Éa, The Ageless and the Divine (phase 2, alpha)
- Thread starter Pazyryk
- Start date
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
I've been working through some of the maths for possible tech costs / KM effects...
105 total techs in the game.
New tech cost by tier (1, 2, … 7): 40, 60, 120, 360, 1440, 7200, 43200
Base Knowledge Maintenance (KM) is +0.1% increased tech costs per tech known per population point in your civ.
Keep in mind that the goal here isn't to finish the tech tree. You should be going for some victory condition with anywhere from 15 to 50 techs, depending. (If you aren't, an AI will.) That may or may not include one or two Tier 6 techs. In most games, probably no one learns a Tier 7 tech.
Your first city usually gets to population 2 in a few turns. A pop 2 city makes 5s/turn (2 from pop; 3 for capital). That gets you a tier 1 tech in 8 turns or a tier 2 in 12 turns. So that gives you an idea for civ naming -- anywhere from 12 turns to twenty-something, depending on how you do it. Policies will be calibrated to be similar in pacing, so not more or less likely to trigger a civ naming.
Let's call a "low tech" civ one that makes 1s / pop, and a "high tech" civ one that makes 5s / pop, regardless of total population. Of course, it will be quicker to get a small civ to 5s / pop than a large civ.
A tiny high-tech civ benefits from low KM (from pop) but suffers from low total science per turn. If you had 10 total pop producing 50 s/turn, that would allow you to research tier 5/6/7 techs in 29/144/864 turns, respectively. KM is pretty mild here, since you would have to have 50 techs before you see a 50% increase in tech costs. Yeah, I know the turn counts kind of suck, but you're really turtling at 10 total population.
A mid-sized high-tech civ will see KM kick in a little harder and earlier. Let's say 50 total pop (5 cities at size 10, 10 cities at size 5, or whatever) producing 250 s/turn. That gets you to tier 5/6/7 techs in 6/29/173 turns, respectively, without considering KM. KM is steeper here, with +100% tech costs (double) at 20 known techs and +200% tech costs (triple) at 40 techs. So the turn counts above become 12/58/346 and 18/87/519, respectively.
A huge high-tech civ could have population 250 (say 8 cities at size 30 or many smaller ones). KM is a real factor here but you're putting out massive science points: 1250 s/turn. Without KM, that's tier 5/6/7 tech in 2/6/35 turns. But now we have +500% tech costs at 20 known techs and +1000% tech costs at 40 techs. So the turn counts above become 7/35/207 or 13/63/381, respectively.
You can do the math for a "low tech" civ in your head: just multiply turn times above by 5. As a big low-tech civ, you can still eat up low tier techs pretty quickly. You can reasonably get a tier 6 tech (e.g., Mumakil Riding) if you beeline for it early, before getting too many other techs (in this case it's possible with only 9 techs known). Or you can spread out and pick up 20-30 low to mid tier techs, which probably will cover all your needs for resource development plus some good (but not fantastic) military units. Either approach will work.
It looks like HUGE wins in the analysis above for high-tech, despite the added KM burden. To some extent, that's true and I'm OK with bigger-is-better in this area. But notice that 5x bigger is not even 2x better in comparing huge to mid-sized. And there are other factors, like time needed to develop cities, big civilizations making more enemies, and the fact that big civs will have to spread out in the tech tree more to develop more different resources. I suspect that a strong early research focus in a few cities will be the fastest way to get into the higher tier techs, if that is your goal.
346 turns to get to a Tier 7 tech?!!! Let me answer this a couple ways: First, these are at the top of four branches that are going to have a lot of very specialized research boosts (e.g., Arcane Towers and Thaumaturges contributing to research and/or lowering costs for arcane techs). So that number is probably off by a factor of 2 or 3 if you are really focused in one of these areas. Second, these are all game-ending techs. If a civ reaches one (either you or an AI), the game is probably going to wrap up in short order.
Is there KM deduction for techs along the Writing branch (Philosophy, Logic, etc.)? Not planned for now. What you have in this branch are buildings, Tomes and other things that you will need if you hope to reach 5 s / population point, and maybe even higher research rates with the top one or two techs in this branch.
