The Medieval Pack II Beta: The Gathering (Part 2) - Page 6

WesW · May 14, 2001, 00:36

UPDATE ALERT: New text update posted.

We finally got all the triggers working correctly. Militia units are back in the mod, though in a simpler version than what we had before. The Elite units now work too. Be sure and read the Main readme about these two unconventional unit types.
The terraforming errors P-man laid out have been fixed as well.

We should now be able to conduct the final round of play-testing to see how the Elite units affect the game, and to check science progress in the second half of the game.
I am leaving tomorrow for a short trip, hopefully only a couple of days, so if you don't hear from me for a little while, that is the reason.

My current game has been quite pleasing. I conducted a long war against a strong civ to drive them from my continent, and it took all of my 20% PW allocation just to repair my troops while I waged my successful campaign. The refugee and building triggers also had a big effect on the quality of the cities I conquered. It took dozens of turns for them to return to their pre-war condition, and I had to spent all my gold to rush-buy happiness improvements to keep them out of riots or even revolts.
I think I am going to continue this game, so that I can make a judgement on the science flow of the later game. Thus I will need you guys to report on the Elite units. Any other observations are welcome too.

janilxx · May 14, 2001, 01:03

Should helps be ok already?

At least few wonders' helps were not ok in build manager window(the appian way, stonehenge or something like that did not work).

Jani
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 14, 2001).]

PinkFriend · May 14, 2001, 04:17

Specialy for WesW and others
----------------------------

1. Civs must be to improve their relations every turn if there is no war between them (and with Human too!!!). We may give them small bonus for the same goverment. Why did you turn off this feature?

2. BAG in DipMod: probably it must be used "MaxPlayer" preference, not "NumPlayer"!!! New players could appear by revolt!!!

3. It's good idea to change Player1's relation to Player2 according to Player3's relation to Player2 and Player1's relation to Player2. Suppose Player1 has positive relation with Player3 and Player3 relation to Player2 falls. Then Player1 relation to Player2 must fall too. On the other side if Player1 would have negative relation with Player3 then Player1 relation to Player2 must rise. I can write this SLIC but I don't know how can I get players's relation.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'v created new Castle cities pictures. They are much more good than earlier ones. You may use them. But I didn't make shadows, cause I don't know how do them. Get it from:

chat.ru/citystyles.jpg

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you have other SLIC command documentation than Apolytion site has?

PinkFriend · May 14, 2001, 04:51

I made a mistake. The adress of new Castle city styles images is:
http://r-island.chat.ru/citystyles1age.jpg
http://r-island.chat.ru/citystyles2age.jpg

janilxx · May 14, 2001, 05:53

quote:

Originally posted by PinkFriend on 05-14-2001 04:17 AM
1. Civs must be to improve their relations every turn if there is no war between them (and with Human too!!!). We may give them small bonus for the same goverment. Why did you turn off this feature?

I disagree. I do not like my neighbour or friend more every day

quote:

2. BAG in DipMod: probably it must be used "MaxPlayer" preference, not "NumPlayer"!!! New players could appear by revolt!!!

How is this new player thing working in practice?

Example: If three of my cities that are close will revolt I would like to get new player(nation) with 3 cities(and that nation's should have continous borders). I would not get 3 different nations. But if cities are far from others I would maybe like to get 2 or 3 different nations.

And what if fourth of my city will revolt lets say 200 years later. If it is next to the nation that was established 200 years ago would it join that nation?!? Or would it do it's own nation?

And how about barbarians... If they can get for example 2 of your cities that are close should them form a new nation so that I could establish embassy with them???

I think that this "new player by revolt/barbarians" issue is so big that it should be studied very carefully after the first final version of MedPack. This issue would need a lot of people discussing about it here in forums or with mails/chats. And if the result is that this should be coded we should get very good spesifications how this should work. And then we could ask someone to code that. That feature should not be added if it will not be working properly and fine. And finally we have to have so good specifications that we could get Wes and others to love this idea and then we could maybe get it to the MedPack version 2

quote:

3. It's good idea to change Player1's relation to Player2 according to Player3's relation to Player2 and Player1's relation to Player2. Suppose Player1 has positive relation with Player3 and Player3 relation to Player2 falls. Then Player1 relation to Player2 must fall too. On the other side if Player1 would have negative relation with Player3 then Player1 relation to Player2 must rise. I can write this SLIC but I don't know how can I get players's relation.

