Rhye's Catapult
- Thread starter Rhye
- Start date
v062 sounds like great improvement 
Well, World Cup is near - one week...
In that month (June 9 - July 9) I will not have much time for civ,
as I have also work to do...
But as v062 is within a day or two - to that I will give try
Well, World Cup is near - one week...
In that month (June 9 - July 9) I will not have much time for civ,
as I have also work to do...
But as v062 is within a day or two - to that I will give try
Blasphemous said:
All valid points. In games of Civ it is the differentiation of state religions that make for the fun of war. Perhaps we could have the US and Euro nations prefer free religion over all other religion civics.
Of course some of the Civ religion's are not religions at all but instead philosophies or ways of life
V. Soma said:
Same for me...the world cup is the only reason to live in that month
http://rhye.civfanatics.net/civ4/files/RhyesCatapult062.zip
I couldn't reproduce the ruins bug.
If you catch it, please send me or post here the save of a few turns before it.
I couldn't reproduce the ruins bug.
If you catch it, please send me or post here the save of a few turns before it.
Blasphemous
Graulich
Perhaps we have to simply introduce a new aspect to the game: cultural affiliation. It can be either static (each civ gets cultural affiliation set by us and it stays that way) or dynamic (we set factors that affect how affiliation is created). Then it should affect diplomacy. If you are affiliated with a rival, you will not as readily declare war on them, but the hit to diplomacy when you get to war with them is greater. On the other hand, the more foreign civs you aren't affiliated with are an easier target for you, but when they declare war on you it doesn't infuriate you as much (you never trusted them in the first place). There can also be associated affects on war unhappiness.Barak said:
If we go with a static model, there are a few ways to go about it.
(1) One way is the simplest and most similar to Civ3. There are a few cultural groups: Western, Mesoamerican, Eurasian, Middle-Eastern, African, Far East. Each civ belongs to one. End of story.
(2) Another way is slightly more complex but perhaps more reflective of history: overlapping cultural affiliations, some triggered by tech. You would still have the generalized cultural groups from (1), right from the start, but then, for example, once each religion is founded there is also a cultural group for the civs that historically followed that religion. This affiliation will change to reflect how, for instance, many civs arround the world slowly succumbed to Christianity and Islam and became more closely affiliated with cultures they once found foreign.
I would imagine we can think of other static ways to do it. Far more interesting are the options if we go dynamic. We could set up a bunch of rules that create cultural affiliation between two civs (and this would work on a civ-by-civ basis, never in groups).
(A) Neighbors: The first two (three?) civs you contact are automatically affiliated as neighbors, after, say, five turns of contact. Later, any civ you share a border with for 30 turns straight without war becomes affiliated as a neighbor as well.
(B) Brothers in faith: Any civ you know that shares your state religion for ten turns straight without war becomes affiliated as brothers in faith.
(C) Political affiliation: Any civ you share three non-basic civics with for ten turns straight without war becomes affiliated as a political ally. The strenght of this affiliation (or basically, how many affiliations it counts on) depends on how many civics are shared.
(D) Latent affiliation: For every thirty turns of affiliation with a civ, you get one count of latent affiliation with them. Whenever A, B, or C gets cancelled out by circumstances, a count of D is added. D decays more slowly than it is gained - every twentieth game turn (counting from the start), every civ has a 50% chance of losing a count of D with each affiliated civ.
This setup gives you a dynamic where dynamic bonds are slowly built up and then become a major force in diplomacy. The entire mechanics would be hidden. Their only effects would be strengthening and weakening diplomatic hits and bonuses (and yes, I realize A, B, and C are reflective of existing diplomatic bonus) and thus creating a more dynamic interaction between civs.
As usual, this may be too complex for implementation, but it could be a very interesting change to the game, perhaps for Trebuchet.
Rossiya
Fridge Magnet Porn
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2006
- Messages
- 6,981
is there anyway you can transfer game saves from v60 to the latest version? i have a good game that i would like to continue with on the version.
p.s. i was starting a game with montezuma and at 620AD, Tokugawa had won a conquest victory- end of game. shame.
and also, in the middle tile of cuba, there is a tribal village in a jungle. when trying to enter it with a melee unit (cant remember which now), it wouldn't let me. is this intentional?
p.s. i was starting a game with montezuma and at 620AD, Tokugawa had won a conquest victory- end of game. shame.
and also, in the middle tile of cuba, there is a tribal village in a jungle. when trying to enter it with a melee unit (cant remember which now), it wouldn't let me. is this intentional?
Blasphemous
Graulich
Of course. There will be plenty of cirumstancial diplomatic factors to offset the effect of affiliation. Affiliation will only alter the dynamic - affiliated nations won't be as quick to go to war with one another, but when they slug it out, they'll really slug it out. This also means once they go to war they will stay in bad relations for longer than they would with a nation they don't feel as related to. I wonder if we can cause this kind of effect on AI behavior beyond simple manipulation of diplomacy hits.Jaguar said:
V. Soma said:
it's ok. If you can enter it, probably it's in your borders
I've decided the new name and drawn the main menu logo...it will be revealed soon 
When RedThread finishes completing Soma's city names map, we'll adopt the new name and move to another thread.
For that time I'll need to complete writing a readme.
Where do you feel this mod is more appropriate?
In Modpacks, or in Scenarios?
When RedThread finishes completing Soma's city names map, we'll adopt the new name and move to another thread.
For that time I'll need to complete writing a readme.
Where do you feel this mod is more appropriate?
In Modpacks, or in Scenarios?
Rossiya
Fridge Magnet Porn
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2006
- Messages
- 6,981
is there anyway you can transfer game saves from v60 to the latest version? i have a good game that i would like to continue with on the version.
ps. it should be in modpacks- it is far too different to the vanilla version to be considered a simple scenario.
ps. it should be in modpacks- it is far too different to the vanilla version to be considered a simple scenario.
Rhye said:I've decided the new name and drawn the main menu logo...it will be revealed soon
When RedThread finishes completing Soma's city names map, we'll adopt the new name and move to another thread.
For that time I'll need to complete writing a readme.
Where do you feel this mod is more appropriate?
In Modpacks, or in Scenarios?
The answer to that question asks a question itself. What is our goal? Is it to change the format of civilization or create (or attempt to create) a reflection of Earth.
I feel that this is more of a scenario than a modification of the general game. But, as we are expecting to expand catapult into trebuchet perhaps while this is a wonderful scenario the proper place for it is in the Mods section. But either way an argument can be made.
Can't wait to here the new name!
Blasphemous
Graulich
It should be in modpacks. And I think I can guess the name.
I'll be glad to edit the readme if you want, Rhye. Just email it to me (you have my address).
I'll be glad to edit the readme if you want, Rhye. Just email it to me (you have my address).
chrisrossi said:
Well just try to load them from v62. It should work but some changes might not take effect
Similar threads