105 total techs in the game.
New tech cost by tier (1, 2, … 7): 40, 60, 120, 360, 1440, 7200, 43200
Base Knowledge Maintenance (KM) is +0.1% increased tech costs per tech known per population point in your civ.
Keep in mind that the goal here isn't to finish the tech tree. You should be going for some victory condition with anywhere from 15 to 50 techs, depending. (If you aren't, an AI will.) That may or may not include one or two Tier 6 techs. In most games, probably no one learns a Tier 7 tech.
Your first city usually gets to population 2 in a few turns. A pop 2 city makes 5s/turn (2 from pop; 3 for capital). That gets you a tier 1 tech in 8 turns or a tier 2 in 12 turns. So that gives you an idea for civ naming -- anywhere from 12 turns to twenty-something, depending on how you do it. Policies will be calibrated to be similar in pacing, so not more or less likely to trigger a civ naming.
Let's call a "low tech" civ one that makes 1s / pop, and a "high tech" civ one that makes 5s / pop, regardless of total population. Of course, it will be quicker to get a small civ to 5s / pop than a large civ.
A tiny high-tech civ benefits from low KM (from pop) but suffers from low total science per turn. If you had 10 total pop producing 50 s/turn, that would allow you to research tier 5/6/7 techs in 29/144/864 turns, respectively. KM is pretty mild here, since you would have to have 50 techs before you see a 50% increase in tech costs. Yeah, I know the turn counts kind of suck, but you're really turtling at 10 total population.
A mid-sized high-tech civ will see KM kick in a little harder and earlier. Let's say 50 total pop (5 cities at size 10, 10 cities at size 5, or whatever) producing 250 s/turn. That gets you to tier 5/6/7 techs in 6/29/173 turns, respectively, without considering KM. KM is steeper here, with +100% tech costs (double) at 20 known techs and +200% tech costs (triple) at 40 techs. So the turn counts above become 12/58/346 and 18/87/519, respectively.
A huge high-tech civ could have population 250 (say 8 cities at size 30 or many smaller ones). KM is a real factor here but you're putting out massive science points: 1250 s/turn. Without KM, that's tier 5/6/7 tech in 2/6/35 turns. But now we have +500% tech costs at 20 known techs and +1000% tech costs at 40 techs. So the turn counts above become 7/35/207 or 13/63/381, respectively.
You can do the math for a "low tech" civ in your head: just multiply turn times above by 5. As a big low-tech civ, you can still eat up low tier techs pretty quickly. You can reasonably get a tier 6 tech (e.g., Mumakil Riding) if you beeline for it early, before getting too many other techs (in this case it's possible with only 9 techs known). Or you can spread out and pick up 20-30 low to mid tier techs, which probably will cover all your needs for resource development plus some good (but not fantastic) military units. Either approach will work.
It looks like HUGE wins in the analysis above for high-tech, despite the added KM burden. To some extent, that's true and I'm OK with bigger-is-better in this area. But notice that 5x bigger is not even 2x better in comparing huge to mid-sized. And there are other factors, like time needed to develop cities, big civilizations making more enemies, and the fact that big civs will have to spread out in the tech tree more to develop more different resources. I suspect that a strong early research focus in a few cities will be the fastest way to get into the higher tier techs, if that is your goal.
346 turns to get to a Tier 7 tech?!!! Let me answer this a couple ways: First, these are at the top of four branches that are going to have a lot of very specialized research boosts (e.g., Arcane Towers and Thaumaturges contributing to research and/or lowering costs for arcane techs). So that number is probably off by a factor of 2 or 3 if you are really focused in one of these areas. Second, these are all game-ending techs. If a civ reaches one (either you or an AI), the game is probably going to wrap up in short order.
Is there KM deduction for techs along the Writing branch (Philosophy, Logic, etc.)? Not planned for now. What you have in this branch are buildings, Tomes and other things that you will need if you hope to reach 5 s / population point, and maybe even higher research rates with the top one or two techs in this branch.
