Extra Traits for C2C

Thunderbrd said:

Well, it was more about having leaders change during the game at all, nothing about the idea for leaders to be represented by units or dynamic traits. But that doesn't stop it from being a possible game option project.

Click to expand...

Ahh I see. Well could you maybe explain to me what all would be involved with getting that feature implemented? I don't know much about modding (as of yet) but I am very willing to learn. I got a little kid and no social life basically so I have the time

I understand the mod team has limited time to make stuff but I don't think that because some people wouldn't really use it that it shouldn't be an option. I would personally love it.

What if:

1) Your leader was a unit (a great general), and the traits became pseudo-promotions that a particular leader is 'born' with.

2) You have 'leader points' that accumulate every turn (just at a constant rate for now, though obviouly it has scope to be influenced by oher game mechanics)

3) When your leader points hits a threshold it get reset to zero and another leader is born. If you have multiple leaders you can choose which is the civ leader (and the civ gets that leader's traits)

4) The leader is also a GG (or a hero?) so that it has SIGNIFICANT battle use (ideally as a GC, but since that's a game option maybe has to be as a hero). If he dies you have to choose another leader. If you have none that's just tough - you are traitless until your next one is born.

The nice aspects of this system are:

• Traits vary (and to a degree you have some choice) over the game
• You have to decide how best to employ your leader - if you use him militarily (where he may well be significant) you risk losing him so you put your traits at stake

Koshling said:

What if:

1) Your leader was a unit (a great general), and the traits became pseudo-promotions that a particular leader is 'born' with.

2) You have 'leader points' that accumulate every turn (just at a constant rate for now, though obviouly it has scope to be influenced by oher game mechanics)

3) When your leader points hits a threshold it get reset to zero and another leader is born. If you have multiple leaders you can choose which is the civ leader (and the civ gets that leader's traits)

4) The leader is also a GG (or a hero?) so that it has SIGNIFICANT battle use (ideally as a GC, but since that's a game option maybe has to be as a hero). If he dies you have to choose another leader. If you have none that's just tough - you are traitless until your next one is born.

The nice aspects of this system are:

• Traits vary (and to a degree you have some choice) over the game
• You have to decide how best to employ your leader - if you use him militarily (where he may well be significant) you risk losing him so you put your traits at stake

Click to expand...

This is a great idea! I've been trying to figure out how to roleplay leaders for a really long time. Going into World Builder to do it has always felt like cheating...

Having a built in system would be awesome.

@Koshling

I like the way you are thinking! But to clarify a little...

The "promotions" would be the trait modifiers basically?
Would you use the leader points to purchase more traits etc?
Could you have a promotion that would give your civ say +10% ? I just don't understand the game mechanics behind promotions causing that to happen.

RidetheSpiral23 said:

@Koshling

I like the way you are thinking! But to clarify a little...

The "promotions" would be the trait modifiers basically?
Would you use the leader points to purchase more traits etc?
Could you have a promotion that would give your civ say +10% ? I just don't understand the game mechanics behind promotions causing that to happen.

Click to expand...

They would be innate 'promotions' the leaders are born with - it's just a suggested way to move the trait definition onto a unit.

The points would just be like GG points - you don't buy anything with them explicitly - they just cause leader to be born periodically

Koshling said:

They would be innate 'promotions' the leaders are born with - it's just a suggested way to move the trait definition onto a unit.

The points would just be like GG points - you don't buy anything with them explicitly - they just cause leader to be born periodically

Click to expand...

Is this really possible from a coding standpoint? I mean, what would have to be done to the current system of leader traits?

I'd been thinking similarly Koshling so its cool to see you join the conversation with all you mentioned there.

GC elements could be optionally possible on any unit I think. I'm not entirely sure but I think the limiting factors are more tied to the promos on the unit (and a bool indicator whether the unit is a commander or not that could have its case adjusted to suit.) This would make it possible for the unit to be used as a GC or not either way based on the option being in play or not.

I was thinking about the promotion/trait tie you suggested but my one reluctance there would be that you'd only be supportive of leaders that went to battle, thus requiring wars and major conflicts to make your leader valuable, and I think that would most likely translate to overwhelming positive feedback. You'd be compelled to conquer as much as possible as often as possible and then there'd really be no way to get the game to allow us to reach the Galactic Era.

I HAD thought, however, that particular promotion lines accessible only by such unit Leaderheads, could be generated to modify the culture needed for a new trait selection, or could give bonus traits. Might lead to something similar but it wouldn't REQUIRE combat for the leader to excell. The alternative would remain as expanding your global culture levels. (Just think of what that would do for the culture slider motivation?)

