[MODCOMP]Broader Alignment

[MagisterCultuum]

Beyond what you already said you'd be adding? Not really, at least nothing big.


Maybe making it so that units also abandon you if you get out of a unit-specific alignment range? I can easily see some heroes not minding if they serve a good(/evil) or neutral civ, but being quite unwilling to serve evil(/good). Different units might have different thresholds of what they consider to good or evil.

You know what might be cooler (but may be beyond the modmod's scope, as I doubt it could be made modular)? Replacing the current abandonment mechanic with a python function determining if and when unit will abandon you or not. For instance, Arthendain is a RoK hero, but the civilopedia mentions he gave his soul to and was given new life by Sucellus; thus I don't think he would have a problem serving in an FoL civ. Of course, this could get confusing since I doubt the python function determining when the unit would defect would be automatically documented like somehting in XML/SDK would be.

(I said defect because I'm still hoping that the abandonment mechanism will be changed so that instead of killing them it would trigger an event that allows a rival that still meet the unit's religion/alignment/civic requirements to take control of the unit)


I'd like for spells to have alignment prereqs and the ability to change alignment too, but if this can be done easily enough through python there probably isn't much point in adding new tags. (There are other tags I'd like to add or changed the spell schema, like allowing more than 2 prereq promotions, removing more than 3 promotions, and letting most of the tags have or requirements, but I guess that isn't relevant to this modmod and not particularly important since python could be used for these too, albeit more awkwardly)



Oh, this is probably beyond the scope of the modmod, but I'd really like it if alignment (as well as religion, civics, leaders, and civs) changed the AI weighting towards researching different techs (and maybe also buildings units/heroes/buildings/wonders/rituals). I despise the coding in CvGameUtils.py that forces the Ljosalfar go straight for Way of the Forests, the Khazad for Way of the Earthmother, The Luchuirp for Construction, Good civs with Philosophy for Orders from Heaven, Evil civs with Philosophy for Corruption of Spirit, AV civs for Infernal Pact. I really think that this is holding the AI back, and making games too predictable. It is the main reason people complain about Evil civs always turning neutral. I also hate how this file makes it impossible for Neutral civs to found the Order or AV, and how it stops you from trading religion founding techs with them. I really think that all of these things need to be replaced with thematically and strategically appropriate weightings; for things that really are unthematic (e.g., the Corruption of Spirit or Malevolent Design tech for the very goos Elohim or Bannor) would have a negative weighting high enough to make the leader refuse to even accept the tech as a gift. Still, you might be able to get them to take it if you offer it in conjunction with somehting they really want. This would be a great way to try to corrupt (or redeem) a neighboring civ.

 

[Grey Fox]

Good good. I can't say I will add everything you want, but I will see what I make time for. In my opinion, if something can be done via SDK and a tag in XML, I'd rather do that over python. First it's more in line with what Kael already did with Shadow, and secondly it's faster. But I will also add the python functionality, cause sometimes it's easier to use python and sometimes you need to do something more complex during the development of your mod. Something that could be added to the SDK at a later time if warranting.


I love working on stuff that might be useful for the real mod eventually, and having alignment affect the weighting is something that the game needs. I guess the Flavor weighting on techs and Leaders is already supposed to do this, but they are too weak I guess.
What would be the smartest way to make the religion dependent civs prioritize their favorite religion instead of being hardcoded to tech for it?

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Yeah, SDK is better in general, but if you want something kinda complicated and particular to individual units that will have to be hardcoded then python is probably better. (Plus, I just started teaching myself C++ and haven't had much time to spend on it, while I've been using python for over a year)


I mostly just mentioned python for things I thought no one else would really need to use. The alignment(/civ/leader/religion/civic) weighting was the main thing.

(I'm actually thinking that the way I was thinking of changing how units abandon might be better dealt with entirely though random events that have a 100% chance of happening when their python prereqs are met, so now new tags or functions are really needed.)


As for how.... Leader specific religious tech weightings could probably be based on the same <ReligionWeightModifiers> that affect how the AI views the percentage of its population to follow a religion, thus the likelihood the leader will convert. (Overall, I think most of these need to be increased.) It think it makes perfect sense for civs to prioritize researching the techs that found the religions they would like to convert to, and to avoid those that found religion they hate. This wouldn't work as well in Unrestricted Leaders games (as it is actually a leader weight system , not civ specific), but in a normal game it could be pretty effective.

I'm not sure how to make sure a civ is weighted towards researching techs that allow UUs and UBs, but now that I think of it I believe I've heard that is already the case; thus, we may not actually have to do anything to make civs prioritize these, just to make them choose techs appropriate for their religion/alignment.


