Half Civ era

Discussion and development of scenarios and campaigns for the game.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Posts: 936
Joined: December 15th, 2007, 8:52 am

Re: Q CIV era

Post by enclave »

Rezonus wrote:
May 15th, 2018, 6:48 am
I have an actual issue this time.

I can start an alliance with another player, but I cannot end it. I open the diplomacy dialogue select the player I'm allied with and tell them I want to end the alliance. Come the turn the alliance should end it doesn't, so I open the diplomacy dialogue again select my ally, select offer/end alliance and there is only a back option.
Yeah I suspected that ending alliance has a problem.. I will look into it, it was already on my todo list.. I must have broken something while making adjustments (it used to work fine). I will let you know here when I resolved it.. Thanks again!

Posts: 5
Joined: June 2nd, 2018, 4:49 pm

Re: Q CIV era

Post by Toti83 »

Game Guide, part 1: Research Tree
Based on version 0.5.0

The technologies are categorized to "levels" based on the research points they require. Occasionally a technology may have same level technology as its prerequisite (such as masonry requiring slavery to be researched first).
















horsebackriding, copper



bow, copper



farming, fishing

horsebackriding, bow







roads, shrines, slavery

bronze, spikedclub

mountedwarriors, bronze

farming, gold



- ports

roads, shrines, slavery

lighthorseman, iron

mountedwarriors, library, slavery

monarchy, construction, religion

monarchy, bronze

mediumbow, bronze, feudalism




iron, feudalism

feudalism, armor, armedriders


marketplace, feudalism

feudalism, iron

longbow, armor

construction, feudalism, tournaments

construction, monarchy, iron

ports, marketplace, roads


armor, axe




lighthorseman, religion, iron

tournaments, castles


colosseum, banks, feudalism

armor, banks, sails


heavypikes, platedarmor


platedarmor, mace



platedarmor, therepublic

knights, platedarmor, therepublic

Posts: 5
Joined: June 2nd, 2018, 4:49 pm

Re: Q CIV era

Post by Toti83 »

Game Guide part 2: Fighting Units
Based on version 0.5.0

Land units level up, getting extra damage and HP. Once you have the technology required, you can upgrade your old units to higher end types inside a village. That costs money though, and only applies to units of same type. Clubman and Heavy Clubman, for example, even if the name could suggest so, do not belong to the same category of units, thus Clubman would only upgrade to Fighter.


Tier - Name
Cost - HP - Melee - Tech

1 - Clubman
10 - 40 - 3-10 - none

2 - Fighter
18 - 60 - 5-10 - bronze

3 - Swordsman
25 - 90 - 7-10 - iron
10% armor

4 - Heavy Swordsman
35 - 120 - 10-10 - armor
20% armor

5 - Master Swordsman
50 - 160 - 13-10 - plated armor
30% armor

6 - Royal Swordsman
60 - 200 - 16-10 - steel
40% armor


Tier - Name
Cost - HP, Melee, Tech

1 - Heavy Clubman
16 - 50 - 4-10 - spiked club
Counters melee units

2 - Axeman
25 - 70 - 6-10 - axe
Counters melee units

3 - Maceman
45 - 120 - 10-10 - mace
Counters melee units, 30% armor

4 - Heavy Infantry
65 - 170 - 14-10 - heavy infantry
Counters melee units, 40% armor


Tier - Name
Cost - HP - Melee - Tech

1 - Spearman
14 - 50 - 4-10 - copper
Counters mounted units

2 - Pikeman
25 - 70 - 6-10 - feudalism
Counters mounted units

3 - Heavy Pikeman
35 - 100 - 8-10 - heavy pikes
Counters mounted units, 10% armor

