1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Final Fixes Reborn

Discussion in 'Rise from Erebus Modmod' started by Ronkhar, Apr 17, 2013.

  1. cthom

    cthom 3,011,451,295

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,298
    Location:
    was clackmannan, now sauchie
    Assert Failed

    File: CvPlayerAI.cpp
    Line: 1661
    Expression: pLoopSelectionGroup && pLoopSelectionGroup->getNumUnits() > 0

    rev 323
     
  2. black_imperator

    black_imperator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,493
    oups forgot to commit the non-debug dll ^^ fixed now
     
  3. dripdrip

    dripdrip Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2016
    Messages:
    41
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Seoul
    It occurs whenever I change between AoE and an other mod. It resets not only graphics option. All game options are reset to default..thing(just guess. I do not know what the default looks like). It never occurs between other mods or vanilla BTS.
    Once option is set for AoE, it does not occur unless I transfer to other mod(I usually use AoE launcher). It's a little bit annoying but not a big issue :).
    And thank you for the new revision and fascinating modules! I wish i had enough time to play civ.
     
  4. Jerrian

    Jerrian Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2016
    Messages:
    46
    I like the new chislev module and it ´s working fine for me without crashes. I think every Civ game/mod needs an indian tribe civ to be complete. Nevertheless I think it ´s still one of the weaker civs in AOE, the hero is nothing special, few unique units with nothing benefit what makes them shine, I even have a big feeling when playing them, that some kind of Religion is missing in this mod, something like "the ancient way" or so that would fit them better as leaves whats more for elves, kilmorph for dwarfes and money, depths for sea civics....etc.

    Also some little tweaks would be nice what make the civ more indian like, free spirit promotions, more special units with the ability to hide or flee from battle, for example phoenix birds as nationale units that can be called by windcallers,
    commerce or science from graveyards for cities when in range....free city supplies when burning down a captured city. I made some thoughts about it :-D
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  5. black_imperator

    black_imperator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,493
    I agree that it's a step in the right direction, but definitely not the full version of the civ yet. There are more stuff i want to review and rework for them, and their arcane/divine line will get a boost when i get to the shamanic rework.
    Many thanks to Alsark who worked on the module. It allowed them to get a much needed improvement way earlier than planned.

    (if anyone else wants to do something similar, a partner module focused on one civ or one area of the game, they're very welcome and i'll provide all the support they may need).
     
    Jerrian likes this.
  6. Alsark

    Alsark Noble

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2006
    Messages:
    841
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    The version in the module is a slightly older version. The current version does change the religious buildings for the Chislev, but doesn't change the religions themselves. So they're still adopting Fellowship of the Leaves, etc.; but the idea is it's sort of a spiritualist/Totemist version of it. This change will be implemented soon.

    I'm going to create a topic about the module once I get the proper module uploaded.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2018
  7. Alsark

    Alsark Noble

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2006
    Messages:
    841
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Fort Wayne, Indiana
    The new version is uploaded that changes the temples. It'll limit the "temple" building to cities around a central city, creating a more tribal feel. I think this is more thematic anyway. The Chislev is a collection of separate tribes, so it would make sense that you would then have little tribes with their own religious beliefs, rather than one religion for the "nation". I considered making the nation itself Agnostic, but thought that would be too big of a nerf. But that may still be a consideration if I add a bunch of other stuff that would buff them.

    Regarding the free spirit promotion - in a very loose way, that's a thing. I've created spirit mana affinity for the Chislev. All Chislev Disciple Units, as well as the Spirit Healer, Shaman arcane line, Menawa, Windtalker, Warchief, and Meskwaki, all get the Chislev Spirit affinity. This affinity provides these units with +5% heal rate, +0.5 XP from combat, and +0.5 strength per spirit mana. Since you start with a promotion equal to how much of a mana you have -1, if you build up to 4 spirit mana, your spellcasters would be starting with Spirit III. I have added quite a few other free promotions, too.

    I like the idea of your units - I'll keep those in mind.

    I disagree with utilizing graveyards. The Chislev burn their dead, so it wouldn't make sense for them to have any particular attachment to graveyards. I've reflected their funeral pyres by giving Shamans and Spirit Healers a way to burn the bodies of units level 5 or higher when they die, granting a morale bonus to the stack.

    The free city supply when razing cities is a good idea.

    Thanks for the suggestions! We can continue our conversation in the new thread I made, if you'd like: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/chislev-module.634466/
     
  8. fdrpi

    fdrpi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    326
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    First time playing in a while (current SVN version) and it might be just me, but there seem to be fewer explorable lairs and such? Those are dangerous, but they had so much fun to them.
     
  9. black_imperator

    black_imperator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,493
    As far as i know, there's no change to the rate at which they appear.
     
