European Middle Ages Mod Resurrection

[Ajidica]

havnt checked all posts, but if you need names for UUs for civs around the british isles i can help. i could also write civilopedia texts for normans, anglo-saxons, norse, welsh, hibernia (ireland), and caledonia(scotland)

 

[Ajidica]

downloaded mod. in civilopedia would it be possible to use the trebuchet unit for the trebuchet here, same with jannisary. thing i noticed is that many units look alike. might want to search for skins to make the units look diferent. also, civilopedea works but when i go to click on a civ to play as it shuts down saying i have an error report. not using a mac and downloaded it to civ 4. also cant find the map that goes with it.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

I don't want Barb Highlanders to replace swordsman, though... I want both to be built, but for Highlanders to built instead of swordsman in the cities that have the special building. As I said, they are not really UUs... in the sense of replacing a unit. As well, there are other UU swordsman that will also have barbarian equivalents, and so the Highlander will not be the only such unit.

And yes, the Settlement_Scottish is assigned as a prerequisite building for the Highlander.

As to giving some advantages to Barbarians in the mod, I'm somewhat opposed to that. For some of the Civs (Egyptians, Moors), life is difficult enough without enhanced Barbarians. That's why I'm worried about some of the Barb UUs spawning... some of them are quire powerful.

I may have to rethink things a bit... perhaps see if I can work something out using unit upgrades. I think the spawning will still be a problem... if people see it as a problem.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

I have been able to solve most of the problems I've had with creating Barbarian units.

Now, if a Barbarian Settlement of a certain civ, in the test case, Scottish, is in a city, that city will generate Highlanders rather than Swordsman.

I did this by using upgrade paths... I made Swordsman upgrade to Highlander which upgrades to footknight. Cities lacking the Scottish Barbarian Settlement building built Swordsma, while those with the building built Highlanders.

The only problem I have, now, is that Highlanders are randomly spawned Barbarian units. I don't know the solution to this, or even if it is a problem. I need the opinions of others...

Is the spawning of the Barbarian UUs desirable or undesirable? Or does it not matter either way.

Also, does anyone know of a way, using XML, to stop certain units from spawning. Animals stop spawning after awhile... how does that work? Are the units that spawn or not determined solely via the Civinfos xml file?

Anyhow, I await a few opinions and a bit of advice before I go further on this project. If I sense a consensus to go ahead, I'll create the entries needed and ask for advice about where to situate them in the relevant xml files (I don't want to gum up the organizing of the entries for buildings and units that Head Serf and lshockley have done).

Thank-you

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Here's a medieval wonder someone made... never heard of it myself, but I'm no expert. Did google it though.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=210558

 

[Broken Hawk]

I looked it up in Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteora

Notice the difference in spelling. I like it. Maybe it could be a National Wonder for the Byzantines.

 

[Head Serf]

Responses to some of your comments and stuff, lshockley:

5. Leper's Quarantine should be removed, the +1 health is not worth the -3 gold, and there are already plenty of +1 health buildings.

I added the -3 gold, as historically, Leper's Quarantines were supported by public donation. Maybe it is a bit much though. How do you feel about -1 gold? I think we should keep it until we have tested the games at a higher level. With the increased unhealthiness in handicapinfos, I want to be sure we have enough buildings to counter unhealthiness. What do you think?

I think that -1 gold would be, as you said, a reasonable compromise, and further playtesting will show whether or not it should be removed completely.

12. Inn shouldn't affect trade routes. I think the current +10% to commerce is powerful enough, since it increases both money and science.

Actually, Inn is +10% gold (not commerce.) I think if we remove the +25% trade route yield, +10% gold isn't enough of a benefit. I was thinking an Inn would increase trade route yield because merchants are able to travel through the area more easily and therefore more often. Currently, other buildings that affect trade route yield are Fair +10%, Hansa Memberships +25%, and Port +50%.

I like the Inn as is. In light of this new info, what do you think? We could compromise and have the Inn add +X% commerce? Perhaps +15%?

I see what you're saying, and I think we should leave the Inn as is for now.