BrokenSky
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 251
Suggestion:
Add another tier 7 tech after steam power which allows use of the land ironclad and 1st level airship from the steampunk senario? (Maybe the later ones too if you ever expand the tech tree up to 10 tiers for people who keep playing after the end? =P)
Also do you have an estimate for the time of release for stage 3?
Also Also still sounds great
Add another tier 7 tech after steam power which allows use of the land ironclad and 1st level airship from the steampunk senario? (Maybe the later ones too if you ever expand the tech tree up to 10 tiers for people who keep playing after the end? =P)
Also do you have an estimate for the time of release for stage 3?
Also Also still sounds great
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
Those units are going at Steam Power itself (this is a fantasy conception of steam power, after all). Steam Power is tier 6, so you will at least have time to use the units. Machinery (tier 5) is getting Volley Guns, which is kind of "steampunk" themed too (a real-world unit that was never very realistic). If you are going for a machine-themed Conqueror Victory, I think you would go for Machinery and Steam Power (for the units and production) and then spread out in the tech tree to best exploit new resources from new territory.
But I may add a post-Steam Power tier 7 tech that helps speed up a machine-themed, non-conquest victory (though you should have won long before this anyway; see below). Perhaps some tech that allows mechanical workers or sea cities that allow super fast land development and rapid population increase ... thus speeding up the Subduer Victory.
[answer in the last 2 paragraphs of my overly long essay here]
My original conception for Éa was a sort of "perpetual" game that could go on forever. This is still possible. If all civs go wide in the tech tree they will reach a sort of "medieval stagnation" where even tier 6 techs are prohibitively expensive (100s of turns away). If all players are balanced in power, this state could go on forever. But there are several "balance tipping" points in the game:
Very early it is possible for a military imbalance where one civ overwhelms the rest. For example, a "runaway" Heldeofol civ could go on a conquest spree with only tier 3 techs (Astronomy is now tier 3, so even naval conquest is possible). They might win with shear numbers or they might get bogged down and finally stopped by the technology of other advancing civs.
If the balance of power holds through the early game, then some civs will start going for tier 6 techs. These are there to "break the balance". They don't come along quickly, with research times on the order of 50-100 turns (see above). Beelining a tier 6 tech has a big trade-off cost: in most cases you could probably benefit more by picking up another 10 tier 4/5 techs instead. But some AI civs will do it. And woe to you if your neighbor now has Mumakil Riding. My guess is that most games will finish (someone reaches victory condition) with one or a couple civs having gained a single tier 6 tech.
If balance continues to hold through this part of the game, then a very small number of AI civs will start on tier 7 techs. These are way way on the horizon, even for a very high-tech civ. Think research times on the order of 150 turns with massive research infrastructure. You could -- and in most cases should -- not bother with tier 7 techs. Better to pick up many lower tier techs instead. In the vast majority of games, something will tip the balance long before any civ reaches one. However, if you let the game go on and on past turn 300 allowing an AI civ to pursue one without interference (or without winning in the meantime yourself) then you will regret it. The effects at tier 7 will be absurdly, game-breakingly unbalanced. Stuff like the Wish spell that can create full-sized cities or armies from nothing. These effects are meant to wrap up the game very quickly (which means they won't be much fun to play with after victory).
But again, it is only a small number of specialized civs that go for a tier 7 tech. Most others will do the more sensible thing, which is to pick up a lot of other techs, which will eventually lead to stagnation from KM. You will never see infinite turns to a tech, but you may well see turn times in the 1000s. IIRC, even the guy who played Civ2 for a decade was only on turn 4000. So ... if you can keep a few civs under control (the few that beeline these game-ending techs early), and you can keep the balance, then you can play as long as you like.
My best guess now is April. I'm working through my To Do list pretty quickly. But I want it to be reasonably complete when released. Maybe not "beta" yet, but close to it.
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
Animals
We now have Wolf, Lion and Spider unit graphics (thanks Kwadjh, Deliverator and ispanets!) so these will be in Éa III Sword & Sorcery. They will appear spontaneously in wildlands and wonder about but never enter cultural borders (except see below). They will be there in addition to barbs, so I'll tone down the barbs to compensate.
