted in an ugly way). Unless I made a mistake...

Kiev/Moscow: Both the complex symbols for these two cities (Angel/St. George) look better in full color/large than small/two-color. I can do a better job on the Moscow one (I shrank it down too small and then made it slightly larger again, which is never a good idea). I'm not very motivated to switch the Kiev one when the current symbol is nice and simple, displays well as small size, and is perfectly fine for Kiev.

Arabia/Cordoba: Why do you want these two civs to have exactly the same symbol? That seems like a bad idea. I'm ok with giving one of them (probably the Arabs, since you hate the palm) this new symbol -- but again, I worry that it's a bit complex and won't look great shrunk down on unit flags/shields.

Bulgaria: I was thinking of the Madra Rider with the horse (which was pre-made, and thus easy). I'll see what I can do with any of the pictures you post. My other option was this seal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_the_Bulgarian_Empire.PNG but it looked bad small in-game.

OK. You've convinced me, esp. on the tughra and the madara rider. I'm OK too with the Cordoban one though it should be green on a white background. Cordoban standards were predominately white with green or black inscriptions. But with the Arab one I'd really like the black one with white letters which is accurate with the jihad banners of the Prophet and early Rashidun caliphs. The green one was really a similiar one under the Ummayads.

Here are some more Madara Riders. I hope at least one of them works. The golden one is currently on Bulgarian currency. The best for our case might be the drawn one, camera pictures are good, but wouldn't work for the flag. We should keep only the main image of the Rider, the written text should not be on the flag.

Here are some more Madara Riders. I hope at least one of them works. The golden one is currently on Bulgarian currency. The best for our case might be the drawn one, camera pictures are good, but wouldn't work for the flag. We should keep only the main image of the Rider, the written text should not be on the flag.

Really nice art. You've certainly taught me something. That's a really good image (esp. No. 3) if we can transfer it to a flag.:goodjob:

Here are some more Madara Riders. I hope at least one of them works. The golden one is currently on Bulgarian currency. The best for our case might be the drawn one, camera pictures are good, but wouldn't work for the flag. We should keep only the main image of the Rider, the written text should not be on the flag.

The drawn one should work well. Odd how compositionally similar it is to Moscow's St. George on the coat of arms.

IMO you should make an flag from the 3rd.

Its strange for me to see Portugal in blue. Shouldn't they be Green and Red? Or at least Green and white?

I thought blue and white was more appropriate for this time period. See the flags at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Portugal

I stand corrected :)

Just a word about Islamic flags. While the new Cordoba flag looks OK it is historically wrong. The Ummayads and the Cordoban caliphate only used white banners so white with a green inscription would be fine.
The followers of Muhammad, the early Rashidun caliphs and the Abbasids flew only a plain black banner or a black one with an inscription in white. The only people who ever used a green flag were the Fatimids of North Africa and later the Ottomans.
I've posted the correct ones above. (post 29)

I don't know if you guys needed 3D LHs or not but I made two European Module packs that have a bunch of new LHs in them. Those packs are unavailable now because they were on FileFront and that closed down, but the LHs are still available here at CFC. If you click on the Leaderhead Gallery link in my signature you will find the LHs I am speaking of.

Thanks for the link and suggestion. Some of your leader-heads would be exactly right for our mod.

I know our default assumption has been that we will do 3D leader-heads, but maybe we should have a discussion of their pros and cons:

Pros:

3D leader-heads are snazzy and can enliven diplomacy
There are a lot of user-created leader-heads out there, many appropriate for us
Consistent appearance/feel with built-in heads


Cons:

Leader-heads are generally big files (~5 MB) which will add substantially to the download size of our mod
Not all user-created leader-heads are the best, and the only real way to test them is in game (i.e. more work for me or someone else)
We will be probably be limited to picking (or re-purposing) a small number of leaders for each civ throughout the course of the game. Although this is probably what we want to do anyway.


The alternative, of course, is to use nice 2D pictures (for some or all leaders). This would work okay for later in our period (plenty of paintings of these leaders), but might be challenging to find for early leaders.

There can be an intermediate solution. 3D leaderheads for some civs and 2D for others.

With all due respect, I don't think a 3D king of Bulgaria, Venice and Genoa is mandatory. But 2 for Spain is OK for me.

I also have flags for fourteen European countries in my Europe module packs. If they are still available that is. You might want to check them out. It also has custom units for each civ (or flavored units rather) and a bunch of UUs you might want to use as well. I'd suggest checking it out ASAP.

2 for Spain, definitely. Phillip II is a must. IF you've got the time there's Ferdinand and Charles IV, too.
I fell like England needs more than one. King Richard, Henry VIII.
I also think the Papal States should switch popes whenever historically accurate. They dont need 3D though.

BTW I'm new to this RFC Europe concept.:confused: I wanna help though. How's the overall progress and when will this be completed?:confused:

What do I do if I want to try running a test game? Where would I download that? :confused:

Let's go, peeps! Lets get this done!

You can find RFCE on the 2nd post of the RFCE-files thread.

I fell like England needs more than one. King Richard, Henry VIII.

There was one leaderhead for the Crusader King using Pericles' animations, but it was lost after the database hacking incident. No chance that someone here would have happened to save it beforehand?

As I suggested in the Discussion thread, there are a number of possible leaderheads we can use in the downloads database. Here a few that I like.
1. Gustav of Sweden -much better than we've got
2. Could be used for Simeon of Bulgaria
3. Could be used for Hungary
4. Could also be used for Hungary or Poland
5. Harald Hardrada instead of Ragnar?
6. Charles V of Burgundy?

Empire: Total War could provide for some nice, flavored Muslim units.
Also, check this thread. It's for Colonization, he's got really nice art for the Spanish Conquistador units, they could replace the sad art we have for the Tercio. In fact, this "deliverator" guy has unique art for just about every musket unit in colonization. Also, he's currently making really snazzy new art for the ships. Take a look at the Spanish Carabela and the galleon he's working on.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=316396
Most of it is about the natives, but look at all four pages.

Empire: Total War could provide for some nice, flavored Muslim units.
Also, check this thread. It's for Colonization, he's got really nice art for the Spanish Conquistador units, they could replace the sad art we have for the Tercio. In fact, this "deliverator" guy has unique art for just about every musket unit in colonization. Also, he's currently making really snazzy new art for the ships. Take a look at the Spanish Carabela and the galleon he's working on.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=316396
Most of it is about the natives, but look at all four pages.

Check out the Military Redesign Thread (post 58) where I've downloaded some Muslim units from the downloads database. They're for BTS and ready to code in. The figures for the knight and foot knight (plumed helmets) are really nice, I think. I like the Conquistador units too. They're already in the downloads database as well. Do you like the new leaderheads I found? 3Miro has included some of them already in the alpha2 version. I'll see if I can find some more today.
EDIT I do agree about the eyeshadow on Gustav and Yaroslav.Its a bit kinky.:lol:

Thanks for using some of the leaderheads I found. As you say, that leaves about 3-4 to find. Of these.
1. Here's one for Stephen of Hungary.(see below)
2. I'm OK with what we've got for Cordoba if somebody can change the background to something like La Mezquita.
3. Genoa - can't find anything for Genoa except a Roman figure. The one below might look better than the Roman figure we've got for Simone Boccanegra.
4. Austria is hard. I guess we're stuck with Washington for now.

The Hungarian one doesn't work. I have tried it already. I found a Maria Theresa for Austria, now she did rule during the time of our mod, just more towards the end of it. I was wondering if you would think she is appropriate.

The Hungarian one doesn't work. I have tried it already. I found a Maria Theresa for Austria, now she did rule during the time of our mod, just more towards the end of it. I was wondering if you would think she is appropriate.

I didn't realize you tried that already. I think Maria Theresa is a bit late. What do you think of the Antony figure for Genoa, esp. if you could change backgrounds? And for Cordoba too?

I didn't realize you tried that already. I think Maria Theresa is a bit late. What do you think of the Antony figure for Genoa, esp. if you could change backgrounds? And for Cordoba too?

OK I at least got the Hungarian leaderhead.

To be honest with you, I don't know enough about Simone Boccanegra to figure out an appropriate image. I can only find a picture of a statue, but according to the wiki, people are not sure if that is truly him or not. I also know little about his personality. I will follow your judgment.

Maria Theresa is little late and Washington (with that wig) does look like someone form Mozart's time (which is perhaps also a bit late). We will keep him for now.

I have not quite figure out how to edit the leaderheads.

Speaking of backgrounds, on the select civilization screen there's a problem with one of the leaderheads that uses Brennus. I think it's Casimir. On the right of the civ description there's usually a picture taken of the leaderhead while he is in a pose. The one for Casimir shows only the background.

Are we going to have more than one leaderhead for some civs? Like that switch off in certain years like in base RFC?

Speaking of backgrounds, on the select civilization screen there's a problem with one of the leaderheads that uses Brennus. I think it's Casimir. On the right of the civ description there's usually a picture taken of the leaderhead while he is in a pose. The one for Casimir shows only the background.

Are we going to have more than one leaderhead for some civs? Like that switch off in certain years like in base RFC?

We will probably stick to 1 per civ. Switching is not too hard (we have Rhye's code), however, we have a hard time coming up with even one head per civ. Besides, the size of the mod is already getting out of hand. In a zipped form it is >120MB and it will probably grow more if we add more unit graphics. I for one vote for more unit graphics than for more leaders.

I will look at Casimir. It might be an XML issue.

We will probably stick to 1 per civ. Switching is not too hard (we have Rhye's code), however, we have a hard time coming up with even one head per civ. Besides, the size of the mod is already getting out of hand. In a zipped form it is >120MB and it will probably grow more if we add more unit graphics. I for one vote for more unit graphics than for more leaders.

I will look at Casimir. It might be an XML issue.

I agree that we should stick to one per civ for now, but there's another possibility that's been discussed before. Some civs would lend themselves very well to a change of leaderhead by era or triggered by achieving some historical goal.
One example is Russia. I prefer Ivan IV (the Terrible) of Moscow as the first leaderhead. (posted below). Later, ie. the Late Middle Ages (or 1600?) or if Kiev is eliminated, it could change to Peter the Great of Russia.
Similiarly, England could start with William I and later change to Elizabeth I of Britain when England controls Wales and Scotland. France would start with Francis I then change to Louis XIV when France reaches its historical borders. Spain could start with Alfonso VI and change to Isabella. etc. etc. This could also be triggered by achieving a UHV.
Just a rough idea for later (beta stage?) and it wouldn't apply to all civs. What do you think?

we can find leaderheads for some civs, however, we still have the issue with the size of the mod. If it gets beyond 200MB, I will not be able to upload it in rapidshare (the last batch of LH increased the size with almost 40MB, now we are at ~120MB).

I suppose Franz Joseph or Maria Theresa for Austria :=)

http://rapidshare.com/files/253770496/possibly_Austria.rar.html

edit: ups, posted it twice :-$

but to say anything reasonable: I prefer Franz!

I'm bumping this thread up to reintroduce a topic I've mentioned before. Now that we're getting much closer to beta stage I'd like us to consider the issue of ethnically-flavoured units, starting with the Muslim civs. You'll see below pics and files for various cavalry and foot units which would be appropriate for the Arabs and Cordoba.
The first pic shows what I'm proposing for the Heavy Lancer (centre-right) and the Knight (centre-left). The rest show what Islamic spearmen, archers, longbowmen, pikemen and swordsmen could be like.
The last two pics show the Barbary pirates which operated out of bases in Tunis and Algiers and the typical Arab Xebec ship (holds 2 pirates) which could replace the Carrick.
What do people think of these? There are also files available for the Ottoman Turks, Kievan Rus and others when we are ready to implement them.

I'm sure everybody approves of this, it's just a question of when it gets added. I think there's a new version coming out today, chances are olives won't be included, my Spanish, French, Italian, Arabic maps won't be included because micbic has gone AWOL, and the Atlantic islands are going to be left the same, this won't be included either. Maybe Alpha 6 will be really super amazing... Oh well, a man can dream.

