Beta 12

[amrod]

I move my post here, maybe I will get a little feedback on it in the Beta 12 thread:

I think you refer to the idea that you want the new civ to have its first (and maybe second) city on a designated spot ; and if there's a city nearby, it can ruin the region, even if it flips. Hmmm hmmm. Does the new city have to be exactly on place? Maybe the nearby city could become the new capital on flip. Of course, then it wouldn't be good, as placing a city in a less good position would force it to be the new capital instead of a city in a goot terrain. Or maybe kind of a cheat: destroy the old city, build the new one, and have the new one receive the wonders and specialists..but it sounds extreme and somewhat unrealistic. Hm, gonna have to think more.

As for squatting - afaik it means you get to keep your city if it's your capital?
Now that could be avoided by not allowing the player to build capital in that region (that is, he can build a city there, but not a palace). It's hard, though, if player moves his first settler there, but then maybe it could be solved by not building palace in first city, but in the first one in core region (or auto move it when next city built) - (or palace would move to another city when the city flips.)


As another matter, if we don't want to be absolutely historical (and this game IS about rewriting history), then I'd say not all civs have to be born, or at least not exactly in the same way as in real life. As I mentioned earlier, for example, if Hungary is so great that it conquers all of Austria before it spawns, and rules it culturally strongly, then Austrians would probably not spawn IRL, or in very different circumstances (also noted in one topic that Habsburgs became emperors somewhat by luck). Of course, new civs rising are there to make the game harder, but maybe that doesn't necessarily mean they have to do it the same way all the time (like changing dates, locations, core regions (sorry, using soi terminology, i like it) - though I understand it would be harder to code and to play, but at least players would be less likely to prepare their armies centuries before a spawn.

 

[Morholt]

I think nuking the entire BFC might be overkill. It should be enough to remove all cities in a 3x3 square so that the capital can be founded in the right spot.

 

[3Miro]

If I understand this, you simply want to reduce cities to towns instead of razing them. You can do that for the human spawn only and for the AI spawn, then reduce only the adjacent 8 tiles so that you will remove squatting.

 

[AbsintheRed]

I think nuking the entire BFC might be overkill. It should be enough to remove all cities in a 3x3 square so that the capital can be founded in the right spot.

True, it allows that they can be founded in the right spot
But the capitals will be seriously weakened if a few older and bigger cities 2 tiles away take away all the best tiles and resources from them
AFAIK you reduced cities in a fat cross too, both for Stockholm (Uppsala) and for Venice (Ravenna) in the new version

 

[AbsintheRed]

If I understand this, you simply want to reduce cities to towns instead of razing them. You can do that for the human spawn only and for the AI spawn, then reduce only the adjacent 8 tiles so that you will remove squatting.

I'm not sure I understand what you want to say here
The first answer is a yes, reducing cities to towns instead of razing them is a better way
We should do that when it's necessary to get rid of an older city
But what do you mean by human spawn only and AI spawn?

Also, a 3*3 area is not always enough. If we go that far, why shouldn't we do the same thing for the entire fat cross? The strength of your capital do make a difference in most games.
For example there was an issue when AI Hungary always founded Sopron, 2 tiles south from Wien
When Austria spawned they flipped the city, but this resulted in a weak Austrian capital, which caused an even weaker Austria than they would have been otherwise.
This was solved when I moved the Hungarian capital 1W, so they won't find a city too close to the austrian spawn area. But IMO it would be better if we wouldn't even allow the opportunity for this

 

[3Miro]

I'm not sure I understand what you want to say here
The first answer is a yes, reducing cities to towns instead of razing them is a better way
We should do that when it's necessary to get rid of an older city
But what do you mean by human spawn only and AI spawn?

Also, a 3*3 area is not always enough. If we go that far, why shouldn't we do the same thing for the entire fat cross? The strength of your capital do make a difference in most games.
For example there was an issue when AI Hungary always founded Sopron, 2 tiles south from Wien
When Austria spawned they flipped the city, but this resulted in a weak Austrian capital, which caused an even weaker Austria than they would have been otherwise.
This was solved when I moved the Hungarian capital 1W, so they won't find a city too close to the austrian spawn area. But IMO it would be better if we wouldn't even allow the opportunity for this

Currently the spawn mechanics work different if a Human player spawns vs an AI player. You can have the fat cross cleaned for the Human and the 3x3 cleaned for the AI.

How many problematic spawns do we have. I think Austria is the only one. We may think of handling the case specifically, rather than changing the spawn mechanics for all the players. Although this change will probably only affect Austria (and Genoa maybe).

 

[AbsintheRed]

Currently the spawn mechanics work different if a Human player spawns vs an AI player. You can have the fat cross cleaned for the Human and the 3x3 cleaned for the AI.

How many problematic spawns do we have. I think Austria is the only one. We may think of handling the case specifically, rather than changing the spawn mechanics for all the players. Although this change will probably only affect Austria (and Genoa maybe).

Yeah, probably we can balance this out either way
City reducing to town instead of city razing is a good idea, whatever direction we follow on this
Btw, probably we should leave this after the release of Beta 13, it's not urgent at all

 

[amrod]

In those special cases, could modifying the settler map help maybe? At least against the AI, not the human player.

 

[Tigranes]

Jerusalem relic resource is a good idea. Currently a Catholic player holding Jerusalem gets lots of buildings from the Pope, with the Relic, Jerusalem would be worth holding.

