1.22 development

[Xyth]

Trying 1.22 which i like so far and have another crash for you.

please find attached the crash report and the saved game.

Thanks. Found the problem: Barbarians aren't able to build/possess certain units (e.g. Settlers) and this wasn't being checked before the units in a rebel city are converted. Single file fix attached. It will also prevent the rebel civ from receiving any of the old civ's unique units.

 

[tchristensen]

Have you thought of adding grasslands as legal ground to build pastures? Logically and strategically makes sense.

I am having a hard time with cities in wide open flat ground making any appreciable hammers. If you add grasslands as a viable plot for a pastures, it increases the ability of such cities to make a marginal amount of hammers.

 

[Nightstar]

I am having a hard time with cities in wide open flat ground making any appreciable hammers. If you add grasslands as a viable plot for a pastures, it increases the ability of such cities to make a marginal amount of hammers.

This is what Workshops are for.

Edit: Or, alternatively, switch to the Slavery civic and convert excess food into production via whipping.

 

[tchristensen]

This is what Workshops are for.

Edit: Or, alternatively, switch to the Slavery civic and convert excess food into production via whipping.

Doesn't really make sense that grasslands cannot be made into pastures, right? Non-irrigated grasslands are best utilized by building pastures not for building workshops -- that makes no sense.

As for Slavery, I think it could easily use a +1 hammer to plantations and quarry. Not a bad extra bonus for the high dissension that it adds.

 

[The_Athenian]

I think tchristensen makes a solid logical case. I am not sure if it would impact game balance.

He is right, pastures have been built on grasslands for millennia. They certainly shouldn't generate large amounts of production, but just something to help you get started, until your civ develops workshops.

 

[The_Athenian]

Late Era Expansion

All versions, all games of Civilization suffer from one large flaw, where a civilization reaches "terminal velocity". We all know that point where your civ is just taking off, and there is no stopping it.

The Civil War system has been an absolutely brilliant remedy for this problem, and I love it! But still, with a civ that has 20+ cities, powerful production, strong culture, revenue rolling in, even civil wars phiz out pretty quickly. The city realizes the error of it's ways and begs to return to the mother country. I think the penalty for additional cities as your empire grows should be much greater (but I only play on huge earth, so I don't know if that would make it harder for players using larger maps or less than 18 civs)

Also, can we have a technology that allows for the creation of Agri-buisness, or the commercialization of the food supply?

As a nation grows there are many mouths to feed, however more land is developed for non agricultural use. This means a fairly small sector of society is responsible for supplying most of the food.

We see that today in our meat and agricultural industry. Animals packed into small spaces, and chemical fertilizers & pesticides being used to bring in greater harvests. The consequence is pollution. So could there be a future tech that allows a single farm square, or pasture to generate much much more food, allowing more land to be used for housing and production; however at the cost of massive increase in pollution/un-health? (To the point where a player must destroy most of the farms within a cities limits, or face disgusting levels of pollution)

Another suggestion, while we are talking about it; is would it be possible to build fish farms in late eras in resourceless ocean squares? Or Fish Farms as a building you can build in a city. It would be a building with high pollution, but would allow you to generate extra food and revenue from ocean squares, but with a very very high pollution penalty. (Concentrated fish populations generate large amounts of waste, also the antibiotics needed to keep down disease gets in to your populations food supply and decreases the effectiveness of antibiotics)

I think those changes could mean that once your civ hits a large size it can become incredibly productive but pollution could lead to massive unhappiness and unrest, which I think in the 21st century we will see as a greater enemy to nations than any competing power.

 

[Xyth]

Have you thought of adding grasslands as legal ground to build pastures? Logically and strategically makes sense.

I am having a hard time with cities in wide open flat ground making any appreciable hammers. If you add grasslands as a viable plot for a pastures, it increases the ability of such cities to make a marginal amount of hammers.

This is what Workshops are for.

Doesn't really make sense that grasslands cannot be made into pastures, right? Non-irrigated grasslands are best utilized by building pastures not for building workshops -- that makes no sense.

I think tchristensen makes a solid logical case. I am not sure if it would impact game balance.

He is right, pastures have been built on grasslands for millennia. They certainly shouldn't generate large amounts of production, but just something to help you get started, until your civ develops workshops.

Pastures on Grasslands makes logical and historical sense, but doesn't make for balanced gameplay. Grassland cities are very powerful once developed due to the abundance of food. This needs to be mitigated a bit by lower production while developing. Workshops provide production, but at a price (unhealthiness and dissent, respectively). Allowing Pastures provides production with no trade-off. And, as mentioned, Slavery is available.

Edit: Or, alternatively, switch to the Slavery civic and convert excess food into production via whipping.

As for Slavery, I think it could easily use a +1 hammer to plantations and quarry. Not a bad extra bonus for the high dissension that it adds.

That would be quite overpowered. A lot of effort and iteration has gone into balancing improvement yields.

All versions, all games of Civilization suffer from one large flaw, where a civilization reaches "terminal velocity". We all know that point where your civ is just taking off, and there is no stopping it.

