I looked at Michael's map. I shouldn't be the only one expressing opinion, so please others do that as well. 1. I am sure the location of the roads (as well as most of the rest) is historical, however, there are way too many roads. We should only keep some of the very main ones, ensuring the Byzantine cities are connected, one trough France going all the way to Rome. One following the coast, going to Iberia and couple of cities there. One connecting Rome to Constantinople. There is an extra road in the middle east outside of Byzantine area, that for sure should go. No Roman roads in northern Balkans either. 2. Nis is on the wrong spot. Anyway there are many cities that had much more impact on the region than Nis. If you want another city in the region, move Nis one tile west and call it Serdica (modern day Sofia). Also, Tomis will have no effect anyway, Bulgaria builds it anyway. 3. There are way too many cities in Iberia. I know that they were there, but so were pretty much all European cities. Settlers increase the importance of an already existing city and do not build cities per say. Right now Iberian nations have virtually no freedom in building cities, it is all prebuild. 4. Byzantium, with that many cities, will instantly die. There is no economy that can keep up with this many small and distant cities. If we give them a city in Iberia, it should be at most one. Tunis may stay (will flip fast anyway), but give them no more than one other city in the Italian region (islands and so). I don't see the point of Memphis, I know the Pyramids were there, but they have long ago lost their importance. 5. Overall I think we are getting back to the stage of way too many cities in Western Europe. We were there and then came back and severely reduced them, so I don't know it is a good idea to come back and re-add them. We should carefully consider things anyway. 6. Many of our Italian friends will disagree with Italy's new situation. I remember them having quite a few heated discussions until settling to the current situation. (PS Michael, in the future, if you wish to contribute map changes, start as Burgundy (the first playable nation), not the Franks, go to WB mode before doing anything (don't even settle) and save the file as World Builder Save, from the WB menu. Right now it is very hard to incorporate anything from your file. The Byzantines have played a turn and as soon as the Byzantines act, they introduce changes that I have to now manually undo one by one.)

Agreed on most of your points, a couple of questions before I make a new map.
-Are the little towns as improvements a good idea? Should they be kept?
-The ruins?
-No roads in the Northern Balkans at all???
-I'm thinking Valentia, Neapolis, Tunes, Dyrrachium, Trebizond and Memphis for the additions to Byzantium, is that ok? I know It wouldn't be terribly accurate but to help gameplay couldn't we give Byzantium a stability benefit from the pyramids? Maybe even the Sphinx via the Stonehenge replacement mod? (Napoleon's artillery once used it as target practice , and it adds a nice historical touch to Egypt)
-Could we have some religion already in the new cities?

I promise to reduce cities by atleast half next map.

(Right, sorry. I just wanted to play as France to test the changes)

Agreed on most of your points, a couple of questions before I make a new map.
-Are the little towns as improvements a good idea? Should they be kept?
-The ruins?
-No roads in the Northern Balkans at all???
-I'm thinking Valentia, Neapolis, Tunes, Dyrrachium, Trebizond and Memphis for the additions to Byzantium, is that ok? I know It wouldn't be terribly accurate but to help gameplay couldn't we give Byzantium a stability benefit from the pyramids? Maybe even the Sphinx via the Stonehenge replacement mod? (Napoleon's artillery once used it as target practice , and it adds a nice historical touch to Egypt)
-Could we have some religion already in the new cities?

I promise to reduce cities by atleast half next map.

(Right, sorry. I just wanted to play as France to test the changes)

I agree with 3Miro. Keep the roads and pre-built cities to a bare minimum. Your little towns look good but what purpose do they serve? Do they act as cottages? What ruins? The Romans didn't settle in the Balkans very much except Rumania. So you don't need any roads north of the Danube.
And forget the Pyramids and Sphinx. Heliopolis and Memphis were only ruins in 500AD. The Arabs looted them for building stone when they founded Fustat in 641AD. Fustat remained the capitol of Egypt until it was moved across the Nile to Al Qahira (Cairo) in 1168.

