1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Suggestions and Requests

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Sep 11, 2014.

  1. Tigranes

    Tigranes Armenian

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    9,599
    The case for steamship (coal transport).

    This mod has pretty straightforward depiction of naval vessel evolution: rowing/small sail vessels, medium sail, large sail, coal ships, oil ships. Transport belongs to oil ships, while Galleon to large sails. The need for a steamship is apparent if you study carefully the tech tree. Oil based Transport comes way too late in the game with Infrastructure, which is the hardest first-tier Global tech to get (because one also need Macroeconomics). The resulting picture is that you see large sail Galleons up until WW1 and sometimes WW2. Not a happy picture. I suggest Steamships to have the same Cargo space as Galleon (3) but double the MPs. Metallurgy is a very good tech to introduce it.
     
  2. Steb

    Steb King

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    815
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Montréal
    I brought this up a little while ago, but Leoreth seemed to think it was unnecessary (since the steamships would have no extra capacity compared to galleons). I agree with you though. Galleons in the global era feels wrong.
     
    Imp. Knoedel likes this.
  3. Royal Tenenbaum

    Royal Tenenbaum Exiled

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,738
    Perhaps steamboats could be more in production, but halved with access to iron. That way steamboats with access to iron is actually faster to build than galleons.
     
    1SDAN likes this.
  4. Caesar Augustus

    Caesar Augustus Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    376
    Alternative: halved if the city has Steel Industry.
     
    1SDAN likes this.
  5. Tigranes

    Tigranes Armenian

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    9,599
    For 1700 AD map I fervently ask to replace Kagoshima to Nagasaki (1NW) for Japan.

    Things are hard for Japan at 1700 AD already. Not working the gold makes it even worse. I know, that city was placed on the resource because it is the only way to work Whale. But with China unstable and soon to be conquered anyway Nagasaki can work Pearls instead! Regardless, what you loose with Gold you can never make it up with Whale. Moving that whale to Sapporo area could actually be a better alternative, because Sapporo has zero sea-born resources to work with despite being well-known for fresh seafood including salmon, sea urchin, crab and, sadly, whale bacon.

    Also historically Nagasaki certainly is more famous than Kagoshima. Nagasaki became a center of colonial Portuguese and Dutch influence in the 16th through 19th centuries, and Churches and Christian Sites in Nagasaki have been proposed for inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage List. Part of Nagasaki was home to a major Imperial Japanese Navy base during the First Sino-Japanese War and Russo-Japanese War. During World War II, the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki made Nagasaki the second and, to date, last city in the world to experience a nuclear attack.

    And if I don't sound compelling enough consider this. Last Saturday I have ordered Tempura Shrimp from Japanese Restaurant. But did you know that Tempura derived from a popular Portuguese recipe originally known as peixinho-da-horta, and takes its name from the Portuguese word 'tempero'! Guess how Portuguese dish became iconic Japanese food item? Through 17th century Nagasaki, of course!

    Spoiler Nagasaki, please! :
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2017
  6. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,410
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    Tempura certainly is a good way to bribe me :)
     
    ales_, hnrysml, 1SDAN and 1 other person like this.
  7. Alexius08

    Alexius08 Emperor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,116
    Considering that the Persian Empire at its greatest extent never made it far into India, I suggest not to spawn Persia at war with India. Besides, their current UHV of getting two shrines can now be accomplished without going there.
     
    Lokki242, 1SDAN and Leoreth like this.
  8. hnrysml

    hnrysml Warlord

    Joined:
    May 18, 2016
    Messages:
    212
    The Maurya Empire did make it far into Persia, however.
     
  9. Alexius08

    Alexius08 Emperor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,116
    Those conquests were made after the withdrawal of Alexander the Great's armies from Persia.
     
    hnrysml likes this.
  10. star15389

    star15389 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    481
    They should have double the cargo space too, but only slightly more strength. Transport vessels in the age of sail were much better combatants relative to the warships of the time than transports were in the coal era. Would also make it less of a headache to send vast armies over long distances as the game progresses which is historical
     
    hnrysml and 1SDAN like this.
  11. Vekkimaster

    Vekkimaster Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    143
    Location:
    Finland
    I can't find it anymore, but someone here said that there should be conditional spawns if Rome is stable and controls some keyareas on its historical area and so on. Leoreth replied something like "I'm planning to redesing the spawns".

    Well please keep this kind of situation in mind regardless which nation one is playing:

    upload_2017-12-8_8-6-33.png

    Rome was solid. Poland was unstable/collapsing. Spain was unstable/collapsing. Rome had two cities in Turkey's corearea. Poland had one. Spain had one. Turkey respawned. Rome lost all its cities in that area. Spain lost one. Poland lost one.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2017
  12. Aharon

    Aharon Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    48
    Request: There was a mod or something that enabled Civ IV to use 64 bit systems more optimally, which was posted about on this subforum. I don't find it anywhere, does anybody still have a link?

    Thanks in advance!
     
  13. KeeperOT7Keys

    KeeperOT7Keys did nothing wrong

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2013
    Messages:
    337
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mugla, Turkey
    Cosmos1985, 1SDAN and Leoreth like this.
  14. TJDowling

    TJDowling King

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2012
    Messages:
    681
    The addition of a Sunni/Shia schism probably (using a similar mechanic to the Oxthodox/Catholic schism) would make the Islamic world less united potentially more interesting. The addition of Sikhism (maybe founded by discovering Education) would be an interesting late-ish game change in India.
     
    bartdanr and 1SDAN like this.
  15. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,410
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    That's a respawn, which works according to different rules. But can you be more explicit about what the issue is with this particular scenario?
     
  16. Vekkimaster

    Vekkimaster Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    143
    Location:
    Finland
    Well I have had a multiple cases where I am solid and, let's say, North Africa-region has three cities all independent. I conquer two of those cities and left the third one be. Sooner or later there will be a Moorish respawn and I lost all my North African cities to them. Nowadays issues like this I normally handle simply by razing those left-over cities to prevent a respawn because after razing: 1) I'm solid, 2) Moorish have no other "none-solid cities" in their core area where to respawn. The situation won't vary much even if those three cities would be occupied a nation. The ending result will still be a Moorish spawn when nation(s) goes unstable or so.

    My last post pic just had Moorish replaced by the Turks. I remember crying about this same thing a year or two ago and IIRC you said, more or less, there must be some sacrifices to make things happen..
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2017
  17. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,410
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    The thing is, without this rule you get those weird aborted respawns with only a few cities that do not amount to anything.
     
    1SDAN likes this.
  18. Imp. Knoedel

    Imp. Knoedel Properly Paranoid Proletarian

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    8,727
    Location:
    The cooler Germany
    Is that such a bad thing though? Failed states are a real thing.
     
    1SDAN and need my speed like this.
  19. Leoreth

    Leoreth 心の怪盗団 Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    34,410
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Leblanc
    Being "real" is not a sufficient criterion for inclusion.
     
    TJDowling likes this.
  20. 1SDAN

    1SDAN Brother Lady

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    2,676
    To be fair it would be nice if respawns didn't flip cities of stable civs. Even if that meant it doesn't get all of its cities. Heck, spawn it with a large army and have them war, I just don't like the idea of inevitable flips in general. As a punishment for instability? Fine. But normal players should have a way to prevent cities from being captured.

    Of course all of this stuff are planned to be changed with the spawning overhaul, so this post is really just me groaning over a temporary nuisance.
     
    Cosmos1985 and GoodHunter like this.

Share This Page