Real life example.
So if lets say Chile and Argentina would have good relations. And Argentina and Mongols are having good relations as does Chile and Mongols have too.

Then Mongolian diplomatic would say bad things about Chile and Chile would get angry and closes its mongolian embassy. Chile would hate Mongols after this.

But why should Argentina hate Mongols too? They should not! Only in rare situations other countries' relations should be affected as you said(like NATO countries in militaristic issues etc).

Jani

Dale · May 14, 2001, 06:26

PinkFriend:
Point 1: I disabled the blatant cheat that the AI was receiving. In the diplomacy.txt settings are two lines that refer to turns of peace and turns of treaty. These two enable two nations to get friendlier during these situations IF (and only if) no other REGARD_PENALTY flag is triggered.

Point 2: As far as I know of CTP2, Preference(NumPlayers) is increased/decreased as the game continues. The script uses this global.

Point 3: Once again, in diplomacy.txt there are some REGARD_PENALTY flags that refer to when you have treaties with other nations. They include "the enemy of my friend is also my enemy" flags. They aren't as vicious as "my enemy" flags, but they have an effect.

------------------
Rommell to a sub-commander outside Tobruk: "Those Australians are in there somewhere. But where? Let's advance and wait till they shoot, then shoot back."

PinkFriend · May 14, 2001, 07:59

quote:

Originally posted by Dale on 05-14-2001 06:26 AM
PinkFriend:
Point 1: I disabled the blatant cheat that the AI was receiving. In the diplomacy.txt settings are two lines that refer to turns of peace and turns of treaty. These two enable two nations to get friendlier during these situations IF (and only if) no other REGARD_PENALTY flag is triggered.

Point 2: As far as I know of CTP2, Preference(NumPlayers) is increased/decreased as the game continues. The script uses this global.

Point 3: Once again, in diplomacy.txt there are some REGARD_PENALTY flags that refer to when you have treaties with other nations. They include "the enemy of my friend is also my enemy" flags. They aren't as vicious as "my enemy" flags, but they have an effect.

To point 1: Can you do wars that have end? I mean wars between AI's. Can you do AI's treaties? I didn't see any one.

To point 2: But when you initialize array (it does only one time in the begining of game) you set array with this number of player that takes place when the game's started.

To point 3: I agree. But I didn't see this effect in the game.

PinkFriend · May 14, 2001, 08:01

quote:

Originally posted by janilxx on 05-14-2001 05:53 AM
I disagree. I do not like my neighbour or friend more every day

............

Real life example.
So if lets say Chile and Argentina would have good relations. And Argentina and Mongols are having good relations as does Chile and Mongols have too.
Then Mongolian diplomatic would say bad things about Chile and Chile would get angry and closes its mongolian embassy. Chile would hate Mongols after this. But why should Argentina hate Mongols too? They should not! Only in rare situations other countries' relations should be affected as you said(like NATO countries in militaristic issues etc).

You speak about real life and I speak about game CTP2. Now we see that after 200 turns all civ's hate each other and even war with each other. It is less realistic sutuation than "love rising to neighbours". After all it makes game not playable. Neverending wars are not interesting thing. And no AI's treaties too.

janilxx · May 14, 2001, 08:13

quote:

Originally posted by PinkFriend on 05-14-2001 08:01 AM
after 200 turns all civ's hate each other and even war with each other.

Dale did something to this and after that all AIs loved all AIs

But now Dale have changed the settings and one main testing area for me is to check out that Dale did the good corrections(if I just remember to check this

)

Now one AI should hate some AIs and love some AIs and have neutral relations to some AIs.

And of course relations should change sometimes because of many reasons!!!

I hope many testers would check AI to AI relationships sometimes and testers would post their findings here. This all-hate/love-all situation was IMO one of the biggest stupidity in CTP2 and if that can be corrected well the game will be a lot better!!!

