1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Completed Modpacks' started by Rhye, Feb 5, 2004.

?

Rate this mod!

  1. I can't play Civ without this: no more loading times!

    203 vote(s)
    66.6%
  2. A good mod, but I won't play with it

    54 vote(s)
    17.7%
  3. I don't like the map

    13 vote(s)
    4.3%
  4. I don't like the terrain

    9 vote(s)
    3.0%
  5. I don't like the additions

    5 vote(s)
    1.6%
  6. I don't like the rules changes

    21 vote(s)
    6.9%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Khift, I have no problem with an all-purpouse 3.2.1 infantry unit being added in the late ancient age, if you have any suggestions I'm all ears. About Pikemen, they're fine where they are - Pikes were invented to counter Knights defensively. It's already a bit inaccurate giving them a good offense because they weren't especially mobile, but it's a sacrifice that must be made for coherence of the unit lines and for differentiation between crossbow and pike.
    Actually, whatever late ancient age all-purpouse infantry that's added could have 3.3.1 and then Pike could get 3.4.1 so they can actually stand up to knights properly. But then Crossbows would have to be 1.4.1 and lonbgbows 1.5.1 and then everyhing else gets screwed up as well. It can be done I guess, but I think it would be better not to.
     
  2. Aeon221

    Aeon221 Lord of the Cheese Helmet

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,900
    Location:
    Hiding from the Afro-Eurasians
    Rhye, can you email me a copy of that spreadsheet you fiddled with? I am starting to get REALLY curious about how to use Excel, and its pretty clear you know a lot about it! ;p

    Thanks!

    Had the mobile tower error just after I finished off the Koreans (the Chinese fell in 90AD, Koreans in 200 something cuz I had a GPT with them). Playing as mongolians on Emperor, had been going really well prior to that (5000+ gold, 40GPT, been exploiting the heck outta the AI)!
     
  3. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    Replace the line:

    #ANIMNAME_PRTO_War_Wagon

    with:

    #ANIMNAME_PRTO_Mobile_Tower
     
  4. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    Here it is, but I have no time to make a detailed guide of it. Consider that the first italic column is a rating of how good the unit is, the 2nd italic is how much it really costs with 0.42, the third with 0.44 and the bold is the ratio: higher it is, better the unit is compared to the price.

    EDIT: removed, see post below
     
  5. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America

    :cry: I don't want to spend the rest of my life tweaking this mod: I listen to everybody but I consider the unit balancement and additions done for 95%, I don't want to begin from scratch again.

    I think cavalry now are OK (I raised some costs, depending on what the excel sheet told me :) ) and I changed Musketman and Guerrilla for the same reasons.
    I'll try to find a solution to make some unit upgrade to the machinegunner. But it won't be easy.
     
  6. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Rhye, you don't have to do all of the work. We can take a more active role if you want to spend a bit less time on the mod.
     
  7. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Rhye, I'm going through the stats sheet (and managing to understand most of it so far) but one thing I don't understand the Upgrades column. What exactly does it list? (The lefthand number of it that is.)
    Also, tank is listed as having 1 movement point. oO
    Blitz value should be in direct relation to the number of movement points, it shouldn't have a constant value.
     
  8. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Sorry, double post due to internet problems.
     
  9. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    the upgrades column counts how many units are there in its line, upgrading to the unit.

    All the abilities are in one column. It's a rough approximation, made in 10 minutes.
     
  10. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    I fixed the sheet; there were a couple of errors
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    1. So that's how many units come before the unit in its upgrade chain? Okay.
    2. I meant that the Blitz ability should be worth more for the MA than for the Tank because MA can make 1.5 as many attacks. And I think the MA should be renamed MBT.

    Besides that, what do you think of us relieving some of your workload? I know in a few days you won't be as free to the mod and I'd hate to see developement die. Alot of your work is technical stuff, right? I mean, going through the biq, making the changes to stats, stuff like that. I bet some of can handle some of the parts of the great work that you do.
     
  12. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America

    Well, the technical stuff isn't the problem, except for long beta tests.
    If you want something different to do, I can give you: create a scenario where you have some fighters, bombers and kamikaze, and your opponent has some cities and units. I've been asking to test Japan since now; but what I really need is to test the kamikaze, and this can be done without playing a whole game.

    Apart from that, I'm quite quick at doing technical things, as long as I have feedback that is useful (requests to remove the Byzantines, in this moment AREN'T useful ;) ). Faster I get a reply, faster I can make a decision and implement it. But this isn't your case: you're always the first to reply.

