C2C - Civics Discussion Thread

AIAndy said:
I suggest you leave the AI out of the arguments about the strength of a civic.
Either the civic is too strong then it is right that the AI is using it often but then the only thing that matters is that the civic is too strong and needs to be nerfed.
If the AI is using it too often despite that the civic is not overpowered then the code for the AI needs to be changed and not the civic.

In short: The AI should only impact balance decisions in cases where it is too difficult to get the AI to use a mechanic correctly.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with (and more broadly than just for civics).

On the specifics of what you propose for pacifism. Ask yourself if you'd still use it. I wouldn't - I think you went too far. The driving reason for using pacifism (IMO) is the GP booster, and by nerfing from 100 to 25 it's past the point where the downsides are not much more significant. I would say 50. I also agree with you that WW should be extraoridinarily high with this civic.
 
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=303605&d=1317861974

Eldrinfal,

This is the link to my latest Civ4CivicsInfos xml file. It's still rough but for the Gov't and Power civics the results have been good. Also Pacifism's changes are in there too. Ans so far the AI is not jumping on that Civic as soon as it's available. Instead they are using other Military Civics and as for Gov'ts they are now using a wider spread. Monarchy may be a bit strong but they are using Republic, Democracy and Federal now too. Currently Monarchy leads in % of AI's usage.

This may all be too late for you but my ISP was down all day yesterday. :p

This is the main section for Pacifism:
Code: 
<Upkeep>UPKEEP_MEDIUM</Upkeep>
			<iAIWeight>0</iAIWeight>
			<iGreatPeopleRateModifier>20</iGreatPeopleRateModifier>
			<iGreatGeneralRateModifier>0</iGreatGeneralRateModifier>
			<iDomesticGreatGeneralRateModifier>0</iDomesticGreatGeneralRateModifier>
			<iStateReligionGreatPeopleRateModifier>0</iStateReligionGreatPeopleRateModifier>
			<iDistanceMaintenanceModifier>0</iDistanceMaintenanceModifier>
			<iNumCitiesMaintenanceModifier>0</iNumCitiesMaintenanceModifier>
			<iHomeAreaMaintenanceModifier>0</iHomeAreaMaintenanceModifier>
			<iOtherAreaMaintenanceModifier>0</iOtherAreaMaintenanceModifier>
			<iCorporationMaintenanceModifier>0</iCorporationMaintenanceModifier>
			<iExtraHealth>0</iExtraHealth>
			<iFreeExperience>0</iFreeExperience>
			<iWorkerSpeedModifier>0</iWorkerSpeedModifier>
			<iImprovementUpgradeRateModifier>0</iImprovementUpgradeRateModifier>
			<iMilitaryProductionModifier>-50</iMilitaryProductionModifier>
			<iBaseFreeUnits>0</iBaseFreeUnits>
			<iBaseFreeMilitaryUnits>0</iBaseFreeMilitaryUnits>
			<iFreeUnitsPopulationPercent>0</iFreeUnitsPopulationPercent>
			<iFreeMilitaryUnitsPopulationPercent>0</iFreeMilitaryUnitsPopulationPercent>
			<iGoldPerUnit>0</iGoldPerUnit>
			<iGoldPerMilitaryUnit>2</iGoldPerMilitaryUnit>
			<iHappyPerMilitaryUnit>-1</iHappyPerMilitaryUnit>
			<bMilitaryFoodProduction>0</bMilitaryFoodProduction>
			<iMaxConscript>0</iMaxConscript>
			<bNoUnhealthyPopulation>0</bNoUnhealthyPopulation>
			<iExpInBorderModifier>0</iExpInBorderModifier>
			<bBuildingOnlyHealthy>0</bBuildingOnlyHealthy>
			<iLargestCityHappiness>3</iLargestCityHappiness>
			<iWarWearinessModifier>100</iWarWearinessModifier>
			<iFreeSpecialist>0</iFreeSpecialist>
			<iTradeRoutes>0</iTradeRoutes>
			<bNoForeignTrade>0</bNoForeignTrade>
			<bNoCorporations>0</bNoCorporations>
			<bNoForeignCorporations>0</bNoForeignCorporations>
			<iCivicPercentAnger>0</iCivicPercentAnger>
			<bStateReligion>0</bStateReligion>
			<bNoNonStateReligionSpread>0</bNoNonStateReligionSpread>
			<iStateReligionHappiness>0</iStateReligionHappiness>
			<iNonStateReligionHappiness>0</iNonStateReligionHappiness>
			<iStateReligionUnitProductionModifier>0</iStateReligionUnitProductionModifier>
			<iStateReligionBuildingProductionModifier>0</iStateReligionBuildingProductionModifier>
			<iStateReligionFreeExperience>0</iStateReligionFreeExperience>
			<YieldModifiers/>
			<CapitalYieldModifiers/>
			<TradeYieldModifiers/>
			<CommerceModifiers>
				<iCommerce>0</iCommerce>  
				<iCommerce>0</iCommerce> 
				<iCommerce>10</iCommerce>
				<iCommerce>-20</iCommerce>
			</CommerceModifiers>
			<CapitalCommerceModifiers/>
			<SpecialistExtraCommerces/>
			<Hurrys/>
			<SpecialBuildingNotRequireds/>
			<SpecialistValids>
				<SpecialistValid>
					<SpecialistType>SPECIALIST_ARTIST</SpecialistType>
					<bValid>1</bValid>
				</SpecialistValid>
			</SpecialistValids>
			<BuildingHappinessChanges>
				<BuildingHappinessChange>
					<BuildingType>BUILDINGCLASS_BARRACKS</BuildingType>
					<iHappinessChange>-2</iHappinessChange>
				</BuildingHappinessChange>
				<BuildingHappinessChange>
					<BuildingType>BUILDINGCLASS_GARRISON</BuildingType>
					<iHappinessChange>-2</iHappinessChange>
				</BuildingHappinessChange>
				<BuildingHappinessChange>
					<BuildingType>BUILDINGCLASS_MILITARY_AIRBASE</BuildingType>
					<iHappinessChange>-2</iHappinessChange>
				</BuildingHappinessChange>
				<BuildingHappinessChange>
					<BuildingType>BUILDINGCLASS_INTELLIGENCE_AGENCY</BuildingType>
					<iHappinessChange>-2</iHappinessChange>
				</BuildingHappinessChange>

