K-Mod: Far Beyond the Sword

[Marguerite Ming]

The AI should be a bit better at defending their territory -- but there's something that concerns me about this. Here's the problem: Making the AI smarter at defending might actually end up making the game easier to win. Because if I improve the AI's defence tactics, that will make it harder for AIs to conquer each other, which will mean it is less likely that one AI becomes very powerful, and if no AI player rises above the others, it will probably be easier for the human player to win. -- Anyway, that probably isn't going to be a problem, but I think it's something worth keeping in mind.

The solution is for two AIs to make an alliance and gang up on the third, and divide up their territory.

 

[Marguerite Ming]

The defence effect of spies does not stack. The best way to defend against espionage is keep running counter-espionage missions on whichever civ you think is attacking you. You can't really stop them from destroying your buildings, but you can at least make it a lot more expensive for them (counter-espionage adds 100% to the cost of espionage missions against you). Security bureaus help a lot as well. -- All of this stuff is unchanged from standard BtS rules, but I'm considering rewriting the espionage advisor to make it more clear how things work... ... ... maybe one day.


Actually, on the topic of espionage, there is one change that I've been considering for quite some time. You may or may not know that you get a discount on your espionage missions if you have earnt more espionage points over the course of the game compared to your rivals. (this is regardless of how many unspent points you have.) -- Anyway, currently this discount only depends on the number of points; and so what tends to happen is that big civilizations get a discount because they have a bazillion jails and courthouses, whereas small civilizations get nothing. The change I have in mind is to make the discount depend on the ratio of points / population, rather than just the points. With this, it will be more viable for small civs to run espionage missions on large civs - whereas currently it is very difficult to do so. I think the it would be more balanced and perhaps more realistic - but I'm not really sure.. (otherwise I would have made the change already.)

Please, please, please add an espionage mission to assassinate a unit. If a spy can destroy an entire building, why can't it kill a worker in the field, or a unit in a city?

It is seriously frustrating, when I get an AI city down to size 1 and cultured so it is 95-4 for me, and it still won't revolt because the AI has 30 units in it (which it moved there because I conquered many of his other cities with culture).

I like to play games with always peaceful set, but you can't win conquest when cities won't revolt.

 

[Marguerite Ming]

I was fighting an early game war vs the Japanese using the latest version. I dont see the "true values" for buildings anymore. I liked that feature.

Anyway I had 4 axemen with one strength upgrade vs one axeman with double upgrades (one strength and one +25% vs melee). Well I lost 3 axemen vs that one axe and he took no damage (he was defending on grassland) and then i lost my last axemen and brought that axeman down to about 50% health. Im sure its highly unlikely (mega unlucky for me) but perhaps it should be coded in a way where the "glitch" where the unit takes 0 dmg should have a cap of only one or two times per turn.

Idk Id like less crazy randomness like that particular instance so I feel the game is more skill based.

Did you ask his name before you attacked? Maybe it was Druss.

 

[zhongguo]

Dear karadoc,

may I have your attention for a moment on this topic.
Would you help me out with the mentioned debug tool so there is a way to find the problem?

Please read:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=12615745#post12615745

 

[Sidder]

Im unable to add money for myself or AI in the trade, I can do like what will you give me for this but then ye .. as resource wise I just want to sell not trade for bonuses Im still no wear near cap(health usually), I want that GPT! xD

..now im not sure weither this is something that was meant to be like this but then why even show it as available

(only my first game with kmod)

One thing I miss which I think was already brought up, from regular BUGmod the CHOP auto cancel

Hm and maybe the more detailed Spy screen

Only my first game so far with Kmod, but ye I noticed some difference already, like archer rush in BC years luckily I had meatshield Cyrus between me and Genghis

Which he now already been at war for entire game, so far since that... and now hes slacking behind rather rapidly nor much progress for Cyrus anymore neither since hes stuck with stack outside his Capital

Anyway sorry Wall of text, just my first observations back to my game now

 

[Windsor]

Only my first game so far with Kmod, but ye I noticed some difference already, like archer rush in BC years luckily I had meatshield Cyrus between me and Genghis

I know. I just had Darius sending me 6 archers 2160BC. That's brutal and actually a problem for K-Mod.

