Merging Super Forts

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Love it too.
with a trappers post I would even go so far as to make it buildable by hunting units.
Others should need workers though, but cheaper then full scale forts.

If you can externalize that ressource access to make it limited per outpost type.. could you exclude normal forts from ressource access? And make a more expensive "fortified trappers/mining/etc outpost" for those who need both the resource and the fort?

You can make a specific outpost for a specific resource as you can make something enabled by something else. However there is no way to say not available on something. So a fort will be available on everything, you wont be able to limit it to non resource plots. Besides you may build the fort before you discover the tech that revels the resource.

 

[Koshling]

You can make a specific outpost for a specific resource as you can make something enabled by something else. However there is no way to say not available on something. So a fort will be available on everything, you wont be able to limit it to non resource plots. Besides you may build the fort before you discover the tech that revels the resource.

But we can turn OFF the tag that causes an improvement to pride resources for a regular fort if we wish to.

 

[Faustmouse]

You can make a specific outpost for a specific resource as you can make something enabled by something else. However there is no way to say not available on something. So a fort will be available on everything, you wont be able to limit it to non resource plots. Besides you may build the fort before you discover the tech that revels the resource.

But farms can't be build if there isn't fresh water. And IIRC you couldn't build them in desert before... hm... Refrigeration?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

But farms can't be build if there isn't fresh water. And IIRC you couldn't build them in desert before... hm... Refrigeration?

There is a "requires fresh water" tag. So I could limit the forts to require fresh water or be on flat land. I can also limit them to one resource. However if you want forts to be able to be built not on a resource I can't do it without python such as is done with the Great Farmer.

 

[Snofru1]

Does this mean that we could build true channels now?

My idea is to build a type of fort that does not provide any bonuses to units and does not provide the ressource below it. It only allows boat units to pass it. And then give it a channel-like graphic and we have real channels. Or am I just dreaming?

 

[Nimek]

you mean canals right. Channel is on TV

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Does this mean that we could build true channels now?

My idea is to build a type of fort that does not provide any bonuses to units and does not provide the ressource below it. It only allows boat units to pass it. And then give it a channel-like graphic and we have real channels. Or am I just dreaming?

No because iirc it is the act as city tag that lets the ships enter. Cities provide the resource below it.

 

[Snofru1]

you mean canals right. Channel is on TV

You are probably right (I´m not a native english speaker), but I looked it up and thought that "channel" stands for both TV and water...

 

[Il Principe]

But we can turn OFF the tag that causes an improvement to pride resources for a regular fort if we wish to.

You can make a specific outpost for a specific resource as you can make something enabled by something else. However there is no way to say not available on something. So a fort will be available on everything, you wont be able to limit it to non resource plots. Besides you may build the fort before you discover the tech that revels the resource.

Koshling already said what i meant. Forts on resources are fine. I just would love stock forts to not give the resources,only special ones.

 

[SargontheGreat2]

You are probably right (I´m not a native english speaker), but I looked it up and thought that "channel" stands for both TV and water...

It does, but a canal is man-made, and a channel is very big and natural... eg. the English Channel

 

[Thunderbrd]

Does this mean that we could build true channels now?

My idea is to build a type of fort that does not provide any bonuses to units and does not provide the ressource below it. It only allows boat units to pass it. And then give it a channel-like graphic and we have real channels. Or am I just dreaming?

I've often thought this too and I've seen the idea 'floated' now and then but yeah, agree here.

you mean canals right. Channel is on TV

A channel can also mean exactly what he said. In the US we don't use the term often but it is in fact a term that can be completely interchangeable. I think Canal does imply a channel that is generally man-made and used to bridge two bodies of water though.

No because iirc it is the act as city tag that lets the ships enter. Cities provide the resource below it.

Programming could change this and will probably need to for the Nomadic project too. I've been thinking we need something like this so we have improvements the nomadic units can move to and be able to create and launch boat units from.

You are probably right (I´m not a native english speaker), but I looked it up and thought that "channel" stands for both TV and water...

See above. You do pretty good for a non-native speaker - what's your first language?

 

[Snofru1]

You do pretty good for a non-native speaker - what's your first language?

Thank you! My 1st language is german. I learned english at school (7 years) and used it a lot in my former job, thereby spending 6 months in the US (east coast). I also speak some french (not great) and even less spanish. And then I try to be able to order a beer and the cheque (bill) in any country I travel to ...

BTW: Sorry that I still tend to write "resource" wrong as it has a "ss" both in german and french.

 

[Nimek]

@Snofru

Sorry my fault. I am not native english speaker also

 

[Snofru1]

@Snofru

Sorry my fault. I am not native english speaker also

No problem, I try to learn all the time!

 

[Sgtslick]

I think that rogues (hidden national units) should be able to capture undefended forts. In my current game its really frustrating coz the AI has spammed all these forts in choke points and we are peace locked (for now).

Like here in this image, I wanted to build a city along here but even my rogue can't pass Yu's "great wall".

Spoiler :

So what it boils down to is there is no way to capture a fort if you at peace? I don't like this.. Especially considering they are undefended!

You should be able to bribe it with money or use hidden units or something.. I could just go and surround an AI with forts, no military units just escort a sh1t load of workers and spam forts all around him. Then he can't leave his little area unless he wants to declare war right? That seems broken to me. Will the AI even realise what has happened?

