Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
I missed that one - even cities can be built on peaks currently, but also what about the resources on the peak.
Improvement Ideas and Discussion
- Thread starter 0100010
- Start date
This is everything, not just changes. However there are a lot of changes. Enough that it was easier to make a table of everything than list all changes out individually. I suggest scanning the current civopedia and comparing.
I did not alter beacon and lighthouse, so they will still do as you want them assuming you get them working. I did make the marine preserve buildable on the improved versions of lighthouse feature forms rather than the unimproved versions though.
It will not destroy usuable mountains, which as I understand it, has to be turned on anyway for them to work. Mountain mines only affect the improvement that can be built on them, it does not alter the base tile yields peaks provide or when a city worker can gain yields from an unimproved peak tile, or the ability to traverse mountains.
First of all, currently the only improvements that were currently buildable on mountains were the mines and the ('medieval version') of the windmill.
I disagree with putting windmill on top of mountains, especially the 'old version' of them. While you might cite pictures of windmills up high the heights are more like hills that the very tops of high mountains where there air is actually thinner, and getting up there for maintenance and running power lines is much more difficult and expensive.
As for mines, the mountain mine remains usable to end of game and if you notice has almost equivalent final total yield bonuses as Core Mine, (but with more hammers / less commerce). The main difference, is that if I make it work how I want it, you can't build mountain mines until explosives, whereas currently you could build
regular mines on a mountain as soon as you got mountaineering/workers who could move onto mountains.
Also, even though you cannot see it on this table, the resources yields for mountain mines are slightly better than non-mountain mines. (deeper, richer veins). Furthermore Mountain mines will be able to access all the normally quarry related resources when they are on a mountain (stone, marble, obsidian, jade, turquoise, etc) whereas you could not access all of these beforehand because you could not build quarries on mountains.
Now I said "if it works how I want it to" because, currently, all the other mines will probably still be buildable on mountains if they have a resource on them. This is because the 'BonusMakesValid' flag makes it buildable there regardless of other intentions. This is something I want to change for mountains only.
Finally, Mountain mines can still be build on mountains that don't have a resource. (hence the Resource Required column in the table being blank)
If we can get a unique graphic, we can also make them look a lot better aesthetically than the current 'floating' mine graphics.
IMO you gain more from a mountain mine improvement than you lose.
Note: cities would still be buildable on peaks (after algebra?) I did not alter that.
Some ideas for peaks:
If we add a "Mountain Pass" map feature that works just like a peak except it allows units to move onto it, we can have limited early game use of peaks. This will let us build early game improvements onto some peaks, and make some things like Machu Picchu buildable earlier.
I would even suggest making the mountain top religious wonders (Machu Picchu, Potala Palace, Christo Redentor, etc.) map improvements that are built by Great Prophets sort of how Civ5 does it. The city building can be made an auto-build if you have the wonder in the radius. So if you have a Mountain Pass you can plop down the wonder as soon as you research it, otherwise you have to get a Mountaineering Leader or wait until you research Mountaineering and then you can put it on any mountain top. Alot of these wonders already have building graphics so all that would need to be done is to copy them to improvement graphics. Ideally the improvements would also need to be un-razable, or at least have some way to re-build them.
If we add a "Mountain Pass" map feature that works just like a peak except it allows units to move onto it, we can have limited early game use of peaks. This will let us build early game improvements onto some peaks, and make some things like Machu Picchu buildable earlier.
I would even suggest making the mountain top religious wonders (Machu Picchu, Potala Palace, Christo Redentor, etc.) map improvements that are built by Great Prophets sort of how Civ5 does it. The city building can be made an auto-build if you have the wonder in the radius. So if you have a Mountain Pass you can plop down the wonder as soon as you research it, otherwise you have to get a Mountaineering Leader or wait until you research Mountaineering and then you can put it on any mountain top. Alot of these wonders already have building graphics so all that would need to be done is to copy them to improvement graphics. Ideally the improvements would also need to be un-razable, or at least have some way to re-build them.
I think that line is a mistake, the description should be two rows down on the Mountain Mine row. I don't think 0100010 meant that only core mines should be allowable on mountains.
