[MOD] Fall from Heaven

[Kael]

when will you release a patch or the next version? I think it's time that you finished your currect thing and place in the new version.

Im waiting for something that is outside of my control before I can release 1.0. I will release 1.0 on the same day that event occurs.

 

[Yakk]

No, the Lanun are the pirates of the world but they are human.



Yes, in 1.0 the Drown, Fireballs and Meteors all travel on land and sea. The Drown are exactly as you describe, able to travel on the land and coast tiles but not enter the ocean tiles.

Close, but not quite.

What if the Drown could only go 1 square away from water, be it a river, a lake or an ocean.

For this to work, land "away from water" would have to be different than "land near water".

Adding "feature" of "Landlocked", and making the "Landlocked" feature impassable for "The Drown", might provide an interesting weakness for "The Drown". They would be able to travel off the coast, on the shore, and up riviers -- but they couldn't invade the center of a continent.

But, as I noted, I haven't checked if this is possible. There are features (like flood plain), and there is a section in the unit data for making certain features impassable -- but I don't know if it works. =)

(At the least, one would have to "process" an existing map and add in the "landlocked" feature to every landlocked tile -- or change the map generation scripts.)

The ai hates the unit enabling buildings (it doesn't cost in the fact that they allow it to build units) and has to be pushed to build them, although it could be more efficient with its builds but i dont think it overbuilds to badly.

I'm just comparing it to my own strategy, which has units being built at unit factory cities and transported out, significantly reducing the number of unit factory buildings I have to build.

I seriously doubt the AI does anything like this.

Then again, simply giving the AI a production bonus would make up for any inefficiencies. =)

I dont like just tossing bonuses but I do agree with you that the t4 buildings are to bland. The reason for this is that the t4 buildings weren't in the origional design doc. The plan was to units to have to get to a certain level before they could get promoted to t4 units. When I wasn't able to do that I added the t4 buildings, so they tend to be kinda bland. I will review that for phase 2.

Ah! That does explain it.

You might want to make the previous-teir buildings a prerequisit for the next teir. Making druids and beastlords in cities that can't build hunters seems strange. =)

The "true elves" that are introduced in phase 2 wont be able to chop forests or jungles. The "elven" and "dwarven" aspects that we have now aren't racial, they are just a nature worshipping and an earth worshipping religion. In phase 2 you will have true racial civs that have more distinctive flavors.

*nod*. Still seems strange that the nature-worshipping civ is more productive than the earth-worshiping civ.

Lumbermills start out equal to mines, because they can be built on top of forests. And they can be built anywhere a forest is -- which can be built anywhere -- while mines can only be built in hilly terrain.

Hill:
-1 food
+1 production
mine:
+2 production
earth worship tech:
+1 gold
end result:
-1 food +3 production +1 gold over base terrain.
Terrain options:
Grass, hill: 1 food 3 production 1 trade
Plains, hill: 0 food 4 production 1 trade

Forest:
+1 production
Lumber mill:
+1 production
nature worshiping tech:
+1 production
end result:
+3 production
Terrain options:
Grass, flat: 2 food 3 production
Grass, hill: 1 food 4 production
Plains, flat: 1 food 4 production
Plains, hill: 5 production

So the nature-worshipping folk can get 3 to 4 production from flat land and 4 to 5 from hilly land.

The earth-worshipping folk get 3 to 4 production from hilly land, and 0 to 1 from flat land. (Well, they could build workshops in the flat land)

The nature-worshiping folk are more productive than the earth-worshipping folk, even in hilly terrain -- and outside of hilly terrain (where there tends to be lots of food) they kick the earth-worshippers arse.

This doesn't fit how I'd view nature and earth worshipping religions. =)

Proposal:
Change hidden paths to +3 trade from lumber mill (or an alternative below)
Change dwarven mining to +2 production from mines

Goal:
Using Earth-worship-tech Mines in the hills should be better than Nature-worship-tech lumbermill forests.

