I don't understand the connection between my point and yours.
Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
I don't understand the connection between my point and yours.
Rod
King
@leoreth
you added some cities like Kiyev
When I check the Barbs.py then everythings seems to be straight forward.
I simply added a city (like e.g. Manchester - in order to ensure that it gets founded even though there is no Inverness, but Edinburgh) with the name and the year like
lManchester = [52, 56, 802, 0]
then I call the function
self.foundCity(iIndependent, lManchester, "Manchester", iGameTurn, 1, -1, -1)
but whenever I start the game I get the "you are defeated" message (from 1st turn). So obviously I am missing some code somewhere.
What am I missing ?
you added some cities like Kiyev
When I check the Barbs.py then everythings seems to be straight forward.
I simply added a city (like e.g. Manchester - in order to ensure that it gets founded even though there is no Inverness, but Edinburgh) with the name and the year like
lManchester = [52, 56, 802, 0]
then I call the function
self.foundCity(iIndependent, lManchester, "Manchester", iGameTurn, 1, -1, -1)
but whenever I start the game I get the "you are defeated" message (from 1st turn). So obviously I am missing some code somewhere.
What am I missing ?
There's probably only a minor syntax error in your code. If you're not familiar with Python, it's important to have the right indentations (whitespaces) in every row, so try to have everything in the same column with the rest of the code. Different Editors may display indentation differently - I suggest using Notepad if you want to make sure.
Other than that, you can see what went wrong when you enable exceptions (look at the first post of this thread to see how to do so).
Other than that, you can see what went wrong when you enable exceptions (look at the first post of this thread to see how to do so).
Rod
King
You wont be surprised, but that was it. I normally edit the files in notepad++ , but then I opened the file in Notepad and the idendations were different !!
Funny though I tested the effect and let the computer automanage till Portugal in order to check how England would develop. I open the WB and I look for England and Manchester .... is Viking-owned ... (and single Viking-square completely surrounded by red and defended by one lonely Berserker ..
(maybe I will let the city spawn just before England appears ..
Funny though I tested the effect and let the computer automanage till Portugal in order to check how England would develop. I open the WB and I look for England and Manchester .... is Viking-owned ... (and single Viking-square completely surrounded by red and defended by one lonely Berserker ..
(maybe I will let the city spawn just before England appears ..
Sandmonster1989
Knights Templar
Lol. The vikings will conquer as much as they can (so will India who I've seen conquer independant cities in Egypt). Maybe the English AI didn't have enough value on that city? (It is their core and they are pretty dumb and don't like to conquer cities like that).
I've also seen spain and france fight over an independant England... But i've never seen England do anything like that...
I've also seen spain and france fight over an independant England... But i've never seen England do anything like that...
Rod
King
Can you let cities spawn in occupied territory?
As Marseille and Venetia are further away from each other in this mod there is now room for Milano. Milano should spawn in 11th century as a Holy Roman city.
As the territory is in the strong grip of Roman culture by 1000 is it possible to still let it spawn or do I have to clean the area first ?
Also in consts.py there are the spawn areas, like
#(61, 62), #tNidaros
(60, 59), #tOslo
(this where you changed the Vikings from Nidaros to Oslo)
is this all there is to it? So could I just change the Arabs-starting area by moving it to Bagdad ?
(76, 40), #tBagdad
or do I need to do more changes ?
Also I cant find the code where Turkey changes it capital to Istanbul on conquest.
I want to implement the same for Arabia.
As Marseille and Venetia are further away from each other in this mod there is now room for Milano. Milano should spawn in 11th century as a Holy Roman city.
As the territory is in the strong grip of Roman culture by 1000 is it possible to still let it spawn or do I have to clean the area first ?
Also in consts.py there are the spawn areas, like
#(61, 62), #tNidaros
(60, 59), #tOslo
(this where you changed the Vikings from Nidaros to Oslo)
is this all there is to it? So could I just change the Arabs-starting area by moving it to Bagdad ?