Miistake there yes, it should have been one row down. It was supposed to be attached to Mountain Mine not Core mine. I have fixed the table. But I did mean (as explained previously) that only "Mountain Mines" should be allowable on mountains. (the difference between explosives and nanonoming as a prereq tech is huge)
Sacred Sites:
These are the Geoglyph, Moai, Stone Circle (uses stonehange art), Mesoamerican Temple (uses ancient relics art), Pyraminds, (uses pyramids art), Asian Temple (uses Angkor wat art), and Ziggurat (uses Ziggurat art)
These all have a 'unique' range of 2. (you cannot build another one within 2 tiles of a prior one, assuming this part of the forts/superforts code works correctly.)
The terrains and features they are valid on are varied but restricted, to create a more limited number of locations in which they can be built. Other ways to limit the number of them should be in build requirements, such as each unique regional culture, stone and/or other resources not yet fully defined and open for discussion. They should also have a decent gold cost for building them. Whether or not we want to use these to affect the ability to build wonders and other city buildings that might need them in the city vicinity is open for debate.
Towns and Production category:
My goal is to have certain building either require these improvements in the CV or at least gain extra benefit from one or more of these improvements in the CV. Those benefits will probably be in the form of extra free specialists and/or free engineers.
Off-Planet category:
I am setting up the basic set of off-planet improvements with those listed above, (including resource bonus on the Colony Extraction Facility) even though we don't have the maps yet.
We will need to restrict the ability to build these via only being enabled on a custom Space worker unit, whenever it is we get around to supporting lunar and martian maps. When we do, I think we will need a "special building" auto build on founding a space colony city, which can marks it as such for latter building requirements.
These are the Geoglyph, Moai, Stone Circle (uses stonehange art), Mesoamerican Temple (uses ancient relics art), Pyraminds, (uses pyramids art), Asian Temple (uses Angkor wat art), and Ziggurat (uses Ziggurat art)
These all have a 'unique' range of 2. (you cannot build another one within 2 tiles of a prior one, assuming this part of the forts/superforts code works correctly.)
The terrains and features they are valid on are varied but restricted, to create a more limited number of locations in which they can be built. Other ways to limit the number of them should be in build requirements, such as each unique regional culture, stone and/or other resources not yet fully defined and open for discussion. They should also have a decent gold cost for building them. Whether or not we want to use these to affect the ability to build wonders and other city buildings that might need them in the city vicinity is open for debate.
Towns and Production category:
My goal is to have certain building either require these improvements in the CV or at least gain extra benefit from one or more of these improvements in the CV. Those benefits will probably be in the form of extra free specialists and/or free engineers.
Off-Planet category:
I am setting up the basic set of off-planet improvements with those listed above, (including resource bonus on the Colony Extraction Facility) even though we don't have the maps yet.
We will need to restrict the ability to build these via only being enabled on a custom Space worker unit, whenever it is we get around to supporting lunar and martian maps. When we do, I think we will need a "special building" auto build on founding a space colony city, which can marks it as such for latter building requirements.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Some cool ideas here. On a more subtle note, it would be nice if the furs resource improvements gave a little food - those furs ARE taken from edible animals.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
I hope cities can still be built on mountains as there are a line of buildings that require it.
I do not like the way that the Machu Picchu wonder currently works however I have made a unit that you can build if you have that wonder and it allows you to build mountain top "cities". This could be turned into a special cottage line for mountain peaks.
Having a range on the cottage line is probably not a good idea. Having culture will mean that they are more likely to be built anyway. Having the range also more so.
I would add mound and standing stone to the culture sites, assuming these are intended as Nomad Start improvements.
I do not like the way that the Machu Picchu wonder currently works however I have made a unit that you can build if you have that wonder and it allows you to build mountain top "cities". This could be turned into a special cottage line for mountain peaks.
Having a range on the cottage line is probably not a good idea. Having culture will mean that they are more likely to be built anyway. Having the range also more so.
I would add mound and standing stone to the culture sites, assuming these are intended as Nomad Start improvements.