Early warfare (pre-500BC and especially pre-1500BC) has always been problematic in Civ4 because of the all-in nature of wars. There's no small skirmishes where you just get some minor setbacks.

As a result, early wars in Civ4 is often just rage-quit moments and instead of trying to be prepared players just decide to play at the mercy of the RNG.

The improved AI and especially the willingness to archer-rush in K-Mod makes this problem more flagrant. The AI is capable of making a solid stack very early and is willing to use it.

Overall, early DoWs feel very punishing rather than challenging. There's no reasonable counterplay here.

 

[lunfa_reo]

Hi, I've recently downloaded K-Mod and played a few games with it. What can I say that hasn't been said? I'll just repeat Awesome AI!! I had to lower a difficulty level and it still keeps me on my toes constantly. Beautiful surprise amphibious invasions with actual chances of succeeding, backstab DOWs that can knock you out of the game because the AI now creates more efficient and capable SoDs. Much more frequent trade embargoes against me. The list goes on an on...

Spoiler :

In my last game as Boudicca (or whatever it's spelled) of Rome (yeah, rigged start ) I spawned in a huge continent with 3 other civs, while there were 3 more continents that were smaller (Fractal map script) with 1/2 civs on each one.

I took out my closest neighbour with a Praetorian rush. Didn't push it towards the next neighbour because he was too far away (big landmass). In retrospective maybe I should have gone after him and razed all his cities!

Anyway I REXed and created a nice, well developed empire, but noticed by the late middle ages I was falling too far behind Roosevelt in tech and score. I decided I should do something at that moment (actually way earlier!) to have a chance of winning the game.
My plan was to steamroll the remaining 2 civs in my huge continent, to get a big advantage on land over Roosevelt and therefore make a comeback possible.
Well, I did manage to take over my continent and ended up with a quality and sizeable army of knights, grenadiers, riflemen and cannons.

By this time Roosevelt had infantry and corporations and soon thereafter tanks and fighters. I was far from Communism to try a SP comeback strategy, so I decided to stop research to upgrade my military while I built top class infra in my many cities to have a chance to compete with Roosevelt (I had quite a lot more land than him).

And here's when the story comes closer to its climax: Roosevelt had been wiping out the other remaining civs, so the game ended up with him, me and Washington from an original 9 civs.
At this point the AIs sign a defensive pack with each other. OMG I thought, that's it, I'm toasted. But after a few turns Roosevelt offers a DP to me! I felt I had a chance then and took it. Now if I or Washington declared on Roosevelt, I or he would be 1 against the other 2 for the war. So I thought Roosevelt is going for a peaceful win by space (because of his tech lead) or culture (he was using Jewellers extensively pressuring my cities a lot). Fine, I'll keep building up momentum peacefully and eventually outpace him.

Then a wild popup appears: UN Diplomatic Victory vote. Roosevelt vs me (I had the highest pop count). Washington was friendly towards both of us, but more friendly towards Roosevelt. OK, this is it. I voted for myself and hit end turn expecting to see my defeat.

Diplomatic victory FAILS. Roosevelt leads (760 votes of 764 required).

HOLY ..... !!! I have never seen that! What a game! I'm alive and with chances!

And then, 5 turns later... Roosevelt DOWs and invades me with 3 stacks from different angles composed of artillery, tanks and marines, supported by battleships, destroyers and bombers.



The AI actually went for a peaceful win, failed, acknowledged it and decided to win by military instead! Such a badass like me!

I even reloaded the turn before the DOW and made a DP with the 3rd AI, to see if that would deter Roosevelt... I didn't. He went for the win at all costs.

I was mad, exhausted, impressed and finally glad with this game and mod!

So Karadoc, I'd like to congratulate and thank you for this wonderful mod you created. It brought back to Civ4 much of the challenge I haven't experienced in some years!

I haven't read all pages from this posts but I did several, and am glad to see you are very dedicated and open with the community about your mod. These are great attitudes I want to give credit to you

Keep up the great work!!