Also, I would like to take this time to remind everybody of the conquistador-esque musketman unit we can use from Civ Colonization. Right now the Tercio unit looks quite retarded. :)

One thing that bugged me in Varietas Delectat was that there were many models that shared the same base design. It's not fun commanding huge armies if the only difference in their appearance is what weapon they carry.

To this reason, I would really prefer the arabic spearman to be the uppermost one in second picture and pikeman being the one on the left in the fourth picture (even if it looked a little unrefined).

I have to ask sedna when he is coming back. He has more experience with graphics and I would rather wait for him to add it.

Is anything going to be done to make the "Burgundian" Charles V a little more Burgundian and less Spanish? I noticed this just now and if you take a closer look, jessiecat, you'll probably recognize it too but his background is the Palace of Charles V in the Alhambra complex of Granada.

Is anything going to be done to make the "Burgundian" Charles V a little more Burgundian and less Spanish? I noticed this just now and if you take a closer look, jessiecat, you'll probably recognize it too but his background is the Palace of Charles V in the Alhambra complex of Granada.

As soon as you find a suitable leader for Burgundy, we will change Charles V.

Why is Burgundy even in the mod? The first Kingdom of Burgundy existed before the mod's time frame, and the second Kingdom of Burgundy existed from 933 for about 400 years. They never really did much, they just stagnated and gradually lost territories. Most of the time they were ruled by Kings from other nations, until those kings ceased to practice the formality of calling themselves the "Kings of Arles", which was when whatever existed of Burgundy- stopped existing.

The later "Duchy of Burgundy" was never even fully independent, it was just a title. I think it would be much more fitting to have the civ as one or two indy cities or a minor civ like the pope. We'd shave off turns, loading time, and it would make room for the inclusion of a different civ. Maybe like a couple of minor civs or something.
(Candidates: Barbary pirates, knights of malta, aragon, scotland, novgorod)

I guess for the same reason we have the Kievan Rus, Cordoba, Genoa, the Norse, Bulgaria and even the Byzantines. None lasted the length of the mod and most not past 1200AD. Do you just want a mod comprised just of history's major players and noone else? This is alt-history afterall and its got to be open to a range of possible outcomes, doesn't it?

Think about France expanding without any competition for several centuries very early on. Talk about a super power. Every one else has someone to keep them in check, and England comes too late to keep France under control.

So far we have not had a single-city challenge. I note that there is a spawn space in SW France that is free. Since 3Miro wants to include heresy in the mod and everybody agrees that France needs a little more challenge, AND the fact that people don't like France respawning even when it's never conquered Toulouse, how about a SCC based in Toulouse (if it's razed give the human a settler but don't allow them to build settlers) that spawns a little earlier (like 1000 instead of 1200) with a UP of the Cathars (heresy cannot be eradicated and has no effect on Faith Points), and the following UHVs:
1. Spread heresy to x% of population by year 1229 (Treaty of Paris)
2. Never declare war (their pacifism)
3. ?

So far we have not had a single-city challenge. I note that there is a spawn space in SW France that is free. Since 3Miro wants to include heresy in the mod and everybody agrees that France needs a little more challenge, AND the fact that people don't like France respawning even when it's never conquered Toulouse, how about a SCC based in Toulouse (if it's razed give the human a settler but don't allow them to build settlers) that spawns a little earlier (like 1000 instead of 1200) with a UP of the Cathars (heresy cannot be eradicated and has no effect on Faith Points), and the following UHVs:
1. Spread heresy to x% of population by year 1229 (Treaty of Paris)
2. Never declare war (their pacifism)
3. ?

A civ right in the middle of the French core ..., this would be hell to balance. I would wait with civ inclusions until we have balanced the current game more.

I think many of those "minor" nations like Toulouse, the Scots, the Serbs, the Croats (Ragusa), could be represented by semi-random revolts. The city goes into revolt and if you don't bring x troops in it by three turns, it goes independent.

I am thinking about perhaps doing something similar to the general respawns, i.e. you get a chance to block the respawn as opposed to "Burgundy Respawns and you have to live with it".

I also like the Barbary pirates idea (since the Mediterranean Sea was a much more dangerous place than it is in RFCE). They spawn relatively early on (9th century). Tunis, Algiers are already in place, you just need to fix a spawn date and give them Islam (hey, a 3rd Islamic country is always good). UP: Start at peace with barbs, gain XP whenever a barb wins a battle, and ships can turn into pirates and back at any time (hit the "blockade" button)
UHVs would have something to do with capturing coastal lands like Crete, Rhodes, Corsica and Sardinia, accumulating money and sinking ships.

I also like the Barbary pirates idea (since the Mediterranean Sea was a much more dangerous place than it is in RFCE). They spawn relatively early on (9th century). Tunis, Algiers are already in place, you just need to fix a spawn date and give them Islam (hey, a 3rd Islamic country is always good). UP: Start at peace with barbs, gain XP whenever a barb wins a battle, and ships can turn into pirates and back at any time (hit the "blockade" button)
UHVs would have something to do with capturing coastal lands like Crete, Rhodes, Corsica and Sardinia, accumulating money and sinking ships.

And then we put in Knights of Malta to keep them in check! :D
How about this, all they get is a single city on Malta, with maybe Tripoli in the spawn zone, automatic founding of Knights Hospitaller, lots of gold, and loads of knights, swordsmen and cogges. It would be a civ with gameplay based purely on combat!
UP: Power of the Order: All units receive +2 exp, and 0 upkeep costs for units.
UHVs: 1. Never lose a city
2. Kill 20 Muslim (Ottoman, Arabian, Barbary) armies
3. Destroy 20 Muslim ships

A quite strong Serbian independent city would be great against the overexpansion of Bulgaria, and anyway those territories are pretty empty in the game for a while.

The Galleas is a pain for the eyes, pls choose another model.

This special unit weakens Venzia, you don't get the needed Coggy but much later the useless Galleas; actually you don't get the Galleas at all with UHVs done earlier.

bye Myri

The Galleas is a pain for the eyes, pls choose another model.

This special unit weakens Venzia, you don't get the needed Coggy but much later the useless Galleas; actually you don't get the Galleas at all with UHVs done earlier.

bye Myri

The galleas would be fine if it was 50% in size and could hold 2 troops. Same as the carrack which it replaces.

The pirates should probably eventually make it out to Tripoli as well, right?
Also, I don't know about giving them caravels, that wouldn't look very historical IMO.
The Mediterranean needs to see more fighting with galley-type ships. Right now most early sea combat starts to take place after galleys and triremes have become outdated, and is ted by cogs. Cogs were used for a period in the Northern seas, in areas like England, Scandinavia and Northern Germany and France. We all know that the massive Genoese Cog fleet that develops at around 1400 is rather inaccurate.

We should break up the galleys and triremes into more units. My suggestion:

Light Galley - 1 strength, 5 movement. Barbary Pirates replace it with the "Fusta", +1 movement. (Mediterranean civs only)
Galley - 2 strength, 4 movement. 2 cargo Space.
War Galley - 3 strength, 4 movement. Norse replace it with longship, +1 movement, +2 Cargo Space. English, Dutch, Germans, Polish, Russians, Swedish get "Cog", -1 strength, +2 Cargo Space
Galleass - Made available to all civs, 6 strength, 3 movement (significantly high production cost) Venetians get "Venetian Galleass", +1 movement, strength 1 promotion. Barbary Pirates and Cordoba get "Xebec", +2 movement. English, Dutch, Germans, Polish, Russians, Swedish get "Heavy Cog", -2 strength, +1 movement +2 cargo space, Norse get Longship again.
(Trireme eliminated, they stopped being used some time after the Peloponesian War)
Carrack - 6 strength, 7 movement, 3 cargo space, +50% movement cost on coast
Caravel - 3 strength, 9 movement, 2 cargo space, +50% movement cost on coast
Privateer - 6 strength, 8 movement, +100% movement cost on coast, privateer ability
Galleon - 8 strength, 7 movement, 4 cargo space, +100% movement cost on coast. Dutch get "Fluyt", -1 strength, +1 movement
Frigate - 8 strength, 8 movement, +100% movement cost on coast
Ship of the Line - 10 strength, 7 movement, +100% movement cost on coast
Eliminate War Galleon?

Light Galley allowed from the beginning,
Galley enabled by Classical Knowledge
War Galley/Cog enabled by Lateen Sails
Galleass/Heavy Cog enabled by new tech, "Naval Artillery", tech will also give all pre-Galleas units +1 strength
Optics will not enable caravel
Carrack and Caravel enabled by new tech, "Advanced Sailing", will have all the same benefits as shipbuilding, tech will also give +1 trade routes to coastal cities and reveal Atlantic Access
Astronomy will be replaced by shipbuilding, providing all the same benefits of Astronomy except for AA. Will lead to trading company and not scientific method.
Astronomy will allow observatories, give great scholar to first to discover, lead to scientific method
Ship of the line will be allowed by Military tactics

The production and maintenance costs for navies will both have to be reduced in general, to provide for bigger navies.

With these changes, galleys will remain very formidable units at least in the Mediterranean, and will probably continue to be produced well into the 1600's. They should start to become obsolete with the introduction of the carrack, but still be large in number.

The right idea but far too many unit types for a limited amount of promotions. It also heavily depends on suitable art being available. I'll look into it and come back with a much simpler plan tomorrow.

The right idea but far too many unit types for a limited amount of promotions. It also heavily depends on suitable art being available. I'll look into it and come back with a much simpler plan tomorrow.

I agree. We are working on a Pangaea type of a map with pretty much all of the action happening on the land. We should have ships for the Mediterranean and some for the northern seas, but overall, we should have only very few ships. Of 20 ship types, even if one plays Venice and Genoa, one would not build 4 - 5 types max.

I think it is appropriate to have two ships for each era (Early, High, Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and what was the last one), one transport ship and one combat ship (i.e. Galley and Trireme early on and Galleon + Frigate for the Colonial Age).

I agree. We are working on a Pangaea type of a map with pretty much all of the action happening on the land. We should have ships for the Mediterranean and some for the northern seas, but overall, we should have only very few ships. Of 20 ship types, even if one plays Venice and Genoa, one would not build 4 - 5 types max.

I think it is appropriate to have two ships for each era (Early, High, Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and what was the last one), one transport ship and one combat ship (i.e. Galley and Trireme early on and Galleon + Frigate for the Colonial Age).

Take out the light galley, and maybe the war galley, but the trireme has to stay out.

Take out the light galley, and maybe the war galley, but the trireme has to stay out.

Here's a much simpler version of your plan. I've dropped the trireme and kept the war galley in the High Middle Ages. The caravel comes in to the Late Middle Ages and can cross oceans but not carry troops. The galleas, Venetian galleas and xebec also appear in the Late Middle Ages. And so on. Anyway here it is.

Early..............High Middle Ages..........Late Middle Ages...........Renaissance...........Age of Discovery

Galley(holds 2)
available
to all civs,
upgrades to Cogge(holds 2) ..upgrades to Carrack(holds 3) upgrades to .......................Galleon(holds 4)
.................................................. ............................( carrack or galleon don't apply
.................................................. .............................for Venice or any Muslim civs)
..........\
...........\
...........or War Galley upgrades to Caravel upgrades to........................Frigate (all civs, no troops)
.........(all civs, holds no troops)....(all civs, can cross ocean, no troops).....................or
.................................................. .................................................P rivateer (all civs, no troops)
.........................................\
...........................................\
............................................or Galleas upgrades to ............................ War Galleas
............................................(holds 2 troops).......................(Holds 3 troops, can enter ocean)
............................................or Venetian Galleas
............................................(Venic e only)
............................................(holds 3 troops, with promotion can enter ocean)
............................................or Xebec
............................................Muslim civs only) upgrades to .....................Large Xebec
.............................................(hold s 2 troops)........................( Holds 3 troops, can enter ocean)

Here is some possible art for an early war galley. For the galleas and xebec upgrades to War galleas
and Large Xebec we can scale them up a bit in size and add stronger specs. What do people think of this scheme?

