Turns out Venetian Conquistadors can't settle cities

sonicandfffan

Warlord
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
244
Location
England, UK
I used playshogi's save from this topic:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=504089

(btw the map itself is highly entertaining, it's a shame it starts from turn 100 because I could easily play this to conclusion)

I beelined chivalry, allied the city state and got a conquistador, moved it to a new continent but no settling option. So yeah, I guess they thought of that.

The save is attached if anybody wants to see for themselves.
 

Attachments

  • Conquistador, No settling.Civ5Save
    990.8 KB · Views: 76
Here's a nice screenshot:

Spoiler :
 
Guess nobody really cared that much.

I wonder what would happen if Venice did somehow settle another city. They don't have a list of city names other than Venice, would the second city be called Venice as well?
 
I don't get the point of your thread. Venice cannot settle new cities under no circumstances. So what's the point of guessing what name would a second city get provided that it will never appear?
 
I don't get the point of your thread. Venice cannot settle new cities under no circumstances. So what's the point of guessing what name would a second city get provided that it will never appear?

Well initially I was just looking to see if they could settle using conquistadors (they can't).

But then I wondered, if you could mod another settler into the game, how would the game deal with a second venetian city?
 
I'm glad you checked it, because I was wondering about Venetian Conquistadors. Also, there is a default rule for when a civ runs out of names for cities, it starts borrowing ones from other civs in the game. Basically The HUns and Venice both have 1 city on their lists. Venice can't make any more, but the Huns can. And their additional cities borrow names from the other civs. If Venice could make additional cities, it would borrow names like the Huns do.
 
I remember asking Putmalk (creator of Sengou Jidai or whatever) and he actually told me that Venice's UA is part-hard-coded to prevent anyway of settling Settlers (they can't even get more than 1 starting settlers).

IF, they were able, they would use the "Run-Out-Of-City-List-Names" rule which takes city names from other civs. The same is applied to Huns (which, still annoys me, it is NOT unique).

Both The Huns and Venice simply have a single City on their list and thus immediately run out of cities.
 
So what happens in a game where every player is the huns? There are no other civs to take names from, does the game crash or is there another rule?
 
I believe that if all civs were to run out of city names, and thus can't borrow from each other, it would prompt you to custom name each city. I'm not sure on that though.
 
I don't get the point of your thread. Venice cannot settle new cities under no circumstances. So what's the point of guessing what name would a second city get provided that it will never appear?

Venice CAN settle a new city with their first settler. They just can't get settlers.


also I think you eventually start taking names from civs NOT in the game. (2 player hun should solve the issue)
 
Yeah, if no city names are available for anyone, it just starts taking names from everywhere at random. It might even use some from the barbarian city lists, so if you have a game with nothing but the Huns, it's entirely possible for one of them to found a city actually called Hunnic. Alongside Minoan, Cherokee, Hittite, etc etc.
 
I decided to test this out with four players, all the Huns. After one guy got Atilla's Court as their capital, the rest of the cities settled afterwards were taken randomly from the city lists.
 
Top Bottom