Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)

[JosEPh_II]

I previously had one major concern when deciding to regenerate a map or not; do I have at least a decent start? I often found myself regenerating a lot.

FYI the Human Player is Always placed last on the Map out of all "players/Civs". So yes you do not get the prime real estate on a game started with Prince or above. I'm not sure if this rule still applies to Difficulties below Noble though.

By the way, what's everyone's opinion on conquering cities before tribalism? There was a Barbarian city so close to my own 200000BC that its "fat cross" would overlap with my own if it were expanded to 3 tiles out. I was struggling to fend them off, but by 25000BC, I had conquered the city for myself. Not only is it a big head start, before I get to tribalism, but it was in a good spot too. Do you think, however, that this is "cheap", or "metagaming" too much?

Major question about this, What Difficulty level did you use for this game? This plays directly into being able to conquer a barb city pre Tribalism. Also Game Set Up Options used will either help or hinder in this as well.

 

[raxo2222]

@Toffer90 and @raxo2222 : Concerning the seasonal camps: I don't think it is a good idea to give them culture. It is way too simple now to claim land even when fixed borders are turned off. I can't build new cities currently because of the city limits (mostly anger but also gold) but hey, want to keep the AI from settling these plots? Just built seasonal camps like hell and all this territory is yours. And they are really cheap to build...

Maybe tag for improvements could be useful:
Cost to maintain improvements.
You would have to pay for all improvements in your territory.

Also on github there is resource spawning saturation:
As you discover more resources of type X, you chance to discover another resource x are falling.
It will be affected by map size (bigger maps mean less saturation) and game speed (linearly scaled).
So if map has 20 grapes, then you won't get much more grapes from improvement resource spawning.
Conversely if there are two iron ores on entire map, they will have much bigger chance spawning.

 

[JosEPh_II]

You can built the camps in neutral land. Accompany your worker with a unit against the occasional cobra (or worse), build the seasonal camp and - tada - the tile is yours and stays yours when you move on.

"Animals keep out" is activated here. They don't destroy your improvements but they can (and will) kill unprotected workers or other units which leads to terrible micromanagement when I have to accompany every single unit that can't defend itself.

I stop using Animals keep out for the added challenge of keeping my workers protected. I also now use Reckless Animals as well all the time. And yes your worker can get killed by a Pigeon (think of it as a super flock lol) if left unprotected. You can still send them out unescorted but you better keep an eye out for danger. And I never automate my workers or hunters either. I also generally do not have the Peace Among NPC checked either. So the competition for animals is increased because the Barbs and Neanders are "hunting them as well. Plus the Predators are hunting the lower class animals too. It also makes the barbs and neanders fight each other. But I do not activate Neanderthal Cities option. So the Neanders are limited. Reason the neanders were given imhpo too much strength in the early Preh era. But that is just my opinion.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Maybe tag for improvements could be useful:
Cost to maintain improvements.
You would have to pay for all improvements in your territory.

Don't get carried away with this idea please. There is already considerable costs to overcome in the Preh era. And adding in more maint costs in this Era would also mess with the early Civics as well. I really do not want that.

 

[raxo2222]

Don't get carried away with this idea please. There is already considerable costs to overcome in the Preh era. And adding in more maint costs in this Era would also mess with the early Civics as well. I really do not want that.

Well it could be used selectively for early improvements and then have some low prices in later eras.

This way you wouldn't abuse seasonal camps
This could be used to curb excess gold in midgame (post Renaissance).
Also could be used to simulate huge cost of initial space colonization.

 

[Toffer90]

@Toffer90 and @raxo2222 : Concerning the seasonal camps: I don't think it is a good idea to give them culture.

I agree. Seasonal camps are raxo's thing though, and I let him try out stuff without directing too much.
Only thing I'll continue to insist on, which I mentioned first 3 days ago, is that they should have the same 3D art as scavenging camp.
It looks ridiculous with a wooden watchtower when it's obviously not a military installation and is unlocked so early in the prehistoric.

FYI the Human Player is Always placed last on the Map out of all "players/Civs". So yes you do not get the prime real estate on a game started with Prince or above. I'm not sure if this rule still applies to Difficulties below Noble though.

