[UXP] World of Legends: Heroes, Guilds, and More!

[krody]

is there still not a mirror for the mod? i dont even try to download from AG

 

[cybrxkhan]

No mirror yet. I'll try to see if I can make one in the next few days.

 

[Bakuel]

First off, it this mod is fun! I played two games as the Vietnamese on the Monarchy difficulty. The first didn't go so well as it was the first time I had played a civ game in a while, I conquered too much in the ancient era and my economy collapsed. On the second game that I am still playing now, I controlled my urges of conquest a bit better and managed to survive to the middle ages. Sadly I haven't made any hero units yet so I can't comment on those. However, as I dealt with a lot of ancient/classical combat, I have a few suggestions and comments surrounding the two new units, the Horseman and the Javelineer. Of course, take this all with a nice, large helping of salt. These are simply the ramblings of a mad sleep deprived man after all. Sorry if it is a bit incoherent.

Spoiler :

First off, I like the concept of Javileneers. A resourceless skirmisher unit with high withdraw was lacking from the vanilla game and it really adds to ancient warfare. However it is just a bit too overpowered and makes capturing cities a bit too easy. Personally, I would either take away the collateral damage or increase the hammer cost a bit.
If the collateral damage was taken away, I think the unit would still be very useful as it has a high withdraw and the 1 First Strike it has insures that it does some damage before withdrawing or dieing. In my game, a Javelin with the first drill promotion usually did damage to a city defending Archer and about a third of the time the archer was damaged enough that the next unit to attack it would probably finish it off anyway. Since the javelineer costs less then a half of an axeman it would still be cost efficient to use them to soften up the enemy. However, without the collateral damage I am not sure how the AI would handle the unit, as it is now, the computer used them similar to catapults and sacrificed some every now and then to damage my stacks. I do not know if the AI would weigh the unit the same way if it didn't do collateral damage.
On the other hand the collateral damage could be kept and the hammer cost adjusted. As the hammer cost is now, I was able to spam javelins pretty easily and every city could make the unit in one to three turns. Since the unit has a 50% withdraw chance, after conquering one city I had a whole horde of them left over to attack the next city. Basically if it was easy to attack the AI in the ancient era in vanilla, it's even easier now. Another odd thing about the low cost of the javelineer is how it compares with the archer unit. The javelineer is cheaper than a archer but much more useful, as it can be used both to help attack enemy cities as well as whittle down enemy unit stakes in the field. On the other hand the archer is only useful on city defense. If the collateral damage is kept, then at the very least the unit should cost as much as a archer if not tad bit more.

Now onward to the Horsemen!
The Horseman unit is pretty overpowered, with the 5 base strength and the 50% bonus against Archery units means that against the AI they really are the best city attackers in the classical era. Actually, they probably are simply the best unit in the era period. If they are promoted with the smash promotion, they are pretty good against axmen and swordsmen as well. Unlike the Javelineers, I am not entirely sure what unique tactical role the Horseman unit is supposed to fulfill, as it does so many things so well. It seems to be basically a slightly more expansive horse archer which is better at attacking cities, my classical unit stacks where composed of large amounts of horsemen and a few horse archers with the smash promotion (along with a slower horde of javelineers of course). Inside of the vanilla game a stack of horse archers was a strong and mobile assault force, however, while the fast stack was good for attacking lightly defended cities/and or newly created cities, it was not as good as attacking more heavily cities as a stack of axmen and/or swordsmen. In other words, the player had to make a tactical choice between a expensive mobile stack, or a slightly cheaper, slower but ultimately more efficient infantry stack. However, with the creation of the horseman unit, the player can create mobile city attack stacks which do the job just about as well as the slower infantry. This is especially true in the ancient era when culture city defense outside of the capital is generally low so siege weapons really aren't as needed . While the javalineer unit brings something new to the ancient era and invites a tactical combined arms approach, I would say that the horsemen seem to simply steal the city attacker role from axemen and swordsmen. But of course, take all this with a grain of salt.

 

[cybrxkhan]

For the hero units, Bakuel, remember that they will "die" of "natural causes" (i.e. be removed from the map)! So don't waste them unnecessarily.

Anyhow, to reply to your comments.