More cities add playability. One reason the ai is no challenge in civ 4 is stupid city placement.

bye Myri

- the towns are OK, they have little gameplay effect, but look good on the map.
- same with ruins (actually ruins have no gameplay effect)
- before Bulgaria, the northern part of the Balkans was Roman, however, it practically had no infrastructure. Justinian had build some forts to try and keep the Slavic invasion out, the forts were poorly guarded so he was unsuccessful, but you can put one or two forts if you like. And yes, Romania was never Roman.
- I will read up on Dyrrachium, might not be the best choice.
- Wonders give stability only if you are the one to build them. Besides what would the effect of the Pyramids be, +2 ex pts for Artillery units? I know we all like the Pyramids, but they really player no role in anything important in the middle ages.

Myri, cities reduce your options on where you can settle and once the cities are there, the AI will have to capture them by war and at war the AI sucks just as much as city placement.

- the towns are OK, they have little gameplay effect, but look good on the map.
- same with ruins (actually ruins have no gameplay effect)
- before Bulgaria, the northern part of the Balkans was Roman, however, it practically had no infrastructure. Justinian had build some forts to try and keep the Slavic invasion out, the forts were poorly guarded so he was unsuccessful, but you can put one or two forts if you like. And yes, Romania was never Roman.
- I will read up on Dyrrachium, might not be the best choice.
- Wonders give stability only if you are the one to build them. Besides what would the effect of the Pyramids be, +2 ex pts for Artillery units? I know we all like the Pyramids, but they really player no role in anything important in the middle ages.

Myri, cities reduce your options on where you can settle and once the cities are there, the AI will have to capture them by war and at war the AI sucks just as much as city placement.

Eh? :confused:I think you are mistaken. It was conquered by the Emperor Trajan in 106AD and became the Roman province of Dacia. It was extensively settled by legionaires and their families for 150 years until it was finally abandoned in 256AD. Even the Romanian language is derived from Roman, as in the name "Romanian". I recommend the excellent Wikipedia article on the history of Romania.:)

Eh? :confused:I think you are mistaken. It was conquered by the Emperor Trajan in 106AD and became the Roman province of Dacia. It was extensively settled by legionaires and their families for 150 years until it was finally abandoned in 256AD. Even the Romanian language is derived from Roman, as in the name "Romanian". I reccomend the excellent Wikipedia article on the history of Romania.:)

I guess you were right. I must have been confused because it was so late. In any way, I don't remember ever seeing a Roman Road in north Bulgaria (I have not been to Romania).

I guess you were right. I must have been confused because it was so late. In any way, I don't remember ever seeing a Roman Road in north Bulgaria (I have not been to Romania).

No problem. As I said in my previous post, I agree with you about having a minimum of built roads and cities.
The human player should be given the option as to what is built. BTW how's Alpha3 going?:)

If people are concerned about too much advantage from Roman roads, one can always put some breaks in the roads (so that trade routes aren't automatically created) and let the human/AI repair them. England should get some broken roads too.
This would actually work well for quicker settlement of cities, so I vote for more ruins, but not more indy cities.

For the time being the Roads will only be normal Roads. We can upgrade them later.

Alpha 3 is under construction, I hope to have it out Friday evening. (however, it will probably not contain as many changes as Alpha 2 did)

I would make a new map... but I have severely screwed up my BTS folder while working with another modmod. All of the mods in the folder are regarded as invalid, I can't even play the original ones that came on BTS. Is there a way to uninstall/reinstall BTS because I'm not getting any options on the menus and the instruction booklet doesn't say anything. :mad:

I would make a new map... but I have severely screwed up my BTS folder while working with another modmod. All of the mods in the folder are regarded as invalid, I can't even play the original ones that came on BTS. Is there a way to uninstall/reinstall BTS because I'm not getting any options on the menus and the instruction booklet doesn't say anything. :mad:

You should be able to go to Control Panel: Add/Remove programs and then Uninstall BtS and Civilization. Then reinstall them.