End result:
Nature:
Grass, Flat, Forested: 2 food 2 production 3 trade
Grass, Hilly, Forested: 1 food 3 production 3 trade
Plains, Flat, Forested: 1 food 3 production 3 trade
Planes, Hilly, Forested: 0 food 4 production 3 trade

Very decent. It allows a civ to live in a forested area with only a bit of farmland to feed itself, and provides an alternative to cottage-spam.

Earth:
Grass, Hilly: 1 food 4 production
Plains, Hilly: 0 food 5 production

More production for the earth-worshippers. They have to find their food and trade elsewhere.

Addition:
It makes more sense for "camps" to be the preferred improvement for nature-loving civ's than lumbermills. What if hidden paths unlocked a "camp" improvement (that goes anywhere) that adds +1 production +3 trade to a forest?

Addition 2:
A tech that gives +1 food from mines (dwarven farming) and +1 food from lumbermills/camps (elven harvesting) might be worthwhile. I understand this would be a 1.0 or later thing, and maybe better delt with as a dwarf/elf innate advantage. . .

 

[Kael]

Close, but not quite.

What if the Drown could only go 1 square away from water, be it a river, a lake or an ocean.

For this to work, land "away from water" would have to be different than "land near water".

Adding "feature" of "Landlocked", and making the "Landlocked" feature impassable for "The Drown", might provide an interesting weakness for "The Drown". They would be able to travel off the coast, on the shore, and up riviers -- but they couldn't invade the center of a continent.

But, as I noted, I haven't checked if this is possible. There are features (like flood plain), and there is a section in the unit data for making certain features impassable -- but I don't know if it works. =)

(At the least, one would have to "process" an existing map and add in the "landlocked" feature to every landlocked tile -- or change the map generation scripts.)

Ahh I see what you are saying. This would be more complex than what I am doing to allow land units to travel on water tiles, but it is doable.

I'm just comparing it to my own strategy, which has units being built at unit factory cities and transported out, significantly reducing the number of unit factory buildings I have to build.

I seriously doubt the AI does anything like this.

Then again, simply giving the AI a production bonus would make up for any inefficiencies. =)

Yeah, you could push missions to the untis to get around this. Do a check at the begining of the turns if the civ has a buildign that allows an upgrade, money to upgrade, and an upgradeable unit you could push a mission to those untis to go to that city. You could also keep ai civs from buildings unit upgrade buildings within x tiles of each other, or set a max amount they want to build.

You can really do anything you want, it just takes work.

Ah! That does explain it.

You might want to make the previous-teir buildings a prerequisit for the next teir. Making druids and beastlords in cities that can't build hunters seems strange. =)

*nod*. Still seems strange that the nature-worshipping civ is more productive than the earth-worshiping civ.

Lumbermills start out equal to mines, because they can be built on top of forests. And they can be built anywhere a forest is -- which can be built anywhere -- while mines can only be built in hilly terrain.

Hill:
-1 food
+1 production
mine:
+2 production
earth worship tech:
+1 gold
end result:
-1 food +3 production +1 gold over base terrain.
Terrain options:
Grass, hill: 1 food 3 production 1 trade
Plains, hill: 0 food 4 production 1 trade

Forest:
+1 production
Lumber mill:
+1 production
nature worshiping tech:
+1 production
end result:
+3 production
Terrain options:
Grass, flat: 2 food 3 production
Grass, hill: 1 food 4 production
Plains, flat: 1 food 4 production
Plains, hill: 5 production

So the nature-worshipping folk can get 3 to 4 production from flat land and 4 to 5 from hilly land.

The earth-worshipping folk get 3 to 4 production from hilly land, and 0 to 1 from flat land. (Well, they could build workshops in the flat land)

The nature-worshiping folk are more productive than the earth-worshipping folk, even in hilly terrain -- and outside of hilly terrain (where there tends to be lots of food) they kick the earth-worshippers arse.

