1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Alternatives for preset cities

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall: Europe' started by AbsintheRed, May 1, 2016.

  1. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    The current plan is to have some indy/barb city spawns with alternatives, to increase replayability of some civs, and to be able to represent more important cities to some degree throughout the timeline of the mod.
    For example instead of a given indy city spawning in 100% of the games, we can add that it only spawns in 50%, while in 30% a second city appears instead, and a third one in the remainig 20%.

    Obviously some cities are very important historically and/or for gameplay, and will still appear in 100% of the games.
    Still, there are a lot of opportunities with this, let's add more flavour to the mod!

    These are all the current spawning cities, and added some others as well which are currently disabled (starting with #), to give some ideas:
    The first 2 numbers are coordinates, the 3rd is the turn number, the 4th is irrelevant ATM
    Spoiler :
    lTangier = [27,16,0,0] #500 AD
    lBurdigala = [37,38,0,0] #500 AD, Bordeaux
    #lNantes = [36,43,0,0] #500 AD
    lAlger = [40,16,0,0] #500 AD
    lBarcino = [40,28,0,0] #500 AD
    lToulouse = [41,34,0,0] #500 AD
    #lTours = [40,43,0,0] #500 AD
    #lOrleans = [42,44,0,0] #500 AD
    lMarseilles = [46,32,0,0] #500 AD
    lLyon = [46,37,0,0] #500 AD
    lTunis = [49,17,0,0] #500 AD
    #lPisae = [53,32,0,0] #500 AD
    lLondinium = [41,52,0,0] #500 AD, London
    lYork = [39,59,0,0] # 500 AD, Eboracum
    lMediolanum = [52,37,0,0] #500 AD, Milan
    lFlorentia = [54,32,0,0] #500 AD, Firenze
    lTripoli = [54,8,0,0] #500 AD
    #lRoma = [56,27,0,0] #500 AD
    lAugsburg = [55,41,0,0] #500 AD
    #lCatania = [58,18,0,0] #500 AD
    lNapoli = [59,24,0,0] #500 AD
    lRagusa = [64,28,0,0] #500 AD
    #lBeograd = [68,30,0,0] #500 AD
    lSeville = [27,21,0,0] #500 AD
    #lRavenna = [55,33,0,0] #500 AD
    #lKairouan = [49,14,0,0] #500 AD
    lPalermo = [55,19,2,0] # 508 AD
    lRhodes = [80,13,25,0] # 600 AD
    lNorwich = [43,55,35,0] # 640 AD, reduced to town on spawn of England
    #lZaragoza = [36,29,45,0] #680 AD
    lToledo = [30,27,45,0] #680 AD
    lLeicester = [39,56,45,0] #680 AD, reduced to town on spawn of England
    #lBulgar = [97,60,45,0] #680 AD
    #lLeon = [27,32,50,0] # 700 AD
    #lBurgos = [30,32,50,0] #700 AD
    lValencia = [36,25,50,0] #700 AD
    lPamplona = [35,32,50,0] #700 AD
    lPorto = [23,31,50,0] #700 AD
    lDublin = [32,58,50,0] #700 AD
    lLubeck = [57,54,50,0] #700 AD
    lTonsberg = [57,65,65,0] #760 AD
    lRaska = [68,28,67,0] #768 AD
    lFez = [29,12,70,0] #780 AD
    #lCorunna = [24,35,75,0] #800 AD
    lMilan = [52,37,75,0] #800 AD, Respawn of Mediolanum, in case it was razed
    lFirenze = [54,32,75,0] #800 AD, Respawn of Florentia
    #lLeipzig = [58,48,75,0] #800 AD
    lPrague = [60,44,75,0] #800 AD
    #lKharkov = [90,46,75,0] #800 AD
    lKursk = [90,48,75,0] #800 AD
    lCalais = [44,50,75,0] #800 AD
    lNidaros = [57,71,75,0] #800 AD, Trondheim
    lUppsala = [65,66,75,0] #800 AD, reduced to town on spawn of Sweden
    #lLadoga = [81,65,75,0] #800 AD
    lBeloozero = [87,65,75,0] #800 AD
    #lVelehrad = [64,42,82,0] #833 AD
    #lNovgorod = [80,62,87,0] #848 AD
    lEdinburgh = [37,63,90,0] #860 AD
    #lNottingham = [39,56,92,0] #867 AD, reduced to town on spawn of England
    lAlbaIulia = [73,35,95,0] #880 AD
    lTvanksta = [69,53,100,0] #900 AD, Konigsberg
    #lBreslau = [64,46,100,0] #900 AD
    lKrakow = [68,44,100,0] #900 AD
    lDuna = [74,58,100,0] #900 AD, Riga (Duna is the name of a sheltered natural harbor near Riga)
    lCaen = [40,47,104,0] #911 AD, establishment of the Duchy of Normandy
    lMinsk = [79,52,120,0] #960 AD
    lSmolensk = [84,55,120,0] #960 AD
    lYaroslavl = [92,61,137,0] #1010 AD
    lGroningen = [52,54,150,0] #1050 AD
    lKalmar = [64,60,150,0] #1050 AD
    #lMunster = [52,50,150,0] #1050 AD
    lMus = [99,21,153,0] #1060 AD
    #lMarrakesh = [24,7,157,0] #1071 AD
    lGraz = [61,37,170,0] #1110 AD
    #lLjubljana = [60,36,173,1] #1120 AD
    lRiga = [74,58,200,0] #1200 AD, Respawn of Riga
    lSaraiBatu = [99,40,200,0] #1200 AD
    #lKolyvan = [74,63,200,0] #1200 AD
    lTarabulus = [54,8,209,0] #1227 AD, Respawn of Tripoli
    #lPinsk = [77,48,210,0] #1230 AD
    lAbo = [71,66,217,0] #1250 AD
    lNizhnyNovgorod = [97,58,240,0] #1320 AD
    #lSamara = [97,54,240,0] #1320 AD
    #lMemel = [70,55,240,0] #1320 AD, Klaipeda
    #lVologda = [91,64,240,0] #1320 AD
    #lTver = [88,60,240,0] #1320 AD
    lTanais = [96,38,264,0] #1392 AD
    #lVisby = [67,60,264,0] #1393 AD
    lReykjavik = [2,70,270,0] #1410 AD
    #lStaraSich = [88,40,300,0] #1500 AD
    lValletta = [57,14,315,0] #1530 AD
     
