[MOD] Fall from Heaven

[Tesla23]

Yup, I get your point. Punishing the well-played fractions (which are the dominating ones) would lower the fun of becoming one.

Your mentioned improvements of Phase2 are all very appreciated. Especially the hell-layer and the Quests will definately boost this MOD from "VeryGood" to "unbelievable OMFGSTFUBBQ".

The Axies vs. Allies Idea seems a good opportunity to add a possible new victory option. Perhaps it would force the fractions to join one of the two Alliances in order to acquire victory by defeating the other one. The neutral fractions would become the balancing factor by joinig the weaker Alliance. To actually make everyone join one Alliance, you could give Boni for the first ones joining or mali for the ones not joining at all.
This would need to change the winnig-options as well, because dominating should at least mean 75% of map control. Cultural victory-score must be higher etc..
Don´t know if its worth it, but at least you could kinda reset the powerbalance without punishing the strong ones in the late game.
Initialized maybe by a wonder on both sides.

Other diplomatic options, hmmmm....
1)The weaker fractions could be more likely to help each others out with ressources or techs (maybe even regardless of their religion). The dominating ones would have to pay a higher price for trading with a weaker one.
2)Perhaps the Gods (as a diplomatic fracion only, if it´s possible) could even help the weaker fractions out, by giving military units or kind of a heavy bless Global-Spell, or..... I don´t know, for an offer of culture or money or whatever.
3)Maybe the chance of declaring war on the dominating fraction could be higher, when these are already in war with another one.
4) Complete new diplomatic-Option:
Embargo (or even war?) for the rest of the game against one of the dominating fractions. Probably bad idea, because I would cry if everyone cancels his trade with me

Guess most of this is not as good as it sounds to me , but perhaps I inspired people with more effective ideas.

 

[Chalid]

Embargo (or even war?) for the rest of the game against one of the dominating fractions. Probably bad idea, because I would cry if everyone cancels his trade with me

Now thats is a good one. Since first seeing Resources in Civ III i wondered why one source of iron is enough to produce iron using units in all your cities.

If this will become possible with the SDK it would be cool if a resource provides 3 (strategic) to 15 (luxury or health) goods of one kind, and each city requiring one good. So a big empire would need a lot of e.g. Gems to keep its civilization happy whereas a small civilization with one source of Gem will have some excess gems to trade away. This would allow to assign a worth to ressources as now typically they are traded 1 to 1. It might even come to resource monopols when there is only one source of silver worth 20 or so....

Furthermore there could be an increase of worth if a resource comes from a different civilization (e.g. they trade you 4 furs that make 8 people happy in your empire whereas the same 4 furs if you captured the source would only affect 4 of your cities - it has ben produced by the elves you know. Its special.... ). This might encourage the player to trade instead of conquer, and might make you cry even more if everyone cancels the deals.

 

[Tesla23]

Whoaah!
This is not what I thought of, but it´s much better. If it´s not too hard to code, this would be so much fun. Yeahh, emeralds from the deepth of the Dwarven mines. And noone has better Sushi than the Overlords (fish etc.)
Great Idea!
Let´s hope it becomes possible sometime.

 

[Jono]

Now thats is a good one. Since first seeing Resources in Civ III i wondered why one source of iron is enough to produce iron using units in all your cities.

Maybe it would be possible to limit the cities one resource could supply to... like 1 iron to supply iron to say 12 cities and 1 copper to supply copper to 8 cities (+25% for dwarves, so that's 15 cities supplied with irons and 12 copper supplied for dwarves)...

 

[Kidinnu]

If this will become possible with the SDK it would be cool if a resource provides 3 (strategic) to 15 (luxury or health) goods of one kind, and each city requiring one good. So a big empire would need a lot of e.g. Gems to keep its civilization happy whereas a small civilization with one source of Gem will have some excess gems to trade away.

You don't need the SDK; you could do this in Python, it'd just be a lot of drudgery. You *might* need the SDK to make the AI understand it.