 

[Marguerite Ming]

Recently, TheMeInTeam commented that he thought my Representation nerf was a bad idea. He described it as a "gaff" and said that it needs to be rethought... Well, I have rethought it; and I've thought about it many times before; and I remember discussing the possibility of such a nerf with TheMeInTeam before I even starting making this mod (and we were not in agreement). I think I'll stick with the Rep nerf for the time being, but it still isn't an issue that I'm completely confident about. I'd like to hear any feedback anyone has about it.

Let me just try to explain some of my reasoning behind the nerf.

The reasons perhaps have more to do with overall game-flow rather than trying to make it equal to the other civics. I feel that the late-game research rate is too fast. In the late game, civilizations suddenly get access to a wealth of powerful buildings and effects which dramatically accelerates their research ... and although I think it's good that everything speeds up like that, I think it's a bit too much.

It seems clear to me that pre-nerf Representation was the most powerful civic in the government branch. Universal Suffrage was sometimes viable for some relatively short portions of the game... but Representation was always viable, and always powerful, and was certainly the #1 civic for anyone who wanted to be a leader in technology. This means that most civs in the game would use representation as much as possible, and thus the game was focused tech. After the nerf, Represenation is still the #1 tech civic, but it is generally less powerful than Universal Suffrage, and so it is only chosen by a handful of civs; and thus the late-game tech rate is slowed significantly.

TheMeInTeam puts forward the argument that towns were stronger than specialists even before the nerf, and thus the nerf was bad for balance. In response to that, I say that since towns were in fact stronger than specialists even before the nerf, I think a pure "specialist economy" was never viable in the first place. (ie. just farms feeding specialists without any towns.) In addition to towns producing more commerce than rep specialists, the specialists economy requires caste-system, so that you can actually get the specialists you want to use; and it requires a lot more happiness - which is a problem, because you'll be hurting from the emancipation anger. So I don't think we should be too focused on a direct comparison between what towns give and what specialists give. Realistically, civilizations will always have a mixture of towns and specialists - it's really just a question of proportions.

Typically, a civilization will try to have has many towns as they can work in their commerce cities; and they'll have just a few farms feeding mines and growth... and so not many specialists unless they are deliberately trying to get great people. -- But what tends to happen is that the food supplies increase. The food supplies were balanced while the towns were growing; but then with civil service, the grain resources give a little bit of extra food, and then with biology, there's a population explosion as all those farm-chains suddenly start producing a lot more food than was needed. You can try to use that exceed food to fuel the growth of more towns, or perhaps workshops or something like that, but commonly what happens is that they become specialists. Corporations and State Property both add more food as well, and the (buffed) assembly lines add specialists. Even aside from all that, some civilizations just have a lot of specialists unavoidably. In food-rich areas with more food than there is land to spend it on, there will be specialists whether you aim for it or not. (eg. coastal cities with seafood, and a lack of hills).

The point I'm trying to make is that there will be specialists. This isn't a simple comparison of towns vs farms + specialists. Because even if you just want towns, you're going to have specialists anyway. The only question is whether or not there will be enough specialists to make Representation viable over Universal Suffrage.

In my experience, it is still viable. I would say that Universal Suffrage is now the stronger civic in most cases, but that Representation is still the best choice for civilizations that are focused on research, and civilizations which happen to have a lot of specialists or settled great people. It use to be that Representation was typically the stronger civic; and now it is the other way around. I can't really say if the balance between those civics is closer or further apart with the change, but I can say that both are still viable choices, and that I'd rather Universal Suffrage be the stronger of the pair because of the tech-rate issue, and because Universal Suffrage has more prerequisites.

So ... that's the bulk of my reasoning. As I said, I'm interested to hear any feedback about this stuff.

I disagree with your reasoning. Players had a choice, specialists + representation, or towns. By nerfing representation, you eliminated that choice, now the most viable choice is towns. If you want to slow down late game teching (which is unrealistic, as science progresses faster as more knowledge accumulates, it is a natural, synergistic effect) then the only way is to increase research costs.

NOTE that your change didn't affect research rates for town-based economies.

 

[Marguerite Ming]

I completely agree that the tests I showed only offer very limited information; because it's only a small number of tests, and it doesn't include human players, and so on... but I think it's better than no tests at all. I don't really want to sit around all day starting tests and recording numbers; I just wanted to see if there was a noticeable effect - and I still maintain that the tests show there probably is a noticeable effect.

