Alternative Map during 1.18

[Leoreth]

What is so essentially superior about American and German civilization that they have 25-30% bonuses to research?

must be those Nazi rocket scientists

 

[Dracosolon]

So far modifiers have been a necessary evil to simulate something closer to history. Seems like the only way to make the argument to get rid of them would be coming up with some better tool to simulate that history in a more organic way.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Thanks for the rather patronising comment considering I've been playing this mod and posting on this forum for ~6 years now.

My intent was to emphasize this very thing so I'll take the fail on that one for communicating poorly. A rephrase might sound something like "You've been playing the mod for and been part of the tribe for years and therefore I don't think we're understanding each other". I promise I'm trying to be charitable.

P.S. the more I reread some of your thoughts the less charitable I suddenly feel. There's stuff I can more confidently deem a bit whack.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

must be those Nazi rocket scientists

btw thanks in particular for Herr von Braun! Hey wait, I just had the thought that his example could make a case for caputring (and/or "encouraging to relocate") GPs in-game.

 

[triplebassist]

I still don't follow. You have not explained what your issue is or what the change should be. You have just described what tech modifiers are.

Ignoring all of the hubub that came after this, do you intend to look at whether the modifiers might need to be adjusted to account for changes in resources/terrain/etc on the new map as part of your playtesting and adjusting UHVs?

 

[SultanRedSnake]

The issue is that America and the UK are granted permanent bonuses to vital game metrics which therefore means they're the world leaders in most games.

Nailed it.

it's hard to see how no matter how good the Turkish economy is, America will outpace them at research

Because America did and not just because "More Total Commerce"? Assumption seems be something like Economic Success = Scientific Progress which you couldn't possibly mean. So it *almost looks like* Leoreth is actually turning the few number tweaks allowed by the 20 y/o game engine to kinda pretty sorta model all the innumerable and abstract factors that contributed to the rise and fall of powers over time.

This makes the game less interesting because it's pre-scripted which civs will be the strongest and most advanced in most games.

That's a simple No (to highlighted text) because it's not a script as you acknowledge elsewhere ("vital game metrics" - see above).

For those playing in Asia, it guarantees Anglo supremacy

You're showing a pattern of exaggerating and/or not knowing what some words mean. You're hurting your own cause.

it implies that British and American advantages in history were some unique, god-granted modifier that they earned by virtue of their civilization, rather than a product of their environment, terrain, government and foreign policy.

There's the rub right here. This is precisely what we are all painfully trying to explain a handful of numerical variables are not. Change "it implies" to "I interpret" and your whole puzzle might be solved.

It encourages ahistorical gameplay that breaks immersion, like conquering London in 1890 as Japan.

Ok cool here's something we probably all agree on in principle and with all else being equal. But now I need your help sorting out something else: Until just now your main big point seemed be a disagreement with excessive historicity ("The Americans Always Beat the Ottomans To The Moon wtf"). Now I'm hearing the opposite?

This doesn't make me feel like my strategy or mastery of gameplay has prevailed - it makes me feel like I've won because I figured out how to gank the fragile Civ 4 AI.

This is good! Please reread and pay extra special attention to highlighted text.

Finally, it's bad game design because it's a permanent advantage that cannot be altered by good strategy.

Yesssss I finally get to just drop the ol' #SkillIssue.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Ignoring all of the hubub that came after this, do you intend to look at whether the modifiers might need to be adjusted to account for changes in resources/terrain/etc on the new map as part of your playtesting and adjusting UHVs?

Updated Plans for DoC 1.18

 

[Zaddy]

Nailed it.

Because America did and not just because "More Total Commerce"? Assumption seems be something like Economic Success = Scientific Progress which you couldn't possibly mean. So it *almost looks like* Leoreth is actually turning the few number tweaks allowed by the 20 y/o game engine to kinda pretty sorta model all the innumerable and abstract factors that contributed to the rise and fall of powers over time.


That's a simple No (to highlighted text) because it's not a script as you acknowledge elsewhere ("vital game metrics" - see above).


You're showing a pattern of exaggerating and/or not knowing what some words mean. You're hurting your own cause.


There's the rub right here. This is precisely what we are all painfully trying to explain a handful of numerical variables are not. Change "it implies" to "I interpret" and your whole puzzle might be solved.


Ok cool here's something we probably all agree on in principle and with all else being equal. But now I need your help sorting out something else: Until just now your main big point seemed be a disagreement with excessive historicity ("The Americans Always Beat the Ottomans To The Moon wtf"). Now I'm hearing the opposite?

This is good! Please reread and pay extra special attention to highlighted text.

Yesssss I finally get to just drop the ol' #SkillIssue.

you are being unpleasant. please be pleasant instead.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

you are being unpleasant. please be pleasant instead.

Thanks (I mean it). Inner voice was nagging me the entire time - "I can't quite see The Line but we might be crossing it" but the other inner voice had this track on replay:

It was the base reaction of a sad man (me!) who'd felt like our carpet had just been whizzed on.

 

[antostor]

The issue is that America and the UK are granted permanent bonuses to vital game metrics which therefore means they're the world leaders in most games.
This makes the game less interesting because it's pre-scripted which civs will be the strongest and most advanced in most games.
For those playing in Asia, it guarantees Anglo supremacy even if the Mongols are defeated and the colonists are repelled. For those playing Europe, it guarantees English supremacy even if Britain is brought to heel and denied its Indian riches.

