1.24.1 Released!

[Leoreth]

This is possible in base BtS as well, in fact very few leaders are completely safe on pleased, and I think there are even some that can attack on friendly. So it depends on the leader personality.

 

[SpartanU]

This is possible in base BtS as well, in fact very few leaders are completely safe on pleased, and I think there are even some that can attack on friendly. So it depends on the leader personality.

That's what I figured when he declared war on me, it was just strange to see the attitude remain pleased while at war

 

[evilcoward]

Xyth, can you clarify how monastery bonus commerces from Great Priests are supposed to work? When I first read description, I thought that each subsequent GP increases bonus, but that was not the case. So I thought that a point is to be able to collect several different bonuses by changing tenets and it was working ok (not practical tho). Then I read python code and saw that these commerces are going into negative when city changes owner. So I though maybe it is to have possibility to get back bonus after recapturing while also not allowing enemy to benefit from it, but that was strange (because second capture by third side will restore bonuses for it). Then I saw bNeverCapture flag and that explanation went out of window too (cause that would mean even if enemy build his own monastery, it will still give it negative commerces until overriden by new GP). So, I'm pretty sure at least something is not working as intended here, but I'm not sure what exactly. Maybe there was some confusion with setBuildingCommerceChange (which overrides previous value) function which is used both when GP is born and when city changes owner?

 

[Xyth]

Noticed, that recycling center does not remove pollution from mines and workshop. You have to remove and rebuild those to get rid of pollution. Seems to be due to python onBuildingBuilt code checking only specifically for public transportation instead of Polluting set.

Oops! I rewrote pollution handling a while back and must have missed that bit. Fixed for 1.25.

Also, AI really underestimates pollution/unhealth.

For 1.25 I've written a rudimentary AI check to help with this.

Xyth, can you clarify how monastery bonus commerces from Great Priests are supposed to work? When I first read description, I thought that each subsequent GP increases bonus

This is the intended behaviour. There were quite a few bugs, but I've already fixed them for 1.25 (I hope).

Then I read python code and saw that these commerces are going into negative when city changes owner. So I though maybe it is to have possibility to get back bonus after recapturing while also not allowing enemy to benefit from it, but that was strange (because second capture by third side will restore bonuses for it).

That religious buildings code in onCityAcquired was never finished and got left in by mistake.

Then I saw bNeverCapture flag and that explanation went out of window too (cause that would mean even if enemy build his own monastery, it will still give it negative commerces until overriden by new GP). So, I'm pretty sure at least something is not working as intended here, but I'm not sure what exactly. Maybe there was some confusion with setBuildingCommerceChange (which overrides previous value) function which is used both when GP is born and when city changes owner?

The bNeverCapture flag is inherited from standard BTS. I'm not sure why it's set for religious buildings but I've never got around to investigating further.

 

[evilcoward]

Nice, will wait for 1.25 release then)

On a side note, is it possible to do updateCityOrganizations checks more often? Corporation penalties only update on civic change or corporations change, but not on resource availability change. Which can lead to strange situations when corporation is active but no penalty is present or vice versa.

And one more thing - is it possible to add an option for blocking WeLoveTheKing messages? When you have large empire those start to be really annoying, because they themself are absolutely useless and much more important messages are delayed because of them.

 

[Xyth]

Nice, will wait for 1.25 release then)

I'm striving to get a 1.25 beta out before the end of the month.

On a side note, is it possible to do updateCityOrganizations checks more often? Corporation penalties only update on civic change or corporations change, but not on resource availability change. Which can lead to strange situations when corporation is active but no penalty is present or vice versa.

Won't hurt to have each city update every turn. That routine is much more optimised than it used to be.

And one more thing - is it possible to add an option for blocking WeLoveTheKing messages? When you have large empire those start to be really annoying, because they themself are absolutely useless and much more important messages are delayed because of them.

I'll add this to my todo list.

 

[Howard Mahler]

Changing Tenets requires both a great person and a period of anarchy.
Changing Civics requires just a period of anarchy.

I think one should remove the period of anarchy for changing tenets.

Personally I find it much less important to change Tenets (once you choose an initial set) than to change Civics.
Thus with the current setup I rarely if ever change Tenets.

By the way, while the idea of penalties for certain Tenets is a clever twist, I think that in a game players prefer bonuses to penalties.

 

[SpartanU]

By the way, while the idea of penalties for certain Tenets is a clever twist, I think that in a game players prefer bonuses to penalties.

I like the negative tenets. I've implied this in previous posts about how I think negatives could be added to civics such as sustainability:

I think this civic could be more balanced if it had some drawbacks, such as no access to coal.

 

[Xyth]

I think one should remove the period of anarchy for changing tenets.

That would be unrealistic and detrimental to balance. See below.

Personally I find it much less important to change Tenets (once you choose an initial set) than to change Civics.
Thus with the current setup I rarely if ever change Tenets.

For most playstyles they're not intended to be changed nearly as often as Civics, but to potentially have significant effects if/when they are.