You will see that WW is still 100% for it's usage. It's the only Civic that I allow to have more than 25% +/- WW.

JosEPh
 
Koshling said:
I 100% agree with (and more broadly than just for civics).

On the specifics of what you propose for pacifism. Ask yourself if you'd still use it. I wouldn't - I think you went too far. The driving reason for using pacifism (IMO) is the GP booster, and by nerfing from 100 to 25 it's past the point where the downsides are not much more significant. I would say 50. I also agree with you that WW should be extraoridinarily high with this civic.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of Civics I wouldn't use. But if there is one called "Pacifism" then it should be VERY anti-military. Not just anti-war. Since I'm the type that DOES go aggressive when I see the opportunity to wipe out an AI, it is hardly the choice for me. It may be a matter of names though. If titled something else, I would approach the settings differently.

But like I wrote in my first posts about it, those are my initial thoughts and I'm very open to adjusting them and hearing what others have to say. It's the reason I didn't just make the changes and push to SVN.


AIAndy said:
I suggest you leave the AI out of the arguments about the strength of a civic.
Either the civic is too strong then it is right that the AI is using it often but then the only thing that matters is that the civic is too strong and needs to be nerfed.
If the AI is using it too often despite that the civic is not overpowered then the code for the AI needs to be changed and not the civic.

In short: The AI should only impact balance decisions in cases where it is too difficult to get the AI to use a mechanic correctly.
Click to expand...

I think perhaps I didn't convey my thoughts on that exactly right. I'm not saying the AI is broken and THAT is why it is using Pacifism all the time. Nor merely because the AI uses it a lot, that means it must be gimped. But if the AI IS using it all the time, that supports other reports that it is valuable, and in this case, likely OP.