  10. vogtmurr

    vogtmurr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,249
    Location:
    my crib
    Here is a proposed new naval development progression for developers and designers to build on. Please post any suggestions or comments by repy here or on the Discord AoE site - Design and Balance. I will be developing new pedia entries and looking for help as we are hoping to include this in upcoming releases.
     

    Attached Files:

    black_imperator likes this.
  11. Calavente

    Calavente Richard's voice

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,689
    Location:
    France
    @vogtmurr : I didn't go into the details, but overall why not, it seems good.
    only remarks;

    I would allow split evolution:

    galley --> caravel
    trirem --> carrack
    and galley/ trirem : privateer

    (I dislike having units without precedents)
    :D
     
  12. PPQ_Purple

    PPQ_Purple Techpriest Engineer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,280
    I'll second that. Precedents serve a very important role in that they allow you to get compound interest (in the form of promotions that carry over) on your unit building so that upgrading actually makes sense over just building a new unit.

    This said, I am not quite sure how the proposed ships will work out because I can't really picture them in the tech tree. So I would like to hear what roles you have intended for each one. Like, the Galley for example I know is an early game transport. The Trireme is an early game warship. But what is the functional niche difference between the Galleas and Carrack. Best I can tell the Carrack is just plain better.

    So like I'd really love to hear just a single line of text explaining what role each ship is supposed to fill.
     
  13. Nor'easter

    Nor'easter Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,423
    Great job incorporating a whole bunch of new modules, so thanks @Derf and @black_imperator .

    For the Scions, I'd like to suggest blocking them from being able to build the Salthouse. The only thing the Salthouse does is store food after a city has grown, but Scion cities don't change population because of food, so this is useless. I'm not suggesting replacing it with a UB, partly because I don't have any good ideas, but mostly because the Scions already have plenty of UBs, so I don't think a Salthouse UB replacement is necessary, just get rid of it for them.
     
  14. black_imperator

    black_imperator Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,493
    Good point, will be done for next commit.
     
  15. vogtmurr

    vogtmurr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,249
    Location:
    my crib
    No problem, some of your questions echo others - so permit me more than a single line to address these and explain my intent. There are 7 lines of naval development - not all are self-explanatory: Transport (galley, galleon, queen of the line); standard warship (trireme, galleass, frigate); trade mission (trader, merchantman); the mid tier ships introduce ocean going Exploration-Sea Patrol (Caravel, Sloop); hidden nationality (privateer, commerce raider); Capital warship (Carrack, man of war); and later there is Arcane (only one ship so far). The goal was to include the existing AoE ship classes in a more realistic development process, and presently there is no precedent for man of war for instance. I see no real issue with diluting some of the development lines by allowing split upgrade paths, but what I have proposed are the most intuitively direct progressions. All ships have at least one upgrade path so accummulated experience is maintained. I am ok with allowing Galley to Caravel and Trireme to Privateer - allowing more flexibility, though it may not make sense to. I'm a little reluctant about trireme to carrack without upsetting the balance, as it doesn't really fit this proposed scheme. Regarding the galleass: Consider that there is over 2000 years of progression in oar powered warships but they are only represented by the classical age trireme - quite limited in capability; and there is quite a difference between it and the Greek fire dromon or early cannon carrying Venetian galleass that came in the medieval and early renaissance eras. I submit that there needs to be a second tier of oar powered warships whose superior maneuvrability, lack of reliance on wind, and ability to carry large crews does not make them obsolete in coastal waters until the advent of mixed fighting sail and large broadsides. They were by far the most common type of warship for much of naval history. The first ocean going warships such as carracks were not superior to galleasses in all cases - they coexisted and were around for over 200 years before Lepanto. They serve a different purpose allowing deep ocean exploration, but I am not proposing they are on completely identical timelines either. I am suggesting we have to tweak the requirements or we tweak the tech table to achieve the relevance of each class, or some combination thereof to make them congruent to more authentic timelines. Combination oar and sail powered warships were used in the Baltic until the 18th century, and they enable some cool UU customizations!
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2018
  16. PPQ_Purple

    PPQ_Purple Techpriest Engineer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,280
    That's all fine and well but what gameplay roles do these serve?
    Like to give you a few examples from the modern unit tree you have:

    Galley - early transport
    Trireme - early warship
    Frigate - mid game warship
    Galleon - mid game transport
    Galleas - ??? No idea. I newer build those.
    Manowar - late game battleship
    QOTL - late game transport
    Caravel - recon ship
    Aracane Barge - support unit

    How do your ships fit into those? What are their role in the game? You design for mechanical reasons and than attach lore to that and not the other way around.
     
