A New Dawn Beta Builds

[Munger]

Could I ask what the progress is on Improved Vassalage? I have been really looking forward to this for some time but it appears to have disappeared from the ToDo List. Is it scrapped?

Apologies if this is detailed somewhere and I missed it; I've been away from the forums for a while.

Thanks for all the continuing hard work anyhow Afforess.

 

[Sonereal]

Could I ask what the progress is on Improved Vassalage? I have been really looking forward to this for some time but it appears to have disappeared from the ToDo List. Is it scrapped?

Apologies if this is detailed somewhere and I missed it; I've been away from the forums for a while.

Thanks for all the continuing hard work anyhow Afforess.

I thought that was meant for 1.75, not 1.74.

 

[climat]

1.74 is going to be the final release for A New Dawn. You all knew this moment would come, and it came later than I originally imagined. (I almost quit modding in February, and again in April). I've wrapped basically everything I wanted to mod in Civ4. My to-do list is bare, and there aren't any real outstanding bugs that need to be fixed. Sure, there are a couple large projects I never tackled, like complex vassalage, or elections; but those are basically mods in their own rights, and I just don't have the prerequisite time to fully realize them. Perhaps they will appear in some form or another in Civ5. 1.74 being a final release doesn't mean I'm abandoning A New Dawn, I'll still update A New Dawn for each following Rise of Mankind release, and will release patches and fix bugs, but the main part of it's development is over. There may even be a 1.75 release to coincide with RoM 3.0, but it won't differ substantially from what AND is now.

I've really enjoyed modding, and the community here is what kept me interested for so long. I'll mod Civ5 for sure, once the dust settles and the first few patches comes out.

I all hope you have enjoyed Rise of Mankind: A New Dawn as much as I have.

As he said.

 

[os79]

Just a pure speculation here...

I think that Ruthless AI mess up AI's skill at expanded into ever more Neutral Territory. To be clear, I'm not asking AI to expand over its economic limit NOR into neutral territory that is not right beside that civ, OK . What I'm talking about is that AIs in Ruthless AI seem to prefer warfare overmuch, even when they still have neutral territory right there nearby, nothing in their way at all. Only after AIs expand as much as they can, and there is need for a conquest then should they go ahead and plan for warfare.

Remember, Afforess, I'm just speculating because I have absolutely no idea how you coded Ruthless AI. I'm posting this because this time I have my Flexible Difficulty maxed at Prince and I'm very close to Medieval Era now and I have 8 well-developing cities while the next best AI had just 3! One of civ in the list had 4 cities but it seemed that another civ captured one of them. So in this game, I have this exploitative strategy: let AIs bash each other up and stay militarily and (long-term) economically weak before I run out of nearby neutral territory, then I will conquer the entire continent I'm on .

By the way, in the last game, it was only when AI reached mid-Renaissance that they finally increased in city numbers.

So in summary, even in Ruthless AI game option, AIs should expand into nearby neutral territory before considering warfare. Exceptions should only be for resource necessity and military might. Again, I emphasize that it is just speculation and please correct me if I'm wrong here please.

 

[Ganja]

I just put together build 242. I choose the custom install as i dont want to run the guilds or corporations and a few other options but they are not in the list anymore. Are these options gone?

 

[climat]

They are in in-game option now.

 

[Ganja]

thanks climat. This is the quickest responding thread ever

 

[JosEPh_II]

An observation regarding Normal Barbs, ever since Raging Barb and or Ruthless AI was implemented the barbs on normal/regular have become more aggressive than the regular CIVs. I know they (the barbs) were pumped up some.

Staring around 4000BC up to 500bc they will come in single, doubles, and stacks as high as 7 units. They come almost every turn. To the extent that if I don't place units over strategic resources and worked tiles I'm generally bottled up in my cities. And most of my early efforts are directed at unit production, not city development as I would like to. I must keep 3-4 units in every city I found or be overrun. I have lost cities to barbs that were newly founded and only had 1 -2 units to protect while I am building more to send out.

By 2500BC I have the strongest army Because of the constant warfare with the barbs. In the last 5 beta versions I have only attacked one CIV AI or been attacked by a single CIV AI because of the constant Barb battles.