It may be appropriate to create tags new in CIV4TechInfos.xml (and maybe CIV4UnitInfos.xml and CIV4BuildingInfos.xml) that modify the tech's value based on alignment and religion (and possibly civics, although this probably isn't as important). You may need one tag per religion, since a tech may be important for more than one religion. Obviously civs would consider techs with a higher weighting towards their state religion more important, but if you wish you could also make leaders put greater value on techs based on the same <ReligionWeightModifiers> values. That could, for example, make the Svartalfar value the techs (and the prereqs to the techs) that allow Esus UUs before they manage to found the religion (or have it spread to them), so that they will be more effective once they convert. This would allow civs not only to prioritize the religion founding tech once they can research it, but also the techs that will help them reach the point.


One tag that determines how good or evil a tech is would probably suffice for the alignment weightings. The closer the leaders alignment to this value the more he/she/it would want the tech. I still think it should be set up so that good civs will avoid evil techs and vice versa. Obviously, most techs would have a neutral alignment weighting.

 

[xienwolf]

Well since alignment is a number now, and a fairly large one, you should be able to have it just add to the weighting factor to decide what tech to research, but you could possibly also grant certain technologies an Alignment Weight multiplier if they are especially flavorful for certain alignments (so Way of the Wicked would have a *(-5) Alignment Modifier, thus ensuring that someone heavily good will almost never research it, and someone very evil will be almost guaranteed once able). To weight a Neutral tech so that people heavily on either side would be less likely to research it you would need something like [ 1000 - 3*Abs|Alignment| ], that would be a bit tricky to work out nice and clean though I imagine...

For religion oriented Civs going after their religion... that one do be a bit more tricky Unless you write an entire section with formulas specific to each individual tech, then you just make an entry for each civ to get a bonus value to that tech. Could be a worthwhile thing to do for the SDK, but would need updated formulas any time that Techs, Religions or Civs get changed. So basically every patch

 

[Grey Fox]

I'm adding an alignment modifier when razing cities. Should it be a strict value (-5 atm). Or depend on the population count, or both? (i.e. X+Y*Pop)

EDIT:
How much should alignment be modified per population point rushed?

Should Conscription be considered evil? (Citizens do get angry at least)

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I'm thinking conscription shouldn't really effect alignment. Frankly, conscription fits Order civs better than the AV ones.


I'd probably just make pop rushing move you 1 or 2 towards evil for now, since the civic that allows it already moves you 16 towards evil (or will when you fix the typo) and you would typically kill about 6 pop each time you rush anyway. We'll see about adjusting it after we've played with it for a while.


For razing, I'm thinking it may be best to use a formula based on the one used to determine changes to the AC; it might be better not to even bother changing alignment when razing, but to just incorporate each leader's contribution to the AC as part of their alignment. (It might be appropriate for pop rushing to effect the AC, in which case you wouldnlt need to deal with that separately either)


Spells like Feast and Consume Soul need to effect your alignment even more than pop rushing does. I think that drown should move you towards evil too. (In my modmod, drowns are not buildable and do not upgrade to anything; any living, non-immortal melee unit (I may also allow recon and archer units) can be drowned, and the unit created will have its base strength adjusted accordingly. Stygain Guards will start with Water Walking but are limited to the coasts.)

It may be appropriate for your alignment to move towards evil for every Demon or undead unit you build or summon. Some other Heroes (Rosier, Hemah, Mary Morbus, Gibbon, Abashi, Losha, Baron von Halfmourn, ect) should probably make you more evil too, while others (Sphenor, Chalid, Valin Phanuel,

 

[Grey Fox]

I'm thinking conscription shouldn't really effect alignment. Frankly, conscription fits Order civs better than the AV ones.

Yeah that was what I was thinking too. If anything it might move you towards neutral. But nah.

I'd probably just make pop rushing move you 1 or 2 towards evil for now, since the civic that allows it already moves you 16 towards evil (or will when you fix the typo) and you would typically kill about 6 pop each time you rush anyway. We'll see about adjusting it after we've played with it for a while.

Typically kill 6? I usually kill one, but we're not discussing playstyle here.
You mean 1 or 2 per population then?

For razing, I'm thinking it may be best to use a formula based on the one used to determine changes to the AC; it might be better not to even bother changing alignment when razing, but to just incorporate each leader's contribution to the AC as part of their alignment. (It might be appropriate for pop rushing to effect the AC, in which case you wouldnlt need to deal with that separately either)

You mean so that razing Veil actually move you towards good, etc?

Spells like Feast and Consume Soul need to effect your alignment even more than pop rushing does. I think that drown should move you towards evil too. (In my modmod, drowns are not buildable and do not upgrade to anything; any living, non-immortal melee unit (I may also allow recon and archer units) can be drowned, and the unit created will have its base strength adjusted accordingly. Stygain Guards will start with Water Walking but are limited to the coasts.)

