Medieval European Mod II 2016-10-05

[embryodead]

@Everyone regarding France
As I said earlier, increasing France's starting food output, whether by Wheat/Cattle or Agricultural trait is a no-no because in such case, they settle in Germany, before Germans (who in turn usually settle in Britanny)... Save for turning Western Germany into a barren wasteland to disinterest the AI, there's not much I can do about that.

I did what Virote_Considon suggested though - moved the Wheat from lower Burgundy to Normandy (but not in Paris' radius). Burgundy is usually rich so they don't need food and initial settler spawn rate of Dijon is now lower than that of Paris. I also added some bonus grasslands in the middle of France.

That should help in the long run making France more powerful than Burgundy, though there's still a problem of France getting stuck at the beginning it seems. It's likely due to settler clash with Germans, but I'm currently playing on DEBUG mode (takes ages) to see what the French AI does exactly.

@Varwnos
Thanks for the write-up. So the Danes killed Poland But look at the map, France is not weak

Well, you probably know Greek better though let me explain my way of reasoning: as far as I understand from several articles 'pronoiar' is the singular form of 'pronoiai'? Since all units in civ3 generally go by singular name, 'warrior' instead of 'warriors' etc., I used that form.

 

[Kyriakos]

Proniai is indeed the plural
However the singular should be 'pronoia'. Pronoia just means 'providence', although i am not sure why the name was chosen. Perhaps they were lighter armoured knights, who were auxiliary in a way, not as heavy as the cataphractoi.
Greek words do not ussually end in -r, although some do, especially archaic ones. For example 'nyktwr' *, which means iirc "at night", and of course mentor. However feminine words, such as pronoia, never end in r.

News of the armenian campaign: i took two cities by conquest, and signed peace for three more. Now i own a part of messopotamia, and the entire anatolia and cappadocia I also took one city in southern Italy, for which of course i have my byzantine design Only relatively negative point was the destruction of my cataphract army.

Atm i am a constitutional monarchy. Previously i was a city-state. What would be the better government for me? (i now have 20 something cities)

As for France, they are getting stronger, although i am more afraid of the monstrous steppe kingdoms..

Btw, can you include a river in southern Greece? I do not recall if there is any other part in the map (at least in the balkans) which is unable to sustain cities over size 6, and the four cities i have in southern/central Greece are simply too useless as things are, whereas with a river or two they would be providing me with much needed income/troops
At least have a river in Mistras, and Larisa (central Greece) could realistically have grown in size, since it is in the most agricultural part of the country due to its terrain.

 

[Mirc]

In my game France has less than half of the territory they have in yours, with Germany all the way to England. And Poland is third strongest, but not for long, as the strongest (me) is at war with them.

 

[Kyriakos]

We should organise a multiplayer game on this map, sometime. Perhaps with the new version and the scenario with the historical borders.. We may have enough players

 

[embryodead]

@Varwnos
I read it up again, and pronoiar is used to describe someone who owned/taxed a pronoia, and for that was obliged to provide military service as a cavalryman, like a feudal knight. They were heavy cavalry that supposedly appeared when cataphracts were already gone. If it's not Greek proper, it is likely an anglicized word based on Greek, but it appears in many articles, be it web or scholarly ones.

For Byzantium I use the Empire government all the time - because it's good for wars (no weariness), large territory (communal corruption) and you could build the vassalage wonders, since all your neighbors require that government (you could probably get Sultanate of Rum title in Iconium right now, unless you captured it early).

@France
A picture is worth a thousand words Though some description is neccessary - those settlers stay there for 20+ turns. It's the settler freeze AI bug that I described when testing settlers with 2+ movement, and apparently it happens with normal ones as well. Considering that France pretty much always goes for that spot, it seems turning western Germany into a barren wasteland is actually the only option... or maybe moving Paris/Aachen away from their locations - would be a bit inaccurate, but Dijon isn't in the right spot either.

 

[embryodead]

Regarding Multiplayer, I don't even know how to run a mod multiplayer.. though I remember it has to be reduced to 8 players, so the Small Europe map may be better.

 

[Kyriakos]

The bad thing with the empire government though is that you cannot hurry any building (unless you want to kill citizents, and then you already have to be near completion of it).

