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

Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Apr 19, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Zirids never united anyone, and the Almoravids and the Almohads only had Morocco and southern Spain. When I'm talking about the Moors I am talking about a culture group. Moors =/= Berbers; the Moors represent the Andalusians, Almoravids, Almohads and the Nasirids as well, all controlled bits of Spain at one point (not the Zirids). The Moors would control Morocco and Spain and would be a good early enemy for both the Spanish and the Portuguese to fight against, and they would populate Morocco all the way down to Mali (at one point the Moors conquered Mali). But of course you would need to push back the Spanish spawn date to 1085 (the year Toledo fell to the Castilians). And whats nice about Toledo is that in the 15th-16th century you could have its name change to Madrid. :)

    If you want Tunis and Algiers to spawn, HAVE them spawn! No one is stopping Leoreth from having them spawn as independents! Not to mention, if they do spawn as independents they'll be easier to conquer by the Arabs and later the Europeans. This makes more sense to me.


    What Linkman says is true, honestly speaking, Poland would be MUCH easier to implement, so I would have to encourage Leoreth to first implement a Poland. Because currently this whole thing with Germany settling the Ukraine, is just weird.

    And talking about Zirids, please add Palermo Leoreth! :p
     
  2. J. pride

    J. pride King

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    These are all the Berber dynasties that stretched from Tunis to Morocco. OK so let me rephrase that: (shouldnt have used moors), they represent all the Berber Kingdoms and just for the records most of the morrocan kingdoms were Berbers not Moors (again my bad for misleading; i thought moors=berbers)
    According to the dictionary Moors were berber and Arab groups that crossed into Spain and established Muslim Kingdom there(aka the Cordoban Empire). So the Almoravids and Almohad were not Moors. Besides i already mentioned these kingdoms are supposed to be like the Celts (cultural group not actual Empire but in their case both are true)

    These are maps of all the Berber Kingdoms; they include Almohads, Zirids, Marinids and Almoravids.(ok so u got me on Almoravids; they never conquered Tunis but they still controlled Algeria)

    As far as the Polish are concerned why cant they be represented as heavily fortified independent Warsaw. Besides Europe is already overrepresented and Middle east has 2 civs in 600 ad.(im not saying dont do Poland; just do it after the Berbers ;))
     

    Attached Files:

  3. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Hey J. Pride I don't know if you haven't noticed something, but the Almoravids and the Almohads and the Marinids and the Nasrid's ALL controlled Spain at one point, mingling with the Moors of Spain, making them Moors. We do not need an ahistorical civilization spanning from Spain to all of NA. Not only does that stump Arab expansion, (especially since the Berbers largely subjected themselves to Arab invaders), but its also not needed and will make them unnecessarily strong. So just having a Moroccon/Muslim Spain civ, is fine, especially if we can fit it as a historical civilization
     
  4. J. pride

    J. pride King

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    Whatever u call them the maps speak for themselves; they were berbers as in ethnicity and they ruled from North Africa and they did control Tunisia and Algeria (except Almoravids). Plus the arabs dont even get to Tripoli in the game. They werent a historical as the maps shows. Moors do not equal Morrocans. Morrocans are Berber.


    Oh and if you research you will find that the Almoravids were nomadic Berber living in present day Mauritania that conquered from senegal to southern Spain; the tribe they belong to are Sanhaja and Lamtuna definitely not moors.
     
  5. SanePerson

    SanePerson Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    123
    About an earlier leaderhead for Italy, one of the popes would work well (there's a few papal LHs floating around on the fora). Considering that the Italian city states spent most of the time they didn't spend trying to out-compete everyone else attempting to get a pope from their country on the throne, and that Italy was and is very Catholic, it's pretty safe to say that even in those times, the Pope more or less controlled Italy.
     
  6. dcode147

    dcode147 Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    178
    I seriously hope if unit spawn changes are made to help the Arab AI that they be ONLY implemented for the AI player. Again, it's just kind of boring as a human player to see your actions entirely scripted out for the first couple of turns (ie: take Libya, take Iran).

    Rather than giving Arabs more longbowmen, I strongly think the much better solution is to get rid of barbarian war elephants in North Africa (completely unrealistic and anachronistic) after AD300 at the latest.

    I'd prefer to see the Arabs spawn with more archers and camel archers rather than longbowmen. Longbowmen spawned at such large quantities so early in the game makes it very unlikely any of those cities in the middle east and the mahgreb can be conquered. Which would make it really hard for something like a...

    CRUSADES Special event! :D :D :D

    idea be implemented. Leoreth, you already have an army spawn system worked out for the Roman UP. Can you have something similar for the crusades?