This doesn't fit how I'd view nature and earth worshipping religions. =)

Proposal:
Change hidden paths to +3 trade from lumber mill (or an alternative below)
Change dwarven mining to +2 production from mines

Goal:
Using Earth-worship-tech Mines in the hills should be better than Nature-worship-tech lumbermill forests.

End result:
Nature:
Grass, Flat, Forested: 2 food 2 production 3 trade
Grass, Hilly, Forested: 1 food 3 production 3 trade
Plains, Flat, Forested: 1 food 3 production 3 trade
Planes, Hilly, Forested: 0 food 4 production 3 trade

Very decent. It allows a civ to live in a forested area with only a bit of farmland to feed itself, and provides an alternative to cottage-spam.

Earth:
Grass, Hilly: 1 food 4 production
Plains, Hilly: 0 food 5 production

More production for the earth-worshippers. They have to find their food and trade elsewhere.

Addition:
It makes more sense for "camps" to be the preferred improvement for nature-loving civ's than lumbermills. What if hidden paths unlocked a "camp" improvement (that goes anywhere) that adds +1 production +3 trade to a forest?

Addition 2:
A tech that gives +1 food from mines (dwarven farming) and +1 food from lumbermills/camps (elven harvesting) might be worthwhile. I understand this would be a 1.0 or later thing, and maybe better delt with as a dwarf/elf innate advantage. . .

Yeah, this all has to be built and tested out in the phase 2 design, but it will change dramatically.

 

[gc33]

Originally Posted by arthurtuxedo
The problem with war weariness, as implemented in Civ 4, is that it forces a 20th century concept into all eras, where it doesn't necessarily apply. Throughout history, people have mostly been happy to be at war, especially when they are winning. The idea of people rioting in the streets in Medieval Europe in protest of the Crusades, for instance, is patently absurd. They were glad to be sticking it to the "heathens". I also didn't read about too many people refusing to work during World War II because they were so upset about sticking it to the Nazis. Not every war is grossly unpopular like Vietnam or World War I, and pretending like they are is both unrealistic and detrimental to gameplay.

Actually, that's not true. The one-hundred years war, for example, was broken by times of peace because parliament would not pay for the king's adventures. When a knight went off on Crusade, he often raised special duties from the peasantry, and sometimes they would riot in the streets.. er, fields.

Just because before modern times common people were not sent off to fight in person did not mean they liked supporting warriors in their fight.

And about WW2: I do think the Germans experienced war weariness in WW2. Maybe in America the Hollywood wonder hid our war weariness. But people would get tired of rationing eventually.

Sorry to be so off topic to this thread but I had to respond to this.

 

[Nikis-Knight]

should vitalize the land destroy resources? I just lost a gold by improving a gold mine on a desert hill.

 

[Kael]

should vitalize the land destroy resources? I just lost a gold by improving a gold mine on a desert hill.

It will destory improvements, so it should get rid of the mine, but not the gold. I'll try it out.

 

[Kelric]

You know, having started work on my own mod based off your work...

... and then seeing what you have planned for Phase 2...

... is absolutely intimidating. I love it. You seem to have most everything planned out. I'm anxiously awaiting the phase-that-must-not-be-named-due-to-outside-issues and Phase 2 just seems like it will be a lot better.

Anyways, having come late to the thread and not knowing if it has been mentioned before or considered, have you guys thought of adding in the ability to terrace hills to allow (more) food? Terracing for food would eliminate all Production and (probably) gold on the hill. This is an idea I am planning on trying to implement in my mod down the line if it's possible. For example:

Grass hill, by default = 1 food
Grass hill with terracing = 2 food
Grass hill with terracing and an aqueduct in the city (simulating irrigation to the hilltop) = 3 food

 

[darkedone02]

Close, but not quite.

What if the Drown could only go 1 square away from water, be it a river, a lake or an ocean.