If your difficulty is below noble you will always be placed in the best starting plot. It hands out from best to worse starting plot to lowest difficulty player before higher difficulty players.

 

[raxo2222]

I agree. Seasonal camps are raxo's thing though, and I let him try out stuff without directing too much.
Only thing I'll continue to insist on, which I mentioned first 3 days ago, is that they should have the same 3D art as scavenging camp.
It looks ridiculous with a wooden watchtower when it's obviously not a military installation and is unlocked so early in the prehistoric.

I changed graphics to scavenger camp one now.
I wanted some graphics, that easily stood out

 

[VCrakeV]

FYI the Human Player is Always placed last on the Map out of all "players/Civs". So yes you do not get the prime real estate on a game started with Prince or above. I'm not sure if this rule still applies to Difficulties below Noble though.

Major question about this, What Difficulty level did you use for this game? This plays directly into being able to conquer a barb city pre Tribalism. Also Game Set Up Options used will either help or hinder in this as well.

It's on emperor. I managed to conquer with Neanderthal slingers and macemen. I have realistic siege on, but they of course had no walls. All C2C Combat mods.

 

[JosEPh_II]

If your difficulty is below noble you will always be placed in the best starting plot. It hands out from best to worse starting plot to lowest difficulty player before higher difficulty players.

Thanks for the reminder.

It's on emperor. I managed to conquer with Neanderthal slingers and macemen. I have realistic siege on, but they of course had no walls. All C2C Combat mods.

Ah, so were the Neander Slingers and Mace combined up from SM? What Str were they when they captured that city?

 

[VCrakeV]

Thanks for the reminder.


Ah, so were the Neander Slingers and Mace combined up from SM? What Str were they when they captured that city?

Yeah, I merged them up; slingers were at 4.5 strength, macemen at 7.5

 

[Toffer90]

I'm wondering if we should rename the earliest settler unit, the unique one that can't be trained ever, from Band of Australopithecus to Ancestral band.
The thing is that this unit should encompass both neanderthals and sapiens because Wrub of the neanderthals start with that unit too, and it would be nonsense to have two versions of a unit that appear so little in the game as the first 10 turns of a prehistoric start game.
That was the reason it was renamed from "Band of Homo Sapiens" to "Band of Australopithecus", but the australopithecus don't really fit the 200 000 BC start....

What does the community think? Please do suggest alternative names, I think Ancestral Band works fine, but others might disagree?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'm wondering if we should rename the earliest settler unit, the unique one that can't be trained ever, from Band of Australopithecus to Ancestral band.
The thing is that this unit should encompass both neanderthals and sapiens because Wrub of the neanderthals start with that unit too, and it would be nonsense to have two versions of a unit that appear so little in the game as the first 10 turns of a prehistoric start game.
That was the reason it was renamed from "Band of Homo Sapiens" to "Band of Australopithecus", but the australopithecus don't really fit the 200 000 BC start....

What does the community think? Please do suggest alternative names, I think Ancestral Band works fine, but others might disagree?

Completely agree.

 

[Dr. Elephant]

I'm wondering if we should rename the earliest settler unit, the unique one that can't be trained ever, from Band of Australopithecus to Ancestral band.
The thing is that this unit should encompass both neanderthals and sapiens because Wrub of the neanderthals start with that unit too, and it would be nonsense to have two versions of a unit that appear so little in the game as the first 10 turns of a prehistoric start game.
That was the reason it was renamed from "Band of Homo Sapiens" to "Band of Australopithecus", but the australopithecus don't really fit the 200 000 BC start....

What does the community think? Please do suggest alternative names, I think Ancestral Band works fine, but others might disagree?

Hello everyine and sorry for the long hiatus.

On this level I humbly propose that we could simply call it: Group of Travelers, as they actually are at this specific moment of the game.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Hello everyine and sorry for the long hiatus.

On this level I humbly propose that we could simply call it: Group of Travelers, as they actually are at this specific moment of the game.

Maybe, Clan?

 

[Somebody613]

Maybe, Clan?

How about: The Ancestor?

 

[VCrakeV]

Maybe, Clan?

Clan/band/horde of Hominids (I think horde is to humans as flock is to birds)?

Edit: or maybe just horde, which already implies it is a group of humans?

