Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
DisposableHero
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 81
Out of curosity, does Christianity switch holy city once the Apostolic Palace is built? I ask because one game it was founded in Jerusalem, but after Spain built the Palace the holy city shifted to Madrid.
Yeah, it does. I did this to mirror the historical situation that the center of Christianity switched from where it was founded to where the popes had their seat. The shrine is not moved with it if already built, by the way.
The feature was mentioned somewhere in the version history files, but I better should also add an additional notice to the civilopedia.
The feature was mentioned somewhere in the version history files, but I better should also add an additional notice to the civilopedia.
Roman AI still stupidly founds cities such as Geneva however
Maybe they could be made so that they are much more inclined to found Massalia. This will help out the French as well in case Italy gets Nice. Cuz otherwise France might be severely weakened by losing a coastal city as well as a good portion of its southeastern corner. Italy's tight packing of cities and its long shape might also mean Italy will usually have 1 more city in its core area than other civs such as France and Spain. Would that make them overpowered?
Regarding the autoraze, does that mean that whenever a city on that tile is conquered, then it is autorazed? Is it possible to link the autoraze to cities only belonging to one player (aka native leader, barbarian etc...)?
Regarding Babylon->Baghdad on the same tile as Babylon is now, even though 1N Babylon doesn't look quite right, the tile is still name for Baghdad in RFC and it wouldn't be that much far north when compared to Sur's in game location. Although the AI sometimes founds Ur or some other lower Mesopotamian city, I don't think a human player would do such a thing. The current location of Babylon also makes the AI sometimes (often stupidly) found a city in northern mesopotamia as well. That makes Babylon AI extremely stupid. I'd rather see them with 2 okay possibly worth keeping cites rather than 3 sucky cities (this is to also help out civs who conquer the Babylonians).
I'm not sure how civ production buffs work, but one way to help civs that traditionally had lots of cities in small areas (such as Italy, Greece or Babylon) may be to give one or some of them UPs or UBs that help out cities in tight spots by giving +x f/p/c/science etc per city in addition to +x% something which rewards larger cities with more tiles to work.
Another idea may be to include some sort of "city states" civic that has high maintenance cost, high cost to stability for cities outside of core area (kind of like opposite of resettlement, but gives like +3 science and +3 gold for each city in civ core area.
Regarding French/Austrian and Spanish wars over Italy, I would be okay with seeing Italy weak kind of like how India is now. Italy would only need to survive when under AI control like ~50% of its games. The other 50% it would be overtaken by one of the aforementioned civs until it respawns again during nationalism.
Well, if you look at its resources, Geneva isn't as stupid as one might thinkRoman AI still stupidly founds cities such as Geneva however
Italy's tight packing of cities and its long shape might also mean Italy will usually have 1 more city in its core area than other civs such as France and Spain. Would that make them overpowered?
It just isn't great for historicity, that's why I've already lowered its settler maps value.Just having more cities in its core hasn't that much benefit in itself, and Italy has rather few land tiles that can be worked (and especially cottaged), so they have to rely on water economy. If there still would be a counterbalance necessary, I'd rather balance it out with its commerce/production coefficients.
Yeah, that's exactly how it works. I could also link the autoraze to the owner, but not to the conqueror (the used function can only reference what the city "knows" about itself).
Production buffs are basically percentual coefficients, so I can do everything I want. I don't think however that Greece and Babylonia need any particular boost.
Sounds good! Maybe I have enough time and ideas to include a sixth row of civics
That's my goal too. I already try to achieve that by giving them only few units on spawn and no advanced military techs (they get a headstart in cultural and economic techs instead), but it's still a lot balance because I don't know much about how the AI behaves yet.
I know these folders, but which maps are you referring to? The stability maps are obsolete because it's already displayed ingame; the only thing I could think of is maps for all new UHVs.You tried RFC:Europe? If so, did you check their Reference folder with all those neat maps? Could we have them too for Dawn of Civilization?
jammerculture
Prince
Man, I am so stoked that this is all working out, and especially that you have included renaissance Italy which is imo one of the most important times in western civilization. I really think you should include some kind of boost to SE/GP's for Italy, it makes sense from a game perspective due to them having so much water, but also I think that being able to accomplish the research UHV using GP's that had appropriate names would be one of my favorite accomplishments in civ, period.
Also I think he meant other maps with city names like you showed for Italy. I've been looking for something like that for ever.
Also I think he meant other maps with city names like you showed for Italy. I've been looking for something like that for ever.
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
Theres an Enrico Dandolo.