In WB I see barbs all over the map but specifically there is a greater concentration around me than any of the AI Civs. I do see Barbs around other AI some have more than others and that could be lucky placement more than anything else.

I have come across city ruins while eXploring. But I don't know if the ruin was a barb city or AI city. Although I have noticed that when the lead city building AI's reach 4 cities they sometime fall back to 3. I've been told not to over expand. But when the AI has 4 cities to my 2 I'm Not over expanding. And it usually takes me all the BC time frame to catch up to the leading AI CIV in city numbers. And that is generally because by the last few centuries of BC time I'm absorbing the Barb Cities that plaqued me for so long. I can't afford to take the time to build settlers even though the games pop advisor keeps telling me I should build a settler to expand. I wish I could.

I can't because I Must concentrate on units 1st, commerce buildings 2nd and health and happiness whenever I Must. In conjunction with this my WW's and National projects are less inclined to be built unless I designate 1 city (usually my Capitol) to build the Necessary WWs and Nats to keep pace with the AI. I rarely get the Great Wall ant more. I get Oracle about 50% of the time and Petra about 33% of the time.

All of this stems from the constant warfare with the Normal Barbs.

Was or is this a carryover from Ruthless AI and/or the buffing up of raging barbs?

All this is played out w/o REV, Or Ruthless, Or any Barb Mod added in.

JosEPh

 

[Ganja]

Build 242 - just noticed there is an option in the menu to 'regenerate map' ....Thanks for this, it will be used a lot

 

[Caldon]

What is the general rule for save breaking? If i am using 8 right now, will upgrading to 9 kill my save?

 

[climat]

Build 242 - just noticed there is an option in the menu to 'regenerate map' ....Thanks for this, it will be used a lot

That menu is just regenerating map with same options.
You can change options in custom game. Start a new game with it.
Or you can change options with Afforess_CIV4GameOptionInfos.xml in Modules/Afforess/Required folder.

What is the general rule for save breaking? If i am using 8 right now, will upgrading to 9 kill my save?

What do you mean "upgrading to 9"? If you mean you'll use Beta 9, it breaks saves (because of changes in files, especially CoreDLL.)


Revision 241: With Realistic Culture Spread, cities border expanded after one turn from start. Culture of the city is 1/180 but border expanded. It's very weird to see.

 

[Caldon]

That option is just regenerating map. It doesn't change your "settings"
You can change "settings" in single player -> custom game. Start a new game with it.


What do you mean "upgrading to 9"? If you mean you'll use Beta 9, it breaks saves (because of changes in files, especially CoreDLL.)

Yes, that is what I meant, upgrading from beta 8 to 9. Thanks

 

[JanusTalaiini]

Beta 9 - the "Name cities after nearby landmarks" option only seems to be working for the player's cities, not the AI cities as well as it used to.

 

[NBAfan]

What is the reasoning behind mines having -1 food? They are now very hard to use.

 

[climat]

What version do you use? In revision 241 (SVN), mines doesn't reduce .

 

[NBAfan]

Beta 9.

 

[Grathocke]

I think Afforess is making changes in the alphas very quickly and those are being discussed here as well as the betas, so some people will have the updated improvements that were talked about earlier, and some will still have the "old" beta version.

 

[dudeSDCA]

What is the reasoning behind mines having -1 food? They are now very hard to use.

REV 240 includes "improvement balancing" -- towns were slightly OP'd so they were favored over trade centers and industrial complex.

Looking over the changelog in the REV, it looks like mines won't be -1 anymore

 

[dudeSDCA]

In the city screen, there's options like "focus on growth" or "focus on production" or "avoid growth" (etc).

Is there a way to change these for all cities at once? For instance, let's say it's earlish game and I'm focused on city growth--I'd want all my cities to focus on growth. But then a war breaks out and I want all my cities to build High walls and units, so I change to focus on production for all cities...

 

[Justin Cray]

I think if you CTRL-Leftclick on the city name to get the quick menu you control all cities. Or ALT-leftclick I can't check atm.