    -Jerusalem's Temple Mount Wonder stops generating a lot of gold ~AD1500
    -Remove all prexisting autowar conditions between Arabs and European civs

    Crusade quest
    -triggered twice, in years ~AD1100 and ~AD1400.
    -For human players, you get choice of going on a Crusade against the Arabs. AI civs pick yes or no based on predetermined percent changes (kind of like reformation event)
    -For each civ that picked yes, 1) they pay 100 gold (AI civs don't have to pay this gold), 2)get 3 free units next to Jerusalem (1 free knight, then two other units depending on civilization), 3) autodeclare war on Arabia if not already at war with them. 4) get relationship boost with fellow crusading states and 4) Arabia gets 2 camel archers spawned in tip of Oman after 10 turns.
    -If no, relationship is hurt with crusading states




    I agree that the Arabian pennisula cities should be nerfed more. However one slight concern I have is that the Arabs will be completely screwed when civs such as Babylon, Egypt, and Phoenicia all respawn after nationalism.

    I'm okay with severely decreasing the likelihood those civs respawn even further. Maybe they'll only respawn if the Arabs. Those civs should only be allowed to respawn if there's high chance that they'll become more powerful than the civ they're rebelling against. Otherwise, all respawns do is unfairly hurt AI-controlled civs who don't know how to handle rebellions.
     
  7. J. pride

    J. pride King

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    Leoreth, do consider my ideas relating Tisfun and Aleppo/Damascus (post #2511) and if u think its worth a shot; test it on the svn. If not then ill stop bothering with those ideas :mischief:. And i have a question about unit spawns there as well??

    Now for the current topics. Wats ur opinion on the discussion between me and the turk? On Poland vs Moors and on the idea doing crusades as stated by decode?

    That gonna be a long one to answer for u:crazyeye:
     
  8. jammerculture

    jammerculture Prince

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Canada
    The common presence of an independent kiev during many test Aztec/Turk starts leads me to believe that one more independent city in central Europe (Krakow?) would accomplish the same goal as a Polish minor civ. Therefore, I believe a berber/moor minor civ would be more useful to the game in general as it would effect Byzantine, Spain, Mali, Arabs and later France, as well as the ripple effects on the civs in contact with these. As well, it would help fill out north Africa. My second pick would be for a central-asian "Turkic" civ.

    Again, this game portrays civs, not states or dynasties. In fact every time you change civics, you are representing a change in state, so all these arguments about this or that based on historic dynasties are moot. Having a game that allows for historical accuracy is great, but it needs to be fun, which means non-deterministic and the ability for random and unexpected events to happen.

    Leoreth, earlier you asked for some input on "how far to take the roman conquest UP". It occurred to me that "controlling the entire Mediterranean" would be a way to set that goal without it being the old "x amount of cities here, y amount there"
     
  9. corovanrobber

    corovanrobber King

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Messages:
    619
    Location:
    Germany
    Oh yeah, he'll say they're unhistorical, like algiers not conquered by france/conquered by france but too early/too late/not supposed to be conquered/sucks/etc :lol:
     
  10. Lord Ainsbirth

    Lord Ainsbirth Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    59
    Location:
    Farallon del Cuervo
    Hello Leoreth!
    I saved the game before attacking Carthage, and I tried different things: conquering the city, destroying the city, waiting a couple of turns and then conquering it, etc.
    And always the same result: as soon as I conquer Carthague (razing it or keeping it), the game crush the very next turn. If I don't try to conquer the city, nothing happens and the game continues as normal...
    Regards the army spawns, I always get 2 legionaries and a catapult. They are very useful! Just to let you now, there's an 'information message' who shows something like...' A new army arrives %%%$$$' (with those characters).
    I didn't continue playing as I realized that I couldn't conquer Carthague. But I'll give it a try this afternoon and I'll let you know!
    Un saludo
     
  11. Linkman226

    Linkman226 #anarchy

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,493
    And the Borgias were patrons of the arts too. Dude the guy was nicknamed Il Papa Terribile (The Fearsome Pope) and Il Papa Guerriero (The Warrior Pope).
     
  12. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,023
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    That would be really helpful. I've already redid the names map for Byzantium (tried to stick to Greek names instead of Latin, so it's Konstantinoupolis now). But fitting these new names into the rename methods is quite a lot of work. I'll commit the new map soon.

    While there's still a lot to criticize about Julius II, he's definitely more awesome. Moreover, he was politically more active, which is exactly what we want for a LH, and he's ethnically Italian, which I forgot the Borgias are not. Unfortunately we're lacking a bearded pope ... but the standard ones will do as well.