  2. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    As the conversation already started in a different thread, I will post some already made suggestions here.
    Would like to keep these in one place, they are highly connected in most cases.
     
  3. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    As per my post in the other thread, for France we should have Caen and Lyon fixed for France. Then for each region there should be a 100% chance of one of the following cities spawning (two for one of Aquitaine and Provence)

    Brittany: Rennes (1E of the wine), Nantes (1S of the wine) Vannes (1SW of the wine)
    Aquitaine: Bordeaux (current location), La Rochelle (2N of Bordeaux), Limoges (1E of the pig), Toulouse (1N of the deer)
    Provence: Toulouse (current location, mutually exclusive with Toulouse on the other side of the river in Aquitaine), Montpellier (1NE of the wine), Marseille (current location), Aix-en-Provence (1W of the salt)
    Swabia: Freibourg en Brisgovie (1S of the honey), Ausbourg (1E of the deer)
    Picardy: Calais (current site), Dunkerque (1E of Calais)

    Of those, imo Caen and Lyon should spawn in 500AD, as Caen was in existence at that time. Also Caen never spawns in 911AD when France is AI, as France settles some other location in Normandy.

    As an aside, imo Normandy should be added to the French 1st UHV, as Clovis did conquer Normandy early on. Maybe give France an extra couple of axemen at the start to compensate for the extra city they need to capture? That would give France the chance to conquer one city at the start without using up all their early defenders.

    For Brittany, Aquitaine, Provence and Swabia, one city in each province should spawn at random at the start, with an extra one in Aquitaine or Provence. For simplicity, probably Toulouse should always spawn but should be 50:50 which side of the river it is on for some variety. That keeps balance for France's 1st UHV, with four random cities and Lyon available instead of the current Lyon, Marseille, Ausbourg, Toulous and Bordeaux, but also gives variety around the placement of the cities, and the optimal location for France to settle their own cities.

    Calais or Dunkerque should spawn in 800AD as in the current game, 50:50 chance of each imo.
     
  4. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    In Wales, I would have an indie city spawn in 900. Either Caernarfon on the hill N of the sheep, Powys on the hill S of the sheep, or Cardiff either on the stone hill or 1W if we want to avoid resources.
     
