My custom civ - Project Discussion

PPQ_Purple said:

A question for the module guys. Just what is and what isn't modular? I seem to recall that back in the day technologies and music as well as city sets had to be installed into the base mod as opposed to being modular. Does that still hold true?

Also, what is your policy on using music in modules? Do I have to keep track of copyright data or can I just use music from other video games and the like without worry? I don't usually handle these things you see.

Click to expand...

Except for audio (Audio2DScripts and AudioDefines) every other XML should be modular.
For music and sound injection several mods use WoCInstaler.exe, so audio is no problem either.

Thanks. I think I'll pass on using custom music though. I realized that the only time you ever hear it is when you get combat zoom whilst attacking their cities. And that's not worth the effort required to mod the music in.

And now for something completely similar. I have a few questions.

As should be familiar to anyone who knows my lore my custom race are basically wicker golems brought to life and sentience by a shard of the falling Bhall in a similar vein to what happened to Braxus the golem and a shard of the dead Mullicam. The difference of course being that Bhall ain't dead. Thus one of the mana types they use is obviously fire.

As for the other, I have been thinking which to use.
I could use life. That would solve my health mechanic issues. But that just does not work lore vise. They are golems. They aren't really alive in the proper sense and thus would not worship life.
A more appropriate choice lore vise would be enchantment. As it is easy to explain how you can take a statue of straw and enchant it into a golem. The issue with this is the fact that enchantment is a stackable resource. And making it a stackable resource as well would just be plain overpowered.
Thus the reason why I settled for creation is simply that it is the least offensive choice.

What do you think? Was I right?

Also, I am working on a review of my magic system. But I don't have time to edit that in now.

PPQ_Purple said:

Thanks. I think I'll pass on using custom music though. I realized that the only time you ever hear it is when you get combat zoom whilst attacking their cities. And that's not worth the effort required to mod the music in.

Click to expand...

...and during diplomatic negotiations.
The other way is to simply modify the original files and instruct the players to say yes for overwriting files during installation. It's a cheap solution

Sogroon said:

...and during diplomatic negotiations.
The other way is to simply modify the original files and instruct the players to say yes for overwriting files during installation. It's a cheap solution

Click to expand...

The expensive part is that I have to worry about copyright. Finding good free music is almost but not as difficult as finding good leader portraits. You'd think it would be easy to find a scarecrow dressed as a king that's not evil or halloween themed.

PPQ_Purple said:

\I could use life. That would solve my health mechanic issues. But that just does not work lore vise. They are golems. They aren't really alive in the proper sense and thus would not worship life.
A more appropriate choice lore vise would be enchantment. As it is easy to explain how you can take a statue of straw and enchant it into a golem. The issue with this is the fact that enchantment is a stackable resource. And making it a stackable resource as well would just be plain overpowered.
Thus the reason why I settled for creation is simply that it is the least offensive choice.

What do you think? Was I right?

Click to expand...

No. There is no universal balance and very little ATTEMPT at that balance throughout Rise From Erebus. Many civs were created as independent projects and hold to radically different standards, and many civs have mechanical "here we go" points where they suddenly dominate the entire game. Most civs, played by a human player of middling competence, will win against all AI on Deity 100% of the time.

It's honestly irrelevant what you do. Adding health to happiness will give your cities better growth potential. So does Sprawling, not CARING because you're undead, unique improvements, Dwarven Mines, and terraforming of the several available varieties. And it's completely irrelevant because having access to Subdue Animal and Runes of Kilmorph are currently binaries as to whether you're economically competitive or if you have to do something obscene like lifedrinker Corgayle to win. Don't worry about small details like that, worry if it's fun and interesting. It is very difficult to exceed the power of Zaria's Mekara or the Scions or the lategame Mechanos or D'tesh without, specifically and deliberately, looking at the most powerful mechanics in the game and saying to yourself, "how can I exceed these."

out of curiosity, viatos, not counting the broken civs(d'tesh, mekara, scions, mechanos,...) what are the points you consider really need some balancing ( you mentioned subdue animal and runes (also the underpowered stuff ) )? in pm if possible, to keep the thread on topic

as for enchantment, since you lose other health resources , it would need some tests but i don't think it's too op.

black_imperator said:

as for enchantment, since you lose other health resources , it would need some tests but i don't think it's too op.

Click to expand...

Well I lose resources but not . They can still use pearls, furs, gems etc. So having those combined with a hordeable resource would result in basically every item of said resource equaling a new citizen on top of what I already have. And that's huge.

The key here is, remember not just making it not OP on its own but making the two branches ( vs ) equally good and competitive.