Here's a much simpler version of your plan. I've dropped the trireme and kept the war galley in the High Middle Ages. The caravel comes in to the Late Middle Ages and can cross oceans but not carry troops. The galleas, Venetian galleas and xebec also appear in the Late Middle Ages. And so on. Anyway here it is.

Early..............High Middle Ages..........Late Middle Ages...........Renaissance...........Age of Discovery

Galley(holds 2)
available
to all civs,
upgrades to Cogge(holds 2) ..upgrades to Carrack(holds 3) upgrades to .......................Galleon(holds 4)
.................................................. ............................( carrack or galleon don't apply
.................................................. .............................for Venice or any Muslim civs)
..........\
...........\
...........or War Galley upgrades to Caravel upgrades to........................Frigate (all civs, no troops)
.........(all civs, holds no troops)....(all civs, can cross ocean, no troops).....................or
.................................................. .................................................P rivateer (all civs, no troops)
.........................................\
...........................................\
............................................or Galleas upgrades to ............................ War Galleas
............................................(holds 2 troops).......................(Holds 3 troops, can enter ocean)
............................................or Venetian Galleas
............................................(Venic e only)
............................................(holds 3 troops, with promotion can enter ocean)
............................................or Xebec
............................................Muslim civs only) upgrades to .....................Large Xebec
.............................................(hold s 2 troops)........................( Holds 3 troops, can enter ocean)

Here is some possible art for an early war galley. For the galleas and xebec upgrades to War galleas
and Large Xebec we can scale them up a bit in size and add stronger specs. What do people think of this scheme?

I like it, but it's got just as many units as my plan, and on mine I really emphasized the galleys but only for the mediterranean civs, if we follow this plan could cogs replace galleys for the Northern civs? The two kinds of ships are completely different and that's because of the conditions they sailed in, warm, calm, not windy mediterranean v.s. cold, choppy, windy, Northern Seas.

Any kind of art is fine, but it would be nice if as many of these as possible could have lateen sails.

What tech/when would those be available and what would the advantages of Galleas vs Carrack would be? What would the strengths of those would be? Right now Caravel -> Frigate would be a big jump.

What tech/when would those be available and what would the advantages of Galleas vs Carrack would be? What would the strengths of those would be? Right now Caravel -> Frigate would be a big jump.

The tech. reqs. should much as now. The Carrack would only really apply to civs other than Venice and the Muslims. and be equiv. to the Galleas in the Med.
The War Galleas could be the link after Galleas but before the Frigate and Privateer, stronger and bigger than the Galleas. It should available to all civs except the Muslims who would have the Large Xebec as roughly equivalent.

ie. Galleas or Caravel or Carrack>>>upgrades to War Galleas>>>upgrades to Frigate or Privateer

The Frigate and Privateer should be available to all civs but very late in the tech tree.

I like it, but it's got just as many units as my plan, and on mine I really emphasized the galleys but only for the mediterranean civs, if we follow this plan could cogs replace galleys for the Northern civs? The two kinds of ships are completely different and that's because of the conditions they sailed in, warm, calm, not windy mediterranean v.s. cold, choppy, windy, Northern Seas.

Any kind of art is fine, but it would be nice if as many of these as possible could have lateen sails.

I've kept the basic galley as the first available ship as available up to 1000AD because even in Northern Europe the basic warship design was the longship which could be rowed or sailed. The split would come when the more Northern civs could upgrade to the cogge for transport and war galley for offence which upgrades to the caravel (mid 1400s).
The Med civs would upgrade to the basic galleas (dual purpose) and the caravel for exploring.

I'm back and I see you discuss something about the ships. But can someone of you give me a summary of the idea and what you have discussed. (I don't want to read all posts completely).

I'm back and I see you discuss something about the ships. But can someone of you give me a summary of the idea and what you have discussed. (I don't want to read all posts completely).

Check out the scheme I did in post 81.

and my scheme in post 77! :D
This discussion came up mostly with the mention of including the barbary pirates as a civ in the mod, most of it has been about how naval warfare should be more accurate in the mediterranean, via the inclusion of more galley type units.

Leaderhead time!!! Just found some LHs: Selim I of Ottomans (MethylOrange), Christian IV of Norse (TheCapo) and El Cid of Spain and Basil II of Byzantium(both Ekmek). Should they be candidates for inclusion?

Leaderhead time!!! Just found some LHs: Selim I of Ottomans (MethylOrange), Christian IV of Norse (TheCapo) and El Cid of Spain and Basil II of Byzantium(both Ekmek). Should they be candidates for inclusion?

- Selim I (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11115)
- Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732)
- El Cid (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11060)
- Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978)

Thx for adding them, I didnt because I wanted to discuss them before posting them :)

Thx for adding them, I didnt because I wanted to discuss them before posting them :)

Until we can find at least one alternate leaderhead for each civ in the mod how can we use just those four?

Why not use what we can?

I agree with Burn. Even in RFC there are some civs with just one leaderhead (Mali, Khmer) while some have 3 (Germany, France).

I agree with Burn. Even in RFC there are some civs with just one leaderhead (Mali, Khmer) while some have 3 (Germany, France).

I thought you were referring to having different leaderheads for each era. If you mean giving the player a choice of leaderheads at the start then I totally agree.

Unfortunately for you, I was meaning the first. And I do not see a reason not to use some of them. :) (since, as stated, it happens at RFC as well)

I've just noticed this really nice reskin of a Spanish knight we might use as a replacement for the generic one. The zip file is below. Also, for people who are asking about leaderheads here are pics of some from the database we haven't used yet. I like the first one instead of the Vanilla Roman one we are currently using for Genoa. Much better I think.
EDIT I've spoken with Flying Pig, the author of the Spanish knight figure below, and he's indicated that he'd like to work with our mod, graphically speaking. So we hope to hear from him again soon.

Just want to announce myself - I'm here to do units, promotions, flags, buttons of any sort and maybe very crude leaderheads.

Welcome to the mod team. :)

Just want to announce myself - I'm here to do units, promotions, flags, buttons of any sort and maybe very crude leaderheads.

Thanks for getting back to us. Try the latest version of the mod on the RFCE Files Thread, First Post. Alpha 6 version. Needs BTS 3.19 to run. Play a couple of test games and see what you think. Your input would be invaluable, mate.:)

I'm going to continue the discussion of naval units here, partly because of the discussion already started by jessiecat and Michael Vick and partly because we might want some modified boat models/art.

To me, the most difficult part of the boat equation is to get the correct balance between Mediterranean and "northern" ships in the early period of our mod. You guys have put out two different plans for how to deal with this that involve restricting ships to given Civs. That's certainly a possibility, but it strikes me as less than ideal. The problem is that many Civs (France, Burgundy, Spain, Germany are probably the main ones) could under normal or plausible scenarios have cities on both the north atlantic and the Mediterranean.

The fundamental reason for the Cog-style ship supplanting the galley in northern europe were the different ocean conditions. Perhaps we could use this idea to encourage the right boat in the right situation. My idea would be to increase the amount of ocean tiles present in the Baltic and give the Cog ocean-access while decreasing the amount of ocean in the Mediterranean. That's early for "real" ocean access, but on our map, that's not a huge problem because (outside of Greenland) the map is all accessible before real ocean-going ships anyway.

The Cog and the galley would have comparable stats. The cog would be a bit more expensive, but its (effective) better speed in northern Europe (thanks to be able to go through ocean tiles at double-speed rather than forced around them) would make it worthwhile. The biggest problem with this general approach is that a lot of the Scandanavia/Baltic area is not very wide, and ocean tiles right next to land look funny/bad. Still, there are some tiles that can be changed, and some minor coast changes could also (in theory) be made, though I hate changing land tiles (so much work if we have to update maps).

You could make a new kind of tile, which looks like shallow water but acts like ocean, and use it in scandinavia. I would make that cold-sea, and say that mediterranian ships get a penalty in it, but they are stronger

I still maintain that the basic cog should be confined to northern waters and the galley to the Med. Neither could navigate far beyond shore so basically one is just the regional variation of the other. In that I agree with Michael, for historical reasons if nothing else. Once you upgrade to caravels and carracks regional variations don't matter. One type can fit all civs. What I was arguing for was a Muslim replacement for the carrack, ie the xebec. Venice already has the galleass. So could Genoa and the Byzantines. Coding in a separate ship type with similiar specs for a couple of civs can't be that hard. No harder than UUs I imagine.

Flying Pig, your suggestion of a third sea type is a good possibility though I worry that it might be an unnecessary complication to solve a relatively minor problem.

Jessiecat, I guess I'm philosophically opposed to creating a proliferation of different, specialized ship types based on Civ. I have no problem with providing distinct _art_ for the Muslim carrack (when we get to increasing the ethnic art), but I'd prefer not to give them an actual different unit. I realize that I did this for the mounted sargent/horse archer thing, but I sort of regret that decision. It just makes the mod too hard for a new person to play if they're constantly discovering that the old unit progression is skewed.

Wouldn't it be a more elegant (and historical) solution to have ship classes available to build everywhere, but construct the game in such a way as to favor mimicry of history (more galleys in the Mediterranean, more cogs in the north)?

BTW: I'm basing my thoughts about medieval ships mainly on the Wikipedia articles and this essay http://users.trytel.com/~tristan/towns/florilegium/popdef14.html

Good to see the Trireme go! I was just going to complain about it ;)

Galleass was a pure warship and as such, "War Galleass" is redundant. It certainly shouldn't be the top transport because it was the Mediterranean ship-of-the-line with broadside cannons. Given it's minor historical role, are 3 versions really necessary?

Xebec was in use in 17-18th c.

"Great Galley" is an actual ship type that appears in texts, e.g. Venetians used Great Galleys for transport and light galleys for war. It is handy if you need a Mediterranean transport equivalent of cog, assuming the basic galley is for everyone.

The same simple tree by jessiecat but with the two fixes and cog/galley differentiation (whatever way it's done) would look like this:

Galley -> Cog / Great Galley -> Carrack -> Galleon

---> War Galley -> Caravel (+Galleass) -> Frigate / Privateer / Xebec

Two warships (no troops): Caravel - small, fast, ocean-going and Galleass - slow and powerful (and no Galleass -> Frigate upgrade).

Another way to deal with the cog issue is to just call it a roundship (http://metamedia.stanford.edu:3455/MichaelShanks/1451) - the general term for any big, round transport used in both waters. Cog is technically a specific type of a roundship suited for Northern seas. Alternatively, roundship could be the fifth, pre-cog class of transports if you ever need it.

I like your idea with one small change. The war galley just replaces the trireme and upgrades to the caravel and the galleas for all civs.The galley upgrades to the cog for all civs. My only change would have the privateer coming before the frigate as now but represented by the xebec art for the Muslim civs and the Barbary pirates only.
Like this:

Galley>>>>>>>>>Cog>>>>>>>>>Carrack>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Galleon

War Galley\upgrades to>>>>>>>Caravel
...............\and
.................\Galleas>>>>>Privateeer or Xebec>>>>>>Frigate

That way, in the late game, all civs will be able to build one type of transport ship, one warship and a fast exploring ship that can only carry merchants, priests etc.

How's that for a compromise Sedna?

I found a very good art for the Belem Tower. But is it big enough or should it be bigger.

I found a very good art for the Belem Tower. But is it big enough or should it be bigger.

That's great. Better than we've got now.

That's great. Better than we've got now.


I know. That's why I posted it;).

@ Jessiecat: I'd really like a naval scheme that doesn't involve the Mediterranean civs building cogs, just a request.

I'm not sure if any one working with us is capable of this, but I had an idea. I was thinking it would be nice to have a special kind of "forest" tile for the Southern Coasts. It would be like the current light forest, but with less overall trees and a mix of palm trees that could be taken from the silk art. It'd be placed around the coasts of the Mediterranean, and in Egypt, the Middle East. It'd be a nice change of scenery, wouldn't it? Can it be done/found?

