What precisely happens if you run a game using a normal map? I realized rather far in that my current 2.501 game is on Big and Small regular, not ROM, and it seems to be going fine. Will something bad (like no critical resources) happen later?
Version 2.5beta patch
- Thread starter zappara
- Start date
Revolucion09
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 67
hey man, im arguing about the sense of the civics, how is that i can have a Monarchy at the same time of an Aristocracy?
Best mod so far in terms of balance and addition, good choice of changes so keep it up! but please be careful with the civics and the sense they make!
Best mod so far in terms of balance and addition, good choice of changes so keep it up! but please be careful with the civics and the sense they make!
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
Monarchy describes the system of government, which is less absolutist autocracy. Aristocracy describes who runs the system of government, who are nobles and warriors. Adding the Government and Power civics together describes the political system as a whole.
For example,
Monarchy + Aristocracy = French/Spanish Monarchy
Monarchy + Parliament = Pre-Victorian British Monarchy
Monarchy + Patrician = Roman Empire
Monarchy + Bureaucracy = Han China
Democracy + Aristocracy = Athens
Republic + Aristocracy/Patrician = Roman Republic
Despotism + Aristocracy = Hellenistic Civilizations
See the combinations? That is the sense of the two political civics.
konradcabral
Prince
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
konradcabral
Prince
An AP World History high school student.
I did not see this coming... What means "AP"? (sorry, english is not my native language)
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
Advanced placement. It is a college-level course in high school.
DanoDavid
Chieftain
- Roman forum dont have all the bonuses like market
- i was not able to build bomb shelters but could build nukes (diplomatic victory was disabled in that game)
- if an enemy spy destorys my international port, i have to build the full harbor line again
- mech untis make 0% bomb damage
- passenger airline event to often in the late game (like every 3rd turn)
- flame thrower should make some collateral damage
- humvee dosent have the 100% against mounted units like jeep
thanks
- i was not able to build bomb shelters but could build nukes (diplomatic victory was disabled in that game)
- if an enemy spy destorys my international port, i have to build the full harbor line again
- mech untis make 0% bomb damage
- passenger airline event to often in the late game (like every 3rd turn)
- flame thrower should make some collateral damage
- humvee dosent have the 100% against mounted units like jeep
thanks
Revolucion09
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 67
Thanks I get it. just not sure if Monarchy + Aristocracy is the right name for a combination. I mean monarchy calls for an absolute power on a single individual.
But taking it as a combination its fine. maybe by the way the dynamic civ name generator in-game could work better that way
But taking it as a combination its fine. maybe by the way the dynamic civ name generator in-game could work better that way
wrestler235
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 70
That class was quite interesting, unless you have my teacher who was only concerned about Islam, Mongols, prostitution, rape, and the various STDs traveling around at the time.
Bastian-Bux
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2006
- Messages
- 795
A better example for a monarchy + aristocracy would be the HRE. There WAS a monarch, though he was elected by the Kurfürsten (electorals).
HannibalBarka
We are Free
I have now uploaded version 2.502beta patch. See first post in this thread for download link.
V2.502beta patch notes:
I decided to release this now as it seems it has taken bit longer from glider to include Inquisition mod component to RevDCM so I haven't got yet chance to merge new version of his mod to RoM. This patch also includes some new experimental civic modifiers (building cost, unit cost, free promotions) that probably need some testing (thanks for Lawrie, Big Heb and other guys for civic mod discussion again - it was their thread that got me thinking if some new civic modifiers could be introduced via python
are the two verions compatible? I am in the middle of a game using 2.501, can I continue it with the new 2.502?
DanoDavid
Chieftain
I had civic aristoracy and couldnt build manor ( i started the game in industrial era; but assembly line not yet discovered)
I like the new civic features
thanx
I like the new civic features
thanx
I noticed the discussion about civics and I had a few suggestions regarding the "Power" civics. I certainly don't want to seem critical since you put a lot of time into this and obviously seem to know what you're doing but I do have a master's in political science so I can't help having an opinion and maybe I can be of some help.
Oligarchy, Aristocracy, and Patrician. - I see what you're trying to differentiate here, but there's too much shared meaning among these three terms and a couple of conflicts that stand out in my opinion.
-An oligarchy is a system in which a small group or sect holds absolute power. This can be either the rich, the hereditary nobility, the most successful army unit or general, a small cadre of senators, a societal caste, the heads of major economic interests, etc, etc, etc. In fact, you could (and some have) argue that any government is essentially an oligarchy in that a small portion of the population is put in power over the rest whether it be through voluntary democratic means or otherwise. That said, aristocracy and patrician are both most certainly different forms of oligarchy. If you're looking for a power structure in which the leader and his small group of advisers/councilors/power brokers rule, perhaps junta is a better match? Although junta almost always implies a military rule, it is rarely a purely autocratic system. Typically a junta will consist of the military dictator himself along with his closest, most trusted staff in positions of power as well as his political or religious allies to fill various civil posts in which the military lacks experience. This is different from the other two in that a small select group rules without regard to birthright or wealth.