4 - Halberdier
50 - 160 - 13-10 - halberdiers
Counters mounted units, 30% armor


Tier - Name
Cost - HP - Melee - Ranged - Tech

1 - Slinger
12 - 40 - 2-10 melee - 1-10 ranged - sling

2 - Archer
14 - 50 - 2-10 melee - 2-10 ranged - bow

3 - Bowman
20 - 70 - 3-10 melee - 4-10 ranged - medium bow

4 - Longbowman
35 - 100 - 4-10 melee - 6-10 ranged - longbow

5 - Crossbowman
45 - 120 - 6-10 melee - 8-10 ranged - crossbow
20% armor


Tier - Name
Cost - HP - Melee - Tech

X1 - Mounted Archer
20 - 60 - 3-10 (melee) -
3-10 ranged; the only rider with both melee and ranged. Closest to tier 2, will not upgrade.

X2 - Crusader
80 - 220 - 16-10 - crusade
10% armor, same cost as Knight with worse armor than Heavy Horseman. Closest to tier 6, will not upgrade.

1 - Nomad
18 - 60 - 4-10 - horseback riding

2 - Rider
25 - 80 - 5-10 - mounted warriors

3 - Light Horseman
30 - 100 - 7-10 - light horseman

4 - Medium Horseman
40 - 130 - 9-10 - armed riders
10% armor

5 - Heavy Horseman
65 - 170 - 12-10 - tournaments
20% armor

6 - Knight
80 - 220 - 16-10 - knights
30% armor

7 - Champion
90 - 300 - 20-10 - champions
50% armor


Tier - Name - Cost - HP - Melee - Tech

1 - Trireme - 20 - 40 - 3-10 - boats
2 - Caravel - 30 - 60 - 4-10 - sails
3 - Carrack - 40 - 80 - 6-10 - navigation
4 - Galleon - 60 - 120 - 10-10 - astronomy
5 - Frigate - 100 - 200 - 16-10 - frigates

Posts: 936
Joined: December 15th, 2007, 8:52 am

Re: Q CIV era

Post by enclave »

Thanks Toti83 that was a huge work :)

I might need to rename the forum topic era name... since I don't update q civ anymore.. or at least haven't done so for a long long time..

I will change the research tree slightly for next update, as a trial, the changes for now will be the:
1) medium bow will require researching bronze and bow. I think before was needed copper and bow.
2) long bow will not require bronze anymore, just medium bow and feudalism.

Im thinking that medium bowman might need decreasing ranged damage as well.. to 3 instead of 4.. but for now nothing changes.
Then later maybe add some kind of composite bowman between medium and long (not sure).

The reason for changes is I still see that bowman are a bit Over Powered (and very easy to research early), while slingers and archers fit/balanced perfecty (in my opinion). So I guess the general idea is that ranged damage should be about 2 times lower than a melee damage of same Age units..
If we compare fighter and medium bowman we will see 5-10 and 4-10... very far from balance.. 3-10 would work well.. so requiring bronze makes medium bowman be more close to Swordsman Age.. if we compare them its 7-10 and 4-10 (not so bad... but I might still decrease 4-10 into 3-10 in future)

Posts: 5
Joined: June 2nd, 2018, 4:49 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by Toti83 »

Heh, not that huge - you did all the work actually. I just copied the info from the .cfg files to a more readable format.

Yes, bowmen. Personally I prefer to start the game by researching sling -> bow -> mining -> copper -> medium bow.

Bowmen are especially powerful against AI. AI prefers to use ranged units very often, but can't do it very well. Also you can heal your bowmen every turn, because AI uses ranged vs ranged and there's the 2 tile distance which allows you to heal as long as you don't attack but only counter.

It takes ages from the "early game" medium bow to long bow. So, when AI comes with long bows, I already have city walls and AI would keep suiciding to my bowmen even if it had longbowmen. Even AI crossbowmen are rather powerless against "passive" city wall/castle mediumbowmen with healing on.

Then again, AI being easily beatable, even with handicap, is very common to strategy games; just think of FreeCiv or regular Wesnoth. So AI is always being given a handicap in strategy games. If this is your single person project it's VERY impressive, including the AI (I play this mod regularly and AI DOES quite often kill people).

