0.9.4 released

[Xyth]

Here's my thoughts on what to work on for 0.9.5:

Priority
• review Siege Units
• further balancing of health and happiness

Probably
• improve select areas of the tech tree
• review/add new buildings (gaps in the tech tree)
• review Archery/Skirmisher units
• review and add new Wonders
• review UBs and UWs
•look into the possibility of adding a third ocean type

Possibly
• add a 50th civilization
•add a couple of new leaders to existing civilizations
• tidy up GP tech preferences (will depend how techtree changes go)
• review UUs (will depend on how Siege/Archery changes go)
• improve how Inquisitions are implemented

Procrastinate (i.e, leave for a later version)
•add further new Civilizations
• corporation changes
• espionage changes

Please let me know if you can think of anything else that you'd like to see in any of these categories.

 

[civ_king]

For Inquisitions do you want them based off European Inquisitions or include brutal repressive theocracies that make the inquisitors look like pansies like in Tibet? If you are doing it off the former I can help since I have access to a wide variety of books on it, but not so much on the latter

 

[Howard Mahler]

I had hoped you would work on getting seas in addition to oceans.

So far health and happiness seems to be not terrible in 9.0.4, but a careful review should be the top priority in my opinion. (I am only in 1420 AD of my first game.)

Reviewing all of the new buildings that have already been added compared to BTS would also be a good idea.

Here's my thoughts on what to work on for 0.9.5:

Priority
• review Siege Units
• further balancing of health and happiness

Probably
•improve select areas of the tech tree
• review Archery/Skirmisher units
• review and add new Wonders
•review UBs and UWs

Possibly
• add a 50th civilization
•add a couple of new leaders to existing civilizations
• tidy up GP tech preferences (will depend how techtree changes go)
• review UUs (will depend on how Siege/Archery changes go)
• improve how Inquisitions are implemented

Procrastinate (i.e, leave for a later version)
•add further new Civilizations
• corporation changes
• espionage changes

Please let me know if you can think of anything else that you'd like to see in any of these categories.

 

[civ_king]

Xyth, in the future could you compress the mod with 7zip (free, the OS X software is Keka), on maximum I managed to compress it to 237MB which is 56% of the zip file

 

[civ_king]

Here's the proper fix (oops) for those errors. Once unzipped it goes it in /History Rewritten/Assets/XML/GameInfo/ replacing the file of the same name.

Aotearoa we've got a problem see attached screen shots (in the sequence they appeared)

 

[Xyth]

I had hoped you would work on getting seas in addition to oceans.

Oh, yes, that should definitely be on the list. Added.

So far health and happiness seems to be not terrible in 9.0.4, but a careful review should be the top priority in my opinion. (I am only in 1420 AD of my first game.)

Yeah, it will take several games on different maps/difficulties/etc to get a good feel for what still needs to be done.

Reviewing all of the new buildings that have already been added compared to BTS would also be a good idea.

Added.

Xyth, in the future could you compress the mod with 7zip (free, the OS X software is Keka), on maximum I managed to compress it to 237MB which is 56% of the zip file

I'll look into it.

 

[Xyth]

For Inquisitions do you want them based off European Inquisitions or include brutal repressive theocracies that make the inquisitors look like pansies like in Tibet? If you are doing it off the former I can help since I have access to a wide variety of books on it, but not so much on the latter

I'm not sure yet but most probably something fairly diverse in scope. The European inquisitions would no doubt be a huge influence though.

Aotearoa we've got a problem see attached screen shots (in the sequence they appeared)

The fix for that one is in post #13 of this thread. Once we've got them all I'll bundle all the fixes together.

 

[civ_king]

I'm not sure yet but most probably something fairly diverse in scope. The European inquisitions would no doubt be a huge influence though.



The fix for that one is in post #13 of this thread. Once we've got them all I'll bundle all the fixes together.

On review Tibetan theocracy a) I want to pour caustic soda on my eyes and b) I'm not sure how to model a society in which the serfs were treated worse than slaves (yeah...), extreme sectarian strife (think of the worse things you've heard of inquisitions and cube it), boys stolen from families to be trained as monks (with yummy molestation goodness), taxed for almost every imaginable thing, being forced by theocracy to endure being screwed over (if you didn't there were plenty of sadistic weapons used to inflict unimaginable pain like gouging eyes out, removing tongues, hamstringing, cutting off noses/ears, breaking hands, branding, whipping, disemboweling and amputation ways to deal with it) and of course hording knowledge preventing society from advancing.

cool, it works

 

[Howard Mahler]

One more possible thing for the to do list,
find more things for workers to do in the later game.

 

[Simon_Jester]

So, in addition to the initial 9.4 download, do we have one patch to load or two now?

