Vokarya's Workshop: Buildings

One of the things I am still working on is how to make sure that all the buildings we have in the mod go somewhere and not just show up, do something for a while, and then disappear. Archery Range is a building that has bugged me for just this reason. It appears, gives you XP for a while, and then goes obsolete.

While the Archery Range formally goes obsolete at Rifling, it is practically obsolete with Matchlock and the appearance of the Arquebusier, because all of your Archery units upgrade to the Arquebusier (and since Arquebusier has no resource requirements, you will always be able to build them). The exception is the bonus to Siege units. I think the thing to do is to have the Garrison be a replacement for both Archery Range and Barracks, but a straight-up replacement would penalize the player by knocking new Siege units down from 3 XP (2 from Archery Range + 1 from Barracks) to 2 XP from Garrison. There are two different ways we could go about this:

• Increase Garrison to +3 XP to Siege units
• Remove Barracks +1 XP to Siege units

I'm almost leaning towards the latter, because 1 XP isn't worth a whole lot. A new Siege unit requires another bonus to get even one promotion. What do you think?

I have just started a V684 nonSVN game and find that barracks do not actually give archers any exp bonus at all. Even though they claim to give three exp.

oldnooob said:

I have just started a V684 nonSVN game and find that barracks do not actually give archers any exp bonus at all. Even though they claim to give three exp.

Click to expand...

I thought the Barracks only gave exp to melee units though?

ok, I guess

Vokarya said:

One of the things I am still working on is how to make sure that all the buildings we have in the mod go somewhere and not just show up, do something for a while, and then disappear. Archery Range is a building that has bugged me for just this reason. It appears, gives you XP for a while, and then goes obsolete.

While the Archery Range formally goes obsolete at Rifling, it is practically obsolete with Matchlock and the appearance of the Arquebusier, because all of your Archery units upgrade to the Arquebusier (and since Arquebusier has no resource requirements, you will always be able to build them). The exception is the bonus to Siege units. I think the thing to do is to have the Garrison be a replacement for both Archery Range and Barracks, but a straight-up replacement would penalize the player by knocking new Siege units down from 3 XP (2 from Archery Range + 1 from Barracks) to 2 XP from Garrison. There are two different ways we could go about this:

• Increase Garrison to +3 XP to Siege units
• Remove Barracks +1 XP to Siege units

I'm almost leaning towards the latter, because 1 XP isn't worth a whole lot. A new Siege unit requires another bonus to get even one promotion. What do you think?

Click to expand...

I'd be in favor of having the Garrison give 3xp to Siege units.

A thing that I think might be reworked is that when Arquebusiers become available, they get less xp than the Archery units they replace, as the Garrison isn't available yet.
This isn't completely senseless, as portable firearms were still a new thing and they did coexist quite a long time with traditional melee weaponry (represented by the fact that macemen and pikemen and swordsmen etc upgrade to muskets, not arquebuses).
I'm just not sure if the "arquebuses get less xp than archery" was intended or not.

Noyyau said:

I'd be in favor of having the Garrison give 3xp to Siege units.

A thing that I think might be reworked is that when Arquebusiers become available, they get less xp than the Archery units they replace, as the Garrison isn't available yet.
This isn't completely senseless, as portable firearms were still a new thing and they did coexist quite a long time with traditional melee weaponry (represented by the fact that macemen and pikemen and swordsmen etc upgrade to muskets, not arquebuses).
I'm just not sure if the "arquebuses get less xp than archery" was intended or not.

Click to expand...

I think it is intended. I've gotten into the habit of researching Leadership before Matchlock so Garrisons are ready to go once I can start training Arquebusiers. Once you get Gunpowder, both Leadership and Matchlock should be immediately available, as the only other prerequisites are Medieval Era techs.

Vokarya said:

One of the things I am still working on is how to make sure that all the buildings we have in the mod go somewhere and not just show up, do something for a while, and then disappear. Archery Range is a building that has bugged me for just this reason. It appears, gives you XP for a while, and then goes obsolete.

While the Archery Range formally goes obsolete at Rifling, it is practically obsolete with Matchlock and the appearance of the Arquebusier, because all of your Archery units upgrade to the Arquebusier (and since Arquebusier has no resource requirements, you will always be able to build them). The exception is the bonus to Siege units. I think the thing to do is to have the Garrison be a replacement for both Archery Range and Barracks, but a straight-up replacement would penalize the player by knocking new Siege units down from 3 XP (2 from Archery Range + 1 from Barracks) to 2 XP from Garrison. There are two different ways we could go about this:

• Increase Garrison to +3 XP to Siege units
• Remove Barracks +1 XP to Siege units

I'm almost leaning towards the latter, because 1 XP isn't worth a whole lot. A new Siege unit requires another bonus to get even one promotion. What do you think?

