Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

[J. pride]

Depends how u look at it, both have made many contributions to algebra and both are consider the father of algebra but IMO it should be Omar Khayyam

 

[kairob]

Well by definition the father of something is its progenitor, the original creator, Greece beats you by quite a number centuries so its not really how you see it, arguing otherwise is like saying Dyson invented the vacuum cleaner just because he advanced the technology a long way.

 

[J. pride]

Diophantus is often called “the father of algebra" because he contributed greatly to number theory, mathematical notation, and because Arithmetica contains the earliest known use of syncopated notation.[12] However, it seems that many of the methods for solving linear and quadratic equations used by Diophantus go back to Babylonian mathematics. For this, and other, reasons mathematical historian Kurt Vogel writes: “Diophantus was not, as he has often been called, the father of algebra. Nevertheless, his remarkable, if unsystematic, collection of indeterminate problems is a singular achievement that was not fully appreciated and further developed until much later.”[13]

The Hellenistic mathematician Diophantus has traditionally been known as "the father of algebra"[75][76] but debate now exists as to whether or not Al-Khwarizmi deserves this title instead.[75] Those who support Diophantus point to the fact that the algebra found in Al-Jabr is more elementary than the algebra found in Arithmetica and that Arithmetica is syncopated while Al-Jabr is fully rhetorical.[75]

Those who support Al-Khwarizmi point to the fact that he gave an exhaustive explanation for the algebraic solution of quadratic equations with positive roots,[77] and was the first to teach algebra in an elementary form and for its own sake, whereas Diophantus was primarily concerned with the theory of numbers.[78] Al-Khwarizmi also introduced the fundamental concept of "reduction" and "balancing" (which he originally used the term al-jabr to refer to), referring to the transposition of subtracted terms to the other side of an equation, that is, the cancellation of like terms on opposite sides of the equation.[2] Other supporters of Al-Khwarizmi point to his algebra no longer being concerned "with a series of problems to be resolved, but an exposition which starts with primitive terms in which the combinations must give all possible prototypes for equations, which henceforward explicitly constitute the true object of study." They also point to his treatment of an equation for its own sake and "in a generic manner, insofar as it does not simply emerge in the course of solving a problem, but is specifically called on to define an infinite class of problems."[52] Al-Khwarizmi's work established algebra as a mathematical discipline that is independent of geometry and arithmetic.[79]

A good argument can made for both but it is important to note that both of them were influenced by others before them. Diophantus made several great contributions but Al-Khwarazmi further establish it and made it an independent science.; lets leave that to the professionals and get back to the topic at hand

 

[jammerculture]

This thread suddenly got all confrontational and aggressive.

I think it must be all the FUFUFUFUFUFU!'s resulting from all the crashes.

Everyone remain calm or you might scare Leoreth away again!




At least you can play civ

 

[J. pride]

Really, that sounded confrontational, i didn't mean to be; my bad. The reason for my remarks was just to get back on topic as i did not want the Turkish idea to be buried.

 

[jammerculture]

lol not just you dude

I was trying to lighten the mood from the last 5 pages or so

 

[civ_king]

I keep getting program execution errors which results in the game locking up

 

[rogue131]

We aren't at war with Libya, we're just dropping tons of bombs, feels like the Balkans

Sure as hell was action on the front.

 

[rogue131]

Depends on how long you were away

I suggest you check the first post or the download page.

I was away for about a month or so, I just want to make sure I download the right update? Guess this means I have to delete the Dawn of Civ version I already have.

As to the Turk, a rite of passage. Ummm, ok, Turk, your mom. That's the best I got right now.

 

[Leoreth]

This mod sounds great, despite me having not played it yet (keeps crashing.)

Welcome to the boards!

Sorry for the crashes again (to all of you) - I've decided to soon release a patch that disables the Roman UP and certain aspects of the respawn mechanic so you can at least play without constant crashes until the game is fixed.

1) Playing as Italy from the 600AD start - Wouldn't it be possible to just force an Italian respawn if you select this option?