For the Javelineer, I think I do agree for the most part. When playing my test games, I remember oftentimes I'd just build the Javelineer instead of the Archer, especially if I needed a unit cheap. The AI using them as cheap, easily sacrificed units is reasonably consistent with their purpose in history - Javelineers, Slingers, and other skirmishers were usually cheap units that were easily run down by more professional troops. So I want to keep the collateral damage. I think what I'll do is first lower their strength to 2, and increase their hammer cost a bit, probably to arond the archer as you suggested.


For the horseman, there was a niche I wanted to fill. Historically, in the classical era, Heavy Cavalry were often the victory-makers when civilized nations were fighting each other. However, you do have a point with it being kind of overpowered. I can solve this by two historically accurate ways: first, to jack up the hammer cost by a lot (historically the heavy cavalry were usually elites and nobles, and they were very expensive to maintain); secondly, to give it a penalty attacking cities (if you think about it, moving a heavily armored horse in such a small space is not the best idea), maybe -25% city attack.

---

Anyhow, thanks for the input. If you don't mind, can you also evaluate the militia units (peasant, minuteman, and guerilla) for me too? They were intended to be extremely cheap and replenish-able units, but I didn't test them extensively, and am not sure of what they can (or can't) do.

Just to add, in the next version I'm thinking of maybe adding a Horse Archer unit for the Medieval era (I'll call it a "Cavalry Archer", which will be weaker than the Knight but have a higher withdrawal chance). That way, there can be a difference between light and heavy cavalry in the medieval ages too.

 

[Nitram15]

Awesome! I will try out your mod!

(btw: will you use my LHs too?

)

 

[cybrxkhan]

^Out of your leaderheads, the only one I think I'll probably be using is the William Wallace one (the other ones couldn't match what Leaders I wanted). I think I'm probably going to add another Celtic leader, so I wanted to add a Scottish leader with that, either William Wallace and Robert the Bruce.

 

[Nitram15]

Okay, thanks.

 

[rkade8583]

This should be an interesting comparison to the other UXP: Legends of Revolutions.

DLing now.

edit: While I'm waiting, I have a question: I have an older computer that can run Civ but not well enough for mega-mods like RoM and HitM. Is this another mod that will crash my box or, like Phungus, are you trying to keep us low-enders in mind?

 

[Bakuel]

If the Horseman is supposed to be noble ancient heavy shock cavalry, how about switching the 50% vs Archery units to 50% vs Melee (or 50% Attack vs Melee) units as well as giving them -25% City Attack?

The Archery bonus really does nothing expect aid units in attacking cities. Archers are rarely used outside of cities by the AI and even then, Archers are at the bottom of the totem pole of power in the ancient era (Well, they share the position with Javelineers now). In the field, everything already beats them anyway and a special counter is not needed. If you give the Horseman a -25 city attack bonus, then it seems to be like a horse archer, except less useful. It goes head to head with axmen, is beaten by swordsmen and horse archers, slaughtered by spearmen, and the only real use for it is beating archery units in the field. Which the rest of the units in the era can do good on their own. I personally would just build the cheaper horse archers and ignore the Horseman unit entirely. Simply put, it would be just a rather expensive archer basher, not really a useful counter to build.

However if you give them 50% melee and the -25% city raider bonus and lower their withdraw to 10% percent and/or get rid of it entirely (Seriously, the unit has a higher withdraw then a horse archer, which is a bit odd), it would be a useful counter for enemies who mass infantry such as axmen and swordsmen. The unit would be transformed into a expensive anti-infantry unit and it would be similar to a classical chariot, in that it would put the overused axmen in their place but also beat swordsmen. The unit would still be beat by spearmen but would have better odds if promoted with shock, this really wouldn't be that overpowering since spearmen are pretty cheap and one can build 2 or so spearman for every horseman, and it would also be beat by the cheaper horse archer as well as being pretty useless at attacking cities. Since I saw the AI using a fare amount of them, this would increase the importance of protecting your infantry stacks with either spearmen or horse archers.
This would also give the horsemen and horse archer distinct roles, horse archers would be somewhat all-around good skirmishers, the unit was good withdraw and beats horsemen and axemen at nice but not astounding odds and is equal in power to swordsmen and is countered by spearmen and is a useful fast city attacker. Given the use of horse archers in ancient and classical history, this role seems to fit. The horseman on the other hand would be a expensive anti-infantry horseman who is only good in the field but is useless against cities. This fits the ancient role of flanking heavy cavalry pretty well I think. A player could still make a stack of largely cavalry, however, in the stack the two mounted units would have their own distinct roles to play and the stack would be a lot less effective against attacking cities while still being useful at attacking lightly defended cities. The expensive stack would still be balanced due to the fact that the much cheaper spearman unit is a effective counter as well as the fact that the units are unlocked by expensive ancient techs (Horse Riding and Army Organization).

