Rhye's Catapult

[Rhye]

I think I know why Greece seems to die out quickly, because when I helped them in my last game they survived, prospered, conquered the Black Sea and became one of the more powerful civs.

Essentially its the 'fall' code. The requirements say that if 1/3 of the civs cities fall to barbarians, the civ is destroyed. What about hwen a civ only has 3 cities, like Greece often times when the first barbarian invasion hits and sometimes Rome at the second? Then all Greece has to do is lose 1 city and they're completelky destroyed.

I think the requirement should be to:
Lose 1/3 of a civs cities, but must lose a minimum of 2.

Thus the minimum number of cities a civ can lose and fall is 2, and that will help out smaller civs in the very beginning, which is generally when they seem to fall.

I've read the code, it says

iLostCities*2 > iNumCities

that is, if 1 city in 3 get conquered, it shouldn't be enough to make the civ fall (it's 2>2; should have been >=)


are you sure you saw exactly 3 greek cities?

 

[Blasphemous]

I just played my second test game, all the wiser from yesterday's. I started as China just to pass the time before Rome spawns. Then I hopped into command of the Roman Empire and did quite a bit better than before. I played for about six hours today I think.
I quickly got used to having such empty maps early on, and the spawning of the other European civs didn't seem as odd as yesterday. I didn't bother with Iberia this time at all (me and Izzy are good friends right now) but I did keep Lutetia Parisorum and Germania Superior. I hunted Louis XIV for a while but just signed peace since he was no real threat and had no cities for me to take at the time. He settled in real-life Portugal (approximately) and later on in North Africa. Bismarck, on the other hand, I hunted down and took his three oddly-placed cities (name-wise). Now in the Rennaissance, I'm first place by score and trying to take French territory after all (due to convenient location). My good friends and partners in being better than everyone else are Cyrus and Hatshepsut.
Everything seems to be unfolding rather realistically (if not completely historically).
I really like the way cities often get the name their civ would give them. I was thinking, perhaps the whole system can be better-integrated in the game. I haven't programmed much, and not in a long while, but I would imagine it can be possible to do the following:
(1) Set up a routine which matches tile and owner to a name and if no match is found uses a name off of a list of additional names for the owner's cities.
(2) Have this routine called every time a city is founded, flipped, or conquered.
Thus you would unify the entire naming system. Currently you have weird quirks - the barbarians found Lutetia, Rome conquers it and renames in Lutetia Parisorum, and then France founds Paris in Iberia.
The whole realistic naming system thingy is just such a beatifully tasteful touch, it's a real bother to see the rough edges around it here and there.

 

[Rhye]

I really like the way cities often get the name their civ would give them. I was thinking, perhaps the whole system can be better-integrated in the game. I haven't programmed much, and not in a long while, but I would imagine it can be possible to do the following:
(1) Set up a routine which matches tile and owner to a name and if no match is found uses a name off of a list of additional names for the owner's cities.
(2) Have this routine called every time a city is founded, flipped, or conquered.
.

????? This is already being done

Thus you would unify the entire naming system. Currently you have weird quirks - the barbarians found Lutetia, Rome conquers it and renames in Lutetia Parisorum, and then France founds Paris in Iberia.
The whole realistic naming system thingy is just such a beatifully tasteful touch, it's a real bother to see the rough edges around it here and there.

This issue will go when I integrate French city map into the game.
In this moment only civs up to Arabia are included.

 

[Blasphemous]

Oh, I understood that the system was split in two, with one system for naming newly-founded cities according to place, and another for renaming conquered/flipped cities that were initially preplaced (as opposed to freely founded). I thought it was intended to stay like that.
So what I "suggested" is in fact already being done. Good.
I didn't read the thread 100% thoroughly until now since I wasn't playing so it was hard for me to relate to some of the things.

 

[Rhye]

the system is split, yes, but the effect is the same

 

[Vishaing]

No I'm not, sorry. I hadn't actually looked at the code, I had just thought about a possibility based on what I thought you had said, I think I might have misread your statement on it. As for how many cities they had, I'm not exactly sure because if I am every actively playing, not waiting for my civ to spawn, I help them and they never fall.
Perhaps they fall when they only have two cities, because then it would be iLostCities = 1 and iNumCities = 1, so
iLostCities *2 > iNumCities ;

1*2 > 1; 2>1 ? Maybe?

I haven't tested it enough to say one way or another, I just thought I might have had the problem pinned down.

On the subject of city names, had you intended to rename conquered cities even for civs that didn't exist at the same time, like get an American equivelent of a Roman or Persian name ready in case America conquers Rome, or the other way around?
I think we could probably at least get the names to *sound* like what their civ would use. For instance, if the Romans conquered the city of Washington, perhaps they might rename it to ; Wasintion Americanium, or something like that. That would be a nice touch in my oppinion, if we can do it. After all, I'm not sure if there are any people on the Forum who might know what Hatshepsut would call the city of Boston.

As for the traits, I still like decreasing maintanence for some civs based on special circumstances, for instance, decrease maintanence for Roman Cities if they have a road connection to represent the Roman Highway system, and give English cities lower maintanence per each luxury resource they have in their radius. That would give Rome the ability to make a massive Empire in Europe and England a similar bonus for a far flung luxury resource based Empire, both of those seem historically accurate to me.

As for the 'no anarcy' trait, I've always found it to be rather weak, as anarchy never really lasts that long anyways in my experience, perhaps we should just do away with it?

 

[Crayton]

Another idea for the city-naming is to map out a default grid of city-names. If the founding civ does not have a unique name for that coordinate, the name is drawn from the default grid. This should give a fairly real-world feel; the Germans can re-found "Rome" or "Athens" instead of the city-list name "Munich".

 

[Red Threat]

Another idea for the city-naming is to map out a default grid of city-names. If the founding civ does not have a unique name for that coordinate, the name is drawn from the default grid. This should give a fairly real-world feel; the Germans can re-found "Rome" or "Athens" instead of the city-list name "Munich".

It was my original idea, but Rhye preferred the other one. The reasons (I guess) are different:

1) The chosen system is easier to code (isn'it, Rhye?);

2) More variability (we don't want history to be completely copied, personally I think that we could partially avoid the use of this system for the european colonies);

3) More flexibility in the name changes: if Rome founds "Tarraco" in Catalunya and then the city is taken by the Spanish it will be renamed "Tarragona"; but if Spain is the first civ to settle there they will found "Barcelona".

However, I realize that the system you and me suggested should be easier to build and understand.

Now I'm working on the colonies of the western european civs (England, Spain, France, Germany) whose motherland has been already done and correct. Any suggestion? I will try to be very "essential" for the reasons I mentioned above.

 

[Rhye]

n.3 is the main reason.
Crayton's idea would be good if there weren't the complication of traslating every name in each language (if French found a city in London, it has to be called Londres)

 

[Rhye]

Yesterday I implemented the following:

IND Spirituality No anarchy
CHI Numbers 1.5X train speed melee and gunpowder units
ROM Infrastructure Roads allow 4X movement within borders
PER Satrapy No distance maintenance cost
JAP Honor All military land units get free City Garrison I promotion
SPA Discovery All naval units get free Navigation I and Navigation II promotions
FRA Entente Non-European civilizations have a friendlier attitude
ENG Navy 2X train speed naval units
GER Blitzkrieg All gunpowder units get free Commando promotion
MAL Wealth 1 trade in plots with 1 trade
INC Terraces Mountains produce 1 food
MON Horde Pillaging costs no movement points

America, Aztecs and Russia will come soon.
Egyptian civics are tricky to mod.
I'm still undecided about Greece and Arabia

 

[Vishaing]

Red Threat: For the colony's names, I would get a list of that civ's names for their colonies, and just have the colonies go down that list in order, that way the colony names would be historically accurate, to a point, but not completely set in stone. Perhaps some of the largert and more important colonies could be location based, such as Cuba, or the U.S. colonies.

Rhye: Blitzkreig is only for Gunpoweder units? what about the tanks, I thought they were the ones that mainly led the charge. Or do they count as gunpowder units?

For Greece, this might be unbalancing, but how about giving them either a golden age to begin with, or something more lasting; giving them a free great person in the first four cities they found? Thus they should get a great person in Athennai, Appolonnia, and Byzantion, plus one other, probably either Sinope or Tyra. That could give them lasting bonuses and a significant boost early on that would still help later in the game, albeit only slightly.

A question, once warlords is out, do you plan on putting in other civs to replace some of the ancient civs? For instance Rome might become Italy, or Gaul might be replaced by France?

 

[Rhye]

-> Tanks should have been in, but that way Panzers would have 4 moves! This is a little frightening and I think it's too much.

-> About Warlords: yes, a kind of, but let's keep this discussion out, it's very early now.

 

[Blasphemous]

Yesterday I implemented the following:

IND Spirituality No anarchy
CHI Numbers 1.5X train speed melee and gunpowder units
ROM Infrastructure Roads allow 4X movement within borders
PER Satrapy No distance maintenance cost
JAP Honor All military land units get free City Garrison I promotion
SPA Discovery All naval units get free Navigation I and Navigation II promotions
FRA Entente Non-European civilizations have a friendlier attitude
ENG Navy 2X train speed naval units
GER Blitzkrieg All gunpowder units get free Commando promotion
MAL Wealth 1 trade in plots with 1 trade
INC Terraces Mountains produce 1 food
MON Horde Pillaging costs no movement points

America, Aztecs and Russia will come soon.
Egyptian civics are tricky to mod.
I'm still undecided about Greece and Arabia

