Moving forward: Rhye's Legacy of Civilization - proposal
- Thread starter Baldyr
- Start date
Magnificent One
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 283
I think there should also be a way play the Byzantines in both 3000BC and 600AD Starts
This is actually interesting. Because no one would be forced to play as Byzantium - it would just be another available option - just like the new game speeds. I mean, the Civ is already present. And I don't think anyone would mind being able to do diplomacy with Byzantium...
But how to implement Byzantium in the 3000 BC scenario? Shouldn't it be possible to play the Celts in the first scenario instead?
(Because they are one and the same. So it wouldn't be possible to have both Celtia and Byzantium in the same scenario, without adding a new Civ. Which of course is another option, but then there is a thing called "the slippery slope".)But making them a "full" civ means to make them a lot stronger. Despite I think it's a good thing (Celtia is WAAAY too weak, Byzantium is only ~3x weaker than in reality) it's altering the gameplay and it's against your plans. But as a(n additional) map- great thing!
Well, I'd like to view this as "our plans".
I only made a proposal and there have been several additional proposals in this thread, including your own.But making Celtia and Byzantium playable could be kosher - if this is what we want. Of course game balance would have to be maintained. And AI Celtia/Byzantium could play by another set of rules than if controlled by a human.
I of course understand the objection, and I also agree with it in principle.
I agree on this. Maybe including changing code to improve mechanisms that Rhye's clearly intended to be there, but had difficulty implementing(like euro settlement of India etc.).
TDK
merijn_v1
Black Belt
Also, more people could actually take the time to learn something as easy as Python. I mean, c'mon! We're basically a community of game designers here and people don't even wanna learn how to do things for themselves.
I actually want to learn python. (not for the legacy, but also for some private mods I'm creating) Could you give me some advice. (Useful tutorials etc.)
I think making all the extra's for the mod shouldn't be separate modmod, but just modular things. Like a module that adds just a 2nd UU for each civs of a 2nd UB. So you can choose if you want to add it or not.
Oh, I can help you there.
Check my signature for a entry point. Once you get into it, there will be no stopping you. (Modding RFC is connected with its own particulars though, but we can get to that once you know some of the basics.)I think those are pretty much the same thing. Because you could design mod-mods that can be installed modularly, so that one doesn't break the other. Well, its the idea anyway.
merijn_v1
Black Belt
Well, I made a private mod which in every civ has a 2nd UU and UB.
I also included a mod where every civ has a unique national wonder. Some examples:
France
Le Louvre
Replaces the Hermitage.
+200%
(instead of 100%)
China
Sun Tzu's Art of War
Replaces the National Epic
Same power as NE, but spawns a GG upon completion and units get 2 XP in that city.
I can try to make a module of this.
I also included a mod where every civ has a unique national wonder. Some examples:
France
Le Louvre
Replaces the Hermitage.
+200%
(instead of 100%)China
Sun Tzu's Art of War
Replaces the National Epic
Same power as NE, but spawns a GG upon completion and units get 2 XP in that city.
I can try to make a module of this.
deanej
Deity
We actually don't even need to make it playable for diplo to be possible. Simply set MinorNationStatus to 0; it would still be unplayable, but diplo would be possible. I don't understand why Rhye never did this.
I believe that I already tried this myself. Are you certain...?
This are XML mods, right? I don't think you need to augment them with any Python.
deanej
Deity
That's how it works normally, unless Rhye changed it so that only playable civs can engage in diplo.
I like the original proposal and agree that it should focus only on optimizing the game; changes to how it plays should be kept to modmods. In my opinion all changes to gameplay, even something almost everyone views as positive like making Byzantines playable/contactable, should be kept out of this and in their own modmods. A change to the gameplay means a change to the balance must be discussed and it becomes subjective. This project should try to stay as objective as possible, so that every single person is happy to use it as a base from which to extend their ideas.
I just got a job so I don't have much time right now but I'll be glad to help where I can. I'm a fairly experienced programmer and there are things I notice when going through the Python and C++ code that could cause bugs or at least inefficiencies that I could point out or fix/optimize when I get the chance. The only one I specifically remember right now is that the constant iArtillery appears twice in const.py and is assigned two different values (one for the tech and one for the unit). So if someone tried to code something using the constant for the Artillery tech, they would end up with some other tech instead. As far as I know this constant isn't actually used anywhere so this doesn't currently cause any bugs, but that kind of thing should be cleaned up regardless in case someone creating a modmod wanted to use it.
I just got a job so I don't have much time right now but I'll be glad to help where I can. I'm a fairly experienced programmer and there are things I notice when going through the Python and C++ code that could cause bugs or at least inefficiencies that I could point out or fix/optimize when I get the chance. The only one I specifically remember right now is that the constant iArtillery appears twice in const.py and is assigned two different values (one for the tech and one for the unit). So if someone tried to code something using the constant for the Artillery tech, they would end up with some other tech instead. As far as I know this constant isn't actually used anywhere so this doesn't currently cause any bugs, but that kind of thing should be cleaned up regardless in case someone creating a modmod wanted to use it.
travathian
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2003
- Messages
- 262
Not really a bug, but I think it is kinda lame that when I start as America my world map consists of the eastern seaboard of North America. I guess everyone who settled that area suddenly forget their current world geography? I think the Americans should get maps for whatever civs have cities flip to them on that first turn.
merijn_v1
Black Belt
I love it! But: there is no Korean civ in RFC! Is this RFC-compatible? And, what is more important, RFCM-compatible?
[EDIT]: And UNW are too powerfulAnd for sure unbalanced.
I don't have to include all civs. But it can be nice if some non-playable civs have an 2nd UU. (Like a Native Amirecan Brave or a Byzantine Tagmata) I can (try to) make it RFC compatible. I think I will succeed.
(What is RFCM?
)I don't have to include the UNW. I can make individual Modules of them. (1 module for the 2nd UU, 1 module for the 2nd UB etc.)
The 2nd UU and 2nd UB are indeed only XML. (And ofcourse for art) The UNW includes some python. (I didn't made the last one myself, but I did with the first 2 (UU & UB))
merijn_v1
Black Belt
I already (sort off) finished the 2nd UU module. But I have some question about the "purpose" of the mod we creating before I will launch it. Is it intended to make an own mod with modules (copy-paste all of RFC and including the modules) or is it intended to paste the modules in the original RFC?
Similar threads
