MOD: The Ancient Mediterranean MOD 0.2.2

[watorrey]

I can't find anything wrong with the TAM 2.5i Fertile Crescent.biq

Could you give me more setup parameters that you used or maybe a .sav?

[Arrian]

Watorrey,

All I did was load the mod (chose conquests, picked fertile crescent 2.5), pick Babylon, and hit enter. I didn't change anything else.

I can get you save when I get home tonight.

-Arrian

[watorrey]

I have an answer for you: Always make sure culturally linked start positions is checked when playing a premade map. (just click 'default rules' during setup)

Turning off Culturally Linked Start Positions' seems to override the preplaced start postitions and civs. It then places random civs in random start positions.

It probably has something to do with overriding the default rules which are specified as such in the editor.

It may be a bug in the 1.22 editor or it has been there all along and nobody noticed or i just haven't heard of it. I'll do some more testing to see if it affects turning on victory points, wonder victories, etc.

[Arrian]

I bet that was it. When I play the stock game, I always play with cultural linking off.

-Arrian

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by watorrey
You should read up on modding and get comfortable working with the editor first.

Basically, find a map you like and import it into the random map biq rules. You'll have to replace all the resources if you want them accurate or you could just let the editor randomize them for you.

Maps can be found at many of the fan sites.

Keep in mind there are lots of things that can go wrong so you should have a good understanding of how it all works.

Thanks

Your last sentence makes me think maybe I should just do the random map and 8 Civs with my son

Im old and info age challenged

Good to see your playing TAM Arrian, Im beginning to prefer it over Standard epic.

I didn't run into the Persian problem, most of my games have been with Western European Civs on the big map but 9 atack that early does sound a bit much.

[Arrian]

Actually, since I was playing AS Persia last night, I should correct that - it's an 8 attack. Still, that's hardcore. 8.3.2, every 10 turns.

It helped that I got an early MGL. 3x Guard Cavalry army... by my calculations that's a 12.4.3.

Down went Babylon (repop, heh), Assyria (now an OCC, not long for the world), and I was able to deal with a Median incursion w/o much trouble (and got MGL #3 for 3x Guard Cav army #2 ). Media at least made me sweat with those 7.2.2. Elite Horsemen. MGL #2 rushed the Parthenon in Babylon.

It's kinda like being handed the Statue of Zeus... only it might be even better.

Con,

I suppose it depends on what type of game you and your son want to play. When I've played with a friend of mine, we typically restart until we're on seperate continents. We've started near each other before, and that simple = ancient warfare. The only question is the unit mix. It might be cool to have a game where you cannot even get at each other (reliably) until near the end, with Galliots (req. Exploration, IIRC).

-Arrian

[conmcb25]

Hey Arrian

My son is 13 and the subtleties of CIV still escape him.

He likes it when we are close and gang up on the AI.

Its not much of a challenge for me but he likes it and I help him along as we play.

And he likes the Ancient stuff the best, so he really likes this mod.

The kid is 13 and he routinely reads books about ancient Rome and Greece. I guess its a good thing he takes after mom

[Arrian]

Sounds like a cool kid!

I forgot he was only 13... at that age, I was trying to figure out how the AI was getting wonders first in the original Civ.

-Arrian

[scaeva]

i think Im a cool kid.

I like the ancient stuff in this mod and enjoy playing it with my dad.

[Arrian]

Wow, the AI is aggressive in this Mod.

I've been playing out my Persian game (on the Fertile Cresent map). I am maybe 2/3 of the way through the Hellenistic Age.

Thus far, the following civs have attacked me:

Babylon
Assyria
Media
Egypt
Nubia
Kolchis

6 out of 9 opponents.

I'm psyched to do a little government comparison next time I play. I've saved the game on the last turn of anarchy, so that all I need to do is press enter and select a new government. My empire is large, a tad oddly shaped. I'm particularly interested to see what city-states would be like. I'm expecting republic to be the best overall (especially since I also have representation and thus can build the roman forum small wonder), but maybe I'll be wrong.

