Rhye's Catapult

[Rhye]

I played a test game yesterday, and in addition to this bug, I noticed that the 'quick moves' setting doesn't carry on when you switch.

sorry, there's nothing i can do about it

1. Initial setting adjustments. I've found it strange that the Hettites, which were one of the dominating powers around the time Greece starts (which, accidentally, is much to early btw), are only represented by one city with a single warrior, while, at the same time, Jerulasem, which was never in its history a major power in the region (most of the time the entive Levant area was pretty much a battefield between Egypt, and, depending on the period, the Hettites or Assyria). I'd like to see that changed, ideally Jerusalem replaced by another Phoenician city (incomparably greater importance)

Jerusalem must survive to found Judaism.
Hattusas shouldn't be too strong if we want Greece to survive

2. The second point is related, I guess. Both Greece and Persia ended up with Judaism as their state religion, which carried all the way to 1600 ad. I'd suggest a tweaking of religion spread rates, particulaly increasing that of christiany. Alternatively, create another religion - orthodox christianity perhaps - instead of judaism (which, in reality, wasn't/isn't one to spread outside of the jewish societies).

Instead of Judaism??? No way.

Religion spread rate are already tweaked.
But every game is different, and not always Greece converts to Christianity

3. Good news: all civs survived. But I'd name some problems. The Romans, even before the barbs arrived, only founded one city outside of italy. There was never a fall of Rome, they just stayed on the peninsula, eventually loosing one city to the French. Greece continued to me a major power (and no thanks to my start with them, it was quite horrible). Russia remained weak. India became a superpower, along with China

All civs survived isn't a good news to me.
And the problems you quote aren't problems. That's just your game. Next time Russia will be a superpowek, India will be weak and Greece will be dead.

4. I am mostly a marathon player, and the speed was way too fast for me. It was like 'only 15 turns to tech? yay, I must be doing great' all the time. I'd love to be able to play the game on slower speed and actually be able to feel the ages passing by, instead of suddenly noticing

EDIT: oh yes, I forgot about the most important thing, the reason which made me quit the game. It's slow as hell. Turn delay after 1000 AD became too much of a bother

You can't have them both.
Longer the game is, slower it will be

'oh! it's 250ad' (the date christianity was founded in my game, something I found rather funny).

I don't get why you all are never satisfied.
You all wanted to get rid of automatic religion founding (Christianity used to be founded exactly in 30AD in Jerusalem) for a more flexible approach that related religions to techs again and made the city and date less predictable...

 

[Riker]

never satisfied?
what about the incans? X

And I think we should change the years. It's too odd to have christianity before christ....

 

[HypnosTene]

Jerusalem must survive to found Judaism.
Hattusas shouldn't be too strong if we want Greece to survive

Well, I see, it makes sense that way. Still, a pity. The fertile crescent is underrepresented in civ4

I don't get why you all are never satisfied.
You all wanted to get rid of automatic religion founding (Christianity used to be founded exactly in 30AD in Jerusalem) for a more flexible approach that related religions to techs again and made the city and date less predictable...

No, no, that's not what I meant here. It would be silly if religion founding was automatic, and I am not dissatisfied with it in any way.

I guess I didn't word my impressions correctly. The overall feel of the game was quite good, some of the options work simply fantastically <the naming grid for one, I simply love it>.

 

[Rhye]

<the naming grid for one, I simply love it>.

Russian city names and wrong because they'not implemented yet (as well as Mongols)

 

[mitsho]

The game is great and I am no man to complain all the time. Imo, you're doing a great job... But do as you please and enjoin the World Cup first (Haut doch bitte die Schwaben raus [please, please, kick the Germans out]).

On topic, the game I played yesterday seemed totally fine, I didn't see any great bugs/problems. But some questions occured to me on the overall look-out of the mod:

- What if there was a Mesopotamian Civ like it'd be logical from a historical point of view (instead of Barbarians)? Would the game be better or worse? It'd certainly would be interesting to play as them completely sourrounded by enemies (Persian invaders, Greek invaders, Arabian invaders, then the Turks)?

- Apropos Turks. They are gonna replace the Barbarian storm on Persia, correct? I mean in the "Warlords"-version. Will there be a way for them to travers Persia and settle in "Turkey"?

