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. Linkman226

    Linkman226 #anarchy

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,493
    Um anyone else with DoC's SVN experiencing this? It won't let you update without a username and password.
     
  2. robf32

    robf32 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Yea, I had that problem earlier, just kind of gave up on it.

    Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
     
  3. Linkman226

    Linkman226 #anarchy

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,493
    From Leoreth's Assembla page, I cans see he hasn't changed anything since April, so at least we're not missing out...
     
  4. Sikandar

    Sikandar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    397
    Wow he just updated it.
     
  5. Sikandar

    Sikandar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    397
    It's funny because I saw 1.72 and was reading the future release plans and then I left the page and came back about 30 seconds later when I realized I only had 1.71 and immediately saw that it had become 1.73 in that 30-second span.
     
  6. Leoreth

    Leoreth 古典部の会員 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    32,591
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamiyama
    Well, that's changed now :D

    Right, I'm back to DoC modding, and to give you something to make up for the long period of inactivity, I release the last update for 1.7, version 1.73, right along with it.

    That's the reason why the SVN has been unavailable for some days - I didn't want anyone to download any of the intermediate versions which didn't work properly.

    Special thanks go to Algor Mortis and robf32, who were able to detect errors I was unable to find for some time. Their fixes have been incorporated into 1.73. Its other features are mainly a UHV progress display similar to SoI's, as well as small bugfixes and balancing issues. All features:

    Spoiler :
    • Temple of Solomon now loses its effect with Liberalism, instead of acquiring it
    • fixed the transition to democracy instability (you now only need to have Representation before you can switch to Parliament without penalty)
    • Arabian expansion now also in the 3000 BC scenario
    • Made Washington more reluctant to peacefully vassalize
    • included Algor Mortis' fixes to the Roman UP and Italian spawn crashes
    • included robf32's fix to the Persian spawn crash
    • England's first UHV goal now requires them to build a total of 25 frigates and ships of the line
    • added an SoI style UHV goal progress display
    • fixed the Persian UHV so that it also accounts for the new wonders added in DoC
    • expanded the Roman UHV requirements to include the whole Roman Empire (4 cities in Greece or Anatolia, 2 cities in Egypt)
    • changed the Arabian UHV requirements to controlling or vassalizing Spain, the Maghreb, Mesopotamia and Persia
    • the Arabian UHV now requires at least one of the area's cities to be controlled by them or one of their vassals, and no cities controlled by anyone else (e.g. your vassal Persia could hold Mesopotamia for you as well)


    You have the usual three methods of downloading the update: via SVN (the password requirement has been removed), downloading the whole mod at the download center or downloading the 1.72 to 1.73 patch attached to this post. As always, this patch only works if you have 1.72 (overwrite everything) and doesn't include the current C++ sourcecode.

    I'll now commence with the work on 1.8, following the ideas laid out in the first post.
     
  7. Gruekiller

    Gruekiller Back From The Beyond

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,365
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Ohio
  8. hoplitejoe

    hoplitejoe Top fun-poster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,465
    Welcome back :D
     
  9. J. pride

    J. pride Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    Welcome Back, Leoreth,

    I just had a few questions/suggestions on the version 1.8

    1) What would be a Mongolian/Arabian conquerers event look like?
    2) Are u sure about Korea, my concern is that adding them would cause unhistorical expansion into Siberia and Manchuria.
    3) There is no mention of changing Chinese and Indian capitals; does that mean that it is not included in this version? ( Louyang or Xian for China, Pataliputra for India)
    4) Are u adding the following cities to the game:
    -Nanjing (replaces Qofu)
    -Turfan and Kashgar along the silk road; these cities would later flip to the mongols thus opening the way for western expansion. Also Ive noticed that the Mongols should not get settler, first because they waste them and second they were primarily a conquering civilization
     
  10. Leoreth

    Leoreth 古典部の会員 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    32,591
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamiyama
    1) I don't think the Arabians still need it, that's kinda obsolete. For the Mongols, currently I picture it as an AI only event that triggers when they make contact with appropriate civilizations (Russia, Byzantium, Arabia, Persia, India), gives them a sizeable army close to their borders and starts a war.
    2) I am. Undesired expansion can easily be kept at bay with settler maps, and they ought to add a little more complexity to the diplomacy in the far east.
    3) The list is far from comprehensive. Changed capitals have to be tested, though (I'm in favor of Varanasi for the Indians) - for example the Indian candidates would be stuck in a lot of jungle.
    4) Yeah, Nanjing really makes sense (though it looks a little odd to have holy cities there), especially with a certain new wonder I plan to add ;)
    I agree about the silk route cities as well; they should spawn or be already present in 600 AD.
     