Viatos said:

No. There is no universal balance and very little ATTEMPT at that balance throughout Rise From Erebus. Many civs were created as independent projects and hold to radically different standards, and many civs have mechanical "here we go" points where they suddenly dominate the entire game. Most civs, played by a human player of middling competence, will win against all AI on Deity 100% of the time.

Click to expand...

Actually that is perfectly balanced. If all civs behave equally well in the hands of an equally competent player than they are balanced against one another by definition.

Also, I frankly think that you can't possibly be right about the Deity thing. I am a rather competent player of Civ and FFH, and wining on Deity in all of those is very, very hard and something I have not ever done. And whilst I am new to this mod, after playing a couple of games I can't see it happening here either. Not unless you deliberately go out of your way to exploit the game or go through it mechanically picking the absolute best option every time based on strategy guides or something.

It's honestly irrelevant what you do. Adding health to happiness will give your cities better growth potential. So does Sprawling, not CARING because you're undead, unique improvements, Dwarven Mines, and terraforming of the several available varieties.

Click to expand...

Do you really need a lot of growth potential though? What already exists seems to be quite enough. I've newer had growth problems without any of those.

And it's completely irrelevant because having access to Subdue Animal and Runes of Kilmorph are currently binaries as to whether you're economically competitive or if you have to do something obscene like lifedrinker Corgayle to win.

Click to expand...

Say what? Sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about. Neither of those were ever high on my list of things I need to get, and I do not see why they should be.

Don't worry about small details like that, worry if it's fun and interesting. It is very difficult to exceed the power of Zaria's Mekara or the Scions or the lategame Mechanos or D'tesh without, specifically and deliberately, looking at the most powerful mechanics in the game and saying to yourself, "how can I exceed these."

Click to expand...

I am not aiming to exceed anything. I just need to make sure that the internal balance of my two branches is set properly so that the there is actually a proper dilemma for the player on if he should go for one or the other and not a single, clearly superior option.

Do you really need a lot of growth potential though?

Click to expand...

No, not really.

It doesn't matter what you do with your life and health resources, is what I mean, because even extreme values aren't going to challenge game balance. If your civ was relatively normal, say the Bannor except every Fire mana you controlled gave you +5 Health and Happiness, you probably wouldn't win often against anything but Bannor without that benefit. Units are the determinators. Everything else is a modifier; units are the base value that determines how powerful you are as a civ.

If all civs behave equally well in the hands of an equally competent player than they are balanced against one another by definition.

Click to expand...

Sorry to have implied that. I mean that "every civ can win, no question," not that "every civ behaves equally well." There is a wide spectrum of civ competence. Some civs behave far more effectively and others are moderately difficult.

I am a rather competent player of Civ and FFH, and wining on Deity in all of those is very, very hard and something I have not ever done. And whilst I am new to this mod, after playing a couple of games I can't see it happening here either

Click to expand...

Regular Civ is challenging. RIFE is not. Maybe I'm just super-good and have no self awareness, but the AI literally can't understand almost anything you do to it. If you take, say, Alazkan the Assassin into an enemy civ solo, you can basically grind them out of existence because they'll never invent a counter-tactic. They don't understand that burning six warriors to swarm you down is preferable to what you're going to do to them if they don't do that immediately. They don't have a number of lost workers that makes them think, something has to change, right now. You can do this with almost any powerful unit, including non-hero units. Pop an Angel from a lair? Teched Assassins? Have a Mage with Air 2? That's a win against your nearest neighbor, which tends to translate into an unassailable economic and production advantage since you can usually repeat that two to three times before the game advances far enough you need to do anything different.

The AI can't counter any attack spell, assassins, recon with a fortified position, Great Commanders dropping forts, any Hero, any kind of combat healing (vampires, undead, mutation), any kind of raiding where the raiding unit will not die instantly to one of their units in range, uh, bunch of other stuff. They don't understand that there is almost never a reason to choose any religion except Runes of Kilmorph. They don't seem to settle animals. They don't know how to prioritize for the Master building they need. They can't fight back.

The only way to lose to the AI is to do the same thing that it does with less efficacy, which is to slowly stack up middling-power producible units while ignoring all the mechanics of whatever your civ is and then march them over in straight lines. Have you ever seen the Clan of Embers rush anyone effectively, ever? Calabim don't make super-vampires. The Elohim don't seek out the sites they need for their bonus traits, the ones that make every leader except Thessalonica invalid. The Grigori don't save Adventurers for Adepts and tech fire mana. They can't fight back.

Say what? Sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about. Neither of those were ever high on my list of things I need to get, and I do not see why they should be.

