Making Doviello (and maybe Clan of Embers) more fun to play

[Kael]

Sweet ... how about them getting pillage from chopping down
Ancient Forests outside their cultural boundries? That'll add a nice new hostility vector (Ljo -> kill -> Barbarian civs) ?

Yeah, unfortunatly its not that easy to do. I may need to check out what it would take to improve outside of cultural borders.

 

[QES]

Sweet ... how about them getting pillage from chopping down
Ancient Forests outside their cultural boundries? That'll add a nice new hostility vector (Ljo -> kill -> Barbarian civs) ?

I think chopping down an ancient forest, NO MATTER WHERE IT IS, should have a LARGE % chance of spawning a permanent barbarian tree ent.

One should not be able to chop down ancient forests (Regardless of where they are) without some serious consequences.
-Qes

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

I think chopping down an ancient forest, NO MATTER WHERE IT IS, should have a LARGE % chance of spawning a permanent barbarian tree ent.

One should not be able to chop down ancient forests (Regardless of where they are) without some serious consequences.
-Qes

Why?









No monster appears when a gem mine is pillaged, or moved into. The "free" treant spawns occur quite nicely already. To chop down a forest there is already a chance the Trant will spawn. That's enough. That's flavorful.

 

[Sureshot]

Yeah, unfortunatly its not that easy to do. I may need to check out what it would take to improve outside of cultural borders.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=184795
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4206878
the improvements outside borders requires SDK changes apparently, the first link is to the thread about integrating some other mods into ffh, and the second is the thread for building improvements outside borders.. which would be great if it could be put in, so many fun things could be done

and grat about barb civs being able to chop trees

 

[Silverkiss]

Well Ancient Forests are trees with own minds, living trees... I agree with QES on this one, there should be a change of a major enfuried ent apearing....

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Well Ancient Forests are trees with own minds, living trees... I agree with QES on this one, there should be a change of a major enfuried ent apearing....

There already is that chance ... any hostile unit moving into a AF has a chance for the ent to spawn. Again, that is flavorful, and that is sufficient.

It should be up the the civilization to protect its forests. Not some uber robot that appears to relieve the nation of the responsibiity to defend itself.

 

[Silverkiss]

Im my opinion It should be a big change, like more than 50%, when you chop a AF, and the treant should be stronger than the normal one and be BARBARIAN and PERMANENT, attacking the agressors and every one else on their fury, even the ones who tried to protect then...

 

[Gamestation]

Or failed to protect them if you think about it a little more. (you call yourselves guardians of nature and you won't even guard us trees?!?)

 

[Silverkiss]

I tough about that whe I wrote the post

 

[Chandrasekhar]

But if you do implement that, be sure to give axemen bonuses against Treants. Axes are made to chop down trees, remember.

 

[Nimbus]

I can see it now, "But Mr. Treant, you were standing on the only source of iron on this whole continent"

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

But if you do implement that, be sure to give axemen bonuses against Treants. Axes are made to chop down trees, remember.

Ah yes, the oft-forgotten Other Side Of The Coin. Well said. +200% against Treants sounds about right for Axemen.

 

[Silverkiss]

lol... not that much

+100% is ok...

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

lol... not that much

+100% is ok...

Well, I WAS going to say +300%, but I figured I'd just save us time and go straight to the compromise.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

And vulnerable to fire.

 

[dreiche2]

if the treant is barbarian (maybe even enraged?), this tactic could even harm the defending nation, so it's not only a bonus for them. (also, you don't have to pillage the forest in the first place...)

 

[QES]

Why?

Becauase your chopping down an ancient forest...
Treants are the guardians of forests.

How more clearly could i put this?

The Ancient forest is a quasi-sentient thing and will protect itself. Most of the time, its associated with FOL, becuase the civ who adopts FOL is a mortal manifestation of the same "will". However, for Ancient forests in lands that have either "Lost" their civ-guardians, and/or have changed religions and/or have had boarders move, should still retain some measure of self-preservation.

Self-preservation is all im talking about here. And a Barbarian Treeant who's appearnce depends on the destruction of its ward makes perfect sense.

No monster appears when a gem mine is pillaged, or moved into. The "free" treant spawns occur quite nicely already. To chop down a forest there is already a chance the Trant will spawn. That's enough. That's flavorful.

Gem mines arnt quasi-sentiant. And chopping down an ancient forest that is in your own lands, when youre not FOL, because of boarder movement - ISNT enough. Because there is no consequence. You wanna kill FOL forests? Culture-expand over them, chop em down, NOTHING will be pissed off by that. Thats rediculous.

Please. The forests are bestial and are at minimum aware of self-peservation. I'm not sure they take much in the way of "political ramifications of boarders" into account.

-Qes

 

[Nikis-Knight]

Gem mines arnt quasi-sentiant

My... My precious?

 

[Grey Fox]

But if you do implement that, be sure to give axemen bonuses against Treants. Axes are made to chop down trees, remember.

And Treants should have weakness to fire, if they dont already.

 

[QES]

My... My precious?

No, my smurf wrangling friend. No.

MY Precious.

-Qes

EDIT: Grey Fox I agree. Treeants shouldnt like fire.