  17. azatote

    azatote Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2016
    Messages:
    72
    I think the idea of having two mid-game warships is interesting indeed, if they have different stats and roles. For example, the galleass could be a naval supremacy ship, being at least slightly superior to the other tier 3 ships, while the carrack would be a support ship with ranged power to bombard cities and land units. In your current proposal, they're too close to each other, the galleass having only weaknesses compared to the carrack. Maybe swap the current upgrade lines: galleass to man o war, carrack to frigate.
    Likewise, I'm not convinced of the current interest of the sloop against the frigate. It is cheaper and appears a bit earlier, but as a tier 4 unit it should have a noticeable advantage over the frigate: a high speed, the sentry promotion and/or a bonus against animals and beasts for example.
    About the privateer line, make sure they are not only slightly weaker, but also more expensive than the carrack and the galleass, you don't want this type of unit to be the backbone of a navy.
    Lastly, I advise you to reconsider the resource and tech requirements for the ships: I think there are a bit too many ships requiring resources (I would notably remove the requirement of iron for the galleon), and some technology requirements look weird (blasting powder and alchemy for the galleass are both very late game techs).
     
  18. vogtmurr

    vogtmurr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,249
    Location:
    my crib
    I welcome all the discussion, please keep in mind when proposing a radical reformat of naval development there are bound to be changes to balance and timeline, and I am aware that still needs some work.

    @PPQ_Purple : In my posted outline the intention and role of these warship classes should become self-evident: ie the galleass is a mid game common warship and the frigate is now a later game class - dependent on much the same requirements as man of war and queen of the line, and a new tech development - mixed sail./ To make room for the galleass we have to move the frigate in development, which is more realistic, and I do have game mechanics in mind, it just affords more opportunities for lore...To sum up the galleass and carrack are near contemporaries, one is ocean going and has some range attack and siege capability, the other excels at ship to ship combat in coastal waters before the age of fighting sail. Note that the Carrack does not depend on gunpowder.

    @azatote:
    I fully agree the tech line still and/or resource dependencies need to be worked out that would allow the galleass to appear earlier than a carrack or even caravel - I wanted to link it to alchemy as an enabler for 'Greek Fire', but is there any reason alchemy has to follow engineering? Instead of blasting powder maybe a siege workshop? It was my intent the galleass would form the backbone by having a predecessor whereas carracks are a new ocean going development, and I see them as more likely in progression for man of war being they were large lumbering ships fewer in number than contemporary war galleys.

    I had a similar conversation about the sloop and it should really be considered tier 3.5 rather than 4. I note that Realism Invictus includes sloops alongside frigates and manofwar, so I am proposing a place for it as an earlier lower cost warship with a specialized role. If we do not - then I see the present multiple mid-tier classes all converging to one - frigate. Which defeats the purpose of specialization and the relevance of 3 existing mid tier ships, and that is the challenge I want to address.
    Regarding the Privateers; they have no innate advantage over the galleass or carrack other than withdrawal, and in my experience the hidden nationality makes them more vulnerable - I've lost more to 'friendly fire' from allies then actual foes. EDIT: I see that the privateer is actually 1/3 cheaper than the carrack in the current game. I can see making them equal in cost because I raised the privateer to 8, but I would not make it more expensive than the stronger carrack.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2018
  19. PPQ_Purple

    PPQ_Purple Techpriest Engineer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,280
    I don't really see it working out that way. Put simply, ships already play a marginal role in this mod at best as the AI does not use them that much. And I don't see a point to having a dedicated defense and offense ship because this mod just does not feature a lot of naval combat.

    Furthermore gunpowder is a really late game tech to begin with. That's why none of the original ships require it. I feel it's understood that in this mod the tech symbolizes not the discovery of gunpowder but the point in its application when gunpowder weapons become advanced enough to transfer from being siege artillery and huge cannon that can be carried on ships but aren't practical on wheeled mounts into small arms and field artillery.


    Finally I would advise you to absolutely categorically avoid any unit not having an upgrade path unless it's a very end game thing like the QOTL or Manowar or a specialized unit like a caravel. Having a unit in the mid or early game that does not upgrade to its replacement makes that unit infinitely less desirable than the alternatives and drives players to skip over it rushing for the next tier instead.
     
  20. azatote

    azatote Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2016
    Messages:
    72
    If ships play a limited role in the mod, it's also because of the map types. If the standard map type was Archipelago instead of ErebusContinent or WorldofErebus, ships would already be much more useful. Another thing deterring players from building ships is sea serpents, but tweaking their acid spit will make them easier to manage already. Also, if some ships have better abilities (more useful trade ships, ships able to raid coastal tiles, etc.) it will be an incentive to build more ships, making the relative lack of upgrade paths less problematic.
    I agree with PPQ_Purple concerning the tech requirements, Alchemy, Mercantilism (consider Currency instead) and Blasting Powder (and the gunpowder resource) are too late-game for tier 3 ships. I find it interesting to de-link a few naval units (notably the Galleass) from the naval tech line, so that you have different naval units available around the same time, but from different tech branches. For the galleass, you could for example require Boat Building (I suppose this tech is aimed at replacing Sailing) and Smelting, plus optionally a Siege workshop.
     

Share This Page