Click to expand...

Then you will stand no chance in competitive PVP, no offense intended.

Let me talk about that for a second so you understand why that's usually a binary and not just "pretty good."

It is not difficult, with a Scout, good positioning, and swift teching - let alone if you go for Hunting too - to have a boar and a hippogriff by the time you're making your first Settler. Those two by themselves mean your city, wherever you stick it, is happy, profitable, productive, and self-sustaining for the first couple population levels. It's like setting next to a fully-grown Dwarven Fortress with a free Market. Those two little animals that there are tons of.

Add a bear. Add an elephant - when you can kill one you can stockpile them, they spawn at a constant level and it takes a long time before the bulls start showing up with their psychotic strength boost and aggression. With a Hunter and Subdue Animal and an aggressive exploration policy, every city you send out will be individually competitive with weaker AI capitals 30 turns after founding. Plus those Hunters can fight and kill - a Spider and an Elephant makes a Hunter better than an Axeman with Iron Weapons in open combat, and you can get more animals and buff a couple Hunters in a stack at once and then tech Assassins and oh, look, Aeron's Chosen on your seven-blooded Assassin #2...

With Runes of Kilmorph, you can spam whatever you want and build wherever you want and you'll still have thousands of gold to buy AI tech or spend on upgrades and events and whatever and your cities still have unbeatable growth potential because four Dwarven Mines is like six extra resources. Also some of them might FIND resources, they're good at that - twice as good, I think, as normal mines. Bambur is amazing because he gives all your melee 20% strength and gives all your workers a nice boost, including the Soldiers of Kilmorph you stack to build mines. Arthendain is amazing because instead of teching down the religion line, you have useful economic techs, an incredible ranged unit, and all the healing you could ever want. The Mithril Golem is amazing because GG Mithril Golem. You don't need to fight the AI for Iron. You don't need to worry about your policy techs because Arete has you covered. Earth mana makes discovering at least a few Resources near to guaranteed.

Individually these are mostly GOOD benefits, except the gold and Dwarven Mines, which are instead INCREDIBLE. But altogether, in one easy package, Runes of Kilmorph is stronger than the full contribution of many actual civs to your ability to win the game.

Some civs are so powerful or so unique that they can get along without these benefits, sort of. I mention the Scions a lot: they don't do religion (well, The Risen Emperor doesn't) and their Subdue Animal game is kinda cringeworthy with those 1-speed Recons, plus they don't need food from Boar and Elephants and Deer. But Korinna is so strong by herself she can solo many AI civs, so it's okay. You can certainly play without these benefits. But against a human who knows what they're doing, you can't just troll them to pieces with a Hero or a cutesy mechanic, you will NEED economy and long-term strength (usually, I mean, you can play Clan of Embers until you've lost a friend) and so you will need access to Subdue Animal and RoK. It's that significant. Winning without them is like winning with all archers. It's not IMPOSSIBLE, but...

Viatos said:

It doesn't matter what you do with your life and health resources, is what I mean, because even extreme values aren't going to challenge game balance. If your civ was relatively normal, say the Bannor except every Fire mana you controlled gave you +5 Health and Happiness, you probably wouldn't win often against anything but Bannor without that benefit. Units are the determinators. Everything else is a modifier; units are the base value that determines how powerful you are as a civ.

Click to expand...

On the other hand going for fire mana would than become a no brainer thus shutting off the whole tradeoff mechanic I want going. Basically, I envision the gameplay style of this civ being very much around that tradeoff. You get metal weapons very late (no bronze before axeman and no iron until champion and no mithril for anything but your immortal/phalanx/berserkers). But you do get this fire affinity which you want to fuel to compensate. And you get mages which again need fueling. So on one hand you have to keep your cities healthy whilst on the other you have to keep your army strong. Ideally the two would be a tough choice between and a very situational one at that.

Sorry to have implied that. I mean that "every civ can win, no question," not that "every civ behaves equally well." There is a wide spectrum of civ competence. Some civs behave far more effectively and others are moderately difficult.

Click to expand...

Well I guess.

Regular Civ is challenging. RIFE is not. Maybe I'm just super-good and have no self awareness, but the AI literally can't understand almost anything you do to it. If you take, say, Alazkan the Assassin into an enemy civ solo, you can basically grind them out of existence because they'll never invent a counter-tactic. They don't understand that burning six warriors to swarm you down is preferable to what you're going to do to them if they don't do that immediately. They don't have a number of lost workers that makes them think, something has to change, right now.

Click to expand...

I guess that's true. But they usually offset this by having enough stacks of doom and a surprisingly good use of mages and stacks to make my life miserable.