Seems a bit obvious now that I think of it, thanks :D

I think there are too many cities in France! Don't know all and don't have the latest RFC-version (because I still have BTS 3.17), but Toulouse, Tours, Marseilles, Bordeaux and Calais? What do the Germans have instead? Augsburg! Yeah... Great.
I have often seen it, that the Germans get conqered by Burgundians ore French quite after they spawned, because these Civs became too strong. So I suggest, Tours and maby Toulouse should not already be in the map. But I'm very much in favor of setting Aachen (don't know the right spot, should be 4 of Köln) which flips to Germany, while the Germans only have 2 Settlers in the beginning

In my games, Germans always get destroyed, Frankfurt usually razed by barbs, or captured by Burgandy. And they sometimes even convert to Judaism. So, maybe, more indy cities in Germany, and they get more chance to respawn. Or, let indy cities have a chance to "rise" to Germany civilization.

That sounds like the French game I'm playing now. Something strange happened: France collapsed and became stronger because of that! Around 850 AD, barbarian berserkers (and probably some other types, I only saw a berserker and a galley when I opened the WB) destroyed Boulogne and Caen. So, France collapsed, since they only had Paris left. ~10 Turns later, they respawned with Tours and Toulouse. This belongs in the playtesting thread though so I'll continue the story there.

@Michael Vick (or whoever else can tell me): Where can I find your map?

The old (first) one is out of date, I have to make a new one.

The old (first) one is out of date, I have to make a new one.

Nice to see you back, MV. If you're making a new map make sure its on the Alpha4 version because the North Atlantic area has been changed to accomodate Iceland, Greenland, Shetland and the Faroes Is. Though that shouldn't affect your roads, ruins etc., of course.

No one makes any more maps until Alpha 5 (hopefully this week).

I can accommodate only one terrain change per version, I cannot "merge" two maps from two different people.

Sorry for the rant, Hungarians and Russian both have updates for Alpha 5.

quick request, can we put the atlantic islands back to normal? They almost never got settled anyway and now they just look weird.

quick request, can we put the atlantic islands back to normal? They almost never got settled anyway and now they just look weird.

What do you mean "normal". Also, Portugal is supposed to settle them.

Remove the land bridges. They're islands, they're supposed to be hard to settle.

Hello everybody!
I made some changes on the map, on the Carpathian Basin. I added two other bigger

rivers, and corrected river Tisza. I also changed resources and terrains, and lake

Balaton (so almost everything). You can see it on the picture.
Because it is so many, and not only minor changes, it might be too much, but the

correction of river Tisza should be in it. I added river Drava, which is a great help

for Austria.
For the future: shall I study the resources of Austria or anything else? I can help

if you want me to. (For example there is nothing on the southern parts of Austria.)
Opinions please! :) Thank you!

EDIT:
Hungarian trading according to my history book(why I changed the resources)
-to the west was mainly the following: gold, salt, wine, copper cow, leather for weapons, iron ware, textile
-to the direction of Venice: the same export with silver for Levante goods
-to Poland : wine, copper, gold, silver for textile
-to Byzantium: industry ware and textile for Levante goods and other resources
-to the East: wares and textile for beef on the hoof

I just sent it because it might help

What do you mean "normal". Also, Portugal is supposed to settle them.

I applaud the new islands. I had a few playtests as Portugal before they were conneced, and this is the boost they needed.

Its not a big deal if they are connected, just like in RFC Japan is one island instead of many.


Also, on ruins, they DO have a game play effect. When building improvements I always improve ruins last for hopes of getting the event where you find ancient discoveries. True its not a big effect, but it is an effect. Admittedly, I don't think events are active in RFCE, yet, but they will be.

In RFC the extra land around the main island (Honshu) were attached because they are very close in real life, too close to use a whole tile of water, if we were working on RFC Asia, with more map tiles dedicated to Japan, I'm sure they'd be separated by water.

I don't like bending the rules of geography to make a part of the game easier. When you play as Portugal or Spain and you're settling the islands, just make sure to either bring an extra ship with a worker or two or leave a ship there to work as a ferry service.

Now that we're on the topic of the Atlantic islands, who here has read the posts in the extending city name maps thread on Terceira?

In RFC the extra land around the main island (Honshu) were attached because they are very close in real life, too close to use a whole tile of water, if we were working on RFC Asia, with more map tiles dedicated to Japan, I'm sure they'd be separated by water.

I don't like bending the rules of geography to make a part of the game easier. When you play as Portugal or Spain and you're settling the islands, just make sure to either bring an extra ship with a worker or two or leave a ship there to work as a ferry service.

