[BtS MOD] Wolfshanze 1850-1920 Enhancement Mod v2.0

[Wolfshanze]

Like the Babylonians and Sumerians? Or the USA and Native Americans?

I know you're trying to be cute Xeno, but they're hardly the same situation.

Xeno... like the Babylonians and Sumerians... two nearly identical peoples, with nearly identical cultures, living in identical locations where one essentially evolved into the other... not fond of that.

USA and Native Americans... two distinctly different people, with distinctly different cultures, NOT living in identical locations (there's about 1,000 Native American tribes that don't live in New England, and that definately includes the Sioux if folks want to call them that based on Sitting Bull), and there were many well-documented hostile wars between the Native Americans and US Americans (severe cultural differences... not identical/same peoples). [/Attempt at cuteness closed]

 

[phungus420]

The name Native Americans for a civ is so weak. I'm surprised you haven't re named the civ the Sioux now that you bring that up Wolf.

 

[Xenomorph]

Cute? What? I know the USA and Natives don't share the same culture, but they do share the same space. The land of the Iroquois? Now America. The Sioux? Now America. Unlike Sumeria and Babylon, it was a case of one civilization driving the other out.

 

[Wodan]

Hmmm... so you want to trade in the 2nd (other) German Civ in the game for the 2nd (other) French Civ in the game!

The Frank people arose in the region stretching from Belgium to Dresden. This region is in Germany, not France.

They then conquered France. This was around 500AD. And, over the next 200 years they conquered the rest of Germany and northern Italy.

Culturally and Politically, the region now known as France is an amalgamation of a lot of peoples, only one of which are the Franks.

It makes just as much sense for Charlemagne to be "linked" to the CIV France as it does the CIV Germany. That is to say, not much at all.

That's why I think the Carolingan Empire should be its own CIV. Neither France nor Germany.

Charlemagne is/was King of the Franks

Franks =/= France

No... I don't plan on bringing-back the HRE... I got rid of it for a reason. I also don't plan on bringing-in the Carolingian Empire... that would be France Part Deux.

Disagree, for reasons stated above. Anyway, that's just my two cents.

In fact, I'm not a big fan of having multiple empires covering the exact same space of ground as their home-base in Civ4 while other Civs get ignored all-together. I'm far more likely to axe the Sumerians in a future version in favor of perhaps the Hittites... why do we need two Iraqi Civs? I just don't like overlapping civs from the same geographic areas.

I guess we need to remove the Native Americans then.

Wodan

 

[Milly]

Why?!?!?

HRE is essentially Germany (a civ we already have)... and if you'd argue that, it's certainly Germany + Austria (two civs we already have). Check the city list for default HRE... the cities on that list span mostly Germany and Austria... The Unique Building is even German (Rathaus)... the HRE itself literally became the Austrian Empire with the same ruler (Francis I) being Emperor of both.

I know, I know!

... I just really like the UU and UB and Charlemagne's traits. ^^;;;

In fact, I'm not a big fan of having multiple empires covering the exact same space of ground as their home-base in Civ4 while other Civs get ignored all-together. I'm far more likely to axe the Sumerians in a future version in favor of perhaps the Hittites... why do we need two Iraqi Civs? I just don't like overlapping civs from the same geographic areas.

Noo! Not Gilgamesh! ;o;

 

[mamba]

The Frank people arose in the region stretching from Belgium to Dresden. This region is in Germany, not France.

They then conquered France. This was around 500AD. And, over the next 200 years they conquered the rest of Germany and northern Italy.

Culturally and Politically, the region now known as France is an amalgamation of a lot of peoples, only one of which are the Franks.

It makes just as much sense for Charlemagne to be "linked" to the CIV France as it does the CIV Germany. That is to say, not much at all.

The Carolingan Empire is the predecessor of the HRE and France. After the death of Charlemagne (who actually is a carolingan king) the Carolingan Empire was divided. The eastern part of it (roughly speaking the area which now is Germany) then evolved into the HRE over the next 200 - 300 years. The western part turned into France. (The middle part was divided yet again and distributed between the eastern and western part )

So the same reasons which got Wolf to replace HRE with Austria apply to the Carolingan Empire as well.

 

[Wodan]

The Carolingan Empire is the predecessor of the HRE and France. After the death of Charlemagne (who actually is a carolingan king) the Carolingan Empire was divided. The eastern part of it (roughly speaking the area which now is Germany) then evolved into the HRE over the next 200 - 300 years. The western part turned into France. (The middle part was divided yet again and distributed between the eastern and western part )

So the same reasons which got Wolf to replace HRE with Austria apply to the Carolingan Empire as well.