I like the idea of the leader points accumulating to produce alternative leaders. How could civic selection tie into this? Would a democracy even have an established leaderhead? Would a representative democracy be required to switch among available leaders now and then?

Could they impact revolutions? Would other potential leaders potentially look to start their OWN civilization, becoming revolutionaries that try to break off a chunk of the nation in a civil war?

All in all, it could be pretty dang cool!

Thunderbrd said:

I'd been thinking similarly Koshling so its cool to see you join the conversation with all you mentioned there.

GC elements could be optionally possible on any unit I think. I'm not entirely sure but I think the limiting factors are more tied to the promos on the unit (and a bool indicator whether the unit is a commander or not that could have its case adjusted to suit.) This would make it possible for the unit to be used as a GC or not either way based on the option being in play or not.

I was thinking about the promotion/trait tie you suggested but my one reluctance there would be that you'd only be supportive of leaders that went to battle, thus requiring wars and major conflicts to make your leader valuable, and I think that would most likely translate to overwhelming positive feedback. You'd be compelled to conquer as much as possible as often as possible and then there'd really be no way to get the game to allow us to reach the Galactic Era.

I HAD thought, however, that particular promotion lines accessible only by such unit Leaderheads, could be generated to modify the culture needed for a new trait selection, or could give bonus traits. Might lead to something similar but it wouldn't REQUIRE combat for the leader to excell. The alternative would remain as expanding your global culture levels. (Just think of what that would do for the culture slider motivation?)

I like the idea of the leader points accumulating to produce alternative leaders. How could civic selection tie into this? Would a democracy even have an established leaderhead? Would a representative democracy be required to switch among available leaders now and then?

Could they impact revolutions? Would other potential leaders potentially look to start their OWN civilization, becoming revolutionaries that try to break off a chunk of the nation in a civil war?

All in all, it could be pretty dang cool!

Click to expand...

I was must suggesting using promotions as a mechanical vehicle in the DLL/XML to allow different modifications to attach to leader units. I did not intend to imply that those promotions would be earnable in any way, just that leaders would get two of them at birth innately. Thus no requirement to engage in combat. The intention in having good combat effects on the leader (though GC mechanics of whatever) is to provide an incentive to risk the leader in combat and thus risk losing your traits. It should be a balanced decision for the player whether it's better to just sit the leader in your capital in safety, or engage in frontline action with him/her, with the optimal choice being situational.

Koshling said:

I was must suggesting using promotions as a mechanical vehicle in the DLL/XML to allow different modifications to attach to leader units. I did not intend to imply that those promotions would be earnable in any way, just that leaders would get two of them at birth innately. Thus no requirement to engage in combat. The intention in having good combat effects on the leader (though GC mechanics of whatever) is to provide an incentive to risk the leader in combat and thus risk losing your traits. It should be a balanced decision for the player whether it's better to just sit the leader in your capital in safety, or engage in frontline action with him/her, with the optimal choice being situational.

Click to expand...

If you did sit your leader in the capital, would he/she eventually die or be replaced by another leader?

Perhaps they can just age, so they gain 1 xp point per turn and once they reach 200 (200 xp) turns - lets say they die and get replaced. Promotions is another good way to overcome the limitation of the traits xml it seems.

Sgtslick said:

Perhaps they can just age, so they gain 1 xp point per turn and once they reach 200 (200 xp) turns - lets say they die and get replaced. Promotions is another good way to overcome the limitation of the traits xml it seems.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a fine idea. It would certainly present interesting and unique challenges mid-game.

thecougarbear said:

If you did sit your leader in the capital, would he/she eventually die or be replaced by another leader?

Click to expand...

No, but new ones would be born, and if you have multiple you could choose which one was in charge (and thus which one's traits you get). MAYBE, more advanced civics would allow secondary leaders (regional leaders or something) that means a second leader could have their traits also applied at half value (or some similar mechanic)

Or have up to three active leaders initially (though start with one of your choice, rest coming when they are born), each with a single trait.
With possible advanced Civics in the later game that could be increased to more active leaders.

Early Trait Leaders you can/will get could have more of a bearing on the early game. Middle leaders on the middle game and later leaders on the later game.

Of course this would have to mean all traits had an inherent positive and a slight negative side or no one would ever chose a purely negative trait in a leader they got.

Cheers

Would it be possible to make the promotion traits on these leader units only affect the city they are in?

For example:

A) Culture leader is in capital and gives that city a boost to culture. Leaves the city and is out wondering around and there is no culture boost whatsoever. Goes into another city and that city gets a culture boost.

