Civilizations Reborn

If the number of teams reaches the limit , how about to make some new civilizations respawn?Just like Aztec and Mexico.
 
IDK why but ever since adding that gitattributes file, I can't push changes anymore. The progress bar doesn't do anything, nothing comes up by using verbose in git bash, and not even removing the file helps. I can't push updates!
erm... sorry if my advice broke your git... I tried it on an empty test repository and nothing like this happened. Are you sure you actually added the file to the repository? What happens if you remove it (I mean, using git rm)?
 
I've find that maybe you'll add Muisca. How about to make it resurrection of Norte Chico? Since Norte Chico only appears for a few turns and very early
 
Pushed the Wonder fix and Khazar fix.

erm... sorry if my advice broke your git... I tried it on an empty test repository and nothing like this happened. Are you sure you actually added the file to the repository? What happens if you remove it (I mean, using git rm)?

It's okay. Restarting my PC fixed it. Would you mind making a pull request? (I don't want to have to restart my PC again, it takes a long time)

If the number of teams reaches the limit , how about to make some new civilizations respawn?Just like Aztec and Mexico. I've find that maybe you'll add Muisca. How about to make it resurrection of Norte Chico? Since Norte Chico only appears for a few turns and very early
The number of teams seems fine. It's just the civilization selection screen that has been impacted as far as I'm aware.

I'd rather avoid using resurrections due to how they're due to be phased out entirely in the next major DoC update and keeping my code as unified as possible will really help with moving my mod over. Plus, the respawn code is rather clunky in general, there's a reason Leoreth stopped using it.
 
Would you mind making a pull request? (I don't want to have to restart my PC again, it takes a long time)
Done.
It should work correctly, though I've only tested it by wget-ing a converted file from Github. Also, it'd probably make sense to do this on the original DoC repository as well, since merging it with all these EOL differences will be quite a pain.
 
Speaking of that 7th part, would you mind posting your ideas for the Olmecs anyways? Even if we had to resort to reusing the Mayan City Name Manger, it'd be amazing to represent all six cradles of civilization, should the Olmecs have an interesting set of Uniques, that is.
Okay, I'll come up with something.

By the way, I played Tiwanaku some more and I confirm that 2nd UHV asks for influential culture (even if the text says refined). And that the Gate of the Sun has a pink button. And that the Pyramid of the Sun currently has no effect.
 
Pull Request Accepted. New Update should now fix the EOL errors.

Okay, I'll come up with something.

By the way, I played Tiwanaku some more and I confirm that 2nd UHV asks for influential culture (even if the text says refined). And that the Gate of the Sun has a pink button. And that the Pyramid of the Sun currently has no effect.
I'm not sure how it's asking for influential culture. I'm using this code iRefined = countCitiesWithCultureLevel(iTiwanaku, 4), and as far as I'm aware, Culture Level 4 is Refined. The Turks use Culture Level 4 for the second part of one of their UHVs. Additionally, I tested with world builder and was unable to reproduce the error.

upload_2020-4-19_22-4-3.png
upload_2020-4-19_22-4-19.png
upload_2020-4-19_22-4-38.png

I included the gate of the sun's button, I have no clue how to fix this, but if you can figure out how to fix it and why it's pink, I'd greatly appreciate it.
I checked and it seems to be included on github, and the XML Art file perfectly matches mine, so I am unsure what's wrong.

upload_2020-4-19_22-5-19.png
 

Attachments

  • gate.zip
    2.8 KB · Views: 74
New Update: Recompiled the DLL...
Apparently this fixed the Pyramid of the Sun issue, can someone confirm this? It's starting to feel like I've gone crazy.
 
<cracks knuckles> How does this sound?

Civilization: Mississippi
Leader: Red Horn
Birth: 100 AD in Ohio/western New York (source of the Ohio River)
UP: The Power of Mshi-Ziibi (extra :commerce: and :culture: for farms next to rivers) OR (trade routes provide :food: and :culture:)
UU: Birdman (replaces Archer - free Shock promotion vs. melee)
UB: Effigy Mound (replaces Pagan Temple - gives +1 :health:).
UHV1: Hopewell Exchange - connect all of the tiles along the Mississippi River, Ohio River, and Great Lakes to your trade network by 500 AD
UHV2: Fort Ancient Culture - build Serpent Mound and 7 effigy mounds by 1070 AD
UHV3: Cahokia - build a palace and settle 2 great merchants in Cahokia by 1400 AD


This would also provide a new wonder:

Serpent Mound - requires Corn and no Iron, +2 Artist GPP, +1 free trade route for all cities connected by river
May I ask what led you to decide to suggest the Mississippi Civilization start in 100 AD?
 
May I ask what led you to decide to suggest the Mississippi Civilization start in 100 AD?
Basically the Cahokia-centric period of Mississippi civilization was too short for a full civ, and it really was a continuation of a long-standing Mound Builder culture that had been around forever. 'Archaic' is out (Mississippi is way too fertile to start in 3000 BC) and the Adena are practically unknown, but the 'Hopewell' seem to be a very strong candidate for a culture/civilization.

...Of course, now that I'm re-reading the wikipedia article, it appears that the start date I listed was a typo -- it says 100 AD when the Hopewell generally began around 100 BC (the dating seems to be tied to the Portsmouth Earthworks). My apologies -- I'll change my suggestion to start at 100 BC.
 
Basically the Cahokia-centric period of Mississippi civilization was too short for a full civ, and it really was a continuation of a long-standing Mound Builder culture that had been around forever. 'Archaic' is out (Mississippi is way too fertile to start in 3000 BC) and the Adena are practically unknown, but the 'Hopewell' seem to be a very strong candidate for a culture/civilization.

