Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Sep 11, 2014.
I don't recall ever getting immigrants as Canada
Speaking of Germany, can the 1700 AD scenario be changed so the Protestant holy city, shrine, and cathedral are in Berlin instead of Frankfurt? Berlin needs those a lot more than Frankfurt does, plus for historical reasons, Wittenberg is closer to Berlin than to Frankfurt.
I had trouble getting sleep yesterday because of the Northern Lights, so I amused myself by creating new civic for each category:
Military Co-operation (Radio, low):
+1 Experience for all units for each Defence Pact
Atheism (Communism, no upkeep):
+1 for each science buildings
Obsoletes all buildings (Cannot be built and give only culture)
No state religion
Trade Ships (Compass, high):
+1 for each coastal city
Automation (Robotics, medium):
+1 from railroads
+25% worker speed
Managed Democracy(Fascism, medium):
+1 from mines, oil
-25% War weariness
-25% City upkeep
Triumvirate(Code of Laws, low):
+1 in three biggest cities
Free stateman in capital
Double production speed for palace
I love Visard's Automation economy civic. It made me think of what could be a viable late game Organization civic.
Federation (Mass Media, low): -25% vassal maintenance costs, -25% city distance upkeep, +15% war weariness
(modifier for extra stability points if also Secretary General of the United Nations)
Possible dynamic names:
England: Commonwealth of Nations
Russia: Russian Federation
France/Prussia/Netherlands (if control or vassalized +50% of continental Europe): European Union
On the topic of new civics I made this post a few pages back:
As a player, some of Visard's civics seem really bad. Trade Ships is a worse version of free market, Military Co-operation would require you to have at least 3 defensive pacts to out perform standing army/naval dominance for experience, yet those civics also have the production speed bonus, Triumvirate doesn't do very much (like dynasticism) so I'd rather run theocracy or autocracy.
That said, Automation would be the best civic in the game. Essentially +1 commerce on all land tiles, like the Mali unique power. Commerce is the most important yield in the game.
I do like the idea of a managed democracy civic - I've tried to get a name for that sort of behavior by a state. However, the bonuses you give it don't do that much. How often at the end of the game do you say to yourself, "I need more production".
Likewise, we do need an atheism sort of religion civic, but giving happiness from science buildings, well how often do you have happiness problems at the end of the game?
Robotics comes so late in game it wouldn't matter that much
Suggestion for a minor map change: can we add the Guadalquivir River? It's the major river in southern Spain (the only navigable one) that connects Seville, Cordoba, and Grenada. It seems odd to have southern Spain be unconnected (un-irrigatable) plains tiles on our map when the real site has so much history and prosperity.
In my opinion, there are some linked animation-problems with game speed in later games (+1800 AD):
1). There is a lot of airships/fighters animations. AI uses airships or fighters to recon the sky each turn. If there are much of air units sended by the AI to recon, game can realy slowing down in these moments.
2). Fighters can intercept units automatically, but if there are 8 cities with 4 fighters each... what do we can see on the screen? Many, many many of flying fighters round around. This also can realy slow the game.
Are these animations are realy necessary? I have enabled "Quick moves", "Animations frozen" end etc. to speed up graphics, but this does not help.
I think, that we do not need to see any of these animations. Maybe they can be disabled in XML files or in further RFC versions?
Good point, I'll make a note for the future.
Amazing work, Leoreth. This modmod is truly great.
Don't you think the Middle East, mostly the Levant, kind of falls off in importance as time goes on, though?
Usually, this is how it will look like in a 600AC game:
Byzantine control -> Arab control -> very rarely Holy Roman control -> Turkish control -> ???
After the Turkish spawn nothing actually happens there, which is not very realistic. Couldn't DoC benefit from a modern civilization there? Israel and a Mesopotamian respawn as Iraq come to mind. Not entirely sure about Israel, since it'd have a very small core and that region of the map would be really crowded, but it'd certainly have an unique gameplay: late spawn (1948), pretty much a city-state based on Jerusalem, constant struggle against arabs and possibly egyptians... Would that be a possibility? (not necessarily Israel, just a modern era Middle East revamp)
Israel has been debated so much here that it will never happen. I think the best case scenario is having the middle east divided between Turkey, Arabia, Egypt, and Iran. We can have Britain and France get colonies there to spice things up (since that never happens except by player intervention).