What does the sultanate of Rum s wonder do?

 

[embryodead]

The bad thing with the empire government though is that you cannot hurry any building (unless you want to kill citizents, and then you already have to be near completion of it).

Oops yeah, that's the downside.

What does the sultanate of Rum s wonder do?

All royal titles work like a second palace a.k.a. Forbidden Palace. Unlike in original civ3, you can have multiple ones and they add up. They can only be built in conquered capitals though, given the AI had the royal wonder (e.g. Sultanate of Rum wonder -> Sultan of Rum title). For detailed explanation see Vassalage in the civilopedia > game concepts.

Oh and the point was, they are also limited by your government, so under Empire you can claim Serbian, Bulgarian, Turk etc. titles, but to claim say, a French throne, you would have to be in Feudalism. So switching to Empire should also give you an additional Palace in Iconium, if there's the wonder there.

 

[Mirc]

BTW - in my game, in the beginning my main "problem" was that with my random start, I started so close to Serbia and Bulgaria that I killed them before they could build their unique wonder. But I know the game isn't thought to be played that way anyway.

We should organise a multiplayer game on this map, sometime. Perhaps with the new version and the scenario with the historical borders.. We may have enough players

I'd be all for it, now that would be cool!

 

[Yoda Power]

A multiplayer game would be interesting. Actually the only time I ever tried multiplayer was with MEM I, when I played against PCHighway.

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

ED, maybe instead of strengthening paris, what about weakening Burgundy, as Burgundy is really the one who takes over most of france? Just a thought because I rerally don't like the idea of making west germany a wasteland. The ai...

I like the idea of a multiplayer game, I hope I would be good enough to play though...

 

[embryodead]

ED, maybe instead of strengthening paris, what about weakening Burgundy, as Burgundy is really the one who takes over most of france?

I did that already, see a couple posts above. It doesn't help because the problem is the French settler(s) getting stuck in Germany.

 

[Kyriakos]

Ed, any thoughts about rivers in central-southern Greece?

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

I did that already, see a couple posts above. It doesn't help because the problem is the French settler(s) getting stuck in Germany.

Oh sorry I didn't see that.

I know this is a bit radical but what about moving Paris 1 tile NW?

 

[Yoda Power]

Ed, any thoughts about rivers in central-southern Greece?

I actually think it adds some variety with no rivers, since it makes the places that got them more special. Southern Greece is pretty good already with all those resources.

If anything I think we should actually remove some rivers from the map, rather than adding more.

 

[Rm80]

I rigth now play as the Tatars (its going great I got a settler in the first hut so I got huge advantage from start)..

I just realised one thing about the nomads and pilgrims.... (never played a with nation that have nomads before)

Nomads costs pop 2 and 30 shields, movements 2

Pilgrims cost pop 3 and 50 shields, movements 1

only advantage to Pilgrims is the marsh and mountains climbing...

but since they are in same upgrade chain as soon as I get pilgrims I lose the ability to build nomads.....what I try to say is that it feels more like a punishment then an advance.

Is it possibile to take away the nomads from the the settler chain? so if you need to climb mountains for some reason you can build pilgrims otherwise stay with the nomads?

edit: btw if this have been brougth up before then im sorry

 

[Mirc]

I agree with you the Nomads are more powerful than the Pilgrims, but don't forget not all civs get the Nomads.

 

[embryodead]

This is intentional - pilgrims were put in as a downgrade, especially to Nomads, not as an upgrade The marsh/mountain movement was added to lessen to pain

 

[Yoda Power]

Also it's really not a much of a disadvantedge if you think about it.

In the beginning of the game your cities are small (like size 2-4), but by the time you got Pilgrims you should have atleast one or two cites above 6. So in the beginning you loose 2/3 of the pop while later you loose like 3/8, and it's clear that 2/3 > 3/8.

 

[Dezzilisk]

Assassins.....AHHHHHH! i am currently playing as the byzantines and see no way to combat these little ****s exept to go to war with the arabs and conquer the lot of 'em.

These things are so annoying
Time for me to get some revenge for all those lost workers and pillaged improvements