C2C - Civics Discussion Thread

What about starting with an early "palace" building instead, one that can be auto-upgraded to a regular palace at some point, or go through a series of upgrades, so that an early reduction in Maintenance would be removed after set points.
DH after all does not need the Palace any more for the Myth buildings.

Though that does not address the problem of a second (or even third) city early on for AI or good conquerors.

So adding to the initial Pre-Palace building, have unlimited amounts and tweak the -CityMaint% so that more than 3 cities that early on before placing a Palace would still (due to iMaxNumCity and high base maintenance) cost more than would be gained.


For instance (numbers might change)
Meeting Hearth, giving -80% Maintenance and +2, +1, +1.
Upgrades at Barter to
Leader's Hearth, giving -50% Maintenance and +3, +1, +1, +1.
Upgrades at Tribalism to
Tribal Meet, -25% Maintenance and +4, +2, +1, +1, -95% hammers needed for Palace.
Upgrades at Chiefdom to
Palace. National building. Might want to hold off with building it if at 3 cities. Maybe as an incentive a nation only gets it's culture once the Palace is built? Or some other incentive like adding slightly to it, like 10:commerce + 1 free Specialist, to make it worth building it even with 3 cities, and a no-brainer at 2 or 1 cities.
I suppose the "reduced maintenance in nearby cities" might help make up for some of the loss from losing from losing the other buildings. Oh, and once a Palace is built the early version, in all cities, should be obsolete, removed, gone.
(could be done by the Palace built giving a hidden tech that obsoletes them?)

Good, bad, workable?

Cheers

Interesting concept... something to play with perhaps. It might be that we still need to have a standard palace base that does nothing but perform the role of establishing the capital then buildings that can only be built in the capital that represent the improving/altering palace.

1) Be very careful of removing the Palace it interacts with so many things. Changing it's name to "Seat of Government" or something similar and adding in a new building to represent the leader's home would be fine.

2) You can't link the base culture to the Palace as that would be the same as moving all the early cultures to Masonry or later. Masonry being the tech that allows you to build and move the Palace.

BlueGenie said:

So adding to the initial Pre-Palace building, have unlimited amounts and tweak the -CityMaint% so that more than 3 cities that early on before placing a Palace would still (due to iMaxNumCity and high base maintenance) cost more than would be gained.


For instance (numbers might change)
Meeting Hearth, giving -80% Maintenance and +2, +1, +1.
Upgrades at Barter to
Leader's Hearth, giving -50% Maintenance and +3, +1, +1, +1.
Upgrades at Tribalism to
Tribal Meet, -25% Maintenance and +4, +2, +1, +1, -95% hammers needed for Palace.
Upgrades at Chiefdom to
Palace. National building. Might want to hold off with building it if at 3 cities. Maybe as an incentive a nation only gets it's culture once the Palace is built? Or some other incentive like adding slightly to it, like 10:commerce + 1 free Specialist, to make it worth building it even with 3 cities, and a no-brainer at 2 or 1 cities.
I suppose the "reduced maintenance in nearby cities" might help make up for some of the loss from losing from losing the other buildings. Oh, and once a Palace is built the early version, in all cities, should be obsolete, removed, gone.
(could be done by the Palace built giving a hidden tech that obsoletes them?)

Good, bad, workable?

Cheers

Click to expand...

This is easily done but I don't quite understand what it is you want here. Are you talking about free buildings or buildings that you build but upgrade for free if you have them? Eg if I have a Hearth in 3 cities but not in the 4th and get barter then the 3 cities with the Hearth get the Leader's Hearth but the 4th city does not but it can build either the Hearth or the Leader's Hearth.

I do not like the idea that your leader resides in more than one city at a time.

I have been thinking of how to implement something like the Civ III throne room. It is fairly easy if you have access to a good (2D) graphics artist. However that is for another discussion.

It is about handling early maintenances more than anything else, so not about replacing a palace really, and not about the nation leader's home.
More about that each city has a leader that reports to the nation leader? Except in C2C really in Anarchism you HAVE no nation leader, not until Chiefdom really. But that is of less importance and gameplay wise it is more important.

Ok, so no fiddling with not having a Palace from start, can one then change so that the "reduce maintenance" part does not come in to the picture until the x:th upgrade of those other maintenance controlling buildings is built, as in that hidden tech gained that obsoletes them all?

As for names and "leader's abode" those can be changed to whatever would fit and be accepted, besides it is just an idea to manage the start where there is no + auto-built buildings so the 1 pop initial City Maintenance is way too high from start.
If some other better way can be found and used then that is better. I would rather have a surgery to fix it than put a bandage around it again.

Cheers

What about giving "Anarchism" -90% maintenance for cities on home continent and +200% maintenance from number of cities. This would make the start of the game more lenient on the small treasury, probably make it affordable to found or capture 1 city, and give the player/AI an incentive to switch to chiefdom because a third city would not be affordable with the anarchism civic.

I'm assuming that the "+200% maintenance from number of cities" doesn't kick in before the 2. city is founded, And I'm not sure how much base maintenance is added by the number of cities; so the proposed number might have to change.

Proposed goal for overall maintenance from civic "anarchism"
1 city -90% maintanance cost
2 cities -20% maintanance cost
3 cities +80% maintanance cost

The number of cities maintenance is the only one that counts for your capital (as it has no distance at all).