...Of course, now that I'm re-reading the wikipedia article, it appears that the start date I listed was a typo -- it says 100 AD when the Hopewell generally began around 100 BC (the dating seems to be tied to the Portsmouth Earthworks). My apologies -- I'll change my suggestion to start at 100 BC.

I had a feeling that's what happened.

Looks like it. Managed to get the remote set up and did a fetch but can't switch to the branch. Is it me or is it related to the problems you're having?

Dialogue boxes for reference:

That happens when there's a a difference between your working version and local versions. In other words, after pulling DoC, you had changed your in game settings, which altered the Strategic Overlay file. You should be able to fix this by right clicking on your DoC folder, clicking Git Commit, typing in any commit message you'd like (example: "My preferred Strategic Overlay settings"), and then switching your branch. This tells GIT to keep track of your Strategic Overlay settings for whenever you switch back to DoC.
 
What should I base mississippi city names on? The names of modern sites? Local tribes? Reverse Romanization of modern sites?
 
I think what I'm enjoying most about my Norte game is dominating the entire Andean region, exploring the entire map of the Americas and accidentally founding Cahokia which gave me access to iron.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how it's asking for influential culture. I'm using this code iRefined = countCitiesWithCultureLevel(iTiwanaku, 4), and as far as I'm aware, Culture Level 4 is Refined. The Turks use Culture Level 4 for the second part of one of their UHVs. Additionally, I tested with world builder and was unable to reproduce the error.

I included the gate of the sun's button, I have no clue how to fix this, but if you can figure out how to fix it and why it's pink, I'd greatly appreciate it.
I checked and it seems to be included on github, and the XML Art file perfectly matches mine, so I am unsure what's wrong.
Okay, maybe it's just a display error then, I'm not sure. Note in your victory screen screenshot that the checkmark part asks for "Cities with influential culture".

As for the pink button issue, I suppose it's an error on my end, though I have no idea what. Don't worry about it then.
 
Okay, maybe it's just a display error then, I'm not sure. Note in your victory screen screenshot that the checkmark part asks for "Cities with influential culture".

As for the pink button issue, I suppose it's an error on my end, though I have no idea what. Don't worry about it then.
Oh. My bad. I'll put out a fix for that text in the next update.
 
What should I base mississippi city names on? The names of modern sites? Local tribes? Reverse Romanization of modern sites?
I'd be really tempted to go with local tribes. It would certainly be wildly inaccurate to real history -- given the 95%-fatality pandemics of the Columbian Exchange, the landscape of North America once Europeans arrived looked nothing like it did from before. But local tribes would feel more authentic, and would be at least somewhat educational in terms of 'this is the area this tribe used to live'.


I think what I'm enjoying most about my Norte game is dominating the entire Andean region, exploring the entire map of the Americas and accidentally founding Cahokia which gave me access to iron.
I feel like (and this might be a suggestion for the big map as well) that if we have major pre-Columbian civs with access to North America, we should make sure that the iron isn't present until later on. Like we do with 'resource spawns' for other things, like horses in the Midwest and the wine in southern California. It's fine as long as no one has access to it, but some of those NA resources could be game-changing.

EDIT: combined two responses.
 
I'd be really tempted to go with local tribes. It would certainly be wildly inaccurate to real history -- given the 95%-fatality pandemics of the Columbian Exchange, the landscape of North America once Europeans arrived looked nothing like it did from before. But local tribes would feel more authentic, and would be at least somewhat educational in terms of 'this is the area this tribe used to live'.
I agree with this. I mean the same is done with other pre-Columbian civs in the Andes and Mesoamerica for the purposes of this mod. We certainly don't know the names of the settlements of Norte Chico, we don't even know the name of the civilization or people but it's in there. Same goes for Harrapa. Frankly a lot of our settlement names for all civs end up being less than historical if you consider when you found the settlements versus what name that place would have had at that time.

That said, are there particular tribal names that are better than others? We don't full well know what language the Mississippian Culture spoke and what would be the closest analogue... best I can get from a cursory search leads me to the Natchez who were the longest lasting Mississippian group speaking a language isolate that linguists suspect might be related to Muskogean so we could choose Muskogean names but that gets us only appropriate names for the Southeast. It deserves further research I guess.

I feel like (and this might be a suggestion for the big map as well) that if we have major pre-Columbian civs with access to North America, we should make sure that the iron isn't present until later on. Like we do with 'resource spawns' for other things, like horses in the Midwest and the wine in southern California. It's fine as long as no one has access to it, but some of those NA resources could be game-changing.
I'll go one further and say there should be some means to limit exploration via land. We have cape for the sea to limit ahistoric discovery of different lands/civs. In the main mod it isn't so important to limit exploration via land because it doesn't yield much benefit outside of Eurasia. That said I think tundra should be locked, up to a certain era, perhaps with some exceptions for certain civs (ie. Russia, Norway, etc). Also I think desert should be impassable without desert promotion with exceptions (Mali, Arabia, Turks, Moors, Mongols, etc.) This would make the Sonoran desert impassible to Mesoamerican civs. Sure trade existed between Mexico and communities north of the Sonoran but it's not necessary to simulate that. Even if Mound-builders were added you could still achieve trade routes without passing the desert. Also perhaps there should be a type of rainforest impassible to scouts (but not explorers) which would limit access to Sub-Saharan Africa and the Amazon.
 
This is a common error that Github makes, open the scenario file in Notepad++, click edit, hover over EOL Conversion, and click Windows.
Sorry, where would this be located?
 
Top Bottom