B) Aggressive leader is in city and all units trained there get combat I promotion. Leader leaves the city and any newly trained units do not get it.

Only one leader's promotion trait could affect any individual city at a time.

RidetheSpiral23 said:

Would it be possible to make the promotion traits on these leader units only affect the city they are in?

For example:

A) Culture leader is in capital and gives that city a boost to culture. Leaves the city and is out wondering around and there is no culture boost whatsoever. Goes into another city and that city gets a culture boost.

B) Aggressive leader is in city and all units trained there get combat I promotion. Leader leaves the city and any newly trained units do not get it.

Only one leader's promotion trait could affect any individual city at a time.

Click to expand...

In principal yes, but quite a bit harder to do (as in more work and more changes)

Koshling said:

I was must suggesting using promotions as a mechanical vehicle in the DLL/XML to allow different modifications to attach to leader units. I did not intend to imply that those promotions would be earnable in any way, just that leaders would get two of them at birth innately. Thus no requirement to engage in combat. The intention in having good combat effects on the leader (though GC mechanics of whatever) is to provide an incentive to risk the leader in combat and thus risk losing your traits. It should be a balanced decision for the player whether it's better to just sit the leader in your capital in safety, or engage in frontline action with him/her, with the optimal choice being situational.

Click to expand...

Ok, then I agree completely!

Sgtslick said:

Perhaps they can just age, so they gain 1 xp point per turn and once they reach 200 (200 xp) turns - lets say they die and get replaced. Promotions is another good way to overcome the limitation of the traits xml it seems.

Click to expand...

I would NOT want to make xp a measurement of aging because that would be a very good reason to NEVER take your leader to war. BUT we COULD easily establish an 'age' for leader units that counts up every round and establish a mortality length.

Perhaps election cycle periods for democratic nations could work like this: We establish an amount of rounds between election cycles, but the leader doesn't die at the end. A new leader is created when an election decides to replace the current one(if they have a high enough approval rating, they would likely choose to repeat the same leader (perhaps term limits could be introduced...)) The old leader, however, doesn't 'die' but remains on the map as a useful leader while a new one is generated, perhaps with traits the nation thinks it most needs right now. (or we could just make the elections a matter of the player's choice and if he chooses to generate a new leader, he selects initial traits then, or picks from a list of available leaderheads.)

In fact, that could be one of the benefits of democratic nations. Their leaders would not have quite the extended 'lifespan' but they would come into play with more traits, and you'd accumulate a number of leaders in play with each election that replaces the current one. Under a more Monarchy style, you would commonly only get a new leader when the old one dies.

This is not to suggest that a leader who isn't currently the head of the nation's traits would continue to benefit the nation, but I'm kinda liking the idea of giving leaders access to a unique line of 'governing' promos that allow it to, via collection of promotions, improve the functioning of the city or region that they are currently in. They could also be used as 'diplomats' as well. Some of that could tie into DH's diplomacy mods coming up. I realize they're made for barbs but if they could do some cool international stunts, it could be quite helpful.

Another thing this system could open up is other Governing Units. These units could BE the pool from which new leaders are chosen. We could really open these up so that each nation commonly has quite a few of them. When a King dies, it goes to his son, the prince, etc... Princesses would be tradeable for great benefits. Governors could enhance cities in their location until elected as President. Heroes could be considered these kinds of units and held aside for eventual elevation to Leaderhead status. The system could get very interesting.

Koshling said:

No, but new ones would be born, and if you have multiple you could choose which one was in charge (and thus which one's traits you get). MAYBE, more advanced civics would allow secondary leaders (regional leaders or something) that means a second leader could have their traits also applied at half value (or some similar mechanic)

Click to expand...

I replied to much of this just above I think. Interesting idea to blend in other leaders having some trait impact on the nation even if they aren't currently the leaderhead. hmm...

RidetheSpiral23 said:

Would it be possible to make the promotion traits on these leader units only affect the city they are in?

For example:

A) Culture leader is in capital and gives that city a boost to culture. Leaves the city and is out wondering around and there is no culture boost whatsoever. Goes into another city and that city gets a culture boost.

B) Aggressive leader is in city and all units trained there get combat I promotion. Leader leaves the city and any newly trained units do not get it.

Only one leader's promotion trait could affect any individual city at a time.

Click to expand...

Koshling said:

In principal yes, but quite a bit harder to do (as in more work and more changes)

Click to expand...