-Aristocracy refers to an oligarchy in which a group of elite citizens hold power. The primary difference among aristocracies is what makes a citizen elite. In some, it is purely a question of wealth with little to no regard for social station or birthright. In others, it is all about who your parents are with little regard for wealth. In yet others, it is all about wealth secured via one's birthright.
In the first case, you are better off calling it a plutocracy. This is a system in which the wealthy hold power without regard to social class, i.e. even the poorest citizen can get lucky, make a successful business, become rich, and hold power.
In the second case, you are better off calling it simply "nobility". This implies that the power is held by people who inherited it and whose children will likewise inherent the power.
With this differentiation achieved, you can eliminate patrician. I would argue this is necessary since the "patrician" society of Rome was essentially the hybrid product of an aristocracy fused into a greater caste system. Under the Roman system, a prodigious merchant could be ten times wealthier than the patrician standing next to him, however he would still be considered of a lower order and therefore inherently inferior because of the established system of social orders. Traditionally (although many of the latter emperors deviated from this), patrician had nothing to do with money but simply meant that you came from a family that could trace it's heritage back to one of the founding families of Rome. Over time, this inevitably led to increased wealth and prosperity as influential families that stayed together over the generations were able to build more and more influence and pass it down to their successors. However, patrician status or lack thereof was not necessarily a barrier to success or power, an excellent example being Pompey the Great. Despite coming from a wealthy family and becoming a great general, politician, and even consul, he was not a patrician and was as such looked down upon as inferior by a majority of the senatorial noblemen.
What I'm trying to get at here is that patrician by it's very definition implies a specific societal caste and that caste cannot exist without a caste system to belong to. This causes a conflict in the civic system since caste is in a different category altogether. To simplify, I would suggest going with junta to signify rule by a small hand selected group, plutocracy for rule by wealthy, and nobility for rule by hereditary noblemen. Sorry if that was a lot to read, just my two cents.
Oligarchy, Aristocracy, and Patrician. - I see what you're trying to differentiate here, but there's too much shared meaning among these three terms and a couple of conflicts that stand out in my opinion.
-An oligarchy is a system in which a small group or sect holds absolute power. This can be either the rich, the hereditary nobility, the most successful army unit or general, a small cadre of senators, a societal caste, the heads of major economic interests, etc, etc, etc. In fact, you could (and some have) argue that any government is essentially an oligarchy in that a small portion of the population is put in power over the rest whether it be through voluntary democratic means or otherwise. That said, aristocracy and patrician are both most certainly different forms of oligarchy. If you're looking for a power structure in which the leader and his small group of advisers/councilors/power brokers rule, perhaps junta is a better match? Although junta almost always implies a military rule, it is rarely a purely autocratic system. Typically a junta will consist of the military dictator himself along with his closest, most trusted staff in positions of power as well as his political or religious allies to fill various civil posts in which the military lacks experience. This is different from the other two in that a small select group rules without regard to birthright or wealth.
-Aristocracy refers to an oligarchy in which a group of elite citizens hold power. The primary difference among aristocracies is what makes a citizen elite. In some, it is purely a question of wealth with little to no regard for social station or birthright. In others, it is all about who your parents are with little regard for wealth. In yet others, it is all about wealth secured via one's birthright.
In the first case, you are better off calling it a plutocracy. This is a system in which the wealthy hold power without regard to social class, i.e. even the poorest citizen can get lucky, make a successful business, become rich, and hold power.
In the second case, you are better off calling it simply "nobility". This implies that the power is held by people who inherited it and whose children will likewise inherent the power.
With this differentiation achieved, you can eliminate patrician. I would argue this is necessary since the "patrician" society of Rome was essentially the hybrid product of an aristocracy fused into a greater caste system. Under the Roman system, a prodigious merchant could be ten times wealthier than the patrician standing next to him, however he would still be considered of a lower order and therefore inherently inferior because of the established system of social orders. Traditionally (although many of the latter emperors deviated from this), patrician had nothing to do with money but simply meant that you came from a family that could trace it's heritage back to one of the founding families of Rome. Over time, this inevitably led to increased wealth and prosperity as influential families that stayed together over the generations were able to build more and more influence and pass it down to their successors. However, patrician status or lack thereof was not necessarily a barrier to success or power, an excellent example being Pompey the Great. Despite coming from a wealthy family and becoming a great general, politician, and even consul, he was not a patrician and was as such looked down upon as inferior by a majority of the senatorial noblemen.
