1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Caveman 2 Cosmos

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Caveman 2 Cosmos' started by strategyonly, Aug 25, 2008.

  1. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Raft have a cargo volume of 66 while the unit it upgrades to, Canoe, only has 22 volume. So you can't have Canoe Builder building if you want to produce usable troop transports like the raft. Of course if you want to keep producing good transport ships like the raft, one could avoid building the Canoe Builder (but the building also gives nice economic bonuses), but wouldnt it be better if the raft and the canoe was not on the same production/upgrade line?

    Im still on the current release version (I have yet to use the SVN) so I dont know if this is also still like this in the latest dev version through the SVN?
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2020
    MattCA likes this.
  2. Yudishtira

    Yudishtira Spiritual/Creative

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2,746
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Rafts are so cheap to build I suggest their capacity should be 33, canoes should be at least the same, maybe 44 or 55, but not double.
     
  3. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    I'd go with that. But should you then be able to build more of the rafts now that they can only have half the volume? Currently limited to max 5 rafts. Which reminds me of another issue I see is if you have a city that is not connected to the trade network, and you have, say, neanderthal culture in the other cities, then you will be able to build both 5x neanderthal rafts in your main cities AND 5x rafts in your non-trade network connected city, effectively enabling you to achieve twice the amount of transports by having a city not connected to trade network(correct me if Im wrong but this seems to be how it is working now?). I dont think having a city not connected to trade network should give you an advantage? Maybe rafts and neanderthal rafts should share the same max limit (or maybe the raft and the neanderthal rafts should not be mutually exclusive build options).
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2020
  4. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    27,692
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    It isn't set quite according to direct value assignments so much. It has a volume of 1 and in the way SM translates it becomes a volume of 33, while the canoes less due to the size and volume comparison. Rafts were intended in this scheme to be concurrently available to canoes, while they don't as good speed or power. I may have to make rafts not upgrade directly to canoes for this reason, bypassing them to upgrade to galleys directly once available so they can remain trainable throughout the canoe segment. Canoes don't get more carrying capacity for having better combat quality but reduced size compared to Rafts. That's why canoes are overall not as strong as rafts for carrying.

    When you get canoes, there's a small wait til sed life which does allow for an additional grouping to accommodate larger unit volumes.

    Are these limited units? Strange... don't see why they would be.
     
  5. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    In my game Rafts are a national unit: Max 5. Im on the latest release version though, not the the SVN so unless things changed there... I should install SVN I think :p

    SCREENSHOT:
    Spoiler :
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2020
  6. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    27,692
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    It probably hasn't changed. I just can't imagine why its limited...
     
  7. altug

    altug Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    I was enjoying 4k C2C with minimal hud, and wanted to try reshade tilt-shift effect :)

    Civ4ScreenShot0001.JPG
     
    xenofeel, Thunderbrd and colonelflag like this.
  8. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    In a way I could see a point to it. With unit sizes you'll have to carefully consider logistics of moving units over water, especially large armies over great distances. For example I build neanderthal elephant riders and they have huge sizes to begin with, but also very powerful when you merge them up, they can get very high strength and good for attacking cities. But to transport them on rafts I need to split up their initial normal size in to 3 smaller units for loading onto the rafts. With max 5 units of rafts transporting neanderthal elephant riders will take some real time. And I like this. It makes it MUCH more difficult to just show up with many sized up high strength units at enemies doorsteps. One sized up neanderthal elephant rider unit requires freighting 9 of the smaller downsized units on rafts, not something one simply do over night :).
     
  9. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    27,692
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Well it was intentionally difficult but not intended to be nearly impossible with unit limitations.
     
  10. Jayman1000

    Jayman1000 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Optimally I would like no limit on max numbers, but an increasing production cost and increasing support cost for every unit exceeding 5 units would be fun I think. Should probably only apply to the player and not the AI (that is the AI should have no limit). Oh well, just an idea for the future perhaps :)
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2020
    Thunderbrd likes this.
  11. tmv

    tmv Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,303
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    That would probably have to be adapted to SM too (exceeding 5 batallions, or exceeding 5 countless?).
     
  12. Toffer90

    Toffer90 C2C Modder

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Messages:
    6,940
    Location:
    Norway
    Yeah, well, there's no national limit on early ships anymore.
    I removed that 11 days ago, so since revision 11198.
     
  13. Redwaller66

    Redwaller66 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2014
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    Canada, Ontario
    Hey guys, been a while since I've played this. Got a better computer, and I want to download this mod again. I seem to remember getting the latest playable version from this thread years ago, but I can't seem to find the link for the latest stable SVN download? Also, dumb question, but do I just extract the files directly into beyond the sword mods folder or the beyond the sword folder? Sorry for the dumb questions.
     
  14. Toffer90

    Toffer90 C2C Modder

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Messages:
    6,940
    Location:
    Norway
    https://github.com/caveman2cosmos/Caveman2Cosmos/wiki/Using-SVN

    Mod should be in a folder named exactly Caveman2Cosmos located in "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos".
     
  15. tmv

    tmv Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,303
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    That's a bit ambiguous. The mod must not be in "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos".
     
    Imaus likes this.
  16. Toffer90

    Toffer90 C2C Modder

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Messages:
    6,940
    Location:
    Norway
    How is that less ambiguous? ^^ If what I said was ambiguous then the same reader would interpret what you said similarly and think it meant the mod must not be in:
    "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos"
    One would have to be dead set determined to do it wrong to interpret what we both said like that.

    I would have written "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos" if that is what I meant, and only a fool would then think that that could mean:
    "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos"
    ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
    Anyhow, I should perhaps have added that the folder names before the Mods folder may have a bit different names on different installs of Civ4+BtS, e.g. Steam vs GoG vs CD install, etc.

    It's important that it is not in "...\Documents\My Games\Beyond the Sword\MODS", it must be in the the Mods folder located where the Civ4BeyondSword.exe is, which again should be in "...\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods" or something similar.
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2020
  17. tmv

    tmv Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,303
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    You said

    If a folder named Caveman2Cosmos is located in "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos", it would be "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Caveman2Cosmos". I know you didn't mean that, but it could be interpreted that way.
     
  18. margolloxx

    margolloxx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    37
    who is trolling who here?
     
  19. Toffer90

    Toffer90 C2C Modder

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Messages:
    6,940
    Location:
    Norway
    Yeah, when you say it like that, but I didn't say it like that, I said it more like:
    If a folder named Caveman2Cosmos is located in "\Civ4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Caveman2Cosmos"

    The usage of bold signify that the first folder is the same as the second in that sentence. ^^
    lol
    I and tmv got some history of cantankerous quarreling, I believe it's just a friendly thing we do. ^^
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2020
    tmv likes this.
  20. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    27,692
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I think our society is starting to misuse the term 'trolling' to mean anyone disagreeing with us when it really should be relegated specifically to people being rude with nothing more than the intention to irritate. Using the term in relation to simple discussion over opinions seems to me to be something many do to defend their position as a last ditch effort when they have no further rebuttals left but still haven't changed their minds - an effort to save face knowing they don't fully understand their own position on a subject yet. Thus, when used in that fashion, the accusation of 'trolling' becomes, itself, 'trolling'.

    Yeah before you ask this all comes from thoughts inspired here by this recent exchange, but also from another discussion elsewhere recently. A bit OT I know.
     
    tmv likes this.

Share This Page