Project SYNTHESIS

[Tyo]

1) Hmmm.... screenshots, or a savefile?

2) If you declare war early, chances are the population is only one. Cities with only one pop are autorazed.

1. I don't have either. But I'm currently on my third play-through and am saving often. Time'll tell.

2. Could be, but if the post about is true that can't be it.

 

[civ_king]

Also I just reworked this:
Dynamic missionary spawns:
Spain, France spawn with Christian missionaries in the 600 AD game and the missionary of Rome's state religion in 3000 AD
England, Germany get France's SR's missionary
Russia spawns with Byzantium's SR's missionary
Vikings get Russia's SR missionary in Oslo in 900 AD (40 years after Russian spawn)
Portugal spawns with Spain's SR missionary

On a related note, what do you guys think of birthing the Vikings in Copenhagen instead of Oslo?

Christianity was alive and well in England by the spawn.

Actually the first person to send missionaries to Scandinavia was the Archbishop of Rheims who got Christianity a foothold in Jutland, later St. Anschar, Archbishop of Hamburg-Bremen converted the Norse.
So either France or Germany SR for Norse

Nah, it's alright..
I don't get it wrong or something else hehe..
Actually, since my English weren't really good, I was a bit confused to get the English translation for this Indonesian phrases oh yaudah gapapa. Then I was thinking either No Problem or Never Mind that only suits well.. And I choose never mind because it seems more polite



I think Viking should settle north pole too, it's why they're unique, to Iceland and Greenland.. but they have to settle at Denmark, Latvia and the Baltic countries as well..
In the reality, Viking cities should be less populated since it's way too cold, IMO

the contraction you are looking for is either "isn't" or "wasn't". "was" is past tense so to say "wasn't" implies your English has gotten better since then. "is" on the other hand is present tense so to use "isn't" means it is not good right now and has the understanding that it was no better in the past.
If you think a phrase might not be well received if you meant it earnestly add a to the end

 

[BenZL43]

the contraction you are looking for is either "isn't" or "wasn't". "was" is past tense so to say "wasn't" implies your English has gotten better since then. "is" on the other hand is present tense so to use "isn't" means it is not good right now and has the understanding that it was no better in the past.
If you think a phrase might not be well received if you meant it earnestly add a to the end

Thanks for the correction..
So how do I say that my English is getting better than before, but still not good?

I always have problem with Writing.. The same goes when I took toefl and sat..

Umm..
I might forget adding on that one hehe..
I usually add either or though. No idea why I didn't add it there

 

[Leoreth]

By the way, on the issue of all the GP being displayed as unique units in the Civ selection screen, this does NOT happen in DoC. Seems you have missed something while merging ... make a diff of CvGameTextManager.cpp.

 

[Linkman226]

It's fixed in the version I'm working with, actually. That's not on the SVN yet however.

 

[J. pride]

Linkman, I think you should take out the extra resources for the time being. I say this because currently these extra resources arent balanced /placed properly. It would more appropriate to put these resources back in when u have added all the civs and features that u want to. At the end, it will be easier for u to decide where which resources are needed. So suppose u add a civ say Brazil and u feel that they are overpowered or underpowered u can place the resources accordingly. Currently since there are no extra civs currently, these resources unbalance the game.

P.s: By putting them out of the game I dont mean taking out their graphics and everything just taking them out of the map and commenting out their spawn. This way it will be really easy to put them back in when appropriate

 

[Linkman226]

The first thing I'm doing after the Safavids and Shi'a is making map changes, pretty big ones, in fact. For now I don't mind leaving it temporarily unbalanced.

 

[J. pride]

The first thing I'm doing after the Safavids and Shi'a is making map changes, pretty big ones, in fact.

What kind of changes?

Do they involve making the the Levant and Eastern Europe bigger by any chance?

 

[Linkman226]

No, I'm afraid.

Basically:

1) Move around new resources; make all resources spread more realistically )for example, coffee starting in Ethiopia and spreading outwards)

2) Change capitals (India, China)

3) Dynamic climate- Saharan desertification, Medieval warm period aiding Viking colonization, the Little Ice Age, and revision of global warming

4) Add city spawns, Timurid and Seljuk barbs

5) Historical natural disasters

And unrelated to the map:

6) Revise the dynamic names extensively, using Edead's excellent system for changing names, leaderheads, and even flags/ colors in SoI

 

[Tandur]

Curious about the SVN update feature. If other minimods are updated via their SVN, is that also placed on the Synthesis SVN? The reason I ask is I like many of the additions here placed ontop of DoC, but I would like to be using the most recent DoC version.

 

[Tyo]

Re-downloaded, it must have been a download error. Not crashing anymore.

Question about Carthage, is it supposed to have Sur on spawn?