Animals are not barbs; they are a separate civ that (like barbs) can never be contacted. You can make peace with Animals by adopting Feral Bond, in which case they will wonder about freely in your unimproved lands treating it as unowned. The Animal Mastery promotion (requires Animal Lore in Pantheism branch or the civ-enabled policy Animal Masters) allows recon units to capture animals that they defeat in combat. If you are at peace with animals, then your unit with Animal Mastery will have the "Challenge" action which turns an adjacent animal hostile, so they can then be defeated and captured. (Yes, this all sounds very familiar. It's a great system so I'm happy to copy it.)
Packs vs. individual units
It seems silly to imagine your army being attacked by a wolf. What you will find wondering around are large wolf packs, lion prides or spider hoards (animal "armies" if you like). Your scouts or warriors interact with these just like any other military land unit. Your individual Great People, on the other hand, will simply "escape" from these units if attacked, randomly appearing at a plot >1 tile distant (so not seen by) the attacking unit. (This is exactly what happens if your GP is attacked by barbs or an enemy civ.) Note that GPs have a sort of limited invisibility so they can only be seen from adjacent plots.
GPs will, however, meet individual wolves, lions, spiders that they have to contend with. Under these circumstances, the GP unit acts like a military unit: you can fight (and possibly die) or try to move away. These individual animals aren't exactly wondering around. What will happen is that your GP makes an escape from a spider hoard, but then (based on some dice role) gets attacked by a single spider unit or maybe more if she hangs around the area. Sounds a little weird but it's part of the system I'm developing to differentiate "armies" from "individuals".
Oh... and I forgot to mention the Polymorph spell. It's free for Druids but can be learned by any arcane caster. Allows you to become an animal and gain its single-unit animal characteristics: wolf (fast), lion (strong attack), spider (poison).
We now have Wolf, Lion and Spider unit graphics (thanks Kwadjh, Deliverator and ispanets!) so these will be in Éa III Sword & Sorcery. They will appear spontaneously in wildlands and wonder about but never enter cultural borders (except see below). They will be there in addition to barbs, so I'll tone down the barbs to compensate.
Animals are not barbs; they are a separate civ that (like barbs) can never be contacted. You can make peace with Animals by adopting Feral Bond, in which case they will wonder about freely in your unimproved lands treating it as unowned. The Animal Mastery promotion (requires Animal Lore in Pantheism branch or the civ-enabled policy Animal Masters) allows recon units to capture animals that they defeat in combat. If you are at peace with animals, then your unit with Animal Mastery will have the "Challenge" action which turns an adjacent animal hostile, so they can then be defeated and captured. (Yes, this all sounds very familiar. It's a great system so I'm happy to copy it.)
Packs vs. individual units
It seems silly to imagine your army being attacked by a wolf. What you will find wondering around are large wolf packs, lion prides or spider hoards (animal "armies" if you like). Your scouts or warriors interact with these just like any other military land unit. Your individual Great People, on the other hand, will simply "escape" from these units if attacked, randomly appearing at a plot >1 tile distant (so not seen by) the attacking unit. (This is exactly what happens if your GP is attacked by barbs or an enemy civ.) Note that GPs have a sort of limited invisibility so they can only be seen from adjacent plots.
GPs will, however, meet individual wolves, lions, spiders that they have to contend with. Under these circumstances, the GP unit acts like a military unit: you can fight (and possibly die) or try to move away. These individual animals aren't exactly wondering around. What will happen is that your GP makes an escape from a spider hoard, but then (based on some dice role) gets attacked by a single spider unit or maybe more if she hangs around the area. Sounds a little weird but it's part of the system I'm developing to differentiate "armies" from "individuals".
Oh... and I forgot to mention the Polymorph spell. It's free for Druids but can be learned by any arcane caster. Allows you to become an animal and gain its single-unit animal characteristics: wolf (fast), lion (strong attack), spider (poison).
BrokenSky
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 251
Cool!
Are you going to implement the system where wolves attacked a unit and if they killed it they either become more powerful or made another unit of wolves?
