Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

Status
Not open for further replies.
Okay, now here's a question I'd like to hear some people's opinions on:

Every civilization has a list of unique names for each kind of great person. I tried to spread these names over the civilization's lifetime as much as possible, but now I have to decide, should the name of a great person be chosen:

1) in chronological order
2) randomly

from that list?

(1) has the disadvantage that there's less surprise involved. You'll always see Thomas Aquinas as the first Italian prophet, for example. Also, the number of great persons for each era has to be carefully adjusted for each civilization, i.e. if France gets one medieval scientist on average, but there are three in their list, it means we'll see those three anachronistic scientists in the Renaissance or industrial era. And I don't think it's possible to avoid these kind of problems.
(2) has the disadvantage that Stephen Hawking can be born to the English in the 10th century etc.

Currently, it's (2), because that's how GP names are handled in BtS anyway.

Thoughts?

Edit: Oh, and to keep you a little up to date, I've now decided not to wait for all bugfixes until I release 1.72, but wrap them up into an otherwise featureless v1.73. I've just finished changing the rebirth mechanism to what I intended it, so that I'll only do the Safavid respawn (shouldn't take long because they don't differ from Achaemenid Persia that much) and then release.
 
There is advantages and disadvantages for both, however, it seems to me that in order to get a chronological naming system in place, it is going to take a lot of work on your part, work that may be more beneficial to more people if put into other areas.

Perhaps you could make a list of GP per era, and then have them chosen randomly? This could be a happy medium between the two situations.

:D on Persian Respawn. will they be selectable on 600AD start?
 
GP names per era has the problem that it's difficult to find names for all eras (you'd especially have to account for civs that survive longer ingame than their historical demise).

The Persians will work like the Italians, so it's waiting for the spawn again (it's really no problem here because you can select the Dutch and switch on the same turn). They're not really "made" to be played though, i.e. there are no new unique assets compared to Achaemenid Persia.
 
GP names per era has the problem that it's difficult to find names for all eras (you'd especially have to account for civs that survive longer ingame than their historical demise).

The Persians will work like the Italians, so it's waiting for the spawn again (it's really no problem here because you can select the Dutch and switch on the same turn). They're not really "made" to be played though, i.e. there are no new unique assets compared to Achaemenid Persia.

yet ;)
 
You're of course free to switch to them still :D

Here's a little teaser picture (city found size and buildings still need to be adjusted, as you can see in Isfahan):
Spoiler :
 
Can't wait!
 
Are the Persians eventually going to have their UHV, UU and everything? And do u want suggestion on that (UU, UB etc)?

And will u be expanding on the name change mechanic once ur done with great people? (to represent different Arab, Persian, Chinese, Indian dynasties)
 
Are the Persians eventually going to have their UHV, UU and everything? And do u want suggestion on that (UU, UB etc)?

And will u be expanding on the name change mechanic once ur done with great people? (to represent different Arab, Persian, Chinese, Indian dynasties)
It's definitely not priority. I've added the respawn mainly to add some balance for the Turks, i.e. something that poses an obstacle to eastwards expansion.

A more intricate naming system is something I plan to do, but I don't know when. It's v1.8 in the earliest.
 
Every civilization has a list of unique names for each kind of great person. I tried to spread these names over the civilization's lifetime as much as possible, but now I have to decide, should the name of a great person be chosen:

1) in chronological order
2) randomly

Personally I'd much rather have no. 1. Having Stephen Hawking appear in the medieval age feels so anachronistic as to be meaningless - it doesn't undermines immersion so defeats the point of having civ-specific great people names in the first place.
 
I would recommend moving Isfahan (which looks like its too far north), to be moved one tile about Shiraz, which is a bit of a joke of a city anyway. And instead of having Shiraz, have another city on the coast. That way Isfahan can actually grow, rather then being stuck in a desert.

But I'm happy you decided to add the Persians :)

Also I still don't understand why you won't add CHristianity to Jerusalem? And I'm pretty sure that I can assure you that if Jerusalem FLIPS with Christianity, that it will keep Christianity. At least thats how its worked in the past. And for heavens sake, please remove the Zoroastrian Holy City, just have Zorastrianism there, without a Holy City, because it does not need one, and the "real" Holy City would be Qazvin (or w/e its called), which anyway cannot be placed. So just having some Zorastrianism here and there, for the Arabs to remove, would be good.
 
The Arabs took nearly a thousand years to really get rid of zoroastrianism, I don't see how an unremovable holy city is a problem.
 
The Arabs took nearly a thousand years to really get rid of zoroastrianism, I don't see how an unremovable holy city is a problem.

EXACTLY! I'm not saying that you should remove Zoroastrianism completely! But what I am saying is that Zorastriansim should not have a Holy City, especially a Holy City in the wrong place completely! I just suggest having Zoroastrianism as a kind of minor religion, which you cannot convert to, if possible.
 
The Zoroastrian holy city is fine, and you should be able to convert to it if you want to. I wish you wouldn't constantly complain about everything, its really annoying. Especially when its over such minor details like this. If it bothers you that much, you can remove the holy city in worldbuilder can't you?

Also, Ishafan has wheat and sheep, I think it should be fine. There's no need to overdo it with the food situation.
 
The Zoroastrian holy city is fine, and you should be able to convert to it if you want to. I wish you wouldn't constantly complain about everything, its really annoying. Especially when its over such minor details like this. If it bothers you that much, you can remove the holy city in worldbuilder can't you?

