JFD and Janboruta's Civilisations

DarthStarkiller said:
I think I might have said this before, but I'm not sure, so: have you thought about changing Washington's city list when Roosevelt is enabled to make Philadelphia the capital? It always felt weird to me to see him with a capital named after himself.
Click to expand...

Well technically it was New York first, then Philadelphia.
Speaking of Washington, the Ranch doesn't fit with 13 Colonies style America, may I suggest instead, perhaps a Printing House to replace the zoo at Printing Press? Gives golden age points upon the birth of a great person in the city?
 
I find Philadelphia more fitting because it was capital for a longer time and is better known as having been a capital, while New York would feel like "Someone's already using Washington, gotta go to the second city in the list".
In any case, I'd like to see the Ranch gone as well, but mostly so Washington and Texas don't share the same UB.
 
DarthStarkiller said:
I find Philadelphia more fitting because it was capital for a longer time and is better known as having been a capital, while New York would feel like "Someone's already using Washington, gotta go to the second city in the list".
In any case, I'd like to see the Ranch gone as well, but mostly so Washington and Texas don't share the same UB.
Click to expand...

I share the same opinion. Washington should probably get a Colonial Paper UB a la Urdnot_Scott's America Split. The Printing Press was really important to the American Revolution so it makes sense to me for Washington to get a more era/leader specific building, especially since the Ranch is also being used by Texas.
 
I personally think that the Ranch is pretty neat and besides, it fits JFD's style. Also, I like this one much more than the version present in late RS's Texas.
 
Well, isn't it because it gets a new portrait which fits the era better?
 
What are peoples thoughts on the other part to Sardinia's UA: accumulating Tourism in conquered cities and then spending it on Units? I'm wondering if I could get away with simplifying it to a direct Tourism-to-Production when building military units, but extending it to all cities. This is the direction I'm leaning if no one chimes in that they're particularly enamoured by the original. The rest of the UA will stay the same, for reference.
Benefits:
  • More stable. Wouldn't need to use TSL.
  • AI can make use of it.
  • Less work for me to re-write the current code.
  • More widely available - perhaps more readily useful.

Detriments:
  • Obvious streamline.
  • No longer able to get Great People this way.
 
I don't think its more useful. Tbh I don't really like that UA, but I think its better as it is now.
 
Natan35 said:
Well, isn't it because it gets a new portrait which fits the era better?
Click to expand...

No, instead, in Ancient-Renaissance era, GG got a protrait of a Nazi officer, then, after Industrial era, GG have the same protrait as other civs.
 
JFD said:
What are peoples thoughts on the other part to Sardinia's UA: accumulating Tourism in conquered cities and then spending it on Units? I'm wondering if I could get away with simplifying it to a direct Tourism-to-Production when building military units, but extending it to all cities. This is the direction I'm leaning if no one chimes in that they're particularly enamoured by the original. The rest of the UA will stay the same, for reference.
Benefits:
  • More stable. Wouldn't need to use TSL.
  • AI can make use of it.
  • Less work for me to re-write the current code.
  • More widely available - perhaps more readily useful.

Detriments:
  • Obvious streamline.
  • No longer able to get Great People this way.
Click to expand...

I don't think I ever benefited from that part of the UA. So from that point of view I think your new idea is better. But for it to be useful, I think you would need a 1:1 ratio or even more for it to have an impact during the game. Obviously, this could be balanced - tourism contribution caps at 80% (or other figure) of the units production to prevent units flying out of the gates in later eras.

If you somehow want to retain the great people aspect, perhaps other high level units beside the Bersaglieri can become a red shirt.

I'd also like to mention now that I have the chance, that the piazza is quite underwhelming and could use a little more love. But perhaps you have been given this feedback already?
 
zwei833 said:
No, instead, in Ancient-Renaissance era, GG got a protrait of a Nazi officer, then, after Industrial era, GG have the same protrait as other civs.
Click to expand...

Had the same experience with the mod before it was updated with a 3d leaderscene. This was also a time when I felt I pestered JFD with my bug reports and imagined him crying in front of the computer every time I wrote.
 
I pretty much wholeheartedly agree with local_hero in regards to the Sardinian UA changes. Though I like the current incarnation, the fact that what you could buy with tourism seemed to be randomly chosen on a city by city basis limited it's usefulness.

