A further observation on the apiary/cottage issue: In my game as Turkey, the Arabians are building apiaries in places where they would ordinarily be building cottages (where no honey is available). Perhaps the improvements have been moved out of sequence in the same way the terrain was?
Oddly enough, I am unable to build apiaries in the same fashion - there must be honey present for me to do it.
thanks for the explanation sedna. That script would be really useful otherwise it's going to take ages to figure out what I'm doing
Something I don't understand though: if I understood correctly, the -1 one values in the second part mean that the default name for that tile shouldn't be changed when settled/conquered by this particular civ. Where's the default name listed though ?
The default name list for each Civ (used only if they settle outside their Name Map) is in Assets/XML/Civilizations/CIV4Civilizations.xml. This file shouldn't be too hard to understand. Technically, the city names in this file are only references to some other file which contains the "real" name. This is normally done in generic Civ to facilitate translations of city names into the player's local language (London -> Londres) I believe. I recommend we don't bother with these fallback lists until the City Name maps are much more complete.
Do people have a preference for how to work with City Name maps? I can either have you put city names into comments in a spreadsheet (where the background color of cells would show the map in a crude form) or have you put city names on "signs/markers" in WorldBuilder. The WorldBuilder option lets you see the map in more detail of course, but might be more tedious for doing a lot of work. Ideally I'd support both modes, but I may prioritize one mode, so comment if you care.
A further observation on the apiary/cottage issue: In my game as Turkey, the Arabians are building apiaries in places where they would ordinarily be building cottages (where no honey is available). Perhaps the improvements have been moved out of sequence in the same way the terrain was?
Oddly enough, I am unable to build apiaries in the same fashion - there must be honey present for me to do it.
for example, Burgundy has "-1" for the tile of Trapani. This means the name of the city they might found there wouldn't change. So if they do settle there (unlikely, I know) the city name will be taken from the xml ? I thought there was a default one specific to the map.
as for working on the city maps, I'm fine with both solutions you proposed, I'd rather pick the simpler for you to implement (I guess spreadsheet) than for me to use (wbs).
Seriously. I had this in my recent game as Venice. After taking Firenze and Pisa they were in constant revolt every few turns until I bribed them with lots of culture buildings. I think its because they are coded as the same team, ie. Independent 1 or Independent 2 which you can see if you check in the civ list in WB. Or maybe they just had an election and voted in Rome as their capitol. Who knows what they get up to behind your back.
Here's where I am at on making it easy for people to contribute City Name Maps.
I decided that it was probably easiest for people to work in WorldBuilder to get city names in the right places. I have written some simple scripts to completely automate the process of getting CityName maps from the python into signs/landmarks which will appear when you open up WorldBuilder within a game and the reverse. So far, so good.
The problem is with accents. I have some transferring accented characters between WorldBuilder and the python program. I'm going to give it another shot, 'cause I assume people are averse to entering accents at HTML entities (see here).
I think the chance to work with WBS is already a great present Sedna, it shouldn't be such a bother for people to use html codes for accents (which won't be so many, after all). Thanks a lot.
This might belong in resources and terrain, but we may want to remove the aluminum/uranium/other unused resources from the mod entirely, if this is possible. In a game as Burgundy, I randomly discovered deposits of aluminum and uranium in France in the same turn. Those are some lucky mines!
One minor, low priority fix to think about - do we want to switch the artwork on the market and grocer as originally intended? (In the city build screen, the little icons for market and grocer are backwards).
A couple of fixes come to mind, esp. concerning independents.
Can we tone down the teching and miltary production of indies a bit? If you let them develop too much past the early game they often out-tech the human player and have more advanced military units. In my last game the indies were the first to Liberalism and had gunpowder units to everybody else's crossbows.
Are these independent cities really independent are just part of some grand alliance? It seems that if you attack one of them all the rest attack you. I'm sick of stacks of 6 or 8 heavy crossbowmen rampaging about and trashing resource improvements. They're worse than barbs as all they do is produce military units. Don't they have production costs like the rest of us?
Why do all the AI players DOW on you when you get a UHV condition, esp. with your second one?
How can the Norse ever reach the ocean tiles in the Black Sea to fulfill the 3rd. UHV condition if the Byzantines will never agree to open borders with you? I've always thought a caravel could pass thru a city tile just as they pass thru all other tiles without needing an OB. Apparently not.
The Genoa UHV is still broken as control of the required areas is not recognized.
And can we change it so the AI civs stop demanding that you adopt Paganism every few turns? It's really annoying. Don't they ever change civics?
There is no solution to the independents being part of a great alliance. A help would be in we make Rome not independent, since the indies get large bonuses from that city. We should also put high tech cost for them. I will do that.
I don't know about the AI, presumably it is in the AI to dislike people who are about the win the game, but still.
Norse can: trade maps or quickly build a city on the Black Sea coast. They has some cities on the Balkans once (I don't think they were on the BS coast however).
Civs need favorite civics, right now they all like Paganism.
If you don't adopt a religion, you can get OB with the Byzantines. Still, I htink it would be better if you removed ocean tiles form the BS entirely in order to make the Norse UHV less tedious.
But then that Norse UHV is trivial. If only there were some good way to simulate the Norse trading down along the rivers of Russia into the Black Sea...
But then that Norse UHV is trivial. If only there were some good way to simulate the Norse trading down along the rivers of Russia into the Black Sea...
IMO, the Norse UHV should not include the Black Sea. I don't recall reading anything about Viking raiding parties terrorizing the black sea in my history books.
If the AI were not so quick to trade maps, I would offer that the Norse need to have explored the most territory by a certain time.
Otherwise, I would be fine with all ocean tiles (some being in the Med) as long as it doesn't include the Black Sea.
The discovery UHV is related to trade not conquest (the other UHVs have "conquest" part in them). The idea is for the Norse is to establish some sort of trade/influence in the area. They did trade with the Black Sea nations.
For the Norse to achieve the victory, they have to either OB with Byzantium, Conquer Constantinople, send a settler early on to Crimea (by land) or trade maps with Bulgaria/Byzantium/Kiev.
We should make it so that Orthodox and Catholic nations have lower "hated religion" diplomatic penalties. That way even a catholic Norse could OB with Byzantium.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