Also, Ishafan has wheat and sheep, I think it should be fine. There's no need to overdo it with the food situation.

Excuse me? I'm sorry Ekolite, if you don't like what I have to say, just block me. What do you think threads like this are for?

And Isfahan is in the WRONG location, its like placing France near Nice. Period.

As for the Holy City, I've already explained myself, don't waste wall space please if your not going to read.
 
Threads like this are for people to suggest improvements to the mod, not to constantly whine, complain and make demands on Leoreth. It's just your attitude really.
 
Threads like this are for people to suggest improvements to the mod, not to constantly whine, complain and make demands on Leoreth. It's just your attitude really.

Umm... Thats what I'm doing I'm suggesting. If you see it as complaining, or demanding please block me, and stop wasting this threads space and my time reading your abusive comments, please PM me if you have a problem.
 
Personally I'd much rather have no. 1. Having Stephen Hawking appear in the medieval age feels so anachronistic as to be meaningless - it doesn't undermines immersion so defeats the point of having civ-specific great people names in the first place.
That's right, the problem is that (1) can create the opposite situation which is just as weird, having Toyotomi Hideyoshi being born in 20th century Japan for example.

I would recommend moving Isfahan (which looks like its too far north), to be moved one tile about Shiraz, which is a bit of a joke of a city anyway. And instead of having Shiraz, have another city on the coast. That way Isfahan can actually grow, rather then being stuck in a desert.
First off, Shiraz is one of the most important Persian cities ever, more important than Esfahan for centuries even. So I really don't know what's a joke about this city, neither which is deserving to replace it.

Then, the current Esfahan tile directly corresponds to the Arabian settler map. It's maybe slightly too far north (the iron tile could be an alternative), if at all it's Shiraz that's too far east, creating this misconception. However, the current composition is definitely the optimal one and I can't understand how you can call access to an oasis, wheat, sheep, iron, dye, horses and incense a bad city spot.

Also I still don't understand why you won't add CHristianity to Jerusalem? And I'm pretty sure that I can assure you that if Jerusalem FLIPS with Christianity, that it will keep Christianity. At least thats how its worked in the past.
The Arabian UP now removes foreign religions when they acquire a new city, partly because you demanded it. And I don't see why I should make an exception to this rule, especially when the post-Arabian number of Christians were rather low and they are still represented by the Holy Sepulchre. It'll spread rather fast to a Byzantine-controlled Jerusalem on its own as well, should they be able to reconquer it.

And for heavens sake, please remove the Zoroastrian Holy City, just have Zorastrianism there, without a Holy City, because it does not need one, and the "real" Holy City would be Qazvin (or w/e its called), which anyway cannot be placed. So just having some Zorastrianism here and there, for the Arabs to remove, would be good.
This isn't SoI. All religions are created equal, and religions do have a holy city. Aside this holy city, the Arabian UP will wipe out Zoroastrianism automatically anyway, so I don't see why you'd bother. It's not like the shrine yields a fortune afterwards.

Threads like this are for people to suggest improvements to the mod, not to constantly whine, complain and make demands on Leoreth. It's just your attitude really.
I have to second this. I don't mind you disagreeing with me, but as I've repeatedly told you, please refrain from unnecessary capitalizations and your "for heaven's sake" as if there are human lifes at stake. It's annoying, really.
 
Concerning Zoroastarianism; its really a minor suggestion regarding Central Asia and Persia.
Is it possible to add:
-Zoroastrianism and Buddhism in Qandahar.
-Zoroastrianism added to Merv and Samarkand.
It wont have any impact on gameplay but I think itll stop the spread of Hinduism to the region incase the Arabs dont conquer it. Only for Historical Accuracy
 
Perhaps a chronological list of GP names that has gaps can be filled with "stock" names or others, such as rhye as an Italian GP, people from the forum, characters from comics or tv shows etc. It's not ideal, but if done properly could add to the game, even if it's just some comedy lol. At least then we would have historical GP births and you can chalk up the others to alt-history GP's.

@the turk, first off, at this stage in the modding process (middle east balancing) your input will be extremely helpful as you seem to have a fair bit of knowledge about the area. however, your overall gaming philosophy is different from the majority of the active posters in this forum, as well as the modder. Your going to have to get over some of your objections to ahistorical aspects of the game that are needed for balancing or gameplay reasons, as the consensus has always been that gameplay trumps historical accuracy. Otherwise, what your going to find happen is that people will just tune you out, and your good ideas will get lost in the mix, which would be a shame, as I have seen your participation in this process over time to be a mostly positive thing.


Zoroastrianism, in game and in history is important imo. in history, it laid some of the groundwork for the abrahamic religions, ideas that are still part of modern day religions and spiritual beliefs came from this religion. In game, it gives the Persians their own religion in the ancient era which is important again for historicity and game play, as the Persian empire was much more important then is portrayed in this game, so removing any aspect of it would not be a good idea.

A possible solution would be to change the religion later into Shia Islam, as they share the same area of influence in Iran. however, Leoreth has said that although it would be possible to change the name, the artwork etc can not be changed. If you object so strongly to Zoroastrianism existing later in game, then perhas this is a way to solve that problem. A positive path for you to follow would be to put your boundless energy and enthusiasm into figuring out a way to make this happen, instead of just complaining and expecting others to do the work for you, which is sometimes how you come off, even if this is not your intention.

Can't we all just get along?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom