Tile Improvements

JosEPh_II

TBS WarLord
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
16,767
Location
Western IL. cornfields
I'm going to start asking for input on Tile improvements in the area of which ones you the player feel are weak and which are too strong. Also observations on which one(s) the AI uses the most, and the least. (This is a key to a sustainable AI Empire)

Example: I think Watermill and Windmill are weak.
Windmill is very restricted in where it can be built.
Water mills destroys forests (always shook my head over this one).
Questions:
Workshops too much food loss? Or not enough Hammers? Gold?
Are Cottages (cottage line) too strong? Too weak?

All Ideas will be looked at. But reasonable suggestions/requests will carry more weight.

JosEPh
 
Watermills are very strong they don't need a buff.
Windmills could use a +1 commerce.
Workshops aren't bad but cottages are just way better. Perhaps another +1 hammer for a specific civic would be good, or a generic +1 commerce.
Cottages seem ok but its just the late game watermills & cottages are way better than everything else.

What about lumbermills? I personally like them but never build them because they suck. I think they deserve some commerce.

I think maybe your jungle camp buff might be a tad too strong, not sure. I think it should lose a food after a certain tech perhaps. Beside river, 4 food 2 hammer 2 commerce for jungle camp, thats like one of the best improvements in the game - and it comes super early/never expires or deteriorates.
 
I wanted it to be a tough decision in the game to remove the JC for a Plantation, Farm, Cottage, or Mine. And to reduce the AI from chopping down all Jungle.

Plus is that extra food or 2 worth losing the extra hammer(s) from going from a JC to a Farm. Or is loosing 2 or 3 Food for 2 hammers going to a mine? And I wanted the JC to compete very much so against the cottage. These choices add to the game and break up the Farm/Mine/cottage dominance.

Workshops do need some consideration, As do Windmills.


I too would like Lumbermills to be better. In RoM they were. Watermills though I'd like to see Not remove the forest.

JosEPh
 
This is a repost of a suggestion I made in the feedback section, but since its relevant to tiles in some manner I have decided to post it here as well:

I have been thinking about this issue for quite some time now and thought I would share my thoughts on the matter. I have played countless games where I have either excelled or did poorly and have been wondering exactly what the deal was as the disparity of my performance was rather huge based on what type of map I was playing on. After this I took a step back and did some thinking; In original civ4, rivers just gave you a +1 :commerce:. Then BTS eventually came out which gave you the levee, granting +1 :hammers: on river tiles which was a huge step forward making cities founded on rivers unbeatable in terms of production bonus once one hit the industrial age.

RoM + AND took this a step further. You now have irrigation canals available relatively early in the game granting +1 :food: on river tiles and the river authority, granting an extra +1 :commerce: on river tiles on top of the +1 :commerce: that river tiles already offer and of course the +1 :hammers: from the levee of BTS. This gives cities founded on rivers unparalleled advantage over cities that are not in every domain and this advantage really begins to shine in the industrial era. Once the industrial era hits, my inland cities (not founded on rivers) simply fall behind in production no matter what I do.

Having thought about this further, I came up with a partial solution to balance things out somewhat. The best part about this solution is that its also realistic IMO. Rather than having the requirement for building river related buildings be that a city is founded on river tile, make the requirement such that to build those buildings, a river needs only to be in the city vicinity.

If you think about it, it facilitates city placement because you don't always have to think about missing out on production / food / commerce bonuses just because you decided to found your city one sqaure away from the nearest river tile.

There is also another upside to this; the AI. The AI often has horrible city placement, many times just a square away from a river tile and thus does not capatilize on all the bonuses that the river related buildings would offer. Thus if the requirement was to change for river buildings to be buildable as long as there is a river in the city vicinity, this would give the AI a much needed boost and make it more challenging to deal with.

Finally, as mentioned before, this is also realistic. There is no reason why a levee / river authority / irrigation canals cannot be built on river as long as a river tile is being used by a city.

When I looked into doing this myself, I found out that unfortunately there is no tag in the XML files that identifies rivers as a tile so I was unable to execute this change. However I feel that this would give a great addition for the game by making it easier for both human and AI city placement all the while making the game more realistic at the same time.
 
In C2C the AI was "weighted" in it's decision making to choose River locations more than it had been previously.

I'll need to ask what they did exactly and where.

JosEPh
 
In C2C the AI was "weighted" in it's decision making to choose River locations more than it had been previously.

I'll need to ask what they did exactly and where.

JosEPh
Even if it is weighted to do the same in AND, it will never maximise river tile usage as a human would. For example if you have 20 river tiles available on your side of the map, you would be able to place more cities in the bend corners of the river than the AI would and would ultimately end up with more river based cities than the AI.

