1700AD Scenario Development Thread

I was under the impression that Leo had agreed to your French Revolution idea.
Yes, I will do it with the upcoming civic redesign.
 
I don't see why Milan should replace Florence and Venice-- I liked those cities, especially since it allows a more interesting division of Italy (the north isn't dominated by one city).

Milan-Rome-Naples is the best combination to represent Italy in modern era.

The problem is that Italy is not represented in modern era by this scenario, so we will usually see an Austrian Peninsula until the end of time, because of the high stability of Austrian civilization.
 
Russian stability is terrible in 1700 scenario (svn 523). Kiev declaired independence in 1750, after this i ended the game ofcourse.
Could it be a bit more stable in the beginning?
 
Here's a save from the turn before the respawn. I think it's from an SVN version before Gran Colombia was added, but that shouldn't make a difference.
Okay, I figured it out. As you rightly suspected, Korea cannot flip any Japanese cities because your stability is too high. Problem was, I added a special rule that if a civ can flip all but two of its potential cities, it gets those for free despite the stability of their owners. This was to allow civs like China to flip the odd European colony on their territory as well on respawn, even if the European country is stable. But since Korea in this situation could only potentially get two cities, the bonus applied to them even without being eligible to flip a single city and respawn at all. So I changed this rule to take effect only when you can flip at least one city on your own.
 
Okay, I figured it out. As you rightly suspected, Korea cannot flip any Japanese cities because your stability is too high. Problem was, I added a special rule that if a civ can flip all but two of its potential cities, it gets those for free despite the stability of their owners. This was to allow civs like China to flip the odd European colony on their territory as well on respawn, even if the European country is stable. But since Korea in this situation could only potentially get two cities, the bonus applied to them even without being eligible to flip a single city and respawn at all. So I changed this rule to take effect only when you can flip at least one city on your own.

You sound like a genius, Leoreth.
 
Yes, writing flawed code and then meandering about why it was wrong :lol:
 
I think Italy spawn shouldn't be conditional...btw I have to use the wb to make sure rome keeps independent giving them enough troops to defend itself...
 
I think Italy spawn shouldn't be conditional...btw I have to use the wb to make sure rome keeps independent giving them enough troops to defend itself...

Are you referring to 1700 scenario? I don't think that Italy spawn is conditional here, but it should follow the respawn rules which are common to any other civilization.
On the other hand, if you're referring to 1167 Italian spawn, I've made it unconditional thanks to a little help from our Leo
 
Italy's spawn in 1167 is conditional to make it worth expanding there as the HRE. An Italian respawn in the 1700 AD scenario (or any other scenario) doesn't have any specific conditions.
 
It might be worth it to have Argentina begin the game with Secularism and Occupation: secularism because on June 4, 1813, the General Assembly declared the state "independent from any ecclesiastical authorities existing outside its territory", Occupation because the conquest of Spanish cities was instrumental in forming the nascent Argentine state. Unless the anarchy from a turn 1 switch to secularism and occupation is meant to represent the civil wars which racked the country until 1853?

Also, why does the "We will not fight our brothers and sisters in the faith" unhappiness malus apply after I've switched to secularism?
 
So is it sure to happen?
No, as any respawn, the cities that can potentially flip are based on the stability of the civ that controls them, and there is a randomized aspect as well (even though Italy's chance is very high).

What I meant is that there are no additional conditions specifically to keep Italy from respawning.

It might be worth it to have Argentina begin the game with Secularism and Occupation: secularism because on June 4, 1813, the General Assembly declared the state "independent from any ecclesiastical authorities existing outside its territory", Occupation because the conquest of Spanish cities was instrumental in forming the nascent Argentine state. Unless the anarchy from a turn 1 switch to secularism and occupation is meant to represent the civil wars which racked the country until 1853?
I didn't give it much thought really, though civs generally start without preset expansion civics for some arbitrary reason. Secularism makes sense though.
 
This is intentional. Russia will probably be changed again though.
 
Maybe place Catholicism in New York even though not completely historical to give America reason to stay Free Religion. With the AI struggling to take New Orleans, they get no religion other than Protestantism and the AI converts to it.
 
Yeah, and then have the US convert back to state religion right around the Red Scare.
 
"Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms."

So I guess that means that no one's mentioned Ethiopia yet? The Empire was very much there in 1700AD, still under the Solomonid Dynasty, with their capital at Gondar. I can understand having indies in Italy, but the area around Gondar at least was unified under Iyasu the Great, and I see no reason why that city can't be under Ethiopian control in this scenario. After taking Mogadishu, the Ethiopians can fight Turkey and clash with Portugal over Mombasa, allowing for historical conflict with European powers, even though Italy is not represented.

You gotta admit it would be fun to see.
 
It would ... I'm not sure if I'll get to adding them before release though.
 
Are all 1700 civs getting updated DOC text? Just loaded up an Iran game and was bemused to see the Persia text come up.
 
Back
Top Bottom