No, it isn't better than no tests at all. You are committing a fallacy known as confirmation bias. It is a serious problem that allows you to take as fact a hypothesis that may be erroneous, and it prevents you from ever discovering your error. So, bad testing is worse than no testing at all. With no testing at all, at least you know that you may be incorrect. Accepting bad testing makes that impossible.

 

[Marguerite Ming]

Alright, so suppose I wanted to nerf representation to make it less powerful for low-level peon players, but so that it isn't hit hard for super-pro players; how would I go about doing that?

Why do you want to nerf it at all? You haven't provided any legitimate reason why it *needs* to be nerfed, you just seem to be determined to do it.

If it ain't broke, don't *fix* it.

 

[Marguerite Ming]

It's not idiotic to run it when you don't have towns and aren't in war prep. The problem is that it lacks the PULL of a civic that might drag you out of HR, PS, or US. If rep is adding ~100 beakers/turn to a 1000 beaker/turn empire that is also putting up 100's and 100's of , , and infrastructure investment, it might not even be worth anarchy due to the production hit...not to mention the new incentive to skip that civic path in favor of sci meth, steel, or rifling. It just depends.



It was very niche. Its primary draw was that it damaged some setups far less than others and could be forced by the UN (say you're not workshop reliant but a rival is, force him out of SP). I wouldn't mind seeing it made stronger, even if indirectly by pushing up the electricity boost on windmills. when you compare an environmentalism + electricity + replaceable parts (likely to have it by the time you'd be in the civic) windmill to a town, you start to notice something.... Alongside the massive health boost it's no joke.

So, why don't windmills provide power to a city, so you don't need a coal plant???

 

[Marguerite Ming]

A big problem is after railroads, when you go on offense, a huge army could be lurking 5 or 6 tiles away and hit you with ease, as you slowly move one tile at a time towards a city.

Spies make excellent scouts. Or, cavalry with commando.

 

[Manujuanel]

Hello Kararadoc, I would like to make a request. I really like that trade routes spread culture in this mod, however it has an annoying side-effect. I don't know if someone has noticed it, but when you change to the global view of the world and check the "show culture" button the world becomes a rainbow chessboard. Culture is so spread that every piece of land has culture form lots of civilizations, this really makes impossible to get an approximate idea of how every civilization is going with culture.

Could you change it so that culture is only shown on the global view when a square of land has something like ~5% of culture from a certain civilization. Only something to avoid the chessboard effect without changing the wonderful new culture system.

Also, I would like to repeat that there's a bug when you declare war on a civilization by dragging your units into its territory. The "Do you want war?" screen always appears twice.

Thank you.

 

[alanthreonus]

Is the SDI working correctly? I just launched a few dozen ICBMs at Sitting Bull, and only about four actually hit. Far less than 25%.

 

[toob]

One thing I miss which I think was already brought up, from regular BUGmod the CHOP auto cancel

Hm and maybe the more detailed Spy screen

Karadoc has explained these:

Chop auto-cancel: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11347702&postcount=615

Detailed spy screen: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12120124&postcount=1762 -- you'll have to read a bit to get to it in this post, and the details seems to be earlier in the thread

You know what's annoying? These aren't otherwise linked, they're just massed into the big-asz thread. Not asking anyone to do the work except piecemeal, like this (I'm trying too!), just saying what we all think .

On the side, is there some way to link internally to civfanatics without copying the entire url? Say I've done a yahoo search and found a thread; how do I convert that to the most efficient internal-to-cfc link?

 

[toob]

I know. I just had Darius sending me 6 archers 2160BC. That's brutal and actually a problem for K-Mod.

Early warfare (pre-500BC and especially pre-1500BC) has always been problematic in Civ4 because of the all-in nature of wars. There's no small skirmishes where you just get some minor setbacks.

As a result, early wars in Civ4 is often just rage-quit moments and instead of trying to be prepared players just decide to play at the mercy of the RNG.

The improved AI and especially the willingness to archer-rush in K-Mod makes this problem more flagrant. The AI is capable of making a solid stack very early and is willing to use it.