Click to expand...

I think removing the barracks +1 XP to Siege units is better.

I just had a random though about the Carpenter building (there was talk about it about a month ago or so, two pages ago). What if it got some bonus depending on forests/jungles in the city vicinity?
+1 per forest is way too much overpowered, but maybe a +5% to building production per forest in the BFC? Is that even doable?

Noyyau said:

I just had a random though about the Carpenter building (there was talk about it about a month ago or so, two pages ago). What if it got some bonus depending on forests/jungles in the city vicinity?
+1 per forest is way too much overpowered, but maybe a +5% to building production per forest in the BFC? Is that even doable?

Click to expand...

Not with the current XML. There is XML for RiverPlotYieldChanges (like Levee), SeaPlotYieldChanges (like Moai), and GlobalSeaPlotYieldChanges (like Colossus), but those are straight adds and not percentage increases. The only thing I think I can do with the current XML is +1 free Specialist per Woodcutter in city vicinity, which is way too strong, even if specialists are limited during the early eras.

Here's a new building that I want to include to fill a few needs in the current building list. This is a new Laboratory building. It's a very simple building: requires Chemistry tech and Library, provides +15% science and 1 Scientist slot, and replaces Alchemist's Lab.

View attachment 374825

The former Laboratory is now the Research Laboratory. Nothing else about it changes.

View attachment 374827

There are three reasons for adding this building.

First, it provides some needed content for Chemistry. Chemistry is right now one of only two techs below the one-trick line (the other is the empty Neural Networks). This strengthens it a little bit, but not all the way into the solid 2+-trick territory.

Second, it keeps Alchemist's Lab from being a building that shows up, does something for a while, and then disappears. I don't really like buildings that do this, and we still have over 50 buildings that are almost completely stand-alone. The new Laboratory links the Alchemist's Lab to the Research Lab. On a side note, the Alchemist's Lab won't obsolete any more until Organic Chemistry, which gives you a window to upgrade before losing the Alchemist's Lab.

View attachment 374826

Third, this provides a badly needed Scientist slot during the Industrial Era. Except for Priests, the number of specialists from buildings stays roughly balanced at 1 per era (give or take 1) up until the end of the Renaissance. During the Industrial Era, the numbers of other specialists jump to 8-10 from buildings, but Scientist is stuck at 4 (1 each from Library, University, Observatory, and Museum). The new Laboratory provides at least one more to even this out a little.

In the game I'm playing as Maya now, I noticed that their UB, the Ball Court, gives more than any of the buildings in its line, and also gets obsoleted before it has a chance to be replaced. A similar situation happens with the Greek UB, the Odeon, although not to the same extent. The building tree looks something like this:

Colosseum: .15 / citizen; available at Construction, obsolete at Realism +2 , +1 /20% rate: REPLACED BY:

Ball Court(Maya): .34 /citizen; available at Construction, obsolete at Realism +2 , +1 /20% rate: AND:

Odeon(Greece): .25 /citizen; available at Construction, obsolete at Realism +2 , +1 /20% rate, +1 with Hit Singles : AND:

Garden(Byzantium): .15 / citizen; available at Construction, obsolete at Realism +2 , +1 /20% rate: +2

UPGRADES TO:
Stadium: .25/citizen, available at Radio, +4 , +1/ 20% rate

UPGRADES TO:
Zero G Sports Arena: .33 /citizen available at Space Colonies, +8 , +1 / 20% rate, new Hi-Tech units get +2 XP

I think that the Colosseum replacments got shorted here. Maya players have to take a hit in the middle of the upgrading, and never get back to what Ball Court got them. Greek players never even get to use Odeon's bonus for Hit Singles, and Byzantine players lose the bonus. I'm not sure what the best way to go about balancing all of this would be, though.

Colosseum UB's are supposed to all obsolete at Mass Media. I often forget to go back and change UB's to match base buildings. I'll fix it in the next revision.

There are several UB's, not just Colosseum replacements, that go obsolete or are replaced. Ikhanda gets replaced by Garrison, Terrace gets replaced by Modern Granary, and so on. I don't think there is a perfect solution. Possible options include new UB's throughout the entire building line (for example, Mayan Great Ball Court and Zero-G Ball Court), but that might be ridiculous. Another options is to prevent the civilization from building the later buildings (can be done in the civilization info file).

Odeon does need to be tweaked.

Maybe UBs could obsolate sometime later? Maybe 1/3 era later.
Also, maybe UUs could get replaced one upgrade later. Like Pretorean (Roman Lightswordsman) could be upgraded to Heavyswordsman, instead of Swordsman.

yes, but shouldn't unique buildings be unique for the era or period of time they are enabled for. The Bonuses shouldn't continue for infinite amount of time. In reality, all inovations by a civilization are copied and improved upon in time.

