civ4-advciv-oracle-bug
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2025
- Messages
- 381
Thanks for your suggestions and feedback, glad the AI is more enjoyable to play with.
While i can't promise i would implement all obviously i'll take them into account.
Before i reply point by point, my general answer could be found in the main changes guide (i assume you already read part of it i guess, but if not you can find info about the changes there: https://github.com/wonderingabout/A..._AdvCiv-SAS/Docs/README_Main_Changes_Guide.md)
Also, ideally, i'm trying more and more of the changes optionalable in sas defines (https://github.com/wonderingabout/A...ework/Assets/XML/GlobalDefines_advciv_sas.xml), and it is still a change in progress (not sure i can make them all be so, but trying to add more and more of them).
On units:
- The idea was to add strategical depth, as in civ4 terrain and features don't play any role, but it can be a fun strategy layer (e.g. camel units stronger on desert, etc.). The samurai ice one is used to symbolize japan being a fairly nordic country and is an abstraction/approximation. Generally i tried to give max 25% terrain/feature bonus unless it's something less important like forest/jungle then i went up to 50% since it doesn't affect city combat anyway. See for details: https://github.com/wonderingabout/A...-for-terrain-modifiers-for-civ-specific-units
Sometimes approximated, but generally accurate to the civ's real world terrain composition (scandinavians strong on ice, etc.)
- quechua, jaguar, are different units than the civ4 ones, quechua is a swordsman replace, and jaguar now replaces axemen. This is because i found quechua rushes then being useless the entire game boring, unbalanced, and useless, as cities are not even built, and something more middle game to be stronger. Jaguar is because the unit is ncredibly weak in civ4, and the axemen timing suits aztec slaving profile much better, i buffed it plenty. They use metallic weapons, so by requiring metal, i can justify them being otherwise stronger, as compared to the base swordsman, unless relevant (see yeoman archer (england) replacing the the crossbow (convenient historical time since no longbow there) not requiring metal). Catapults and trebs don't, they are mostly comprised of wood from what i checked/remember, although i could be wrong ofc, even if they had a bit of metal in them, it's not iconic enough to justify requiring the bonus itself (other metals existed or such, not a core feature (if i'm not mistaken).
- i thought about it plenty, and in civ4 they require iron as well if i'm not mistaken. Civ-specific crossbows in my mod advciv-sas are also buildable with copper (bronze abstraction), and btw rome legiinaries, the new holy roman houfnice too, since it's sensical and to buff them on this end. If you don't have metals, you can still build horse units. If not, i added the camel bonus, so you can go with camel units. If not, the yeoman archer (england) covers this (no bonus crossbow replacement) since they are a more defensive civ and i thought it's much nicer and stronger/better fit than the old unit they had (redcoat iirc). My general idea is buff the weak and useless, rarely nerf the strong but more like uplift everyone so there is more strategy and room for player mistakes and opportunism (else would be boring i think.
- the "warrior" (ancient maceman) has 3 str but is weaker in city combat (-33%-33%). It is also stronger vs animals than archers. Archers are better inside cities, but ancient macemen have the advnatage outside of cities. Plus ancient macemen are cheaper if you're short on hammer. I beleive it's balanced and stronger than the civ4 implementation, now you have choices. The scout and some other units (see pedia entry) can walk on peak, so there is a lot of strategy on how you can use them (plus early you'll gain more commerce if you see their borders before you have world map if i'm not mistaken), or prepare for war sooner (i lost 4986 because i didnt see the hell comign to me in rome AI's nearby territory (and other reasons ofc).
- i thought bazooka was cool and more distincitve. Anti air and "missile" types of units are a part i mostly didnt reork yet, but intended to, but it's tedious a bit and would need thinking like for other changes to make it different from base advciv in an interesting way (that at least i think it is), ideally i would rework them later and not sure yet exactly how (one of my ideas is to add a new combat type and give it specific modifiers vs other ocmbat types, but not sure nor determined yet, etc.)
- the swift worker is basically the old BTS fast worker. Some people were fond of it vs base advciv one's it seems. Since dutch are fairly peaceful, i thought it would help them a lot, and a lot more than some late naval unit for the most part useless. Also adds balance as india is no longer the only civ with a worker boosted. The 3 movespeed can be used by higher level players (not saying you arent i dont knwo, but they try super hard to optimize worker move or such so i think theyll find it useful in some way, maybe they can even be used for scouting or such who knows.). The unit itself represents dutch's modern trading profile and hiogh mobility commerce.
