Spawn dates for Burdigala WTF

[G-Max]

Lugdunum spawns in 340 BC on normal and epic speeds, and 344 BC on Marathon. Historically inaccurate by about 300 years (it was actually founded in 43 BC), but at least it's internally consistent.

Lutetia spawns in 40 BC on normal and epic speeds, and 44 BC on Marathon. Historically inaccurate by about 200 years (actually settled during the 3rd century BC), but at least it's also internally consistent.

Burdigala spawns in 160 BC on normal, 210 BC on Epic, and 254 BC on Marathon. Why such a wide spread?

also, are there any conditions under which a rarely seen fourth city might spawn? I'm pretty sure I've seen it happen once.

 

[Leoreth]

Are you talking about RFCMarathon here? Because normal RFC doesn't have different speeds. The conversion of dates in RFCMarathon runs by a mathematical formula, while the different date time tables don't, so some inaccuracy is to be expected in certain situations.

I think the order in which the cities spawn is this way to slowly lure the Roman AI into Gaul.

I've never seen any additional city, neither ingame nor in the related code.

 

[G-Max]

Are you talking about RFCMarathon here?

Naw, I'm talking about Crossroads of the World

The conversion of dates in RFCMarathon runs by a mathematical formula

Okay, but something about that formula must be pretty screwy to produce results like this. Going by the pattern, it should spawn in 164 BC on Marathon.

 

[embryodead]

Two things are happening here:
1. What Leoreth said; some dates that exist on one speed don't exist on another, so they are approximated
2. City spawn times are not fixed; if there are units around the spawn site, a city will be created a few turns later.

 

[G-Max]

Two things are happening here:
1. What Leoreth said; some dates that exist on one speed don't exist on another, so they are approximated

I knew that, but 254 BC is not an "approximation" of 160 BC.

2. City spawn times are not fixed; if there are units around the spawn site, a city will be created a few turns later.

I took that into account and was diligent about clearing non-Celtic units from the region. Worldbuilder is kind of useful like that.

 

[embryodead]

I knew that, but 254 BC is not an "approximation" of 160 BC.

Burdigala is set to spawn at 300 BC, not 160 BC. See point 2.

I took that into account and was diligent about clearing non-Celtic units from the region. Worldbuilder is kind of useful like that.

It doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not. A city will not spawn if the plot belongs to someone else, a barbarian unit is on the plot, or any human-controlled unit is within 1 tile of the plot.

I just ran the game on normal and without camping the spot it spawned at 300 BC.

 

[G-Max]

It doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not.

Wait... you're telling me that a Celtic city won't spawn next to Celtic units?!?

A city will not spawn if the plot belongs to someone else, a barbarian unit is on the plot, or any human-controlled unit is within 1 tile of the plot.

Barbarians count as non-Celtic, as do human-controlled (in this case, Roman) units. Neither was in the region at the relevant time during my tests.

 

[embryodead]

Wait... you're telling me that a Celtic city won't spawn next to Celtic units?!?

No, I listed the exact conditions.

Barbarians count as non-Celtic, as do human-controlled (in this case, Roman) units. Neither was in the region at the relevant time during my tests.

I told you all I know about the code - the date is 300 BC and there are conditions that postpone city spawning for later. So how many times did you run your tests it to establish that Burdigala spawns at 160 BC? Because it normally spawns at 300 BC.

 

[G-Max]

No, I listed the exact conditions.

Yes, and you contradicted yourself in doing so. First, you said "if there are units around the spawn site", and "It doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not". Later, you said "if a barbarian unit is on the plot, or any human-controlled unit is within 1 tile of the plot".

how many times did you run your tests it to establish that Burdigala spawns at 160 BC?

I ran two on normal. When all 3 cities spawned on the same dates the second time around as they did on the first (keeping in mind that the region was void of non-Celtic units both times), I concluded that the spawn dates were fixed, barring the presence of enemy units, and that it was time to move on to the next speed.

 

[embryodead]

Yes, and you contradicted yourself in doing so. First, you said "if there are units around the spawn site", and "It doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not". Later, you said "if a barbarian unit is on the plot, or any human-controlled unit is within 1 tile of the plot".

You inquired so I posted more details. It still doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not. Are you looking for information, or just want to argue about nothing?

 

[G-Max]

Unless you know of a way to play as the Celts, you're contradicting yourself.

 

[embryodead]

Unless you know of a way to play as the Celts, you're contradicting yourself.

No, it doesn't matter whether the units are Celtic or not. They can be Roman, Babylonian or Egyptian and it still doesn't matter, as long as they're not Barbarian or human-controlled. If that's still not clear, you'll have to figure it out yourself.

 

[2phunkey4u]

I think he's insinuating that there should be an exception to the rule if the unit belongs to the Celtic civ.

 

[Tlönitte]

It's not like the Celts were some big homogenous nation, there was lots of fighting between cities and clans. Plus it adds that random factor that thrives so well in RFC

 

[Leoreth]

G-Max, you weren't around here for some time so we forgot how annoying you are. Thanks for reminding us of that.

 

[killerkebab]

Unless you know of a way to play as the Celts, you're contradicting yourself.

Considering this guy coded the goddamned mod you're playing, I'd probably cut him some slack on these 'contradictions'.