You can do this with almost any powerful unit, including non-hero units. Pop an Angel from a lair? Teched Assassins? Have a Mage with Air 2? That's a win against your nearest neighbor, which tends to translate into an unassailable economic and production advantage since you can usually repeat that two to three times before the game advances far enough you need to do anything different.

Click to expand...

This is all assuming early game right? Because by the time I go to war with anyone they already have decent stacks to throw at me. And a mage with Air 2 is not going to cut it from my experience. Than again I am not a fan of rushing at all. I prefer to play it peaceful and build.

The AI can't counter any attack spell, assassins, recon with a fortified position, Great Commanders dropping forts, any Hero, any kind of combat healing (vampires, undead, mutation), any kind of raiding where the raiding unit will not die instantly to one of their units in range, uh, bunch of other stuff.

Click to expand...

They can and do throw enough units at you that it does not matter though.

They don't understand that there is almost never a reason to choose any religion except Runes of Kilmorph.

Click to expand...

Say what? I don't follow. RoK is not even on my list of top tier religions unless I play the dwarves. I mean sure, you do get some bonuses. But you could instead get an Archangel hero with spellcasting or Crusade or the tower of complacency (+ Calabim) or the pillar of chains (+ Calabim) or those insane tier 2 AV and OO priests that in rather small stacks can completely replace catapults and beat Air 2 mages easily. Or Chalid the unstopable stack killer. You can win a game using Chalid and a band of warriors.

They don't seem to settle animals. They don't know how to prioritize for the Master building they need.

Click to expand...

I don't do those either...

Have you ever seen the Clan of Embers rush anyone effectively, ever? Calabim don't make super-vampires. The Elohim don't seek out the sites they need for their bonus traits, the ones that make every leader except Thessalonica invalid. The Grigori don't save Adventurers for Adepts and tech fire mana. They can't fight back.

Click to expand...

Sounds to me like the kind of thinking people do when they write strategy guides. As in, you figure out the most optimal choice and than do that all the time.

Then you will stand no chance in competitive PVP, no offense intended.

Click to expand...

None taken. I am generally not a fan of competitive PvP at all. In fact, I do not consider my self a player of a competitive nature. I don't go out of my way to optimize and analyze the best possible strategy. I find that this kind of approach ruins the game for me. I just wing it. And quite often I even roleplay the leader I am using.

It is not difficult, with a Scout, good positioning, and swift teching - let alone if you go for Hunting too - to have a boar and a hippogriff by the time you're making your first Settler. Those two by themselves mean your city, wherever you stick it, is happy, profitable, productive, and self-sustaining for the first couple population levels. It's like setting next to a fully-grown Dwarven Fortress with a free Market. Those two little animals that there are tons of.

Click to expand...

You seem to be encountering way more animals than I am. All I get is lions. But I get the gist of it.

Add a bear. Add an elephant - when you can kill one you can stockpile them, they spawn at a constant level and it takes a long time before the bulls start showing up with their psychotic strength boost and aggression. With a Hunter and Subdue Animal and an aggressive exploration policy, every city you send out will be individually competitive with weaker AI capitals 30 turns after founding. Plus those Hunters can fight and kill - a Spider and an Elephant makes a Hunter better than an Axeman with Iron Weapons in open combat, and you can get more animals and buff a couple Hunters in a stack at once and then tech Assassins and oh, look, Aeron's Chosen on your seven-blooded Assassin #2...

Click to expand...

30 turns is a lot of time. By that time you could have your state religion in there and be doing just fine with your city. And you'll newer get really competitive with an enemy capital anyway due to the loss from maintenance. Yes you'll get more people. But improvements for those to work take time as well.

With Runes of Kilmorph, you can spam whatever you want and build wherever you want and you'll still have thousands of gold to buy AI tech or spend on upgrades and events and whatever

Click to expand...

So? Once you get past the early-mid game this is true anyway. All those +1 and +5 and stuff from not wanting your slider to drop into negative start to add up. I newer know what to do with all the gold I have in any of the FFH related mods even without running RoK.

and your cities still have unbeatable growth potential because four Dwarven Mines is like six extra resources.

Click to expand...

I've had them pop resources, but rather rarely. Maybe I just don't have much luck.

Also some of them might FIND resources, they're good at that - twice as good, I think, as normal mines. Bambur is amazing because he gives all your melee 20% strength and gives all your workers a nice boost, including the Soldiers of Kilmorph you stack to build mines. Arthendain is amazing because instead of teching down the religion line, you have useful economic techs, an incredible ranged unit, and all the healing you could ever want. The Mithril Golem is amazing because GG Mithril Golem. You don't need to fight the AI for Iron. You don't need to worry about your policy techs because Arete has you covered. Earth mana makes discovering at least a few Resources near to guaranteed.