(76, 40), #tBagdad
or do I need to do more changes ?
Also I cant find the code where Turkey changes it capital to Istanbul on conquest.
I want to implement the same for Arabia.
Venice and Marsailles were moved apart to give each other space and to stop them being poor cities, adding another city in between them would just reintroduce the cramping issues that moving them solved in the first place.
Well, from a game design perspective, I agree with kairob that we shouldn't force another city there too avoid the old cramping situation. I wanted to leave that as a possibility for players who like historical, yet suboptimal city placement.
The moving of Marseille created a new cramping issue, these time with Barcelona, though. It often doesn't even get founded anymore ...
From an implementation perspective: both answers depend on how "smooth" you want everything to be in the end. It's no problem to spawn a Holy Roman Milano/Mailand in Italian/Independent territory, however, it will only place the city, the surrounding culture will stay Italian/Independent, rendering the city useless.
You're right about the capitals, the tCapitals tuple is the only thing you have to edit, but mind that this doesn't influence overlay maps like the initial flip or stability in any way.
The code for the capital change is, rather unintuitionally, located in CityNameManager.py. Look for Turkey's entry in the renaming method, the capital gets changed right along with the name.
The moving of Marseille created a new cramping issue, these time with Barcelona, though. It often doesn't even get founded anymore ...
From an implementation perspective: both answers depend on how "smooth" you want everything to be in the end. It's no problem to spawn a Holy Roman Milano/Mailand in Italian/Independent territory, however, it will only place the city, the surrounding culture will stay Italian/Independent, rendering the city useless.
You're right about the capitals, the tCapitals tuple is the only thing you have to edit, but mind that this doesn't influence overlay maps like the initial flip or stability in any way.
The code for the capital change is, rather unintuitionally, located in CityNameManager.py. Look for Turkey's entry in the renaming method, the capital gets changed right along with the name.
I know a lot of hard work has already been put into the Italian UP, and I may have brought this issue up before, but is there any way to give cities in a particular region specific buffs?
I completely understand that game modifiers can make entire civs more, but what about giving the certain civ's cities absolute, not percentage buffs in particular regions?
In summary, a +x% production/commerce buff encourages cities built in less crowded areas, wheras a +y production/commerce per city buff encourages more cities to be built (which could help recreate heavily urbanized Northern Italy).
Example:
Italy (or Babylon)
-Reduce core area to just Northern Italy and Rome (reduce core area to just Mesopotamia/area around Iraq)
Then an example UP for a heavily urbanized civ such as Italy (Babylon) could be something along the lines of
-Cities built in core area produce +3 production and +3 commerce (ziggurats constructed in cities in core area produce +2 food and +2 commerce)
This greatly increases the incentive of building more cities in historically heavily urbanized areas of the world such as Northern Italy or Mesopotamia. This also gives cities in those areas an early advantage, but this bonus would mean relatively less as other cities around the world grow in size. Towards the end of the game, these cities built in those crowded areas would still suck, but for a large part of those civ's era of historical dominance (ie Italy during the Renaissance or Babylon during the pre-iron age) and for when those civs are aiming to achieve their UHV, these crowded cities would be really good for civs with such a UP.
I completely understand that game modifiers can make entire civs more, but what about giving the certain civ's cities absolute, not percentage buffs in particular regions?
In summary, a +x% production/commerce buff encourages cities built in less crowded areas, wheras a +y production/commerce per city buff encourages more cities to be built (which could help recreate heavily urbanized Northern Italy).