-Arrian

[watorrey]

It's good to hear you are having fun
I'm curious to see what you come up with in a goverment comparison on that map.

[Arrian]

I can post the save too, so others can compare if they wish. The only governments missing, I believe, will be Empire and Feudalism.

...

Unrelated thought: what do you think of adding "produces veteran units" to some of the small wonders (I'm thinking mainly of the forbidden palace type small wonders. Parthenon, etc.)?

Producing hordes of regular units is driving me nuts, but that's not really the main issue. I understand you guys deliberately set things up that way. Besides, having 1-2 more cities that produce vets won't change much. What I'm after is upgrading. With a large empire, it's REALLY a pain in the butt to have to do any and all upgrading in the capital (Persopolis). From a "fun" perspective, being able to upgrade them in Babylon (my Parthenon city) too would really be nice.

-Arrian

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Arrian
Unrelated thought: what do you think of adding "produces veteran units" to some of the small wonders (I'm thinking mainly of the forbidden palace type small wonders. Parthenon, etc.)?

Producing hordes of regular units is driving me nuts, but that's not really the main issue. I understand you guys deliberately set things up that way. Besides, having 1-2 more cities that produce vets won't change much. What I'm after is upgrading. With a large empire, it's REALLY a pain in the butt to have to do any and all upgrading in the capital (Persopolis). From a "fun" perspective, being able to upgrade them in Babylon (my Parthenon city) too would really be nice.

-Arrian

I like this idea. I find it a tad bit to restricting as well, and have been playing Rome just for that reason although I prefer to play one of Agricultural Civs.

[watorrey]

You need a slightly different mindset for TAM. Try upgrading only the units close by and sending the old units into battle first. Less emphasis on upgrading, more on replacement.

Just a thought

[Arrian]

Try upgrading only the units close by and sending the old units into battle first.

Because, strategically, that's... um... not very smart. It's a waste. If the option to upgrade is there, I will use it! If the intent of the mod is to emphasize replacement instead of upgrading, you should either:

1) increase upgrade cost such that it becomes more cost-effective to build new units from scratch; or
2) break the upgrade chains periodically.

Not that I'd be particularly pleased with that, personally, but hey, it's your Mod.

The result of the current setup is that I will end up rotating my troops around in order to get them upgraded w/o leaving myself defenseless during the upgrade process.

Luckily for me, most of my units at this point are horsemen, and thus can move 8 tiles/turn on my roads. Upgrading my spears to pikes will be more annoying.

-Arrian

[thamis]

You can upgrade units once you become more technologically advanced.

[conmcb25]

True buts thats well into the last age.

Arrian is not suggesting we can just build barracks anywhere, he is suggesting to give the barracks attribute to some of the other "FP"s that are in the game.

[Arrian]

Yes, I know. You can get to Standing Military, build barracks, and upgrade units there. But of course that doesn't come until 1/2 way through the 3rd age.

...

As for my government comparison:

City-States wins, HANDS DOWN.

It offers lower overall corruption, and of course it's communal corruption, so it allows me to build up areas that were heretofore useless. I could imagine Republic being slightly better if my empire was a certain perfect shape, and I had a leader handy to rush the Roman Forum small wonder. Otherwise...

City-States is like a combination of the best bits of Republic and Communism from the stock game. Communal corruption, commerce bonus, and cash rushing. I'm kicking myself for not realizing how awesome CS was before... all that time I wasted using Monarchy!

If anyone is interested, I can post the save tonight, so you can compare for yourselves.

-Arrian

[conmcb25]

Please do

Thats the save where you can make the decision correct? And then do the comparison.

[Arrian]

I'll post it tonight, Con. All you have to do is press enter, deal with a (Median, I think) request for a world map trade, and then select your new government.

I didn't even bother trying some of the others (theocracy, thing law, merchant oligarchy).