13. The Astrologer's Tower should be removed. There are already enough science increasing buildings, and I'm finding that having the Astrologer's Tower, Apothecary, Scriptorium, and Library all increasing science to be too overpowering.

I was trying to get the total science closer to vanilla - where there's a max of +100% from basic buildings (ignoring wonders and monasteries) - +25% each for Library, University, Observatory, and Labratory.

We have a total of +90% including the Astrologer's Tower - Apothecary +10%, Astrologer's Tower +10%, Library +25%, Print Shop +10%, Scriptorium +10%, University +25%. (Again, ignoring monasteries and wonders.)

I don't think that's too much - what do you think given the comparison to vanilla's +100%? If you still don't like it, I'll remove it.

I think that having the buildings divided up into many, low science yield buildings is not as good as less, more science yield buildings, and I still think it should be removed. Do Craig_Sutter or Drtad have any opinions regarding the Astrologer's Tower?

14. I think that +1 or +2 unhealthiness should be added to each difficulty along with +1 unhappiness.

Great - that's what we have in there now. Did you play with the new HandicapInfos? (Or are you proposing add'l unhealthiness/unhappiness in addition to the changes I made?)

I meant in addition to the new changes.

15. Reliquaries shouldn't require Holy Cities. This way they can be used by more than 3 civilizations.

I disagree with you on this one. In order to provide religion-specific bonuses, I created 4 "reliquaries" - one for each religion (excluding Paganism.) If we allowed Reliquaries to built in any city, and even limited each reliquary to one per civ, then each civ could have potentially gain 1 torah scroll, 1 black stone, and 2 christian relics (assuming they produce enough great saints, and have each of those religions present in their lands.) I think making the bonus available to every civ defeats the purpose of having religion specific bonuses. (And it would make the Shrine of the 3 Kings and Relic of the True Cross pointless - why build these wonders when you can gain the relic for free with a great saint.)

I think limiting the Reliquary to the Holy City better controls the presence of these special religious bonuses and makes control of the Holy City that much more valuable.

What do you think?

I see what you're saying. Let's leave reliquaries as is.

16. Minstrel's Stage should be removed, it's not needed.

Actually, in both my test games, I've played as Germany, and I've found that I needed the Minstrel's Stage to help control unhappiness, as Jewish civs are at an unhappiness disadvantage compared to civs with the big 3 religions. Of course, this is an incentive to switch to the big 3 (a nod to Craig Sutter), but I think we should keep it to help Pagan or Jewish civs deal with unhappiness until they have the opportunity to convert. What do you think?

I think that more playtesting will show whether or not it's needed, but for now, let's leave it in.

18. The Master's Workshop or whatever it's called should be removed, the production bonuses between that, the mint, and the forge add up to a lot.

The Master's Workshop is +25% - that is a lot to remove! The other buildings that add production are as follows: Belfry +10%, Guildhall +10%, Master's Workshop (formerly Workshop) +25%, Mint +15%, and Smithy (formerly Forge) +25%, for a total of +85%.

Vanilla allows +75%: +25% with Forge, +25% with Factory, and +25% with Power.

Here are some suggestions that would get us to +75% hammers overall:
1) We could remove the Belfry's +10% (Belfry's only benefit would be +1 infl, in which case I think the cost should stay at 30).
2) We could reduce Mint to +10%, and reduce the Workshop to +20%.
3) We could remove Workshop, and increase Guildhall to +25%.

What do you think? Or, do you think we should aim for a target production other than +75%?

I think that the Master's Workshop should still be removed. I also think that having less than 75% bonuses is alright, considering that the change in building and unit costs are not as steep as in vanilla as you move through the tech tree.

 

[Head Serf]

Firstly, @ Craig_Sutter. I like your recomendations except I don't think Wise should have 2x speed courts. I think Wise is already strong enough.

Well, along with finalizing the traits, I need to decide what leaders get what. Back when I was making a lot of these leaders, I just gave them random traits since I wasn't sure if the traits were going to be permanent or not. Anyway, here are the leaders and what traits I think they should have (remember, I want the traits to be fairly evenly distributed). No combination is used twice.