Jani

[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 14, 2001).]

janilxx · May 14, 2001, 08:13

double
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 14, 2001).]

GreatDane · May 14, 2001, 10:48

I have started a new game with the latest update and so far all the AI's hate each other. They have started many wars and are never making peace it seems. They all love me for some reason. Maybe because I built the staue of liberty wonder and I am first in the rankings.

Would it be possible to trigger that when the human player is in the lead all AI's would become angry at him? Is this code already in the game?
This would make the game more interesting in the later stages if I am far ahead of the AI.

I would rather have the AI hate other AI's instead of them loving eachother. It would be nice to have a mixture, but I am afraid that is not possible with the current gamecode.

Henrik

Martin Gühmann · May 14, 2001, 15:11

quote:

I'v created new Castle cities pictures. They are much more good than earlier ones. You may use them. But I didn't make shadows, cause I don't know how do them. Get it from:

http://r-island.chat.ru/citystyles1age.jpg

http://r-island.chat.ru/citystyles2age.jpg

an alternative castle style that would also enrich CityMod2 (I think there are to much castle civs) but there is something missing: The shadows as you said, the industrial age and I already made a new modern style. I could finish the work PinkFriend. By the way I think Green roofs would be much

er than this metallic blue-gray - A green patina of a bronze roof. Great work PinkFriend.

-Martin
[This message has been edited by Martin Gühmann (edited May 14, 2001).]

Dale · May 14, 2001, 18:41

Pinkfriend:
If you can ge the AI to make treaties with other AIs, you're a better man than I am. I've been trying for something like 5 months now. I've got the AI proposing treaties to Humans though.

Also, I tested using MaxPlayers instead of NumPlayers last night for 5 minutes. It crashes because it tries to read players that aren't there. EG. NumPlayers = 8, MaxPlayers = 16. From player 9 - 16 it's NULL, you get crashes. On my setup anyways.

As for AI-AI relations, I've setup three seperate diplomatic states in diplomacy.txt: AI_AI_NORMAL, AI_AI_SUCKUP and AI_AI_WARMONGER. These states are based on the personality of the AI. If you get militant personalities it sets as WARMONGER state. If you get scientific/economic personalities you get SUCKUP state. All others are NORMAL. Bloodlust sets all AIs to militant personalities, so you'll never see the other two diplomatic states. The harder the level you play at, the more likely you get militant personalities. This may be the effect you're noticing. I played a test game on the middle difficulty for 500 turns, and found that there was a mix of AI relationships. *shrugs* But if you want to change it, speak to the file diplomacy.txt. It's easy to understand. As for me, I'll keep an eye on these boards to see how it's going, but I just quite simply don't have any time to even bootup my PC, let alone play games or SLIC-script.

------------------
Rommell to a sub-commander outside Tobruk: "Those Australians are in there somewhere. But where? Let's advance and wait till they shoot, then shoot back."

David Murray · May 14, 2001, 19:07

sorry
[This message has been edited by David Murray (edited May 14, 2001).]

Rhuarc · May 15, 2001, 00:49

ok, a couple of questions, do I have to start completely new games in order to use the new text update? Or can I install it then reload the files using modswapper, then play my saved games? Also, the videos for some of the wonders are messed up, the stonehenge one for example is one of the much later videos. I don't know if you meant it to be this way or if it was a glitch. Any way, thanks a lot for all your help everyone!

May 15, 2001, 00:56

I wrote to W. Lee tonight and she answer with this;

"Heh, I can't believe anyone actually saw those. I guess the joke's on me. I'm really glad you liked CTP2. I'm working on a new game for playstation 2 called Legion:The Legend of Excalibur. Keep an eye out for it - it should be on the shelves by Christmas. Thanks for making me laugh today

"

Winnie Lee

------------------

janilxx · May 15, 2001, 01:30

1.
Sometimes there is a messagebox "Sir, we do not have enough public works..." when you end your turn. There is yes and no buttons but there is no question in the box. I tested those buttons and yes does end the turn. So I suppose that message box would need a question like "Are you sure you want to end your turn anyway?"

