[submod] Cross' Overhaul: Wu, Bulgaria, Fatimids, Macedon, Iroquois, Armenia, Parthia, Minoans, Ghurids, Timurids, Khazars, Xia, Shu, Nigeria, Zulu

[Crossphazer]

https://github.com/crossCiv4/DoC-Cross-Overhaul

Installation
As per the original mod, but in a different folder called RFC Dawn of Civilization Cross Overhaul.

If you just want to play, you only need to clone this repo into your mod folder (Beyond the Sword/Mods/) and rename it to "RFC Dawn of Civilization Cross Overhaul".

New Section to explain the changes and purpose of the submod:

NEW CIVS​

Wu (Southern Dynasties, Ming)
Xia (Xia, Shang, Zhou)
Shu (Shu, Shu-Han)
China rebranded as Qin, and other Northern Dynasties
Bulgaria (dynamic Serbian, Croatian names)
Muslim Egypt & Tunisia (Fatimids, Ayyubids, Mamluks)
Macedon
Iroquois
Armenia
Parthia (Sassanids)
Minoans (Myceneans)
Ghurids (Ghaznavids, Sultanate of Delhi)
Timurids (Mughals, Pakistan)
Khazars (Golden Horde, Crimean Khanate)
Nigeria (Kanem, Bornu, Sokoto)
South Africa (first phase representing ZImbabwe/Shona, with a resurrection as Zulu and potential to become the nation of South Africa)

NEW RELIGION​

Shia Islam

Other Stuff​

Conqueror events tweaked to have (better) preconditions, and more events!
Crusade mechanic for Catholics (including for the human player)!
Name maps now working for many civs on the new large map!
More barbarian or independent cities; tweaked barbarian spawns.
Many Near Eastern factions have had their spawn dates and UHVs altered to create a more dynamic ancient period.
Arabian Empire splinters into more civilizations (leveraging reskinned Carthage, Persia and Assyria).
Rebalanced modifiers and tech costs for better technological progression by civ until the year 1860 (I have not extensively tested beyond that point).
A few extra turns have been added to the Bronze, Iron and Classical Ages; the equivalent number of turns have been shaved off the early Ancient (stone), Global and Digital ages, to maintain an equal number of total turns.

Also, I do all my balancing and testing in the 3000 BC start at the moment, so if you are giving feedback from the 600 AD start, please say so in your post, so I can identify if the issue is caused by the 600 AD start.

Initially intended to add a new civ to the south of China, along the Yangtze river, to reflect cycles of unity and division in China and differentiate northern and southern-based dynasties, my fork of Leoreth's DoC codebase has evolved to include many changes, mostly to minors (indies, barbarians), or spawn dates, settler & war maps, modifiers, and UHV's of the civs of Antiquity and the Middle Ages, as a result of running many hundreds of games in autoplay and observing recurring oddities, in order to balance the inclusion of Yangtze China.

I try to keep this fork up to date with Leoreth's changes, unless there is a change which conflicts with my own, in which case I will probably resolve the conflict in my favour. I'm not really interested in making changes to civics, techs, stability or other mechanics, which I consider to work well and to be fairly mature in their development cycle.