- Yes camels are a bit op on desert, but again, (i mean i didnt say it yet), desert tiles are weaker. Instead of always it being better to plant on grass cities, now you can gain advantages or exploit weaknesses from desertic tiles. The numbers may be a bit op it's a matter fo balance and review, but the general idea is fine and great for balance (making horse and camel a tiny bit more disitnct, although horse as of now doesnt have specfic bonuses since it's plenty strong, for now at least if ont always or not anyways etc.)
Then for suggestions before reading, sure i am open, but obviosuly as you cna guess i guess i have my own vision, i hope the mod is flexible enough so palyers can tune it as they prefer:
- i considered it (bombard medieval unit), but the problem is the window is so tight that by the time you have trebuchets, cannons are not so far off. It would be tedious to upgrade them every while, chinese people were the first with gunpowder it seems, some firing based medieval unit would be great for them (but their zhuge nu is already (quite) cool so not sure). (i saw them do a rush with it believe it or not xd in autoplay, and england doing a yeoman archer rush too of 50+ units
(more like a stack / egular stomp though (rivals were strong but anyways etc.)
- pikes are great against medieval mounted units and cheaper, combined with city defense, they are a fine option already. I buffed it i believe as compared to the civ4 or base advciv one. It is also plenty strong vs maces i think (unitcombat_shock bonus as well).
- the dragoon looks cool but personally i'd rather build rifles or muskets, they are more hammer efficient overall and less prone to counter or such (i don't remember exactly). They can be handy to counter or target siege though, but i beleive they are balanced (move speed is not decisive, str is marginally better, cost higher), coudl increase cost a bit but doesnt seem necesasary (from waht i rmember, didnt look just now since i remember it well enough i think and reowrked it not lon ago (open to ideas though so tell me and i'll see if it fits mor especific ideas))
- yes war elephants are a bit too strong indeed, but their cost is also higher. Also, elephants are useless in medieval. As you saw in advciv-sas games are not determined in ancient or classical era, you're still building your empire and have solid defense (AIs too), so not sure it is that op in advciv-sas (if all you have is elephants and no other bonus (i.e. ressoruce in sas as per civ4 code terminology anyways etc. (for clarity since advciv-sas often uses this name instead of the usual one but anyways etc.)), so i think it's decently fine. Plus spearmen are buffed in advciv-sas, so you have more room to coutner them, especially civ-specific vairants; overall maybe it's fine as such.
- i had intended to create anti air and rework them, but it's late game and not a priority (so many things to do first as you can see xd but super fun though! Open to ideas, although i have a generla idea in mind, it's definitely not settled, can't promise i'ill implement though but open to listening anwyays etc.)
On AI:
Generally yes, advciv-sas AI is much much much stronger than base advciv one, i reduced handicap to adjust it, and i beleive it's much smarter and hopefully hope i mean it's enjoyable as such. It is still prone to mistakes or such, but i believe they'll blunder much less, and be sneaky as in opportunistic more at any player's i.e. rival's mistake (ai vs ai or ai vs human i mean, in short all and each aiplayer is stornger which maeks sense but to clarify anyways etc.).
- i made changes to control the units to build depending on map type. Water heavy maps (guessedly based on map name) don't have the same unit profile in AI_ChooseUnit (function i used to control quotas for sanity and opportunism). In autoplay i chekced archipelago and they still did raids (raiding a rival's island), so i thought watery maps worked fine, but i barely tested them otherwise (maknig sure thye produce plenty anval units vs our pangea restrictions, grossly glancing at their pace).
Continents counts as a land heavy map (it's 2 small pangeas i think) for advciv-sas AI so maybe this explains why, as they should have much less naval units (stronger as such)
I saw in autoplay one player spawn in its own island in a pangea where all rivals were, believe it or not, it won a space race! So i believe it's fariiyl fine (but open to feedbakc or issues).