Sandmonster1989
Knights Templar
Why don't you raid RFCE? Theres a few Italians appropriate enough....
Cosmos1985
King
No, this simply is not correct. The Kalmar Union lasted only 1397–1523, and even that is taking it far: the Swedes elected a different king than Denmark and Norway in 1448 and broke away from the union various times even in that period. Denmark and Norway was united in personal union until the end of the Napolenonic Wars, after which Norway passed to Swedish authority. Denmark and Norway is however only half of Scandinavia - and Norway wasn't passed back and forth continuously.
For gameplay reasons I agree that the Viking UU is best represented as axemen or swordsmen - absolutely. But 800AD is way off: the first known Viking strike was Lindisfarne in 793 - the Viking period may not have lasted that long, but hey, give us more than seven years
Scandinavian historians usually place the end of the viking period in the middle of the 11th century, some using 1066 as the offical cutoff; when a primarily Norwegian/Danish army was defeated in England, right before the Norman invasion. And christianity wasn't a "de facto religion" that early at all; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Scandinavia fx.I do however absolutely agree that it wouldn't work out well with 2 civs in Scandinavia - and I do not see any good argument for it at all, neither with basis in history nor gameplay. It wouldn't play out well, and we're going to split up Scandinavia, that is really opening a Pandoras box with regards to what constitues a civilization.
Using Sweden as "model" for later dynastic names, excellent idea, they were the dominant country from the 15th/16th century and onwards, and could work out fine - personally I don't care so much whether it's Vikings/Scandinavians/Swedes, that's mostly flavour, but.. it's fine - what is there more to ask for? Why split the civ up?
Aboout the Arabs and Baghdad/Mecca; if it's not possible to differentiate the spawns between 3000BC and 600AD starts, making the AI want to relocate the Palace to Baghdad upon conquest or founding seems an excellent idea. (Perhaps auto-relocate it and/or let them do it without a stab. hit?)
Maybe take out Optics, having to grab all four is maybe a bit too much too ask for? Excellent ideas though, flavourwise also
+1 to having the Ottomans spawn without Settlers also - although it would make a 3000BC start quite the gamble.. but hey, that's what you get for rolling 3000BC starts with late civs. If you beef up their starting units, it could work, I think - at least let's try it out!
And +1 to a whole bunch of other great ideas popping up all over this thread, too big a task to name them all. This is just looking better and better. Only bad thing is the late dutch spawn, they are however my favourite civ, and it's a shame they're so weak and not interesting in this
Are you btw. considering implementing/copying/stealing the "grab-citynames-from-other-civs-if-you-don't-have-a-name-for-the-tile-yourself"-function from that other modmod that was recently published, Leoreth? And maybe also the improved American UP?
to cosmos
Spoiler :
Regarding technologies to be first discovered.
Is there some way of notifying the player civ if they had failed at discovering a particular technology first at the time that happens? I'm not sure if there already exists a certain way to check that right now, but if it doesn't cause the game longer to load turns, maybe it'll be helpful?
Regarding UUs and UBs, if such graphics exist, would it be okay to incorporate them? In particular I feel that for certain civs such as China or India, one UU and/or UB doesn't seem to do them justice given their exceptionally long history. It doesn't appear the Chu-Ko-Nu serves any particular function to the in-game Chinese civ other than serving as some eye candy. Maybe for your massive combat update, you could consider having multiple unique units for civs?
Also Leoreth, what did you think about the idea of blocking successor civs together into one civ? Eg: Persian Achaemenids->Safavids(indirectly represent other medieval Iranian empires), Greeks(or Romans)->Byzantines, Vikings->Sweden, Portugal->Brazil, HRE->Austria.
All these would be done sort of like the way Phoenicians change from representing a kingdom along the Phoenician coast -> Carthage's western Mediterranean empire and how Italy changes from representing the north Italian city states of the renaissance -> the kingdom of Italy. The UHVs selected would represent great achievements made throughout history represented by that in game civ(kind of like how you're planning on doing Italy now). Even better, but would prolly require a lot more code and thought, is to offer 4 UHVs (ie: 2 viking, 2 swedish) so the player can choose which 3 of them to accomplish. This gives them more flexibility to play more as Vikings (2 viking UHVs, 1 Swedish UHV just to keep them on track for later on in the game), or play more as Swedish (2 Swedish UHVs, 1 viking UHV).