This is intended as my own personal version, which I keep publicly accessible at the link below. The fastest way to include changes which I find to be interesting are to make them myself, as Civ IV and indeed the DoC mod itself is quite easy to modify and adapt.

~~~ original post ~~~

After a brief discussion with other members of this subforum about adding more variety to China, I decided, as an experiment, to create a new civ, Southern China, or Yangtze China (contrasting with Yellow River China). After many hours (and setting up my dev env to build the DLL, thanks Leoreth!), I have a version which launches & plays without error, with UB, UU, UP, UHV, stability (settler) maps, respawn, etc. It needs a lot of balancing work, but I'm prepared to at least share the existence of this project, which can be found here:

I also added a number of barbarian spawns and independent cities, so that even if a second civ isn't in the best interest of the mod, there are a few much lighter changes that could be implemented to spice up the Chinese experience, to reflect its cycles of unity and disunity.

I need to extensively playtest as both Chinas, civs around China (like Korea or Japan), and civs unrelated to China just to see how the region develops (pick Canada -> load in -> retire & view history, repeat).

Please see the link for the description and changes. Changes are still ongoing.

 

[Crossphazer]

Since I'm doing a lot of 200AD starts from 3000BC, I'm also taking the opportunity to tweak other settler maps, or barbarians, or indy/barb cities, in order to improve recurring issues. The issue I'm currently working to address is that of Spain by 200AD. It is usually very barren, so I'm tweaking the Phoenician settler map to encourage the founding of a city there. I'm also playing around with the idea of an indie or barbarian city in central, inland, Spain.

 

[Matara]

How would you simulate Chinese unification (which happens in 600AD) when there are multiple civilizations? Will it collapse, or conquered? By the way, kingdom of Wu is more likely to be a indie than a civ, considering its historical impact.

 

[Crossphazer]

How would you simulate Chinese unification (which happens in 600AD) when there are multiple civilizations? Will it collapse, or conquered? By the way, kingdom of Wu is more likely to be a indie than a civ, considering its historical impact.

Having "forced" the spawn of a southern civ (as one "forces" any civ, like France or Germany), I want to take a hands off approach to the unification of China. Both Chinas have historical areas covering mainland China, with the North having its core in (obviously) the North, and vice-versa.
If either one dies, they are also able to respawn, similar to how China works currently but with a reduced rebirth flip area, constrained to the core. After 1660, Yangtze China can no longer respawn, which means any Chinese unification will fall on the north alone, and it will probably be able to do so. If it can't, I'll see what I can tweak. There's another window in which the south can respawn, between 1850 and 1920, to represent another tumultuous time for China.

I have not ran games past 400 at the moment, since I'm testing the start and the behaviour of AI northern China from -2070 to 200.

If China seems to be a completely dysfunctional, disunited mess, I will consider options such as giving a reborn China more starting units.

As far as naming is concerned, it starts out as Wu, since it's the first large independent southern entity, and was in contention for reunification (Wei winning was not an absolute certainty). I have the civ adopt the names of Southern Song and Southern Ming with the flow of time, just like how (northern) China would change dynastic names over time. If with Yangtze (Southern) China, you are able to get to 9 cities, that's the threshold at which you are considered an Empire for naming, and drop the "Southern" part from the name, because at 9 cities you probably rule most of China, and Yellow River China is either collapsed, conquered or a rump state.

 

[Temüjin VIII]

If this is supposed to be a modmod, why open a pull request? Leoreth will most likely not merge it.

 

[Crossphazer]

If this is supposed to be a modmod, why open a pull request? Leoreth will most likely not merge it.

It's a PR targeting the develop branch of my own fork (which I keep up to date with Leoreth's version), so I can track what I've been changing. Plus, that's a really defeatist way of looking at things.

 

[IrishDragon]

There was also some discussion about China and East Asia generally in this thread, if you haven't seen it:

East Asia Overhaul

Edit: Back to this after 3 years. I still like my old ideas but I think they are a bit extravagant. Instead (in addition?) I propose some simpler new UPs for China and Japan, inspired by Leoreth's new (1.18) Russian, American, and Indian UPs. China: The Power of Dynastic Cycles: When you enter...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[Temüjin VIII]

It's a PR targeting the develop branch of my own fork (which I keep up to date with Leoreth's version), so I can track what I've been changing. Plus, that's a really defeatist way of looking at things.

I see, I did not notice the fork, mb. And as much as I also welcome new ideas, I would not call it defeatist from the POV of someone who has been active in this subforum for almost ten years. Though I acknowledge that I came off as shutting down your idea; I apologize for that.

 

[Crossphazer]

There was also some discussion about China and East Asia generally in this thread, if you haven't seen it:

East Asia Overhaul

Edit: Back to this after 3 years. I still like my old ideas but I think they are a bit extravagant. Instead (in addition?) I propose some simpler new UPs for China and Japan, inspired by Leoreth's new (1.18) Russian, American, and Indian UPs. China: The Power of Dynastic Cycles: When you enter...

forums.civfanatics.com