The problem is that the game can't distinguish between Italy and Rome in the civ selection screen, and even in the 3000 BC scenario the respawn mechanic isn't designed to account for any kind of autoplay (it works outside the usual spawn mechanic).

2) Very minor I know, but having the full list of Spawn/Respawn dates for the Civilizations in the Civilopedia would be very convenient.

Yeah, you're probably right.

3) I don't know if this is already implemented, but giving the European colonial powers varying levels of reduced distance-to-palace maintenance depending on the sizes of their historical empires would promote larger colonial empires. Namely England, then closely followed by Spain/France, then Portugal and ultimately Germany etc...

Yeah, it is, distance maintenance is one of the coefficients that vary for every civ (already in base RFC).

4) I also think that in order to accurately portray the age of discovery, the Civilization that discovers Astronomy first (or in Portugal's case, Optics) should have the African coastlines etc instantly unveiled, maybe a naval transport or two instantly built and possibly a golden age. The decision to make Portugal only require Optics was merely to increase the likelyhood of the real Portuguese age of Discovery happening, but I suppose having Carracks as your unique unit to boot awell could be pushing it abit, and making Optics a more crucial tech from Portugal's POV would be just as good.

The idea isn't bad, but do you really think the AI needs help in the Age of Discovery? They're doing quite well to my experience.

Also I'd like to apologize for all of my suggestions being associated with the European Civ's, as I know your current focus is on the Middle East

Nothing to apologize for

 

[Kraizer]

Welcome to the boards!
Sorry for the crashes again (to all of you) - I've decided to soon release a patch that disables the Roman UP and certain aspects of the respawn mechanic so you can at least play without constant crashes until the game is fixed.

Can't wait.

 

[srpt]

I'm not sure if this is useful information or not but I added your Roman UP to my mod and I haven't gotten any crashes. I haven't played very far past the Roman spawn because I'm going at the changes I want to make in a chronological order and I'm still working on early civics, bronze age vs iron age units and things like that but I've had absolutely no crashes. I just commented out the line about "is rome respawn" and I think that's all I changed.

 

[J. pride]

Leoreth: What kind of changes we expect once u start working on E. Asia.

 

[BenZL43]

How about making Rome and Italia as a different Civs, but Italia spawn conditionally if Rome is dead.. like in SoI, I think the game will then force Rome to crash whatever the way is if Player choose to play as Rome

 

[Hell Hawk]

I ran into a problem on both the 3000BC and 600AD scenario. As Japan on 3000BC and Dutch on 600AD, the game crashes going from year 1505 to 1507, further more, the save game from 1505 wont load, though a 1503 save will.

I zipped and uploaded a rar with a 1503 and 1505 Japan and Dutch (4 total), maybe you can figure out why?

Also I played a China game from 3000BC to early 1900's no problem, and autoplay ran to America just fine. All 1.72 http://www.megaupload.com/?d=UKJ908PW

 

[rogue131]

I don't know if this is built in yet or not, I haven't really paid attention but is there anyway to trigger the 100 years war, 30 years war, and at least the 7 years war in some shape or form? Just wondering.

 

[FakeShady]

LMAO. The Turk stirring up controversy on yet another thread again. Whats new?

EDIT: Hello new here. Leoreth: love your mod AND your quote lol

Is it just me, or did anyone else realize a magical -20 stability hit to the Byzantines in between turns 940AD to 950AD? Ohh, it must be just me...

 

[OldGuard]

@Hellhawk, I'm pretty sure the problem you're experiencing has to do with the Persian respawn since alot of people have the same problem. Hell, I can't play the mod since my games keep on crashing at around ~1510 AD the respawn date of Persia. Don't worry though since this is a well-known bug and hopefully, it will be fixed in the upcoming patch.

 

[jammerculture]

just a heads up

there is a post of leoreth's a few pages back where he details how to disable the respawns and eliminate the problem
It may be (probably should be) on the first page

 

[OldGuard]

Ah, thanks for the heads-up jammer. I found the post: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=10363027&postcount=2934. Unfortunately, no matter how much I try to change the values to -1, excel insists that there is a formula error and the changes cannot be made. God, I miss my '03 Office...