FYI, not that it matters unless you actually play forward, but I'm at war with the Kolchis (center north, brown).

-Arrian

[watorrey]

All of the communal goverments should be better than comparable central goverments. C3C unbalanced the comunal goverments, probably in an attemp to keep the AI from destroying itself in the epic game.

Justus II put alot of effort into rebalancing the goverments for 2.5i. Some are suppose to be better for certain situations than others.

[Arrian]

Yeah, I know. They realized that communism sucked and a) the humans didn't use it; and b) the AI did, to its doom. So they tried to fix that, and overcorrected. Then they added Fascism, a new and improved AI self-destruct mode.

The real problem is the combo of very low communal corruption (can't help that) and the trade bonus (and, to an extent, the ability to rush buy things with that extra cash). It's uberpowerful, IMO.

It might be a good idea to further reduce (or even eliminated entirely) the unit support for that government.

-Arrian

[Justus II]

Wow, great to see so much activity here! I generally just follow the forums at CFC and CDG, but thanks to a nudge from Watorrey I see that this is where the action is!

The communal problem is the biggest thing we had to deal with (in terms of governments). Because the communal corruption basically got better as the empire got bigger, about the only thing I could use to counteract it was unit support. From my tests, City States should be ideal for a spread-out yet peaceful empire. If you have a large military (3 or more units per city/town) unit support should actually drive City State into the red. That, and the War Weariness (City States has max WW) should make it hard to be a war monger in that government. We also tried to offset it by allowing a second FP for Republic and Empire, but not for City State or Oligarchy.

Republic generally did best in most cases, although at 2xOCN or more, Empire definitely showed the advantage. If you have a small military (1-2 units/city), then City States is competitive with Republic, if you include the extra FP for Republic. Republic (and Empire) also get the faster worker rate.

As for the early governments, don't overlook Thing Law, or Theocracy. You can reach them much earlier (with the slowed tech pace, up to 100 turns sooner than Monarchy), and they both allow for improved worker speed, which is a big boost early. Thing Law also removes the despotism penalty. It's great for agricutural civs or peaceful builders, who want to get good pop growth or build decent settler factories. Theocracy is actually ideal for Religious civs, who get a head start on that tech path, and a short anarchy. They get sped-up workers and can support a huge early army. Especially for Industrious civs, due to the anarchy-worker bug, all workers (slave/normal/ Industrious) are considered to have speed one during Anarchy (and Despotism in this mod). But hitting Thing Law and/or Theocracy unlock the industrious bonus.

Anyway, I'm glad to get some more feedback, I told Watorrey numerous times, I knew my government tests might be skewed by my play style (generally builder/trader early, then go for a small, higher-tech military when I'm ready to conquer). I tried some tests on civs with heavier military, but until you get some in-game data, it's hard to tell. If you'd like to post that save, I'd be glad to run the numbers through my comparison spreadsheet I used in testing.

[Justus II]

Originally posted by Theseus
Can I possibly see the map and starting locations for this mod, without going all the way through installing it?

Thanks.

This is a map of starting locations for the Ancient Med Large map, I mostly worked with that one. It is missing the last civ added, the Massagetae, who are in the upper NE corner east of the Caspian Sea.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Justus II
Wow, great to see so much activity here! I generally just follow the forums at CFC and CDG, but thanks to a nudge from Watorrey I see that this is where the action is!

The communal problem is the biggest thing we had to deal with (in terms of governments). Because the communal corruption basically got better as the empire got bigger, about the only thing I could use to counteract it was unit support. From my tests, City States should be ideal for a spread-out yet peaceful empire. If you have a large military (3 or more units per city/town) unit support should actually drive City State into the red. That, and the War Weariness (City States has max WW) should make it hard to be a war monger in that government. We also tried to offset it by allowing a second FP for Republic and Empire, but not for City State or Oligarchy.