If yes to the above question, will there be zombies or similar undead (e.g. those spawned by mana-depletion) with the same capabilities? I guess I'm also asking if there will be a significant risk of zombie apocalypse/epidemic?
edit:
Are you going to implement the system where wolves attacked a unit and if they killed it they either become more powerful or made another unit of wolves?
If yes to the above question, will there be zombies or similar undead (e.g. those spawned by mana-depletion) with the same capabilities? I guess I'm also asking if there will be a significant risk of zombie apocalypse/epidemic?
edit:
Yes, sorry werewolves.
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
You mean werewolves? Well, there is a Lycanthropy tech now, which seems suggestive...
We desperately need skeletons and zombies for our Necromancers to play with, and demons for our Summoners. We're still awaiting unit graphics for those, however. But zombies making more zombies from killed living units seems like a reasonable proposition.
(Btw, I'm tired of "good" werewolves and vampires. Twilight, Harry Potter, Discworld, Dragon Age, etc. These are all unambiguously evil in Éa.)
We desperately need skeletons and zombies for our Necromancers to play with, and demons for our Summoners. We're still awaiting unit graphics for those, however. But zombies making more zombies from killed living units seems like a reasonable proposition.
(Btw, I'm tired of "good" werewolves and vampires. Twilight, Harry Potter, Discworld, Dragon Age, etc. These are all unambiguously evil in Éa.)
Will anything be unambiguously good?
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
It's easier to agree on what's evil than what's good. Theistic and Pantheistic civs will find a lot of agreement on what is evil, but not what is good. Even some of the evil civs will agree that they are evil, though not all.
So perhaps "unambiguous" was a little too strong. It's a matter of consensus. The mod makes no judgement on you.
So perhaps "unambiguous" was a little too strong. It's a matter of consensus. The mod makes no judgement on you.
just for discussion :
wouldn't werewolfs be more of the "savage" type than good or evil ?
vampires are evil (no issue with that).
but werewolfs more .. chaotic neutral IMO : when hungry they hunt... but no more than a rabid wolf or an angry bear. they won't (unless you want to design them that way them to) pursue chaos for chaos or kill for pleasure.
wouldn't werewolfs be more of the "savage" type than good or evil ?
vampires are evil (no issue with that).
but werewolfs more .. chaotic neutral IMO : when hungry they hunt... but no more than a rabid wolf or an angry bear. they won't (unless you want to design them that way them to) pursue chaos for chaos or kill for pleasure.
Depends on the mythos really. For instance, this is clearly an evil curse when viewed in something like American Werewolf in Paris.
I'm fine with this being more of an abberation, evil notion in Ea.
BrokenSky
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 251
Yeah, I've encountered two versions of werewolves really -> the change at will kind and the curse which forces transformation (although some versions it's resisted based on willpower and hared as the full moon gets closer). With the at will kind, or the at-will-but-harder-to-wolf-at-new-moon-harder-to-human-at-full deal, it some changes personality slightly, if it can be bestowed at all, to more chaotic/hungry or chaotic/evil or /neutral, while the other is generally leaves the person the same as they were before, except when transformed, and then they're animal/hungry and stronger than you, which is often mistaken for evil. Sometimes they're just evil when transformed, but generally not (the difference here being that a chaotic evil would prefer to kill than not, and prefer to eat than hurt- would a werewolf prefer to eat a (raw) stake or nuke ... lets say Switzerland? I'm not 100% sure that this is great model for determining morality, but it probably outputs nuke for neutral or chaotic evil. I mean unless the chaotic evil guy is hungry or really likes stake or has (a) friend(s) in Switzerland or the guy isn't cartoon-super-villainy-evil and is just everyday-evil-evil).