Unless you have a road from the resource to the city, you will not get access to the resource. The only exception is if you build a Fort, but the AI doesn't know how to do that and you will not get the extra commerce or whatever is provided for the tile itself.

Basically, without road connection, you have to chose between the resource or the bonus that it provides for the tiles. Either way, you lose and the Islands become next to useless.

Is it possible to make an exception in the code?
or Like.. create a "sea route" or something?
Maybe workboats could establish "sea routes" which would connect resources?

Is it possible to make an exception in the code?
or Like.. create a "sea route" or something?
Maybe workboats could establish "sea routes" which would connect resources?

Nope, roads work very weirdly. The only thing that can be done is to make Plantations and Quarries act as Channels, which is at leas as wrong.

I'd prefer that, either that or the hard way, I the land bridges.

Nope, roads work very weirdly. The only thing that can be done is to make Plantations and Quarries act as Channels, which is at leas as wrong.

I think you're just breaking too much to tweak a very minor issue. The map is abstraction. Some things have to be slightly different to make the game play work in civilization. It is not going to be perfect.

I think you're just breaking too much to tweak a very minor issue. The map is abstraction. Some things have to be slightly different to make the game play work in civilization. It is not going to be perfect.

Good point. Ocean trade routes in RFC work fine already. As you say, the map is an abstraction. Any map is just the representation of reality. Ours is representative enough for gameplay IMO.

I guess I'll just change it right before I start each game.
But: the bridge in the Azores isn't really needed, it used to be that there was a two tile island with salt and sugar, and another one with nothing, with founding Ponta Delgada on the right spot you can have both resources with road access and later build a cottage or something on the other island.

Nevermind the last post, what do you think of this? All the resources are now connectable via roads to cities and they are all in the same quantity as before. And at the same time, the islands look a lot more like their real life counterparts. Check this, then check a map and compare. :D

A few differences:
Madeiras moved two tiles East (not shown)
Last Alpha's version of Azores moved 1 tile East to allow for more islands
Added Azore islands of Terceira, Graciosa, and Pico.
Replaced one of the salt resources in Canaries with bananas
Added 1 fish to new Canary islands
Added 1 fish to new Azores

If it's acceptable I'll put it in the next Roman roads map WB save.

Why is there ocean next to the Canaries? It looks really bad when an ocean is directly adjacent to land.

Nevermind the last post, what do you think of this? All the resources are now connectable via roads to cities and they are all in the same quantity as before. And at the same time, the islands look a lot more like their real life counterparts. Check this, then check a map and compare. :D

A few differences:
Madeiras moved two tiles East (not shown)
Last Alpha's version of Azores moved 1 tile East to allow for more islands
Added Azore islands of Terceira, Graciosa, and Pico.
Replaced one of the salt resources in Canaries with bananas
Added 1 fish to new Canary islands
Added 1 fish to new Azores

If it's acceptable I'll put it in the next Roman roads map WB save.

That looks fine to me.

Nevermind the last post, what do you think of this? All the resources are now connectable via roads to cities and they are all in the same quantity as before. And at the same time, the islands look a lot more like their real life counterparts. Check this, then check a map and compare. :D

A few differences:
Madeiras moved two tiles East (not shown)
Last Alpha's version of Azores moved 1 tile East to allow for more islands
Added Azore islands of Terceira, Graciosa, and Pico.
Replaced one of the salt resources in Canaries with bananas
Added 1 fish to new Canary islands
Added 1 fish to new Azores

If it's acceptable I'll put it in the next Roman roads map WB save.

So one needs 5 cities to get 6 resources. Sorry, but who in hi right mind would build that. There shouldn't be more than one city per Island group that is capable of getting all (or almost) the resources.

Hey all,

Just popping in briefly--I have a little breather now that my thesis is turned in while I await my defense.

I've had a look at Alpha 4. Nice work. It's always exciting to see what's changed when you've been away for a while. The new leaderheads and music makes the mod feel a lot more finished.

I like the islands as they are in Alpha 4. Gameplay should trump geography in this case.