@ Jessiecat: I'd really like a naval scheme that doesn't involve the Mediterranean civs building cogs, just a request.

I'm not sure if any one working with us is capable of this, but I had an idea. I was thinking it would be nice to have a special kind of "forest" tile for the Southern Coasts. It would be like the current light forest, but with less overall trees and a mix of palm trees that could be taken from the silk art. It'd be placed around the coasts of the Mediterranean, and in Egypt, the Middle East. It'd be a nice change of scenery, wouldn't it? Can it be done/found?

So would I. But Sedna won't do it. Anyway, are you saying that France and Spain can build only the war galley in Mediterranean ports and the cog in northern waters? And neither are allowed to travel in the other ocean? That's impossible without some kind of toll gate at Gibraltar.:crazyeye: Cogs should be the cargo ship and the war galley as the naval vessel for everybody. Everyone else agrees with that, I think.

So would I. But Sedna won't do it. Anyway, are you saying that France and Spain can build only the war galley in Mediterranean ports and the cog in northern waters? And neither are allowed to travel in the other ocean? That's impossible without some kind of toll gate at Gibraltar.:crazyeye: Cogs should be the cargo ship and the war galley as the naval vessel for everybody. Everyone else agrees with that, I think.

A fair description of the consensus, although you make me sound like a harsh parent.

It's simply wrong to say that galleys and cogs (or ships like cogs) were confined to the mediterranean and the north atlantic respectively. Roundships (sailing ships) were an important component of the merchant fleet in the Mediterranean.

A fair description of the consensus, although you make me sound like a harsh parent.

It's simply wrong to say that galleys and cogs (or ships like cogs) were confined to the mediterranean and the north atlantic respectively. Roundships (sailing ships) were an important component of the merchant fleet in the Mediterranean.

I didn't mean to make you sound that way. Anyway you're not the old grandad here. I have that honour.:lol:

Ok so what if we didn't call them cogs but something more generic? Any more feedback on the coastal forest idea?

Ok so what if we didn't call them cogs but something more generic? Any more feedback on the coastal forest idea?

Cog, round ship or cargo boat. What's the difference? The name doesn't really matter.

Cogs had lateen sails, our art does not. So that's why it should be less specific.

Cogs had lateen sails, our art does not. So that's why it should be less specific.

I think you're confused. Read the wiki article. Cogs generally had "a single mast with a square-rigged sail".
Just like in this illustration.

Yes, I'm confused, for some reason the tech that allows the cog is "Lateen Sails" :lol:

Hey I've got 2 LH suggestions:

Dutch dude from C4Col on the left - he looks like a sneaky Italian bastard to me, perfect for Simone Boccanegra which atm is Alexander the Great... If he's too much like William of Orange, there are 2 more new Firaxis-quality Dutch heads in C4Col.

Modified Indris II (background & "de-yellowed" face) - as non-Ottoman Abd-al-Rahman III (http://pedagogie.ac-toulouse.fr/lyc-gourdon/spip/IMG/jpg/Abderraman_III.jpg).

Also, there's a problem with Gustavus' eyelashes (at least here they're PINK) - to fix it you only need to copy "eyeshadow.dds" file from another leaderhead (most have them) to Gustavus' folder.

Good suggestions, embryodead. I recall Dutch King even being used as Lorenzo de Medici in Thomas' War mod. Obviously someone else has thought similiarly.

However, I believe there would be some legal issues to use the said art from Colonization. Not sure would it still apply if the LH was fiddled around with, as it was in your preview picture. (Personally, I would prefer either the original Dutch King art or the tweaked version (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10809) if the art files ended up being usable.)

Yeah I don't have C4Col and the one on my preview is from Thomas' War actually, it seems it's been modified already to look more Italian. Simone Boccanegra didn't wear facial hair so I think that one is better ;) As far as legal issues go, most mods I've seen, RFCE included, already use C4Col artwork so I doubt it's a problem for Firaxis.

Here is a composed list of LHs for use and timing. Notes:
1) AFAIK the Henry VIII and Clovis LHs are under construction or planning.
2) I also dont know what part would Clovis play, since Burgundy will (?) be moved later, and such noone will meet him.
3) Basically, this one is to get coded just after beta 1.0

The List
France: Clovis (500-700) (?)---> Charlemagne (500/700-1400)---> Louis XIV (1400-1800)
Burgundy: Phillip the Bold
Byzantium: Justinian (500-850) ---> Basil II (850-1800)
Arabia: Saladin
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
Germany: Frederick
Spain: El Cid (909-1400) ---> Isabella (1400-1800)
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1520) ---> Christian VI (1520-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1620) ---> Peter (1620-1720) ---> Catherine (1720-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: Henry VIII (1066-1550) ---> Elizabeth (1550-1800)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1500) ---> Suleiman I (1500-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

One note for everyone, the mod is quickly growing in size and leaderheads is by far the largest reason. Leaderheads already available in BtS are not a problem (since everyoen already has those), however, custom leaderheads do cost us.

Extra note, if someone knows how to make leaderheads:
Currently Simeon uses graphics made for Basil II, if someone knows how, we can change Basil's graphics to get unique graphics for Simeon and then use Basil's graphics for Basil.

I think no more than 2 LHs per civ should be the limit, to avoid too many new LHs which will just take up space.

I agree. Just 2 for each if possible. A couple of suggestions for micbic's list.

France . Charlemagne > Louis XIV

Arabia. Abu Bakr > Saladin

England William I > Elizabeth I

Moscow. Ivan IV > Peter I

Cordoba. Abd ar Rahman III > Al Mansur (use Idris graphics below)

Portugal. Joao II > Henry the Navigator

Burgundy. William the Justiciar > Philip the Bold (use Francis I graphics for William)

If William I doesn't have art available, cfkane's Macbeth (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13190) could be given a try. Anyone with enough time could improve his crown.

I found this in Rise of Mankind for the Xebec unit.

And some art for the leaderheads.

1. Alfonso (Portugal)
2. Basil (Byzantine)
3. Charles V (alternetive)
4. Henry VIII (England)
5. Jean d'Arc (France)
6. Richelieu (France)

I love Cardinal Richlieu!

As an aside, I'm working on a Walrus resource - watch this space

And some art for the leaderheads.

1. Alfonso (Portugal)
2. Basil (Byzantine)
3. Charles V (alternetive)
4. Henry VIII (England)
5. Jean d'Arc (France)
6. Richelieu (France)

1. Alfonso is good, that pretty much solves it for Portugal.
2. You have to admit, Basil still looks very Incan. When players see this it will give the mod that "homemade" feel if you know what I'm talking about.
3. We already have a much better Charles V, and if Spain was going to get a second leaderhead, I'd opt for Phillip II, who we also have a good leaderhead for.
4. Why not? Although I'd like to see more leaderheads that didn't all come from the "King of Spain" character in Colonization, we already 2 civs in RFCEurope that use his face.
6. Wasn't he just Louis XIV's advisor while he was growing up? If we could get art of him holding a small child then he would do very well for 1638 to 1642. :lol:

Here is a composed list of LHs for use and timing. Notes:
1) AFAIK the Henry VIII and Clovis LHs are under construction or planning.
2) I also dont know what part would Clovis play, since Burgundy will (?) be moved later, and such noone will meet him.
3) Basically, this one is to get coded just after beta 1.0

The List
France: Clovis (500-700) (?)---> Charlemagne (500/700-1400)---> Louis XIV (1400-1800)
Burgundy: Phillip the Bold
Byzantium: Justinian (500-850) ---> Basil II (850-1800)
Arabia: Saladin
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
Germany: Frederick
Spain: El Cid (909-1400) ---> Isabella (1400-1800)
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1520) ---> Christian VI (1520-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1620) ---> Peter (1620-1720) ---> Catherine (1720-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: Henry VIII (1066-1550) ---> Elizabeth (1550-1800)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1500) ---> Suleiman I (1500-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

The Revised, s3xier List
France: Clovis (500-700) (?)---> Charlemagne (500/700-1400)---> Louis XIV (1400-1800)
Burgundy: Phillippe II de Bourgogne
Byzantium: Justinian (500-850) ---> Basil II (850-squashed by Ottomans) ---> Respawn as Greece: Ioannis Kapodistrias (respawn-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (632-1174) ---> Saladin (1174-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
Prussia: Freiderich
Spain: Isabela (909-1554) ---> Felipe II (1554-1800)
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1520) ---> Christian VI (1520-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1620) ---> Peter (1620-1720) ---> Catherine (1720-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: Henry VIII (1066-1550) ---> Elizabeth (1550-1800)
Portugal: Alfonso (1139-1485) ---> Joao II (1485-1800)
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1500) ---> Suleiman I (1500-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa



If a leader's art is already in Civ IV then we can add extra leaderheads to that civ right? for example, France can have three?

1. Alfonso is good, that pretty much solves it for Portugal.
2. You have to admit, Basil still looks very Incan. When players see this it will give the mod that "homemade" feel if you know what I'm talking about.
3. We already have a much better Charles V, and if Spain was going to get a second leaderhead, I'd opt for Phillip II, who we also have a good leaderhead for.
4. Why not? Although I'd like to see more leaderheads that didn't all come from the "King of Spain" character in Colonization, we already 2 civs in RFCEurope that use his face.
6. Wasn't he just Louis XIV's advisor while he was growing up? If we could get art of him holding a small child then he would do very well for 1638 to 1642. :lol:

I just post some LHs of Rise of Mankind who I thought we could use.
2. You're right. But in RoM it is used for him.
3. Same. But maybe for an other LH.
4. What do you exactly mean by this?
6. No. He was chief minister of Louis XIII.

I think Basil looks good, actually.

I like Michael Vick's list the most, especially since it discards some non-optimal heads and puts Mehmed back to Turkey (I assume Indris would become Abd-al-Rahman)

What's up with Gustav Vasa though? There's a good Vasa LH (pic below, don't remember the author, I just switched the BG) but RFCE is currently using Gustavus Adolphus. I guess both could be used (Vasa up to 1617, then Gustavus).

Also if Clovis is to be available, how about leaving France with 2 heads, and putting Charlemagne (as Otto I) to Germany? Maybe it's just me but I can't stand Frederick as German leader throughout the middle ages. That LH looks like Otto anyway, minus the beard which can be removed (I can probably do it).

@Merijn_v1/Vick, that Incan Basil II in RoM is an outdated version, below is a more recent one that looks much more Byzantine (both heads are in downloads database).

Revision 4:

France: Charlemagne (500-1400)---> Louis XIV (1400-1800)
Burgundy: Phillippe II de Bourgogne, using Richelieu's LH
Byzantium: Justinian (500-850) ---> Basil II (850-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (632-1174) ---> Saladin (1174-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (I didnt find any LHs for Al Mansur)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
HRE: Freiderich
Spain:Isabela (909-1540) ---> Charles V(1540-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1520) ---> Christian IV (not VI, stupid me :D) (1520-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1620) ---> Peter (1620-1720) ---> Catherine (1720-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (1066-1550) ---> Elizabeth (1400-1650)---> O. Cromwell (1650-1800)
Portugal: Alfonso (1139-1485) ---> Joao II (1485-1800)
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1500) ---> Suleiman I (1500-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

On a sidenote: Can a leader be coded to appear under certain conditions? (ie Louis XIV when France gets united)?

As the Spaniard I'd like to point out that El Cid was a mercenary that might just as well have been a hero to the Muslim side, he never led Spain in any sense, I think Isabela is good enough to represent Spain during all of the the reconquista years, if we're getting three Spanish leaderheads then Carlos V is by far the next most important man to consider.

Spain: Isabela (909-1516) ---> Carlos V (1516-1556) ---> Felipe II (1556-1800)

As far as I agree with Cid (Great General is okay for him IMHO), I would favor Carlos over Felipe:
Carlos managed to create a huge empire by royal marriages, having unified Iberia, Benelux and Holy Roman Empire (he was a Holy Roman Emperor IIRC)
Felipe, on the other hand, managed to sink somewhere like 150 ships in the France/England Strait.
As a Spaniard, could you explain me better why was Felipe so important?