2.
Same messagebox. That message appeared to me many times in the beginning of the game. I did have all my units' power on top so those did not take any of my PW. I think that the message game when I did not got any PW in that turn(in the begining of the game that is usually possible). Should you change that so that when you are losing PW(so that army reparation does not decrease it) you would get that message.

3.
Message tab(Msgs) is still sometimes red even there is only already read(gray) messages. At least the message described in 1 and 2(above) does change msgs tab to red and when I open that tabthere is only one read(gray) message. Could this be fixed so that tab is not red when there is no unread messages?

4. Have someone made something to the building speed? It seemed to be very slow again in the beginning of the game. But it might be that my two cities were in bad positions and did not get lot of production points.

5. Can you get Monarchy too fast if you aim to it. I had two city(first only one) and I got monarchy in the first 70 turns. It was about 2000BC or something. I think that is quite too fast? When you get monarchy that will boost your empire quite a lot. And if you are aiming to monarchy and AIs' are studying other kind of technologies you can quite easily become superb empire after you get monarchy(in 70 turns)(?)

6.
Is ruins' content always random? In some games it seems that I do find empty ruins almost every time. And in the new game I found for example four times a new unit and only one empty. And there were two money ruins too. I am just curious.

Jani
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 15, 2001).]

Harlan · May 15, 2001, 07:10

I've been waiting a looong time for Wes to iron out the militia and other related bugs, so I could start playing CTP2 again. Looks like it has happened- yea! Hopefully this will get me repsyched again about CTP2, and I can finally finish off the improved Alex scenario.

I just played almost up to 0 AD, and I quite enjoyed the game so far. It seems pretty balanced. I did notice a few problems though, that I hope will get fixed. As I'm sure Wes knows, the GL is messed up in places. One I noticed was the text for Carrack and Trireme being the same. Another was no text at all for City State.

I also noticed that Archer dies out long before I can get the replacement, Longbowmen. I think there should always be a standing Archer type unit until Renaissance times, no?

Has the problem with loading saved games been finally fixed? I'm a bit out of the loop.

Have the rules on ejections changed? Either I can't eject Settlers and Diplomats when I want to, or it doesn't take place till the next turn, I can't tell.

I think one needs to be more rigorous in getting rid of defacto obsolete units, so they don't clutter up the build queue. For instance, Coracle and Trireme. The Trireme costs a mere 30 more, and gives 5 extra offense, but otherwise their stats are exactly the same. Either Trireme should be clearly better, and Coracle should be obsolete by it, or Trireme and Coracle should be different enough so there'd be a reason I'm still building Coracles sometimes after I can build Triremes. I can't see any. There are other examples like this. It would make more sense to me to have Trireme move one further (3 vs 2 for Coracle) or carry 2, and in either case obsolete Coracles.

Also, I'm not entirely sure about this, but it seems I'm having the symbol for a successful slave raid appear above some of my cities when I in fact didn't do any slave raid. For instance, my capitol went up 1 in population and got a slave symbol on it at one point, even though I never built a Slaver. Am I missing something, or is this a bug?

Anyways, great work Wes et al, and please keep on keepin' on.

janilxx · May 15, 2001, 07:27

quote:

Originally posted by Harlan on 05-15-2001 07:10 AM
Also, I'm not entirely sure about this, but it seems I'm having the symbol for a successful slave raid appear above some of my cities when I in fact didn't do any slave raid. For instance, my capitol went up 1 in population and got a slave symbol on it at one point, even though I never built a Slaver. Am I missing something, or is this a bug?

Some(or all?) units does slave raid now when they win battles. Read this whole thread. This is discussed here.

preacherman · May 15, 2001, 09:51

cataplts and mounted archers replace archers, you can't eject a unit if it is still in it's own civ. you have to waite till it comes out side his boundry lines. Trimmies carrie three units while coracle can only carrie 1 unit.

------------------
Hear the word and live refuse and die!

Pintello · May 15, 2001, 10:43

Hi Harlan,

Good to see you back. The Longbowman is an Elite unit. That means that only one civ will get it. The way Wes has had this setup is that Once a civ discovers a tech that gives it an elite unit, that civ then has a chance of getting that unit, until one civ gets it. The Elite unit is then out of play for all other civs. One way that Wes has balanced this is that every civ can only get one Elite unit for every age, but there are usually at least 2 Elite units that are available in each age. This way civs get civ specific units and it does affect your strategy, but you can never know when, if, or which one you will end up with.