It seems like a useful thing for me to contribute right now would be an update of the Reference maps. We have some new territory UHVs and, of course, the background map has changed. I will hold off on doing this if there are major map changes coming in a soon-to-be-released new version -- are there?

Anyhow, keep up the good work...

Hey all,

Just popping in briefly--I have a little breather now that my thesis is turned in while I await my defense.

I've had a look at Alpha 4. Nice work. It's always exciting to see what's changed when you've been away for a while. The new leaderheads and music makes the mod feel a lot more finished.

I like the islands as they are in Alpha 4. Gameplay should trump geography in this case.

It seems like a useful thing for me to contribute right now would be an update of the Reference maps. We have some new territory UHVs and, of course, the background map has changed. I will hold off on doing this if there are major map changes coming in a soon-to-be-released new version -- are there?

Anyhow, keep up the good work...

Hope everything is working out for your thesis.

There will be a new Alpha tomorrow and it will involve new map changes for Hungary and Moscow. The biggest thing in the new version would be the Faith Points. I think we can make the religious dynamic the "grown jewel" (OK jessiecat, "Crown Jewel" :D) of our mod.

I think you mean "Crown Jewel".:D

So one needs 5 cities to get 6 resources. Sorry, but who in hi right mind would build that. There shouldn't be more than one city per Island group that is capable of getting all (or almost) the resources.

The Azores are two cities to get 4 resources.
The Madeiras are 1 city to get 3 resources.
The Canaries are two cities to get 5/6 resources and and optional extra city to get two, which will probably never happen, because Spain is already loaded with salt.

Sugar and bananas aren't found anywhere else in Europe. 4 cities to have a monopoly on those resources until colonies come around? I, in my hi right mind would do that.:lol:
Plus for Portugal it's required to build there, might as well have options, no? (There isn't even any salt in Portugal, another perk) Again, you don't have to build all the cities, it's up to the civ.

@SF23, It's not ocean, it's just the effect of when you change a previously land tile to water.

12 cities is considered a large empire. 5 cities on the islands means that half of a large empire is situated there, consider the monopoly over something (you have only 1 banana so you cannot trade it and only one sugar and you can only get to those islands when you get very close to Astronomy) vs the maintenance cost of 5 overseas cities. And with so little production land around them, they will hardly grow into anything significant.

I think one should only have one city on each of the screenshots that you posted.

We could put another banana somewhere on the canaries, and yes, 1 city should be the logical intention of most players, it's up to them. They might not get settled at all, except for by the Portuguese, it's all optional, completely up to the player. The island setup is not obligating anybody to maintain 5 overseas cities. :crazyeye:
I'm just saying this looks better than the other versions, it's more accurate, and it leaves more for the player to decide:)

With the new version out I'm going to make a new version of the starting map with Roman roads, ruins, villages, and a few extra indy/barb starting cities. Also I will put in the changes I suggested to the islands, a small terrain change in Gallicia, and indications of where the olives will be. Make suggestions now and I'll include them. :)

With the new version out I'm going to make a new version of the starting map with Roman roads, ruins, villages, and a few extra indy/barb starting cities. Also I will put in the changes I suggested to the islands, a small terrain change in Gallicia, and indications of where the olives will be. Make suggestions now and I'll include them. :)

Could you put a few fish near Greenland, Iceland and Shetland? The northern islands are pretty bare at the moment. Maybe one ivory on Iceland too.
BTW. I live in Cornwall where there's loads of fishing villages. Why haven't we got any fish?:confused:

Could you put a few fish near Greenland, Iceland and Shetland? The northern islands are pretty bare at the moment. Maybe one ivory on Iceland too.
BTW. I live in Cornwall where there's loads of fishing villages. Why haven't we got any fish?:confused:

Iceland has one Ivory currently, Iceland and Greenland already have two fish each, do we need more? What about the Faroe Islands? Where's Cornwall? Is that Wales?

Roads taken out of Romania, reduced where possible. New Villages, Ruins, Forts added.
One Byzantine city suggestion: Dyrrachium
New Indy Suggestions: Strasbourg, Pisa, Seville, Zaragoza, Bordeaux, A Coruna
Terrain Changes in NW Spain
Previously suggested changes to Atlantic Islands
Terrain change in Western Sahara

What's to be kept, what's not?