I avoid getting slingers at all and set production to settlers before researching bow to get archers directly instead of slingers, if starting city production is high (as I prefer it to be). I also use this "settler trick" to get bowmen instead of archers if the research to medium bow is in progress or it doesn't look like I need to fight that much right away.

Players can, of course, counter ranged unit spam much better (block ranged counter attack with a cheap clubman, for starters) and would ideally have mixed troops.

Posts: 1
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 4:07 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by dwarw22 »

nice to see you guys...i suggest add range attack to warship... especially to galeon and frigate...will be nice to have anything who brokes coast defend line on the island

Posts: 2
Joined: July 19th, 2010, 4:21 am

Re: Half Civ era

Post by Uncle_Sam »

Hello. I was thinking on how to improve flanking, formations and unit balance.
First of all I think giving resistances to units depending on their type (melee, heavy, anti-melee etc) is a wrong decision, some type of unit should dominate others based not on their predefined resists but from natural causes.
Currently flanking makes no sense (e.g. why is 3-side flanking like that?), also the cavalry dominates everyone because only they can properly flank.

Historically dominant forms of doing warfare changed with development and population growth: at first everyone was a shitpoor peasant dressed in rags with a sharp stick, what is now known as light infantry. Light infantry basically warred each other and whoever had most people generally won. At first it was simple disorganized mobs, then organized mobs, but the nature remained the same - light armor and close range weapon.
Then some Mediterraneans invented phalanx and it turned out to dominate light infantry utterly - nobody can come close enough to stab you with a sword because your pikes nail everyone meters away. Your only deaths happen when some javelins strike your first line. Alexander took some phalanxes and stomped his way through half the continent with ease like knife through butter - that's how strong formations of pikes are.
Greek city-states awed with his success adopted phalanx as a main combat force. All went well until Romans appeared. Turned out that when you have enough light infantry and an uneven terrain you can outmaneuver phalanx and strike its flanks. Pikes are unwieldy and phalanxes can't move as fast as light infantry while maintaining formations. They still own everyone of course, but its cheaper to train and arm an infantryman with a buckler and short sword than with a pike and a cuirass. The Greeks still won against Romans, but their general gave his name to Pyrrhic victories for a reason. For every victory Greeks achieved against hastily drafted Romans they paid toll with expensive equipment and well-trained troops. That's why they lost in the end.
Romans understood that its cheaper to maintain a whole bunch of fast and versatile legions which consisted mostly of light infantry - lamellar lorica segmentata is the heaviest armor their infantry used, only generals and such got cuirasses.
Romans seemed to have got many things right because only after a thousand years and their total collapse did warfare revert back to disorganized mobs. Then came the the middle ages when feudal lords got enough resources to turn themselves into basically unkillable tin cans on horses, proper knight armor wasn't penetrable by anything except at joints. A few hundred or even dozen heavy cavalry completely rekt disorganized mobs of peasants without suffering a single loss. Sure, one knight surrounded by a hundred peasants had no chance as he was quickly pulled off his horse and stabbed in the eye, but in a formation one knight could hack and slash until he died of hunger without suffering a single wound. Medieval kings understood this so they treasured their heavy cavalry by granting them lands and peasants - whoever got more cavalry won. By this time firearms already existed but they were used by knights themselves as a way to flush out fortified peasants (e.g. English longbowmen) from their positions to slaughter them like any other panicked peasant mob.
At some point peasants smartened up and remembered the pike formations - and so were born the swiss pikemen. Swiss mercenaries and copycat landsknecht relatively quickly removed knights and everybody else from the battlefield as pike formations strength combined with numbers that weren't possible in Greek times turned them into an ultimate battle unit.