  5. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    For Italy, I would keep Mediolanum in place as that's a major city and pretty much undisputed capital of the north at the time. But in Tuscany, have either:

    lPisae = [53,32,0,0] #500 AD, Pisa
    lFlorentia = [54,32,0,0] #500 AD, Firenze
    lRimini = [55,32,0,0] #500 AD
    lAncona = [56,31,0,0] #500AD (not sure those coordinates are right for the village which is there)

    I think Ravenna is too close to Venice to be viable for gameplay, but that one could be put in instead

    Then in southern Italy have one of:

    lNapoli = [59,24,0,0] #500 AD
    lRossano = [61,22,0,0] #500 AD
    lTaranto = [62,24,0,0] #500 AD, Tarrentum
    lBenevento = [60,25,0,0] #500 AD
     
  6. DC123456789

    DC123456789 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,910
    Location:
    Canada
    I think Bordeaux is important enough that it should always be there at start. In that case I don't think La Rochelle really makes sense to spawn.

    Perhaps one of Tours, Orleans, or Bourges could also spawn on the Loire?

    Maybe Narbonne could be added to the Toulouse/Provence pool?

    How important was Dunkirk in the timeframe? I feel like just having Calais spawn would make more sense.

    If a city were to spawn for Powys it would be Mathrafal, though technically it should be on the sheep. Instead of spawning Cardiff directly an option could be to spawn Dinefwr for Dyfed/Deheubarth W of the sheep which the English then rename Cardiff, as Morgannwg was conquered early and never important at all.

    I think Naples was important enough to always spawn, but I think it would be good to spawn another city spawning in southern Italy. Perhaps also a choice between Palermo and Syracuse in Sicily?
     
  7. SanJose

    SanJose Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Moscow
    Almost all of the data on the old Rus' cities are incorrect, not mentioned in the town later became the center of principalities during feudal fragmentation
    (Vladimir, Suzdal, Galich)
    Samara and SaraiBatu: out of map
     
  8. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    694
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    Lincoln, Canterbury, Chichester, Bath and Hereford were the biggest towns of their time. They can alter some o the current spawns.
     
  9. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Keep in mind that we cannot only have same chance for all those cities.
    We can have 80% Calais against 20% Dunkirk. 60% for Palermo with 40% for Syracusa.
    Also we can keep 100% for Naples, and also add a separate 20% for Taranto, just by itself.
     
  10. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    You are right of course, that area is the least accurate ATM.
    On the other hand the map itself for Russia will be changed to some degree, so we cannot really set the positions yet.

    We can decide though what cities should be included, for example one western Rus city does sound like a good idea.
    Especially Galich/Halics, which would be a good buffer zone between Kiev and Hungary
    (Hungarian Kings conquered it at least 5-6 times between the 11th and 14th centuries, but never got around to keep it for long)

    English preset cities are special, because some of them have the reduce city mechanics set, right before the English spawn.
     
  11. merijn_v1

    merijn_v1 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,673
    Location:
    The city of the original vlaai
    Ofcourse, most of the variations can apply to the 1200 AD scenario as well.

    @ absinthe
    Are you already working on this? I can start with the ground work already. But I want to avoid doing things double.
     
  12. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    If the city spawns after 1200, it will be applied by default.
    Otherwise the city placement is set in the scenario file, so there is no real room for variance there.

    I don't mind if you do the base changes for it, having the exact cities and chances on a desired gameplay-level will be a longer process anyway, with lots of finetuning.
    Keep in mind that indy spawns in the barbs.py are set up in time clusters ATM.
    I would prefer to avoid too many unnecessary checks, so you should change the basic setup to some degree.
     
  13. merijn_v1

    merijn_v1 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,673
    Location:
    The city of the original vlaai
    Not necessarily. I can leave some parts of the map blanc and create a script which places some additional cities when initializing the scenario. e.g. A city (size X, buildings Y, defenders Z etc.) placed at either Calais or Dunkerque.

    In fact, it wouldn't differ much from the soon to be ready spawning city mechanics. The only thing I can think of is that the 1200 AD script also includes some prebuild buildings.

    All I want to do for now is to write the basic script, so we only have to add the city variations and chances.
    I did see the clusters and I already changed some minor things to speed up the proces. ;)
     
  14. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    Not in 500AD it wasn't - it had been sacked three times and was in a period of decline. It was direct decisions by the Frankish Empire that saw its revival around 600AD, so that could easily have happened to a different city.

    Although maybe Saintes makes more sense than La Rochelle for the time period.

    I don't think cities should spawn in the French core regions, as that just undermines the whole point of the player starting with settlers for these regions.

    That's a good call - Narbonne should probably replace Montpellier as it was more historic for the time frame.