And also applies to others, such as Rome. We should replace Rome with the Byzantines and Italy.

Wodan

 

[mamba]

And also applies to others, such as Rome. We should replace Rome with the Byzantines and Italy.

Funny, I always consider Rome to be the Western Roman Empire as Byzantium obviously is the Eastern Roman Empire Yep, you could replace it with Italy, but since it is the western part anyway (for me at least) that is not really needed.

Unlike HRE and Germany, Rome and Byzantium cities do not overlap (afaik).

Other than that, yes you could argue we should turn Rome into Italy and get rid of Byzantium as it is in the same location is the Ottoman Empire (or better yet, replace the Ottomans with Turkey)

 

[Pendragon65]

Wow sorry guys didn't want to stir up this sort controversy just thought we could obtain some cool Israeli units, m113 mech Inf & some Merkhevah MBTs and stuff, i must go away and self flagellate

 

[Wolfshanze]

Cute? What? I know the USA and Natives don't share the same culture, but they do share the same space. The land of the Iroquois? Now America. The Sioux? Now America. Unlike Sumeria and Babylon, it was a case of one civilization driving the other out.

Do you also Consider Rome to be French, German, Turkish, Greek, Spanish, Egyptian, Carthaginian, English and Syrian?

Or do you consider Rome to be originally from Italy, Rome in-particular?

Maybe you don't realize that Washington DC to South Dakota is some 1,500 miles distant on starting locations. London to Paris is a little over 200 miles as the crow flies. Maybe we should merge France and England into one civ too (after all, Henry V controlled much of France).

Are you considering the starting locations of empires as the home base, or everything they conquered at the hight of power? Because the Sioux and the Anglo-Americans were no-where near each other when either started... in fact, the Germans and French are closer to one-another then the Anglo-Americans and Sioux were when they started.

Xeno, since you seem to think Sioux and Anglo-Americans (based on expansion after-the-fact) are one-in-the-same, then I suggest we get rid of the French, German, Ottoman, Greek, Spanish, Egyptian, Carthaginian and English empires from Civ4 as well, since Rome controlled all those lands too, and were in-fact culturally more similar to their native inhabitants then the Anglo-Americans were to the Sioux. Same logic you're expressing.

I don't know a single Sioux Indian who's native home is in New England. Yet you argue it's the same starting location... I beg to differ that 1,500 miles is more of a separation then most capitals in Europe are from one-another.

 

[The_Coyote]

the same discussion, but here are my five cents (Edit: i´m absolut slow writing a post, 2 new post while writing this one )

Spoiler :

if you see germany, considering the standard leaders, as prussian which founded the germany empire (Kleindeutsche Lösung ("Lesser German Solution")) and had his main area in the eastern part (Brandenburg) and the HRE with its main area in western germany and bohemia than both nations are possible. Both can get an individual city list (HRE: capital Aachen, western germany, bohemia, austria [ok, perhaps not, after austria is a civ], and prussia: capital Berlin, eastern germany names (also east prussia)).
If somebody want a prussian germany you have to replay history (reunited germany by the mean of war - conquer the cities from the HRE).
Would be still far away form perfect and also from being historic correct and no idea if is enough place in europe for a new middle europe civ but this way it could work. But to be honest, i think there are more important questions

now i better leave this thread and try to model a bit

 

[Wolfshanze]

the same discussion, but here are my five cents (Edit: i´m absolut slow writing a post, 2 new post while writing this one)

Spoiler :

if you see germany, considering the standard leaders, as prussian which founded the germany empire (Kleindeutsche Lösung ("Lesser German Solution")) and had his main area in the eastern part (Brandenburg) and the HRE with its main area in western germany and bohemia than both nations are possible. Both can get an individual city list (HRE: capital Aachen, western germany, bohemia, austria [ok, perhaps not, after austria is a civ], and prussia: capital Berlin, eastern germany names (also east prussia)).
If somebody want a prussian germany you have to replay history (reunited germany by the mean of war - conquer the cities from the HRE).
Would be still far away form perfect and also from being historic correct and no idea if is enough place in europe for a new middle europe civ but this way it could work. But to be honest, i think there are more important questions

now i better leave this thread and try to model a bit

Frankly, I'd rather see a seperate "Bavarian" civ then the HRE... because Bavaria was more autonomous then the HRE was. I don't like calling the HRE a "real" empire or civ at all to be honest... it was more a patchwork of treaties with separate autonomous kingdoms then it was a true empire... that's why I don't sweat it's disappearance. It's less an issue of finding the HRE a starting location, and more a fact that it simply wasn't an independent nation like Prussia, Austria, Bavaria, Hungary and others were.