The difference between the Corcale and the Trieme is that the Trieme has a better either defense or attack, I think it is attack, and it can only carry one unit. The Corcale has a lower attack but can carry two units. In this way, the Corcale can be used as an ancient age transport while the Trieme acts as an ancient age warship.

Wes has also designed the game so that Mounted Archer and Catapult are used to replace the generic archer that everybody gets. Wes was hoping for a crossbowman to replace the generic archer in the Midevial or Rennesainse era, but the graphic for that units has never been produced despite come people, not Tom Davies or Kate, saying that they will make one. That is to bad too, because this would have been the perfect update for the generic archer.

As for the slaver thing, now all units can make slaves when they win a combat. Wes did this to help the AIs as he never could convince them to include slavers in their stacks like most humans do. The way Wes figured it, most humans do this anyway, so to save the humans the trouble and encourage the AI to do the same thing, just make all units automatically make slaves. This only applies to Ancient, Classical, Midevial, and Rennesainse units. I don't think Wes gave this ability to modern or later units. Slavers still can be used to take slaves from cities and to see other stealth units. Also, because of this change Wes set things up so that everybody can create Abolusionist even it they have slaves or not. His reasoning here was that he did not want to take the Abolutionist out of the game. Besides, in the US we had both slaves and Abolutionist existing at the same time.

Well, hope this covers everything for you Harlan. I really hope you decide to finish you Alexander Scenario because I would really like to play that one. I mean Navigatable rivers and everything. I really look forward to it.

Timothy Pintello

GreatDane · May 15, 2001, 11:12

Regarding the slaves. When I conquered a city after I built the wonder which frees all slaves (can't remember its name right now) I still got a slave in one of my cities. Is this how it should be or is this a bug?

Henrik
[This message has been edited by GreatDane (edited May 15, 2001).]

Immortal Wombat · May 15, 2001, 15:50

quote:

Originally posted by Harlan on 05-15-2001 07:10 AM
Hopefully this will get me repsyched again about CTP2, and I can finally finish off the improved Alex scenario.

Wes informs me that you might have use for a battering ram unit? Is this right?

Anyway: http://members.aol.com/wvrs4/ctp2/ctp2dl/ramreadme.htm

Its good to see you back Harlan.

Ben

preacherman · May 15, 2001, 17:14

REALY WEIRD Just went back and loaded a game that I had saved from 2050AD, my one warrior is now a wearwolf. How did this happen? Looks good though.
I have played several games with last mod and latest mod. somethings I have found.
Water craft do not ever leave when you have withdraw pack.

No treaty between Ai's at less don't show up on diplomacy Manager. They do go to war ok.
Ai's are sending out slavers, but they very seldom take slaves. I find them fortafied not doing anything. They send out quit a few Abolitionist, but only once ia awhile do they free slaves. Most the time they sit out side a city without slaves. I have never seen a cleric or a Lawyer. They do make good use of spys. I almost always have most science so they are trying to steal it.

I have not seen an Elite unit.
I have not seen a Partisan, but then never lost a city.

Ai are not stacking much in hard game. Barbs are I have seen up to stacks of 9 with them and there citys are well defended.
On the counter bomb, I like that when I set up my forces next to a city they bombard me then all their units are destroyed. Just make sure you have more bombared units then they.

Still have the problem that when you load a saved game you lose half of your trade profit.

I am playing hard level and with large map 6 civs. On this level I have never lost a city and am top dog by time reach modern time. Last time I played very hard I was in trouble plenty. There is a major diffrrents in how the two leavels play. Time line seem to be right on, but play is unbalanced between Ais and human on hard level.

------------------
Hear the word and live refuse and die!