 

[Linkman226]

Curious about the SVN update feature. If other minimods are updated via their SVN, is that also placed on the Synthesis SVN? The reason I ask is I like many of the additions here placed ontop of DoC, but I would like to be using the most recent DoC version.

No, and don't try that or it'll screw up the mod. My general policy is to make every major release up to date with DoC anyways, as well as in most-but not all- of the SVN revisions. By the end of tonight or tomorrow
night I'll make an SVN release with the latest features from DoC anyways.

Re-downloaded, it must have been a download error. Not crashing anymore.

Question about Carthage, is it supposed to have Sur on spawn?

Yes. It's technically Phoenicia.

 

[great.taurus]

Also, guys, could I get some Shia wonder suggestions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holiest_sites_in_Islam_(Shia)

I guess you can find some here.

 

[BenZL43]

where will you spawn the new China at?

 

[Linkman226]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holiest_sites_in_Islam_(Shia)

I guess you can find some here.

Ya I looked here. I have a list already, thanks.

where will you spawn the new China at?

Luoyang, I believe, was someone's suggestion.

 

[Gruekiller]

Funny you should mention Seljuq barbarian invasions, Linkman. Since the Italians are already on a conditional spawn (won't spawn if a civilization holds north Italy), maybe the Turks don't spawn in Anatolia if it's not controlled by barbs/indies?

 

[J. pride]

1) Move around new resources; make all resources spread more realistically )for example, coffee starting in Ethiopia and spreading outwards)

I remember me and some other people made a huge list on this.

2) Change capitals (India, China)

Been waiting for this for a long thime

3) Dynamic climate- Saharan desertification, Medieval warm period aiding Viking colonization, the Little Ice Age, and revision of global warming.

I dont like this, mainly because i dont really see a point especially to the Saharan Desertification. All this will do is encourage the Egyptians, Pheonicians and Ethiopians to settle in unhistorical area. Even though the Sahara used to be fertile no important civ settled and no cities survive

4) Add city spawns, Timurid and Seljuk barbs

I like this but I had a suggestion. You know the suggestion I had for Poland (for DOC). Can u apply the same thing here. The Seljuks and the Timurids can be a "minor barbarian civ". They would spawn and just like a normal barbarians but with the following features:

1) Will have their own flag and Unique Horse Archer type unit (because horse archers are too weak but knights and Camel Archers dont look right for a Turkic Invasion).
2) Instead of normal Barbarians they will be a lot less likely to destroy cities and rather keep them.
3) Will not be allowed to build settlers; I would let them research but that depends on you.
4) Most importantly if the Seljuks die, the Timurids will spawn in Samarkand with the different flag and color (the one u will import from SOI) just like the Ghorids and Delhi Sultanate in SOI.
5) Another benefit of this is that if u add the them u will still be able to spawn the Mongol conquerors event which wouldn't work out with normal barbarians.
6) Lastly, if u have Seljuk Barbs u can edit them as u please; something that u cant do with normal barbs. I mean Rhye could have made the Celts Barbs but it was more benificial not to; i think in many ways the Turkic dynasties (Seljuks, Timurids) are very similar to the Celts in that respect

*Also if u think it is appropriate, u can give them the right to conduct diplomacy after a certain number of turns. This is especially for the Timurids who u can drag on right to the modern age with different dynamic names and making them likely to vassalize to Russia after 1800 ad.

It can go like this
-Timurids
-Khanate of Bukhara (after the Safavid spawn)
-Russian Turkestan (Russian Vassal)
-Turkestan A.S.S.R or Uzbek S.S.R (Communist Russian Vassal)
-Central Asian Republic (Modern Age, when free)

5) Historical natural disasters

Sounds good, I have some ideas. Remind me when u are about to start this.

And unrelated to the map:
6) Revise the dynamic names extensively, using Edead's excellent system for changing names, leaderheads, and even flags/ colors in SoI__________________

Does SOI have a system of renaming civs after a certain date so we can change Arabs, Chinese, Indian and Persian names according to historical dynasties of the time period. If not u should import that from RFCE.

 

[Linkman226]

Funny you should mention Seljuq barbarian invasions, Linkman. Since the Italians are already on a conditional spawn (won't spawn if a civilization holds north Italy), maybe the Turks don't spawn in Anatolia if it's not controlled by barbs/indies?

Read my mind (or a post from this thread many pages ago ). I discussed this earlier.

I remember me and some other people made a huge list on this.

Yup, it's long overdue.

Been waiting for this for a long thime

Yup.

I dont like this, mainly because i dont really see a point especially to the Saharan Desertification. All this will do is encourage the Egyptians, Pheonicians and Ethiopians to settle in unhistorical area. Even though the Sahara used to be fertile no important civ settled and no cities survive

Berber barbs should stop that.

