Suggestion re combat system

[TowerWizard]

Yes the contract worker could also solve the problem that the AI tends to pay 3500 gold for a buffalo worker while I have to pay 911 gold for Elephant Riding tech to them. (eternity speed that is). Disabling worker trade and enabling contract workers would really help balancing the system a lot.

EDIT: what about if the contract worker is, like a spy, unattackable by thiefs and bandits etc?

EDIT2: ah you included that already by "cannot attack or defend" I think...

Glad you liked the idea. The "cannot attack or defend" line is there to make them into civilians: they cannot kill other units, and are killed automatically if they are attacked. It would be nice if the enemy could not kill them with thieves and such, though, since then they can kill them without declaring war, and that is not what I had in mind. If this is a possible mechanic, then yes, make them unattackable by invisible units. They can still be killed by Mercenary type units, since they have Hidden Identity, but that is ok in my book.

 

[Koshling]

Glad you liked the idea. The "cannot attack or defend" line is there to make them into civilians: they cannot kill other units, and are killed automatically if they are attacked. It would be nice if the enemy could not kill them with thieves and such, though, since then they can kill them without declaring war, and that is not what I had in mind. If this is a possible mechanic, then yes, make them unattackable by invisible units. They can still be killed by Mercenary type units, since they have Hidden Identity, but that is ok in my book.

No specific opinion on the contract worker idea (it's interesting though), but I just wanted to say that disabling worker trade i not (part of) the answer. Fixing the way workers are valued is a better approach. This is already somewhat different between current SVN and release v21, but if you se obviouly bad pricing in the current SVN version please post a save game with your observations.

 

[DRJ]

No specific opinion on the contract worker idea (it's interesting though), but I just wanted to say that disabling worker trade i not (part of) the answer. Fixing the way workers are valued is a better approach. This is already somewhat different between current SVN and release v21, but if you se obviouly bad pricing in the current SVN version please post a save game with your observations.

Ok I have experimented a bit with trying to buy/sell workers...turns out the egyptians want to buy a normal worker for ~350, a buffalo worker for ~700
while another AI wants ~1300 gold from me if I want to buy a buffalo workers of theirs

So far so good, only that sometimes the AI really bets thousands of gold to get one of your buffalo workers. I had this a few times in this game, I don't know what triggers it.

My last autosave is from 340 AD and it happened now in 349 AD (see screenie). I don't know if it's reproducable but I will post the last autosave and the save of the turn it happens (I will neglect the request now), hope it helps.
Current version SVN from yesterday (1965 I guess).

EDIT: I neglected the request in screenie and when it was my turn I asked AI Mansa to buy a buffalo worker from me he wanted to give me only 603.
What possibly could have triggered him to value that buffalo so much higher during his turn??

Btw. any idea how to get more space for attachments here? Had only space for the screenie... Or how to find earlier attachments easily so I can delete precious civfanatics history for new stuff?

 

[Koshling]

Ok I have experimented a bit with trying to buy/sell workers...turns out the egyptians want to buy a normal worker for ~350, a buffalo worker for ~700
while another AI wants ~1300 gold from me if I want to buy a buffalo workers of theirs

So far so good, only that sometimes the AI really bets thousands of gold to get one of your buffalo workers. I had this a few times in this game, I don't know what triggers it.

My last autosave is from 340 AD and it happened now in 349 AD (see screenie). I don't know if it's reproducable but I will post the last autosave and the save of the turn it happens (I will neglect the request now), hope it helps.
Current version SVN from yesterday (1965 I guess).

EDIT: I neglected the request in screenie and when it was my turn I asked AI Mansa to buy a buffalo worker from me he wanted to give me only 603.
What possibly could have triggered him to value that buffalo so much higher during his turn??

Btw. any idea how to get more space for attachments here? Had only space for the screenie... Or how to find earlier attachments easily so I can delete precious civfanatics history for new stuff?

I can't answer that without a save game so I can reproduce it I'm afraid. I would hazard a guess that the trade value in some cases it uses is based on its evaluation of how YOU should value it, and in other cases on how IT values it, but I'm not certain.

 

[DRJ]

ok I have deleted some older save games I posted... here my last autosave before the bug and the save from the turn after I neglected the request of Mansa. Hope it helps. Hopefully you can reproduce it it by just pressing end turn end turn from autosave... If not, it has either to be something I triggered as player (which is unlikely, since I didn't have interaction in his land or traded since some turns or something between Mansa and other AI.
Another suggestion is that with recalculation of assets some calculations where multiplied like they had been with power or GP rate etc as you stated?

 

[BlueTemplar]

The idea is: make all battles at fx 90%+ an automatic win and conversely for under 10% automatic loss.

I'm sorry but that's an awful idea. Why would you want to stack the odds even more against the losing side?
If you want 0% chances of losing, get a great commander with some Tactics promotions. It's quite easy to get 100% withdrawal chances that way...

 

[Sgtslick]

there is a BUG option- force original odds i think.