No, Because the present day city is called ٹیکسلا which translates roughly to Taxila or Taksila. And it is the only name that survives till present day. The reason this name is the most reasonable is because none of the other languages survive today.
Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
No, No this is strictly limited to 3000 BC
600 ad was the date that the city will be renamed to Peshawar in the 3000 bc scinerio to represent the fall of Taxila and the rise of Peshawar after the White Hun Invasion.
What do you mean? Why cant they settle anywhere else in the entire subcontinent?
MontcalmXVI
Chieftain
Hi! I just want to thank you for updating Rhye's and Fall. I have some suggestions.
•Reborn civs should be playable. I would love to be able to play as Italy from the 600 AD start.
•Hawaii should be opened to building cities on the big island.
•The Sphynx should be spelled Sphinx. Sphynx is a type of cat. (I know you spelled it right on this website, but I remember seeing it misspelled in game) Also on that note, several units and buildings are missing descriptions.
•You added a cape in northern Chile, but what I always did was added a glacier at the bottom of South America, and one more to the bottom right of it. That way it gave it a Strait of Magellan, galleys couldn't go around South America, and caravels could still pass through.
•There should be a tile improvement that is sort of like a wonder. Like a strait in Central America or Suez, where it would allow ships to go by (like a city or fort would), but it would also give gold per turn.
•Vassals should be forced to give technology, gold, or other things if asked (but risk being declared war on). For instance, when I always play, I usually take over a weak but technologically advanced country, and world edit their technologies into mine (makes sense to me). I support the idea of vassals keeping their core tiles though.
•Now that the Byzantine neutral isn't being used, perhaps Australia could replace it. I would understand Canada staying British, since they are heavily connected with England, but Australia is completely independent of England now, and they are a large power in the area.
•Adding in more modern technologies would be amazing. Or extending the ending year. For instance, I think it's obvious now that the internet isn't just a world project now, it is a major technology. Same with cell phones. Also, wireless power has recently been invented in the last few years. Electric and bio-energy options for oil are being opened up.
•This is a rather big idea to throw out there, and I'm sure you've thought of this before. But being able to negotiate borders between countries, and being able to claim territory.
•Also, I think you should hurry up with the prosecutor units
Thanks
Montcalm XVI
•Reborn civs should be playable. I would love to be able to play as Italy from the 600 AD start.
•Hawaii should be opened to building cities on the big island.
•The Sphynx should be spelled Sphinx. Sphynx is a type of cat. (I know you spelled it right on this website, but I remember seeing it misspelled in game) Also on that note, several units and buildings are missing descriptions.
•You added a cape in northern Chile, but what I always did was added a glacier at the bottom of South America, and one more to the bottom right of it. That way it gave it a Strait of Magellan, galleys couldn't go around South America, and caravels could still pass through.
•There should be a tile improvement that is sort of like a wonder. Like a strait in Central America or Suez, where it would allow ships to go by (like a city or fort would), but it would also give gold per turn.
•Vassals should be forced to give technology, gold, or other things if asked (but risk being declared war on). For instance, when I always play, I usually take over a weak but technologically advanced country, and world edit their technologies into mine (makes sense to me). I support the idea of vassals keeping their core tiles though.
•Now that the Byzantine neutral isn't being used, perhaps Australia could replace it. I would understand Canada staying British, since they are heavily connected with England, but Australia is completely independent of England now, and they are a large power in the area.
•Adding in more modern technologies would be amazing. Or extending the ending year. For instance, I think it's obvious now that the internet isn't just a world project now, it is a major technology. Same with cell phones. Also, wireless power has recently been invented in the last few years. Electric and bio-energy options for oil are being opened up.
•This is a rather big idea to throw out there, and I'm sure you've thought of this before. But being able to negotiate borders between countries, and being able to claim territory.
•Also, I think you should hurry up with the prosecutor units
Thanks
Montcalm XVI
Sorry Canada > Australia.
Because unlike Australia, Canada has the continous problem of being invaded ahistorically by the Americans, creating some sort of super North American giant, which needs to be stopped. Having a minor power in Canada, would stop this weird spread, and would unite the entire Northern North America. Australia usually only has 2-3 cities in it, while at the same time Canada has 5-6 cities min.
I do support having an Australia, but Canada will have to come first.
Because unlike Australia, Canada has the continous problem of being invaded ahistorically by the Americans, creating some sort of super North American giant, which needs to be stopped. Having a minor power in Canada, would stop this weird spread, and would unite the entire Northern North America. Australia usually only has 2-3 cities in it, while at the same time Canada has 5-6 cities min.
I do support having an Australia, but Canada will have to come first.
I am for Canada being fully implemented, but if you do not support Canada as a full civ, what about Quebec? It would be a good ahistorical situation with Quebec breaking from Britain, and will not interfere with colonialization as much as an independent Canada.
christos200
Never tell me the odds
I want to see canada.