This would allow to assign a worth to ressources as now typically they are traded 1 to 1. It might even come to resource monopols when there is only one source of silver worth 20 or so....

Are we even playing the same game? I certainly feel like that when I read some of these posts, about people dominating easily on Emperor or having barbarians disappear easily. On this particular subject, try the 'Reconquista' mod - only one of the Christian kingdoms has excess iron, and he'll gladly trade it to you for marble or stone plus two foods. In my experience, the AI does take advantage of resource monopolies to extort 2:1 and 3:1 trades, they just don't often occur because of how 'fairly' Firaxis' scripts generate worlds.

 

[Kael]

Are we even playing the same game? I certainly feel like that when I read some of these posts, about people dominating easily on Emperor or having barbarians disappear easily. On this particular subject, try the 'Reconquista' mod - only one of the Christian kingdoms has excess iron, and he'll gladly trade it to you for marble or stone plus two foods. In my experience, the AI does take advantage of resource monopolies to extort 2:1 and 3:1 trades, they just don't often occur because of how 'fairly' Firaxis' scripts generate worlds.

I feel this same way when people talk about their games. Its all I can do to keep the barbarians off of me, and if Im doing well on Prince difficulty Im feeling good. But to each his own I suppose.

 

[Belizan]

I feel this same way when people talk about their games. Its all I can do to keep the barbarians off of me, and if Im doing well on Prince difficulty Im feeling good. But to each his own I suppose.

I find that with the xp/promotion boons and the lifting of the xp cap for barbarians, that barbarians are a self pealing potato. I set up some defenders in heavily fortified terrain (mountain + top covering, usually), and watch them gain promotions. There is a period in every game, usually somewhere between 1-4 cities, where I have to stop and build up military units sufficient to keep my improvements and workers alive. Then some of my units acquire a puissant level of promotions, and the moment passes. From then on, I outtech the barbarians, so they never pose more then a nuisance (like those damn horseman).

 

[Xarathas]

Bug report.. if no one's already noted these -

1) For some reason, sometimes Guardian of Nature doesn't seem to take into account of forests being planted/cut when they are calculating the happiness bonus. I've even seen it missing the health bonus sometimes when in multiplayer games. Maybe it's a MP issue, and not a SP issue. I've never seen these happen in single player.

2) Bambur - the weaponsmithing thing seems to work on a tile without any mines on it. Perhaps it has to be a tile previously occupied by a mine, this part I'm not sure, but I've had him basically sit on the same tile making weapons even though there's no more mines there.

 

[Kael]

Bug report.. if no one's already noted these -

1) For some reason, sometimes Guardian of Nature doesn't seem to take into account of forests being planted/cut when they are calculating the happiness bonus. I've even seen it missing the health bonus sometimes when in multiplayer games. Maybe it's a MP issue, and not a SP issue. I've never seen these happen in single player.

I think it doesn't refresh every turn, so it may be a few turns behind. I have no idea on the health bonus, although as you say that may be a MP issue. I know some of the team stuff messes with bonus's.

2) Bambur - the weaponsmithing thing seems to work on a tile without any mines on it. Perhaps it has to be a tile previously occupied by a mine, this part I'm not sure, but I've had him basically sit on the same tile making weapons even though there's no more mines there.

Bambur doesn't require a mine to work. He just need to be in a tile you own and outside of a city. So what are seeing is fine.

 

[Jono]

The units who promote other units (like bambur or high priests) destroy worker improvements if it's a bug...

 

[Kael]

The units who promote other units (like bambur or high priests) destroy worker improvements if it's a bug...

Kinda a bug. I wish I had some other way to do it, but for now they have to destory the imrpovement. The reason is I hijack the improvement code to perform the action. Basically the game has the ability to kick off an event when an improvement is built. So I create bogus improvements and have the units build them (which destorys the improvement that was already there), then I trap the action, do whatever I want in python and then clear the tile (so you won't see a "Weaponsmith" or "Bless" improvement still sitting on the tile).

Spells and Summons used to work this same way but I moved them to the promotion code (which broke leveling on those units) instead.