I like this but I had a suggestion. You know the suggestion I had for Poland (for DOC). Can u apply the same thing here. The Seljuks and the Timurids can be a "minor barbarian civ". They would spawn and just like a normal barbarians but with the following features:

1) Will have their own flag and Unique Horse Archer type unit (because horse archers are too weak but knights and Camel Archers dont look right for a Turkic Invasion).
2) Instead of normal Barbarians they will be a lot less likely to destroy cities and rather keep them.
3) Will not be allowed to build settlers; I would let them research but that depends on you.
4) Most importantly if the Seljuks die, the Timurids will spawn in Samarkand with the different flag and color (the one u will import from SOI) just like the Ghorids and Delhi Sultanate in SOI.
5) Another benifit of this is that if u add the them u will still be able to spawn the Mongol conquerers event which wouldnt work out with normal barbarians.

*Also if u think it is appropriate, u can give them the right to conduct diplomacy after a certain number of turns. This is especially for the Timurids who u can drag on right to the modern age with different dynamic names and making them likely to vassalize to Russia after 1800 ad.

That was a typo, I meant to type Seljuk/ Timurid indies, not barbs. So:

1) Yes. I'll be using the qizilbash horse archer art from Bakuel here, and obviously with better stats than regular HA's.

2) They won't be barbs, so they won't have the barb predilection to burn cities down.

3) Not sure about research, have to think about it.

4) Why only if the Seljuks die?

5) Mongol conquerors already in from DoC.

6) Why diplomacy after a certain number of years? And when did the Timurids vassalize to Russia?

Sounds good, I have some ideas. Remind me when u are about to start this.

Sure

Does SOI have a system of renaming civs after a certain date so we can change Arabs, Chinese, Indian and Persian names according to historical dynasties of the time period. If not u should import that from RFCE.

Don't remember off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure it's mostly only based on certain events (for example, as you mentioned, Ghorids conquering Delhi). But this is very easy to do so don't worry about it.

 

[BenZL43]

Oh.. I see why you choose Luoyang
I was about to suggest Xi'an when I saw that Luoyang was also influential..
But IMO, we have to find some way to make sure AI China don't build Beijing as their second cities and AI India don't build Dilli as their second cities...

Because both Dilli and Beijing were not exist (large enough as cities) at around the time they usually acquired their first settler..

 

[J. pride]

3) Not sure about research, have to think about it.

4) Why only if the Seljuks die?

5) Mongol conquerors already in from DoC.

6) Why diplomacy after a certain number of years? And when did the Timurids vassalize to Russia?

Just so im sure are u adding indie cities to represent the Seljuks and Timurids or an actual minor civ.

4) Two Reasons:
1.Because the Timurids were in all sense of the word a successor state of the Mongols in Central Asia. The Seljuks existing signifies that the Mongol conquest was not successful and so the Taimur would not have been able to take advantage of the power vacuum left by the Mongols if the Seljuk or the Khwarezmids dynasty still existed. Its somewhat like this: The Ottomans would not have existed without the Sultanate of Rum and other Turkish invasion in Anatolia.
2.As u know, i want there to be a Turkic minor civ (Seljuks/Timurids) instead of just a few indie cities or barbs. And it would not be feasable to have both the Seljuks and Timurids so its like tackling two birds with one stone. Also, most of the time u will see both the Seljuks and the Timurids in their historical time periods so it will be fine but once in a while if the Seljuks do survive the Mongols, its shouldnt be a big deal.

5) Mongol conquerors in doc is only for the Arabs; that system isnt made for the indies or barbs so what i was saying is that u can extend that system to the Seljuks if u add them as a minor civ but not if u add them as independents.

6) To answer the question about the Timurids and Russia: Since almost every other empire represent a bunch of dynasties (China: Tang....Ming-Qing and a bunch of others; Arabia: Ummayads, Abbbasids, Fatimids; Spain: Cordoba, ,Leon, Aragon,) i think the the Timurids should also represent their successor state which was the Khanate of Bukhara. And as u know in the 19th century the Russian Empire expanded and vassalized the Khanate which was then transformed into a socialist satellite state in the 20th century before becoming independent nation(s). Now Back to the question of giving it diplomacy: i think u should give it diplomacy in 1500 because this was the date Khanate of Bukhara was formed. And since the Khanate had active relationships with Persia and Russia which often involved vassalization, i think it warrants communication.

I think that Timurids and the Khanate of Bukhara are more than warranted to be one civ because unlike Arabia, China, India and Spain they did not go through multipe religous, territorial and ethnic changes in the ruling power which makes them more than qualified to be one civ. Atleast by the standard of RFC