Dale · May 15, 2001, 18:58

Preacherman:
Taken straight from my Moder's Notes txt file.....

quote:

Why withdraw does what it does is because of my way of seeing the world. All through history, the seas have been a very hard place to patrol and keep control of. Land on the other hand is a lot easier to keep an eye on. By using border patrols and garrisons, cities strategically placed in chokepoints, nations have been able to keep control of their land. But the seas constantly change. It's a big place out there (70% of our planet is water!). This is why withdraw will ONLY expel units that are on a land terrain. Anything on a sea terrain square (including planes in flight, units on transports, etc) will be ignored for this simple reason. Also, I saw a situation in V1.1 where the AI was trying to move a battleship through a straight between two islands I controlled, and everytime the battleship hit my border it got expelled. The AI was too stupid to move the battleship around my islands, but for 30 turns kept moving into my border. It will now be allowed to move that ship through my straight to the open seas on the other side. This also allows for pirates to get in and cause you troubles (like English and Portugese pirates kept hassling the Spanish Main).

------------------
Rommell to a sub-commander outside Tobruk: "Those Australians are in there somewhere. But where? Let's advance and wait till they shoot, then shoot back."

janilxx · May 16, 2001, 02:01

Here we go again...

715BC a message popped up: "...race afoot to complete wonder... begun work on the Medieval Pack II". I suppose this is not ok. I am not sure but maybe that AI changed to build other wonder in next turn(at least he started to build other wonder next turn but in what city). And he never completed Medieval Pack II wonder.

I am sure I have not seen any AI's but sometimes I can hear the horn(this has happened always with CTP2). Could that horn be disabled if the action that generates that voice does not happen inside my borders or inside my units' vision.

GL not ok yet... for example coracle/trireme.

There is werewolf(that was mentioned above too) in GL. It is almost the same as warrior(when looking it's points). Werewolf is not mentioned in any of your docs(or is it?). Should that be there?

I made 6 contacts with the same AI in turn. That is still a bug(if you did not disable that property). 4 should be ok.

Feat of Wonder - sail around the world: You do not need to sail around the world. It was about 5 squares short

I mean when you sail around the world and there is still about 5 squares to go you get the FOW. I think I have seen this before too. Could that be fixed?

I am not sure but it seems that AI still makes MANY farms and no mines if there is a lot of grassland around his city. And many mines but no farms if there is lot of plains around the city.

Relations:
(all yerars are AD and I really did my first contact on 140AD

)

So left is the year and the AI which relations to horizontal AIs in top I checked.



                blue(me)   orange     green      lilac      violet     light blue

140AD orange               -                                                  



215AD lilac                                          -                        



470AD orange        peace  -                                                  

      lilac                                          -                        

      blue                              not met                    war   -

      (light)



610AD orange        ceasef -                                                  

      green                             -                    not met not met

      lilac         peace                            -                        war

      blue                              not met        war         war  -

      (light)

So in this time it looks strongly that AI - AI relations are allways

or

war. Maybe Dale should check his code again and make some changes again. Lets anyway wait some comments from others too!

I do not know anything about the AI-AI relations code but I have an idea

If there is one variable that says something about relations(like there is 50% change that relations changes etc) and every AI checks that variable every turn etc...

Maybe there should be some kind of regard variable in every AI agains every other player. Orange would have variables against blue, green, lilac... and green would have ... ... ... and those variables would change independently from other AIs variables

In that way every AIs would have its "own" will and every AI would have different relations against other players.

Jani

[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by janilxx (edited May 16, 2001).]

preacherman · May 16, 2001, 14:23

Dale, I am ok with it, Just was not sure which way it was to work. I haven't seen your moder notes were are they?

started very hard game now this is fun!! hords of barbs runing every where taken citys, don't send no wimpy army to expore or you will lose them to stacks of 9 barbs.
Barbs defend better and fight harder then all Ai together. Though I am fighting one Ai that has keep runing cannons and culveins at lest 20 onto one city I was trying to take. I had to back off for now I am haveing to supply across water. I am about 4 advances behind him. once I get bombers He is mine.
Embassies don't automacticly reform after going to war. I had to make them over every time.It works fine in hard game.

------------------
Hear the word and live refuse and die!

Harlan · May 16, 2001, 17:08

I've started a second game, now that I'm more familiar with the rules. A strange thing about the elite units. The first game, it seemed like I never got them. In this game, it seems like I get them every single opportunity! Perhaps there is a problem with the way they're randomly generated? I could build them once I got the announcement, by the way.

