Mungaf
TET 2.0 won't be out :(
I was just an idiot and forgot I reinstalled Civ3C, and so didn't have the right patch. All better now.
Thunderfall said:Congrats on the 10,000th download of RaR on 3DDownloads!![]()
solops said:Why can everyone but me build cities in tundra? This has been going on for the last 1000 years.
Doc Tsiolkovski said:Nobody can build cities on Tundra. The ones that seem to be there are in fact built on Forest; the human can even use that deliberately later by planting a Forest on a Tundra tile he wants to settle.
Holy Goat said:Hello all, Im new to this forum and have just down loaded RaR. Forgive me if this has already been addressed.
1) Even after the discovory of Steam engine my labourors still cannot build farms/irrigation in squares not adjacent to fresh water.
2) I read the first 25 paged of this thread, but gave up after that- Has there been a patch or update for this mod yet.
Thanks in advance and this mod rocks
i have a little problem with the RaR, usually i dont have any.....i dunno whats wrong
also, i know double post but the other one is gonna get modded since i didn't read the "Don't post if you don't have any mod".....
anyways, anybody who can help me plz do so
well, the problem is this......
Downloaded RaR, installed it in the right place. To spice up the game, I decided to use a world map which i got from here. So, i opened up the map file that came with RaR which is just essentially a blank map filled with rules and I imported the terrain from other world map using the editor resulting in a RaR world map complete with all the rules. So i started the game and it gave me an error saying "Error Reading PediaIcons.txt: missing description in ICON_BLDG_Palace Garden"
out of curiosity, i opened the that PediaIcons.txt and looked up that Palace Garden. I found out that it refers to two pictures in the icons folder which didn't exist (I checked other pics btw, they exist). So I figured this can easiliy be fixed by getting a pic and name them both what the PediaIcons refered them as.
Ran the game again but it still gave me an error.
Now I just looked over the RaR board and it told me to dl the "Medieval Japan" and "World War II" unit packs. I don't know if dling those 2 is going to help. If it is then nevermind this, but if that's not the problem, can anybody plz help me.....
Hi, I have been playing this mod now for a while, I love it! I have a question for you all though - what is the deal with locked trades? I am playing MP with a friend and sometimes when we make a trade between human players it becomes locked and sometimes it doesn't. How does this work? When will it lock and when will it not? Thanks for any help with this!
Pfeffersack said:I never used multiplayer, some I'm probably the wrong person to help you.What do you mean by "locked trades"? I never heard of that, only of "locked alliances".Or do you mean the "always renegotiate deals"-option, which makes expiring treaties show up to decide if the should be renewed?
Doc Tsiolkovski said:Important: No changes to RaR1.01 except now an updated Civilopedia is included
If you already downloaded RaR101, here is the Civilopedia file
Thanks to Harrier for the work!
Rise and Rule 1.01
Simply put the .biq file into the \Conquests\Scenarios folder (next to RaR1.00.biq)
Replace the Civilopedia.txt file (...\Conquests\Scenarios\RaR\Text) with the new one................
<snip>
Camber said:You might check your Preferences menu and see if you have "Always Renegotiate" checked. I find that it helps a lot. In my current game, I have about 20 ongoing deals with the Americans, and a new one comes up for renegotiation every turn. They are the richest civ in the game (over 50,000 gold at the end of the modern era) and don't mind paying 25 gpt for every luxury I have to offer, even though they already have more than 7.(..)
Camber said:I would like to second the suggestion I have seen posted here to give Missile Destroyers and AEGIS Cruisers the ability to carry Tactical Nukes. This seems like a no-brainer. While on the subject, that would make it profitable to have a conventional missile that was flagged as a tactical weapon, so that these ships, and the subs, could also fire cruise missiles in addition to their regular bombardment. Lastly on this subject, the addition of a "nuclear" Bio/Chemical missile late in the game, that had no Uranium requirement, would be very cool. Perhaps that could go along with one of the genetics techs on the far right hand side of the modern era techs.
Camber said:Speaking of which, Genetic Engineering needs a purpose. You've done a great job of finding things that would give Athletics a purpose, and this tech has the same uselessness that Athletics did. I would suggest a genetically-engineered infantry unit, not quite a cyborg but perhaps a few notches more formidable than the Modern Infantry.
Camber said:I can practice patience on the Civilopedia entries, I understand why they are necessarily the last to be updated. My only complait there, in the midst of a vast ocean of appreciation, is the need for a mention of the "treats all terrain as roads" trait of any that currently have blank entries. The Commando (who gets my vote as the only amateurish looking unit in the game) comes immediately to mind--I was raped by them before I realized that they didn't need a road to get to me in one turn over mountains.
Camber said:My last suggestion, and this might be the hardest to implement, deals with the Satellites tech. In my game, this was easier to research than the one that enables Tactical Nukes. It seemed that this might not be the case for everyone, but the game led me on this path, going for the TOW Infantry-enabling techs right away, which then made Satellites very easy to obtain. It seems that either this tech needs to have a higher cost, or have the Tactical Nukes tech (sorry, I don't recall the name) as a prerequisite. If you had the Atomic Weapons Test also produce a small short-range nuke every 20 turns, that would also be nice. I just like having a real use for nuclear weapon deployment vehicles (like the nuclear sub) for a long time before infinite-ranged ICBMs come into play. Perhaps there could be an ICBM and ICBM II, where the second has infinite range, and the earlier one has a 20-30 tile range, similar to what the Chinese currently have IRL. (...)
XenoOGear said:(...) It works fine now, my only regret is that im playing as demigod and the AI cheats every single second.........blast you AI.......
The first IRBM was the German V-2 (A-4) missile of WW2. The first effective ICBMs were the Soviet SS-3 and American Jupiter missiles of the middle 1950s. Submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) were also developed in the 1950s. The Polaris missile was first deployed in 1961. The problem with SLBMs was not the missile but rather the submarine navigation systems. To hit a target, you have to know where the target is and you have to know where you're launching from. Since a submarine is continually moving, a reliable navigation system had to be developed. The American SINS (Ship's Inertial Navigation System) used gyroscopes and accelerometers and could give the submarine's location within 10 meters.Pfeffersack said:But to come close to reality, we should have at least two types for every kind of nuclear weapon, because I not sure if development of submarine based a-weapons has taken the same time route than development of ICBMs.