 

[Koshling]

I think that rogues (hidden national units) should be able to capture undefended forts. In my current game its really frustrating coz the AI has spammed all these forts in choke points and we are peace locked (for now).

Like here in this image, I wanted to build a city along here but even my rogue can't pass Yu's "great wall".

Spoiler :

So what it boils down to is there is no way to capture a fort if you at peace? I don't like this.. Especially considering they are undefended!

You should be able to bribe it with money or use hidden units or something.. I could just go and surround an AI with forts, no military units just escort a sh1t load of workers and spam forts all around him. Then he can't leave his little area unless he wants to declare war right? That seems broken to me. Will the AI even realize what has happened?

That's a general forts issue, not a merging (of the mod) issue. Hidden nationality units by their nature cannot capture since to do so would reveal their nationality - that also applies (and always has) to undefended cities. Invisible units do not capture because they can always move through (again same as cities).

Would you want invisible units to NOT be able to move through? If so then I could turn your example around and have a perfect defense against invisible units, even though I could never see them (by occupying the forts). Conversely if invis units captured they'd really have to also attack, or else you're really saying they have a choice (which I definitely don't want to contemplate).

As far as I know the merging of the super forts mod shouldn't really have changed any of this behaviour. What aspect has changed from how it used to be? (with AND forts, which also had culture)

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

If we are going to have these mini-forts that are just resource gathering outposts I don't think they should upgrade along the fort line but they should upgrade to the normal city worked improvement.

So a marble gatherer outpost will upgrade to a quarry if worked by a city.

We need some proper names for these things also. Outpost suggests a military presence.

Again thinking of Egypt - each year pharaoh would sent an expedition to a site in the Sinai to get turquoise. Eventually a temple to Hathor was built there. Then some priests started living at the temple. Eventually a very small village grew there to support the expanded cult temple. Turquoise mining was limited to the cooler month otherwise the colour went bad due to the heat. (Yet another example of why the population requirements for buildings just don't work.)

edit If someone can point me at a good improvement graphic I could set up a few of these so we can try them out.

edit 2 you know this sort of thing may fix all my problems with realistic cultural spread ignoring important plots that are essential for your nation eg have stone resource on them.

 

[Yudishtira]

If we are going to have these mini-forts that are just resource gathering outposts I don't think they should upgrade along the fort line but they should upgrade to the normal city worked improvement.

So a marble gatherer outpost will upgrade to a quarry if worked by a city.

Absolutely agree (FWIW).

We need some proper names for these things also. Outpost suggests a military presence.

Nearly every single name I can think of is already taken for something. What about "Settlement"? Or in some (remote?) cases "Encampment" might be better.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Other things we probably consider for "Seasonal Encampments" or resource forts. I assume we will be having one per current resource improvement line.

1. How far from your borders should they be allowed to be. It is a dangerous world should they be within a certain distance of normal cultural borders from a town or fort. Or do we let them be be built anywhere and just ensure that raiding parties from the AI nations and in particular Barbarians and Neanderthals target them.

2. If on a one plot island then if they upgrade to a city you wont have access to the resource just the improvement yields.

3. What will Neanderthals and Barbarians do to/with them! What about animals and events.

4. Who can build them, when can they be built and at what cost in time and units.

5. When will AI nations build their own.​

Further how will they interact with things that are not in C2C but are on our work plan

Nomadic Start this may need a whole new set of these specific for the nomadic way of life. There are two basic forms of nomadism

1. Follow a herd on it's migration path
   
2. Move from seasonal plenty to seasonal plenty or winter security. This has been shown in finds in caves in modern France where the winter security place, ie the caves, was where the tribe(s) made for example beads from materials collected at other sites along their annual migration path.

In both these cases the route needs to show up on the map some how with some marker encampment for the centre and then having seasonal encampments along the migration route where the resources are.

The form of nomadism we have so far in c2c is the exploration phase. This would be very very dangerous with many bands disappearing without trace. Not fun.

Indigenous Peoples (from WLBO). This concept could be seen as a sort of independent cities of Civ V without the cities. It would in fact work well with such a concept.You get to do diplomacy with IPs and maybe get them on your side or anger them enough for them to start terrorism on you. You could also get them to terrorise you neighbours and be friendly with you. Currently they have no cultural lands but maybe they should.​

 

[Sgtslick]

That's a general forts issue, not a merging (of the mod) issue. Hidden nationality units by their nature cannot capture since to do so would reveal their nationality - that also applies (and always has) to undefended cities. Invisible units do not capture because they can always move through (again same as cities).

Would you want invisible units to NOT be able to move through? If so then I could turn your example around and have a perfect defense against invisible units, even though I could never see them (by occupying the forts). Conversely if invis units captured they'd really have to also attack, or else you're really saying they have a choice (which I definitely don't want to contemplate).

As far as I know the merging of the super forts mod shouldn't really have changed any of this behaviour. What aspect has changed from how it used to be? (with AND forts, which also had culture)

I don't know, I guess I was just really angry coz Yu locked me out of some nice land and took over all the choke points

I managed to take over a couple in an inevitable war and build some more forts of my own so all good I suppose

Don't mind me