[offtopic] (BTW good luck at the Eurobasket final, you deserved to win us :))

As far as I agree with Cid (Great General is okay for him IMHO), I would favor Carlos over Felipe:
Carlos managed to create a huge empire by royal marriages, having unified Iberia, Benelux and Holy Roman Empire (he was a Holy Roman Emperor IIRC)
Felipe, on the other hand, managed to sink somewhere like 150 ships in the France/England Strait.
As a Spaniard, could you explain me better why was Felipe so important?

[offtopic] (BTW good luck at the Eurobasket final, you deserved to win us :))

I don't know why you keep suggesting 3 leaderheads per civ. It's just not going to happen, as 3Miro has already explained. If you missed post 125 I've already made suggested additions to your list based on 2 per civ. Like William I starting England. Like Al Mansur succeeding Abd ar Rahman. And I provided all the art. Did you miss that post?

Basically, I think that some civs having 3 LHs deserve it, while some others can just do with 1, so the average keeps around 2. And I do not think that 6MB per LH is so much that it must be a barrier (I dont mean that any civ should have 10 LHs, but some civs deserve 3 for a bit of diversity across the many important historical figures)
Revised list at post 135. Two civs have 3 LHs, a bunch of them 2 and many more have 1.

The problem isn't entirely about the size of the leaderhead in the download. Every extra leaderhead also increases the memory that Civ IV needs to use for processing art. That means each custom leaderhead adds to the load time, end of turn wait time and diplomacy loading time. Plus, many custom leaderheads are poorly optimised and so take up more time than original ones. There was a recent study that showed that a plurality of processing time is spent on art of various sorts.

6MB are the smaller heads, some leaderheads require up to 20 - 25MB extra. Many people are already complaining about the graphical demand that leaderheads are creating, i.e. people can play regular BtS, but cannot even start our mod.

There is another issue. We have to consider the effect that we will have on gameplay. Right now, every leader's personality is somewhat adjusted to match the civ's goals (UHV), however, if we have different leaders then: we can keep the leaders from a given civ with the same personality or we can give them different personalities and then make the game even harder to balance.

I am not against adding more leaderheads, we should just keep those issues in mind.

6MB are the smaller heads, some leaderheads require up to 20 - 25MB extra. Many people are already complaining about the graphical demand that leaderheads are creating, i.e. people can play regular BtS, but cannot even start our mod.

I can offer to downsize the big LHs, e.g. I've cut Istvan LH from 21 MB to 9 MB without any quality loss. This is the case with many LHs, they are distributed with unused or redundant files, or normal maps saved in wrong format etc. EDIT: The effect on memory load will be smaller, but it's 4-5 MB less still.

Additionally, maybe distribute the final mod with static leaderhead option? That makes the game so much faster / less crashy regardless of the number of LHs.

I can offer to downsize the big LHs, e.g. I've cut Istvan LH from 21 MB to 9 MB without any quality loss. This is the case with many LHs, they are distributed with unused or redundant files, or normal maps saved in wrong format etc. EDIT: The effect on memory load will be smaller, but it's 4-5 MB less still.

Additionally, maybe distribute the final mod with static leaderhead option? That makes the game so much faster / less crashy regardless of the number of LHs.

Last Alpha has a version within the .zip that replaces the custom leaderheads with standard ones from BtS. We can have something along those lines (i.e. RFCEurope - Light).

As an aside, I'm working on a Walrus resource - watch this space

There is a walrus resource in the pack below. It is from Civ3 and isn't animated but maybe we can use it anyway.

There is a walrus resource in the pack below. It is from Civ3 and isn't animated but maybe we can use it anyway.

AFIK Civ III and Civ IV graphics are not in any way compatible.

I can offer to downsize the big LHs, e.g. I've cut Istvan LH from 21 MB to 9 MB without any quality loss. This is the case with many LHs, they are distributed with unused or redundant files, or normal maps saved in wrong format etc. EDIT: The effect on memory load will be smaller, but it's 4-5 MB less still.

Additionally, maybe distribute the final mod with static leaderhead option? That makes the game so much faster / less crashy regardless of the number of LHs.

Hey embryodead,

Just in case it wasn't clear, it would be awesome if you could go through the big LHs and make them more efficient as you describe above for Istvan.

AFIK Civ III and Civ IV graphics are not in any way compatible.

I've heard that as well. I've currently hit a wall after cutting the elephants ears and legs off.

I've heard that as well. I've currently hit a wall after cutting the elephants ears and legs off.


Could you do a more simplistic tusk, rather than having to do a walrus from scratch? This way, we could use the tusk graphic for both walrus and elephant ivory. We don't have elephant units, so the distinction for the game is unimportant.

Could you do a more simplistic tusk, rather than having to do a walrus from scratch? This way, we could use the tusk graphic for both walrus and elephant ivory. We don't have elephant units, so the distinction for the game is unimportant.

Civ III is a 2D game, i.e. all the pictures are just like pictures taken with a camera. Civ IV is a 3D game, meaning that all the graphics is actually has volume (in virtual world). Looking at an elephant from an angle changes the way the elephant looks (i.e. looking from behind you see the butt, looking from the front you see the front you see the trunk). 3D graphics is something like a: take a real tusk, then wrap it with paper, then copy the "texture" of the tusk onto the paper, then approximate the tusk with a number of simple 2d figures (usually triangles, but other polygons are also used). The "paper" + the geometry makes up the tusk.

Basically, creating 3D models is very hard and while I know some theory behind it, I don't know how to do it.

Civ III is a 2D game, i.e. all the pictures are just like pictures taken with a camera. Civ IV is a 3D game, meaning that all the graphics is actually has volume (in virtual world). Looking at an elephant from an angle changes the way the elephant looks (i.e. looking from behind you see the butt, looking from the front you see the front you see the trunk). 3D graphics is something like a: take a real tusk, then wrap it with paper, then copy the "texture" of the tusk onto the paper, then approximate the tusk with a number of simple 2d figures (usually triangles, but other polygons are also used). The "paper" + the geometry makes up the tusk.

Basically, creating 3D models is very hard and while I know some theory behind it, I don't know how to do it.

Right, I know that it's more complicated. I figured something geometric like an elephant or walrus tusk would be a lot easier to create than a walrus, though. That was the basis for the suggestion.

Hey embryodead,

Just in case it wasn't clear, it would be awesome if you could go through the big LHs and make them more efficient as you describe above for Istvan.

Alright, I've cut the current LHs from 105 to 51* MB and did some minor fixes, like Gustuvus' pink eyebrows and Yaroslav's missing alpha for hair & fur. I don't know how SVN will handle this, but this should replace the whole Leaderheads folder, since a lot of files have been deleted, not just updated.

Link on rapidshare: http://rapidshare.com/files/288611430/RFCE-leaderheads.zip.html
EDIT: Oops, I don't want to re-upload the file with my slow uplink, so when you get it, please delete the whole Yaroslav/copy folder, it's a backup of Yaroslav I forgot to delete. *Updated the final folder size to reflect that.

so if I get this right, you have not posted anything in the svn and I am supposed to do this.

so if I get this right, you have not posted anything in the svn and I am supposed to do this.

I just put these into the SVN. I am now done with my changes.

I summarized the commit log into the readme if you want to use that as a mostly-complete "Changes" list.

so if I get this right, you have not posted anything in the svn and I am supposed to do this.

Sorrrry, I didn't have SVN write access.

I just put these into the SVN. I am now done with my changes.

I summarized the commit log into the readme if you want to use that as a mostly-complete "Changes" list.

Seems like someone beat me to it, all the leaderheads have been updated in the svn.

@embryodead: Congrats at half-cutting the current LH size! :goodjob:
@everyone: Another revised LH list at post 135 (on a sidenote: How can I make hyperlinks?)

@embryodead: Congrats at half-cutting the current LH size! :goodjob:
@everyone: Another revised LH list at post 135 (on a sidenote: How can I make hyperlinks?)

Go to Advanced Posting, press the Globe button with the Staple icon and enter your address there. From that point on you can write anything in the field and still have it posted, like this. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=204)

I think I've got it. (http://www.google.com) Thanks! :)

Can someone please explain to me what Christian VI is doing on the list...?

Can someone please explain to me what Christian VI is doing on the list...?

What list?

Can someone please explain to me what Christian VI is doing on the list...?

Probably a typo, as the leaderhead is Christian IV ;) In such case I don't see anything wrong with him.

New list for LHs; sorry if it has become tiring, this time have also added hyperlinks (thx Cethegus! :))

Revision n(where n an integer):

France: Charlemagne (500-1400)---> Louis XIV (1400-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352) (using Richelieu's LH)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-850) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (850-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1050) ---> Saladin (1050-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa *yay second leader* (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1430) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1430-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1540) ---> Charles V(1540-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1520) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1520-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1620) ---> Peter (1620-1720) ---> Catherine (1720-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (1066-1550) ---> Elizabeth (1400-1650)---> O. Cromwell (1650-1800) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13275)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1500) ---> Suleiman I (1500-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

What I'd suggest for Cordoba as a 2nd. LH is Abu Yusuf Yaqub (1259-1286), the most important leader of the Marinid dynasty who ruled North and West Africa and part of Al Andalus from his capitol at Marrakesh. The art below is for Idris II but would be OK for any Moroccan Berber leader, especially if Cordoba collapses and respawns in Morocco, as I think we're planning.
So it would go;

Abd-ar-Rahman III, 712-1260....>Abu Yusuf Yaqub, 1260-1800

Thanks for this one, so, after adding more appropriate landmarks for leader changing, the situation is:

Revision n(where n an integer):

France: Charlemagne (500-960)---> Louis XIV (960-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352) (using Richelieu's LH)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-868) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (868-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1170) ---> Saladin (1170-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (716-1161) ---> Abu Yusuf Yaqub or whatever (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8503) (1161-1800)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I
Poland: Kazmierz III
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa *yay second leader* (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1524) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1524-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1512) ---> Charles V(1512-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1522) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1522-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1598) ---> Peter (1598-1730) ---> Catherine (1730-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (1066-1336) ---> Elizabeth (1336-1604)---> O. Cromwell (1604-1800) (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13275)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1512) ---> Suleiman I (1512-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

I strongly dislike the idea of Oliver Cromwell being the English leader for the entire Early Modern period. Either have him for about fifty years and then switch to George I or something, or just keep Elizabeth on. I don't see why Elizabeth is a problem after 1604.

If you're going to use Indris as 2nd leader for Cordoba, who is gonna be Abd-Al-Rahman? At the moment it's Mehmed II... and on the chart you've given him back to Turkey.

Indris II was posted twice in the last 2 pages as a suggestion for the LH representing Abd-Al-Rahman. I assumed that was the idea since you can't have Mehmed II for both ;)

Also, once again, the current Swedish LH is Gustavus II aka Gustav Adolph, not Gustav Vasa. Two different people and two different leaderheads (I posted screenshot of Gustav Vasa here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8473448&postcount=134)) Technically you can use both (Vasa up to 1617, then Adolph)

If you're going to use Indris as 2nd leader for Cordoba, who is gonna be Abd-Al-Rahman? At the moment it's Mehmed II... and on the chart you've given him back to Turkey.

Indris II was posted twice in the last 2 pages as a suggestion for the LH representing Abd-Al-Rahman. I assumed that was the idea since you can't have Mehmed II for both ;)

Also, once again, the current Swedish LH is Gustavus II aka Gustav Adolph, not Gustav Vasa. Two different people and two different leaderheads (I posted screenshot of Gustav Vasa here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8473448&postcount=134)) Technically you can use both (Vasa up to 1617, then Adolph)

For Abd-ar-Rahman. we could use this one if we changed the background to one of a cropped shot of La Mezquita and if somebody could fix his mustache a bit.