edit: I just realised that got a bit off topic. The point is that werewolves I.G., given that they are 'evil', should either:
1. be sort of stealthy, like G.P.s, to represent the fact that they are only evil at night and at the full moon, probably shackled to a town, city or village, have a target priority for civilian units, pillaging farms and improved meat resources (cow, sheep ...), prefer pillaging and woods terrain, make new WEAK werewolves after damaging civilian units which are shackled to that unit (and die if it dies? but not if it makes a city- then its shackled to the city) and spawn invisible and next to or near it and controlled by the animal AI (ALL WEREWOLVES, including those of the civs, unless controlled using some form of animal handling?), but able to move in and out of player borders - representing the cursed/hungry variant
or
2. be strong, aggressive and maybe visible or maybe have limited invisibility like G.P., depending on Lore, be free to move as independent units, generally act as military units spawn werewolves on kill and actively be controlled by the owning civ, and be used by Barbarians and not by animals - representing the choice/evil varient.
Maybe have them be invisible off turn, or partially invisible like G.P. if a slayer type unit or paladin/priest type unit is in range? Also maybe someone (a theistic priest or something?) using heal could auto kill (read "Cure" - they guy isn't dead but he's a regular guy again so he doesn't appear on the map) adjacent enemy werewolves?
Also
!! This sounds great!
!!
\/
edit: I just realised that got a bit off topic. The point is that werewolves I.G., given that they are 'evil', should either:
1. be sort of stealthy, like G.P.s, to represent the fact that they are only evil at night and at the full moon, probably shackled to a town, city or village, have a target priority for civilian units, pillaging farms and improved meat resources (cow, sheep ...), prefer pillaging and woods terrain, make new WEAK werewolves after damaging civilian units which are shackled to that unit (and die if it dies? but not if it makes a city- then its shackled to the city) and spawn invisible and next to or near it and controlled by the animal AI (ALL WEREWOLVES, including those of the civs, unless controlled using some form of animal handling?), but able to move in and out of player borders - representing the cursed/hungry variant
or
2. be strong, aggressive and maybe visible or maybe have limited invisibility like G.P., depending on Lore, be free to move as independent units, generally act as military units spawn werewolves on kill and actively be controlled by the owning civ, and be used by Barbarians and not by animals - representing the choice/evil varient.
Maybe have them be invisible off turn, or partially invisible like G.P. if a slayer type unit or paladin/priest type unit is in range? Also maybe someone (a theistic priest or something?) using heal could auto kill (read "Cure" - they guy isn't dead but he's a regular guy again so he doesn't appear on the map) adjacent enemy werewolves?
Also
!! This sounds great!
!!
\/
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
Keep in mind there are gradations in evil. Lycanthropy tech is tier 3 after Maleficium. You'll get some relationship hit (with most civs) for being Fallen. But the big relationship hits come with each tier level tech you achieve downstream of Maleficium. So having this won't by itself single you out as "the civ that's destroying the world". Lycanthropy pairs well with Pantheism, and could (strangely enough) be used in pursuit of the Restorer Victory. So you could role-play it out in different ways. The Protector Victory is probably impossible since it involves destruction/elimination of all the products of Maleficium (or maybe not ... you can give up Maleficium techs as a surrender condition, but you'd also have to lose your werewolves too).
Relationship effects for being evil (if any) are summed up and displayed as "You are Evil". Here are the basic rules (from memory):
Note that there are other diplo bonuses/penalties that aren't listed above because they are not "You are Evil" penalties. There are "We don't like your kind" and "We admire your accomplishments" effects. Each of these is complicated too, with factors like race, similarity in policy progression and total culture playing a role. (A lot of this is already described in the existing pdf manual, but it's not completely up to date.)
Relationship effects for being evil (if any) are summed up and displayed as "You are Evil". Here are the basic rules (from memory):
- If a civ considers itself evil, then it doesn't mind if you are. In other words, it will evaluate you as evil but not give you a "You are Evil" diplo penalty. But only a few civs consider themselves evil (mostly only those that are very evil and actively perusing the Destroyer victory).
- Converse of above: civs that consider themselves good or very good have an increased hatred of evil. This "goodness" is measured by number of polices obtained in either Pantheism or Theism branches, plus tier level obtained for techs downstream of Divine Liturgy.
- Being Fallen is considered evil, but not hugely so.