Otto
Seafarer Industrious
Canute
Conqueror Seafarer
William the Conqueror
Conqueror Architect
Brian Boru
Seafarer Wise
Alfred
Seafarer Learned
Elisedd
Influential Seafarer
Robert the Bruce
Learned Financial
Phillip Augustus
Influential Financial
Charlemagne
Learned Industrious
Widukind
Conqueror Influential
Piero Orseolo
Seafarer Financial
Baldwin
Pious Financial
Flavius Aetius
Influential Learned
Alfonso VI
Conqueror Pious
Henrique
Seafarer Architect
Pope Gregory
Learned Pious
Mieszko
Influential Architect
Vytautas
Influential Wise
St Stephen
Influential Pious
Basil
Learned Architect
Theodora
Seafarer Pious
Ashot
Architect Financial
Vladimir I
Influential Industrious
Samo
Wise Learned
Alp Arslan
Conqueror Learned
Ziebel
Financial Industrious
Kavadh
Wise Industrious
Umar
Architect Pious
Krum
Conqueror Wise
Saladin
Pious Industrious
Abdermann
Architect Industrious
Batu Khan
Wise Financial
Genghis Khan
Conqueror Industrious
Theodoric
Conqueror Financial

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Given your goals and constraints, I guess these are ok... although Otto with Seafarer Industrious, I'm having a bit of trouble with... Seafarer doesn't seem a good fit for him. Others are similarly, not quite what I envision. The Seafaring trait is too widely distributed for my taste, and doesn't quite go with some of the leaders it is set with.

That being said, I understand the difficulty one might have in distributing the traits equitabley.

They're fine, so long as we redistribute them again upon adding second leader heads. Then, the Seafar trait can be moved towards Civs which better fit it and the leaders it is assigned to.

 

[Head Serf]

Well, another good option could be adding in another leader trait. If anyone has any ideas, that'd be great.

 

[lshockley]

Hello All !

Revised building XML attached in response to Head Serf's suggestions. Master's Workshop has been removed. Leper's Quarantine (now with -1 gold) and Astrologer's Tower remain pending further evaluation.

@Head Serf re: Astrologer's Tower:
I understand your point concerning multiple science buildings. If we decide to remove Astrologer's Tower, perhaps we can increase Scriptorium from +10% to +25%? We'd have to think about the effect of this change on Zvartnots, but I think the Scriptorium is the most eligible of the remaining science buildings for an increase. Just a thought!

Whoever plays next, if you would be so kind as to verify that the Chancery bug is fixed and report back. Chancery is intended to be built only once (Nat'l Wonder), and it should *not* be movable from city to city (like Palace).

-Laina

 

[lshockley]

@Craig & Broken Hawk re: Meteora:

Good find on the art! Rather than using it as a new Wonder, what do you guys think about using that art for Mt. Athos? (It sounds like they are somewhat similar anyway.)

-Laina

 

[lshockley]

@Craig: re hybrid barb UUs:

I have never done anything with the World Builder, and therefore probably wouldn't use a building that had to be added via WB, and further, I have yet to play a scenario. However, I think it is a very clever idea, and would add a nice twist to the mod package, especially as I know you guys are wanting to further develop the scenarios.

My opinion is that I think it is worth figuring out and including.

I'm glad to hear that you have most of your code problems worked out.

I think you can control what terrains a unit can spawn on by setting <TerrainNatives> and <FeatureNatives> in UnitInfos.xml. Maybe a good way to control spawning barb UUs in nonsensical areas would be to set Camel Archers to desert, Highlanders to hills, etc, etc. (I'm not 100% sure that this is how the tag works, but it's worth a shot!)

