The Ancient Mediterranean MOD

Shqype said:
Unfortunately it seems to be your computer. I'm past 100 AD and I haven't gotten such an error. Do you know how much RAM your computer has? If you could give some information (like processor, graphics card, and ram) then maybe I can let you know what's going on.

By the way, the AI is more aggressive now! Vercingetorex and Arminius declared war on each other near the beginning of the game, Phoenicia declared war on somebody as well, Agamemnon declared war on me (I played as Illyria) because our borders sparked tensions, and in the middle of my war with Mycenae Decebal of the Getians declared war on me! He hit me with a huge stack of Peltasts and Armored Spearman so my city on the Dacian border fell, but he's gonna regret that ;)
Very Good! I love two front wars and since I play as Egypt that means that the Babylonians will constantly be at war with me (Good). Plus I will have to prepare for the inevitable stab in the back by either the Carthagenians (Great) and/or the Phoenecians (Even Better). Since I maintain a mobile reserve of units outside of my major cities to counter such threats (including Barbarians), that means that this rapid reaction force will experience up that much quicker. My foes will bleed themselves dry against this corp of crack troops. Excellent! Babylon will fall; Carthage will tremble; Phoenecia will lay prostrate at my feet; and the great unwashed hordes outside of my borders will be enslaved! Bow down before your Pharoah (evil maniacal laughter).
 
I play Civ4 in spanish language. When i start the TAM mod I don't see any caption or text. If I change language to English it works properly.

It happens with Star wars mod too.

What's happening? Itsn't possible to play this mod in other languages?
 
Playing version 1.9 with the Getae.
In 2450 BC, upon trying to move my peltast from Barbosi (the westernmost town) one tile to the north-west, I get the following message:

FATAL_ERROR
Memory allocation failure - exiting program.
Reason:bad allocation.

After clicking OK, the game exits to the desktop.
 
What graphics card does your system have? Maybe one of your RAM modules is bad...
 
I'm getting something weird. Playing as Carthage I've explored and exposed the map all the way to the west coast of Africa. Yet most of that area does not show up as explored on the mini map. The line between what shows and what doesn't is perfectly straight, from about the longitude of Algeria to the far West.
The cities and cultural extents that I have built in this region do show up, however. And there is no problem to the East all the way to Babylon.
 
Shqype said:
Ick of the East, I won't say I disagree with you ... do you have some suggestions for alternative names?

There was nothing much wrong with the names that you had before. Why change them?
The Great Library. There was only one, so there is no confusion.
The Pyramids. There is no Central American civ in this game, so again no confusion.
The Oracle. Hmmm, since we have several, how about The Oracle for the most famous one (Delphi). And for the other, I forget how it is named. But I think the name is not on any city list so it may not matter to leave it as is.

(And speaking of city lists - Alexandria should be in the Greek list and not the Egyptian. The Greeks can build one in Egypt (and many other places) if they want to, just as they did in the real world.)
 
Wierd error Ick of the East. The Oracle of Dodona was in Epirus and Dodona is in the Illyrian city list. As far as I know there is no other name for it except "the Oracle of Dodona."
 
Ick of the East said:
(And speaking of city lists - Alexandria should be in the Greek list and not the Egyptian. The Greeks can build one in Egypt (and many other places) if they want to, just as they did in the real world.)[/COLOR]

Alexander was already dead a couple years after the city was founded, and then the city fell under a control of a dynasty that despite being Macedonian in origin had its power base in Egypt itself.
 
Ok, some feedback after playing 1.8 and 1.9 fairly extensively in SP and MP (only one other human player).

First, as a "warmonger" the changes from 1.8 to 1.9 have made a pretty big difference. In 1.8 it was easy (almost stupid easy) to conquer most of the "world" by 1AD, with 1.9 the pace of wars feels much better, mostly due to the minor tech changes I suspect. Anyway, a definate improvement from what I've seen so far as it now takes me an extra 3-400 years to conquer the known world.

As for the AI...

I read some of the changes and while they do declare war more often with 1.9 few of them actually do anything. It's still very common to see some of the AI build large stacks of units and then never use them offensively. In particular Arminius has done this in both of my 1.9 games, in fact during one of the games he declared war on one (I can't recall which) empire and then pulled his armies back into his cities the next turn where they remained for about the next thousand years until I went in and killed them. This was a substantial army, with stacks of 10+ per city, mostly spearmen. Other AI opponents are now doing substantially better than before however it is still very easy to found an early religion, build the shrine quickly and then end up with a bunch of neighbors who will never attack you. Perhaps the same religion bonus could be removed or reduced, leaving only the penalty for having a different state religion?