Roads taken out of Romania, reduced where possible. New Villages, Ruins, Forts added.
One Byzantine city suggestion: Dyrrachium
New Indy Suggestions: Strasbourg, Pisa, Seville, Zaragoza, Bordeaux, A Coruna
Terrain Changes in NW Spain
Previously suggested changes to Atlantic Islands
Terrain change in Western Sahara

What's to be kept, what's not?

Forgot to post it.

Forgot to post it.

Oh wait I forgot to compress it. There we go. :)

Iceland has one Ivory currently, Iceland and Greenland already have two fish each, do we need more? What about the Faroe Islands? Where's Cornwall? Is that Wales?

Are you kidding? The SW tip of Britain past Plymouth of course.:mad:

Your thing says "somewhere near England" Sorry, I'll go read the entire wikipedia article on cornwall now.

Haven't seen the map, but if Dyrrachium is in its proper location in the southern Adriatic, please don't put it, or Venice will be pushed back even more.

As usual what Michael Vick makes looks very good and as usual I have some objections to it from purely gameplay point of view.

1. Forts and towns look great, but I would cut the down on the roads, particularly in France and northern England. There is nothing more frustrating than a Barbarian Skirmisher traveling from beyond your area of view and taking down your worker. We should only connect the capitals i.e. one road from Rome to Dijon to Paris with a side branch to the coast maybe.

2. Lion is now going to starve big time. Cows and sheep on hills do not provide enough food to feed all the other mountains around it. Maybe you can handle such a situation, but AI controlled Spain would be doomed because of it.

3. This is the biggest thing for me. If you are going to add all of those independent cities (especially in Iberia) you should take some of the other indy cities out. A Coruna and Hispala would flip to Spain and Cordoba anyway, so the only effect they will have is to restrict the player's choice on where he/she can found new cities.

4. Did you made changes to the middle east? Now Arabia has way too much silk, it is not like they are going to trade with anyone other than Cordoba anyway. I don't know if you did that or if it was introduced in some of the other map updates, I just don't remember seeing it before.

5. JediClemente has a point about Durazzo (or whatever you want to call it). If you want, we can add another Independent Ohrid on the spot. It will be inland so it will not block Venice, and it had more impact on the region than Durazzo (culturally I mean).

I know that you are trying to represent Iberia and all as well as possible, but the gameplay simply doesn't allow for this. For example one of the largest cities on the Balkans was Sredec (modern day Sofia), it was first Byzantine, then it was conquered by Bulgaria. It has always been a large center of culture and power in the region, however, when we tried to include it in the game, it was just killing Bulgaria (culture block) and we had to take it out.

I've tried opening his map but I can't see any changes. But to address the points you made.

1 We spent a long time and effort cutting the indy cities down to the minimum number. There's no way we need to add a lot more, esp. in Iberia. That's going to screw up the gameplay something aweful.

2. I don't mind the roads but they have to be kept to a minimum, for the reasons you pointed out.

3. Arabia already had 4 preset silk plantations anyway to represent the end of the Silk Road from China to Damascus which predated Islam. So that's OK.

4. Ragusa already works pretty well and is very historical from Roman times. It doesn't interfere with gameplay and there's absolutely no reason to add a 2nd. indy city on or near the Adriatic. Beograd is enough.

5. The existing map and its preset city locations evolved over a period of a year and half and was only decided after days of argument and compromise with strong opinions expressed by everyone. There's no way that should be radically altered on the basis of a single suggestion. Sorry Michael.

I also forgot to mention, Pisa in Italy and the peninsula in general has seen a lot of work of several somewhat zealous Italians. They came up with the current structure and I don't think we should change it (there was a huge discussion about Pisa and they picked Firenze at the end, I don't remember all the details, you can find it if you read far enough backwards on the treads, one of the Italians was onedreamer).

