[Religion and Revolution]: Monasteries and Forts

raystuttgart

Civ4Col Modder
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
9,637
Location
Stuttgart, Germany
Hi guys,

I had some interesting discussions lately and thus started thinking a bit about some features / concepts we had been talking about before.

Monasteries

1. Monasteries would be improvements that cannot be built within the cultural borders of another nation (unless you are at war with that Nation).

2. They could be built by Pioneers.
(Time and money would be a little bit more than with Mines.)

3. Monasteries would only be "active" if a Missionary is stationed in them.

4. If a "wandering" Native (UnitAI-check) walks into an active Monastery or one of its surrounding plots (its Zone of Control) there is :
A) A small chance to become a "Converted Native" of the Monastery Owner.
B) A small chance to switch UnitAI to "bearing gifts"

5. The chances are doubled if the Missionary in the Monastery is an Expert (Jesuit Missionary / Evangelist).

6. Any Nation that is at war with the owner of the Monastery could destroy it.
Otherwise units can simply walk through it.

7. A Missionary of another Nation that accidently walks by an empty Monastery could take possession of it.

8. Your own Military will heal much faster in such a Monastery.

9. If a City is built on top of a Monastery it is destroyed.

Forts

I always had a problem with an improvement "Forts", because I never saw a real use compared to building cities.
But there is a use: A shield from Native Raids. :)
(Since Forts would not have Population, Buildings or Yields, there is not that much harm a Native Raid could do at a Fort.)

1. Forts would be improvements that cannot be built within the cultural borders of another nation (unless you are at war with that Nation).

2. They could be built by Pioneers.
(Time and Money would be a little bit more than with Mines.)

3. Forts would only be "active" if a military Unit is stationed in them.

4. Aggressive Units (Raiding or at War) could not simply walk by an active Fort.
(Zone of Control of 1 Plot).

5. Forts will give a defensive Bonus to the Units inside.

6. Natives on Raid, would attack such Forts.
(Thus Forts would shield your cities from raids.)

7. Empty Forts would be destroyed by Natives that are at war with you.

8. Empty Forts would be taken by Europeans that are at war with you.

9. If a City is built on top of a Fort it is destroyed.

--------------

Summary:

Both concepts would be based on new improvements.
Both concepts work with "Zones of Control" that however do different things.
Both concepts should be taught to AI.

The basic idea about these features is, that the player should try to position these new improvements in strategic locations.
I believe, this would add a new dimension to the game and could be a lot of fun.

I am not really sure about historical accuracy.
(But Forts and Monasteries did exist of course.)

Efforts would be considerable although there already exists a feature with code that I could partially reuse.
(This should be taught to AI.)

Balancing exposed to XML.

--------------

Feedback ? :)
 
I don't think that mentioned benefits would justify building monasteries/forts.Instead maybe they should function as city, with unique benefits and drawbacks.
religious - faster student training, research or ???.Probably should have limited number of citizens
military - (faster) producing specific units or military assets.They should also start with some kind of walls and later have walls stronger then citadel.
 
I like the idea. Although would'nt Mission be a more appropriate term rather than Monestary? Protestant denominations did not have any kind of monestary until 1841. With Mission it could be applied to Catholic and Protestant whereas Monestary sounds very Catholic. True there were not many Protestant missions like the Catholic missions founded by the Spanish and Portuguese, but the Protestants especially the English did form Praying towns of converted Indians. - Just a thought.
 
Although would'nt Mission be a more appropriate term rather than Monestary?

We already have "Missions".
(Your Missionaries found Missions in Native Villages.)

This is a different concept and I wanted a different word. :dunno:
(And Monestaries really did exist in North, Central and South America to my knowledge.)
 
I like the Fort concept. I don't feel strongly about Monestaries but I'd agree with that if others like it. As colonialfan mentioned, in a mainly protestant country like the US there have generally been almost no protestant monestaries to speak of, though there are some catholic ones.

9. When a City is build on top of a Fort or directly next to it, the Fort is destroyed.
Hmm, there's a possible exploit where you build a city near a Fort to destroy it, then easily abandon the city. A better rule might be that a City/Fort/Monastery cannot be built within 2 tiles of another City/Fort/Monastery. (Then you'd need to capture & destroy nearby Forts/Monestaries before founding a city there.) These should be rare outposts in the wilderness & we wouldn't want people to make big clusters of Forts next to each other. BTW I think there may be code in Dune Wars and/or FFH mods that may be reused to let an Improvement be buildable only once within a certain tile radius.
 
I like the Fort concept. I don't feel strongly about Monestaries but I'd agree with that if others like it. As colonialfan mentioned, in a mainly protestant country like the US there have generally been almost no protestant monestaries to speak of, though there are some catholic ones.

Well yes, but we are not playing "Colonization of Northern America only". :dunno:
And as mentioned many times, we are playing alternative history to some degree.

But if you guys really don't like the "Monasteries", I don't have to implement that feature ...