My comment about Pacifism compared to the other Civics in the Military Category is mostly stating the obvious, and the AI is used as a neutral party example, since it isn't subject to personal preferences or prejudices, as a Player might be (ie. someone doesn't want to use the Slavery or MAD Civics merely because of the ideologies they represent).

Pacifism is the natural non-war Civic in this category because it provides actual benefits outside of warmonger and unit building. The entire category needs balancing imho but I was attempting to address the one commented on by one of our more vocal players prior to the freeze, so I didn't have time to do the others.
 
JosEPh_II said:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=303605&d=1317861974

Eldrinfal,

This is the link to my latest Civ4CivicsInfos xml file. It's still rough but for the Gov't and Power civics the results have been good. Also Pacifism's changes are in there too. Ans so far the AI is not jumping on that Civic as soon as it's available. Instead they are using other Military Civics and as for Gov'ts they are now using a wider spread. Monarchy may be a bit strong but they are using Republic, Democracy and Federal now too. Currently Monarchy leads in % of AI's usage.

This may all be too late for you but my ISP was down all day yesterday. :p
Click to expand...

Ah, that's what happened. Yeah, I was waiting to hear back from you. I didn't push the SVN since there weren't a lot of comments at the time.

You will see that WW is still 100% for it's usage. It's the only Civic that I allow to have more than 25% +/- WW.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

Glad you think so. Didn't want to fight you on it ;)
 
@Koshling or @AIAndy

On a separate note, this tag in the Civics XML doesn't seem to be working correctly, or works differently that described in the Modiki:

<iGoldPerMilitaryUnit>I</iGoldPerMilitaryUnit>

This is supposed to represent added support cost for each Military unit. However, even when I set it to 3, for example, it still only shows in the Cevopedia as +1 :gold: Support Cost per Military Unit.
 
@EldrinFal

If the Civics are getting changed by you, then I have a Big request. Please remove the Fixed Borders settings from the Civics. They are still wreaking havoc. The Game Option for Fixed Borders should be the Only way for FB to be instituted. This will eliminate many many problems. Will help restore Culture and it's spread.

JosEPh
 
JosEPh_II said:
@EldrinFal

If the Civics are getting changed by you, then I have a Big request. Please remove the Fixed Borders settings from the Civics. They are still wreaking havoc. The Game Option for Fixed Borders should be the Only way for FB to be instituted. This will eliminate many many problems. Will help restore Culture and it's spread.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

Admittedly I don't have a complete grasp on the pros and cons of Fixed Cultural Borders. But it seems a significant aspect of some civics. But before removing such a thing completely (and it CAN be turned off per Civic with an XML change), it would be nice to hear other thoughts on it.

Have you experimented with turning it off, Joseph?
 
EldrinFal said:
Admittedly I don't have a complete grasp on the pros and cons of Fixed Cultural Borders. But it seems a significant aspect of some civics. But before removing such a thing completely (and it CAN be turned off per Civic with an XML change), it would be nice to hear other thoughts on it.

Have you experimented with turning it off, Joseph?
Click to expand...

Since there would then be no way to turn it on I am strongly against this. It certainly does need some work to mke it more balanced and not a 100% sure-fire defense against culture offensives, but the answer is not to just remove it from the game.

Sicne Joseph feels so strongly about it I propose two specific things:

1) (Under duress) I will add a game option to disable it globally. Default will be on. Civics should continue to specify it and it just won't show up if the game option is set to off.

2) In V19 (so as soon as V18 is out the door work can start) I solemnly do promise, swear, and hereby undertake to work on tweaking it to balance it.
 
Koshling said:
Since there would then be no way to turn it on I am strongly against this. It certainly does need some work to mke it more balanced and not a 100% sure-fire defense against culture offensives, but the answer is not to just remove it from the game.

Sicne Joseph feels so strongly about it I propose two specific things:

1) (Under duress) I will add a game option to disable it globally. Default will be on. Civics should continue to specify it and it just won't show up if the game option is set to off.