- Yes, but it's not "NOT" building wonders strictly, just much less. If you see the scoreboard there are still some wonders but much less, especially early. By turn 200-300 you should have more or less 10 if not more wonders built, generally by the top dog. I changed it becuase it's stupid to build a wonder when you are losing (and many buildings in fact). AdvCiv-SAS AI is much strogner but opportunistic and less versatile (actually more since it doesn't spm wonders just so you conquer it, which i beleive is very stupid and boring as a concept or thing to do i mean). They still build wonders, just much less. If you reduce xml costs, they'll build them more i believe (they have thigns like max 20 turns to build a wonder else ditch it, don't build a wonder 3+ rivals have the tech for before them (i don't remember the specific but things liek this, and hammer minimal resticitons too, ditching them if danger or war, etc.). In sas defines you can tune some of these settings, although i could add more, i beleive there is some to tune there as you prefer. As for me i vlaue storngest AI not roleplayu so i set it up as such, there are less wonders as a human would (at least i), but not none. I may buff wonders more to make them more attarctive, but not nerf unit spam unless it's op (buff wonders rtaher). Wonders especially early are a huge gamble, and not best move i think epecially at higher dififcultes, it's more aobut buffing wonders than nerfing unit spamming AIs or buiding spamming AIs here i think, but open to feedback as well.
- it's a new civic i added (and didn't have the time to test yet), open to ideas, but they still cost 2 food. I thought no auto science specialists is an interesting idea, but open to ideas there. I beleive the wage labor civic itself is a nice idea for balance though, but if you have better ideas tell me as i'm open to change this if relevant (look at unlimited priest and spies in other civics too)
- ports are late enough and expensive enough. They require other water buildings. By the time you have them, you'd have invested plenty time and hamme,r and if you're not killed, then it's deserved you enjoy the reward of thi risk. Plus you need to work the water tiles, it doesnt give free hammer, so you abandon your cottages or food or such. I beleive it's fine as it is, although coudl bebalanced a bit in the unmbers maybe, the concept seems fine to me. In civ4/advciv, water cities are way too weak, i tried to buff this which i beleive i did quite well. It's basically a city specific moai, no big deal since all players could get moai way earlier in civ4 right iirc? Now moai is much later and a world wonder, much more expensive too, i beleive it's fine
- from what i rmember, feitoria uses another formula that emphasizes trade route modifiefrs ratehr or somethign simialr (didint look). If you're playing portugal the reowked traits would make joao and other imperialistic very strong or beenfiting from this i think (but didnt look too deep into it)
- not sure exactly which hover you are talking about, show a screenshot. The matchup thing i added in the UI as i could, i am not pro coder xd but can try maybe. Ideally i'd want the map view to show comba tmodifiers a bit nicer too, but didnt get to rework this yet (and forgot, as there are so many things, i believe it woudl be a ncie enhacnement if it's what youi're rereferring to additionally) (if not i generally try to make it so you dont need to hover (see the new specialists breakdown for example in the city screen on bottom right, etc.)
- this is not a strict hsitorical enactment, but i believe much more historically accurate than base advciv is. Scandinavians and arabs were big sailers from what i saw on some reading, they probably went to the american continent in the 1000s if not sooner. Even if not, it's not unthinkable to have some poarallel universe wher ea civ went to another continent in the 1000s, i beleive it's fine (just like in some games islam may eb founded before christianity (rarely and not by a lot but maybe), so religions spread more gameplay wise). It's already much more accurate and muc much muchmore than civ4 base advciv i mean. I am steering away from strict accuracy in latest tree rework (see latest posts and commits and the medieval rework i'm adding (open to feedback on it, will post after this message too), i beleive it's mroe interesitng for gameplay variety than have say islam requrie christinaity tech (islam is a abrahamic rleigion tied to judaism so not nonsensical in a ^parallel universe that it woudl happen at same time or evne slightly before rarely, but reuslts in mroe rleigions beign spread sooner (but not overdoign it as i still want it mostly accurate, unliek civ4's meditaiton but most importantly buddhism in ancient era...) (i could put meditaiotn early for hinduism (dint research enough to tell) byuut it fits buddhism very well so better keep it at late classical for hsitorical accuracy i think
- possibly, i didn't test it yet, tell me your feedback. I added 2 city bars but didnt check if ti's the default yet or not. Tell me what bugs you have or a screenshot. I beleive latest addition is the 2 new extra rows which are veyr handy to not scrolll to see all avaialble city produciton in city bar
And thanks for your feedback, tell me further thoguths on it thanks!
While i can't promise i would implement all obviously i'll take them into account.