By the way, while the idea of penalties for certain Tenets is a clever twist, I think that in a game players prefer bonuses to penalties.

Civics have penalties as well: maintenance and dissent, which can sometimes deter you from selecting the civics you'd prefer. With Tenets, you get to choose the penalty that suits you best and (other than Apostasy) your choice doesn't limit your other possibilities. Tenets are thus the less punitive system, but with both you get control over the magnitude/nature of penalty you receive – but in exchange for a larger bonuses. Meaningful trade-offs rather than punishment.

 

[dretnoth]

Can be there a option in new game or custom game to denied using GP to tech rush?

And its still impossible have at last one square circle around city not ower-takable by culture? I mean when a city is conquered and the city who is few (4+) square away have so hideously high culture (and production) then the city is doomed unless that distant city stop have culture.
Oder side is to a citty producing a large amount of culture can ride off everything to small and practically steal titles.

 

[Xyth]

Can be there a option in new game or custom game to denied using GP to tech rush?

That would require a DLL change, so it would be Windows only. I can add it to my todo list, but I definitely wouldn't be looking into it until after 1.25.

And its still impossible have at last one square circle around city not ower-takable by culture? I mean when a city is conquered and the city who is few (4+) square away have so hideously high culture (and production) then the city is doomed unless that distant city stop have culture.

Oder side is to a citty producing a large amount of culture can ride off everything to small and practically steal titles.

Do you have the "City Flipping After Conquest" game option enabled? Disabling it will let such cities survive by flipping. Or if you're referring just to a city's difficulty retaining workable land near a culturally powerful city, well that's intended. One of the chief benefits of investing heavily in culture.

 

[Xyth]

1.25 Progress Update

Good News: I made heaps of progress in February and the first half of March.
Bad News: Not so much this past week, it was a rather busy one.

Good News: Thanks to @evilcoward's help the parts of Advanced Diplomacy 2 and Super Forts that I merged will remain in 1.25 after all (Windows only).
Bad News: This means getting the release version of 1.25 finished will take longer, as these additions require a lot of testing/balancing and work to ensure they won't mess up the Mac side of things.

Good News: I'm still on track to have the beta out at the end of this month.
Bad News: I may not get as much sleep as I should in order to meet this self-imposed deadline.

 

[Nightstar]

Good News: I'm still on track to have the beta out at the end of this month.
Bad News: I may not get as much sleep as I should in order to meet this self-imposed deadline.

Much as I'm looking forward to the update, I think I'd prefer you extended the deadline to include time to sleep. In the short term, this will likely result in higher overall quality and fewer bugs. And in the longer term, we're more likely to see continued development of the mod if you take good care of yourself so as not to burn out (or worse).

 

[Howard Mahler]

1. I did not see anything in what you said to convince me that changing Tenets should cost both a valuable GP and anarchy, while changing Civics requires only anarchy. But then it is your game, so you do not need to convince me.

2. Compared to Civics, I do not think that as a whole the Tenets provide large bonuses, beyond those for Divinity which goes with whatever is the religion. (Could be my play style.)

3. I was not objecting to penalties. I was commenting on having a whole category consisting solely of penalties.
The Civics have trade-offs rather than a whole category just consisting of penalties.
Tenets are not broke, so I do not expect you spend any time on them.

4. For me Tenets only come up when I found a religion. The choice of what type of religion is important. For the others, I either have no choice, or it is an easy choice for me. After that Tenets are not an active part of game play in the sense of my having to worry about changing them; they are what they are almost like for example the map size. (This may be due to my style of play.)

That would be unrealistic and detrimental to balance. See below.



For most playstyles they're not intended to be changed nearly as often as Civics, but to potentially have significant effects if/when they are.



Civics have penalties as well: maintenance and dissent, which can sometimes deter you from selecting the civics you'd prefer. With Tenets, you get to choose the penalty that suits you best and (other than Apostasy) your choice doesn't limit your other possibilities. Tenets are thus the less punitive system, but with both you get control over the magnitude/nature of penalty you receive – but in exchange for a larger bonuses. Meaningful trade-offs rather than punishment.

 

[evilcoward]

I agree with Nightstar, getting enough sleep is important, both for your health and your work (I always make a lot of small errors in code if I'm working in not well-rested state; and very stupid errors I must say).

If I'm allowed to increase an amount of work a bit more, may I suggest making Tenets that lower requirements for monasteries/great temples scale better with map size? Because when you are on tiny map, change from 2 temples per monastery to 1 temple per monastery is quite impactful, but on larger maps it becomes 3 to 2, then 4 to 3, 5 to 4 etc.

 

[Leoreth]

Much as I'm looking forward to the update, I think I'd prefer you extended the deadline to include time to sleep. In the short term, this will likely result in higher overall quality and fewer bugs. And in the longer term, we're more likely to see continued development of the mod if you take good care of yourself so as not to burn out (or worse).

I second this sentiment. Take care of yourself.

 

[Xyth]

Still some loose ends to tidy up before I can release the beta. One more week, sorry.

 

[DarkLunaPhantom]

Is source code for the dll of this version available somewhere?