2) In V19 (so as soon as V18 is out the door work can start) I solemnly do promise, swear, and hereby undertake to work on tweaking it to balance it.
Click to expand...

yes i like fixed borders too
 
Koshling said:
Since there would then be no way to turn it on I am strongly against this. It certainly does need some work to mke it more balanced and not a 100% sure-fire defense against culture offensives, but the answer is not to just remove it from the game.

Sicne Joseph feels so strongly about it I propose two specific things:

1) (Under duress) I will add a game option to disable it globally. Default will be on. Civics should continue to specify it and it just won't show up if the game option is set to off.

2) In V19 (so as soon as V18 is out the door work can start) I solemnly do promise, swear, and hereby undertake to work on tweaking it to balance it.
Click to expand...

A wise and generous solution as always Koshling. Making it an option and offering to tweak and balance seems the best solution possible.

So for now I'll keep the Fixed Borders on the Civics that have it and in the future when I do the real overhaul, I'll look to those who understand it better to figure out WHICH Civics should really have it.
 
EldrinFal said:
A wise and generous solution as always Koshling. Making it an option and offering to tweak and balance seems the best solution possible.

So for now I'll keep the Fixed Borders on the Civics that have it and in the future when I do the real overhaul, I'll look to those who understand it better to figure out WHICH Civics should really have it.
Click to expand...

I trust those with strong opinions will also take interim releases with the tweaked version in while we are modifying it to help balance-test for me please...
 
JosEPh_II said:
@EldrinFal

If the Civics are getting changed by you, then I have a Big request. Please remove the Fixed Borders settings from the Civics. They are still wreaking havoc. The Game Option for Fixed Borders should be the Only way for FB to be instituted. This will eliminate many many problems. Will help restore Culture and it's spread.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

EldrinFal said:
Admittedly I don't have a complete grasp on the pros and cons of Fixed Cultural Borders. But it seems a significant aspect of some civics. But before removing such a thing completely (and it CAN be turned off per Civic with an XML change), it would be nice to hear other thoughts on it.

Have you experimented with turning it off, Joseph?
Click to expand...

Koshling said:
Since there would then be no way to turn it on I am strongly against this. It certainly does need some work to mke it more balanced and not a 100% sure-fire defense against culture offensives, but the answer is not to just remove it from the game.

Sicne Joseph feels so strongly about it I propose two specific things:

1) (Under duress) I will add a game option to disable it globally. Default will be on. Civics should continue to specify it and it just won't show up if the game option is set to off.

2) In V19 (so as soon as V18 is out the door work can start) I solemnly do promise, swear, and hereby undertake to work on tweaking it to balance it.
Click to expand...

bill2505 said:
yes i like fixed borders too
Click to expand...

I am with bill2505 on this one, i like fixed borders also, as long as it is ON by default, then if you want to do an option for it, have at it, but i really like FB, makes the game way more complex, at least for me that is.

If its OUT of the Civics, thats fine with me also, as long as its there, even the old way is fine with me.
 
Koshling said:
Since there would then be no way to turn it on I am strongly against this. It certainly does need some work to mke it more balanced and not a 100% sure-fire defense against culture offensives, but the answer is not to just remove it from the game.
Click to expand...

I didn't say remove FB from the Game, judt from the Civics. When Afforess 1st made FB it was a game Option and was Not intertwined with the Civics. Later as versions progressed it began to infiltrate the Civics. I opposed this back then and still do.
Koshling said:
Sicne Joseph feels so strongly about it I propose two specific things:

1) (Under duress) I will add a game option to disable it globally. Default will be on. Civics should continue to specify it and it just won't show up if the game option is set to off.

2) In V19 (so as soon as V18 is out the door work can start) I solemnly do promise, swear, and hereby undertake to work on tweaking it to balance it.
Click to expand...

I understand the amount of work to make new additions thru Mods as Options to the game. Zappara and Afforess both struggled with these but both actually succeeded too. Later for the sake of streamlining Afforess made it a Fixed Feature and no longer an Option.