I haven't made any militia men yet, but will as soon as I discover the technology. A high withdraw cavalry unit for the middle ages sounds pretty good, it would help take over the role from the javelineers. As it is now, I am rather addicted to high withdraw units. If the power of the Javelineers is reduced, could you re-evaluate the Mali Skirmisher unique unit? 50% City Attack on a unit with 2 strength is pretty useless. I would leave the skirmisher unit stats as is, with 3 strength and 50% City Attack, while extremely useful it is a unique unit and it would still be defeated by everything on the defense.

 

[cybrxkhan]

This should be an interesting comparison to the other UXP: Legends of Revolutions.

DLing now.

edit: While I'm waiting, I have a question: I have an older computer that can run Civ but not well enough for mega-mods like RoM and HitM. Is this another mod that will crash my box or, like Phungus, are you trying to keep us low-enders in mind?

This mod does work on my old dingy laptop, even with a standard sized map. At this point it's almost entirely xml and some python, so it isn't too much to handle. It's just more the graphics; so I would highly advise that if you doubt your computer's ability to run this, then put the game on low graphics. When I was testing, I used lowest graphics for everything (except for the units which I kept their normal numbers, instead of having just one).

If so, then the mod should work fine. However, I would also advise saving often - which everyone should be doing normally anyways for everything.

Anyhow, I can't guarantee that your computer can't handle it. However, I don't see any reason why it can't, if it can handle the normal game. Unlike the mega-mods like RoM and HitM, this one comparatively doesn't add much heavy-duty stuff to the game.

[... cut down because too long... ]

Actually, that makes real sense! It'd go along well with the heavy cavalry's historical role as a CHARGE! BAM BAM BAM *all the infantry run away* kind of unit - historically, for example, the Cataphracts (in classical/early medieval times) would just keep charging like heck into the infantry until they broke away. +50% vs. melee and -25% city attack - I'll change it to that for the next version.

As for the Skirmisher, I guess I'll have to fix them too. I think I'll just remove the city combat bonus and give them an extra first strike, similar to how their old bonus in the normal game.


Anyhow, thanks so much for the in-depth input!

 

[dreadknought]

Im trying this also and appreciate the work you put into this. Im playing a small map with just 3 ai civs to see how it runs and plays out. I am using always at war setting(monarch level) as well which means the new pillage promotion can be usefull in the early going as I found a nearby civ to harrass early on. I will try to give some feedback next few days but I agree the skrimisher unit makes it a little too easy too take cities, maybe archers need some bonus against them, well in reality archers in fortified positions taking collateral damage doesnt make much sense if you think about how high up they are located esp. in castles.

 

[Bakuel]

[... cut down because too long... ]

Hey I can't help it that I tend to over think things, the post length comes naturally.

By the way, if you make that change to the horseman then the bonuses would overlap with the Carthaginian UU which replaces the Horse archer. To get around this problem, you could just make the Numidian Cavalry replace the Horseman, it's bonuses could be a slightly lower cost (Numidian Cavalry was a plentiful resource for the Carthage after all) and the withdraw and flanking promotion which it already has.

Im playing a small map with just 3 ai civs to see how it runs and plays out. I am using always at war setting(monarch level) as well which means the new pillage promotion can be usefull in the early going as I found a nearby civ to harrass early on.

Actually, I just realized that I rarely pillage. About how useful is the bonus amount from the pillage promotion?

 

[cybrxkhan]

Note: Thank you CurryAztec for this one - if your computer is running VISTA, make sure you remove the dll, or else the game will crash. Vista doesn't work with the normal dll, and I can't do SDK to make it work right now.