    As important as Calais - both were connected to the sea about the same time, due to silting of the coast. Dunkirk is still a larger port today, it's just for freight traffic whilst Calais is for passengers. I would say it's 50:50 on which one should spawn.

    I don't think it was tbh - Benevento was the main Byzantine city in Southern Italy at the time, Naples only became more important as the Duchy of Naples arose later. It would only become important again if a Sicilian / Neapolitan civ was added later.
     
  15. DC123456789

    DC123456789 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,910
    Location:
    Canada
    Well, I'm not just considering its status right at 500 AD, but overall throughout the timeframe of the mod (or at least the first half). Bordeaux was an important city/sometime capital in the Duchy of Gascony and the capital of the Duchy of Aquitaine all the way until the French conquest in 1453. It was a provincial capital for centuries before that and as you said quickly regained prominence not long after start, so I think it definitely deserves to be preplaced in all games. It's even a spawned city in DoC, which in France is shared only by Paris itself and Lugdunum.

    That is a good point, but it does feel a little weird to have the Franks settling most of these regions rather than conquering them, which is what they really did best. Obviously if this were implemented a settler should probably be removed from France's starting stack.

    True, I suppose. I guess an even split between Benevento and Naples would make sense.
     
  16. merijn_v1

    merijn_v1 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,673
    Location:
    The city of the original vlaai
    We do need to consider the inertia rule. If a city was important in the beginning of the mod, but became less important not much after that, it should get a lower chance of appearing than a city which would become more important later on.

    E.g. At the start of the scenario, Benevento was probably more important than Napoli. But when Napoli became important, it became more important than Benevento ever was. So therefore, I think Napoli should have a bigger chance of appearing than Benevento. (Let's say 70-30)
     
  17. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,909
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Off:
    Why do you always say "inertia rule"? It's like the third time you said that recently where it sounds sooo strange to me :confused:
    It's inertia, like in Newton's law, right? Does the word have another meaning which I'm unfamiliar with?
    Is 'inertia rule' a common expression for something different, so this makes sense to native english speakers?

    On:
    I added a city reduce mechanincs some revisions ago.
    We can more accurately represent if there was a shift in city importance in a given region.
    I don't want to go overboard with using it though, so we should only use it occasionally:
    Where both cities were way too important in different eras to leave them out, or when gameplay dictates it
     
  18. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    Is that not what we are trying to avoid? I think we are risking the mod being deterministic because cities which became important due to historical events are put in place automatically, thus undermining the player's ability to influence said events.

    Imo we should be allowing the player (and AI) maximum variation in the games they play, rather than saying "Well, Bordeaux and Naples were important in real life therefore they will be important in your game". After all, if not for strategic decisions taken in real life those cities would probably not have been particularly important, so why not let those decisions unfold in a different way?

    But then you could apply that logic to any emergent civ, and remove almost all their starting settlers as they generally occupied existing cities rather than founding their own. Imo a nation's core should always be open to the player (and AI) to choose how to settle it, and of course which cities become important.

    After all, it was the division of Clovis' kingdom that led to the rise of Paris, Reims and Orleans into major cities ahead of the surrounding settlements. So surely we should let the player simulate that for themselves, and choose other cities if they so desire to make into major ones in the French core.
     
  19. Swarbs

    Swarbs Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    938
    One thought I had is would it be possible to simulate the process by which some conquered cities were abandoned and resettled elsewhere by their new owners. So instead of the usual capture / raze options, is it possible to have a resettle option whereby upon city capture you have the option to raze the city and get a settler instead of any gold from the capture?

    That could be a good way to simulate the 'inertia' as Merjin refers to it, and give the player a choice of replacing cities they don't really want with ones which are more useful / historic, at a cost of lost infrastructure and gold.

    It could also be applied to the AI, to provide some changes / variety due to wars and conquests.
     
  20. DC123456789

    DC123456789 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,910
    Location:
    Canada
    It's a DoC expression. Basically, it just means that in RFC and civilization in general, things are much less dynamic than historically, and so if you want to have a desired effect/city/civ control/whatever down the road you kind of have to railroad it earlier on. It's the reasoning for what would otherwise be anachronistic design decisions in DoC (and other RFC mods).

    It's a matter of personal perspective. Some people like determinism and to see historically important cities be constantly founded (with a more extreme example being SoI and RFCCW) and the game to run generally as historical (basically, people like me), while others like more dynamism and "what-if" scenarios (I imagine you're in this camp).
     

Share This Page