But who wants a China game that's one big sandbox after you repel the Mongols? Historically Ming/Qing China was the dominant power in Asia until the British appeared at the shores. Why wouldn't I want this challenge? Why would I want to defeat the English in one war as France and never worry about them again? Or build a few more cottages as Italy and just out-pace everyone with no issues at all until the end of the game? I want to be forced to go on an expansion spree somewhere in Libya and Ethiopia to keep up!

I want tough Romans in the antiquity. I want tough Mongols in the middle ages. I want tough Ottomans, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch in 15th-17th century. And I surely want powerful English and French in 18th/19th century and tough Germans, Russians and Americans in 20th century. If you need modifiers so my Persia suffers from Portuguese, English and Russian incursions, give them these modifiers. Otherwise it's dull.

 

[Leoreth]

Ignoring all of the hubub that came after this, do you intend to look at whether the modifiers might need to be adjusted to account for changes in resources/terrain/etc on the new map as part of your playtesting and adjusting UHVs?

Yes, that is the primary reason why I am playing through all the civilizations right now, and will continue to make adjustments once I get more player feedback.

The whole idea of civ modifiers notwithstanding, specific modifier values are never set in stone.

 

[Pawlak]

In the industrial era, Spain's research cost is 80, America's is 75, Germany's is 70, Japan's is 110. What is so essentially superior about American and German civilization that they have 25-30% bonuses to research? Conversely, what is so essentially inferior about Japanese civilization that they have a 10% malus to research?

The problem that this modifieres (as far as I understand logic behind them) adres is different starting times and locations. Bascially if China got same rate as say America by the time USA spawns China would have already had Pentagon built. So later spawning civs have to get bonus and this bonus is larger for civs that start in locations with relatively poor starting locations that did in real history non the less got powerful. It's about achieving world states kind of like real history. There is so much other factors that change world state anyway that it never really goes exactly like real history, but without this it would basically be just ancient civs all the time (unless the collapse) thx for their early start advantage.
It's not about assessing civ abilities.

 

[GuitarDemon]

I'm not sure how all the modifiers under the hood work but on the latest version Britian hasn't been going as crazy as they use to.

Theyre still comfortably tech leader but not as exaggerated as before and hording every single late wonder

Edit: then again I was playing civs with good modifiers themselves so maybe not a good point of reference

 

[AOS9001]

I'm not sure how all the modifiers under the hood work but on the latest version Britian hasn't been going as crazy as they use to.

Maybe they adopt expensive public welfare civics in the 20th century and have to lower their research slider to pay for them?

 

[Maggy_domain]

Bascially if China got same rate as say America by the time USA spawns China would have already had Pentagon built. So later spawning civs have to get bonus and this bonus is larger for civs that start in locations with relatively poor starting locations that did in real history non the less got powerful.

I subscribe to this field. Modifiers are a necessity to balance a game where civilisations are by design unbalanced. This is not vanilla, some civs here enjoy hundreds of turns before others come to play, and we all know how valuable snowballing is. To the extent that it's definitely possible to beat America to space race with China, regardless of the modifiers, but that's just minmaxer me.

All I want to add is this: the problem is not AI Germany (which barely expands) or America. I play a lot of America games and imho without modifiers it would be unfeasible to keep the pace considering a) how late the span date is relative to all your other competitors and b) you expand through complete uncolonised virgin land & therefore it takes time to come online. By the time you cottaged the Midwest in Marathon you normally hit 1900.

The problem is England, and I argue not so much relative to its modifier but first and foremost due to its broken UP which allows it to keep a prime empire for absolutely no cost. Coloniser civs have to endure an initial money hit before their colonies turn profitable. England can skip this phase and thus the AI easily maintains high research rate.

Now, Leoreth fixed this during 1.18 development. It might still need tweaks (or not?) but that answer can only come from testing. I know this is not a priority for almost all of the UHVs but if @Leoreth spot something interesting please share it ! I'm also conscious that lots of changes are on the table & it's difficult to gauge at this stage. Thanks for all the work !

 

[Ballazic]

Thanks for the rather patronising comment considering I've been playing this mod and posting on this forum for ~6 years now.

You've identified the problem in your comment - "simply tools in a limited set" - so why is the idea of modernising those tools, as the game undergoes multiple changes, so outrageous?

Threads like this demonstrate a confusion. Yes there is a community around this mod, but the community does not own the mod or set the direction. This is Leoreth's baby. It's been his vision all these years.

 

[Leoreth]

I appreciate people coming to my defense, but that's really not necessary. I welcome the open discussion in this thread and don't want it to be shut down in my name.

 

[trexeric]

I just had the thought that his example could make a case for caputring (and/or "encouraging to relocate") GPs in-game.

Not to change the subject, but I think it would be a cool idea to be able to use espionage to recruit GPs settled in foreign cities (like how you can assassinate them now), if that were possible.

 

[Publicola]

Not to change the subject, but I think it would be a cool idea to be able to use espionage to recruit GPs settled in foreign cities (like how you can assassinate them now), if that were possible.

This definitely belongs in the suggestions & requests thread; this is a really cool idea.

 

[KIJLC]

Modifiers make perfect sense as currently implemented. It would be extremely unfun to not have good modifiers as a late game civ and basically be able to get nothing done. However for ancient civs that respawn or just last the entire game (China) it most definitely sucks to be stuck with ancient era modifiers of like 140% research cost. Perhaps China and India specifically should be coded to get new modifiers in the modern era. It doesn't affect the game much but it'd make it more fun to see those two be able to approach their real life heights.