Im trying this also and appreciate the work you put into this. Im playing a small map with just 3 ai civs to see how it runs and plays out. I am using always at war setting(monarch level) as well which means the new pillage promotion can be usefull in the early going as I found a nearby civ to harrass early on. I will try to give some feedback next few days but I agree the skrimisher unit makes it a little too easy too take cities, maybe archers need some bonus against them, well in reality archers in fortified positions taking collateral damage doesnt make much sense if you think about how high up they are located esp. in castles.

That's not a bad idea. I'll think about it. And please feel free to give feedback, I like it, it helps make this even better!

Hey I can't help it that I tend to over think things, the post length comes naturally.

By the way, if you make that change to the horseman then the bonuses would overlap with the Carthaginian UU which replaces the Horse archer. To get around this problem, you could just make the Numidian Cavalry replace the Horseman, it's bonuses could be a slightly lower cost (Numidian Cavalry was a plentiful resource for the Carthage after all) and the withdraw and flanking promotion which it already has.



Actually, I just realized that I rarely pillage. About how useful is the bonus amount from the pillage promotion?

Hmm... I don't remember if I switched the Numidian Cavalry to replace the Horseman or not. I will, anyways, if I haven't.

---

The pillage promotions are Looting I, Looting II, and Looting III. I forgot the specifics, but each one gives about 10-25% increase in piillage money. Could be useful for your economy.

 

[Rome in a Day]

Can't wait to try it out. Any chance someone could design an earth map for it with civs in their historic locations?

 

[cybrxkhan]

Can't wait to try it out. Any chance someone could design an earth map for it with civs in their historic locations?

That's not a bad idea. I think I'll do it myself, make two maps - one with 40 civs to the max, and one with 18 civs for people whose computers can't handle that kind of stuff or those people that have to remove the dll for whatever reason.

However, in the meantime, I know it isn't exactly what you asked for, but I'm pretty sure the mod comes with two maps already, a blank world map (i.e. choose civs, they'll have random start locations) and a 1410 AD scenario (scenario with 40 civs that starts in 1410 AD).


Anyhow, I'll try to upload WoL to filefront and (maybe) make the earth maps in the next few days. As for now, I want to play my own mod!

 

[Rome in a Day]

Thanks cybrxkhan!,

I tried the 1410 scenario and am loving it so far. I did try the earth map, but can't seem to enjoy the game if civs are not in their historical locations. Thanks in advance for the offer for the earth maps. I can't wait to try them, especially the 40 civ map.

Kudos again on the great mod!

 

[cybrxkhan]

Glad to hear it! I'd just advise that you save frequently on the 1410 scenario, especially if your computer is on the lower end - since the map has 40 developed civs mid-game, it can crash randomly.

 

[Rome in a Day]

I am saving regularly but have had a CTD. My computer is not on the low end either. I noticed an odd graphic issue with the caravans. The graphic switches from the caravan to whatever unit you used last. I had to use the unit button and click on the caravan to select it on the map in order to have it revert to a caravan. Then it would allow me to conduct a trade mission. I am not sure if anyone else is having this issue.

 

[cybrxkhan]

I am saving regularly but have had a CTD. My computer is not on the low end either. I noticed an odd graphic issue with the caravans. The graphic switches from the caravan to whatever unit you used last. I had to use the unit button and click on the caravan to select it on the map in order to have it revert to a caravan. Then it would allow me to conduct a trade mission. I am not sure if anyone else is having this issue.

Thanks for reporting on the caravan; I'll check it myself to see if that problem happens for me, too. The unit art for the caravan is a bit confusing, so I suspected that something could be wrong with it. At the least it can still function as it should.

As for the CTD, I'm starting to conclude that it happens indiscriminately to any computer. It's happened pretty randomly - do you know when it happened for you, what were you doing right then? I suspect there may be something wrong with the SDK or python, but I'm not really sure myself, since it's not consistent and doesn't seem to have any clear pattern.


Anyhow, hope you're still enjoying the mod despite the issues (it's still in development, after all ), and thank you for reporting the issues/bugs.

 

[Rome in a Day]

The game was simply cycling through the AI moves when it crashed. I will try to reload it and see what precisely was happening. On a side note, I noticed in the 1410AD scenario the year is not in the 1400's. In fact, my game began in BC.