Either way, both the Turks and the "Mesopotamians" (Babylon, Hittite or Assyria? what about Sumer?) would create a "One civ too many for the region"-situation which would certainly make the game more interesting.
Now, the problem is there won't be a mesopotamian civ/leaderhead in warlords. (but there are other unused leaderheads, from Brennus to Ramses/Hatshepsut or Ceasar/Augustus who would somehow fit in there).

- Next question: the new warlord civs:
Carthage will certainly replenish the meditteranean, taking away Roman expansion area and a connection to Mali and Egypt, very fine.

Korea will be another player against the Asian Barbs, and certainly help the situation there.

The Turks I already mentionned, they will be a great addition.

The Zulu will pose the problem of how to implement them to not let them grow to big but still give them a chance to win somehow. Their main goal will be to fight back the European colonisators (like Inca in South and Aztec in Middle America), it'll work great.

The Vikings, I'm not sure about them, europe gets too crowded now. Now idea really.

The Celts: BIG BIG problem, there'll be no way to implement them but to place them in Eastern Europe as a Slawic pendant, but they are really the third civ too much in Europe. Do you have any idea what do to with them?


Instead, imho, there are some "civs" missing for a perfect Rhye's Catapult:

North America, imo, the Aztecs do expand too much. There is few room for Maya, but it'll certainly rend the game much more interesting if the Aztecs start in a war with maya and wouldn't only have to fight Barbs. More important, there is &#238;mo a need to halt Aztec expansion into the Mississippi valley, either the iroquois or more barbs. (since we have no iroquois or maya, it'd mean barbs?)

Asia
To barren in my opinion, more civs would be much better than the massive amount of barbs we have now. Why not a small tibet? Or the Khmer/Thai to fill it starting sometime aroun 1300 AD? With another civ Australia starting around 1800 a simulation of WWII would be possible, not?
These civs would be relatively easy to create, as you could use the leaderheads of India, China, Mongolia and America respectively for them.

I don't know what your plan is, but these are just the thoughts that occured to me while playing yesterday. I do not expect you to answer, maybe you are waiting for Warlords to plan the thing, this is totally ok. But this really is the only thing I find not too perfect in your mod: the number of civs is too low...

But hey, enjoy the World Cup. Forza Italia! (I'm not sure wether to support the frog eaters or Portugal now ).

mitsho

 

[Tyranausaurus]

Just a suggestion here,

Instead of the Celts we should have another alternative civ, IMO perhaps the Sumerians? it would ad ALOT of difference to the game to have such a civ.

 

[OzzyKP]

No to another mediterranian civ. They are represented just fine by barbs imho.

 

[Rhye]

Warlords will bring some cool stuff along with some problems.

Carthage is a great addition in the Mediterranean, as with the new wars system (which is working btw, you'll see in the next version) there might be some cool wars with Rome.
Vikings have their place up there,
and Ottomans will be surely included but I've yet to decide if as Ottomans (appearing in Turkey and flipping cities there, eventually killing Greece) or Turks (those barbarians in Persia)...we'll see.
Zulu won't be included at all. There no point in starting playing in 1800 with no chance to win or to be just not the worst.
Celts are a real problem and I'm thinking of a simple appearance as "green barbarians" (barbarians with celtic flag). Possibly with diplomacy w/Brennus
Koreans are in a very tiny space: I don't know it that's enough to host a civ. In case, it will be a non-playable minor civ.

The mesopotamian situation will change.
Jerusalem will be assigned to Israel (peaceful minor civ)
The rest to Babylon (Sumeria is too early, we start in 3000BC). Now if there are good leaderheads, units and so on, Babylon will be playable. Otherwise, a minor civ.
Other minor civs might be Maya and a SE Asian civ.
Coloured barbarians instead could be native americans and huns (as well as celts)

 

[Rhye]

But do as you please and enjoin the World Cup first (Haut doch bitte die Schwaben raus [please, please, kick the Germans out]).

But hey, enjoy the World Cup. Forza Italia! (I'm not sure wether to support the frog eaters or Portugal now ).

mitsho

thank you!
Beating Germany will be hard, much harder than last time (4-1 in Florence)
I definitely support Portugal in the other semi.
If France wins, then it will be revenge! I'm still wounded by the Euro 2000 final French last-minute equaliser

are you from Canton Ticino?

 

[Barak]

Rhye, have you looked into the Arab banking situation?