I strongly dislike the idea of Oliver Cromwell being the English leader for the entire Early Modern period. Either have him for about fifty years and then switch to George I or something, or just keep Elizabeth on. I don't see why Elizabeth is a problem after 1604.

Having a leader for just 50 years is overkill. So, if you agree, I propose dropping him.

Having a leader for just 50 years is overkill. So, if you agree, I propose dropping him.

Also, the change of leaderhead for Cordoba should be 1261 not 1161. (a typo?), and you left Austria off your list.
Anyway, here are 5 more leaderheads we might use. The link for the Afonso LH is closed but I'd suggest using the El Cid one for him. It's the right period and it looks good too.

Poland: Kazmierz III (970-1630)...> Jan III Sobieski (1630-1800)

Dutch: Willem Van Oranje (1580-1670)...> Johan de Witt (1670-1800)

Austria: Leopold I (1160-1700)...> Maria Theresa (1700-1800)

Hungary: Istvan I (900-1460)...> Mathinus Corvinus (1460-1800)

Portugal Afonso Henriques (1100- 1400)...> Joao I (1400-1800)

Wow! Thanks! (I also think of replacing Willem van Oranje with Maurits von Nassau, he played a bigger part in the Dutch history than Willem IMO, anyway we have Dutch guys here so they could tell us their opinion about that :))
EDIT: Not a typo; used the date the Marinid Kingdom was founded. I hope you guys get the other landmarks, will add explanations if not.
EDIT 2: Willem van Oranje will be used for only 45 turns with that system. Overkill perhaps?

Wow! Thanks! (I also think of replacing Willem van Oranje with Maurits von Nassau, he played a bigger part in the Dutch history than Willem IMO, anyway we have Dutch guys here so they could tell us their opinion about that :))
EDIT: Not a typo; used the date the Marinid Kingdom was founded. I hope you guys get the other landmarks, will add explanations if not.
EDIT 2: Willem van Oranje will be used for only 45 turns with that system. Overkill perhaps?


1. I beg to differ. The wiki article says the dvnasty began in 1215. I said 1260 because Abu Yusuf lived from that time and he was the most important of the Marinids, capturing Marrakesh from the Almohads in 1269 and uniting all the Maghreb under Marinid rule. Also, that way it divides the Cordoban period into 2 roughly equal halves.

2. Maybe we could extend Willem a bit further, maybe about 60 turns, the way we have extended so many of the others.

Cordoba: Would you be satisfied with a 1215 switch?
Netherlands: They would currently do with one leader, IMHO, since it barely does anything significant enough after 1670; Johan nevertheless dies before 1700.
Austria: Maria Theresa would be better for me to get in at 1740 (start of Austro-Prussian dualism), so she is a bit of debatable. Same for Cathy of Russia.
Sweden: Kinda same with Nederland, one leader atm. Karl XII would be good for me as a second later leader, given we have a LH of him/could resemble him.
Turkey: Would it be better to use Selim I's LH as Mehmed, and keep Mehmed as Abd-Rahman?
Portugal: Doesn't El Cid seem too Arab for a Portuguese leader?

So:

Revision n, nEN.

France: Charlemagne (500-987)---> Louis XIV (987-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-868) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (868-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1170) ---> Saladin (1170-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (716-1215) ---> Abu Yusuf Yaqub or whatever (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8503) (1215-1800)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I (900-1302) ---> Hunyadi Matyas (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=7715) (1302-1800)
Poland: Kazmierz III (969-1570) ---> Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2549) (1570-1800)
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1524) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1524-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1512) ---> Charles V(1512-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1522) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1522-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1598) ---> Peter (1598-1740) ---> Catherine (1740-1800)
Austria: Leopold I (1161-1740) ---> Maria Theresa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10731) (1740-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13458) (1066-1452) ---> Elizabeth (1452-1800)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1512) ---> Suleiman I (1512-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

Leader change years:
France: 987 as the start date (Hugh Capet) of the French Kingdom
Byzantium: 868, start of the Macedonian Dynasty
Arabia: 1170, the creation of Saladin's Egyptian Kingdom
Cordoba: 1215, founding of the Marinid Kingdom
Hungary: 1302, end of the Arpad Dynasty
Poland: 1570, beginning of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
HRE: 1524, Prussia becomes an independent kingdom.
Spain: 1512, there wasn't much between these leaders, so...
Norse: 1522, independent Sweden and the end of the Kalmar Union
Muscowy: 1598, where expansion in Asia starts/1740, kinda same as the Spanish justification
Austria: 1740, creation of the Austria-Prussia dualism in Germany
England: 1452, end of the Hundred Year War
Turkey: 1512, expansion in Africa starts.

Sorry if the post is too long. :)

2. Maybe we could extend Willem a bit further, maybe about 60 turns, the way we have extended so many of the others.

Or not, and use the Dutch King more effectively as a Venetian Doge.

Or not, and use the Dutch King more effectively as a Venetian Doge.

What do you mean? Putting the second LH as a Venecian leader?

Wow! Thanks! (I also think of replacing Willem van Oranje with Maurits von Nassau, he played a bigger part in the Dutch history than Willem IMO, anyway we have Dutch guys here so they could tell us their opinion about that :))
EDIT 2: Willem van Oranje will be used for only 45 turns with that system. Overkill perhaps?

I say keep Willem van Oranje as the LH. And IMO he could stay for the whole period.

What do you mean? Putting the second LH as a Venecian leader?

Yes. In Rise of Mankind (although a little modified), he was used as Valenzio de Medici, Venetian leader. I thought it looked wonderful with all the luxury on him. It's not an idea not worth considering, keeping in mind Netherlands don't necessarily need a second leader, being a late game civ and all while Venezia is in the game for a thousand years.

Weren't the Medici from Firenze?

Yes. In Rise of Mankind (although a little modified), he was used as Valenzio de Medici, Venetian leader. I thought it looked wonderful with all the luxury on him. It's not an idea not worth considering, keeping in mind Netherlands don't necessarily need a second leader, being a late game civ and all while Venezia is in the game for a thousand years.

Umm, you mixed it a bit tbh. Medicis were the rulers of Florence, not Venice. Just a few pages age I thought we agreed that Lorenzo the Medici / Dutch King (the other one, not the one that is discussed right now) would be good for GENOA as Simone Boccanegra, because unlike Venice, Genoa doesn't have a leaderhead at all. Alexander the Great makes me cry.

EDIT: The shaved Dutch dude (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8461568&postcount=119) as Genoan and the 2 other dudes from your post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8463232&postcount=120) are Dutch through and through and can be used as extra leaders for Netherlands. Right?

Umm, you mixed it a bit tbh. Medicis were the rulers of Florence, not Venice. Just a few pages age I thought we agreed that Lorenzo the Medici / Dutch King (the other one, not the one that is discussed right now) would be good for GENOA as Simone Boccanegra, because unlike Venice, Genoa doesn't have a leaderhead at all. Alexander the Great makes me cry.

Regarding your mixing up comment, it's you who missed my point entirely. I just stated where he was used and as whom. Much like how there's no independent Florence in RFCE, wouldn't it be incorrect to have de Medici in charge of Venice if there was even a chance de Medici Banks would be founded in France or Germany?

Anyway, if Willem was gone, the Dutch King leader graphics could be used effectively because there would be no 'duplicates' in the mod (and I personally like it better than the shaved version). But true, I had forgotten about Genoa, whose Simon Boccanegra makes up for the void perfectly. If Willem stays for good, then I'm fine even with the "toned down" LH.

Sorry then, I assumed it was about Thomas' War where he is used as Lorenzo the Medici, leader of Florence/Italy. Either way, with all the extra Dutch leaders I think there's no reason to keep him as Dutch.

Yes, that's true. I got a bit carried away. And you're right, I think it was Thomas' War I saw him in. I deleted both Thomas' War and Rise of Mankind from my Mods folder a while ago and it's possible I mixed them up together.

Staying on topic what's the case on the Dutch leaderheads? Are Johan de Witt and Willem van Oranje concensually supported inclusions? Although this is Thomas' War influenced (again), the black Stuyvesant might work wonders for a religious Eastern European middle leader, should there be need for one.

Oh yeah. Does Venezia need a second leaderhead? And is the current Dagolo the best LH around to depict the current leader? Surely the blind eye effect can be added on the fly, yes?

Hmm, that LH was made specifically to represent Dandolo, he has venetian symbols and looks blind (cloudy eyes). I think he's perfect tbh.

Hell yeah, I am back (I had been to Athens, and had forgotten my laptop here :( ). In the meanwhile, I see that some work has been made in this one, and...so have the LH makers, which provide us with another LH (Hungarian). So the situation has as follows:

LHs used

France: Charlemagne (500-987)---> Louis XIV (987-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-868) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (868-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1170) ---> Saladin (1170-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (716-1215) ---> Abu Yusuf Yaqub or whatever (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8503) (1215-1800)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I (900-1302) ---> Hunyadi Matyas (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=7715) (1302-1526) ---> Janos Szapolyai (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13534) (1526-1800)
Poland: Kazmierz III (969-1570) ---> Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2549) (1570-1800)
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1524) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1524-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1512) ---> Charles V(1512-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1522) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1522-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1598) ---> Peter (1598-1740) ---> Catherine (1740-1800)
Austria: Leopold I (1161-1740) ---> Maria Theresa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10731) (1740-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13458) (1066-1452) ---> Elizabeth (1452-1800)
Portugal: Joao II
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1512) ---> Suleiman I (1512-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

Leader change years
France: 987 as the start date (Hugh Capet) of the French Kingdom
Byzantium: 868, start of the Macedonian Dynasty
Arabia: 1170, the creation of Saladin's Egyptian Kingdom
Cordoba: 1215, founding of the Marinid Kingdom
Hungary: 1302, end of the Arpad Dynasty/ 1526, Hungary gets much overruled by both Habsburgs and Ottomans
Poland: 1570, beginning of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
HRE: 1524, Prussia becomes an independent kingdom.
Spain: 1512, there wasn't much between these leaders, so...
Norse: 1522, independent Sweden and the end of the Kalmar Union
Muscowy: 1598, where expansion in Asia starts/1740, kinda same as the Spanish justification
Austria: 1740, creation of the Austria-Prussia dualism in Germany
England: 1452, end of the Hundred Year War
Turkey: 1512, expansion in Africa starts.

And BTW: My normal part of involvement will be ready at Sunday afternoon, dont swear for earlier.

Just wonder, how many flags do you have at the current time?

(*clears voice*)

Boys (and girls) since we now have a good LH for Afonso Henriques, we can get it to being used as Portugal's initial LH.

So:


LHs used

France: Charlemagne (500-987)---> Louis XIV (987-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-868) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (868-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1170) ---> Saladin (1170-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (716-1215) ---> Abu Yusuf Yaqub or whatever (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8503) (1215-1800)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I (900-1302) ---> Hunyadi Matyas (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=7715) (1302-1526) ---> Janos Szapolyai (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13534) (1526-1800)
Poland: Kazmierz III (969-1570) ---> Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2549) (1570-1800)
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1524) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1524-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1512) ---> Charles V(1512-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1522) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1522-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1598) ---> Peter (1598-1740) ---> Catherine (1740-1800)
Austria: Leopold I (1161-1740) ---> Maria Theresa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10731) (1740-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13458) (1066-1452) ---> Elizabeth (1452-1800)
Portugal: Afonso Henriques (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13595) (1100-1416) --->Joao II (1416-1800)
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1512) ---> Suleiman I (1512-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

Leader change years
France: 987 as the start date (Hugh Capet) of the French Kingdom
Byzantium: 868, start of the Macedonian Dynasty
Arabia: 1170, the creation of Saladin's Egyptian Kingdom
Cordoba: 1215, founding of the Marinid Kingdom
Hungary: 1302, end of the Arpad Dynasty/ 1526, Hungary gets much overruled by both Habsburgs and Ottomans
Poland: 1570, beginning of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
HRE: 1524, Prussia becomes an independent kingdom.
Spain: 1512, there wasn't much between these leaders, so...
Norse: 1522, independent Sweden and the end of the Kalmar Union
Muscowy: 1598, where expansion in Asia starts/1740, kinda same as the Spanish justification
Austria: 1740, creation of the Austria-Prussia dualism in Germany
England: 1452, end of the Hundred Year War
Portugal: 1416: Reign of Joao I, and focus turn in colonization
Turkey: 1512, expansion in Africa starts.