Before i reply point by point, my general answer could be found in the main changes guide (i assume you already read part of it i guess, but if not you can find info about the changes there: https://github.com/wonderingabout/A..._AdvCiv-SAS/Docs/README_Main_Changes_Guide.md)
Also, ideally, i'm trying more and more of the changes optionalable in sas defines (https://github.com/wonderingabout/A...ework/Assets/XML/GlobalDefines_advciv_sas.xml), and it is still a change in progress (not sure i can make them all be so, but trying to add more and more of them).
On units:
- The idea was to add strategical depth, as in civ4 terrain and features don't play any role, but it can be a fun strategy layer (e.g. camel units stronger on desert, etc.). The samurai ice one is used to symbolize japan being a fairly nordic country and is an abstraction/approximation. Generally i tried to give max 25% terrain/feature bonus unless it's something less important like forest/jungle then i went up to 50% since it doesn't affect city combat anyway. See for details: https://github.com/wonderingabout/A...-for-terrain-modifiers-for-civ-specific-units
Sometimes approximated, but generally accurate to the civ's real world terrain composition (scandinavians strong on ice, etc.)
- quechua, jaguar, are different units than the civ4 ones, quechua is a swordsman replace, and jaguar now replaces axemen. This is because i found quechua rushes then being useless the entire game boring, unbalanced, and useless, as cities are not even built, and something more middle game to be stronger. Jaguar is because the unit is ncredibly weak in civ4, and the axemen timing suits aztec slaving profile much better, i buffed it plenty. They use metallic weapons, so by requiring metal, i can justify them being otherwise stronger, as compared to the base swordsman, unless relevant (see yeoman archer (england) replacing the the crossbow (convenient historical time since no longbow there) not requiring metal). Catapults and trebs don't, they are mostly comprised of wood from what i checked/remember, although i could be wrong ofc, even if they had a bit of metal in them, it's not iconic enough to justify requiring the bonus itself (other metals existed or such, not a core feature (if i'm not mistaken).
- i thought about it plenty, and in civ4 they require iron as well if i'm not mistaken. Civ-specific crossbows in my mod advciv-sas are also buildable with copper (bronze abstraction), and btw rome legiinaries, the new holy roman houfnice too, since it's sensical and to buff them on this end. If you don't have metals, you can still build horse units. If not, i added the camel bonus, so you can go with camel units. If not, the yeoman archer (england) covers this (no bonus crossbow replacement) since they are a more defensive civ and i thought it's much nicer and stronger/better fit than the old unit they had (redcoat iirc). My general idea is buff the weak and useless, rarely nerf the strong but more like uplift everyone so there is more strategy and room for player mistakes and opportunism (else would be boring i think.
- the "warrior" (ancient maceman) has 3 str but is weaker in city combat (-33%-33%). It is also stronger vs animals than archers. Archers are better inside cities, but ancient macemen have the advnatage outside of cities. Plus ancient macemen are cheaper if you're short on hammer. I beleive it's balanced and stronger than the civ4 implementation, now you have choices. The scout and some other units (see pedia entry) can walk on peak, so there is a lot of strategy on how you can use them (plus early you'll gain more commerce if you see their borders before you have world map if i'm not mistaken), or prepare for war sooner (i lost 4986 because i didnt see the hell comign to me in rome AI's nearby territory (and other reasons ofc).
- i thought bazooka was cool and more distincitve. Anti air and "missile" types of units are a part i mostly didnt reork yet, but intended to, but it's tedious a bit and would need thinking like for other changes to make it different from base advciv in an interesting way (that at least i think it is), ideally i would rework them later and not sure yet exactly how (one of my ideas is to add a new combat type and give it specific modifiers vs other ocmbat types, but not sure nor determined yet, etc.)
- the swift worker is basically the old BTS fast worker. Some people were fond of it vs base advciv one's it seems. Since dutch are fairly peaceful, i thought it would help them a lot, and a lot more than some late naval unit for the most part useless. Also adds balance as india is no longer the only civ with a worker boosted. The 3 movespeed can be used by higher level players (not saying you arent i dont knwo, but they try super hard to optimize worker move or such so i think theyll find it useful in some way, maybe they can even be used for scouting or such who knows.). The unit itself represents dutch's modern trading profile and hiogh mobility commerce.
- Yes camels are a bit op on desert, but again, (i mean i didnt say it yet), desert tiles are weaker. Instead of always it being better to plant on grass cities, now you can gain advantages or exploit weaknesses from desertic tiles. The numbers may be a bit op it's a matter fo balance and review, but the general idea is fine and great for balance (making horse and camel a tiny bit more disitnct, although horse as of now doesnt have specfic bonuses since it's plenty strong, for now at least if ont always or not anyways etc.)