My suggestions:
-Clubman should have no flanking abilities. Clubman is our member of disorganized mob, an untrained peasant.
Everybody else:
- halve taken damage when being 2-flanked by allies (having allies on two opposite sides) and having enemies only on one side of this formation.
- deal more damage when staying side-by-side with ally against the same enemy
Unit types:
- what's currently anti-cavalry melee units (spearmen and other piercing melee units) should have only 2 movement, rename them to Heavy infantry, remove various resists, limit terrain defence to 40%.
- what's currently melee units (fighter, swordsman, etc) should have 3 movement, rename them to Light infantry. Variable defense depending on terrain. Damage should only be half of Heavy infantry.
- heavy counter-melee units (axeman, maceman, etc) should be removed completely. I've never seen anyone use them.
- cavalry should rise in price at least 2 times, better 3. Damage same as heavy infantry. Only cavalry should eat upkeep, infantry should be free.
I haven't thought out how ranged units should change or whether they even should.

Justifications for changes:
Cavalry has movement advantage which allows them to flank and retreat much easier than infantry and this advantage largely offsets weakness to spears while allowing to dominate everything else, yet they cost the same amount of gold and provide same upkeep cost as an analogous melee unit. You need twice as many infantry as cavalry to cover the same piece of border. You need three times as many infantry to fight off an attack on a village and break even in losses - cavalry can easily isolate and flank your troops and retreat when damaged. And for that you spend more gold in the long run because cavalry eats same upkeep per unit as infantry.
Counter-melee infantry is useless because cavalry can do the same except it also moves faster.

How tactics should theoretically look like after the changes:
Early game Player builds Light infantry - they are the fastest scouts he has available, they are rather nice individually thanks to terrain defense and they can flank enemy Heavy infantry if he has any.
Middle game when Player has all kinds of units researched he builds Cavalry and Light infantry - cavalry is expensive, yes, but its offset by its speed - he can concentrate cavalry to flank enemy Light infantry, kill it and retreat before the rest arrive to assist. Light infantry is built because waiting for Heavy infantry to arrive to the front is probably painful without roads. For defending choke points Player still builds Heavy infantry because its cheap and strong.
Endgame when Player has advanced far in science and has most villages developed and connected by roads:
Player spams Heavy infantry stretching the formations across the whole map. Player still needs a few Cavalry and Light Infantry to scout and help flank enemy formations, but Heavy infantry rules the battlefield. Also non-HI should help patch up formations when enemy breaks through.

This should cause two infantry types and cavalry to have Rock-paper-scissors-like relationship without resorting to artificial means like assigning resistances, HI > Cavalry > LI > HI would be caused purely by their own ability to create formations, movement speed and cost.

Posts: 22
Joined: March 30th, 2019, 10:38 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by Atreides »

I'd like to see the units made more civ like. I know that it is named HALF civ for a good reason, there's no point in recreating civ but one of the charms of civ is it's classic unit progression of Militia, Phalanx, Horseman, Chariot, Knight, Musketeer... I don't know how far one can advance since I've only started playing this mod but taking it all the way to artillery, bombers and nukes would be nice. Probably unwise but oh well.
Any typos are the fault of my laptop keyboard!

Posts: 22
Joined: March 30th, 2019, 10:38 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by Atreides »

Couple of observations.
1. The large number of swimgs means that you must turn on accel speed or it is too slow, is it really needed that units have 10 swings?
2. Ship vs land is very low damage, and it lets one pull a dirty trick to hold a city... park a ship and land units can't take the city doing only 10 (60 max) per turn. In civ you could use BB's to bombard land units very effectively. Why is land vs ship combat this way?
3. Seems a bug in the min dist between cities. Set for 3 by default but in game it was 4. If it means hexes _between_ cities that should be stated clearly. Most will assume it is a simple range count.
Any typos are the fault of my laptop keyboard!

Posts: 936
Joined: December 15th, 2007, 8:52 am

Re: Half Civ era

Post by enclave »

Uh bloody hell.. so many comments... sorry i have been away for like... ages... had no time.. thank you very much for comments and suggestions...