Just wonder, how many flags do you have at the current time?

We have flags for all the civs. Some of them aren't perfect, but most of them are decent (I think, but then, I made many of them).

Boys (and girls) since we now have a good LH for Afonso Henriques, we can get it to being used as Portugal's initial LH.


Seems reasonable.

I attached a zip with two files I managed to break with my LH trimming, probably no one noticed but Istvan's background got cropped at the bottom in some views etc. Also, since we're at this I need to mention that the Polish flag in the mod is a German eagle, that is, the early Holy Roman flag :p so I added a medieval Polish eagle to the zip.

We have flags for all the civs. Some of them aren't perfect, but most of them are decent (I think, but then, I made many of them).

We are still using the wrong flags for both the Arabs and the Cordobans, as historically they should be solid colours with no decoration at all, black or green for the early Arabs and white or green for the Cordobans. And the Ottomans should be using the red crescent flag.
We should at least get rid of that silly palm tree from Civ.
I'd suggest the Arabs have the one the Cordobans have now and the Cordoban one match their button but be green on a white background. Can we do that?:)

We are still using the wrong flags for both the Arabs and the Cordobans, as historically they should be solid colours with no decoration at all, black or green for the early Arabs and white or green for the Cordobans. And the Ottomans should be using the red crescent flag.
We should at least get rid of that silly palm tree from Civ.
I'd suggest the Arabs have the one the Cordobans have now and the Cordoban one match their button but be green on a white background. Can we do that?:)

I agree about the palm tree, but Cordoba is continuously Umayyad, so their current flag (is that Umayyad?) or the circular flag from BTS (this one certainly is) is probably better for them than for Arabs. Total War modders consistently use a crescent turned 90 degrees although I'm not sure what is the basis for that: http://70.40.209.33/totalwar/images/dlv_5.7/fe_buttons_48/symbol48_moors.png

Abbasid flag, alternative to a plain one: http://balagan.org.uk/war/iberia/0711/images/Flag_Abbasid.jpg .

---

While looking at the flags I just noticed the mod actually has a Polish eagle (although a 20th century one) in TeamColor folder but the XML links to the German one.

We have flags for all the civs. Some of them aren't perfect, but most of them are decent (I think, but then, I made many of them).
Just wondered as i made a pretty nice Venice Decal Flag for a while ago. I can upload a pic and you could decide if you want to use that instead of the one you already have.

Just wondered as i made a pretty nice Venice Decal Flag for a while ago. I can upload a pic and you could decide if you want to use that instead of the one you already have.

Please do. I'm not entirely happy with the current Venice flag.

Re: Cordoba and the Arabs. My preference is that flag designs be relatively simple and easy to distinguish. We're not going to do blank solid-color flags. I know that might be historically accurate, but it looks boring and like the flag is broken in game. In addition, we're going to keep flag colors consistent with Civ colors. This means no black flag, because then the main Civ color would have to be black, and end up looking like barbarians.

The Ottoman flag is currently a very nice tughra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tughra). I know we had this discussion before. The crescent would be appropriate as well, of course.

Maybe the upward-facing crescent for the moors comes from the present flag of Mauretania? That's kind of a nice simple design...

Then all I ask is give the Cordoban flag to the Arabs and let Cordoba have a flag which matches their button. That's not too much to ask, is it?

Ok, here's a pic of it in warlords, and it is easy to remowe those borders around the lion to, so that isn't a problem. The color's is gold and venetian red. The unit is, of course, the galleas ;)

EDIT:
Just a though, why dont you just use a camel as the arabian sign? I can't seem to think about any symbols for them, and the web wont give me either. So a camel would actually fit them. If not, i have an old version of the Eagle of Saladin in th egyptian coat of arms as a decal, if you are interested i men.

I note that Westminster Abbey currently uses Kalmar Castle graphics. As long as you're using a non-custom piece of art, Notre Dame would be a much better fit.

http://www.world-city-photos.org/Paris/paris_notre_dame/Paris_Notre_Dame.jpg
Notre Dame de Paris
http://myteamrivals.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5513d181b88340120a5b855a5970c-800wi
Westminster Abbey

On a related note, there's also a Big Ben graphic, which you may already have seen: http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2442

Ok, here's a pic of it in warlords, and it is easy to remowe those borders around the lion to, so that isn't a problem. The color's is gold and venetian red. The unit is, of course, the galleas ;)

Looks good veBear. A bit cleaner and better proportioned than my attempt. I removed the borders because I prefer it that way, and it'll go in.

Here are screen captures of the Arab and Cordoban buttons. An improvement?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=233875&stc=1&d=1257733537

I'm not sure about the Cordoban one but it certainly looks good. OK with me.

Here are screen captures of the Arab and Cordoban buttons. An improvement?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=233875&stc=1&d=1257733537

I'm with jeesiecat, the cordobian looks ok. Maybe it needs a bit of tweaking, but other than that, it looks good.

Edit:
Maybe a new flag for the arabs would be good i think.

There's a new Yaroslav leader head: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8626525&postcount=1083

Neat. It's in now.

I didn't play this mod till alpha 7, but i have some question:

-do you have a sort of module who gave to each civ his own artstyle?

-Can you include varietas delectat in the mod? (and don't forget that avain has also made a superb polonish and hungarian unit style!)

Thanks for answering

New shadered Charles V leaderhead: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8632468&postcount=1101

-do you have a sort of module who gave to each civ his own artstyle?

-Can you include varietas delectat in the mod? (and don't forget that avain has also made a superb polonish and hungarian unit style!)


We do intend to do culture-specific units, particularly so that the Muslim civs look different. It will take some effort, but we (I?) will get to it eventually. Part of the complication is that we have a lot of new units and civs. VD will give us Poland and Hungary, but not (e.g.) Venice and Kiev. Additionally, VD doesn't cover our new units which mostly come from the Charlemagne mod -- so everyone would get a unique spearmen but everyone would have the same light lancer.

So, in summary, I envision that the mod team will do some basic culture-specific units (grouped roughly as Muslim, Slavic, Mediterranean, Eastern, Western, Nordic), but no civ-specific units.

If someone wants to take up the challenge of skinning/texturing civ-specific units and/or integrating VD, go for it!

New shadered Charles V leaderhead: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8632468&postcount=1101

He looks very... shiny. I think I prefer the current one.

Which should be transferred to Spain as he has no relation to Burgundy IMHO

We do intend to do culture-specific units, particularly so that the Muslim civs look different. It will take some effort, but we (I?) will get to it eventually. Part of the complication is that we have a lot of new units and civs. VD will give us Poland and Hungary, but not (e.g.) Venice and Kiev. Additionally, VD doesn't cover our new units which mostly come from the Charlemagne mod -- so everyone would get a unique spearmen but everyone would have the same light lancer.

So, in summary, I envision that the mod team will do some basic culture-specific units (grouped roughly as Muslim, Slavic, Mediterranean, Eastern, Western, Nordic), but no civ-specific units.

If someone wants to take up the challenge of skinning/texturing civ-specific units and/or integrating VD, go for it!

How soon do you want to start introducing these? As I posted some time ago, there are lots of good civ-specific re-skins which are already available in the downloads section of CFC, esp. for the Muslim civs and Ottomans. These are ready to use right now, whenever you want to implement them. I'll put them together again and post the files as proposals any time you like. You only have to say the word.:D

EDIT: Here are some examples from the database which could be used for the Arabs and Cordobans.
Other designs are available for the Ottomans and many others.

Which should be transferred to Spain as he has no relation to Burgundy IMHO

The leaderhead is being used as Phillip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy. (However, it really does look like a Habsburg, what with his large jaw.)

I already implemented flavor units for my personal needs, with similar unit line-up, if you need XML fiend it'll be mostly copy'n'paste work on my part. VD as such is too far away from RFCE's unit lines to be used but there's enough extra units in the db to have complete culture groups, Charlemagne units included. Personally I've got Euro, Norse, Rus, Iberian, Arab, Turk, Balkan(Hungarian).

In any case, if you ran into gaps, I can offer re-texturing/changing weapons and such, I attached pics of some unpublished work, e.g. Arab horse archer and a generic pavise crossbowman/arbalester (based on a Hungarian one from VD), the pavise makes it distinct from regular crossbowmen and I can't stand those German Chu-ko-nus personally ;)

I already implemented flavor units for my personal needs, with similar unit line-up, if you need XML fiend it'll be mostly copy'n'paste work on my part. VD as such is too far away from RFCE's unit lines to be used but there's enough extra units in the db to have complete culture groups, Charlemagne units included. Personally I've got Euro, Norse, Rus, Iberian, Arab, Turk, Balkan(Hungarian).

In any case, if you ran into gaps, I can offer re-texturing/changing weapons and such, I attached pics of some unpublished work, e.g. Arab horse archer and a generic pavise crossbowman/arbalester (based on a Hungarian one from VD), the pavise makes it distinct from regular crossbowmen and I can't stand those German Chu-ko-nus personally ;)

Heh, funny thing. This evening I was just going through nifskope tutorials to figure out how to reskin a better arbalester. I used the Total Realism special Genoan as my base, but it's probably the same root figure, since it also has a pavise. Anyway, cool that you've done it already. If you've got the XML and art set up I'd be happy to integrate your work into the main mod -- that would be nice and quick.

Heh, funny thing. This evening I was just going through nifskope tutorials to figure out how to reskin a better arbalester. I used the Total Realism special Genoan as my base, but it's probably the same root figure, since it also has a pavise. Anyway, cool that you've done it already. If you've got the XML and art set up I'd be happy to integrate your work into the main mod -- that would be nice and quick.

It'd be great if we could incorporate the XML and art embryodead has already done into our mod. It seems he's used many figures I've suggested for over a year now but I do hope they'll still be some consultation about which ones we finally use. People should still be able to have a look at them before they're implemented, shouldn't they? So what do you think about the suggested figures I posted above?

There will be a chance for feedback of course, but the only effective way to get input from a bunch of people is to implement something in the mod and iterate from there.

Jessiecat, I think I used all of those you posted except 1 or 2, I'll move it over and post a screenshot of all styles so it can compared and modified easier, OK?

Jessiecat, I think I used all of those you posted except 1 or 2, I'll move it over and post a screenshot of all styles so it can compared and modified easier, OK?

That'd be great. I'm sure we're of one mind about nearly all of them.:D

Screenshots are attached. My iberian set only had archer & spanish knight so I left it out for now. Hungarian has a few, and England, France etc. have some extra 1-2 but here are the basic big sets. Line Infantry, Dragoons etc. have no substitutes. Some units like Russian knight replacements couldn't be used since they're used as UUs in RFCE.

Rus' set is for Kiev & Moscow. I'm not sure about Bulgaria, but Poland doesn't fit in this style. Byzantines & Ottomans are pretty distinct and complete, but if you want to use other sets like those from VD there will be a lot of gaps and problems, e.g. with Poland, I may be biased, but Polish units from VD all have the same Hussar armor & helmet, it's not realistic and doesn't look like Polish army at all tbh.

EDIT: Also, Rus' set has Cossack as Arquebusier and Strelets as Musketman, in reality one belongs to Kiev and the other to Moscow, it can be split but that would be going into more civ-specific sets.

EDIT2: Link: http://rapidshare.com/files/306716731/rfce-unit-artstyles.zip.html (xml based on Alpha8 files)

Nice work, embryodead. I support all these as they are. However, there are are a couple of points about the Muslim set anyway.

1. The Cordoban set should pretty well be the same as the Arabian one, except for the Light Lancer which is replaced by the Berber cavalry UU anyway. Also the names of the foot units could be changed to Berber or Moorish, as they usually were from the Maghreb anyway. ie. Berber spearman, Moorish pikeman etc..