Anyone holding their breath for the HRE to return in the Wolfshanze Mod should probably start finding a burial plot for themselves!

I'm very happy with ditching them and replacing them with Austria, thank you very much.

Oh and Coyote... when are the Pocket Battleships going to show up?!?!? You said you'd work on them sometime in the not too distant future!

 

[The_Coyote]

Oh and Coyote... when are the Pocket Battleships going to show up?!?!? You said you'd work on them sometime in the not too distant future!

not good (not even started so far), less free time, also no motivation to start , it´s still on me list, but i would surprise my when i make it this month.

 

[Pendragon65]

Who wants Pocket Battleships they blow themselves up :suicide:

 

[Wodan]

I'm very happy with ditching them and replacing them with Austria, thank you very much.

I guess I thought that part of your desire was to make use of all the good graphics out there. To that end, we have a Charlemagne leaderhead, so it seems a shame to simply ditch it. That's part of the reason I suggested the Carolingan Empire.

Wodan

 

[Wolfshanze]

I guess I thought that part of your desire was to make use of all the good graphics out there. To that end, we have a Charlemagne leaderhead, so it seems a shame to simply ditch it. That's part of the reason I suggested the Carolingan Empire.

I guess you haven't seen the new Poland lately then!

Never thought Charlemagne looked like Charlemagne anyways.

Obviously you haven't tried v2.71 of the Wolfshanze Mod... shame on you!

 

[killmeplease]

why early tank does only have 22 strength?
it's only 2 points bigger than infantry's. how could they to brake the front on Somma with such a crappy stats?

maybe give them +25% vs infantry bonus?

 

[Wolfshanze]

why early tank does have only 22 strength?
it's only 2 points bigger than infantry's. how could they to brake the front on Somma with such a crappy stats?

Would you rather attack with a 15-str Cavalry unit?

Early Tanks are a direct replacement for Cavalry and an interim step between Cavalry and WWII Tanks (not present at-all in default Civ4). Early tanks can be given CR and Gunpowder promotions, where-as Infantry are only likely to have Gunpowder promotions (which don't work against tanks... I know there is an anti-tank promotion for infantry... but get real... when does the AI ever do that?).

I roll all over infantry in WWI tanks all the time. I'll think about an anti-infantry bonus, but i'm not sure they really need it.

 

[Xenomorph]

Xeno, since you seem to think Sioux and Anglo-Americans (based on expansion after-the-fact) are one-in-the-same

I have never stated once that was my held view, so I don't know where you are getting that from. You had stated that you didn't like civs that existed in the same geographical location, and I was simply commenting on that.

why do we need two Iraqi Civs? I just don't like overlapping civs from the same geographic areas.

So where do you get the impression I was implying they were the same people by this post?

I know the USA and Natives don't share the same culture, but they do share the same space.

Besides...

There's nothing wrong with choice...

 

[phungus420]

Early tank is also critical against machine guns. In the default game the AI doesn't really build machine guns (weak move MGs are great defenders), but all you need to do to get the AI to use them is increase the UnitAI_ tags given to MGs. In the default the only UnitAI the AI recognizes is UnitAI_City_Special so it pretty much never builds them, but if you just add regular old UnitAI_City_Defense and UnitAI_Counter they build them, and you wol't want to be attacking with infantries, as your army will just get slaughtered. These are found in the CIV4UnitInfos file

Spoiler :

Original XML tag:
<UnitAIs>
<UnitAI>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_CITY_SPECIAL</UnitAIType>
<bUnitAI>1</bUnitAI>
</UnitAI>
</UnitAIs>
Change it to such:
<UnitAIs>
<UnitAI>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_CITY_SPECIAL</UnitAIType>
<bUnitAI>1</bUnitAI>
</UnitAI>
<UnitAI>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_CITY_COUNTER</UnitAIType>
<bUnitAI>1</bUnitAI>
</UnitAI>
<UnitAI>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_CITY_DEFENSE</UnitAIType>
<bUnitAI>1</bUnitAI>
</UnitAI>
<UnitAI>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_COUNTER</UnitAIType>
<bUnitAI>1</bUnitAI>
</UnitAI>
</UnitAIs>

Tested this alot, it works fine. When I first made this change I was worried the AI might build MGs for offensive purposes, and missuse them. It doesn't, it just makes it so the AI actually uses MGs for city defense. MGs are very good with their collateral immunity and they just cut down infs, so I've found it more of a challenge like this, forces me to use the early tanks honestly.