Click to expand...

Thing is, a lot of those things are situational. Like you are assuming I want to play with the dwarves and get Bombur (although with your optimizing mindset that's probably the only civ you think is worth playing) or that I can get the holy city (not always the case if early game messes you up with barbarian and animal spawns). Also it assumes I can stack build SoKs.

Individually these are mostly GOOD benefits, except the gold and Dwarven Mines, which are instead INCREDIBLE. But altogether, in one easy package, Runes of Kilmorph is stronger than the full contribution of many actual civs to your ability to win the game.

Click to expand...

Under ideal conditions yes. But there are so many things that can go wrong. Like what happened to me in my last game running RoK (my 1st game with this modmod). I got hit hard by animals and barbs early on, even losing my 2nd city. Than I barely got the holy city. But not being dwarves I had to rely on SoK's for my mines. And those cost a hell of a lot of hammers when you are fighting wars on the side. So I could only afford like 4 of them. And I was getting on by the skin of my teeth all game long.

But against a human who knows what they're doing, you can't just troll them to pieces with a Hero or a cutesy mechanic, you will NEED economy and long-term strength (usually, I mean, you can play Clan of Embers until you've lost a friend) and so you will need access to Subdue Animal and RoK. It's that significant. Winning without them is like winning with all archers. It's not IMPOSSIBLE, but...

Click to expand...

So basically the real benefit in all this is in competitive PvP? Makes sense actually.

Thanks for the info overall.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

My main concern though is still with balancing the civ internally. I don't particularly care for making it better than the rest. What matters is that the player is kept engaged. Will he optimize for production or for war? Can he judge his allies and enemies closely. Etc.

Ultimately though the game balance is going to lean toward player vs AI because that's what I do, what I care about and what is needed for me to have fun. PvP is not really on my radar.

You're saying you're not competitive, that the AI is hard for you, and that you don't like thinking about strategy - but also that you don't think the strategy I am describing to you is effective. That is, you're saying "I don't know anything about this subject, but here's why you're wrong..."

Can you see why that doesn't exactly mesh from my perspective? I almost went line by line here but I guess I can just shortcut it:

The concerns you're describing are, for various reasons each, either not truly concerning or easily mitigated. RoK is best religion, settling animals is best economy. You will find this out if you start testing those waters in a serious, strategic manner. If you don't start testing those waters, then obviously it doesn't matter...but maybe don't make statements like "state religion spread = a boar and a hippogriff" because oh, man, is that ever not in the ballpark of truth.

optimizing

Click to expand...

You're starting to rely on that word to mean something other than what it means. You asked a question about civ balance and I did my best to explain why the whole line of thinking behind that questioning shouldn't barricade you from designing your civ; you're getting increasingly defensive about paradigms you didn't create and that aren't your fault. I'm not saying you're inherently wrong for not using good strategy or not building a civ to compete with those who do. That's fine.

I'm just pointing out that since those things exist, you should feel free to have fun and do whatever because you're not going to disrupt game balance.

Viatos said:

You're saying you're not competitive, that the AI is hard for you, and that you don't like thinking about strategy - but also that you don't think the strategy I am describing to you is effective. That is, you're saying "I don't know anything about this subject, but here's why you're wrong..."

Click to expand...

Well, basically it's not that. I do believe that your strategy is effective and that when executed fully it is the one or one of the optimal ones to take. My replies were more like a combination of random rambling, bewilderment, interested comments and questions.

The concerns you're describing are, for various reasons each, either not truly concerning or easily mitigated. RoK is best religion, settling animals is best economy. You will find this out if you start testing those waters in a serious, strategic manner. If you don't start testing those waters, then obviously it doesn't matter...but maybe don't make statements like "state religion spread = a boar and a hippogriff" because oh, man, is that ever not in the ballpark of truth.

Click to expand...

I am still curious where the hell you find boars and hippogriffs in those numbers. All I can find is lions, wolves and the occasional bear. Also giant spiders. Giant spiders everywhere.

I'm just pointing out that since those things exist, you should feel free to have fun and do whatever because you're not going to disrupt game balance.

Click to expand...

And as I said, all I care about is the internal balance of the civ it self. That's what I mean by balance. The idea that no single choice is so overpowering that everyone just does that and ignores all the neat mechanics I work hard to put in. I need to make the path as appealing but not more than the path. Otherwise people will just always pick one or the other. And all my hard work will have been for naught.