Ok, less roads, less indys. We can take out Dyrrachium then. I among others am not a fan of Augsburg being there, can we take that out? A Coruna isn't important either. The rest I see as kinda important though. Like Pisa, one of the city-states that competed with Genoa and Venice in trade, Strasbourg, to cause wars between Burgundy and Germany, Hispala, because it'd be fun to see Seville during the reconquista for once, as important as it was it's never there, ever. Same with Bordeaux, how can you not have Bordeaux? Can we take out Toulouse to keep Bordeaux?
No I didn't touch the silk.
@3Miro, I'm not sure what you're talking about because Leon now has more food than it used to :lol: Also, Spain should definitely have smaller populations. Historically, Castille only had about a 1/3 of the population that France did.
everything else is fine then? :)

EDIT: Was Onedreamer's problem that Pisa was there or that Firenze wasn't? He'd be ok with both.. right?

I also forgot to mention, Pisa in Italy and the peninsula in general has seen a lot of work of several somewhat zealous Italians. They came up with the current structure and I don't think we should change it (there was a huge discussion about Pisa and they picked Firenze at the end, I don't remember all the details, you can find it if you read far enough backwards on the treads, one of the Italians was onedreamer).

Ya. I forgot about Onedreamer. Beware zealous Italians at your peril!:eek::lol:

Ok, less roads, less indys. We can take out Dyrrachium then. I among others am not a fan of Augsburg being there, can we take that out? A Coruna isn't important either. The rest I see as kinda important though. Like Pisa, one of the city-states that competed with Genoa and Venice in trade, Strasbourg, to cause wars between Burgundy and Germany, Hispala, because it'd be fun to see Seville during the reconquista for once, as important as it was it's never there, ever. Same with Bordeaux, how can you not have Bordeaux? Can we take out Toulouse to keep Bordeaux?
No I didn't touch the silk.
@3Miro, I'm not sure what you're talking about because Leon now has more food than it used to :lol: Also, Spain should definitely have smaller populations. Historically, Castille only had about a 1/3 of the population that France did.
everything else is fine then? :)

EDIT: Was Onedreamer's problem that Pisa was there or that Firenze wasn't? He'd be ok with both.. right?

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

So Pisa or Florence, Italians made their choice and I don't see why we should change it.

Leon used to have Pigs (purely food resource) and you replaced them with Cow (some food + some production, which they already had). Weak capital is enough to kill any AI.

How would Strasbourg cause war between Germany and Burgundy?

Seville is close to Cordoba and competes with them, and adding that would mean no Cardiz. Remember we cannot put every big Spanish city on the map. Historically on the Balkans, Ohrid was the second most cultured city (after Constantinople) and you don't see it in any game here simply because it gets too close to Thessaloníki and Sofia and others. Too Crowded.

So which one would you rather have, Seville or Cardiz.

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

So Pisa or Florence, Italians made their choice and I don't see why we should change it.

Leon used to have Pigs (purely food resource) and you replaced them with Cow (some food + some production, which they already had). Weak capital is enough to kill any AI.

How would Strasbourg cause war between Germany and Burgundy?

Seville is close to Cordoba and competes with them, and adding that would mean no Cardiz. Remember we cannot put every big Spanish city on the map. Historically on the Balkans, Ohrid was the second most cultured city (after Constantinople) and you don't see it in any game here simply because it gets too close to Thessaloníki and Sofia and others. Too Crowded.

So which one would you rather have, Seville or Cardiz.

For me, Florence over Pisa and no Strasbourg. As far as Spain goes, no change required. Let the human player as Cordoba decide what to build. This is Civilization (you know that game where people build cities). In other words leave things as they are. As they say "If it ain't broke don't fix it."

Fine. Just Zaragoza. :D and if I took the pig out I didn't mean too. Wait, which pig are we talking about, the one South of Leon or way to the West near Santiago?

Fine. Just Zaragoza. :D and if I took the pig out I didn't mean too. Wait, which pig are we talking about, the one South of Leon or way to the West near Santiago?

South of Leon.

That was an accident, it's supposed to be there.

Michael Vick, where did you say the mod with olives graphics is? It is not in the Civ IV Greek World and not in any of the BtS mods.

CIV IV Warlords, Peloponesian War

CIV IV Warlords, Peloponesian War

I don't have it, I only have BtS.

I will see what I can do.

I don't have it, I only have BtS.

I will see what I can do.

Here are the relevant Warlords files. Tell me if you need more.