Hmm, there's a possible exploit where you build a city near a Fort to destroy it, then easily abandon the city. A better rule might be that a City/Fort/Monastery cannot be built within 2 tiles of another City/Fort/Monastery.
(Then you'd need to capture & destroy nearby Forts/Monestaries before founding a city there.)

Theoretically it sounds good. :thumbsup:

I just wonder, how I can teach this to AI. :think:
Because with this, you could easily block AI (that is not at war with you) from settling.

These should be rare outposts in the wilderness & we wouldn't want people to make big clusters of Forts next to each other.

I agree with that. :)

BTW I think there may be code in Dune Wars and/or FFH mods that may be reused to let an Improvement be buildable only once within a certain tile radius.

I don't need to reuse other code to implement something that is that simple. :thumbsup:
(Only one improvement within a certain tile radius.)
 
as mentioned many times, we are playing alternative history to some degree.
true enough lol ;) I am ok with the monasteries if u want them.

Hmm, there's a possible exploit where you build a city near a Fort to destroy it, then easily abandon the city. A better rule might be that a City/Fort/Monastery cannot be built within 2 tiles of another City/Fort/Monastery.
(Then you'd need to capture & destroy nearby Forts/Monestaries before founding a city there.)
Theoretically it sounds good.
I just wonder, how I can teach this to AI.
Because with this, you could easily block AI (that is not at war with you) from settling.
Maybe if the AI and Natives will pillage unoccupied forts/monasteries outside your borders, then its a fair/realistic strategy to be able to build a wilderness fort and prevent others settling nearby as long as you occupy it. Right now it could be an even easier trick to block the AI by building 1-person cities with no cost or time needed, then abandoning whenever you want. I've wondered if there should be some cost for founding a city to offset this.
 
Hum...:think: I have a problem with this feature.
I would really like to see forts. :goodjob:
Why not monasteries, but I don't like the concepts as they are. :(

I would rather have forts as simple as possible. Why can't we build a fort next to one of our cities? For me this would probably be quite handy when there are two plots of land tiles in a row and ocean around (like in Panama or Suez in Egypt). Why would forts be destroyed when they're too close to a city :dunno:

About monasteries, I'm thinking about it. I haven't decided yet. :dunno:
 
Why can't we build a fort next to one of our cities ?
...
Why would forts be destroyed when they're too close to a city :dunno:

I simply thought it would be better considering balancing of the feature.
Also I thought, that considering atmosphere, these improvements should be built in the wilderness.

But well ok, I have adjusted the concept:
(It is much easier to implement and probably much better considering performance.)

New:

1. Monasteries / Forts cannot be built within the cultural borders of another nation (unless you are at war with that Nation).

2. If a City is built on top of a Monastery / Fort it is destroyed.

Removed:

1. Monasteries / Forts would be improvements that could be built in minimal distance of 2 plots (min city distance) of any Native village or European city.

2. When a City is build on top of a Monastery / Fort or directly next to it, the Monastery is destroyed.
 
I think we need graphics for

- Forts and
- Monasteries

right?

Due to atmosphere reasons we could think about 2 versions for both: One for England, Denmark, Dutch and France and one for Spain and Portugal.
 
I hate to be mean about this but I think the only real way for this to be even slightly effective or warrented is if its a: pioneer built b: requires a soldier c: can only built outside borders d: is destroyed upon successful enemy victory and e: is destroyed if another nation builds near it.
 
I think we need graphics for
- Forts and
- Monasteries
right?

Well, we probably will, since generally the team agrees that it should be implemented.
But until now, I cannot be sure how and when I can implement it, because the details of the concept are not clear yet. :dunno:

So there still is some risk, that this concept will be cancelled ...
(If team does not agree on details.)

Due to atmosphere reasons we could think about 2 versions for both: One for England, Denmark, Dutch and France and one for Spain and Portugal.

I don't think we would need different "ArtStyles" ... :dunno:
But I also don't have any objectiosn to having them. :)

@team:

Please tell me clearly again,

1. If you have any objections or generally agree.
2. The details how you think this should be implemented.

:thumbsup:
 
Maybe you would like to use one of these graphics for fort and monastery?
(found in other civ4-mods)

Spoiler :

Fort


Monastery

Indeed, the monastery model looks quite catholic, so it fits at least for Spain, Portugal and France... :rolleyes:

You may already know that having different fort model for some civs can be done with PlotLSystem.xml (the file, which all modders do love so much, don't we?) :lol:
 

Attachments

  • Civ4ScreenShot_fort.jpg
    Civ4ScreenShot_fort.jpg
    99.9 KB · Views: 1,141
  • Civ4ScreenShot_monastery.gif
    Civ4ScreenShot_monastery.gif
    120.5 KB · Views: 1,091
  • Fort.7z
    136.6 KB · Views: 141
  • Monastery.7z
    169.3 KB · Views: 123
Maybe you would like to use one of these graphics for fort and monastery?

The one for monastery we already know / have. :thumbsup:
The one for fort I somehow don't like (as fort). :dunno:
 
Top Bottom