Example:
Italy (or Babylon)
-Reduce core area to just Northern Italy and Rome (reduce core area to just Mesopotamia/area around Iraq)
Then an example UP for a heavily urbanized civ such as Italy (Babylon) could be something along the lines of
-Cities built in core area produce +3 production and +3 commerce (ziggurats constructed in cities in core area produce +2 food and +2 commerce)
This greatly increases the incentive of building more cities in historically heavily urbanized areas of the world such as Northern Italy or Mesopotamia. This also gives cities in those areas an early advantage, but this bonus would mean relatively less as other cities around the world grow in size. Towards the end of the game, these cities built in those crowded areas would still suck, but for a large part of those civ's era of historical dominance (ie Italy during the Renaissance or Babylon during the pre-iron age) and for when those civs are aiming to achieve their UHV, these crowded cities would be really good for civs with such a UP.
rigo92
Chieftain
what about enabling older corporations i.e. Medici banks and stuff like that and then have them be overwritten by the more modern corporations when they roll around? or is the total number of corporations hard-wired into the whole thing?
Yes, corporations do give absolute bonuses, but I don't think corporations alone will make players aiming for a high score to want to build a city in Sumeria/Southern Iraq(such as Ur, or Basra) or in Northern Italy (such as Milan or Genoa). Nor will it help make up for an AI's mistake to build a city there. All cities can have access to corporations, so corps will just make all other city location options better as well.
I think being able to give a civ's cities specific bonuses only if the city is situated in that civ's core area is the only way I see for it to actually be remotely worth it for players to have crowded cities in historically heavily urbanized areas.
Or perhaps, I had previously mentioned, maybe this could be part of a "city-states" civic idea.
Again, adjust Italian core area to only northern Italy and Babylon core area to only Mesopotamia.
Cities founded within a civ's core area would receive +x food, +y production, +z commerce. +5 civic stability for each city within core area, -1 civic stability for every population point of a city outside of the core area. Some other effect needs to be added so that this civic is not appealing for England, France, Spain and Portugal, but is really appealing to pre-Alexandrian Greece, Renaissance Italy and Babylon.
I think that one way to encourage a more crowded Europe would be to increase unhappiness and unhealthiness from larger cities (say +2 per pop after size 10 and +3 per pop after size 20?). This way limited luxury and health resources in pre-colonial Europe would mean that city growth would have more limitations. This would be very punitive to very large cities making multiple medium sized cities more viable.
As an example a Mega-London working its full fat cross can reach population 27. With the new mechanic this would equal 51 unhappiness and 51 unhealthiness just from population (instead of 27). Taking that into account a smaller pop 17 London sharing tiles with cities in the West Country and northern England would only have 24 unhealthiness and unhappiness (instead of 17) from pop making building more cities in Britain a very viable option.
It would also have a secondary effect of making the acquisition of luxury and health resources important giving an incentive to colonialism.
Although this might take a bit of play-testing to balance changed research rates etcetera, I also think that the need for extra resources might help justify the addition of resources in areas that people feel need improving. (like tobacco, coffee or peals)
I would also like to add that the is a big difference between adding resources to the game just for the sake of it and doing so in a way that will increase game-play, I think that this would move any argument for additional resources into the latter case.
As an example a Mega-London working its full fat cross can reach population 27. With the new mechanic this would equal 51 unhappiness and 51 unhealthiness just from population (instead of 27). Taking that into account a smaller pop 17 London sharing tiles with cities in the West Country and northern England would only have 24 unhealthiness and unhappiness (instead of 17) from pop making building more cities in Britain a very viable option.
It would also have a secondary effect of making the acquisition of luxury and health resources important giving an incentive to colonialism.
Although this might take a bit of play-testing to balance changed research rates etcetera, I also think that the need for extra resources might help justify the addition of resources in areas that people feel need improving. (like tobacco, coffee or peals)
I would also like to add that the is a big difference between adding resources to the game just for the sake of it and doing so in a way that will increase game-play, I think that this would move any argument for additional resources into the latter case.
What would happen to India?
This would be very annoying for the player.
Playtesting and rebalancing. Possibly the addition of more resources (like opium?)
Why, if balanced properly it should only affect large cities and with additional resources in the game it should still be possible to overcome these once you start colonising.
Sounds like a lot of work for Leoreth, but I guess it could be possible. To be honest, I would rather see Byzantines and other new nations in this mod first.
- Status
Similar threads