By the way, as has been alluded to, pushing back the start date would make the Australopithecus more accurate. There are also a lot of "techs" discovered by earlier hominids (compared to sapiens), like persistence hunting and captured fire.

 

[Toffer90]

Clan/band/horde of Hominids?

A band is a fitting term for a small group that is basically an extended family who are part of a band society, a pre-tribalism community category normally used for typical prehistoric societies.
I have considered something along that line, but here's why I didn't go for Hominids.

The Hominidae taxonomic family of primates whose members are called Hominids (or Great Apes) include Pongo, Orangutang, Gorilla, and Pan in addition to the Homo genus.

The Homininae taxonomic subfamily of Hominidae whose members are called Hominines include Gorilla, and Pan in addition to the Homo genus.

The Hominini taxonomic tribe of the subfamily Homininae whose members are called Hominins include Pan (Chimpanzee and Bonobo) in addition to the Homo Genus.

The Australopithecina taxonomic subtribe of the tribe Hominini whose members are called Australopithecines (or Hominina) include Ardipithecus, Orrorin, Sahelanthropus, and Graecopithecus in addition to the Australopithecus genus.

From the Australopithecus genus the Paranthropus, Kenyanthropus, and the Homo genera evolved.

If we are to use a precise taxonomic term it should be as precise as possible, so a "Band of Homos" would be more precise than both "Band of Hominids" and "Band of Australopithecus".
Though that doesn't sound good to modern ears, so I would prefer "Ancestral Band", it's an unspecific generic term, it doesn't try to isolate a specific group, and imo it sounds good as a name of the initial unit.

End note: Earliest species of the Homo genus are H. Habilis, H. Erectus, H. Rudolfensis, H. Floresiensis, and Australopithecus sediba (last one may be a transitional species between Australopithecus and Homo).

H. Erectus is most likely the predecessor of H. Sapiens and H. Neanderthalensis.​

On that note Band of Homo Erectus would be a name that would encompass both sapien and neanderthal, but that too doesn't sound good to modern ears.

 

[raxo2222]

but that too doesn't sound good to modern ears.

Taxonomy version of that astronomy joke about planet after Saturn

 

[Dr. Elephant]

A band is a fitting term for a small group that is basically an extended family who are part of a band society, a pre-tribalism community category normally used for typical prehistoric societies.
I have considered something along that line, but here's why I didn't go for Hominids.

The Hominidae taxonomic family of primates whose members are called Hominids (or Great Apes) include Pongo, Orangutang, Gorilla, and Pan in addition to the Homo genus.

The Homininae taxonomic subfamily of Hominidae whose members are called Hominines include Gorilla, and Pan in addition to the Homo genus.

The Hominini taxonomic tribe of the subfamily Homininae whose members are called Hominins include Pan (Chimpanzee and Bonobo) in addition to the Homo Genus.

The Australopithecina taxonomic subtribe of the tribe Hominini whose members are called Australopithecines (or Hominina) include Ardipithecus, Orrorin, Sahelanthropus, and Graecopithecus in addition to the Australopithecus genus.

From the Australopithecus genus the Paranthropus, Kenyanthropus, and the Homo genera evolved.

If we are to use a precise taxonomic term it should be as precise as possible, so a "Band of Homos", or a "Horde of Homos" would be more precise than Hominids and Australopithecus.
Though that doesn't sound good to modern ears, so I would prefer "Ancestral Band", it's an unspecific generic term, it doesn't try to isolate a specific group, and imo it sounds good as a name of the initial unit.

End note: Earliest species of the Homo genus are H. Habilis, H. Erectus, H. Rudolfensis, H. Floresiensis, and Australopithecus sediba (last one may be a transitional species between Australopithecus and Homo).

H. Erectus is most likely the predecessor of H. Sapiens and H. Neanderthalensis.​

On that note Band of Homo Erectus would be a name that would encompass both sapien and neanderthal, but that too doesn't sound good to modern ears.

Ancestral Band, seem the most logical approach to have, as Erectus were a totally separate specie.

 

[VCrakeV]

Could we use "Band of Humans"? I know "archaic humans" is used to refer to extinct species of the Homo genus, like Neanderthalensis and Erectus. Presumably, "Humans" would encompass all members of the Homo genus.