 

[Xyth]

So, in addition to the initial 9.4 download, do we have one patch to load or two now?

Just one.

 

[Simon_Jester]

One more possible thing for the to do list,
find more things for workers to do in the later game.

Hmm. That could be rather difficult. Having more than one of each basic improvement 'type' (irrigation, mines, and roads being the main ones) would greatly increase the complexity of the terrain bonus and gameplay balance in the late game. And what else could we do, really...

 

[Xyth]

One more possible thing for the to do list,
find more things for workers to do in the later game.

Hmm. That could be rather difficult. Having more than one of each basic improvement 'type' (irrigation, mines, and roads being the main ones) would greatly increase the complexity of the terrain bonus and gameplay balance in the late game. And what else could we do, really...

I could always bring back pollution cleanup duty from Civ3! (kidding)

Realistically though, I'm not sure what we can do here. We don't want yields to get too much bigger or late game balance gets out of control. Trying to code Workers to have other effects is almost impossible due to the AI being unable to cope with it. It might be possible to introduce more route types, but I'm not sure what would make sense, nor what graphics are available. Are building 'high-speed trains' (or something) worth the effort and more importantly, would they cause unbalance?

 

[Azoth]

I could always bring back pollution cleanup duty from Civ3! (kidding)

Realistically though, I'm not sure what we can do here. We don't want yields to get too much bigger or late game balance gets out of control. Trying to code Workers to have other effects is almost impossible due to the AI being unable to cope with it. It might be possible to introduce more route types, but I'm not sure what would make sense, nor what graphics are available. Are building 'high-speed trains' (or something) worth the effort and more importantly, would they cause unbalance?

Yeah, I don't think adding new improvement types is the way to go.

Here's an idea:
How about you give Workers a miniature version of the Great Engineer's ability to rush production in cities? You could set the amount to half the production cost of Workers, adjusted for game speed: 30 hammers on Normal speed, for example. That way, once Workers have finished improving the countryside, they can return to the cities and contribute hammers towards a building or wonder. Later in the game, once you have a few production multipliers in place, it might even make sense to train Workers in your core cities, then send them to your most distant colonies to improve their infrastructure.

As always, the question is: will the AI be able to handle it?

 

[Highwayhoss]

Hey Xyth, just writing to let you know I have been playing your mod and have really enjoyed it so far.

Here's an idea:
How about you give Workers a miniature version of the Great Engineer's ability to rush production in cities? You could set the amount to half the production cost of Workers, adjusted for game speed: 30 hammers on Normal speed, for example. That way, once Workers have finished improving the countryside, they can return to the cities and contribute hammers towards a building or wonder. Later in the game, once you have a few production multipliers in place, it might even make sense to train Workers in your core cities, then send them to your most distant colonies to improve their infrastructure.

You know I was thinking of the same idea for a Civ4 modcomp; I fully support the idea. It would make it easier to develop cities with low hammer output, and enable core cities to assist newly founded cities in beefing up infrastructure. Also it would enable a player to dispose of excess workers in a productive manner.

As always, the question is: will the AI be able to handle it?

Just add the Great Engineer AI to the Worker see of that works.

Also I thought of the idea of having a modern worker (using the MW graphics) which both the worker and fast worker could upgrade to....it would work 2x as fast as the worker; question is which tech should be a prereq?

BTW some ideas for future updates:
1) More Air and sea units. See OrionVeteran's Navy Mod for ideas.
2) Maybe ranged combat for artillery? You can do it with XML only.

 

[Xyth]

Here's an idea:
How about you give Workers a miniature version of the Great Engineer's ability to rush production in cities? You could set the amount to half the production cost of Workers, adjusted for game speed: 30 hammers on Normal speed, for example. That way, once Workers have finished improving the countryside, they can return to the cities and contribute hammers towards a building or wonder. Later in the game, once you have a few production multipliers in place, it might even make sense to train Workers in your core cities, then send them to your most distant colonies to improve their infrastructure.

As always, the question is: will the AI be able to handle it?

You know I was thinking of the same idea for a Civ4 modcomp; I fully support the idea. It would make it easier to develop cities with low hammer output, and enable core cities to assist newly founded cities in beefing up infrastructure. Also it would enable a player to dispose of excess workers in a productive manner.

Just add the Great Engineer AI to the Worker see of that works.

I think that could work. 30 hammers on Normal would be 20 on Quick, 45 on Epic, 60 on Marathon (factors of 0.67, 1.5, 2, respectively). How does that sound?

Also I thought of the idea of having a modern worker (using the MW graphics) which both the worker and fast worker could upgrade to....it would work 2x as fast as the worker; question is which tech should be a prereq?