- Everyone considers Maleficium techs and Anti-Theism policies as evil. The degree of evil is proportional to the tier tech level achieved (for techs downstream of Maleficium) plus number of Anti-Theism policies.
- If a civ has not opened the Slavery branch, then it considers Slavery evil. The effect starts small and builds with number of policies in branch.
- If a civ follows Azzandara, then it considers pantheism and arcane magic as evil. Again, the effect starts small and builds with number of policies in Pantheism and Arcana and with tier levels achieved for arcane techs (i.e., downstream of Thaumaturgy but not Maleficium).
Note that there are other diplo bonuses/penalties that aren't listed above because they are not "You are Evil" penalties. There are "We don't like your kind" and "We admire your accomplishments" effects. Each of these is complicated too, with factors like race, similarity in policy progression and total culture playing a role. (A lot of this is already described in the existing pdf manual, but it's not completely up to date.)
BrokenSky
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2013
- Messages
- 251
I just realised; in my above post "The point is ... representing the choice/evil variant." is one sentence.
Also maybe make pantheistic civs not consider lycanthropy and its requirements evil? but everything else after malficium, either right or up/down from lycanthropy, is still evil. Or would this be too complicated for small benefit? (It depends on how you coded it- does each civ have Evilness scores based on tech and the modifier is based one of these, depending on the other faction or ...?) Also is it possible to become more Evil in the eyes some civs by directly acting against civs who follow their ideals, for example by killing priests, attacking Azzandara civs or the controller of the capital or similar?
Also maybe make pantheistic civs not consider lycanthropy and its requirements evil? but everything else after malficium, either right or up/down from lycanthropy, is still evil. Or would this be too complicated for small benefit? (It depends on how you coded it- does each civ have Evilness scores based on tech and the modifier is based one of these, depending on the other faction or ...?) Also is it possible to become more Evil in the eyes some civs by directly acting against civs who follow their ideals, for example by killing priests, attacking Azzandara civs or the controller of the capital or similar?
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
A pantheistic civ would consider a lycanthropic pantheistic civ evil, but only to a limited degree. You would get the "You are evil" penalty for having a tier 3 Maleficium tech. But that's not too great. It would get larger as the other civ becomes more and more "good" in its own eyes (e.g., by gaining pantheistic policies). But, on the other hand, there is relationship bonus ("We like your kind") for sharing pantheistic policies. So these two could balance out and allow you to manage relationship with other pantheistic civs. On the other hand, if you continue to progress in higher tier Maleficium techs, then that relationship would deteriorate. (Eventually, pantheism and world destruction become incompatible. Maleficium and Lycanthropy aren't world-destroying evil though, or at least not to a significant degree.)
One point here is that you shouldn't look at Maleficium as limited to games where you pursue the the Destroyer Victory. It's more versatile than that.
One point here is that you shouldn't look at Maleficium as limited to games where you pursue the the Destroyer Victory. It's more versatile than that.
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
Since the topic came up...
Lycanthropy
Lycanthropy
- Lycanthropy can affect both GPs and normal living land army units (includes Animals but not Beasts). It's marked by a set of promotions, one for each "wereform".
- The Lycanthropy tech enables the Moon Ritual, which can be performed by any GP. The ritual requires the GP to be adjacent to an ordinary Animal unit. Once performed, the animal vanishes and the GP takes the form of the animal, becoming a werewolf, werebear, werespider, or were-whatever. The first of each form (e.g., the First Werewolf in the world) is special and becomes ageless if they weren't already so.
- A lycanthropic GP can switch to their wereform at will, partially healing in the process. They can switch back only when fully healed. The wereform can directly attack (or be attacked by) other military units, and can't do any of the other actions that GPs normally do (except see rule #9 below). These units have GP's limited invisibility so can be seen only from adjacent plots. Combat strength is equal to GP level regardless of class, modified by the Combat promotion series.
- A normal living military unit can become "infected", gaining a wereform promotion, when injured by lycanthropic units. This chance is fairly low at only 1% per 3 hp sustained, direct melee damage only. After this, the unit is normal in all ways except: a) if the unit is subsequently killed, it may rise in its lycanthropic form, and b) the unit may convert to the lycanthropic form if seriously damaged (< 20 hp remaining) and it is within four plots of the first of its form (e.g., it has werewolf promotion and the First Werewolf is nearby).