2. The Arabian set is fine except for the Heavy Lancer which is replaced by the Ghazi cavalry UU. But our Ghazi now looks too much like the light cav in set 6. Maybe we can change the Ghazi to look like the figure in my first pic,(lower left) with the red plume carrying lance and bow. What do you think?

3. The names of some of the other Muslim infantry might have to change. Guisarme or Arbalest don't really seem right. Any ideas?

Sorry I didn't mention that I changed the Ghazi graphic for the reason you mentioned - not a big change, but it differs from the more plain skirmisher, see attachment.

Arab set was meant for Arabs & Cordova. That's why it doesn't include UUs, which are added on top of this. These are all artstyle/flavor units so renaming isn't necessary I think?

As for problematic names, I suggested renaming Guisarme (for everyone) to a more generic "Heavy Spearman" or "Armored Spearman" before - this way you don't have to create additional units like with the Horse Archer/Mounted Sergeant. For Arbalester, I had "Composite Bowman" in MEM for Muslim civs but that isn't likely to work here (needs splitting the unit in two, and graphic is already used for longbowmen).

Right, in general there's a provision to allow civ-specific graphics for units but not civ-specific names. The only way (without some deep SDK hacking) to give the "same" unit a different name for different civs is to actually create different units. This is sort of a kludge, and makes many things more complicated, so I oppose it.

I agree we could rename some of the units to be more general. The feeling was that very generic names were boring though. The Charlemagne mod, in particular, has lots of units which are light X and heavy X, it's just not very immersive.

How about the Guisarmier becomes a "Polearm ___" I'm not sure what the appropriate term is. Polearm-man can't be right. Polearm Infantry? If there's a common use that I'm blanking on...

It's a good generic word that conveys the sense of a medieval somewhat more advanced staff weapon (even though it would technically cover both a spear and a pike).

In case you're incorporating the XML, there's 2 things I missed:
- all heavy swordsmen use maceman icons (in artdefines)
- byzantine swordsman uses two graphics for different eras, should only use the early one (in artstyleinfos)

"Polearm Infantry" appears in google frequently enough to consider it OK, although your above post is already in top 10 results ;)

In case you're incorporating the XML, there's 2 things I missed:
- all heavy swordsmen use maceman icons (in artdefines)
- byzantine swordsman uses two graphics for different eras, should only use the early one (in artstyleinfos)

"Polearm Infantry" appears in google frequently enough to consider it OK, although your above post is already in top 10 results ;)

Great, I've downloaded your files but probably won't get a chance to integrate them for a couple days. I'll keep those corrections in mind. Looks all very nice...

Great, I've downloaded your files but probably won't get a chance to integrate them for a couple days. I'll keep those corrections in mind. Looks all very nice...

I'm very much looking forward to seeing these in the next version. Thanks again to embryodead.:goodjob:

Just a quick question. I noticed from sourceforge that you're planning to implement my suggestion about a 2nd. splash screen with text for the colonial projects. Any success yet? I've got an idea for background art with that, if you're still interested. :)

Just a quick question. I noticed from sourceforge that you're planning to implement my suggestion about a 2nd. splash screen with text for the colonial projects. Any success yet? I've got an idea for background art with that, if you're still interested. :)

I have it down as a feature to implement so I don't forget about it. I haven't looked at the code for doing pop-up windows -- I know how to do it in general, but I haven't tried it yet. I don't have time to do this for Alpha 9, so hold on to your background art a bit longer.

Some weird art failures. Especially the line infantry. The English Longbowman is a very small one. Just some flying arrows.

After the release of another LH (Louis XVI, yes I know he was kind of a fail, but we have no better choice for an 18th century LH), the list has as follows

So:


LHs to be used

France: Charlemagne (500-987)---> Louis XIV (987-1713) ---> Louis XVI (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13734)(1713-1800)
Burgundy: Phillipe II de Bourgogne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11352)
Byzantium: Justinian (500-868) ---> Basil II (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9978) (868-1800)
Arabia: Abu Bakr (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10727)(632-1170) ---> Saladin (1170-1800)
Bulgaria: Simeon
Venice: Enrico Dandolo
Cordoba: Abd-Ar-Rahman (716-1215) ---> Abu Yusuf Yaqub or whatever (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=8503) (1215-1800)
Kyiv: Yaroslavl the Wise
Hungary: Istvan I (900-1302) ---> Hunyadi Matyas (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=7715) (1302-1526) ---> Janos Szapolyai (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13534) (1526-1800)
Poland: Kazmierz III (969-1570) ---> Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2549) (1570-1800)
HRE: Freiderich Barbarossa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13459) (940-1524) ---> Friedrich the Prussian (1524-1800)
Spain:Isabela (909-1512) ---> Charles V(1512-1800), using the Burgundian LH, actually depicting...him.
Norse: Harald Hardrada (780-1522) ---> Christian IV (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11732) (1522-1800)
Moscow: Ivan IV (1320-1598) ---> Peter (1598-1740) ---> Catherine (1740-1800)
Austria: Leopold I (1161-1740) ---> Maria Theresa (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10731) (1740-1800)
Genoa: Simone Boccanegra
England: William I (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13458) (1066-1452) ---> Elizabeth (1452-1800)
Portugal: Afonso Henriques (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13595) (1100-1416) --->Joao II (1416-1800)
Turkey: Mehmed II (1300-1512) ---> Suleiman I (1512-1800)
Dutch: Willem van Oranje
Sweden: Gustav Vasa

Leader change years
France: 987 as the start date (Hugh Capet) of the French Kingdom/ 1713, Louis XIV dies, the French Monarchy starts declining
Byzantium: 868, start of the Macedonian Dynasty
Arabia: 1170, the creation of Saladin's Egyptian Kingdom
Cordoba: 1215, founding of the Marinid Kingdom
Hungary: 1302, end of the Arpad Dynasty/ 1526, Hungary gets much overruled by both Habsburgs and Ottomans
Poland: 1570, beginning of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
HRE: 1524, Prussia becomes an independent kingdom.
Spain: 1512, there wasn't much between these leaders, so...
Norse: 1522, independent Sweden and the end of the Kalmar Union
Muscowy: 1598, where expansion in Asia starts/1740, kinda same as the Spanish justification
Austria: 1740, creation of the Austria-Prussia dualism in Germany
England: 1452, end of the Hundred Year War
Portugal: 1416: Reign of Joao I, and focus turn in colonization
Turkey: 1512, expansion in Africa starts.

BTW when will they make it to Alpha/Beta?

Hey guys, what do you think about this Casimir LH (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13772)? TBH, I prefer the old one...

Do you need walrus graphics for Norway? :P

Do you need walrus graphics for Norway? :P

And for Iceland too. Yes, please. If you've got them in BTS.:)

No but I can make them. Should they be animated?

No but I can make them. Should they be animated?

If possible. But they have to be BTS compatible, like the elephants.

Elephants are not BTS-compatible, ask anyone. It's BTS which is elephant-compatible.

Hey guys, what do you think about this Casimir LH (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13772)? TBH, I prefer the old one...

Judging from the screenshot, except for the ugly background I like him, he's a bit more accurate.

Hey guys, what do you think about this Casimir LH (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13772)? TBH, I prefer the old one...

As a lurker's opinion, he looks much better than what I'm used to seeing. I'd definitely add him.

Hey guys, what do you think about this Casimir LH (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13772)? TBH, I prefer the old one...

I think he's a bit dull. But if it is more accurate, I say use that one. But with an other background.

A Warlords mod, Total Realism, has some good graphics you might want to borrow. Their wonder art and button for the Brandenburg Gate is pretty good, as is the graphics they use for Arsenal. Personally I'd prefer it a medieval dungeon, maybe for the Inquisition? The Papal States are going to have a UB, aren't they?

A Warlords mod, Total Realism, has some good graphics you might want to borrow. Their wonder art and button for the Brandenburg Gate is pretty good, as is the graphics they use for Arsenal. Personally I'd prefer it a medieval dungeon, maybe for the Inquisition? The Papal States are going to have a UB, aren't they?

I don't know if they currently have a UB, however, they only have one city, so it makes little difference. The Pope is a special player not necessarily in direct competition with the other players.

You can say the St. Peter Basilica is their "UB".:) I think they shouldn't have another UB.

I agree on that with merjin_v1, also the Pope is not playable, and thus a UB would be no useful.

Back to normal terms, after a hard in exam terms two-week-period (just before Christmas, damnit).
So, the debates are:

1) After the new Casimir LH (passed), we have also this new Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13867).
2) In case the 1070 spawn date for the Turks gets passed, we must be in search for an Alp Arslan LH. The candidates (tbh, I have a preference to 1)
Candidate 1 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13757)
Candidate 2 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13903)

Opinions plz, we have democracy over there! :p
And Merry Christmas!1! :D

1) After the new Casimir LH (passed), we have also this new Jan Sobieski (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13867).
2) In case the 1070 spawn date for the Turks gets passed, we must be in search for an Alp Arslan LH. The candidates (tbh, I have a preference to 1)
Candidate 1 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13757)
Candidate 2 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13903)

1. ok
2. I prefer the 1st one too.

And to finish with the debates, we have the "battle of the Williams"
Candidate 1 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=11807)
Candidate 2 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13458)
Candidate 3 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13923)
Aaaaand:
Candidate 4 :lol: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Nico_Rosberg_Canada_2006.jpg)
Well, okay, it is a Williams afterall.....

Own preference for 3, yours?

And we also have a Clovis available, though we will have time for him later.

I prefer number 1.

P.S.
Maybe adding the crown from C.Roland's Charlemagne (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=2747) would make Number 1 even better ;)

I think I prefer 2, though it is a little hard to tell with leaderheads -- sometimes you really need to see it in-game.


And we also have a Clovis available, though we will have time for him later.

I saw the Clovis I. I think it's a pretty cool leaderhead, but there must be a point at which we limit the number of leaders per Civ, mainly because of size considerations. France, of course, is around for a long time, so it sort of makes sense that they get more leaders. I think a limit of 3 would be good. Charlemagne and Louis XIV are obvious choices. I've read a lot more about the early middle ages recently, so I would naturally favor Clovis over Louis XVI, but that's just me...

Yes, sedna, this is the controversial point.
We are supposed not to use "overkill" LHs. Perhaps (basically almost surely) Clovis (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13940) is an overkill LH. Not because he would be the 4th French LH, while the Dutch still have only one (while this size-considerating point is actually sensible), but because the LH turns/total turns ratio would be unfair:
Clovis: 67/500 (13.4%)
Charlemagne: 52/500 (10.4%)
Louis XIV: 281/500 (56.2%, which is more than half of the game)
Louis XVI: 100/500 (20%)

While, using eg Joan d'Arc (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=4659), it would go:
Charlemagne: 119/500 (23.8%)
Joan d'Arc: 164/500 (32.8%)
Louis XIV: 117/500 (23.4%)
Louis XVI: 100/500 (20%)

Which is much more balanced, I think...

However, since TheCapo has stated that the LH could be used for any Dark Ages European Leader.....what about Sigismund of Burgundy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigismund_of_Burgundy)? (well, okay, much younger than in this wiki pic XD)

I agree with you, micbic. In fact, why not drop Louis XVI altogether and just have three?:)

At first:

Merry Christmas!

Back to business, I like the 2nd and 3rd one. But the 3rd one needs a different background. (Something like a castle IMO)

Have you found the files for your linked Joan of Arc somewhere, micbic? Because the download here at civfanatics doesn't work anymore, sadly.

I have actually tried to download this Joan, and it redirects to civfanatics.ru. It seems someone has uploaded the Joan there. ;)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13970

A new Vercingetorix was released.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=13970

A new Vercingetorix was released.

Why do we need Vercingetorix?

To apply the secret plan to extend the French spawn date to 100 BC, so that they have a chance of winning XD

I found this for the timber art. Its more dynamic IMO.