Religion spread has been working better as well. Playing as the Greeks I didn't found my own religion and by ~500BC only 2 of my 8 cities had any religion in them.

Also when playing as the greeks I noticed that I didn't receive my free "Combat 1" promotion for Axemen or Swordsmen. I didn't see that mentioned in the readme so I don't know if it is a desired effect. If it isn't a desired effect you may want to leave it in, it has the pleasant effect of giving the Greeks a strong early army but only a mediocre army later.

There is a Carthagian city with a TXT_KEY_ for a name, sorry I can't remember which right now I'll check the savegame later if you need the name.

One of Teutra's (sp?) units has a messed up formation (or is missing form the formation defs). I'm (obviously) not good with names, it's their UU with a mix of re-skinned praetorian models and a spearman. You get some funky combat animations as a result like your attackers will swing at empty air and then one of their defenders dies on the other side of the tile.

The units with defensive bonuses on plains/grasslands (spearmen, hoplites, etc) need some attention. Technically almost every tile in the game is plains or grasslands so they get extra defensive bonuses in woods, on hills and in cities. Basically all woods are also grass/plains so they get the normal +25% for woods on top of their +20 or so bonus for grassland/plains, the same happens on all but the desert hills and in virtually every city. As a result they feel a bit overpowered as defenders, in fact they end up with higher bonuses in woods and on hills than the units that have either of those specifically.

Archers could use something as well, particularly in the early game. Maybe something as simple as a bonus against melee units. Currently they're useless, they are the easiest defenders to defeat and since they cost more than most melee units and perform worse I never build any for myself. The collateral damage doesn't feel like enough, even though it is more than the javelins have (I think). Perhaps they should be the only non-siege unit to do collateral damage, that would definately give them some appeal over javelins.

I'd also like to suggest removing the "Armored ..." units. The number of available units feels a bit excessive with them in there when they really only offer a very small increase in strength over the earlier units. In my opinion a better option would be an armor promotion granted by a building similar to the existing weapon promotions. The various flavor units are excellent so it's not that the mod has too many total units, just too many that can be built by a single empire.

Anyway, great mod, keep it up :)
 
reinstalled and that cleared my python problem right up. Too much mod clutter I guess. Noticed the same map problem as mentioned above while playing Carthage. All else is good so far.
 
Shqype said:
Unfortunately it seems to be your computer. I'm past 100 AD and I haven't gotten such an error. Do you know how much RAM your computer has? If you could give some information (like processor, graphics card, and ram) then maybe I can let you know what's going on.

By the way, the AI is more aggressive now! Vercingetorex and Arminius declared war on each other near the beginning of the game, Phoenicia declared war on somebody as well, Agamemnon declared war on me (I played as Illyria) because our borders sparked tensions, and in the middle of my war with Mycenae Decebal of the Getians declared war on me! He hit me with a huge stack of Peltasts and Armored Spearman so my city on the Dacian border fell, but he's gonna regret that ;)

This reads very promising! Already looking forward to playing this!
 
Shqype said:
What graphics card does your system have? Maybe one of your RAM modules is bad...

GeForce FX 5200 with 128 MB
It is rather old, but nothing ever happened in other games I played. :confused:
 
Seven05 said:
Ok, some feedback after playing 1.8 and 1.9 fairly extensively in SP and MP (only one other human player).

Very good feedback Seven05. Keep it up, this is what we need !

First, as a "warmonger" the changes from 1.8 to 1.9 have made a pretty big difference. In 1.8 it was easy (almost stupid easy) to conquer most of the "world" by 1AD, with 1.9 the pace of wars feels much better, mostly due to the minor tech changes I suspect. Anyway, a definate improvement from what I've seen so far as it now takes me an extra 3-400 years to conquer the known world.

ok

As for the AI...

I read some of the changes and while they do declare war more often with 1.9 few of them actually do anything. It's still very common to see some of the AI build large stacks of units and then never use them offensively. In particular Arminius has done this in both of my 1.9 games, in fact during one of the games he declared war on one (I can't recall which) empire and then pulled his armies back into his cities the next turn where they remained for about the next thousand years until I went in and killed them. This was a substantial army, with stacks of 10+ per city, mostly spearmen.

this is very curious. Needs further testing. Did Arminus declare peace with the other AI civ btw ?