What I'm trying to get at here is that patrician by it's very definition implies a specific societal caste and that caste cannot exist without a caste system to belong to. This causes a conflict in the civic system since caste is in a different category altogether. To simplify, I would suggest going with junta to signify rule by a small hand selected group, plutocracy for rule by wealthy, and nobility for rule by hereditary noblemen. Sorry if that was a lot to read, just my two cents.
Revolucion09
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 67
Thats a good way to start, im studying to about this and well, this mod is one of the best aproximations to some sense in political matters, but we could make it better by adjusting some civics as Complex says
And well been playing to this mod (not too much though) and loving it so far.
Personally I would add some leaders for the factions, since the revolution mods "changes" leaders and well many times we change to the same one
Other thing I would like to see is some more "normal" resources, in terms of increasing number per map, and even some new. By "normal" i mean fruits and vegetables. This would improve diplomacy in matters of commerce and add some variety to the game
It should work in v2.502 directly as I haven't added anything new between those versions, just changed some xml modifiers to different values.
Hi,
I must say thanks to zappara and his supporting crew. And also thanks for the guys keeping up the good discussions around here. not much spamming around.
I like the idea of havng even more civics. I am really impressed by some peoples historic knowledge, I am only an engineer...
But anyway isnt it really useless to discuss the names of the civics as one could name them Politics: prehistoric, ancient, old, classical, reformed neoclassical, new renewed...
Its just a name for a bonus or malus. As long as I am fighting Spearmen with Marines I really dont care that much about realism in naming of civics. Especially if it works the way Big Heb explained.
Greetz
I must say thanks to zappara and his supporting crew. And also thanks for the guys keeping up the good discussions around here. not much spamming around.
I like the idea of havng even more civics. I am really impressed by some peoples historic knowledge, I am only an engineer...
But anyway isnt it really useless to discuss the names of the civics as one could name them Politics: prehistoric, ancient, old, classical, reformed neoclassical, new renewed...
Its just a name for a bonus or malus. As long as I am fighting Spearmen with Marines I really dont care that much about realism in naming of civics. Especially if it works the way Big Heb explained.
Greetz
jm_dracolich
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 45
hey zappara
great mod!
i love the realism it brings
i just tried to install the 2.502 patch, and when i ran it, everything worked fine, except the civics were still the same as in 2.4
so i just reinstalled rom completely and tried to add the 2.502 patch again, and i got the same problem...
any suggestions?
great mod!
i love the realism it brings
i just tried to install the 2.502 patch, and when i ran it, everything worked fine, except the civics were still the same as in 2.4
so i just reinstalled rom completely and tried to add the 2.502 patch again, and i got the same problem...
any suggestions?
Grimz101
King
In 2.502 did you make revolutions occur more often?
Because in 2.501 they hardly happen.. it may be since i play on Emperor/immortal and the AI get many bonuses.
Also maybe the Rebels should get more troops and siege weapons based on difficulty, anything that makes the climate more unstable is
1) Fun
2) makes it more difficult which is the point of the harder difficulties.
Because my last game Julius Ceaser of the Roman Union (he had 4 vassals) had multiple revolts with Victoria leading them.. they(Victoria) had infantry and some of Englands UU, which were crushed under the Roman Unions tanks everytime.. no chance!
Because in 2.501 they hardly happen.. it may be since i play on Emperor/immortal and the AI get many bonuses.
Also maybe the Rebels should get more troops and siege weapons based on difficulty, anything that makes the climate more unstable is
1) Fun
2) makes it more difficult which is the point of the harder difficulties.
Because my last game Julius Ceaser of the Roman Union (he had 4 vassals) had multiple revolts with Victoria leading them.. they(Victoria) had infantry and some of Englands UU, which were crushed under the Roman Unions tanks everytime.. no chance!
No doubt, I like the extra civics much better than vanilla BTS and it's pretty clear what they are intended to represent, but having spent so many years studying this exact sort of stuff I just can't help being a stickler for realism. The only one that really stands out to me is Patrician since it doesn't represent a system so much as a particular caste of society.
With the others you can say "well, we're just generalizing aristocracy to imply rule by the wealthy" (especially since most people assume that's the complete definition of aristocracy to begin with), or "we're just using oligarchy to represent an example of a system of absolute control by a few individuals". With patrician however, even if you remove the Roman-specific "patrician" and make it generic you're still implying rule by a particular caste of society. imo, this cannot be if there is no caste system to belong to.
Anyways, like I said it's just my two cents on the matter. ROM is def the best mod out there and I salute Zappara and everyone else who spent so much of their time working on this project.
Similar threads
