Current v1.13 Development Discussion

[Chep]

ok, then change that goal altogether, it is just annoying to play and play and then see, "oh, no matter how well I did, I never had a chance".

make it "build that food-wonder-thing in the capitol before 1450" or something, since you want that particular city founded and the UHV revolves around that wonder anyway.


from what I have seen the Dutch are the only civ that can be stable without their core, I never noticed any problems with their tech speed but then they're usually without their capitol in my games. But the fact that they remain in the game even without their core basically forces the player to raze that city if they want to control those tiles (else they WILL lose the city to a congress).

AP: quick info: what does "collect tithe" do? I thought it would give some money to the AP-resident
does "send inquisition" remove all non-catholic religions from that civ? 1 from a random city?
and why is there the option to asign a city from a Catholic civ to a non-Catholic one? that doesn't seem to be in the interest of the Catholic Church.

edit: concerning the "you're busy" - I am completely satisfied with comments on the forum along the lines "I agree, will come some day" / "I dont agree (ideally with reason)" / "maybe, need to think about it" / "WTH?"


edit: another thing for your "to-do-queue": updating the flip-maps in the Americas (Mexico/Canda/Colombia/....)

 

[FinalLegendZero]

"Collect Tithe" sends some gold from all members to the Pope.

"Send Inquisition" gives the Pope extra espionage points against the target of the inquisition.

 

[Chep]

the gold part I already assumed, but then didn't notice any significant changes, thanks for the explanation of the inquisition.
however I feel these votes could come far more often, and the AI rarely votes "yes" on either of them.

the "asign city from believer to non-believer"-vote option however still seems ... well, not really clever lets say.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

I would say that the collapse of the Mongol Empire and the political fracturing of the Muslim world played a much more significant role. It's not as if the Ottomans were interested in stifling trade from Europe along the silk route, in fact their decline in the later centuries of the Ottoman Empire can probably in part be attributed to the loss of valuable trade routes to Europeans.

I'm not saying the ottomans were stifling trade, but Venice and Genoa more or less had a monopoly over that trade during and after the crusades, which helped prompt Western Europe to find alternate routes for those goods so they wouldn't have to go through them. But the crusades did help give Europe access to those resources that they otherwise wouldn't have had. The crusades really had more of an effect on Europe than on the Middle east, at least economically.

That being said, we probably don't need conquerors for the crusades, Holy Rome and France can easily field a small force over by boat if they conquer Italy in time.

Yes, the Mongol presence definitely influenced the middle east, although i don't think it was ever really politically unified since the Umayyads (just count how many different nomadic groups steamrolled through Iran before the Safavids, including the Mongols).

 

[ales_]

What about this Aztec goal: make Tenochtitlan one of the top N cities of the world by population, where N is a reasonable number?

By the way, I'm kind of busy in RL right now, so don't expect major fixes or new content until somewhere next week.

I hope you'll appear on the forum, won't you?

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, the Mongol presence definitely influenced the middle east, although i don't think it was ever really politically unified since the Umayyads (just count how many different nomadic groups steamrolled through Iran before the Safavids, including the Mongols).

Oh right, that was badly phrased. The political fracturing of the Muslim world started earlier and the Mongols certainly contributed to that. Their impact was more to establish comparatively save trade routes from the Middle East to China.

I hope you'll appear on the forum, won't you?

Yeah, just like now. It's just that my evenings are full so I won't get much done in terms of actual modding.

 

[DC123456789]

Honestly, Europeans already send troops to attack the Seljuks often enough even without special conquerors.

 

[Leoreth]

That too. Actually I should probably get rid of the Seljuk's special "always at war with everyone" status.

 

[calad]

First of all, before that change the ToS expired with Liberalism, an even later tech.

For me, ToS does not simply represent the temple itself, but the role of Jerusalem as a whole, including its rule for the other Abrahamic religions. I deliberately let a wonder that will always be in Jerusalem boost shrine income to make Jerusalem something to fight over, even though your own religion's shrine is located elsewhere. Since the fighting over Jerusalem took place long after the temple had been destroyed, it wouldn't make sense to have it expire so early.

The reason why I made it expire earlier is to nerf the Arabs. I think citis suggested Banking in particular, which makes sense because it's a late medieval tech that roughly coincides with Arab decline, and also includes a building that can help you recoup some of the lost gold over time.

It is a good balancing solution but I just dislike how it is presented. Jerusalem should be fought over but not because of ToS.

 

[youtien]

It is a good balancing solution but I just dislike how it is presented. Jerusalem should be fought over but not because of ToS.

Theocracy: +2 unhappiness if your holy shrine is controlled by heretics.

Dome of the Rock: +2 unhappiness for all Catholic civs, only effect if state religion is Islam. So once Arabs build that, they'll attract hatred, and crusader event will take place by AP.

 

[Leoreth]

It is a good balancing solution but I just dislike how it is presented. Jerusalem should be fought over but not because of ToS.

Why not? It's an important city in both Islam and Christianity because of their Jewish roots.

 

[Cosmos1985]

Dome of the Rock: +2 unhappiness for all Catholic civs, only effect if state religion is Islam. So once Arabs build that, they'll attract hatred, and crusader event will take place by AP.

That's definitely too much, that'd be game-breaking.

 

[Chep]

meh, they almost never build it anyway.

 

[Leoreth]

I see it quite often ... 600 AD though.

 

[citis]

The problem with crusades is that AIs don't know how to use navy, else they would go for Jerusalem on Seljukc spawn.

AFA the human is concerned, Jerusalem gives a juicy +40 gold, and it is part of German UHV and many european paragon strategies. So it's ok for the time being.

Teach european AI to use boats and we will see AI european Jerusalem often, if not always.

 

[youtien]

The problem is some annoying coding. In RFCE every crusader civ would have some of their best unit 'lost', and the leading crusader just get the same blank lv 0 army near Jerusalem. Why doesn't them do 'draft & move'? Maybe too troublesome.

 

[Leoreth]

Such a detailed implementation would be inappropriate for the scope of this mod anyway.

 

[baseballpie]

The problem is some annoying coding. In RFCE every crusader civ would have some of their best unit 'lost', and the leading crusader just get the same blank lv 0 army near Jerusalem. Why doesn't them do 'draft & move'? Maybe too troublesome.

I like the way CKII handles Crusades. Obviously, though, that would be hard to implement using the Civ 4 engine.

 

[DC123456789]

Is there any way to prevent the (re)spawn of Iran?

 

[Chep]

only if you keep Persia alive (3000BC) or disable them somewhere in the game files.
They are not a conditional spawn or so for the 600AD-scenario