Thanks, I took a look. I can see Leoreth's point regarding the gamist aspects of the forced anarchy. My solution was the Yellow Turban Rebellion, which I consider to be on par with the Sea Peoples in terms of balance between purely mechanical and scripted, since the Sea Peoples can also appear out of nowhere inside your borders, and their purpose is to prepare the ground for the next wave of Iron Age civilizations (like Phoenicia and Persia).

While I've been testing China, and running many games, I have continued to look into Spain, and more generally the issue of the "early colonist" events (which exist for Greece, Phoenicia and Rome). I am beginning to suspect that there is something preventing at least some of these colonists from appearing, especially the ones that are targeting Iberia (the code randomly selects a plot in rIberia, and then tries to find a coastal plot 1 tile away. However, many plots in Iberia are landlocked, so I suspect the plot isn't being found). I have added a message to active players about citizens leaving their home cities to establish a new colony, when hitting the lines of code that create the galley+settler+archer, so I will know if the event triggers or not.

While I was at it, I noticed that the Dawn of Man text for Rome is inaccurate, referring the old 753 BC date, so I changed the date and added a line about the exile of the king and the new republic, rather than the founding of the city.

Also, the independent-celt city of Milan has had its building culture changed from iRome to iCelts, not that that matters, since it's unlikely to be seen by any player other than the Celts player.

 

[Crossphazer]

There was indeed a flaw with the early colonist script, that would cause Rome not to spawn a settler boat near Iberia. I have revamped it to:
a) give a message when it triggers, using an immersive description
b) combined the foundation of Carthage event into the early colonists logic
c) give Carthage an extra colonist, directly in southern Iberia
d) give Rome a generic version of the event, as it doesn't need to have the galley placed near Iberia for it to target a sensible location for a new city
e) added a bit of randomness to the exact dates, similarly to how it was done for the Carthage foundation event
f) moved the wine in southern Iberia 1 tile east of Gades/Gadir, as it is the mostly likely city to be founded. This shouldn't affect Cordoba for later years, or the 600/1700AD spawn scenarios.
g) add massive value to 2 city locations in Iberia for Carthage, otherwise it will refuse to settle there (even with a free settler!).
h) Reduce the settler value to 1 in the westernmost North African plots (Mauritania/Morocco) for Carthage

I also tweaked Greece settler map so it doesn't try to settle in Magna Graecia with its spawn settlers (so that its culture doesn't overwhelm Carthage). It does settle there with its second colonist wave (the early colonists events).

In general this is getting tweaked with subsequent commits as I iterate.

I might take the time to separate the Mediterranean stuff from the China stuff, into its own PR, if splitting the changes becomes relevant, but right now I'm iterating very rapidly on both fronts.

 

[Crossphazer]

Hmm, may have found another bug, although I may also just not comprehend something, but in the linked commit that will follow, tConquestCholaSumatra was removed from lConquests but iNumConquests in Consts.py was not decremented. Would that cause any problems?

Disable Tamil conquerors · crossCiv4/DoC-Cross-Overhaul@42cd238

The "Cross Overhaul" submod of The Dawn of Civilization mod for Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword, based on the popular Rhye's and Fall of Civilization mod. - Disable Tamil conquerors · crossCiv4/DoC-Cross-Overhaul@42cd238

github.com

edit: even though the tConquestCholaSumatra isn't in lConquests, it still has an ID, the total number of which is probably what iNumConquests is referencing, although it is still a question worth asking.

 

[Crossphazer]

At this point, my changes are evolving to implicate the Med, Near East and Far East, up to 200 AD (when Wu spawns), as a result of constantly running games to 200 AD and observing them. Since China and the West are so distant so as to be unrelated, it's pretty easy to tweak both at the same time, to cut down on time spent running autoplays.

Roman, Greek, Carthaginian, Hittite settler maps tweaked, usually involving the priority assigned to certain locations, although a few extra tiles were added to the settler map.

Played around with the impact of a few civs (which mostly dictates whether they spawn during autoplay, and which civs get collapsed if there's no room for them in the max player count):
Yangtze China demoted to limited (if they don't spawn, not a big deal, since the end result of history is a unified China).
Poland promoted to significant, while Rus demoted to limited. In gameplay, Poland has a more important influence on the development of Eastern European affairs, whereas Rus is typically wiped out by barbarians and the Muscovy spawn. I might have an independent city spawn in Kyiv/Kiev if Rus is not alive, similarly to Sardis/Phrygia indy spawn if Hittites are not alive.
Speaking of Hittites, I promoted them to significant, and buffed the spawn forces of the AI. Hittites should ideally destabilize the Levant in preparation for the Sea Peoples, and later empires including Persia.

Added Qin Conquerors, same conqueror mechanic as Alexander the Great or Rome, directed at indies. 240 BC. This is to help unify China, whereas the human player should need to do that manually.

Added more Phrygian barbarian pressure, and adjusted Hittite fall date to be earlier in time. If Hittites are to spawn, then there should be more pressure on them to fall in the earlier Iron Age.

Renamed Assyrian UP to "The Power of Brutality", rather than "The Power of the First Empire". Assyria was not the first empire, as that distinction goes to the Akkadians. I think the current Sumeria/Babylonia civ covers Akkadia better than the Assyrians. I'm not 100% on board with the depiction of Assyria as a uniquely and totally brutal people, but they did cultivate a propaganda of terror as a tool of empire, but "Terror" is what the Mongol UP is called.