Starting to answer..
For mmmax and Darkhorse
The source code of default research tree:
The source code of experimental progressive research tree:
Just change numbers depending on what you feel like.. and I will add your theme to dropdown combobox.. in host menu.

Toti83 yeah I'm only a 1 person.. so I try my best.. but time is what I mostly don't have... otherwise I would make this mod much better.. But I try..
dwarw22 thanks very much for your feedback, I agree with you and I will try to improve this as soon as I have enough time for it. Thank you!

Posts: 24
Joined: July 9th, 2019, 9:33 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by ThinkSome »

There are lua errors on 1.14.7, when starting any HCiv map (e.g. hciv tiny europe ships) with the HCiv era. First villages are spawned and then a warning pops up saying that starting with prebuilt villages is unsupported. Then the villages disappear, but the errors persist.

Code: Select all

k20190804 21:21:45 error gui/layout: grid [] place: Failed to place a grid, we have 575,32 space but we need 619,32 space. This happened at a grid with the id '' in a 'N4gui214tree_view_nodeE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui29tree_viewE' with the id 'custom_options' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui29generatorINS_6policy17minimum_selection7no_itemENS1_17maximum_selection10many_itemsENS1_9placement11independentENS1_13select_action4showEEE' with the id '_content_grid' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui214stacked_widgetE' with the id 'pager' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '_window_content_grid' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '_content_grid' in a 'N4gui215scrollbar_panelE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui24gridE' with the id '' in a 'N4gui26windowE' with the id 'mp_create_game'.
20190804 21:23:22 error scripting/lua: [string "..."]:9: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
	[string "..."]:9: in function <[string "..."]:3>
	[C]: in field 'redraw'
	lua/wml-tags.lua:807: in field '?'
	lua/backwards-compatibility.lua:11: in field 'fire'
	lua/wml/message.lua:385: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:38: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:6: in function <lua/wml-flow.lua:5>
20190804 21:23:47 error scripting/lua: [string "..."]:9: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
	[string "..."]:9: in function <[string "..."]:3>
	[C]: in field 'show_message_dialog'
	lua/wml/message.lua:255: in local 'msg_dlg'
	lua/wml/message.lua:393: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:38: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:6: in function <lua/wml-flow.lua:5>
20190804 21:24:00 error scripting/lua: [string "..."]:9: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
	[string "..."]:9: in function <[string "..."]:3>
	[C]: in field 'show_message_dialog'
	lua/wml/message.lua:255: in local 'msg_dlg'
	lua/wml/message.lua:393: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:38: in local 'cmd'
	lua/wml-utils.lua:145: in field 'handle_event_commands'
	lua/wml-flow.lua:6: in function <lua/wml-flow.lua:5>
After confirming the warning, the folowing warnings show up:

Code: Select all

20190804 21:24:55 warning unit: Unknown attribute 'animate' discarded.
20190804 21:24:55 warning unit: Unknown attribute 'generate_description' discarded.

User avatar
Posts: 449
Joined: January 9th, 2015, 9:25 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by sergey »

I recently installed this add-on and was impressed with its high quality and awesomeness. Enclave, thank you very much for creating it!

I have a question. Usually when I capture a village it is moved under my control. However, at later stages of the game it is destroyed. Is it intentionally?
Author of SP scenario Dragon Fight and SP campaign Captured by a Nightmare.
Created The Rise of Wesnoth (alternative mechanics) version of the mainline campaign.

Posts: 13
Joined: September 8th, 2006, 2:22 pm

Re: Half Civ era

Post by ichbinsehselber »

This is a great add-on. Thank you a lot for the work! It is well playable against the AI.

There is one item which I don't understand: Why does the unit description always seem wrong. All the ships refer to boat and all the other units also seem to link to incorrect entries in the unit documentation. Is this a bug? Or does the wesnoth modding design not allow to change these entries?

Post Reply