That said, I do like the idea of buying things with tourism - it'd be nice to see it used elsewhere at some point.
 
local_hero said:
I don't think I ever benefited from that part of the UA. So from that point of view I think your new idea is better. But for it to be useful, I think you would need a 1:1 ratio or even more for it to have an impact during the game. Obviously, this could be balanced - tourism contribution caps at 80% (or other figure) of the units production to prevent units flying out of the gates in later eras.

I'd also like to mention now that I have the chance, that the piazza is quite underwhelming and could use a little more love. But perhaps you have been given this feedback already?
Click to expand...

That's what I figured was happening - no one really reported on their experiences (rather, on the bugged first part :p), so I figure it didn't see much use as it was a bit difficult to accumulate enough Tourism in an occupied city, and so was altogether a niche ability.

I have, and in the update it now begins with +2 Tourism and +2 Culture, and replaces the Zoo/Menagerie. I think if the UA changes to 1:1 Tourism:Military Production, then that should make it a bit more directly useful. It'll keep the 15% Culture to Tourism effect, but I could also buff it to 20% if need be.

If I do make this UA change, S-P update will almost certainly come tomorrow. I'm not sure what to focus on after that - I'd thought about Roosevelt, naturally, but if people are adamant for a change in UB for Washington, then that update may be indefinitely on hold until art can be procured. I'll make the capital change, however. And before anyone says - I won't be turning to HRE just yet. I'll have to treat it as a second re-release, rather than an update. Now that the HRE won't be an Institution in Sovereignty (as Institutions have been discontinued), I may want to roll some of the ideas I had into the civ. So I guess Carthage is in need most? (though I'm not clear on why). Well, other than...

local_hero said:
Had the same experience with the mod before it was updated with a 3d leaderscene. This was also a time when I felt I pestered JFD with my bug reports and imagined him crying in front of the computer every time I wrote.
Click to expand...

It would've been an issue there from the beginning, so it's a surprise no one brought it up before. Noted, anyway.
 
No!!! Please don't change Washington's UB!!! Its one of my favorites...
 
And personally I think the UU is a wee bit problematic with EE. Will it replace the skirmisher?
 
JFD said:
That's what I figured was happening - no one really reported on their experiences (rather, on the bugged first part :p), so I figure it didn't see much use as it was a bit difficult to accumulate enough Tourism in an occupied city, and so was altogether a niche ability.

I have, and in the update it now begins with +2 Tourism and +2 Culture, and replaces the Zoo/Menagerie. I think if the UA changes to 1:1 Tourism:Military Production, then that should make it a bit more directly useful. It'll keep the 15% Culture to Tourism effect, but I could also buff it to 20% if need be.

If I do make this UA change, S-P update will almost certainly come tomorrow. I'm not sure what to focus on after that - I'd thought about Roosevelt, naturally, but if people are adamant for a change in UB for Washington, then that update may be indefinitely on hold until art can be procured. I'll make the capital change, however. And before anyone says - I won't be turning to HRE just yet. I'll have to treat it as a second re-release, rather than an update. Now that the HRE won't be an Institution in Sovereignty (as Institutions have been discontinued), I may want to roll some of the ideas I had into the civ. So I guess Carthage is in need most? (though I'm not clear on why). Well, other than...



It would've been an issue there from the beginning, so it's a surprise no one brought it up before. Noted, anyway.
Click to expand...

Will S-P keep the decision which allows training of Alpini units? If you had intended to move the unit to WW1 Italy you could perhaps keep the tourism-buying feature as a decision. I realise that coding decisions isn't something any modder looks forward to though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Lua error attempt to index a nil value when trying to modify CQUI production panel and the game flashback Unhandled Exception Error
Replies
0
Views
575
g1bew
G
Agiwan
  • Sticky
VoxPopuli Modpacks (last update: 4.6.2)
8 9 10
Replies
198
Views
46K
Agiwan
Agiwan
R
Artful Terrain Textures
Replies
4
Views
2K
Rajul
R
R
Few questions about vox populi and more
Replies
1
Views
306
Yerltvachovicic
Yerltvachovicic
Blake00
Heroes of Might and Magic 2 Scenario Mod (& HoMM1 Addon) - Release Thread
Replies
6
Views
2K
CurtSibling
CurtSibling
Top Bottom