  11. robf32

    robf32 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Other than the cvPlayer.cpp if statement were any other changes made to the DLL for the change from 1.72 to 1.73?

    Sent from my EVO 4G running CyanogenMod.
     
  12. J. pride

    J. pride Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    788
    Arabia and Persia are appropriate targets for the mongols but the rest I dont think are good ideas for the following reasons:

    Byzantine- were allies of the Mongols (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine–Mongol_alliance). The better thing to do would be to spawn seljuk barbarians in Anotolia in the 12th century ad that spread Islam on conquest. I recall that you also wanted to spawn seljuk barbs in the Middle East but i wouldnt recommend that because unlike the conquest of Anatolia the seljuk conquest of the Middle East was largely peaceful even to an extent that the Abbasid Caliph and the Seljuk Sultan could co-exist. Instead for the Middle East, the Mongol conquerors event would be more fitting.

    India- The Mongol Empire never conquered India; they stopped at the Indus River which was the boundry between Ancient Persia and India.

    Russia- It would be better if the Russians just vassalize to the Mongols because if the Russians collapse it would just be mess later on. On a similar note, I think you should push the Russian spawn back and they should have more cities flip to them instead of settling (their settlers are just terrible at picking a good spot)


    BTW: Leoreth, You should consider merging the feature from Civilizations in Abundance where Jarkov gave every Independent Civ unique Graphics, Stats, etc.
    That would not only look really cool but also can be tweaked in a way where u can have those indies to behave a certain way like if u want the Arabs to conquer the Sassanids or the French to conquer Rome

    Civ4ScreenShot0039.JPG

    Civ4ScreenShot0038.JPG

    Civ4ScreenShot0037.JPG
     
  13. hoplitejoe

    hoplitejoe Top fun-poster

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,465
    :agree: but if you do make them a separate folder in the civpeadia otherwise it gets quite messy.
     
  14. Orka

    Orka Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    106
    :D Welcome back Leoreth! Can't wait for the next version. How exactly do you plan to implement the Silk Road (I saw the Silk corporation thing, but is that the final choice?).

    Also I noticed Confucianism is on the list? I thought you removed it long ago b/c it was redundant.
     
  15. Leoreth

    Leoreth 古典部の会員 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    32,591
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamiyama
    No, did you find anything else?

    That's how it actually played out in history, but that's no reason to enforce it. I see no reason why the Mongols shouldn't ally with say Arabia to conquer Anatolia instead.
    And the Mongols tried to conquer India (not very hard though) and failed. Consider that ingame the war could end without a city conquered, only a few cities conquered or the target vassalizing.

    I haven't followed CiA for a while, what exactly did Jarkov do? Split the independents into lots of different players?
     
  16. BenZL43

    BenZL43 Physician - still can't spell this correctly.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2010
    Messages:
    3,198
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Indonesia
    LEORETH IS BACK~!!!

    WELCOME :D

    *downloading the patch now*
     
  17. robf32

    robf32 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Not that I recall, just wondering if I needed to go back and make my other changes. Thanks.

    Sent from my EVO 4G running CyanogenMod.
     
  18. Sikandar

    Sikandar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    397
    Any idea why Rhye excluded the Persians (Sassanids), Ethiopians (Axumites), and Maya from the 600 AD start? All three were still active and strong in 600. Also shouldn't the Indians respawn in 750 as the Palas?
     
  19. Gruekiller

    Gruekiller Back From The Beyond

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,365
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Ohio
    I don't see much use in having the Sassanids when they'll just be conquered in a few years by the Arabs any way (despite the fact that the Arabs often don't conquer the Persian indies any way).
     
  20. Leoreth

    Leoreth 古典部の会員 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    32,591
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamiyama
    I guess Rhye's reasoning was that they all have failed at least one of their UHV goals at that point. They also all collapse one way or another until 1000 AD, which isn't much in game turn terms.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page