Another minor tweaks usually related to China, which can be found in the commit history of the PR.

Other things I'm considering:
Time-limited resource(s) near Crete in the Bronze Age. They should disappear by 1000 BC. I might even consider having there be an indy city that gets flipped by Greece, and reducing the Greek settler count to 1 instead of 2, but I'm not sold on the need to make that change, and it might be too deterministic.

Bringing the Assyrian spawn to just prior to the Middle Assyrian period, about 1400 BC (Middle Assyrian period starts 1360). It was not really a relevant force until then. I'll have another look at the Assyrian UHV to make sure I'm not compromising it by making this change, or modifying the UHV to fit in a reduced time period. They would spawn with greater numbers of troops if spawning in the Middle Assyrian period rather than -2600. Might be interesting for the player Hittite game, to start with little resistance, but then the Assyrians appear and challenge the status quo.

 

[Crossphazer]

Assyria in a 1450 BC start, with more units than its 2600 BC start. A bit of a conquest rush game, with less time spent developing the infrastructure. Hittites capturing Khalpe is a nice touch - the Hittites sort of combine with the Hurrians in terms of their scope.

Still needs tuning for the number of units, and the UHV, but I like it. The Sea Peoples are the biggest danger. Might be wise to avoid the coasts and wait out the Sea People attacks, and then swoop in, taking out the various civs needed for the conquest UHV goal.

 

[Crossphazer]

rLevant was not in the regions where Phoenicia checks its capital location, to switch out the leader to Hannibal. This meant that Hannibal would be the leader right from the start. This is corrected.

Hittites given the Phrygian adjective if they make it past 750 BC.

Conqueror armies spawning also grants 20 gold to the civ, so they can afford a bit more unit maintenance in the short term.

Assyrian UHV now only concerned with Elam (a small region around Shushan) rather than all of Persia. This is important because I pushed back the UHV date to beyond the Persian spawn.

Kassites now spawn more in the Zagros mountains than in the deserts of Mesopotamia. They got slightly buffed in numbers (3 warriors instead of 2 in the early phases).

Yellow River and Yangtze China have worse relations at start, and start at war. Currently experimenting with flagging Yangtze China as an "Independence Civ", so that if Yellow River China is stable, there won't be a breakaway kingdom.

A few other minors tweaks listed in the commit log (adjusting Assyrian starting techs & units, tweaking China modifiers).

 

[Crossphazer]

Having launched an autoplay game as the Dutch, and another as Canada, the state of China, and generally the world is pretty good. However, I noticed, in the respawn of the Chinas following the collapse of the Mongols, that I could leverage the respawn ranges and dynamic names, such that Yangtze China would revive first, as the Ming, and then in the 17th century, Yellow River China can revive as the Qing, and stay the "main" China civ, with a period in the late 19th - early 20th where China can tear itself apart as IRL.

 

[Crossphazer]

I know that Spain vs Moors, where the Moors are still very active in Spain into the Renaissance and even industrial ages, is a recurring problem, and so I think I've solved it in 3 ways:

1) they should decline in 1050, to coincide with:
2) the Almoravids, here depicted as invader-barbarians that appear in Morocco and southern Iberia
3) Carthage's rebirth area redefined to be Tunisia (and a bit of Algeria), to form a rival Emirate to the Moors civ.

To do: Carthage probably needs a leaderhead for that period, with a preference for Islam.

 

[Crossphazer]

Been a few days!

Updated my branch with Leoreth's latest changes.
Added Abu Faris Abd al-Aziz II to Phoenicia, to give them a muslim-favouring leaderhead for their medieval revival as the Tunis/Hafsid region. I have chosen this leader based on an admittedly cursory overview of Hafsid history.

 

[Crossphazer]

In an attempt to make early Persia more aggressive, I have added eastern Anatolia to its flip zone. However, I have pushed back the Persian spawn date to 650 BC, circa the birth of the Median Empire. Persia also starts at war with the Hittites (if still around) and Assyria. UHVs have not been adjusted because I'm not sure about the effect on the difficulty for the player.

Similarly, I have pushed back Rome's start date to 338 BC, the end of the (Second) Latin War, when Rome really became a noticeable regional player. In exchange, their starting techs, gold, units got buffed. The UHV dates were pushed back, since it's still valid to have the goals for dates like 100 AD or 200 AD. This should give Mediterranean civs some more breathing room, especially Greece, so it doesn't get jumped by Rome in the middle of its Alexandrian conquests.

I also give Crete 2 temporary resources (fish & olives) that disappear in 1100 BC, to give a buff to any Minoan-esque city founded by the Greeks in the Bronze Age.

South China has been given iron, in Guangdong province. Rare earth metals have been moved just south to Hainan, to give that island more relevance later in the game. With iron, it means that Yangtze China can make better military units, especially swordsmen to facilitate conquest or dealing with barbarians.

Yangtze China also got a tech buff, because I found as a player, you end up really behind in the tech race for compass, and your cottages are either non-existent or underdeveloped when you inherit some lands from the other Chinese civ.

 

[Tigranes]

Hainan gets Uranium in the base DoC, so it's already very relevant island.

 

[Crossphazer]

Hainan gets Uranium in the base DoC, so it's already very relevant island.

In the large map? In worldbuilder, and RFC_Earth.txt, there is no resource there. Unless it spawns at a later date than 3000 BC, but I don't see Uranium anywhere in Resources.py.