Isn't tweaking already required in terms of the evaluation of forts providing culture range to get the AI to not build them inside city culture borders? they might alleviate those issues, but I'd still like the advanced forms of the town category to help spread culture out a bit further than their own plot. I think it will just need some play through to see how they perform.
While Standing stone/mound could be added, I only wanted 1 type per regional culture. Stone circle is effectively several standing stones too. The current proposed set could be used for nomadic start related stuff, but I was aiming for general usage.
Hydromancerx
C2C Modder
Yeah we should still be able to make improvements and cities on peaks.
I just think the Core Mine looks bad one peaks so perhaps that specifically should not be allowed on peaks. Plus it doesn't make much sense to start digging to the core from a thicker part of the crust.
All mines look bad on peaks due to the floating graphic. Core Mines just look the worst, That is one of the reason for having a specific mountain mine improvement, if someone can get the graphics right.
I'll try to get a table of bonus yields and terrain validity up in the next couple of days.
I'll aim to create the buildinfos that are missing, but someone else will need to hook them all up into worker units if they want them sooner rather than later.
Hydromancerx
C2C Modder
I am VERY much against changing the whole usable mountains stuff. This is one of th first ideas I requested to Afforess back in RoM/AND and I would like to keep all the awesomeness that it has. From mountain promotions, unlocking passing though mountains at mountaineering and of couse having cities on mountains. Heck even the Llama units we have are special because they can move across peaks while other units cannot. We even have some special UU units can can pass though peaks before Mountaineering.
Also the other mines don't look that bad on it.
Also the other mines don't look that bad on it.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
sry dbl post
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
Currently both the Moai and Geoglyph improvements can only be built by units that can only be built in one nation. Moai requires the Rapa Nui culture and geoglyphs require the Nazca Lines great wonder which anyone can build. These are the "main" advantage to both so if you are going to change it then we will need something to make them worth while.
I am not sure how regional cultural improvements could work. Do we need to create a line of workers for each region? Is there any stage where those lines merge? Or do we need a cultural tag on the build and improvement and have the dll sort it out?
I was also thinking of the possibility of such improvements upgrading eg Standing Stone to Stone Circle.
You all do realize that the Mountain Mine improvement doesn't in any way turn off usable mountain mod stuff? (I like usable mountains, and improvements on mountains don't work without it) But it's just an improvement, whose only terrain validity flag is bPeaksMakeValid. I just turned the bPeaksMakeValid off for other improvements. there was no python or other code changes involved.
They don't look bad in comparison to Core mine no.. but still, we can do better. This change makes that possible, because without different improvements pointing to different art styles, you can't make different art for mountain mines vs non-mountain mines actually useable.
Its all open to debate, My overall goals was:
This is a 'culture' improvement, it gives commerce and plot culture. Most anyone can build them but only so many of them due to distance, terrain, and resource restrictions. They are similar to each other in overall function but with slight variations based on cultural region.
There was talk about making them features too (I think I initiated it), and having archaeology sites built on them later on. That is still a consideration also. For now though, I just implemented them as improvements, and emulated the archeology and tourism stuff via late game tech yields.
climat
King
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2009
- Messages
- 735
We can separate Mountain mines to solve the 'floating' problem like your idea, but I think it should have same prereq tech as general mines on mountain. (That means Mountaineering.)
Don't you think the gap between Mountaineering and Explosive is also huge?
Earlier is better when it comes to using mountains, not the other way round.
About region culture improvements, I am not against it.
But.. You know that not every African culture built Pyramids, right?
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
Not to mention the ones in the Americas, Middle East and Europe.
I think to get any major mining related gains from mountains requires explosives to get to it. But if it is insisted on, it can get pushed back to Mountaineering, and Explosives made into a tech yield. Or there can be two verins, the 2nd an upgrade at explosives like the shaft mine, but that means more or or using the same art, and then people start to ask why stop there...make a Modern mountain mine, and so on...
And yes I know not all those cultures for those regions had used those things...its merely a representation...use your imagination
Faustmouse
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,524
Talking about mines, what are your plans regarding mines and forests? I think right now the Stone Tool Maker and Mines don't remove Forests while Shaft, Modern and Core Mines do. I'd rather have two different lines which slightly different values where one removes features while the other don't.
Similar threads