What was the reason behind not including Church of the Holy Sepulchre as a prize Wonder in Jerusalem? I was looking forward to do what crusaders came to do in a first place -- to free the empty Tomb of the Lord, worked hard to be elected as a leader of Crusade, waited impatiently few turns, took over Jerusalem with some losses -- only to discover Smokehouse and Market buildings in Beta 12 version, or Relic resource in SVN version. I felt kind of cheated -- the Empty Tomb was not there . The only special Jerusalem-only Wonder is a remote Temple Mount prospect, which is a bit strange concept (the Mount cannot be built, its a mountain, and if you mean the Jewish building, it would be called Temple, not Temple Mount), but for alternative history it is ok I guess. However if we allow hypothetical Jewish Shrine what is wrong with very real and very simple Church of the Holy Sepulchre wonder, which was the very target of the Crusades? Don't care about silk or coffee -- even if that Wonder does nothing and serves aesthetic purposes only the players with crusader spirit would keep it . But can we make it to generate 1 Relic resource -- and kill 2 birds with 1 stone ?

P.S. By the way Coffee is little too early to be placed on 500 AD map. How it made it there in a first place? I wonder if playing too much SoI was the reason

The earliest credible evidence of either coffee drinking or knowledge of the coffee tree appears in the middle of the fifteenth century, in the Sufi monasteries around Mokha in Yemen.[3] It was here in Arabia that coffee beans were first roasted and brewed, in a similar way to how it is now prepared. By the 16th century, it had reached the rest of the Middle East, Persia, Turkey, and northern Africa. Coffee beans were first exported from Ethiopia to Yemen. Yemeni traders brought coffee back to their homeland and began to cultivate the bean.

 

[3Miro]

What was the reason behind not including Church of the Holy Sepulchre as a prize Wonder in Jerusalem? I was looking forward to do what crusaders came to do in a first place -- to free the empty Tomb of the Lord, worked hard to be elected as a leader of Crusade, waited impatiently few turns, took over Jerusalem with some losses -- only to discover Smokehouse and Market buildings in Beta 12 version, or Relic resource in SVN version. I felt kind of cheated -- the Empty Tomb was not there . The only special Jerusalem-only Wonder is a remote Temple Mount prospect, which is a bit strange concept (the Mount cannot be built, its a mountain, and if you mean the Jewish building, it would be called Temple, not Temple Mount), but for alternative history it is ok I guess. However if we allow hypothetical Jewish Shrine what is wrong with very real and very simple Church of the Holy Sepulchre wonder, which was the very target of the Crusades? Don't care about silk or coffee -- even if that Wonder does nothing and serves aesthetic purposes only the players with crusader spirit would keep it . But can we make it to generate 1 Relic resource -- and kill 2 birds with 1 stone ?

P.S. By the way Coffee is little too early to be placed on 500 AD map. How it made it there in a first place? I wonder if playing too much SoI was the reason

The real reasons for the Crusades can be debated, however, the point about coffee is an interesting one. This is definitely worth considering.

Jerusalem does provide relic resource and in the case of Catholic players, it also provides extra gifts from the Pope. If you are Catholic and you have Jerusalem, then you have more than 50% chance of getting a free building form the Pope every 5 or so turns.

The Temple Mount is the Temple on top of the Mountain, this is just the name for it. It is the Jewish holiest cite.

 

[Tigranes]

As you said Temple Mount is the site -- not the actual building you can build when you research Banking The site is holy for both Jewish and Muslim religions (Dome of the Rock and Al Asqa Mosques sit on Temple Mount), but if hypothetically Middle Ages Jews were allowed to rebuild their Temple it would be called Holy Temple, Beit HaMikdash (Hebrew "House of the Holy").

You misunderstood me: I am not complaining about the lack of reward in gameplay terms after capturing Jerusalem. I merely said that an artifact is missing -- some visible Target(the Tomb) inside the Target (Jerusalem). Again, that Wonder could generate the Relic resource -- which is more realistic. It is also can be coded to generate such a resource under Christian religions only.

Many historians still maintain that the main concern of Pope Urban II, when calling for the First Crusade, was the threat to Constantinople from the Turkish invasion of Asia Minor in response to the appeal of Emperor Alexios I Komnenos.[citation needed] Still, historians agree that the fate of Jerusalem and thereby the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was of concern if not the immediate goal of papal policy in 1095. The idea of taking Jerusalem gained more focus as the Crusade was underway. The rebuilt church site was taken from the Fatimids (who had recently taken it from the Abassids) by the knights of the First Crusade on 15 July 1099.[16]
The First Crusade was envisioned as an armed pilgrimage, and no crusader could consider his journey complete unless he had prayed as a pilgrim at the Holy Sepulchre. Crusader Prince Godfrey of Bouillon, who became the first crusader monarch of Jerusalem, decided not to use the title "king" during his lifetime, and declared himself Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri (Protector (or Defender) of the Holy Sepulchre).

 

[ezzlar]

If its not much work I would also prefere a unique building that gives the relic resource rather the Jerusalem spot itself.

 

[3Miro]

As you said Temple Mount is the site -- not the actual building you can build when you research Banking The site is holy for both Jewish and Muslim religions (Dome of the Rock and Al Asqa Mosques sit on Temple Mount), but if hypothetically Middle Ages Jews were allowed to rebuild their Temple it would be called Holy Temple, Beit HaMikdash (Hebrew "House of the Holy").

Oh, I misunderstood. In Beta 12 what is called the Temple Mount should be the old Synagogue in Krakow. This is fixed in Beta 13 (I am not sure if there is an actual Tmeple Mount in Jerusalem pre-build).

You misunderstood me: I am not complaining about the lack of reward in gameplay terms after capturing Jerusalem. I merely said that an artifact is missing -- some visible Target(the Tomb) inside the Target (Jerusalem). Again, that Wonder could generate the Relic resource -- which is more realistic. It is also can be coded to generate such a resource under Christian religions only.

Hm, yes we could add the Relic resource to a pre-build wonder as opposed to a tile. It is a cosmetic change only.

BTW: move all discussions to Beta 13.