Republic generally did best in most cases, although at 2xOCN or more, Empire definitely showed the advantage. If you have a small military (1-2 units/city), then City States is competitive with Republic, if you include the extra FP for Republic. Republic (and Empire) also get the faster worker rate.

As for the early governments, don't overlook Thing Law, or Theocracy. You can reach them much earlier (with the slowed tech pace, up to 100 turns sooner than Monarchy), and they both allow for improved worker speed, which is a big boost early. Thing Law also removes the despotism penalty. It's great for agricutural civs or peaceful builders, who want to get good pop growth or build decent settler factories. Theocracy is actually ideal for Religious civs, who get a head start on that tech path, and a short anarchy. They get sped-up workers and can support a huge early army. Especially for Industrious civs, due to the anarchy-worker bug, all workers (slave/normal/ Industrious) are considered to have speed one during Anarchy (and Despotism in this mod). But hitting Thing Law and/or Theocracy unlock the industrious bonus.

Anyway, I'm glad to get some more feedback, I told Watorrey numerous times, I knew my government tests might be skewed by my play style (generally builder/trader early, then go for a small, higher-tech military when I'm ready to conquer). I tried some tests on civs with heavier military, but until you get some in-game data, it's hard to tell. If you'd like to post that save, I'd be glad to run the numbers through my comparison spreadsheet I used in testing.

In an hour or two, I'll post the save and you can compare Republic and City States for the empire I have going. I just have to get home, walk the dog, and eat first

I found that CS resulted in significantly lower corruption (using the F1 figures for lost commerce). The ability to build up my holdings in Phoenicia, Assyria and now Kolchia (?) - which were at or near max corruption under Monarchy & Republic - was a big factor as well.

Anyway, I'll post the save in a few... later,

-Arrian

[Justus II]

Originally posted by Arrian


Because, strategically, that's... um... not very smart. It's a waste. If the option to upgrade is there, I will use it! If the intent of the mod is to emphasize replacement instead of upgrading, you should either:

1) increase upgrade cost such that it becomes more cost-effective to build new units from scratch; or
2) break the upgrade chains periodically.

Not that I'd be particularly pleased with that, personally, but hey, it's your Mod.

The result of the current setup is that I will end up rotating my troops around in order to get them upgraded w/o leaving myself defenseless during the upgrade process.

Luckily for me, most of my units at this point are horsemen, and thus can move 8 tiles/turn on my roads. Upgrading my spears to pikes will be more annoying.

-Arrian

In addition to the Romans, at least 3 other civs get a civ-specific wonder that gives the 'vet units' flag (Macedon, Persia, Scythia). Iberia had it at one point as well, but it was dropped IIRC. So, if the wonder is built closer to the front, it gives a second option.

One other way of adding a limited option pre-barracks would be to modify one of the army-related small wonders (Military Academy, for example) to make it a vet-units small wonder, and make it available during the second age. At least then you would have a second city to upgrade at. I was thinking of Mil Academy, because the ability to cash-rush armies is pretty overpowered in C3C anyway, this would remove that option, but give you something else of value.

[conmcb25]

So the Military Academy would do what then?

Just give you vet units????

I wonder (no pun intended) if it would even be worth building then ??

[Justus II]

Originally posted by conmcb25
So the Military Academy would do what then?

Just give you vet units????

I wonder (no pun intended) if it would even be worth building then ??

Well, it would allow vet units, and upgrades, an age and a half before any other non-capital city. That's a long time, and could be well worth the cost. Of course, the cost could be adjusted as well, it's just a suggestion to provide a (limited, and expensive) option to supplement the palace.

[Arrian]

Here it is...

I would have had it up an hour ago, but our DSL was acting up.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

I think the best choice for the "vet units" flag would be the Parthenon. It's supposed to be like a second palace - your civ's secondary capital. So it makes a certain amount of intuitive sense as well.

The military academy comes rather late, IIRC, but it too would make sense.

-Arrian