3UC/4UC for VP: Project Coordination Thread

[pineappledan]

+2 science to all their Councils : as a consequence, a Iroquois player with Tradition policies can have Councils giving +5 science

I totally agree with @Hinin. I hadn’t considered the absurd tradition play that this building gives Iroquois, it makes it just as viable as progress, and I would consider Iroquois a flagship progress civ.

This also synergizes a bit too well with their obvious pantheon choice, which gives +1 science to herbalists

Science should be reduced to +1 to councils or changed to +1 culture. That reduced the number of flavours as well
GDPs should be reduced to +2 and the increased production on diplo unit’s should be reverted to the base amount on scrivener’s office. Agora is now focused on early tech diplo unit’s, it makes sense that sachems should be focused on GDiplomats

 

[Jarula]

Make it +2 culture... For tradition.

Nobody chooses tradition in games despite the fact most societies at that time were...

 

[adan_eslavo]

• Added promotion name changes into main post for all who are looking for changed names.
• now Philhellenism (Gain Production and Gold for every City-State Ally or Friend on Fight)
  • formula for yields (5 * EraScaler * (1 + AllCSFriendsAndAllies))
• now Sachem's Council (+1 to Councils; standard Diplomatic Unit Production; GDP from 3 to 2)

 

[Hinin]

I just did some tests with Rome :
- The ballista, thanks to its double movement (which, outside of rival territory, allows it to position itself well for every encounter) is a very strong asset to the Roman army and can effectively be used to replace archers/composite archers.
- The new legion is very fearsome, since it is now able of some very interesting tricks : in standard speed, with a GG nearby, it can build a Road in one turn and build a Fortress in three turns. One interesting thing you can do is, with three legions, to progress quickly through flat terrain while creating three tiles of roads per turn by advancing your units through the road so they can have enough MP to also build roads (insane logistical benefits during a protracted war).
- The Latifundia worked well for me. The only thing that bothers me is the picture/3d model of the UI (that's clearly not a Latifundia), but that's a detail for now.
- The combination of Legion and Ballista create an extremely adaptable army, capable of putting itself quickly in defensive formation, and then strike through the enemy (weakened thanks to "Pilum" and the Ballistas), or cruising through neutral terrain to attack at weak points. The use of ZOC is primordial to protect your Ballistas, and you most not feel overpowered, because being flanked can ruin your plan, but I like this combination of UM a lot. Thanks !

 

[pineappledan]

sounds like the GG boost for legionnaire needs to be toned down a bit? Enough that it takes 2 turns for a road and 4/5 turns on a Fort?

 

[ThirstQuencher]

sounds like the GG boost for legionnaire needs to be toned down a bit? Enough that it takes 2 turns for a road and 4/5 turns on a Fort?

2 turns for a road is a perfect medium, I don't agree with making forts harder to build since they aren't built all that much. So the AI seeing some flavor to build forts as Rome would give game a bit more of color

 

[pineappledan]

I’m not aware of a way to change road construction time without Fort construction time.

With the change to forts in VP (cannot be built outside your own territory), the offensive usefulness of that part of legion’s ability is much less important. I would set improvement speed as fast as possible within the limitation of 2 turns for roads. My guess is that would be about 60%

 

[Hinin]

Some more things to say (after some tests) :
- The science/faith yield from exploring ruins with a Holkan is far too little to be of interest (5 faith at standard speed is negligible) : I think the yield should be doubled, or even tripled, to prove useful.
- The promotion of the Atlatlist and the "+33 CS against wounded units" promotion of the Cossack are one and the same in terms of effects : I suggest replacing both by a new one (Maybe "Pursuit" ?).

For new modifications to promotions icons/names :
- Withdraw from melee attacks (maybe the turning arrow from the "flanking bonus" promotion ?)
- Great general I/II promotions (a yellow star ?)

On a sidenot, the "indirect fire" promotion from the Bowmen bothers me a bit : a "Cover I" promotion (against a diminution of 1 CP) would better representate the use of pavise by these archers, and would also make more sense (is it the use of Mathematics that allow Babylonian archers to shoot blindly, or is there another explanation ?). I know that, aside the "Sentry" promotion for the Ethiopian UM1, we don't want to modify UC1 too much, but I just wanted to say what I've been thinking about.

Have a good day !

 

[LukaSlovenia29]

I just wanted to say that you guys (and gals?) have been doing an amazing job with this mod! Once all civs are introduced, it will be almost like a mini-expansion to the Civ5 game, a tremendous effort and gift to the VP community! Thank you!