I can learn to live with FB if it's fair to player and AI alike and Does Not destroy Culture and borders shifting from having better Culture than the neighbor. But as it is the AI hangs on to FB (just like Pacifism and Slavery) and this prevents it from progressing to a better Civic.

So this boils down to this;
1. do you want Civics to be a progression dependent upon Leader traits
or
2. A smorgasbord of choices were different combinations give different but usable combinations that the AI will readily use. Not a set pattern.

JosEPh
 
I prefer FB's myself as well. It definitely makes things more interesting. Personally I'm not partial as to how its in the game (civics or otherwise), so long as its there.
 
JosEPh_II said:
I didn't say remove FB from the Game, judt from the Civics. When Afforess 1st made FB it was a game Option and was Not intertwined with the Civics. Later as versions progressed it began to infiltrate the Civics. I opposed this back then and still do.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, they are only activated by Civics right now. So to make them either universally on or off, then that would have to be coded, OR applied to ALL Civics, and then Koshling's game option would turn it on or off completely.

I can learn to live with FB if it's fair to player and AI alike and Does Not destroy Culture and borders shifting from having better Culture than the neighbor. But as it is the AI hangs on to FB (just like Pacifism and Slavery) and this prevents it from progressing to a better Civic.
Click to expand...

I don't think the AI "hangs" on Pacifism just because of FB. I think it has to do with being the ONLY peace-time Military Civic. Although that would mean he is ALWAYS using FB. Maybe that is what you meant?


So this boils down to this;
1. do you want Civics to be a progression dependent upon Leader traits
or
2. A smorgasbord of choices were different combinations give different but usable combinations that the AI will readily use. Not a set pattern.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

They have always been a combination of the two. Very early game Civics are naturally less beneficial. But once you reach a certain point, there should be several viable options in each category imho. At the end-game there may be some "uber" Civics due to advanced technology, which is fine, I think.
 
FB is Fubared if you play with a Gov't Civic at Republic and above. If you play with Monarchy and below it's not a problem for YOU or the AI. You Win cause your Borders can't be touched by Culture. And the AI (with FB on) will only go to a Gov't Civic above Monarchy IF it has certain LD Traits.

If you use Repub and above you Lose border tiles when you should not. And you can Not reclaim them thru Culture but Only thru Conquest. This problem 1st reared it's Ugly head back in version 14 iirc. And I posted about it then. Now couple this with Pacifism which gives a Whopping 100% Culture boost and the AI will sit with a FB Gov't Civic (when there are overall better civics available) and Pacifism and Build Legendary Cities exclusively. With City Limits in Place it gets even worse. The AI will hunker down with 6 cities (despot) and make them ALL legendary(FB and Pacifism combined), and will not use it's LH traits to wage war (ie Shaka, Monty, etc.) This is Good? This is Fun? This is challenging?I used to cringe every time Shaka would show up as an AI opponent cause I KNEW I'd have to fight him and fight for a long time. Now he's just an annoyed angry Pacifist who sits in 6 cities and demands Techs but never backs up his threats. I guess Turn Based Strategy has a whole different meaning for ppl my age than the current usage/age group. I don't know what else to attribute to this situation.

JosEPh
 
JosEPh_II said:
FB is Fubared if you play with a Gov't Civic at Republic and above. If you play with Monarchy and below it's not a problem for YOU or the AI. You Win cause your Borders can't be touched by Culture. And the AI (with FB on) will only go to a Gov't Civic above Monarchy IF it has certain LD Traits.