For this to work, land "away from water" would have to be different than "land near water".

i kinda agree that you let the drowns travel around coastal and allow you to travel one ocean tile only, they are called Drowns for a reason.

 

[naf4ever]

Lumbermills start out equal to mines, because they can be built on top of forests. And they can be built anywhere a forest is -- which can be built anywhere -- while mines can only be built in hilly terrain.

Hill:
-1 food
+1 production
mine:
+2 production
earth worship tech:
+1 gold
end result:
-1 food +3 production +1 gold over base terrain.
Terrain options:
Grass, hill: 1 food 3 production 1 trade
Plains, hill: 0 food 4 production 1 trade

Forest:
+1 production
Lumber mill:
+1 production
nature worshiping tech:
+1 production
end result:
+3 production
Terrain options:
Grass, flat: 2 food 3 production
Grass, hill: 1 food 4 production
Plains, flat: 1 food 4 production
Plains, hill: 5 production

So the nature-worshipping folk can get 3 to 4 production from flat land and 4 to 5 from hilly land.

The earth-worshipping folk get 3 to 4 production from hilly land, and 0 to 1 from flat land. (Well, they could build workshops in the flat land)

Just also wanted to add that workshops are basically useless also. They are inferior to mines and lumbermills in the vanilla game and more so in this one.

Perhaps they can be looked at and tweaked also (perhaps do something unique like add to research) because they might as well be deleted as is at the moment which is too bad,,, because i like building workshops and putting my people to work in them. Just wish they were more useful.

 

[Ploeperpengel]

Hi Kael,

just wanted to tell you I'll have about 20 buttons uploaded in an hour or two. You could tell me then which ones you like and we could apply something like this where possible. What do you think of that? Just a quickdraw though. Well but there aren't much where can do that. Most of what I got are Palaces and Castles.

Edit: here they are but oops just noticed to small images to put flags on. Wouldn't have posted all of these normally but your list is so long I thought I just send'em all. Post 3 3rd thread. Now I need a break

 

[Kael]

You know, having started work on my own mod based off your work...

... and then seeing what you have planned for Phase 2...

... is absolutely intimidating. I love it. You seem to have most everything planned out. I'm anxiously awaiting the phase-that-must-not-be-named-due-to-outside-issues and Phase 2 just seems like it will be a lot better.

I certainly hope phase 2 is a lot better than phase 1, we are working hard on it. But remember that phase 2 will be a while before release, and even when it does release it will be going through numberous quick patches and adds for quite a while. FfH 1.0 will be the last stable version of FfH for a while.

We will release betas of phase 2 as we develop them but I wouldn't recommend developing scenerios or mods on them. For that you will want the final version of phase 2, and that is a long long way off.

Anyways, having come late to the thread and not knowing if it has been mentioned before or considered, have you guys thought of adding in the ability to terrace hills to allow (more) food? Terracing for food would eliminate all Production and (probably) gold on the hill. This is an idea I am planning on trying to implement in my mod down the line if it's possible. For example:

Grass hill, by default = 1 food
Grass hill with terracing = 2 food
Grass hill with terracing and an aqueduct in the city (simulating irrigation to the hilltop) = 3 food

We don't have any "negative" improvements in the mod, or any that have negative consequences because the AI doesn't do a good job of deciding what improvement is appropriate for what condition.

 

[Chip56]

We don't have any "negative" improvements in the mod, or any that have negative consequences because the AI doesn't do a good job of deciding what improvement is appropriate for what condition.

There are still workshops in...
And they have a a -1food. (and they are useless since you could plant a forest to get the +1prod without the food penalty)

Anyways, having come late to the thread and not knowing if it has been mentioned before or considered, have you guys thought of adding in the ability to terrace hills to allow (more) food?

I would like it too if there was a way to improve food producton on hill tiles.
I remember good old civ2 where you could irrigate hills if you really needed food.
When you found a city thats surrounded by hills i would like to have a way of improving food production.