    And of course, I'm getting angry for how we don't find any unit creator for the Shifta. There are lots of creators that did a lot of work for Double your Pleasure and RaR. I never asked anything to anyone. Now that I do, nobody cares, they prefer to keep working on the long wishlish other mods have.
     
  13. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    Now, on with the work:

    1) I've added the Modern Destroyer. Now I need to know what stats have to be increased from normal Destroyer, and what special abilities it has.

    2) I want to know if ANY of {Cruiser, Destroyer, Battleship, Submarine, Carrier} are post WWII only and which one were from WWII on (no WWI).

    3) I've thought of how to divide the lines, to tie the machinegunner to something.
    There are pros and cons, I'd like to see what you think.


    now (0.45):

    Warrior->Spearman->Pikeman->Fusilier->Rifleman->Infantry->Mech.Inf.
    Archer->Crossbowman->Musketman->Fusilier->Rifleman->Infantry->Mech.Inf.
    (nothing)->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry

    the machinegunner is the only problem. Historically it is OK.

    it could be:

    Warrior->Spearman->Pikeman->Rifleman->Infantry->Mech.Inf.
    Archer->Crossbowman->Fusilier->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry
    (nothing)->Musketman->Fusilier->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry

    the cons are obvious:
    -few upgrades, that will keep pikemen until early industrial
    -fusilier to rifleman connection is missing
     
  14. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Rhye, gameplay is far more important than small issues of historical accuracy.
    make it:
    Warrior->Spearman->Pikeman->Fusilier->Infantry->Mech Inf
    Archer->Crossbowman->Musketman->Rifleman->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry
    Upper row should mostly have equal or almost-equal def and att, except for infantry which should have more def than attack. (This is important, since trench warfare was all about attacking with a disadvantage against enemies that are defending with an advantage.)
    Lower row should have more defense than offense as it will be the one defending cities (because it's the line starting with archer.) That means making TOW the main defender for modern times. For this you should increase attack and lower defense of Mech Inf.
    (Of course I would rather you use my more comprehensive suggestion, but if you insist on making fewer changes then fine.)
     
  15. Asclepius

    Asclepius AWOL

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    620
    Location:
    Lurking
    Well, have you tried grovelling in a personal PM to BeBro or Aaaglo or anyone else? Maybe if you told them how important it is to you they may be interested in helping. There are one hell of a lot of units requested out there, and they take a long time to create. Even if someone does respond how fast do you think it will be completed? A more personal approach might gain a quicker response.
     
  16. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    Fusiliers / Line Infantry were organized in long lines that fired simultaneously. In the Napoleonic era they had bayonets, too, but before that, I see them more defensive.
    Later Riflemen are more skirmishers, less organized. They better suit the all-round unit, while the fusiliers the defenders.
    Well, in truth, none of them fit the defenders line.


    That was true in the standard civ3 and RoC. Now with the machinegunner, the defensive role is already taken and infantry must be an all-round
     
  17. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    I sent a PM to Utahjazz.
    But I'm quite sceptic because of the reasons stated above.
     
  18. Blasphemous

    Blasphemous Graulich

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,079
    Location:
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Yes, I realize this, but a sacrific must be made, and really it's more unrealistic for pikemen to last into the industrial age than it is for riflemen to defend.

    Oh, right, I forgot that.
     
  19. Aeon221

    Aeon221 Lord of the Cheese Helmet

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,900
    Location:
    Hiding from the Afro-Eurasians
    Put another Musketman type unit in the upgrade tree between pikes and fusiliers; having pikes for that long is not a 'small historical innaccuracy', it is an anachronism of epic proportions!

    Warrior->Spearman->Pikeman->SOMETHING (muskets, Arquebusiers, skirmishers...)->Rifleman->Infantry->Mech.Inf.
    Archer->Crossbowman->Fusilier->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry
    (nothing)->Musketman->Fusilier->Machinegunner->TOW Infantry

    If we are going with Rhye's upgrade tree, I think it needs to look like that simply to keep things logical. The greatest advantage of this mod is that it is historical while still fast; don't take away its historicity!

    Personally, I see nothing wrong with keeping the original tree; it has worked rather well thus far, and I have no problems with its historical content. The only addition I am begging for is a colonial marine; with that granted, everything is A O K!
     
  20. Rhye

    Rhye 's and Fall creator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    9,468
    Location:
    Japan / South America
    I got the first refuse, from Utahjazz "Nah, I'm not interested."

    I'll try with BeBro
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page