Feast only eat 1 pop per cast right? So that is easily added in the iAlignmentModifier xml tag for spells. I'm unsure what Consume Soul does without checking, but maybe it will require python.

It may be appropriate for your alignment to move towards evil for every Demon or undead unit you build or summon. Some other Heroes (Rosier, Hemah, Mary Morbus, Gibbon, Abashi, Losha, Baron von Halfmourn, ect) should probably make you more evil too, while others (Sphenor, Chalid, Valin Phanuel,

This can be easily added through the iAlignmentModifier xml tag I've added in the next version on units.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I tend to mostly rush buildings that give extra food, health, or happiness. Typically I stick to gold rushing (I'm usually good), but in my last game I found that killing off 5-10 pop at a time for buildings that help your cities grow more quickly is very effective. It allows more rushing in the future, and actually makes your cities more productive in the mean time.


I guess. Well, from what I've heard razing cities tends to raise the AC anyway, the the decrease from it having AV in it tends to just make things break even (exception: razing the AV holy city). Assuming that is the case, then basing the alignment change on this makes sense. (Plus, Good here is Anti-Evil, right?)



Consume Soul is just like Feast, except that instead of giving you xp it makes the caster able to cast another spell that turn.


If I had known you had already added iAlignmentModifier tags in the CIV4SpellInfos.xml and CIV4UnitInfos.xml I probably wouldn't have mentioned it again. Is there also such a tag in CIV4BuildingInfos.xml? What about prequisite alignment ranges in all three files?

Perhaps you should have the changes in the next version posted in the changelog in the first post.





Oh, I have a non-mechanics-related suggestion; change the religion screen to show the religions in order from good good to evil (or evil to good if you prefer) instead of the apparently random order thay have now (FoL-Order-OO-RoK-AV-Empyrean-CoE). This is easy to do by changing the order in which they occur in C:\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Fall from Heaven 2 031\Assets\XML\Gameinfo\CIV4ReligionInfos.xml, but there is one problem: I think that some of the icons are handled in the SDK, so unless you change this too they will display incorrectly (Order will have a leaf icon, RoK an octopus, etc)

You may also want to reconsider how each religion changes your alignment first. While your current system seems more symmetrical (Empyrean should definitely be more good that RoK, and the Empyrean-Esus rivalry mirrors the Order-AV rivalry), the Octopus Overlords seems more evil than the Council of Esus to me.



Is this modmod going to stay modular? It seems like it is getting to the point where it would make more sense for it not to be. Besides, if you turn off modular loading the different DLL already changes the main game significantly; everyone is always neutral.

 

[Grey Fox]

Should losing a building/unit which gave you an alignment change, reverse that change?

 

[Grey Fox]

If I had known you had already added iAlignmentModifier tags in the CIV4SpellInfos.xml and CIV4UnitInfos.xml I probably wouldn't have mentioned it again. Is there also such a tag in CIV4BuildingInfos.xml? What about prequisite alignment ranges in all three files?

I've added iAlignmentModifier in CIV4UnitInfos.xml, CIV4PromotionInfos.xml, CIV4SpellInfos.xml, CIV4BuildingInfos.xml, CIV4ProjectInfo.xml, and CIV4TechInfos.xml

and iPrereqBroadAlignment in in CIV4UnitInfos.xml, CIV4PromotionInfos.xml, CIV4SpellInfos.xml, CIV4BuildingInfos.xml, and CIV4ProjectInfo.xml

Perhaps you should have the changes in the next version posted in the changelog in the first post.

I'll do that, but then again, I might release a version later tonight.

Oh, I have a non-mechanics-related suggestion; change the religion screen to show the religions in order from good good to evil (or evil to good if you prefer) instead of the apparently random order thay have now (FoL-Order-OO-RoK-AV-Empyrean-CoE). This is easy to do by changing the order in which they occur in C:\Program Files\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Mods\Fall from Heaven 2 031\Assets\XML\Gameinfo\CIV4ReligionInfos.xml, but there is one problem: I think that some of the icons are handled in the SDK, so unless you change this too they will display incorrectly (Order will have a leaf icon, RoK an octopus, etc)

I'll look into it.

You may also want to reconsider how each religion changes your alignment first. While your current system seems more symmetrical (Empyrean should definitely be more good that RoK, and the Empyrean-Esus rivalry mirrors the Order-AV rivalry), the Octopus Overlords seems more evil than the Council of Esus to me.

My theory was that OO was RoK's counterpart, Esus/Empyrean and Veil/Order. But I can see why Esus would be less evil.

Is this modmod going to stay modular? It seems like it is getting to the point where it would make more sense for it not to be. Besides, if you turn off modular loading the different DLL already changes the main game significantly; everyone is always neutral.