A note on Egypt though: they should respawn with guilds so they can build Knights. Currently they just spam War Chariots, which looks really out of place.
The biggest factor creating the power vacuum now is the collapse of the Ottomans after WWI, which led to the very quick attempt at colonial stabilization by England and France. If there is no world war incorporating Turkey, or a collapsing Turkey in general, it's unlikely that enough unrest would exist to make the Levant unstable. If the Ottomans limited their empire to Anatolia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia, perhaps they could have lasted past WWI?
Of course, that could be framed in another way: why is it that Turkey can remain so stable so far into the modern era? Perhaps we could make Arabia and Egypt guaranteed respawns (like Mexico and Colombia) to add a little instability to the historical Turkish borders, to shake them up in case they do overextend in a game.
This would take a lot of scripting, and probably would be more difficult than it's worth, but making America post-modern era more aggressive toward Turkey, Arabia and Iran to complete their oil historical objective could be another possibility.
I would like to see Spain and France colonize North africa
Conquerors or TC? Or something else?
And of course Britain!
Historically, the Ottoman Empire was already relatively weak when WWI started, even being known as the "sick man in Europe". If it wasn't for such a huge war, it'd collapse eventually as other countries would want to take advantage of its weakness to conquer their territories, just like Britain did.
Surely forcing Arab and Egyptian respawn could weaken the Ottomans and solve that, but it kind of feels out of place to see an unified "Arab" Middle East containing Palestine, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq in the 20th century, when the Middle East was far from being homogenous and unified. Making France and Britain more aggresive towards the Arabs could help, but then it'd feel weird to have a Middle East full of colonies in the end of the 20th century.
Since apparently there is no way a new civilization is implemented to fill that gap, why not just:
1- Enforce Egyptian and Arab respawn to weaken Turkey in the 20th century
2- Make France and Britain more aggresive towards the Middle Eastern countries
3- Respawn Mesopotamia as an Iraqi state, given Iraq's economic, military and political importance in modern Middle Eastern affairs
4- Make America aggresive towards Arabia, Iraq and maybe Iran (to avoid Iran from rampaging through a region plagued by constant wars?)
Ottomans -> colonies -> Iraq (together with the iranian and egypt respawn) would make a living middle east?
Thanks for the nice words.
I don't think any modern civ in the Middle East deserves being a civ, but I agree that the Ottoman Empire is too stable territorially.
Perhaps independent cities should be harder to conquer? That would allow for (1) the Papal states to last longer rather than easily fall to HRE, France or Spain, (2) more significant military resources needed to conquer the African and Indian indies, and (3) modern splintered countries could be more easily represented.
One, more starting units, including defensive archers and workers to build improvements. With Apostolic Palace, perhaps invading a Catholic indie will automatically trigger war with all Catholic civs? With United Nations, perhaps invading indies will trigger an automatic drop in how much other civs that aren't already at war with that indie like you?
Yes. I'd love to have more meaningful interaction with independents. But that's quite the big topic that deserves its own focus at some point.
Can some sort of attrition mechanism be introduced for units (especially ships, but land units as well) that venture too far from friendly territory (caravels, most modern units and scouting units would be excluded). It could probably use a weaker form of the Russian UP that would strengthen as distance from friendly territory increases.
This would help prevent situations where Poland conquers the Middle East and help simulate the importance of establishing bases/outposts/colonies to reach areas that were previously inaccessible. This would also give some use to explorers because they would be the only pre modern/industrial unit able to travel long distances without attrition.
Even if you're not interested in implementing this for land units, could you at least consider it for ships? For pre modern ships this especially makes sense because wooden ships are not submarines, they need to return to port at some point!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As realistic as this could be, i don't think we want to hurt ships too much, this may hurt colonization attempts by the Euro's, especially considering we have privateers. Also sn issue would be trying to circumnavigate if your caravels die off before getting around the world. Land units i could see it working for, as Armies definitely need bases and supplies to move forward.
Separate names with a comma.