Other AI opponents are now doing substantially better than before however it is still very easy to found an early religion, build the shrine quickly and then end up with a bunch of neighbors who will never attack you. Perhaps the same religion bonus could be removed or reduced, leaving only the penalty for having a different state religion?

Agreed on the shrine. I posted this in the staff mailing list.
About diplomacy boni, there were discussions to greatly reduce the importance of religions and increase the penalty (or bonus) for close borders and for same gov. civic. I also suggest anticipating gov. civic a bit so that this boni have effect in ancient age as well.

Religion spread has been working better as well. Playing as the Greeks I didn't found my own religion and by ~500BC only 2 of my 8 cities had any religion in them.

yes religion spread aside from shrines now is ok.

Also when playing as the greeks I noticed that I didn't receive my free "Combat 1" promotion for Axemen or Swordsmen. I didn't see that mentioned in the readme so I don't know if it is a desired effect. If it isn't a desired effect you may want to leave it in, it has the pleasant effect of giving the Greeks a strong early army but only a mediocre army later.

I think that probably the free promotion is available to heavy units only.

There is a Carthagian city with a TXT_KEY_ for a name, sorry I can't remember which right now I'll check the savegame later if you need the name.

Hadrumetum.

One of Teutra's (sp?) units has a messed up formation (or is missing form the formation defs). I'm (obviously) not good with names, it's their UU with a mix of re-skinned praetorian models and a spearman. You get some funky combat animations as a result like your attackers will swing at empty air and then one of their defenders dies on the other side of the tile.

Kambsor if I'm not wrong.

The units with defensive bonuses on plains/grasslands (spearmen, hoplites, etc) need some attention. Technically almost every tile in the game is plains or grasslands so they get extra defensive bonuses in woods, on hills and in cities. Basically all woods are also grass/plains so they get the normal +25% for woods on top of their +20 or so bonus for grassland/plains, the same happens on all but the desert hills and in virtually every city. As a result they feel a bit overpowered as defenders, in fact they end up with higher bonuses in woods and on hills than the units that have either of those specifically.

Well this is not working as intended. They should only get the bonus in the flatlands. I thought that something like you descibed would happen, but some XML experts said it wouldn't, early in the thread... :mischief:

Archers could use something as well, particularly in the early game. Maybe something as simple as a bonus against melee units. Currently they're useless, they are the easiest defenders to defeat and since they cost more than most melee units and perform worse I never build any for myself. The collateral damage doesn't feel like enough, even though it is more than the javelins have (I think). Perhaps they should be the only non-siege unit to do collateral damage, that would definately give them some appeal over javelins.

I agree in general about Archers. They lost too much with the last changes compared to javeliners. 1 first strike does not compensate 33% less strength. However I don't agree with your suggestion, collateral damage wouldn't help much to make them more defensive, since it's not very useful in defense.

I'd also like to suggest removing the "Armored ..." units. The number of available units feels a bit excessive with them in there when they really only offer a very small increase in strength over the earlier units. In my opinion a better option would be an armor promotion granted by a building similar to the existing weapon promotions. The various flavor units are excellent so it's not that the mod has too many total units, just too many that can be built by a single empire.

Interesting considerations, but the later unit should also COST more, not just have higher stats ;)

Anyway, great mod, keep it up :)

you too. Enjoy
 
onedreamer said:
Very good feedback Seven05. Keep it up, this is what we need !
Ok, I'll make you a deal, you guys keep it up with the mod, I'll keep it up with the feedback :)

onedreamer said:
this is very curious. Needs further testing. Did Arminus declare peace with the other AI civ btw ?
No, they remained at war. In fact in an MP game he did the same thing again, he decalred war on me (Greece) as I was decimating Decebal ( ?? orange guy, you know me and names). He proceeded to move several sizeable stacks toward me and then he suddenly decalred war on Rome and pulled all of his units back into two of his cities. He did refuse to talk for a while and when he finally would talk he wouldn't even pay a single gold for peace (he accepted it, but wouldn't offer any tribute). So it looks like all of the pieces work, just not together like they should be. I fear it's either an AI quirk that you may not be able to do anything about or there is a conflict between the AI weights of different actions and it's confusing him.