Yeah, I think it's pointless for it to be modular. I started making it modular cause I didn't want to copy the main folder (was low on disc space).

 

[marioflag]

If the alignment numbers are added or subtracted, I would personally see greater alignment numbers modifiers for civics, they are too small to be meaningful.
I would also further increase the negative modifier toward adopting AV so that some good civs won't become neutral adopting AV.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Looks Awesome.

Feel free to take your time though, since I'll probably want to play a game right after it comes out and I should be studying for a test tomorrow. I should probably be working on the group project I'm behind on instead of playing anyways, but I suspect I'll have to play a quick game to test the changes anyway once it is out. (If it comes out tonight I may not have anything ready for when our group meets tomorrow evening.)



Not exactly relevant to the main point of the mod, but could you add a religionPrereq tag to CIV4PromotionInfos.xml while you are at it? There is already a <StateReligionPrereq> tag, but several promotions I have planned for my modmod should really depend on the religion of the individual unit instead of or in addition to the civ's state religion. Alternately, I could just go back to having religious promotions like in pre-BtS FfH, but I've yet to find the code which randomly assigns a religion to units based on the religions present in the city that built it.

Edit: Also, I think I agree with Marioflag that some modifiers should probably be made larger. I'm thinking that Overcouncil, Undercouncil, and Sacrifice the Weak should have a bigger effect, but the others seems fine as they are. I also think that both Order and AV should have a larger effect on alignment.

 

[xienwolf]

Well, if the Civic modifier is added each turn for which you run the Civic that makes small numbers work fairly well. Then you can use a counter-alignment Civic briefly without affecting your overall score too heavily. Could be kinda cool.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Well, if the Civic modifier is added each turn for which you run the Civic that makes small numbers work fairly well. Then you can use a counter-alignment Civic briefly without affecting your overall score too heavily. Could be kinda cool.

If that is the case, the modifiers are likely too large. (Especially if the same is true for religions.)

 

[Grey Fox]

I don't think that 16 or 24 is small number, when a single alignment covers 341, 24 is a 7% alignment change.

And the ones that are at 4 are low cause they shouldn't change you much. (And if you changed 4 per turn that would quickly become a lot)

But the numbers aren't definite, as I've said, I am counting on you guys (the community, and the team (and Kael in particular) if they want to help) to help shape these numbers.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Have you tried PMing Kael about this yet? He back from Los Vegas now, you know.

 

[Grey Fox]

Should losing a building/unit which gave you an alignment change, reverse that change?

I repeat myself.

My first thought is that logically, if it was a bonus or penalty(like a building that adds food), or a state of being (religion, civic) it would be reversed. But creating this unit or building is an Act and shouldn't be reversed even if lost.

Have you tried PMing Kael about this yet? He back from Los Vegas now, you know.

I didn't want to be pushy

 

[xienwolf]

Yeah I would say we probably ought to lay off any PMs to Kael until he has had time to catch up on posts, and maybe till someone actually posts "Welcome Back, Kael!" It is nice to greet someone first

Besides, If I haven't just missed seeing it before, he updated his Avatar incorrectly, but meant to set it to have a 43 day countdown... (look at his profile).

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I think I agree. Alignment changes from the act of building buildings or training units should not be removed when they are destroyed, but religion/civic alignment changes shouldn't last after you switch religions/civic.


I'm not sure, but I think that the way Prophecy marks work is they increase the AC contribution of the player that builds the units, and then decrease the contribution of the player to destroy the unit an equal amount. I could be wrong about this, but it could be a good way for both AC effects and alignment modifiers to work. (So, building Mardero would make you more evil, and defeating an enemy Mardero would make you more Good. Not sure what it would do if you captured such a unit instead, probably leave the building civ like it was and apply both the positive and negative modifer to you, so the net effect would be none.)



So long as you're polite in your wording I think it is ok to be a little pushy. Of course, this doesn't mean you should PM him every 5 minutes until you get a response. (see, if you don't capitalize the p in it shows up as an animated smilie)


Edit:

Besides, If I haven't just missed seeing it before, he updated his Avatar incorrectly, but meant to set it to have a 43 day countdown... (look at his profile).

That has been there for a while. I think it has been like that ever since he removed went back to his normal avatar after the countdown to the release of Shadow ran out.

 

[xienwolf]

Well the question which would arise from the buildings having alignment modifiers is what happens when you capture a city with such buildings in it? Does it count like you just built them? If so that is bad (I think I recall this being the case with the AV Holy Shrine once, so every time that city changed hands the AC went up).

Also, any chance of changing your alignment opposite of the buildings in a city when you raze it? Not sure if that is a good idea though since you don't always check what buildings exist when attacking a city.