Overall, early DoWs feel very punishing rather than challenging. There's no reasonable counterplay here.

You know (of) TMIT? He says similarly (paraphrased, no disrespect intended): "the RNG evens out in the long run, but sometimes early-game there's no long run."

I just moved to (K-Mod) Monarch, and the fact the AIs start with Archery (and I start too often near Montezuma, "randomly") kills me. Clearly, a different tack (sp?) is warranted. Maybe we need a thread just on this? I do ...

 

[toob]

Hello Kararadoc, I would like to make a request. I really like that trade routes spread culture in this mod, however it has an annoying side-effect. I don't know if someone has noticed it, but when you change to the global view of the world and check the "show culture" button the world becomes a rainbow chessboard. Culture is so spread that every piece of land has culture form lots of civilizations, this really makes impossible to get an approximate idea of how every civilization is going with culture.

Could you change it so that culture is only shown on the global view when a square of land has something like ~5% of culture from a certain civilization. Only something to avoid the chessboard effect without changing the wonderful new culture system.

Thank you.

I never/rarely use F11 to take screenshots so I never noticed this; I just mouse-wheel scroll out til fog then one back in. I really like your (Karadoc's) changes to culture, like Manujuanel, but this matters a bit. There's a workaround (what I just described), but it's not the same.

I see the "~5%" culture idea. Any others, from people who use F11? (You are talking about F11, right?)

 

[Manujuanel]

I never/rarely use F11 to take screenshots so I never noticed this; I just mouse-wheel scroll out til fog then one back in. I really like your (Karadoc's) changes to culture, like Manujuanel, but this matters a bit. There's a workaround (what I just described), but it's not the same.

I see the "~5%" culture idea. Any others, from people who use F11? (You are talking about F11, right?)

Yes, I was talking about F11. I know that maybe few people use this function, but I like it, so thanks for supporting my idea.

 

[lunfa_reo]

Regarding some aspects of BUG/BULL:

There are also some features which were removed because I thought they gave away too much information, or because they just weren't up to standard. Such as the Traits articles in the Sevopedia, the WHEOOHRN indicator on the scoreboard, and the BUG Espionage screen. (Actually, the standard Espionage screen isn't very good either. I was intending to write my own one, but I haven't gotten around to it.)

This reminds me of something that actually troubles me while playing K-Mod: I can't see the amount of espionage points I cumulatively spent on a rival (and vice-versa) when I hover the rival's entry in the scoreboard (I only see the icon that tells me I have more points spent on it than it has on me, but I don't see the actual amounts). That makes it really difficult for me to estimate and decide the proportion of espionage I would spend from then on for that particular civ to pursue a specific strategy or just to enhance my esp defense against it.

It troubles me so much that I've been turning espionage off (which sucks) while playing K-Mod.

So Karadoc, did you remove this feature? Because I looked everywhere (BUG options and all) for a switch to re-enable it but couldn't find such a switch anywhere.
(Maybe it's in an obvious place I'm overlooking, but I've really looked hard)

I can live without the espionage screen telling me exactly how much points each AI spent on me the last turn (I think that's what you were talking about in the post I quoted from you), but without the actual amounts in the scoreboard hover...

 

[Marguerite Ming]

Guys u are mixing game and reality the entire time. I will try again.
In K-mod trade culture makes the city plot gain other culture and because of that u will be able to flip it easier. Goods on their own dont change ur nationality but influence u in one way or another. The fact u imported something u dont have from a totally different nation doesnt slowly make your people theirs. It influences culture in a way to maybe learn new things and/or perfect the current ones. In no way does the trade change your ethnicity. As i mentioned before u need more than that - scholars, philosophers, teachers, priests, etc. etc... Now if u cant make a difference between the game and reality i wont write anymore. Im just saying karadoc implemented something that isnt coherent with history. I dont say he should remove it (its a bloody game), just pointing out the common mistake people make (i made it as well, but i clarified it with experts in that area). Now if u dont or wont understand that then live in a lie.

I found this argument almost persuasive, until two words came to me: trade enclave. Countries that trade heavily import their people into their local business offices. This adds a small percentage of residents who are foreign nationals. The more trade, the more immigrants.