 

[IcyAngel]

I love how the Ballista makes a motor racing sound.

And the Latifundium makes for interesting choices versus Plantations - for example with the Incense, which gives +1 faith with a plantation (but 2 less gold and food). Was it intended for the Latifundium to take longer for workers than Plantations, btw? With no bonuses, on Epic the first is 14 turns and the second 8 turns.

edit: Oh the worker doesn't actually get the choice, it just shows as much on the preview tooltip. My bad!
edit2: But I assume it still does take longer than a plantation... intended? :3

 

[adan_eslavo]

@pineappledan:

• You were right. 60% is exactly what we need for Legion to reduce build time of road to 2 turns.
• Do you think we can substitute +1 move on Kibitum with something else equally worth?

@Hinin

• 5 yield on Goody Hut was just blind shot just to be. I will increase it a bit. Do we need Speed Scaling for it?
• I think we can leave naming for flavor. Maybe we can differentatiate those 2 promotions using different values? Or add something to atlatlist (f.e. 15% vs Wounded Units + ...).
• I rework promotions (almost) alphabetically using sql tags. But when the time come I will surely reconsider every suggestion for renaming. If you have one, please tell me. I can have stupid ideas for names sometimes. And if there some spelling error also remind me.
  
• I think we can modify UC1 if balance is our target. We did it for Atlatlist, Mehal Sefari, Mission, Conquistador or Carolean. Why not change something else?

@IcyAngel

• Ballista is now what we were avoiding - speed master. I added double move for every terrain and feature. Maybe restrict it a bit and give bonus for only 2 or 3 things?
• You are right, Rome cannot build plantations. They are totally substituted by Latifundium.
  
• We wanted to make build time of Latifundium and Figs generating the same. It somehow more powerful so 10 for normal sounded good. I can reduce it to 8 on standard speed and do the same for Figs.

 

[Hinin]

5 yield on Goody Hut was just blind shot just to be. I will increase it a bit. Do we need Speed Scaling for it?

I think it could be necessary : the number of ruins on a map doesn't change with the speed of the game, so leaving the impact a UM directly linked to the game speed (aside from the fact that a UM lasting longer is, of course, more impactful) isn't a good thing.
I would be for 10/15/22/25 science/faith for each ruin discovery, but it may be too much (once again, tests will have to be made).

I think we can leave naming for flavor. Maybe we can differentatiate those 2 promotions using different values? Or add something to atlatlist (f.e. 15% vs Wounded Units + ...).

I think +33 % CS against wounded units is good enough for both. Do you have an idea for a modification to "poisoned weapon" ?

I rework promotions (almost) alphabetically using sql tags. But when the time come I will surely reconsider every suggestion for renaming. If you have one, please tell me. I can have stupid ideas for names sometimes. And if there some spelling error also remind me.

I'll make a full check up of the promotions on civilopedia one day or another.

I think we can modify UC1 if balance is our target. We did it for Atlatlist, Mehal Sefari, Mission, Conquistador or Carolean. Why not change something else?

If you agree with the principe of changing some UC1, what do you think about the proposition I made ?

 

[pineappledan]

Do you think we can substitute +1 move on Kibitum with something else equally worth?

I think that the +1 move is at odds with the idea of them being "heavy" spearmen, so I'm in favor of dropping it. Quick study and legacy should actually be enough for the unit, don't you? adding any benefits which don't carry forward like those two are at odds with the whole idea behind the unit of being a highly prized "legacy" unit you try to keep around

5 yield on Goody Hut was just blind shot just to be. I will increase it a bit. Do we need Speed Scaling for it?

Speed scaling might be appropriate. I am not a fan of faith on the goody huts, I don't like the idea of Maya founding their pantheon on the back of ruins.
I think the ruins bonus should be restricted to science, since Maya have a terrific source of steady faith (Kuna) if they can just tech fast enough. Maya needs to clear the techs in ancient ASAP, and If the Holkan could be an interactive, but semi-consistent source for that then I think that is the kind of synergy we are aiming for.
Science ruins give 15 base science, +3 because of the 25% yields on scout. The consistent science would be set to 7, so it's an even 25 science on goody huts. Otherwise maybe 10 science, just for a nice round whole number

I think we can leave naming for flavor. Maybe we can differentiated those 2 promotions using different values? Or add something to atlatlist (f.e. 15% vs Wounded Units + ...).

I'm fine with the names being different even with the same bonus. The two units in question have very different eras, combat classes, and uses.

