Dawn of Civilization v1.12 Discussion

[Leoreth]

This is the general discussion thread for the mod. You can discuss anything not better suited for one of the other threads here.

 

[baseballpie]

Cross-version saves aren't compatible, are they? Will I be able to play a game I started in 1.11 in 1.12?

 

[Leoreth]

Yes, that won't work.

 

[baseballpie]

OK, thanks.

 

[Novicenoble]

Wow, yes. Finally.

It's SVN 780, right?

 

[ezzlar]

When civs collapse and the cities become independent, they start over with two defensive units, no matter how many units that were stationed there. In RFCE the independents keep all the old units.

What was the reasoning for this? Independents become very easy targets with this mechanism.

 

[Mouthwash]

Are Egypt, Babylon and China supposed to get two settlers now?

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

What are the current rules about cities on tundra? I seem to remember that either RFC or DoC imposed limits, joking "no more big cities way, way up north" but I can't find any reference to this in the Complete List of Features.

 

[FinalLegendZero]

What are the current rules about cities on tundra? I seem to remember that either RFC or DoC imposed limits, joking "no more big cities way, way up north" but I can't find any reference to this in the Complete List of Features.

Tundra cities have to be coastal.

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

Tundra cities have to be coastal.

Thank you for instant info!

 

[Leoreth]

That's an RFC rule by the way, which is why it doesn't show up in the DoC changelogs.

 

[Mouthwash]

Are Egypt, Babylon and China supposed to get two settlers now?

Question unanswered. This is a pretty damaging bug; it results in an overpowerful Egypt and Babylon, either of whom can last until 1 AD, and makes an absolute game-raper of China.

 

[Leoreth]

I've just rolled a China start and had a settler and a warrior.

 

[Mouthwash]

I've just rolled a China start and had a settler and a warrior.

Maybe it's the fact that it's my own edited scenario? I made sure to remove the existing units before saving it in Worldbuilder, though.

Also, all civs appear to have one extra settler. This might actually result in something good, if not balanced.

 

[Tigranes]

The old thread has been archived somewhere?

 

[Leoreth]

The old thread has been archived somewhere?

It's still in this forum, just not sticky anymore.

 

[Mouthwash]

Complaints:

Buddhism didn't found automatically at 300 BC in my first 1.12 game. This could be a fluke, but has anyone else experienced this?

Units that you don't have the resource to build should be available under the mercenaries civic. They should just start with the mercenary promotion. Otherwise, you're removing a lot of the flexibility for civs that don't have iron or bronze (read: Phoenicia).

The dead civ culture mechanic is utterly broken. I have two plus unhappiness from the motherland penalty in Babylon, and it's aggravating to measure culture at all because of the bugs. When I hovered over the surrounding tiles, they were 100% Persian. Going into the city screen it claimed a proportion of 56% Persian culture, however, the colors on the bar showed about 80% Babylonian culture (which was probably accurate). A few turns later, and the numbers changed to 82% Persian culture, an inverse of the reality.

Look, there might be some potential for keeping dead cultures alive. But this is emphatically not how it should be done. It's not like it even affects respawns.

 

[Fresol]

Buddhisim is not auto founded. Why should it be?

Consider Aztec horse archers and war elephants before the Europeans arrive. Just like with the old mercenary system. Plus, Phoenicia has both.

Your culture accumulates and Babylonia's wanes, though the speed it changes is a bit drastic. And 2 unhappiness isn't much, is it?

 

[Mouthwash]

Buddhisim is not auto founded. Why should it be?

When a Hindu temple is not built, Buddhism is supposed to auto-found in 300 BC.

Looking in debugger mode, something really needs to be done about the AI, too. 150 BC and only two buildings in Varanasi? Does the AI not know how to whip?

Consider Aztec horse archers and war elephants before the Europeans arrive. Just like with the old mercenary system.

Mercenaries could be restricted by region. So you would be able to recruit mercenary swordsmen within, say, ten tiles of an iron resource.

(I've no idea what you've experienced in the old mercenary system, but that's actually how it worked. In DoC you only got local sorts of troops.)

Plus, Phoenicia has both.

Not on the historical areas.

Your culture accumulates and Babylonia's wanes, though the speed it changes is a bit drastic.

Slowly. Much too slowly for the early game, where having a single pagan temple can be considered adequate culture for a city. This is practically game-breaking.

And 2 unhappiness isn't much, is it?

Is this serious?

 

[Fresol]

I'm on cellphone so bad format, no quotes sorry.

I do not know about auto founding of Buddhism. But on Paragon, India founded Buddism even they only started with 1 city. And it's also possible for Islam, Protestantism not to have holy cities.

It was DoC and I even posted it in the OMG thread.

And about copper and iron, have you even looked at the map? Seriously. Check the historical tiles, the copper is even once in their core.

Finally, 2 unhappiness for Persia. Huh? Even on Paragon it can support 4 pop with 1 garrison(you have ivory and wine). What's the problem?