The short of it is if I want to perform these special actions I need to steal a function from somewhere else to do it (hopefully this will change when the SDK is released). For priests and bambur, thats the improvement changes. For mages its leveling.

 

[Xarathas]

Hmm, I'm not sure if this would work, but if I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, couldn't you just instead create a bogus tech in the tech tree (or use the "never gonna happen" one), and steal the research tech action from the great people and use it on Bambur? You'd just have to make that tech cost rediculously high and have the action add 1 beaker to it everytime you use it. If you do that, then bambur wouldn't even be restricted to being on certain tiles (AFAIK, you can't do weaponsmithing with bambur inside the city, which doesn't really make sense).

 

[loki1232]

1. Open up a new area to explore in the midgame, "Hell"

2. Enable quests that can be accomplished in the late game. This will help both domineering players by giving them tasks they can pursue if they desire (quests will always be optional). As well as helping low ranked players by rewarding them and giving them a better chance to win if they successfully accomplish the task.

3. Detail the relationship system. This is what you mentioned and I think you are 100% correct. More and better options between the civ's will make the end game much more interesting. We are looking to add alignments to the civ's, making "axis vs allies" confrontations more likely. Also civs will be given specific enemies that that harbor an even greater hatred for. Civ's origional voting system was pulled because it doesn't work like I would like it to. I want to have it back and play a more meaningful role (and have players able to ignore the decree's at a relationship cost).

1. Yay?

2. What if you gave the more succesful players harder quests to complete?

3. Nice idea. This will work really well once we get a UN together. What if the UN was actually set in the city of the person who built the wonder. That person would be able to organize the others sort-of, but had more influence ofver the smaller than the larger rivals. Unless of course the one who built the UN was the winner...

 

[Corlindale]

Considering new Diplomatic options, would it be possible to create a sort of "Crusade"-type alliance?
You make a pact with a civilization sharing your state religion, to initiate a crusade against one of the religions of opposing alignment. Both allies then automatically declare war against all known civs with the religion the crusade targets(or perhaps only the one who founded the religion, controls the holy city AND has it as state religion), and this war alliance remains in effect, until the defending civ(s) switch their state religion, or until its influence has decreased by a certain percentage, or something like that. Or perhaps it can be terminated by one of the allies after a set amount of turns.
Would be very nice to have that option, especially when aiming for religious victory, to practice cleansing of the other religions from the world.
While the crusade lasts, it should of course cause massive unhappiness, if the religion the crusade targets is present in some of your own cities.

EDIT: Btw, I just noticed that Fall from Heaven is mentioned, and recommended, in the danish computer game magazine ">pc player". The eyes of the world are on this mod

 

[loki1232]

Considering new Diplomatic options, would it be possible to create a sort of "Crusade"-type alliance?
You make a pact with a civilization sharing your state religion, to initiate a crusade against one of the religions of opposing alignment. Both allies then automatically declare war against all known civs with the religion the crusade targets(or perhaps only the one who founded the religion, controls the holy city AND has it as state religion), and this war alliance remains in effect, until the defending civ(s) switch their state religion, or until its influence has decreased by a certain percentage, or something like that. Or perhaps it can be terminated by one of the allies after a set amount of turns.
Would be very nice to have that option, especially when aiming for religious victory, to practice cleansing of the other religions from the world.
While the crusade lasts, it should of course cause massive unhappiness, if the religion the crusade targets is present in some of your own cities.

Anything is possible. Maybe a war where the teams are based on what ov civic you are using, or what labor. (cough slavery cough).

If the person who built the UN got to chose this stuff, that would make it an awesome wonder, a very fun thign to use.

 

[Kael]

Considering new Diplomatic options, would it be possible to create a sort of "Crusade"-type alliance?
You make a pact with a civilization sharing your state religion, to initiate a crusade against one of the religions of opposing alignment. Both allies then automatically declare war against all known civs with the religion the crusade targets(or perhaps only the one who founded the religion, controls the holy city AND has it as state religion), and this war alliance remains in effect, until the defending civ(s) switch their state religion, or until its influence has decreased by a certain percentage, or something like that. Or perhaps it can be terminated by one of the allies after a set amount of turns.
Would be very nice to have that option, especially when aiming for religious victory, to practice cleansing of the other religions from the world.
While the crusade lasts, it should of course cause massive unhappiness, if the religion the crusade targets is present in some of your own cities.

EDIT: Btw, I just noticed that Fall from Heaven is mentioned, and recommended, in the danish computer game magazine ">pc player". The eyes of the world are on this mod

I agree with Loki, also this could be a function of the quests. Every civ with a certain religion recieves the same quest "Destroy the Ashen Veil Holy City". May help incent civs to work together (and certain civs to fight).

 

[loki1232]

I agree with Loki, also this could be a function of the quests. Every civ with a certain religion recieves the same quest "Destroy the Ashen Veil Holy City". May help incent civs to work together (and certain civs to fight).

And as you said, the good religions are more likely to work together than the bad religions.

I have a huge question about the spellcasting though. The current problem is that they can't level, and previously the problem was that they need cultural borders and destroy improvements. At the previous point, the spells were treated as terrain improvements. Well I have a question about this. Why can't they still be treated as terrain improvements, simply benign terrain improvements that don't require cultural borders. We already have this in the game, its called roads. Why can't the spells be counted as roads? This would solve all of our problems in one swoop. Plus next game my demons will be blasting their elves with fireballs.

 

[loki1232]

Other diplomatic options, hmmmm....
1)The weaker fractions could be more likely to help each others out with ressources or techs (maybe even regardless of their religion). The dominating ones would have to pay a higher price for trading with a weaker one.
2)Perhaps the Gods (as a diplomatic fracion only, if it´s possible) could even help the weaker fractions out, by giving military units or kind of a heavy bless Global-Spell, or..... I don´t know, for an offer of culture or money or whatever.
3)Maybe the chance of declaring war on the dominating fraction could be higher, when these are already in war with another one.
4) Complete new diplomatic-Option:
Embargo (or even war?) for the rest of the game against one of the dominating fractions. Probably bad idea, because I would cry if everyone cancels his trade with me

1. Nice idea.
2. Hmm. I think we should leave the gods out of it for now. Maybe the weaker fations could produce disciple units quicker, because their devotion is needed to regain power.
3. Maybe...
4. That is beautiful. Just temporary and not permanantly though.

 

[Kael]

And as you said, the good religions are more likely to work together than the bad religions.

I have a huge question about the spellcasting though. The current problem is that they can't level, and previously the problem was that they need cultural borders and destroy improvements. At the previous point, the spells were treated as terrain improvements. Well I have a question about this. Why can't they still be treated as terrain improvements, simply benign terrain improvements that don't require cultural borders. We already have this in the game, its called roads. Why can't the spells be counted as roads? This would solve all of our problems in one swoop. Plus next game my demons will be blasting their elves with fireballs.

Because there isn't an event thats triggered when a road is built.

 

[loki1232]

If this will become possible with the SDK it would be cool if a resource provides 3 (strategic) to 15 (luxury or health) goods of one kind, and each city requiring one good. So a big empire would need a lot of e.g. Gems to keep its civilization happy whereas a small civilization with one source of Gem will have some excess gems to trade away. This would allow to assign a worth to ressources as now typically they are traded 1 to 1. It might even come to resource monopols when there is only one source of silver worth 20 or so....

Furthermore there could be an increase of worth if a resource comes from a different civilization (e.g. they trade you 4 furs that make 8 people happy in your empire whereas the same 4 furs if you captured the source would only affect 4 of your cities - it has ben produced by the elves you know. Its special.... ). This might encourage the player to trade instead of conquer, and might make you cry even more if everyone cancels the deals.

This would be a great change. I have felt this way too. Would the cities that got these resources be the ones closest to the resource, or the ones closet to the capital? Maybe city states would eb the former, god king the latter. For republic they would go to the largest cities.