If you use Repub and above you Lose border tiles when you should not. And you can Not reclaim them thru Culture but Only thru Conquest. This problem 1st reared it's Ugly head back in version 14 iirc. And I posted about it then. Now couple this with Pacifism which gives a Whopping 100% Culture boost and the AI will sit with a FB Gov't Civic (when there are overall better civics available) and Pacifism and Build Legendary Cities exclusively. With City Limits in Place it gets even worse. The AI will hunker down with 6 cities (despot) and make them ALL legendary(FB and Pacifism combined), and will not use it's LH traits to wage war (ie Shaka, Monty, etc.) This is Good? This is Fun? This is challenging?I used to cringe every time Shaka would show up as an AI opponent cause I KNEW I'd have to fight him and fight for a long time. Now he's just an annoyed angry Pacifist who sits in 6 cities and demands Techs but never backs up his threats. I guess Turn Based Strategy has a whole different meaning for ppl my age than the current usage/age group. I don't know what else to attribute to this situation.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

The AI's behaviour in terms of hunker-down vs attack has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with FB since the AI is totally unaware of it, except as an abstract something-Id-like-to-have concept. The city limits I can buy causing this behaviour but I thought you had them turned off? Anyway, it certainly isn't FB that causes Shaka et al not to attack you (as you'll be able to confirm when I add the game option for you to turn FB off)
 
EldrinFal said:
<snip>



I don't think the AI "hangs" on Pacifism just because of FB. I think it has to do with being the ONLY peace-time Military Civic. Although that would mean he is ALWAYS using FB. Maybe that is what you meant?
Click to expand...

Not what I said, but it is a factor. Check out an AI's Civic choices when they switch to Pacifism. Especially so in games that have both FB and City limits ON.

The AI holds on to Pacifism because it's OP'd. And the ironic part about it is that it's the Culture that is Op'd. :crazyeye:

The Military Civics are corrupted because of Pacifism. It should have been a Societal Civic in the 1st place. Being the "only Peace time Mil Civic" is an oxymoron. And illustrates the problem.


EldrinFal said:
They have always been a combination of the two. Very early game Civics are naturally less beneficial. But once you reach a certain point, there should be several viable options in each category imho. At the end-game there may be some "uber" Civics due to advanced technology, which is fine, I think.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's time to go back and revisit the basic Civ IV Civics and rethink on How and Why to expand them. Or maybe reduce the current set to more manageable levels till things become better defined and implemented.

JosEPh
 
JosEPh_II said:
The Military Civics are corrupted because of Pacifism. It should have been a Societal Civic in the 1st place. Being the "only Peace time Mil Civic" is an oxymoron. And illustrates the problem.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.
 
JosEPh_II said:
Not what I said, but it is a factor. Check out an AI's Civic choices when they switch to Pacifism. Especially so in games that have both FB and City limits ON.

The AI holds on to Pacifism because it's OP'd. And the ironic part about it is that it's the Culture that is Op'd. :crazyeye:

The Military Civics are corrupted because of Pacifism. It should have been a Societal Civic in the 1st place. Being the "only Peace time Mil Civic" is an oxymoron. And illustrates the problem.

Maybe it's time to go back and revisit the basic Civ IV Civics and rethink on How and Why to expand them. Or maybe reduce the current set to more manageable levels till things become better defined and implemented.

JosEPh
Click to expand...

Which is why I am in the process of revamping them all. But it takes time for me to conceptualize things correctly in a way that not only makes sense within a single category, but across several. Governments, politics, society... all that study is difficult to categorize even by the experts!

But this discourse is great for working out issues. And once I am satisfied with my ideas, I'm going to put them out here for feedback.

In the meantime, I just wanted to make some tweaks to improve things a bit. Especially since you are so vocal about some being OP/broken.


Koshling said:
I agree with this.
Click to expand...

I agree as well and likely it will be removed/moved in a future revision, barring any outpour of complaint. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Thunderbrd
Categories Project Thread for Modders and Players
Replies
10
Views
1K
Thunderbrd
Thunderbrd
G
What should the Civ VII political system be like?
16 17 18
Replies
340
Views
17K
aieeegrunt
aieeegrunt
Sedna
Ukrainian Conflict - New scenario project - Dev Thread
4 5 6
Replies
102
Views
5K
Seymen
S
PPQ_Purple
Command and Conquer Planning Thread
6 7 8
Replies
147
Views
8K
Jarmrik
Jarmrik
SirNovelty
Combat Bonuses - A Thread Comparing the Combat of Civ V and VI
Replies
19
Views
4K
iammaxhailme
iammaxhailme
Top Bottom