-90% home and +200% numCities would end up as -70%, for all cities you get during that time, so second and third and forth and so on would all be at -70% City Maintenance.

If using the Palace as requirement for the first only the second and third Anarchism Maintenance building is needed. This way might be simpler as well as work decently.
The first, a Hearth or Hall or something, instead of PreTribeMaint, requires the Palace, so no need for National Wonder any more, and gives -80% City Maintenance.
The second, that is auto-built in the second city, and gives "free building blocking it in any other cities" can give the same, or maybe -70% only, if that works for the AI's second city on Deity. Would have to be checked.
The third can be unlimited, giving only -50%.
All three though needing a reduction at times of that maintenance reduction.

This should be coupled with removing the -Home% from Anarchism too.

How would that work guys?

Cheers

Currently a civic called Martial Law gives +1 for each military unit in a city. I suggest this advantage should be on a new civic (possibly an alternate to Nationalism) called Militarism.

Martial Law can be popular for short periods, but after a while you would expect it to be seen as despotism. I would propose it should give a reduction in War Weariness for 5-10 turns, but after that:
- WW should come back with a vengeance (eg. increase at double speed or instantly restore to non-Martial Law levels), and
- excess (???) military units in cities should cause not

Yudishtira said:

for 5-10 turns, but after that:

Click to expand...

This will require a new mechanic. One which I would love for buildings by the way. Some mods do have it.

Actually if buildings did go away after x-y turns it could be a "pseudo auto build" for a change to this civic also.

OK, since people have been talking about this lately, i am going to compare Dec 2014 to present CivicsInfos, then we can "discuss what needs to be CHANGED, . . how does this sound C2C modders??

Also pls do not write in this thread UNLESS referring to this change, thx. . .SO . . .

I have d/l'd your file.

EDIT: But in the interim have reverted and committed all rev modifications to Civics Back to v36 Official Release values for now.

Will compare your new file to those values soon.

JosEPh

I said this in the bugs and crashes thread but I don't feel very qualified yet to comment on what the rev values really should be because I cannot pretend to understand what the numbers mean fully without taking the time to research the code and how those numbers plug in to create their game effects. All I know is we have players complaining about vast early instability.

hmm, the instability in the early game comes from unhappiness. And in SVN 9265 at least you can fight unhappiness with military units (-1 unhappy per unit stationed). So as you have a bunch of free units and brutes are cheap you can just build a bunch of brutes? Not an elegant solution but at least a temporary workaround for players?

I thought that may be part of the issue. A while back, the starting civics would keep unhappiness from being possible in the capital. I'm not sure that's a good thing either. Maybe by reverting other changes in the civics, we can make things stable enough with the unhappiness that it shouldn't be too big a problem. Otherwise we could possibly make the palace offer a happiness bonus that counters it enough?

Can't comment as I use the new civics by Civplayer8

Dancing Hoskuld said:

Can't comment as I use the new civics by Civplayer8

Click to expand...

WELL ?? ? ? I dont understand this, all i asked is CAN u pls try it, not what ur using presently . .

Thunderbrd said:

I thought that may be part of the issue. A while back, the starting civics would keep unhappiness from being possible in the capital. I'm not sure that's a good thing either. Maybe by reverting other changes in the civics, we can make things stable enough with the unhappiness that it shouldn't be too big a problem. Otherwise we could possibly make the palace offer a happiness bonus that counters it enough?

Click to expand...

there was a "few" civics on "happiness" changed, but not that many . . . i will take a look . .v36 is bad, i believe it does not have some of the new stuff TB added, but not sure yet, will take a look at that also, but pls give me time, thx . .. .

JosEPh_II said:

I have d/l'd your file.

EDIT: But in the interim have reverted and committed all rev modifications to Civics Back to v36 Official Release values for now.
JosEPh

Click to expand...

OK did a very very quick winmerge, and the Civic u changed was alot more than just the REV stuff . . .

Yes I had made changes to Banditry and Tribal Warfare. Banditry was way OP and Tribal was basically broken.

Monarchy also received some tweaking because of player input that said it was also "broken".

There were a few tweaks to some others, like on the number of cities allowed when City Limits is On and to the level of unhappiness as you exceeded the limit. Some of them only added 1 unhappiness per city over the limit. When they originally had more.

I did not write into the SVN change log Every tweak. Same as you Boss when you made all these changes and said they were really nothing.

And I also caught the Civic that had 2 sets of Rev Modifiers With the <!--Rev Mod Start --> comment above each. Copy/paste mistake? Maybe? But they had different values. So when that Civic was used it had conflicting Rev Modifiers. I'm pretty sure it was Banditry. But I did not write it down I just fixed it.

Sorry if this is upsetting.

JosEPh

JosEPh_II said:

Sorry if this is upsetting.

JosEPh

Click to expand...

Doesnt upset me, so never ever take anything like that. . .

would rather get things right . . .

v36 is bad, i believe it does not have some of the new stuff TB added, but not sure yet, will take a look at that also, but pls give me time, thx

Click to expand...

I didn't do anything with civics myself since v36. And that's all that's being conditionally reverted is what pertains to civics.

@SO,
You Anarchism Civic is a No Go. It makes Rev more likely to go into the Endles revolt cycles some players have posted in the bug thread about. The 3 extra citizens at game start is Too much. Especially since the largest city happiness has been set a >0<. This makes some games with Rev On go into the Endless revolt cycle.

Still evaluating the rest of your set.

JosEPh