I do know for sure that you can set booleans for whether or not barb units and animals spawn in EraInfos.xml:

Spoiler :

<Type>ERA_ANCIENT</Type>
<Description>TXT_KEY_ERA_ANCIENT</Description>
<Strategy>TXT_KEY_ERA_ANCIENT_STRATEGY</Strategy>
<bNoGoodies>0</bNoGoodies>
[B]<bNoAnimals>0</bNoAnimals>
<bNoBarbUnits>0</bNoBarbUnits>[/B]
<bNoBarbCities>0</bNoBarbCities>

In vanilla, animals disappear once you enter the Classical era, and Barbs disappear when you hit the Renaissance.

Hope this helps! -Laina

 

[lshockley]

Hello All!

Here are some late-game tech suggestions from Wikipedia's article entitled "History of science in the Middle Ages":

Medieval Alchemy: Alchemy underwent major advances during the Middle Ages. Roger Bacon (1214–1294) was a significant medieval alchemist.

Logical Method: Medieval thinkers are credited with making Aristotle's logical deduction process compatible with faith, and thus laying the foundation for the scientific method. Pioneers included Robert Grosseteste (1170-1253), Albertus Magnus (1193–1280), Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), and William of Ockham (d. 1349). (Requires Medieval Alchemy)

Advanced Cartography: During the Age of Exploration, map making underwent a renaissance of sorts - old maps were re-copied and updated using more accurate readings from astrolabes and compasses. (Requires Compass)

Kinematics: (Study of motion) - Kinematics was first distinguished as separate from dynamics (causes of motion) by Thomas Bradwardine in the 14th c. (Requires Logical Method)

Natural Philosophy: The search for "natural" causes of astronomy, botany, and animal behavior, rather than "supernatural" causes. (Requires Logical Method)

Aside: I wish I had found this article when I was working on the Great Scholars!

Also - I started working on the tech buttons, and noticed that there are two Renaissance Arts - one on the final level (tech tree level 10), and another on tech tree level 7. I think Renaissance Art should stay on level 10 - we can come up with a new name for the level 7 tech.

-Laina

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Thank-you lshockley, for your suggestions... the Terrain Natives/Feature Natives might work... I can limit spawning of some by selecting a terrain that is unlikely to be on-map, like Ice... and limit Camel-riders, as you said. I'll look into it for certain.

 

[Head Serf]

lshockley, your new buildinginfos.xml didn't include the new trait production bonuses, which is isn't a problem since I wanted to adjust them anyway. Anyway, here are the new traits and leaders with the traits, and the buildings with the proper production bonuses. I gave the belfry the double production bonus with industrious, and decided to withhold giving financial the double production for mint, since financial is already a very strong trait. I also didn't give Wise the Town Square double production, since Wise is already a very strong trait. Of course, none of this is set in stone, and further testing will show if maybe those changes should be made.

EDIT : I updated the to-do list on the first page if anyone's curious.

EDIT2 : I looked into using flavors or another AI function to get certain computers to build certain victory projects. Unfortunately, projects can't use flavors and such. The only solutions as I see it are to leave it as is, with every civilization going for every victory, or to limit the civilizations through technologies to one or two victories each, depending on what seems most reasonable historically.

 

[Broken Hawk]

@lschockley

From looking at Mount Athos in Wikipedia, it's history and appearance mirror Meteora. I say go with your suggestion.

Also, here is a Hanse ship:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=5150066#post5150066

It's not anything I'm familiar with but I'm no expert on naval units.

 

[lshockley]

@Head Serf - Oh! Sorry... the double speeds didn't even come to mind when I was making those building changes. I'm glad you checked!

@Broken Hawk re Mt Athos: Great, I'm glad you agree! If everybody else concurs, I'll incorporate the meteora art for our existing Mt Athos wonder.

 

[Head Serf]

I agree with adding the new art.

 

[Drtad]

Since I am home sick today, I'll test those new XML files and see the AI faction progression. I thought of a way to keep the barbs from overrunning North Africa. Why not adding the Zirid Berbers of Tunisia? At their greatest extent, they owned all of Tunisia, portions of Algeria, and the lower half of Sicily. They could be viable.

About the Armenian translation, I may have it by this weekend. Most of my free time lately (which is not much) has been spent play testing some Total War mods.