    I meant reducing their starting units and placing them in Qahira/Baghdad instead so that they flip to them in the right places.

    It already has three hills of which one has copper, which is a lot more production than Constantinople can muster. All that river floodplains are also awesome, and it has wheat. Maybe a sheep resource from Mecca can be moved there, but that's it. Imo the city has only the problem of its tiled not getting improved.

    The cities in Anatolia are this way to allow for a more historical Turkish city placement. I'm also wondering whether Byzantium really needs the North African cities on spawn.

    Okay, but what would this goal actually entail? Allow no foreign cities at the coast of the mediterranean? This would make for more conflict with their eastern enemies, however, they could easily ignore Gaul and Iberia then.

    Muchas gracias :) If you could also upload the savegame right before it that would be an immense help.
     
  13. J. pride

    J. pride King

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    Ok ur idea for the sheep in Baghdad is great :)

    But more importantly what do u think about the replacement of Anitoch

    \
     
  14. lumpthing

    lumpthing generic lump

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Lumpinium, England
    Couldn't it just be that every Mediterranean coastal tile should be within Rome's borders? So it would entail conquest, colonization and cultural expansion.

    It would also be great if another Roman UHV could be achieving certain techs by a certain date (or making the required UHV buildings require more advanced techs). This would prevent players from always prioritising production over economics, resulting in a gloriously large but unhistorically technologically backward empire.

    While we're on the subject of Roman UHVs, I personally think that the 'no cities lost to barbarians' UHV should be scrapped. I think the focus should be on re-creating the historical glory of Rome, which is extremely challenging in itself. I don't think the anti-barbarian UHV adds anything at all.
     
  15. christos200

    christos200 Never tell me the odds

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,054
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    EU, Greece, Athens
    i think that in 330 ad ( byzantines spaw) Zoroastrianism should br replaced by Orthodox christianity.
     
  16. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    @Christos200
    3000 BC and 600 AD start are the same, making it VERY difficult to add in one religion and remove another religion from one game, therefore making it impractical.

    @lumpthing
    That would be cool for the Romans to do that, but it would never happen. Already they need help conquering France, they would never conquer the entire Mediterranean. But yes I agree with you that UHV goal not to lose a city is quite so-so, I think a better one could be devised.
     
  17. Visard

    Visard Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    199
    Just tried Byzantines 3000 BC emperor. I was fun and fairly easy. I got flipped Phoenician army from Tyrus and Babylonian army with St. Peter from Hierusalem. Catholism was founded by Celts and barbarians destroyed the Holy city but I got it back by building Apostolic Palace. Old Peter waiting all those years to finally to build his shrine. Athene had the Great Lighthouse so I used my armies to conquer rest of Mediterraen and vasalized Egypt and Babylonia.

    I like playing 3000 BC starts and there is one thing that annoys me. Whener city is founded on floodplains it becomes desert. In normal civ this is okay. But in this mod cities get founded and razed a lot. That often leaves Egypt and Mesopotamia full of ruins and deserts where should be fertile land. Would it possible to leave that floodplains to be, or at least transfer it to plains or grassland instead of desert.

    Thanks for great modmod and all the hard work you are doing Leoreth.
     
  18. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,023
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    Antioch will stay for the moment.

    No, I plan to remove some of Arabia's initial units and place them in their flipping cities instead (maybe switching the unit types a bit, I don't think they should have that many longbowmen for example).

    Okay, that's actually quite a good goal. But you can still ignore the interior of Iberia and Gaul then.

    Don't know about a tech oriented Roman goal ... they didn't invent that many new technologies outside of the military (and even there they were masters of adaptation, not innovation).

    I agree that the third goal should be changed, because we have the Byzantines for the later Roman Empire now. But to what exactly?

    Nice. I'd like to hear if it's still that easy with the rebalancing of 1.71 (I think I'll release it as soon as the city names are finished).

    I agree, but the problem with floodplains is that they're a feature like forests, which disappear by default when a city is founded. And it's difficult to make them return after a city is destroyed because there's no way of determining whether there was a floodplain before or not.
     
  19. Visard

    Visard Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    199
    I did a little search and found out that is possible to leave the floodplains.

    So if you are interested to do that you should check this thread out:
    Unofficial Patch for BTS 3.19:
    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324024
    Version 1.50 changes:
    - CvCity::init - Reverted to standard BTS code where floodplains are removed when a city is founded
    - CvCity::kill - Replace floodplain after city is destroyed
     
  20. need my speed

    need my speed Rex Omnium Imperarium

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,116
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    European Union (Magna Batavia)
    What if Carthage (AI) quickly settles Iberia?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page