And this AI argument was just one of my arguments - what do you think of my suggestion overall? It facilities city placement all round and is realistic.
 
If it improves the AI I'm for it.

But how do you get the AI to do it? Would it require Python? SDK? Or could it be achieved thru xml?

JosEPh
 
This is a repost of a suggestion I made in the feedback section, but since its relevant to tiles in some manner I have decided to post it here as well:

I have been thinking about this issue for quite some time now and thought I would share my thoughts on the matter. I have played countless games where I have either excelled or did poorly and have been wondering exactly what the deal was as the disparity of my performance was rather huge based on what type of map I was playing on. After this I took a step back and did some thinking; In original civ4, rivers just gave you a +1 :commerce:. Then BTS eventually came out which gave you the levee, granting +1 :hammers: on river tiles which was a huge step forward making cities founded on rivers unbeatable in terms of production bonus once one hit the industrial age.

RoM + AND took this a step further. You now have irrigation canals available relatively early in the game granting +1 :food: on river tiles and the river authority, granting an extra +1 :commerce: on river tiles on top of the +1 :commerce: that river tiles already offer and of course the +1 :hammers: from the levee of BTS. This gives cities founded on rivers unparalleled advantage over cities that are not in every domain and this advantage really begins to shine in the industrial era. Once the industrial era hits, my inland cities (not founded on rivers) simply fall behind in production no matter what I do.

Having thought about this further, I came up with a partial solution to balance things out somewhat. The best part about this solution is that its also realistic IMO. Rather than having the requirement for building river related buildings be that a city is founded on river tile, make the requirement such that to build those buildings, a river needs only to be in the city vicinity.

If you think about it, it facilitates city placement because you don't always have to think about missing out on production / food / commerce bonuses just because you decided to found your city one sqaure away from the nearest river tile.

There is also another upside to this; the AI. The AI often has horrible city placement, many times just a square away from a river tile and thus does not capatilize on all the bonuses that the river related buildings would offer. Thus if the requirement was to change for river buildings to be buildable as long as there is a river in the city vicinity, this would give the AI a much needed boost and make it more challenging to deal with.

Finally, as mentioned before, this is also realistic. There is no reason why a levee / river authority / irrigation canals cannot be built on river as long as a river tile is being used by a city.

When I looked into doing this myself, I found out that unfortunately there is no tag in the XML files that identifies rivers as a tile so I was unable to execute this change. However I feel that this would give a great addition for the game by making it easier for both human and AI city placement all the while making the game more realistic at the same time.

It looks like a very promising idea and I'm for it too. There are many possibile improvement piling up right now and I'm still working on balancing research after we've upgraded production of hammers with forge, steel mill, etc in rev 599-600; but this proposal is something that should be added as well, so I'm placing it on the to-do list (although changing so radiacally hammer/food/gold production will require balancing again). :)
 
45°38'N-13°47'E;12038780 said:
It looks like a very promising idea and I'm for it too. There are many possibile improvement piling up right now and I'm still working on balancing research after we've upgraded production of hammers with forge, steel mill, etc in rev 599-600; but this proposal is something that should be added as well, so I'm placing it on the to-do list (although changing so radiacally hammer/food/gold production will require balancing again). :)
Great I will be looking forward to it. I am very confident that this will bring a lot to the game while making it more realistic in the process.

If it improves the AI I'm for it.

But how do you get the AI to do it? Would it require Python? SDK? Or could it be achieved thru xml?

JosEPh
Thats the beauty of it - the AI does not need to be programmed to accommodate for it. Now as long as there is a workable river tile in the city vicinity, the AI will have the river related buildings available to it as if the city was founded on a river. The reason it improves the AI is that if this change was implemented, then by definition, more of the AI's cities will have the possibility to build river related buildings in its cities, which give +1 :hammers:, +1 :commerce:, and +1 :food:. Thus a faster growing, researching and production based AI, hence the improvement to the AI in general.

One reason for possible poor city placement is that the AI (and human in some cases) prioritize having resources within 2 squares of a city but in many cases this also means compromising by founding a city a full square away from the nearest river as placing the city on the river would make the resource(s) out of reach. In the new scenario you can can simply found the city close to the resources, a full square away from the nearest river tile, and, when your culture expands to accommodate the rivers in the city vicinity, have access to river related buildings.

I also can't tell you how many times I had to make a sacrifice between choosing to found a city next to the coast or on a river on account of the stupid river being 2 squares away from the nearest coast tile. That meant eiither my city would be inland (on the river tile) but would not be able to get coastal city benefits, or the city would be next to the coast but lose out on all the river buildings. Very irritating and unrealistic. Thus I am really looking forward to seeing this implemented.
 
Top Bottom