Rhye's of Civilization - the fastest loading mod Expanded

[Blasphemous]

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.

 

[Aeon221]

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)!

 

[Rhye]

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)!

Replace the line:

#ANIMNAME_PRTO_War_Wagon

with:

#ANIMNAME_PRTO_Mobile_Tower

 

[Rhye]

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!

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

 

[Rhye]

To Rhye: I wouldn't say this is throwing away your hard work at all. This is just an extension of your work - I took it and did what I could to make it seem more viable in my eyes hoping it would work out better for the mod, and then Blas did the same for my idea.

To Aeon: Of course there is nothing to say about ships; they're fine as is! Well, from what I can tell.

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.

 

[Blasphemous]

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.

 

[Blasphemous]

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.

 

[Blasphemous]

Sorry, double post due to internet problems.

 

[Rhye]

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.

 

[Rhye]

I fixed the sheet; there were a couple of errors

 

[Blasphemous]

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.

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.

 

[Rhye]

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.

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.

 

[Rhye]

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

 

[Blasphemous]

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.)

 

[Asclepius]

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.

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.

 

[Rhye]

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,
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.)

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.

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.)

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

 

[Rhye]

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.

I sent a PM to Utahjazz.
But I'm quite sceptic because of the reasons stated above.

 

[Blasphemous]

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.

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.

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

Oh, right, I forgot that.

 

[Aeon221]

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!

 

[Rhye]

I got the first refuse, from Utahjazz "Nah, I'm not interested."

I'll try with BeBro