Then for suggestions before reading, sure i am open, but obviosuly as you cna guess i guess i have my own vision, i hope the mod is flexible enough so palyers can tune it as they prefer:
- no, i want civs to have an early alternative to ancient macemen, but i agree they fade a bit too fast, however archery existed from -50 000 BCE more or less if not earlier from what i looked, so it's fine. Longbows are stronger classical unit so fine as well, then crossbows are the medieval upgrade, simple and effective, although can always be adjusted in terms of balance ofc for specific numbers, i like it overall but tlel em your ideas too if you want thanks (not like this is necessary, but the 1 unit 1 time is simple and effective as you also seemed to want and i like it simpel this way as it's easy to read and not bloated (but still added camel for versatiltiy and variety, nto utlra simplified either, etc.).
- i considered it (bombard medieval unit), but the problem is the window is so tight that by the time you have trebuchets, cannons are not so far off. It would be tedious to upgrade them every while, chinese people were the first with gunpowder it seems, some firing based medieval unit would be great for them (but their zhuge nu is already (quite) cool so not sure). (i saw them do a rush with it believe it or not xd in autoplay, and england doing a yeoman archer rush too of 50+ units
(more like a stack / egular stomp though (rivals were strong but anyways etc.)- pikes are great against medieval mounted units and cheaper, combined with city defense, they are a fine option already. I buffed it i believe as compared to the civ4 or base advciv one. It is also plenty strong vs maces i think (unitcombat_shock bonus as well).
- the dragoon looks cool but personally i'd rather build rifles or muskets, they are more hammer efficient overall and less prone to counter or such (i don't remember exactly). They can be handy to counter or target siege though, but i beleive they are balanced (move speed is not decisive, str is marginally better, cost higher), coudl increase cost a bit but doesnt seem necesasary (from waht i rmember, didnt look just now since i remember it well enough i think and reowrked it not lon ago (open to ideas though so tell me and i'll see if it fits mor especific ideas))
- yes war elephants are a bit too strong indeed, but their cost is also higher. Also, elephants are useless in medieval. As you saw in advciv-sas games are not determined in ancient or classical era, you're still building your empire and have solid defense (AIs too), so not sure it is that op in advciv-sas (if all you have is elephants and no other bonus (i.e. ressoruce in sas as per civ4 code terminology anyways etc. (for clarity since advciv-sas often uses this name instead of the usual one but anyways etc.)), so i think it's decently fine. Plus spearmen are buffed in advciv-sas, so you have more room to coutner them, especially civ-specific vairants; overall maybe it's fine as such.
- i had intended to create anti air and rework them, but it's late game and not a priority (so many things to do first as you can see xd but super fun though! Open to ideas, although i have a generla idea in mind, it's definitely not settled, can't promise i'ill implement though but open to listening anwyays etc.)
On AI:
Generally yes, advciv-sas AI is much much much stronger than base advciv one, i reduced handicap to adjust it, and i beleive it's much smarter and hopefully hope i mean it's enjoyable as such. It is still prone to mistakes or such, but i believe they'll blunder much less, and be sneaky as in opportunistic more at any player's i.e. rival's mistake (ai vs ai or ai vs human i mean, in short all and each aiplayer is stornger which maeks sense but to clarify anyways etc.).
- i made changes to control the units to build depending on map type. Water heavy maps (guessedly based on map name) don't have the same unit profile in AI_ChooseUnit (function i used to control quotas for sanity and opportunism). In autoplay i chekced archipelago and they still did raids (raiding a rival's island), so i thought watery maps worked fine, but i barely tested them otherwise (maknig sure thye produce plenty anval units vs our pangea restrictions, grossly glancing at their pace).
Continents counts as a land heavy map (it's 2 small pangeas i think) for advciv-sas AI so maybe this explains why, as they should have much less naval units (stronger as such)
I saw in autoplay one player spawn in its own island in a pangea where all rivals were, believe it or not, it won a space race! So i believe it's fariiyl fine (but open to feedbakc or issues).