Caesar Augustus
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2001
- Messages
- 385
I'm probably in the minority, but I would prefer neither Canada nor Australia. The fact is that the UK remains a prominent world power to this day, but its territory wouldn't support one. Canada and Australia remain culturally similar to the UK and have strong political connections to it as well. As far as the US taking over Canada, I don't have an objection to it. I think the idea of the US and England (and France, I guess) conflicting over influence in Canada represents it relatively well. If the US taking over Canada means that it becomes to powerful, I'd rather a nerf to the Canadian land, which IMO is somewhat overpowered anyway.
That said, I'm all for Mexico and Brazil. I'd like to see scripted respawns for Indonesia and perhaps Inca (which could theoretically include the Colombia/Venezuela region). I'm on the fence about Argentina. On the one hand I do think Spain's downfall should be pretty much complete, leaving them just Spain, a bit of the Caribbean/Florida, the Philippines, and whatever they end up with in Africa, but on the other hand I'm not sure Argentina has enough decent space to thrive. I mean, Buenos Aires is a wonderful city location but that's pretty much the limit of decent land they'd have. Maybe one other city (Santiago?) but still, they'd be pretty insignificant.
And I would imagine this is pretty much a pipe dream, but a Bantu civ would be just wonderful.
That said, I'm all for Mexico and Brazil. I'd like to see scripted respawns for Indonesia and perhaps Inca (which could theoretically include the Colombia/Venezuela region). I'm on the fence about Argentina. On the one hand I do think Spain's downfall should be pretty much complete, leaving them just Spain, a bit of the Caribbean/Florida, the Philippines, and whatever they end up with in Africa, but on the other hand I'm not sure Argentina has enough decent space to thrive. I mean, Buenos Aires is a wonderful city location but that's pretty much the limit of decent land they'd have. Maybe one other city (Santiago?) but still, they'd be pretty insignificant.
And I would imagine this is pretty much a pipe dream, but a Bantu civ would be just wonderful.
MontcalmXVI
Chieftain
So, I was playing it as France, and playing it for the first time overall. I found one bug.
•When France gets the New World conqueror event, it gets standard cannons instead of its special cannons. Besides that, this map is getting pretty close to perfect
Also, I have one more suggestion...
•I'm tired of seeing Muslim Scotland, Norway, or Denmark o_O. Maybe script it so islam cannot spread to North Europe without conquest or missionaries?
•When France gets the New World conqueror event, it gets standard cannons instead of its special cannons. Besides that, this map is getting pretty close to perfect
Also, I have one more suggestion...
•I'm tired of seeing Muslim Scotland, Norway, or Denmark o_O. Maybe script it so islam cannot spread to North Europe without conquest or missionaries?
Ekolite
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 5,451
It might be worth getting rid of natural spread of religions all together and instead make it so that that your state religion automatically spreads with conquest, and peacefully can only spread with missionaries. A city with a religion in it to me represents a significant proportion of that population practises the religion, not just a small, negligible minority. With this logic it makes no sense to see Islam in much of Europe at all, even in the late game, and even less sense for other religions like the occasional Hindusim or Buddhism. I don't think a religion has ever spread peacefully to this extent just via trade or some natural process, except possibly along the silk road to an extent, and with the rise of Protestantism a little bit at first. Even in Europe Christianity was spread around purposely and sometimes with force.
Also this would work great if one of the civics also removed any non-state religions from conquered cities to represent forced/incentivised conversion practised by numerous civilisations throughout time.
The Arab UP would need changing of course, but I think it would be worth it.
Also this would work great if one of the civics also removed any non-state religions from conquered cities to represent forced/incentivised conversion practised by numerous civilisations throughout time.
The Arab UP would need changing of course, but I think it would be worth it.
Linkman226
#anarchy
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,493
Or modify the religion spread algorithm to take distance into account. This seems to me the most reasonable approach.
MontcalmXVI
Chieftain
I like it.
I agree 100%! Religions like Islam and Hinduism and the other Eastern religions should be discounted completely from Europe and the Americas. Also Eastern Religions should also be banned from Africa and the Middle East. Please no more Buddhist Athens or Hindu Babylon
I wouldn't say that Islam should be completely discounted when it comes to Europe. It had a significant presence in the Balkans and Iberia historically (and still, to some extent, does in the former).
Linkman226
#anarchy
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,493
Just checked: It DOES take into account distance, but as the crow flies- not as a human might get there. In other words it would draw a straight line from Arabia to Scandinavia, instead of taking the route someone in the Middle Ages would have: through the Mediterranean and Gibraltar and up the northern coast of Europe.
To fix that we have two options:
1. Make a map like the settler maps governing a religion's probability of spreading to that plot
OR
2. Make a pathfinding algorithm to figure out the human route.
To fix that we have two options:
1. Make a map like the settler maps governing a religion's probability of spreading to that plot
OR
2. Make a pathfinding algorithm to figure out the human route.
- Status