Again, I kinda replied to this above. It would be very possible to create promotions that allow for regional bonuses that work similar to traits. Maybe the 'traits' of the Governing Unit would be applicable to increasing region sizes (range in plots from the location of the Unit) based on promotions they can achieve that could extend that range. (Perhaps this could somehow also tie into secondary capital buildings too... extending the range of such governing units extensively...)

@ Thunderbrd

I LOVE the idea of governor units that would become the leader unit eventually! I would be so pumped if this got put into place.

EDT: As I said earlier I would love to help with some of this stuff if someone will point me in the right direction of what to learn first. The map team is still waiting to meet up so I have some time. I have only done a little modding here and there and different games but I'm not a complete idiot so I hope that I could help in some way

RidetheSpiral23 said:

@ Thunderbrd

I LOVE the idea of governor units that would become the leader unit eventually! I would be so pumped if this got put into place.

EDT: As I said earlier I would love to help with some of this stuff if someone will point me in the right direction of what to learn first. The map team is still waiting to meet up so I have some time. I have only done a little modding here and there and different games but I'm not a complete idiot so I hope that I could help in some way

Click to expand...

Well... This is where it all begins really. We need to solidify the plan before we even begin. Then we stage the development plan out into various projects, with the intention that it can be a blend into the new from the old rather than a sudden, bug-ridden shift. Modularize the plan if you will.

Then, usually I find the first steps are taken in the dll to establish the code structure to enable these kinds of things. Then xml can be addressed. (sometimes python may play a role somewhere in there but I do avoid it like the plague...)

So I can help you with the dll stuff and I'm sure Koshling could offer some tips now and then as well. But I warn, its not for the faint of heart. It's terribly complex to sort out, especially at first. I'm finally beginning to feel I've got some foothold on understanding a lot of critical things to 'get' but its taken a lot of work to get here and I still find a lot of areas that baffle me.

But I wouldn't suggest getting to that point until our plans are quite solid. Not to say some things don't get adapted for ease and simplicity and sometimes to work around problems along the way. But we need a clear roadmap before we begin the journey.

Thunderbrd said:

Well... This is where it all begins really. We need to solidify the plan before we even begin. Then we stage the development plan out into various projects, with the intention that it can be a blend into the new from the old rather than a sudden, bug-ridden shift. Modularize the plan if you will.

Then, usually I find the first steps are taken in the dll to establish the code structure to enable these kinds of things. Then xml can be addressed. (sometimes python may play a role somewhere in there but I do avoid it like the plague...)

So I can help you with the dll stuff and I'm sure Koshling could offer some tips now and then as well. But I warn, its not for the faint of heart. It's terribly complex to sort out, especially at first. I'm finally beginning to feel I've got some foothold on understanding a lot of critical things to 'get' but its taken a lot of work to get here and I still find a lot of areas that baffle me.

But I wouldn't suggest getting to that point until our plans are quite solid. Not to say some things don't get adapted for ease and simplicity and sometimes to work around problems along the way. But we need a clear roadmap before we begin the journey.

Click to expand...

Well thank you for replying to me, it seems a lot of people don't like to get bothered with newbies trying to learn (which is understandable)

I am confident with the world builder save files but that's not even difficult at all.
I have done some XML in Civ and also in Total War so I can fumble my way through a lot of the files lol. The DLL I have no clue!

I have made more civs and leaderheads before messing around and I can edit a lot of the XML files with no problem. What would be a good example of what to try to get a grasp of next?

Koshling said:

What if:

1) Your leader was a unit (a great general), and the traits became pseudo-promotions that a particular leader is 'born' with.

2) You have 'leader points' that accumulate every turn (just at a constant rate for now, though obviouly it has scope to be influenced by oher game mechanics)

3) When your leader points hits a threshold it get reset to zero and another leader is born. If you have multiple leaders you can choose which is the civ leader (and the civ gets that leader's traits)

4) The leader is also a GG (or a hero?) so that it has SIGNIFICANT battle use (ideally as a GC, but since that's a game option maybe has to be as a hero). If he dies you have to choose another leader. If you have none that's just tough - you are traitless until your next one is born.

The nice aspects of this system are:

• Traits vary (and to a degree you have some choice) over the game
• You have to decide how best to employ your leader - if you use him militarily (where he may well be significant) you risk losing him so you put your traits at stake

Click to expand...

This is an interesting idea. Add in the option of a new leader or new traits on your current leader and you have "dynamic traits". Keep a history of what the leader does and you have "era traits".

Maybe the leader can do more than just GC. Why not increase , or in the city it is in. Probably as missions for a short while.