For Game play purposes, they should continue to the replacement building. Otherwise, you'd be penalising late game unique units and buildings, who don't get as much time in the sun to shine, as does an Ancient era building.

By all means, have a continous liner line of replacement and upgrades, but don't give the bonus, for an Ancient era Unique building to the Future era, over every city in the empire.

Sogroon said:

Maybe UBs could obsolate sometime later? Maybe 1/3 era later.
Also, maybe UUs could get replaced one upgrade later. Like Pretorean (Roman Lightswordsman) could be upgraded to Heavyswordsman, instead of Swordsman.

Click to expand...

While not related to buildings, I totally agree with this. The Roman Praetorians obsolete far too quickly in my eyes, and they're infinitely more useful than the slightly-stronger Swordsmen unit - *especially* if you're playing with revolutions on.

On Marathon speed, I got maybe 20 or 30 Prat's in before Swordsmen tech got unlocked and I was denied any further Praetorian building >_>
Giving us the option to build UU's still even after their immediate upgrades are available, or obsoleting slightly later... I 'unno. I don't think I've ever been able to use the Incan's special unit (Well... Once. Just once. Stormed a nearby AI capitol with seven of them *que evil laugh* )

Here's a minor thing I came across in my current game: Bakery does not have any building requirements. I'm going to add a requirement of Granary or Modern Granary to it. From a realism standpoint (dangerous words, I know), it makes more sense that a Bakery should have a steady supply of grain to draw from. From a gameplay standpoint, the only real effect will be to shorten the build list of a newly-founded Medieval or early Renaissance Era city a bit. Cities founded by a Colonist or Pioneer start with a Granary already, so it won't come up after that point.

Vokarya said:

Here's a minor thing I came across in my current game: Bakery does not have any building requirements. I'm going to add a requirement of Granary or Modern Granary to it. From a realism standpoint (dangerous words, I know), it makes more sense that a Bakery should have a steady supply of grain to draw from. From a gameplay standpoint, the only real effect will be to shorten the build list of a newly-founded Medieval or early Renaissance Era city a bit. Cities founded by a Colonist or Pioneer start with a Granary already, so it won't come up after that point.

Click to expand...

Makes sense to me!


On another note, Oil Power Plants don't replace Coal Power Plants, so if you had coal for a long time but no oil and finally obtained some and wanted to put Oil plants in your cities for less , you either have to demolish the Coal plants first - and suffer a few turns of no power in the city - or build the oil plant first then demolish the coal plant and deal with two employed citizens and a TON of

Since there's currently no reason to have more than one kind of power plant in a given city, I don't know why they don't replace each other when [most] other plants do. Maybe it's because they both depend on a resource? (Like if you had three Coal resources and one Oil, and your Oil got pillaged shortly after building the Oil plant, suddenly you're without power because you replaced the coal plant earlier)

Rezca said:

On another note, Oil Power Plants don't replace Coal Power Plants, so if you had coal for a long time but no oil and finally obtained some and wanted to put Oil plants in your cities for less , you either have to demolish the Coal plants first - and suffer a few turns of no power in the city - or build the oil plant first then demolish the coal plant and deal with two employed citizens and a TON of

Since there's currently no reason to have more than one kind of power plant in a given city, I don't know why they don't replace each other when [most] other plants do. Maybe it's because they both depend on a resource? (Like if you had three Coal resources and one Oil, and your Oil got pillaged shortly after building the Oil plant, suddenly you're without power because you replaced the coal plant earlier)

Click to expand...

The problem with the Power Plants is how the XML is written. There are four tags that cover providing power:

• <Power_Bonus> for buildings that need fuel (Coal Plant, Oil Power Plant, Nuclear Plant). You can only have one of these per building.
• <bPower> for buildings that provide power without fuel (Shale Plant, Hydro Plant, Solar Plant).
• <bDirtyPower> if the power provides unhealth (it's set to +4, compared to +2 for BTS)
• <bAreaCleanPower>, for Three Gorges Dam and Fusion Plant, to provide clean power to every city on the continent.

So we can't have more than one fuel for a power plant (otherwise we could just combine Coal and Oil) and I think if we try and have Coal and Oil mutually replacing each other, the game will crash on the spot. It's really more a quirk of the game code than anything else.

Why not combine the two? Make Coal and Oil one resource named "Fossil Fuels" and go with that.

Arakhor said:

Why not combine the two? Make Coal and Oil one resource named "Fossil Fuels" and go with that.

Click to expand...

Because there are coal powered ships and oil powered ships and they're different. I'd like them to stay that way.