I'm altogether happy with this list, except for Germany.
Besides the fact that the Blitzkrieg was entirely based on motorized units (albeit in the role of transport a great deal of the time) it's a very unrepresentative, almost bigoted choice for Germany's UE. Blitzkrieg is a very WWII-centric concept (though it inspired tactics that survived later) and it was most famously used by a regime that Germany is infamous for but does not represent Germany's historical and cultural legacy.
Like I said, Germans are far prouder of their intellectual legacy (which, unlike Nazi era methods of warfare, they are usually not ashamed of) and this is also more representative for Germany throughout the ages.
One implementation is as I suggested, extra beakers per population. Another is cheaper universities and/or more culture from universities and/or more effective universities. Another option is a higher rate, or + points from libraries and/or universities. There are really many ways to represent the uniqueness of Germany without alluding solely to the country's darkest period of history. I'm almost German enough and almost annoying enough to be insulted by the whole thing.

 

[Red Threat]

For the colony's names, I would get a list of that civ's names for their colonies, and just have the colonies go down that list in order, that way the colony names would be historically accurate, to a point, but not completely set in stone. Perhaps some of the largert and more important colonies could be location based, such as Cuba, or the U.S. colonies.

Yes I think this should be the right way (and the same should be applied to Russian colonization of Siberia); however today I have worked on Latin America and I have succeeded in making a full coverage of the plots following Rhye's rules. Surely I will be more flexible for Africa, Asia, Oceania and northern Canada, nevertheless Latina America is not excluded to be reviewed in order to make stronger the feeling of "brand new discovery and colonization".

 

[Red Threat]

@Rhye

Martedì ti dovrei mandare tutte le civ tranne Mongolia e Russia che, essendo le più difficili, mi riservo come ultime.

 

[Cannae]

Yesterday I implemented the following:

IND Spirituality No anarchy
CHI Numbers 1.5X train speed melee and gunpowder units
ROM Infrastructure Roads allow 4X movement within borders
PER Satrapy No distance maintenance cost
JAP Honor All military land units get free City Garrison I promotion
SPA Discovery All naval units get free Navigation I and Navigation II promotions
FRA Entente Non-European civilizations have a friendlier attitude
ENG Navy 2X train speed naval units
GER Blitzkrieg All gunpowder units get free Commando promotion
MAL Wealth 1 trade in plots with 1 trade
INC Terraces Mountains produce 1 food
MON Horde Pillaging costs no movement points

America, Aztecs and Russia will come soon.
Egyptian civics are tricky to mod.
I'm still undecided about Greece and Arabia

Are you saying that it is now possibal in your mod to have units move and build improvements on monuntains???If so that would be awesome!!!

 

[Rhye]

I'm altogether happy with this list, except for Germany.
Besides the fact that the Blitzkrieg was entirely based on motorized units (albeit in the role of transport a great deal of the time) it's a very unrepresentative, almost bigoted choice for Germany's UE. Blitzkrieg is a very WWII-centric concept (though it inspired tactics that survived later) and it was most famously used by a regime that Germany is infamous for but does not represent Germany's historical and cultural legacy.
Like I said, Germans are far prouder of their intellectual legacy (which, unlike Nazi era methods of warfare, they are usually not ashamed of) and this is also more representative for Germany throughout the ages.

a quick reply during halftime of Holland-Portugal:

Germans are ashamed of the Nazi era, but there's absolutely no reason for being ashamed of their effective methods of warfare. I feel this solution is very representative in the late game.

 

[Rhye]

@Rhye

Martedì ti dovrei mandare tutte le civ tranne Mongolia e Russia che, essendo le più difficili, mi riservo come ultime.

di lusso



EDIT: ah, una cosa: ma te sai mica dal forum di POL qualche exit poll non ufficiale sul referendum? Ho visto parlavi di brogli ma non ho capito a cosa ti riferivi

 

[Rhye]

Are you saying that it is now possibal in your mod to have units move and build improvements on monuntains???If so that would be awesome!!!

it could be possible but I'm not doing it.
I've just made mountains produce 1 food in incan territories.

 

[Red Threat]

di lusso



EDIT: ah, una cosa: ma te sai mica dal forum di POL qualche exit poll non ufficiale sul referendum? Ho visto parlavi di brogli ma non ho capito a cosa ti riferivi

Niente exit poll non ufficiali, c'è solo tanta apprensione per la distribuzione dell'affluenza, che è parecchio scarsa al sud.

Quanto ai brogli, si discuteva l'ultima teoria (ne ha parlato un libro, "il broglio" di recente uscito e recensito da Repubblica) che mette in relazione la drastica e inspiegabile, nemmeno dalla nuova scheda, riduzione di oltre un milione di schede bianche con il milione circa di voti in più alla CdL e specie a FI rispetto alle previsioni degli exit poll calcolati sulle schede valide teoriche (data cioè l'affluenza e una percentuale fisiologica di bianche).