Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Nov 19, 2015.
Your will be done, then.
Seriously? You don't see how it's incredibly rude and entitled to respond to my statement that something isn't worth the time in my opinion that I should do even more work? In such a commanding tone?
In the end, it's always my will that will be done because it's my mod and I'm the one doing it. That doesn't mean that I never want to hear ideas or disagreements or different opinions. But it also means that I give my perspective on things so you can orient your feedback around that. I could also never say anything in this thread and everyone would be happy, but then that would also mean that people would waste their time discussing things that have no chance of happening, and I would have to read that, and it would drown out more constructive discussions. I think engaging is a good use of my time. Especially in the face of that, ignoring what I say and respond with "just do what I want" is incredibly rude and not something I want to see. But I have the ignore feature for that, so problem solved.
Leoreth works hard. Please play nice everyone
Speaking of scenarios, I need to get around to creating a 1900 AD scenario, but I don't have many modding skills yet. Do you type out all of the city locations on the file?
If I create a 1900 scenario is there a chance it might be included in the main mod?
And I still want to ask about the Greek Conquerors event, is it supposed to fire when they are a vassal?
It's not intended, I still plan to rewrite conqueror events to reliably take care of these edge cases.
Actually, I would have simply accepted that you really don't want to include it, if only you chose better words. I don't know if it's just me, but reading your previous replies to us on this matter, they seem a tad condescending to me, and I did not like the tone I perceived on that, especially with the fairly strong wording. Hence I replied as such. I do acknowledge that you've worked so hard over the years for everyone to have the DoC everyone enjoys now--and I give you full credit for that. I also know that as the mod creator you have the final say in everything. I simply wanted to know more reasons why you disagree with the idea from a gameplay perspective, aside from the "it's just five turns" argument because it does not sound convincing enough to me. But since I got replies that came across as rude to me, I simply returned what I received.
Nonetheless, to rephrase that earlier rude reply of mine into better words, I rest my case. I apologize, and I would like to reiterate @freethink's statement: you're working hard, keep it up.
I don't need my ego stroked about working hard and everything. Dressing this conversation up in all these asides is exactly what is bothering me.
Please be aware of the fundamental imbalance in expected effort when you expect me to respond to every single post in the same level of detail, because then I need to afford the same attention to everyone else here. Also please be aware that I have had many of these conversations in the past already and have seen many of the presented arguments already. I just can't always do the thing where I longwindedly write around the good points in an argument and politely acknowledge them, reiterate all my counterarguments to them, and then make a fully formed case for my point of view. It takes too much time that I either do not have in my day at all or that directly cuts into my modding time. You really shouldn't underestimate the amount of time that goes into multiple posts with that degree of granularity that addresses multiple people.
And I don't say this to be condescending, but: in these conversations you want to convince me, but I do not need to convince you. That is why I sometimes make these deliberately pointed posts to focus the discussion on the part that is actually the deciding factor for me. I think that is in everyone's interest because it saves all of us the time of talking about something else that I may even agree with and don't need convincing on.
I hope you take the fact that I take the time to type all of this out as an indication that it's not my intention to be dismissive or condescending.
Lastly though, I think you undercut your own point by jumping in only at the point where you come to the defense of MalayanGamer, who did none of the things we were just talking about. They did not present any arguments that are even worthy of being addressed and that I then cut post. They just entered the conversation, and did not ask, did not suggest, but straight up commanded me to do what they want. I really don't have the time for that kind of behaviour, categorically.
Something I've always wondered - does trading your map away help the computer? Like, will they make different / more advantageous decisions if you give them your map?
Overall question: How do you turn off specific "Victory Conditions"? I want to match that Korean kid with a Science Polynesia Victory, because apparently I have way, way too much free time.
(If anyone is hiring in real estate development / finance, I need a more difficult & time-consuming job.)
No idea how I'm only "Shaky" or how Italy got Aztec Conquerers, and apparently I missed some global waming in Poland. Also, still somehow Dan Quayle. (And yes, this is also a weird brag to internet strangers about the apparent emptiness in my life.)
Note: I didn't actually spend 77 hours. I keep my computer on at work, I'm not that sad.
I hope you are doing well. I'm always very grateful about the game you did, it's the best in all history, really! However I found a bug that crashes the game the next turn, attachment below, happens with all civs in the XX century with the fix 16.3 aswell. Thank you!!!
Hey, unfortunately this image only shows the beginning of the error message. Do you have more information? Maybe a save from before this error occurs? And just to make sure, does this crash you out of the game, or just show this error message?
Here are some screenshots of the new happiness/health display in the diplomacy window:
When in a World Congress, how is it recommended to vote Yes, No or Abstain?
I've tried these two: Voting yes for everything unless they claim one of my cities or picking sides in each Congress so every vote that regards another nation either helps or hurts it (That is, if I voted Yes when someone else claimed one of their cities, not supporting their claim when it's their turn and viceversa).
I had the idea of simulating commuting in DoC by allowing allocation of population to a spot in the BFC of a city occupied by a different city.
The population would appear as citizens in the different city, freeing population up to perform different jobs (or more jobs of the same kind)
I like this idea because it would allow you (to a limited extent) to use your cities in the periphery to support the cities in your core.
eg. a library allows for scientists and gives a bonus to your research. A commuter would allow the city with a library to work both the slot of the library (for sciencebulbs and Great Scientistpoints) and a plot (for commerce you can allocate to even more sciencebulbs) with half the population.
I figure it would make your periphery more valuable and incentivise urbanisation (a priority of commerce and production over food) in your core and ruralization (vice versa) in your periphery.
About the most recent update:
This makes sense, but does the city get a couple free defenders then? If the city ends up undefended, especially if it is far from the new owner's other cities, I worry it will be an easy target for conquest. I can see gamey strategies of voting in favour of city reassignment just to deplete the garrison.
Yes, of course. There always would be defenders spawned if there were no or not enough defenders present in the city already, which is why I didn't find it necessary to mention.
So uh, what's the latest version?
Sorry, couldn't remember if that was the case. Thanks for clarifying!
This looks dope. What does the "currently in +1 cities" mean? Does it mean that one more city can be added and still benefit from that resource?
Separate names with a comma.