Regarding the Phoenicians. When I conquered their capital Sur as Persia, they immediately collapsed. Could the Phoenician AI have higher stability such that they will survive the capital switch from Tyre to Carthage if their old capital at Tyre is conquered? If the capital has not switched by the year 650BC, I think it should be scripted to move to from Sur to Carthage (maybe in a similar fashion as the Mecca to Baghdad move for the Arabs).
I think the year 600AD for the 3000BC start should be as similar to the 600AD start as possible in terms for city locations. This will help even out the post-600AD civ starts a slight bit between the 3000BC scenario or the 600AD scenario. I think the situations would match more if independent cities in 600AD and the settler/conquest maps of 3000BC civs matched up a bit more. A particular issue I've had (which you're currently working on now) is get get the Roman northern Italy city to match up with a 600AD northern Italy indy city. Other areas, such as Turkey, may need to be examined as well.
Well I'm not sure if this would work or not but could you possibly link the autoraze to Gordium if owned by an independent civ? Then in addition make the Sardis location very high on the Persian settler map (like 9 or 10). That way right after the Persians, or some other civ, destroys Gordium, Persians will just most likely found the city again in most games. This will help ensure Persians are the first civ to have a city in the area.
Could this same autoraze city concept be put to work to represent barbarian/neutral/independent cities such as a weak Inverness that resists English flip, and a weak Granada that resists Spanish flip? Similar autorazed cities could be scattered around China to prevent the Chinese civ from simply getting all the rich lands of China for without a fight.
Just played a game as Spain, and I would recommend adding an independent Cordoba, to the game, in Southern Spain. It would be heavily fortified, forcing the Spanish player to conquer it. It would also act as a distraction for the Spanish player to focus on bringing it down, rather than raising an army to destroy poorly defended Portugal (which I was able to destroy within 2 turns).
Also Cordoba should give Spain OR Portugal a science boost, therefore allowing them to get ahead of the science field, because all too frequently, I'm seeing a French New World, as they have really high tech rates, and their cities are already founded, with religion, so they get a boost in that sense. I would recommend that capturing Cordoba would possibly give a "navy" tech like compass or optics, as this would really help the Iberian nations.
Also can you please get rid of Khmer Landshkenets (I mean really? They should be restricted to Europe), and Incan/Aztec Horsemen, thats REALLY ahistorical, and therefore should definitely be changed.
Also what happened to a "Scottish" city, in my game their was only Newcastle, there wasn't any Inverness or Edinburgh??
Why do the Vikings start at war with the Spanish? They never fought each other?
Also please allow Muslim Missionaries for the Turks, they are almost ALWAYS Catholic, which is ridiculous, as it ruins the whole "European" expansion aspect. But rather then just giving them missionaries, I would program Islam, to kind of "sweep" through Anatolia, and covert some of their cities, even before they get their though (perhaps a few turns before?)
Also Cordoba should give Spain OR Portugal a science boost, therefore allowing them to get ahead of the science field, because all too frequently, I'm seeing a French New World, as they have really high tech rates, and their cities are already founded, with religion, so they get a boost in that sense. I would recommend that capturing Cordoba would possibly give a "navy" tech like compass or optics, as this would really help the Iberian nations.
Also can you please get rid of Khmer Landshkenets (I mean really? They should be restricted to Europe), and Incan/Aztec Horsemen, thats REALLY ahistorical, and therefore should definitely be changed.
Also what happened to a "Scottish" city, in my game their was only Newcastle, there wasn't any Inverness or Edinburgh??
Why do the Vikings start at war with the Spanish? They never fought each other?
Also please allow Muslim Missionaries for the Turks, they are almost ALWAYS Catholic, which is ridiculous, as it ruins the whole "European" expansion aspect. But rather then just giving them missionaries, I would program Islam, to kind of "sweep" through Anatolia, and covert some of their cities, even before they get their though (perhaps a few turns before?)
Their current UP gets them a GPP boost from wonders (a +8 culture wonder adds +8 gpp). But maybe it's better to switch that over to specialists?
By the way, I only did the dynamic GP names in a hurry without proper research, if you have some more names I'd be happy to add them. This is what I currently have:
Spoiler :
I don't know about that Enrico Dandolo ... he looks quite lacking in several aspects.Why don't you raid RFCE? Theres a few Italians appropriate enough....
I did consider to use Matthias Corvinus though, maybe as one of the Medici.
Yeah, I think auto-relocating as for the Turks works best. In this case they also don't get a stab hit.
I think it plays out. They have to race for Banking and Optics, get a lot breathing time, and then can race to Radio and Fascism.Maybe take out Optics, having to grab all four is maybe a bit too much too ask for? Excellent ideas though, flavourwise also
Maybe I shift the UHV more on the Renaissance, though, and change the second condition to something more cultural. Maybe "Build four universities, one academy and one great work by 1550 AD" ...
Exactly
Seconded. Many of the features here come directly from your input, and this modmod wouldn't be half as good without the feedback. Keep it up guysAnd +1 to a whole bunch of other great ideas popping up all over this thread, too big a task to name them all. This is just looking better and better. Only bad thing is the late dutch spawn, they are however my favourite civ, and it's a shame they're so weak and not interesting in this
I don't know what your problem with the Dutch is though. In my opinion, they have become a lot more interesting exactly because they're weak in Europe. You can't ahistorically build up a strong military like in RFC, but have to race for colonies asap ... I rather like it, and judging from AI performance, they're able to do rather well.
I haven't yet looked into it to see how it works, but I think the feature is a good one. So maybe next version
Load turns is exactly the reason why I think Rhye didn't do it like you suggested. See how it works on the example of Greece's UHV:
Currently, when Greece discovers, say, Literature, it's check whether someone else already knows that tech. If yes, their UHV fails, if no, it's checked if they have all necessary techs, which would make them achieve that condition.
Your proposed version would have to trigger whenever any civ discovers Literature, which is about 10 times the effort depending on the number of active civs.
I also find it annoying not to know if you're still in the game, though, so maybe I can test if the additional load is noticeable.
Depends. Do you have any concrete ideas?
4 UHV conditions wouldn't be much work, but I would only add them if it were for everyone, and that would need a lot more ideas.
I still think it's the better alternative to see Persia/India respawn with new Safavid/Mughal goals, because it wouldn't force me to get rid of some of Rhye's perfectly good conditions. I'm currently divided whether the same is true for Vikings/Sweden.
An automove makes sense for them, which is why I think additional stability won't be any issue anymore then.
The Italy change will come with the next release, Turkey probably later. I will try to allow the same city setup in both scenarios, which doesn't have to mean that the preplaced cities have to be the same.
Problem is that Phoenicia's territory will block them from Asia Minor.
It could, and maybe it's time to think about a Moor representative again
I agree that Spain needs something to do to occupy the player. He has too much time preparing to crush Portugal and France while waiting for the colonial era to begin currently.
I was under the impression that the conquerors spread quite realistically since Rhye's final patch (it doesn't have to be 100% Spain).
I've never seen Khmer Landsknechts, but they definitely shouldn't have them. I would have to learn how the mercenary system works first, though.
There isn't a preplaced Scottish city anymore, so the English end up founding Inverness, Edinburgh or Aberdeen, and sometimes even no city there.
Wikipedia has a footnote on it, so I don't think there were absolutely no raids. I guess it's to make everyone a possible target of Viking attacks.
They'll get some missionaries to not end up Catholic, that's seems easier to me than hardcoding an Islam spread.
Specialist seems better, although an UP turning culture points into GPP might also be good, like you sort of suggested.
And seriously, no need to spend your time on that latter thing IMO.
EDIT: That gives the human Viking (or even France/Spain/Germany/Netherlands) player an easy exploit by just sitting a settler in Scotland and founding the city after the flip.
@Leoreth
I at first liked the idea of having Italy come back in the 19th century, as a strong unified state; and then you said that they were going to spawn in the Renaissance, which I was so-so ok with, AND NOW your saying that you want to move the emphasis to the Renaissance!
Personally I feel that Italy was a collection of city-states! And if you want to represent that, then just add feuding independent cities, across Italy, and have Italy spawn in the 19th century en force.
I also agree that more emphasis should be put on Modern Italy, rather than Renaissance Italy which was just a collection of various city-states, whose only connection was a fierce hatred for each other and the language of Italian.
Although I guess I'm fine representing them as a weak "country", which can be bumped around by the large powers of Spain, France and Germany, I still recommend not having a "Renaissance" Italy respawn, but I guess if you REALLY want it its fine; just as long as they are a pushover as mentioned above.
Also I agree, you should remove the optics requirement, I would strengthen their importance for the "Modern Italy". Also why on earth do they need to control Greece? I think just controlling the Dalmatian Coast line would be fine (with 2-3 cities).
Also I would recommend having Spain and the HRE having very close relations together, to at least represent the Hapsburg dynasty under Charles V (who should technically be a Spanish King, as he lived there until his death in 1558).
Also are you going to move Bari to the most Southern tip of Italy as I suggested earlier?
Also I'm still getting a Buddhist Mexico, so if you don't know how to add Christian Missionaries to the "Explorer Event", then I can show you how, as I've done it before, and I have the exact coding.
I at first liked the idea of having Italy come back in the 19th century, as a strong unified state; and then you said that they were going to spawn in the Renaissance, which I was so-so ok with, AND NOW your saying that you want to move the emphasis to the Renaissance!
Personally I feel that Italy was a collection of city-states! And if you want to represent that, then just add feuding independent cities, across Italy, and have Italy spawn in the 19th century en force.
I also agree that more emphasis should be put on Modern Italy, rather than Renaissance Italy which was just a collection of various city-states, whose only connection was a fierce hatred for each other and the language of Italian.
Although I guess I'm fine representing them as a weak "country", which can be bumped around by the large powers of Spain, France and Germany, I still recommend not having a "Renaissance" Italy respawn, but I guess if you REALLY want it its fine; just as long as they are a pushover as mentioned above.
Also I agree, you should remove the optics requirement, I would strengthen their importance for the "Modern Italy". Also why on earth do they need to control Greece? I think just controlling the Dalmatian Coast line would be fine (with 2-3 cities).
Also I would recommend having Spain and the HRE having very close relations together, to at least represent the Hapsburg dynasty under Charles V (who should technically be a Spanish King, as he lived there until his death in 1558).
Also are you going to move Bari to the most Southern tip of Italy as I suggested earlier?
Also I'm still getting a Buddhist Mexico, so if you don't know how to add Christian Missionaries to the "Explorer Event", then I can show you how, as I've done it before, and I have the exact coding.
Oh, I never thought about that. Scotland makes my mind spin.
Preplaced Inverness doesn't do its importance justice, preplaces Edinburgh confuses the AI so that it doesn't found North English cities anymore, and now that objection.
I'll see what I can do.I was thinking like you before, but the more I pondered the question, the more I was convinced of a Renaissance spawn.
That's because even though Renaissance Italy wasn't a unified nation state, it was a civilization. The cultural and scientific advancements of that era are numerous, and it would be a shame to not do them justice with their own part of the UHV, not to mention all the GP I could exclude. It would be wasted fun and flavour to cut all that out.
Dalmatia is what in game, five tiles? Sometimes things have to be looked at more generously.
Only if you can come up with a name for Bari's current tile.
Foggia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foggia
Also I suggest having the Abur Farnbarg prebuilt in Shiraz in 600AD start, but have it be destroyed along with the Holy City when the Arabs capture it.
Also what do you think of my Christian Missionaries spawning idea?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foggia
Also I suggest having the Abur Farnbarg prebuilt in Shiraz in 600AD start, but have it be destroyed along with the Holy City when the Arabs capture it.
Also what do you think of my Christian Missionaries spawning idea?
Foggia looks good, Bari can be moved.
Adur Farnbag in Shiraz makes sense. I'll consider what happens to it when I start to work on the Arabia suggestions after the next release.
What exactly do you mean with your Christian missionaries idea?
Adur Farnbag in Shiraz makes sense. I'll consider what happens to it when I start to work on the Arabia suggestions after the next release.
What exactly do you mean with your Christian missionaries idea?
Basically when a European nation discovers either the Incas or the Aztecs first, they get a free army right? So I'm saying, that with that army, they get an additional 2-3 Christian Missionaries (or whatever their state religion is).
Also please change tile (25, 29) to Quito if the Spanish take the city, currently its Ibarra a city I've never heard of; I think Quito would be a much more optimal location.
Also have you ever thought about opening that small isthmus to colonization? I think you should code a fort to appear in Panama in 1914, so that you create the Panama Canal, that would be REALLY great; you could also do the same with the Suez Canal, completed a bit earlier. But have them as permanent forts.
Also I would recommend a Chinese revival in 1368, to simulate the rise of the Ming Dyansty, and the overthrow of the Mongols, that way we could actually see an independent China later on in the game.
Also please change tile (25, 29) to Quito if the Spanish take the city, currently its Ibarra a city I've never heard of; I think Quito would be a much more optimal location.
Also have you ever thought about opening that small isthmus to colonization? I think you should code a fort to appear in Panama in 1914, so that you create the Panama Canal, that would be REALLY great; you could also do the same with the Suez Canal, completed a bit earlier. But have them as permanent forts.
Also I would recommend a Chinese revival in 1368, to simulate the rise of the Ming Dyansty, and the overthrow of the Mongols, that way we could actually see an independent China later on in the game.
- Status