 

[Kael]

There are still workshops in...
And they have a a -1food. (and they are useless since you could plant a forest to get the +1prod without the food penalty)

I would like it too if there was a way to improve food producton on hill tiles.
I remember good old civ2 where you could irrigate hills if you really needed food.
When you found a city thats surrounded by hills i would like to have a way of improving food production.

Sorry, I should have said we haven't added any NEW negative improvements. I suspect when Firaxis built the WorkerAI they put some logic in about workshops (at least I hope so). But if we were to add other negative improvements the AI wouldn't know how to deal with them.

 

[Chip56]

Sorry, I should have said we haven't added any NEW negative improvements. I suspect when Firaxis built the WorkerAI they put some logic in about workshops (at least I hope so). But if we were to add other negative improvements the AI wouldn't know how to deal with them.

i know i am a damned smartass
No offense meant

But i think that workshops need a serious boost

 

[nibenay]

Any of you players experiencing any breakdowns during (direct ip) multiplayer. We played previous versions but this breaks down without error message after all players have joined and you push start.

 

[Unser Giftzwerg]

Forgive me if this is old news, or, as is most likely, I am merely an idiot.

I am playing 0.95 with the most recent patch. But my cities don't seem to benefit from trade route income. I spent some time comparing data from the F1 screen and with individual civ screens, and the info seems mis-matched.

Has anyone reported anything like this? Am I overlooking something? I'm going to double check myself.

Thanks again. It is an amazing, amazing mod.

 

[Trimaj]

hey, just wanted to check in and let you know i've recently downloaded and started playing this. been watching it since the beginning, but missed a fair amount in the middle.

i'll chime in with a few comments after i play through it a little.

and just my two cents, but workshops definitly need something in any version of the game that i've seen thus far, unless they've already been adjusted.

 

[Kelric]

I certainly hope phase 2 is a lot better than phase 1, we are working hard on it. But remember that phase 2 will be a while before release, and even when it does release it will be going through numberous quick patches and adds for quite a while. FfH 1.0 will be the last stable version of FfH for a while.

We will release betas of phase 2 as we develop them but I wouldn't recommend developing scenerios or mods on them. For that you will want the final version of phase 2, and that is a long long way off.

I figured as much and I'll be building off of Phase 1, I'm just excited to see what you guys do with Phase 2. Phase 1 will keep me busy for quite a while, I'm sure.

 

[Frozen-Vomit]

Hi - first off: Great Mod, in fact the only reason why I still play Civ 4

I just thought that it would balance the Drown a bit if the could only be created in coastal or fresh water supply cities. Just another requirement to further limit the number of cities that can pump out cheap early offensive units. But well, i guess you can drown somebody in a glass of water if you had your mind set on it

edit: My bad, typos in my first post...

 

[cordas]

Just also wanted to add that workshops are basically useless also. They are inferior to mines and lumbermills in the vanilla game and more so in this one.

Perhaps they can be looked at and tweaked also (perhaps do something unique like add to research) because they might as well be deleted as is at the moment which is too bad,,, because i like building workshops and putting my people to work in them. Just wish they were more useful.

You could play a bit of a change around on this, allow drawfs to gain one extra food from hills period (they just know how to work these enviroments) maybe even allowing 1 food of desert hills.

Workshops and Watermills both need improving, they should acrue more bonuses. You could either do this by MORE tech bonuses, or you could make them like cottages and have them improve with turns used.

I would say workshops improve over time, give them a skill ranking, Apprentice Workshop, Journeyman Workshop, Master Workshop. AW is standard, JW +1 prod +1gold, MW +2 prod +3 gold.

Watermills could be given more tech bonuses -
Iron Working gives +1 prod
Trade gives +1 gold
Machinery +1 food
Mithril Working +1 prod

This would make them far more useful.