One thing that comes to mind, if you really did want an alternative proposal for poisoned weapon, is it could do +15% vs wounded and apply a debuff of -10% defense on the unit for 1 turn, stacking up to 3 times. You hit an enemy unit with atlatls first to so your other units do more damage in the same turn. It would be very similar to the Khopesh fatigue promotion, but half as strong, stackable, and only lasting 1 turn

I think we can modify UC1 if balance is our target. We did it for Atlatlist, Mehal Sefari, Mission, Conquistador or Carolean. Why not change something else?

The proposed bowman change would be a significant nerf to the unit. Cover is much less powerful than indirect fire. I think the significantly increased CS of the bowman is meant to reflect their use of defensive implements. If you were to add Cover I, I wouldn't remove the indirect fire, rather, I would remoe the +2 CS

Ballista is now what we were avoiding - speed master. I added double move for every terrain and feature. Maybe restrict it a bit and give bonus for only 2 or 3 things?

The unit should only be able to move and fire in open terrain, and these bonuses should only take effect in enemy terrain, correct? Giving double movement in open terrain (plains/floodplains/grassland/tundra) should do it I think. No bonus movement on features (hills/marshes/forests/jungle), and no bonus movement in hindering terrain (desert/snow)

We wanted to make build time of Latifundium and Figs generating the same. It somehow more powerful so 10 for normal sounded good. I can reduce it to 8 on standard speed and do the same for Figs.

Making it same as Plantation (7-8 turns), and then the fig being 8-10 means the latifundium is "done" in 16-18 turns. That feels like plenty to me.

I think we should reduce the CP on the Sofa to 1 less than base crossbowman. They will be high value targets since they buff the surrounding cavalry.

 

[Hinin]

I think that the +1 move is at odds with the idea of them being "heavy" spearmen, so I'm in favor of dropping it. Quick study and legacy should actually be enough for the unit, don't you? adding any benefits which don't carry forward like those two are at odds with the whole idea behind the unit of being a highly prized "legacy" unit you try to keep around

Ingame, the Kibitium isn't that well used by the IA : it doesn't understand the interest of keeping units alive when there is an interest in sacrificing them for killing enemies. As a consequence, I've never seen Babylonian units with that much of a bonus from "Legacy".
I think we should drop the +1 movement, but give the unit something else (the problem being that "Armor plating", the promotion which could have represented how the Kibitium was considered as "heavy infantry", is already used by the Immortal).

Speed scaling might be appropriate. I am not a fan of faith on the goody huts, I don't like the idea of Maya founding their pantheon on the back of ruins.
...
The consistent science would be set to 7, so it's an even 25 science on goody huts. Otherwise maybe 10 science, just for a nice round whole number

I'm also for that : the Mayas will already have large amounts of faith in the early game (when they have the technology), and obtaining Ancient techs quickly is key for the civilization. If the yield is only science, I would be okay seeing the amount dropped to 10.

I'm fine with the names being different even with the same bonus. The two units in question have very different eras, combat classes, and uses.
One thing that comes to mind, if you really did want an alternative proposal for poisoned weapon, is it could do +15% vs wounded and apply a debuff of -10% defense on the unit for 1 turn, stacking up to 3 times. You hit an enemy unit with atlatls first to so your other units do more damage in the same turn. It would be very similar to the Khopesh fatigue promotion, but half as strong, stackable, and only lasting 1 turn

Not a bad idea, but I think it is not a priority. I was just doing a renaming suggestion, not talking about a rework of the promotion.

The proposed bowman change would be a significant nerf to the unit. Cover is much less powerful than indirect fire. I think the significantly increased CS of the bowman is meant to reflect their use of defensive implements. If you were to add Cover I, I wouldn't remove the indirect fire, rather, I would remoe the +2 CS

I agree with you and would be okay with that idea.

The unit should only be able to move and fire in open terrain, and these bonuses should only take effect in enemy terrain, correct? Giving double movement in open terrain (plains/floodplains/grassland/tundra) should do it I think. No bonus movement on features (hills/marshes/forests/jungle), and no bonus movement in hindering terrain (desert/snow)

Maybe give the "Rough terrain penalty" to the unit ?

Making it same as Plantation (7-8 turns), and then the fig being 8-10 means the latifundium is "done" in 16-18 turns. That feels like plenty to me.

I'm okay with this duration too.

I think we should reduce the CP on the Sofa to 1 less than base crossbowman. They will be high value targets since they buff the surrounding cavalry.