- Living land units killed by lycanthropic GPs or units have a 33% chance of re-appearing as lycanthropic units themselves, already converted to their lycanthropic form.
- Normal (non-GP) units that convert to the lycanthropic form stay that way forever. These units can flip between a player's control and the barb faction, which is hostile to all civs. They switch to the barb faction if >4 plots distant from any lycanthropic GP but return to a player's control if within a GP's 4-plot range (range is only checked during the barb turn). Conflict between two lycanthropic GPs of different civs is resolved in favor of: a) a GP that is First Wereform (matching the unit's wereform) or b) in favor of the civ that created the individual unit as a lycanthropic unit.
- Animal units that become lycanthropic keep their original form (wolf, bear, spider, etc.). All others units take the form of the lycanthropic unit that injured or killed them.
- For the purpose of "being injured by" or "being killed by" (rules 4 & 5 above), it's the presence of the wereform promotion that matters, not the unit's current form. So, for example, a lycanthropic Warrior's Lead Charge action counts even if the Warrior is not presently in wereform. Infected but non-transformed army units (see #4) also count.
- Lycanthropic Warrior GPs of any subclass retain the Lead Charge ability when in wereform, but it is only available if they are leading a lycanthropic army. Conversely, Lead Charge can't be done for lycanthropic units except by a Warrior currently in wereform.
nice mechanics.
but that means that druids or sage or whatever have no real interest to cast full moon.... unless you canno't get your hands on a warrior ?
or does that mean that in human form the GP can still perform the normal actions ?
is there a penalty for not triggering the wereform enough ? (or not attacking ennemy units frequently enough)
(like destroying improvements ? triggering health / unhappy events / triggering lower morale to nearby allied units... etc ?)
but that means that druids or sage or whatever have no real interest to cast full moon.... unless you canno't get your hands on a warrior ?
or does that mean that in human form the GP can still perform the normal actions ?
is there a penalty for not triggering the wereform enough ? (or not attacking ennemy units frequently enough)
(like destroying improvements ? triggering health / unhappy events / triggering lower morale to nearby allied units... etc ?)
Pazyryk
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,584
It could be useful to any GP even though Warriors are the best. For now, I don't have any limit on the ritual so you can convert all your GPs if you want (but see below*). It gives them a nice combat option, and a level 15 werekind is tough to deal with even without Combat promotions.
Werekind strength:
For werebears & werelions, GP level is directly converted to combat strength. For werewolves, you get 2/3s of your levels as combat strength and 1 extra movement each 5 levels. For werespiders, you get 3/4s of your levels as strength and level 5 gets you poison and level 10 gets you a stronger poison.
*We may need some restriction on "First Werekinds" so that the first civ to get the tech doesn't get all of them. Maybe each civ should only be able to do the ritual once. Then I could add an action allowing that GP to "bite" other GPs
. Then you are committed to one form and only get one First, although you can convert all your GPs if you want.
On the other hand, maybe geographical distribution of particular animals species will make this a non-issue. It is going to be a commitment to send your GP out looking for a particular animal. I may change my mind on this several more times, but for now I'll leave it as is (without restriction).
Werekind strength:
For werebears & werelions, GP level is directly converted to combat strength. For werewolves, you get 2/3s of your levels as combat strength and 1 extra movement each 5 levels. For werespiders, you get 3/4s of your levels as strength and level 5 gets you poison and level 10 gets you a stronger poison.
*We may need some restriction on "First Werekinds" so that the first civ to get the tech doesn't get all of them. Maybe each civ should only be able to do the ritual once. Then I could add an action allowing that GP to "bite" other GPs
. Then you are committed to one form and only get one First, although you can convert all your GPs if you want.On the other hand, maybe geographical distribution of particular animals species will make this a non-issue. It is going to be a commitment to send your GP out looking for a particular animal. I may change my mind on this several more times, but for now I'll leave it as is (without restriction).