I think Civ2 had this, called Engineers if I remember correctly. It's represented in BTS by the worker boost at Steam Power. Question though: do we want this proposed new Worker ability to be available right from the start of the game? If we don't we could use a Worker upgrade mechanic to limit it to the later part of the game.

Hey Xyth, just writing to let you know I have been playing your mod and have really enjoyed it so far.

Glad to hear!

BTW some ideas for future updates:
1) More Air and sea units. See OrionVeteran's Navy Mod for ideas.

I've downloaded those and plan to have a look through them when it's time to work on the Modern tech tree. I wouldn't want to add anywhere near as many units his modcomps add but there's bound to be a few good additions in them.

2) Maybe ranged combat for artillery? You can do it with XML only.

This is already in HR but it's causing balance issues. Hoping to address this in 0.9.5, feedback most welcome.

 

[Highwayhoss]

I think that could work. 30 hammers on Normal would be 20 on Quick, 45 on Epic, 60 on Marathon (factors of 0.67, 1.5, 2, respectively). How does that sound?

Sounds good. You can adjust as needed.

I think Civ2 had this, called Engineers if I remember correctly. It's represented in BTS by the worker boost at Steam Power. Question though: do we want this proposed new Worker ability to be available right from the start of the game? If we don't we could use a Worker upgrade mechanic to limit it to the later part of the game.

I think it should be available from the start....easier to code IMHO. You could also have some later worker style units like an engineer with increased hurry capabilities.

I've downloaded those and plan to have a look through them when it's time to work on the Modern tech tree. I wouldn't want to add anywhere near as many units his modcomps add but there's bound to be a few good additions in them.

Yeah at least he has a logical progression in his naval units....worth looking at if nothing else.

This is already in HR but it's causing balance issues. Hoping to address this in 0.9.5, feedback most welcome.

OK I will let you know about any issues.

 

[Simon_Jester]

Ranged combat for artillery, real by-God artillery of the 20th century, might not be so bad. By that point you're already seeing other 'remote damage' capabilities arise, air combat being the obvious example.

It's in ancient times that it makes less sense, when the longest-ranged weapons in the world couldn't shoot farther than a determined man could run in a few minutes. Even Napoleonic cannon weren't all that long ranged, except for impractically heavy naval guns.

But for battleships and cruisers of the World War era, and land-based guns of the same period? The ability to pound on units a square away might not actually be that bad. The unbalancing effect is mostly in naval tactics, but it requires huge numerical superiority to use effectively.

I don't know though. I should defer in this to others, especially since I haven't really playtested the modern era properly yet.

 

[Highwayhoss]

Ranged combat for artillery, real by-God artillery of the 20th century, might not be so bad. By that point you're already seeing other 'remote damage' capabilities arise, air combat being the obvious example.

It's in ancient times that it makes less sense, when the longest-ranged weapons in the world couldn't shoot farther than a determined man could run in a few minutes. Even Napoleonic cannon weren't all that long ranged, except for impractically heavy naval guns.

But for battleships and cruisers of the World War era, and land-based guns of the same period? The ability to pound on units a square away might not actually be that bad. The unbalancing effect is mostly in naval tactics, but it requires huge numerical superiority to use effectively.

This I think would be the best approach for ranged combat: limit it to modern artillery and heavy naval units, starting with Age of Sail ships like frigates and SotL (the artillery in heavy naval units were much bigger and more numerous than in land based cannons).

 

[Azoth]

This I think would be the best approach for ranged combat: limit it to modern artillery and heavy naval units, starting with Age of Sail ships like frigates and SotL.

Limiting ranged combat to modern artillery and naval units solves the historical balance issues; but it does nothing to address the gameplay balance issues. Simply put, ranged combat allows one unit to damage another unit every turn without taking any damage in return. That is the definition of imbalanced gameplay. It was recognized as a serious problem in Civilization III: once players assembled a critical mass of Catapults, Cannon, or Artillery, they would be literally unstoppable, as an unlimited number of enemy units could be whittled away on approach. The same problem plagues HR. A stack of Catapults, properly defended, can march up to any city in the Ancient to Medieval Eras and bombard the garrison, leaving it open to capture. Restricting ranged combat to Artillery simply restricts the problem to the Industrial and Modern Eras.

You'll note that BtS studiously avoids the problems associated with ranged combat. Catapults can inflict "collateral damage" but they risk defeat in battle. Bombers can strike targets from afar but they can be resisted with Bunkers, damaged by half a dozen Anti-Air units, and shot down by Fighters. Suicide-Catapults are not ideal, which I why I suggest moving that ability to a new class of Skirmisher units. Still, the theory is sound: it is a design decision the developers got right. For this reason, I strongly suggest ranged combat abilities be limited to single-use Missiles.