I did start a new game as Rome last night and he hasn't done this yet, but then he's not at war with anybody.

onedreamer said:
I think that probably the free promotion is available to heavy units only.
Makes perfect sense then.

onedreamer said:
Kambsor if I'm not wrong.
Yes, I confirmed that name last night. Although it looked like they had the right formation in my most recent game too. I'll mess around with that in the WB to see if it was just a problem with the stack and not the specific unit, it just happened every time I ran into one of those in the other game so it struck me as odd.

onedreamer said:
Well this is not working as intended. They should only get the bonus in the flatlands. I thought that something like you descibed would happen, but some XML experts said it wouldn't, early in the thread... :mischief:
Yeah, it happens. I first noticed it in other mods and tested it out to see exactly what would happen. You can work around it by applying a matching penalty to hills, forests, jungles and cities but that makes for a lot of text when you're looking at the unit info in the game.

onedreamer said:
I agree in general about Archers. They lost too much with the last changes compared to javeliners. 1 first strike does not compensate 33% less strength. However I don't agree with your suggestion, collateral damage wouldn't help much to make them more defensive, since it's not very useful in defense.
Right, but it would at least make them useful for something. Hey, you could give them the grassland/plain defensive bonus :)
 
M@ni@c said:
Alexander was already dead a couple years after the city was founded, and then the city fell under a control of a dynasty that despite being Macedonian in origin had its power base in Egypt itself.

Egypt was conquered by the Greek/Macedonians who then founded a city (Actually, renamed an existing port town). They gave it a Greek name.
That's exactly what should happen in Civ when you conquer a city and rename it.
What would not happen would be for the unconquered Egyptians to found a city and give it a Greek name, which is what we have now.

Come to think of it, Heliopolis (City of the Sun) is also a Greek name. The Egyptian name was Iunu.

If we ever include the Judeans or Israelites we wouldn't want them founding Caesaria would we? It's the same thing.
 
Seven05, as Onedreamer said, you provided very nice feedback. Thanks for your input!

I will have a closer look at Arminius and see what's up with him. I'll also go in and further reduce religious importance for everyone (so that the absolute most will be +2).

Regarding shrines, I wouldn't be against removing them altogether. But, perhaps we could change it such that shrines only give a culture bonus (and maybe very slight commerce bonus), but no espionage or religious spread. As far as I know, religion wasn't that important in those days to warrant shrines being as powerful as their vanilla implementation.

I'll fix that spearman defensive bonus to something a little more subtle.

For archers, perhaps giving them 50% city defense bonus, or maybe as high as 100% ?

Dacian Peltast issue will be fixed as well. Peltasts will also be in place of the Armored Javelineer.

Speaking about armored units, I think the promotion idea for them is nice ...
 
Shqype said:
Regarding shrines, I wouldn't be against removing them altogether. But, perhaps we could change it such that shrines only give a culture bonus (and maybe very slight commerce bonus), but no espionage or religious spread. As far as I know, religion wasn't that important in those days to warrant shrines being as powerful as their vanilla implementation.

On this I don't entirely agree. Religion wasn't very important when it comes to determine the relationships of civs based on religion, but in general it was very important. Wars could happen or not happen based on religious signs. This was very very common in the roman monarchy, as romans would never fight any battle or war without positive signs from the Gods. Also these signs were often collected in locations that you can compare to the "holy cities" of Vanilla. Oracle of Delphi, Temple of Artemis etc...
I wouldn't remove shrines, but I would limit them to a cultural and commercial bonus, as you said. This IMO would fit the ancient age well.

Ick of the East said:
(And speaking of city lists - Alexandria should be in the Greek list and not the Egyptian. The Greeks can build one in Egypt (and many other places) if they want to, just as they did in the real world.)[/COLOR]

A few points on this:
First off, it would be quite hard to assign Alexandria to Greeks or Macedonians, since neither of them is in the mod.
Second, Alexandria has been an important egyptian city for 4 centuries. Have you considered that New York has been an important center for the US for less time and that it wasn't founded by the US or even by english ? But I wouldn't remove NY from the USA city list now, and assign it to the Netherlands.. Would you ?

Culturally though this city was atypical for Egypt. Only on this extent I would agree on its removal. There are other egyptian cities that I would add, like Hermopolis.
 
Back
Top Bottom