I tried a game from scratch and the same thing happened. Prior to the selection of a state religion all flipped cities got a bank and supermarket.

 

[mitsho]

hmm, minor civs are a cool idea, I agree . It sounds interesting at all. Quick thing from an inca game I just started: It seems very well balanced, the two food mountains are a good idea but I doubt the AI uses it. For that I'd be positive if the mountains would add something more (a hammer? or giving the inca worker the possibility to enter mountains and build actual terraces there, adding another something). but overall, the bonus is ok the way it is.

to your question, no, I'm not a ticinese I do not speak Italian at all too, sorry. I am able to read some italian stuff though due to my years of Latin and other experiences Actually, I am from the opposite corner of Switzerland (Basel).

mitsho

 

[OzzyKP]

Where is the most recent file, btw?

I haven't played this in a while and I've got some free time today to play around a bit.

 

[Barak]

Just an FYI....the american immigration thing is evident even when I play as Japan at 1670 AD. And it seems to pop up ever turn

 

[Tyranausaurus]

The mesopotamian situation will change.
Jerusalem will be assigned to Israel (peaceful minor civ)
The rest to Babylon (Sumeria is too early, we start in 3000BC). Now if there are good leaderheads, units and so on, Babylon will be playable. Otherwise, a minor civ.
Other minor civs might be Maya and a SE Asian civ.
Coloured barbarians instead could be native americans and huns (as well as celts)

I totally agree with you, and about Sumeria your'e right, about Babylon: it should start along with the Egyptians, Chinese and the Indians (although it sometimes goes back to older times).

Rhye you mentioned if they get a good leaderhead and a UU:
1. Amra has done a fine job on creating some leader heads (use the one he created for Gilgamesh).
2. I'm not sure who was the creator but someone made a good looking Babylonian Bowman you could use.
3. Forum member 'Prestidigitator' has created some nice flags for mesopotamia and made some nice Ziggurat. It could be used a unique building for them too.

I hope I did a good job on convincing you .
BTW, v. 0.80 looks very good.

 

[Rhye]

Where is the most recent file, btw?

I haven't played this in a while and I've got some free time today to play around a bit.

http://rhye.civfanatics.net/civ4/files/RhyesCatapult080.zip

Rhye, have you looked into the Arab banking situation?

I tried a game from scratch and the same thing happened. Prior to the selection of a state religion all flipped cities got a bank and supermarket.

I've fixed all the things you've said about the UPs so far.

 

[Rhye]

Just an FYI....the american immigration thing is evident even when I play as Japan at 1670 AD. And it seems to pop up ever turn

I know I know, I forgot the popup that I was using for debugging purposes.

If you feel it's too annoying, I'll post the fixed 083.

 

[Barak]

I know I know, I forgot the popup that I was using for debugging purposes.

If you feel it's too annoying, I'll post the fixed 083.

I do not find it annoying, it just takes away from the experience, reminding you that there as an all powerfull Oz behind the curtain making everything happen...or some such.

Of course these are all nitpicking aspects of an excelent product which I'm sure is difficult to achieve.

 

[Barak]

In my next test game as Rome, I noticed that Arabia's temples and mosques worked as intended when Arabia became Muslim in the first turn.

 

[Blasphemous]

I have a novel idea (I hope): how about have Arabia spawn as Muslim one turn after Islam is founded?
I don't know enough about the matter to say for sure, but I'm inclined to believe the Arabs were truly born as a nation when they were united by Islam. It would make sense to link the two in-game. You could also have the holy city of Islam flip to them no matter what as long as it's in a certain range of plots that makes sense, but perhaps that's too much (and unrealistic).

 

[Arkaeyn]

Rhye, I'm glad you're looking at adding minor civs, at least when Warlords comes out. I think it would be interesting to get the AI working so that it successfully destroys civs on its own, and new civs are chosen randomly (and get around the cap that way)

You could have three types of Civs - those that spawn no matter what (the big ones, Rome, Arabia, Germany, America, etc), those that spawn if there's room (Assyria, Vikings, Korea, Portugal), and those who spawn from barbarians (the Huns, Celts, Mongols, Turks) if the barbarians successfully capture a city in the right place at the right time.

I'll need to think about this a little further, but it seems like a feasible way to change the mod from being barbarian-centered to Civ-centered.