The Civil War system has been an absolutely brilliant remedy for this problem, and I love it! But still, with a civ that has 20+ cities, powerful production, strong culture, revenue rolling in, even civil wars phiz out pretty quickly. The city realizes the error of it's ways and begs to return to the mother country. I think the penalty for additional cities as your empire grows should be much greater (but I only play on huge earth, so I don't know if that would make it harder for players using larger maps or less than 18 civs)

Cities that rebel and become barbarians are meant to be suppressed relatively easily. The cost is in lost output while reabsorbing the city, and the risk of a neighbouring civ acquiring the city instead. Multiple city rebellions (ones that form a new civilization if a slot is available) could do with being a bit more resilient though. I have a few ideas how to do this (higher native culture, defenders scaling with population, more diplomatic effects).

The dissent penalty for over expanding could be a bit higher too (or the culture offset lower). In the late game at least. I was deliberately cautious with these values for this initial release

Also, can we have a technology that allows for the creation of Agri-buisness, or the commercialization of the food supply?

As a nation grows there are many mouths to feed, however more land is developed for non agricultural use. This means a fairly small sector of society is responsible for supplying most of the food.

We see that today in our meat and agricultural industry. Animals packed into small spaces, and chemical fertilizers & pesticides being used to bring in greater harvests. The consequence is pollution. So could there be a future tech that allows a single farm square, or pasture to generate much much more food, allowing more land to be used for housing and production; however at the cost of massive increase in pollution/un-health? (To the point where a player must destroy most of the farms within a cities limits, or face disgusting levels of pollution)

At the moment unhealthiness is almost exclusively a result of production/industrialization. I agree that pollution from agriculture should also be a factor. Will have a think about it.

Another suggestion, while we are talking about it; is would it be possible to build fish farms in late eras in resourceless ocean squares? Or Fish Farms as a building you can build in a city. It would be a building with high pollution, but would allow you to generate extra food and revenue from ocean squares, but with a very very high pollution penalty. (Concentrated fish populations generate large amounts of waste, also the antibiotics needed to keep down disease gets in to your populations food supply and decreases the effectiveness of antibiotics)

Water improvements have had little rebalancing/redesigning compared to land improvements so far. The introduction of Islands opens up further possibilities here. On my todo list.

I think those changes could mean that once your civ hits a large size it can become incredibly productive but pollution could lead to massive unhappiness and unrest, which I think in the 21st century we will see as a greater enemy to nations than any competing power.

I need to get the new Climate Change mechanic tweaked and developed to my satisfaction before I get too involved in such changes.

 

[The_Athenian]

Xyth,

Thank you for your responses to all our inquiries and suggestions. Your work to develop this mod has been outstanding!

I am in the middle of an Odyssey game on the huge earth map. So far history has been unfolding at a perfect pace, the renaissance arrived right on time, and colonial development began in the 15th century. The addition of dissent and Civil wars has added much more depth to the game.

XYTH Cities that rebel and become barbarians are meant to be suppressed relatively easily. The cost is in lost output while reabsorbing the city, and the risk of a neighbouring civ acquiring the city instead. Multiple city rebellions (ones that form a new civilization if a slot is available) could do with being a bit more resilient though. I have a few ideas how to do this (higher native culture, defenders scaling with population, more diplomatic effects).

The dissent penalty for over expanding could be a bit higher too (or the culture offset lower). In the late game at least. I was deliberately cautious with these values for this initial release

I see what you are talking about, I had a city (Istanbul) which rebelled, and suddenly I had French, Assyrian, and Arab troops marching through my lands…perhaps claiming to be peacekeepers like the Russians in Crimea… I had to order the French out of my lands (which lead issues with naval passage through Gibraltar)... and rushed troops to the city before the Assyrian-Arab armies arrived. It was quite tense, and incredibly enjoyable. Thank you!

 

[Horatius]

I noticed that you based your inquisition code on platy's. It may or not be useful to HR, depending on your ideas, to add a check to prevent the AI from purging foreign religions if the respective shrine or holy city is owned.

 

[Xyth]

Time for an update on what I've been working on, and to announce what I've decided will be the next major feature of HR. First up, an all new Civics Screen:



You'll notice that the Religion category is gone. The reason for this will become apparent shortly. I'd like to replace it with a new civic category but I haven't yet decided what this will be, nor when I will implement it. Suggestions welcome.

On to the main attraction - Religious Tenets:



Should be obvious from this screenshot that this is very much a work in progress, nothing finalized yet and a lot of design and implementation yet to do. Should give a taste of what I'm trying to achieve though. Although Tenets use the Civic UI and mechanics, there's some crucial differences. A very rough synopsis:

• When a player founds a religion they choose which tenets it begins with. The Divinity tenet is predetermined by the chosen religion (e.g. Christianity = Monotheism), but all others categories are selectable.
• I haven't yet decided how individual tenets will be unlocked, or even if they need to be unlocked at all.
• When another player adopts a state religion, they inherit the tenets chosen by the founder of that religion.
• Tenets cannot be changed freely like civics can. Great Prophets have a new ability called 'Reformation' - using this allows you to change one tenet per Great Prophet expended.
• Depending on relative levels of faith, reformations can also change the tenets of other civilizations.
• With this system I can control when and how the AI changes tenets. This means I can be much more creative with effects compared to civics.
• Players with the same tenet earn an attitude bonus. Players with different tenets have an attitude penalty. This will replace the current system of religious diplomacy.
• Dissent from religion will be derived in a similar fashion.
• The Divinity category will probably only be changeable by switching state religion. It's effects are focused on generating faith and the more unique bonuses.
• The Worship category is a unique one - all options will be penalties. The benefits of religion come at a cost.
• The Aspiration category will mostly be about customising the effects of Temples.
• The Morality category will mostly be about customising the effects of Great Temples.
• The Revelation category will mostly be about customising the effects of Monasteries.
• The Tolerance category is all about interactions with other religions, religious spread, and such things.
• I'm still figuring out how faith will work exactly, more on this another time.

I'll stress again that nothing here is remotely finalized, there has already been several fundamental changes and there are bound to be more to come. Especially once everyone starts sharing their ideas and feedback - let me know what you think

 

[The_Athenian]

This is the greatest thing ever. Awesome.

 

[Nightstar]

Very impressive. Looks quite ambitious, and I like what I see so far.

Can't give any more feedback than that until you present us with more details, though.

 

[BBQ man]

Remarkable. Is part of the intention to make religion more desirable to those of us who simply dispense with it? Animosity costs of state religion still seem to outweigh its benefits, even with the new dissension mechanic, which does make a unified religion highly desirable.

 

[BBQ man]

Unsure about raising the National Wonder limit, I think I prefer having them spread around more cities."


I think there should be room for a third national wonder-- possibly even a fourth-- scaling with population. Cities that get two very early, then grow to large size in later eras, should logically be able to absorb a third at some threshold-- say pop 15? And a fourth at pop 20?

 

[cpease61]

Hello again,

I seem to have run into some kind of loop or other block that does not result in a crash, its just sits there saying "waiting on other civilizations…" and not advance. I am including a saved game which is at the point this is happening.

yours

 

[EmmyD8]

I'm curious, will there be way a way for players to disband their free specialists or halt GP production? I usually play on Normal length games and I'm having trouble making it so my first and second Great People aren't Prophets even if I try, and with the Philosophical trait, this becomes a cycle of creating less optimal GP with the new system.

 

[Xyth]

Remarkable. Is part of the intention to make religion more desirable to those of us who simply dispense with it? Animosity costs of state religion still seem to outweigh its benefits, even with the new dissension mechanic, which does make a unified religion highly desirable.

Yes. There'll be greater benefits from developing a state religion, you'll definitely want one. Having no state religion won't become an optimal choice till the late game. I'm also hoping to rework religious diplomacy; my goal is to make religious faction-forming a lot more fluid over the course of a game. Subject to technical limitations of course.

I think there should be room for a third national wonder-- possibly even a fourth-- scaling with population. Cities that get two very early, then grow to large size in later eras, should logically be able to absorb a third at some threshold-- say pop 15? And a fourth at pop 20?

It's logical, I'm just not sure it's ideal for balance. Population threshold is a good idea though. Maybe.

Hello again,

I seem to have run into some kind of loop or other block that does not result in a crash, its just sits there saying "waiting on other civilizations…" and not advance. I am including a saved game which is at the point this is happening.

I've just added an entry in the Troubleshooting thread about this issue. No easy solution yet I'm afraid.

I'm curious, will there be way a way for players to disband their free specialists or halt GP production? I usually play on Normal length games and I'm having trouble making it so my first and second Great People aren't Prophets even if I try, and with the Philosophical trait, this becomes a cycle of creating less optimal GP with the new system.

With this new system I'm actually considering decoupling Great Prophets from GPP altogether. They'd be generated by Faith instead, like in Civ5. Still thinking through the technical challenges of this. Biggest hurdle is retaining Priest specialists.

 

[Nightstar]

With this new system I'm actually considering decoupling Great Prophets from GPP altogether. They'd be generated by Faith instead, like in Civ5. Still thinking through the technical challenges of this. Biggest hurdle is retaining Priest specialists.

Have the Priests generate Faith instead of ?

 

[Xyth]

Have the Priests generate Faith instead of ?

Getting the AI to understand this is the issue. I need take a look through the DLL source code to find out how the AI evaluates on specialists.

 

[cpease61]

I should note that i play at a rather low difficulty Warlord.

Ok here is how it works, and so far i have had two games (both Greek Civ) with no civil wars.

Once i have picked Slavery, i check the dissent page, if a city is working towards less then loyal i use Slavery to hurry production. Sometimes what ever is next in the que, sometimes i pick something that increases healthiness or happiness.

This often results in return to loyalty or at least increases the number of turns that it takes to reach stable.

I'm not sure if this is how its supposed to work, but that is the effect.

Also i noticed that when i have a Vassal and they have a CW that creates a new Civ that new Civ declares war on me and then is also at war with my other Vassals if any.

Seems to make for some very short lifespans for these 'rebel' civs.

Yours