I've also noticed the first round the world feat to be screwed up. Both times I got it when I was sailing north, instead of east or west. Neither time was it when I had actually sailed around the world- I was still quite a ways short. I don't remember this ever happening playing without the Wes mod.

Thanks Pintello, for the info. If there's no proper graphic for a later archer unit, then perhaps Longbowman shouldn't be an elite unit. Seems like there's a big gap here, and mounted archer and catapults don't cover it. Regarding the Coracle and Trireme, I didn't realize the Coracle could hold 2- I'm learning one can't trust the GL info. Speaking of which, I wanted to rush to Monarchy and looked up what technology I'd need. I was told the Monarchy tech, which doesn't exist in the game.

Also, I was pretty surprised how few units can't move over mountains. For instance, Settlers and basic defending units can, like Spearmen. I think it should be changed back. Settlers so they can't build cities on mountains and create an unconquerable strongpoint, and things like Spearmen so they aren't used for exploring.

Another thing: after trading maps with some enemy civs, I'm amazed how little terrain some of them had explored. At one point I'd discovered like half the land on the planet, and the civ I traded maps with hadn't explored beyond about 6 tiles from any of his cities! Even the perfectionist personalities need to get around more than that. This is especially a problem in that AI civs aren't getting into ships and colonies lands near them.

Other than that, I'm really impressed.

Harlan · May 17, 2001, 00:37

After about 0 AD, I've had to quit my game cos the AI wasn't doing well. I turned on the cheat and found out that none of them had managed to found any cities off their original islands, so none of them had over 3 cities (one, I saw, had an settler on another island, but too little too late). This despite all being very competitive technologically. Clearly, the AI needs to be more expansionist. I'm also gonna have to try again on a setting with much less ocean, since it seems they can't deal well with islands.

A couple other things: Absolute Monarchy desperately needs some kind of GL entry. Also, despite getting just about every (if not every) elite unit, there doesn't seem to be any cavalry type unit really worth building until Knight, IMHO. Chariot has A: 15, D: 5, R: 15, M: 3, and Heavy Cavalry has A: 15, D: 10, R: 15, M: 3. Whoop-de-do. Even with the HP change, that's not much of a difference. Light and Heavy Cavalry should move 4, instead of having that happen with Knights. Knights if anything would go slower, since all that armor slowed them down. Horse Archers on the other hand, should be speed devils, able to outrun the opposition. Perhaps M: 5 there?
[This message has been edited by Harlan (edited May 17, 2001).]

Harlan · May 17, 2001, 07:38

Yet more game results...

Keeping on with the game, I did get an elite unit or two (not all or nothing, which is good), but haven't seen any enemy elite units, except for barbarians. Maybe I just didn't get lucky in seeing them.

One thing I've noticed that's really wierd: the AI civs generally suck at building roads. I would think they're completely incapable, except one civ (the Vikings in this game) which has developed a good road network. Two civs (Egypt and Slavs) have not built a SINGLE ROAD, despite it already being 700 AD and them living on flat terrain. Two other civs (Romans and French) have built a pathetic smattering of roads. Whatever setting the Vikings are on, the other need to have that setting too!

Here's an even wierder thing. Out of the blue, a city in the middle of my inland empire was attacked by 4 Coracles, despite being nowhere near any ocean. They were a civ (Brazilian) that I haven't seen anywhere else despite exploring most of the map, so I can only imagine it was some wierd compu-hiccup.

The only battles I've really had are with barbarians. The AI seems too meek still. I was at nonstop "war" with a neighbor, sharing a wide common land border with cities just a short distance away, and in all that time, not once did that civ ever attack me. Pretty much all the AI civs have lost towns to the barbarians, and have never taken them back, even when it was in the middle of their empire. Perhaps something along the lines of the Frenzy Mod needs to be implemented.

Finally, game speed seems to be good, except right when I'm walking onto a goody hut. It takes quite a noticable amount of time before I can finally walk on it.

Over and out.
[This message has been edited by Harlan (edited May 17, 2001).]