- Yes, but it's not "NOT" building wonders strictly, just much less. If you see the scoreboard there are still some wonders but much less, especially early. By turn 200-300 you should have more or less 10 if not more wonders built, generally by the top dog. I changed it becuase it's stupid to build a wonder when you are losing (and many buildings in fact). AdvCiv-SAS AI is much strogner but opportunistic and less versatile (actually more since it doesn't spm wonders just so you conquer it, which i beleive is very stupid and boring as a concept or thing to do i mean). They still build wonders, just much less. If you reduce xml costs, they'll build them more i believe (they have thigns like max 20 turns to build a wonder else ditch it, don't build a wonder 3+ rivals have the tech for before them (i don't remember the specific but things liek this, and hammer minimal resticitons too, ditching them if danger or war, etc.). In sas defines you can tune some of these settings, although i could add more, i beleive there is some to tune there as you prefer. As for me i vlaue storngest AI not roleplayu so i set it up as such, there are less wonders as a human would (at least i), but not none. I may buff wonders more to make them more attarctive, but not nerf unit spam unless it's op (buff wonders rtaher). Wonders especially early are a huge gamble, and not best move i think epecially at higher dififcultes, it's more aobut buffing wonders than nerfing unit spamming AIs or buiding spamming AIs here i think, but open to feedback as well.
On Misc:
- it's a new civic i added (and didn't have the time to test yet), open to ideas, but they still cost 2 food. I thought no auto science specialists is an interesting idea, but open to ideas there. I beleive the wage labor civic itself is a nice idea for balance though, but if you have better ideas tell me as i'm open to change this if relevant (look at unlimited priest and spies in other civics too)
- ports are late enough and expensive enough. They require other water buildings. By the time you have them, you'd have invested plenty time and hamme,r and if you're not killed, then it's deserved you enjoy the reward of thi risk. Plus you need to work the water tiles, it doesnt give free hammer, so you abandon your cottages or food or such. I beleive it's fine as it is, although coudl bebalanced a bit in the unmbers maybe, the concept seems fine to me. In civ4/advciv, water cities are way too weak, i tried to buff this which i beleive i did quite well. It's basically a city specific moai, no big deal since all players could get moai way earlier in civ4 right iirc? Now moai is much later and a world wonder, much more expensive too, i beleive it's fine
- from what i rmember, feitoria uses another formula that emphasizes trade route modifiefrs ratehr or somethign simialr (didint look). If you're playing portugal the reowked traits would make joao and other imperialistic very strong or beenfiting from this i think (but didnt look too deep into it)
- not sure exactly which hover you are talking about, show a screenshot. The matchup thing i added in the UI as i could, i am not pro coder xd but can try maybe. Ideally i'd want the map view to show comba tmodifiers a bit nicer too, but didnt get to rework this yet (and forgot, as there are so many things, i believe it woudl be a ncie enhacnement if it's what youi're rereferring to additionally) (if not i generally try to make it so you dont need to hover (see the new specialists breakdown for example in the city screen on bottom right, etc.)
- this is not a strict hsitorical enactment, but i believe much more historically accurate than base advciv is. Scandinavians and arabs were big sailers from what i saw on some reading, they probably went to the american continent in the 1000s if not sooner. Even if not, it's not unthinkable to have some poarallel universe wher ea civ went to another continent in the 1000s, i beleive it's fine (just like in some games islam may eb founded before christianity (rarely and not by a lot but maybe), so religions spread more gameplay wise). It's already much more accurate and muc much muchmore than civ4 base advciv i mean. I am steering away from strict accuracy in latest tree rework (see latest posts and commits and the medieval rework i'm adding (open to feedback on it, will post after this message too), i beleive it's mroe interesitng for gameplay variety than have say islam requrie christinaity tech (islam is a abrahamic rleigion tied to judaism so not nonsensical in a ^parallel universe that it woudl happen at same time or evne slightly before rarely, but reuslts in mroe rleigions beign spread sooner (but not overdoign it as i still want it mostly accurate, unliek civ4's meditaiton but most importantly buddhism in ancient era...) (i could put meditaiotn early for hinduism (dint research enough to tell) byuut it fits buddhism very well so better keep it at late classical for hsitorical accuracy i think
- possibly, i didn't test it yet, tell me your feedback. I added 2 city bars but didnt check if ti's the default yet or not. Tell me what bugs you have or a screenshot. I beleive latest addition is the 2 new extra rows which are veyr handy to not scrolll to see all avaialble city produciton in city bar
And thanks for your feedback, tell me further thoguths on it thanks!
Last edited:
)