The unit isn't ingame yet, so I can't have an opinion for such a small diminution of combat potential. Once I can test it, I'll talk about it extensively.

 

[CrazyG]

• You are right, Rome cannot build plantations. They are totally substituted by Latifundium.

• We wanted to make build time of Latifundium and Figs generating the same. It somehow more powerful so 10 for normal sounded good. I can reduce it to 8 on standard speed and do the same for Figs.

Should the Latifundium be benefited by the pantheon that boosts plantations?

 

[pineappledan]

Should the Latifundium be benefited by the pantheon that boosts plantations?

No.
The latifundium spawns figs which are automatically improved with a plantation. If latifundia could benefit from Goddess of Springtime, then Rome would get double yields from that pantheon.

There are rare cases where a latifundium can't spawn a fig resource (eg. a 1 tile island), but latifundia also improve wheat, so you're more likely to get more plantations than less with Rome.

Hypothetically, since Latifundia can be built on wheat, we could give Latifundia the 'God of the Sun' Pantheon bonus (bonus faith and food on wheat with a farm), but there's nothing in this mod that prevents Rome from building wheat farms, so there isn't any reason why they couldn't choose that over a latifundium.

The reason plantations were removed from the Roman workers was because it was messing with AI and automated workers if the improvement is built on a luxury. There doesn't seem to be a problem if it is built on a bonus resource though

 

[IcyAngel]

A small note: using Enginseer's Unique City-States, the city-state bonus granting +1 gold on every resource (luxury, strategy & bonus) does not apply to Figs, even though they would be considered a bonus resource. Perhaps it should stay that way to avoid excessive gold generation, perhaps not.

(Tell me if I should bring this up with Enginseer instead.)

 

[pineappledan]

huh... No I think that should be added for full mod compatibility. But I think that is something that we should worry about later.

Once we have a fully fledged mod up and running we can maybe think about making demands of other modders to accommodate what we have built.

The bigger issue is Enginseer's Events and decisions. We have a lot of conflicts with that, specifically with respect to unique units. There's also some of those events which implicitly or explicitly refer to new UCs in our mod (eg. a Maya event refers to the invention of the mesoamerican ballgame). It will be awkward if we don't deal with those

 

[pineappledan]

Holy hell guys. The latest patch from G is a huge shakeup. We have to go back and change a hell of a lot of stuff.

Increased maintenance costs for post-renaissance buildings

... ****

Bank - changed Caravansary/Mint bonus to local, increased to +3g (from 1)

Waag update

Dropped Modifiers on CSD Ideology NWs to 5% (were 15%), 10% for Prodction on Hall of Honor

Debuff to Sachem's Council?

Culture Modifier on Opera House now 5%

Maybe drop Sambadrome to 7%, and Kabuki to 10% now?

Reduced pop science growth on University (but not Seowon) to 25% (was 33%)

Madrasah update?

Reduced science per citizen on Public School (but not Skola) to 1 per 4 (was 1 per 2)

HUGE buff to Sweden there. Maybe keep Grande Ecole unchanged?

Heroic Epic - +1 Production per 5 citizens in city added.

Teutonic Order Buff. Maybe increase it to 1 per 4 on TO?

National Epic - added +15 culture when citizen is born in city.

Add to Etemenanki?

Grand Temple - removed Golden Age, but buffed Temple bonuses to +2 (Was +1)

Maybe make the temple buff change on Huey Teocalli, but keep the GA? It synergizes too well with the UW to give up. Or maybe since the GA trigger increases faith anyways, you don't touch anything? Let the temple buff be smaller in comparison, but you're getting that faith in the capital anyways.

Units purchased with gold now receive half of the potential XP from the city (so if a city has a barracks, you get 7xp, not 15xp)

I need help adding this onto the Tophet for the proposed changes to Tophet. The idea is to bypass this change and make Carthaginian purchased units come with full building XP.

Need to make a .lua code to get the XP of the unit and multiply it by 2

Naval Ranged units are now all a base 1 range

Ouch!

G also been dropping Great people like it's out of style, but the only one that affects our project is the dropped Civil Servant Slot on Scrivener's. I'd vote to keep the specialist slot on Iroquois, but further reduce the GDiplo points on building to the base +1. The Sachem's would be too underpowered without a good source for G diplomats

 

[Ziad]

One other thing. East India company now provides +1 TR, making it a "relative" nerf to Carthage's UB, which coupled with the massive nerfs to Progress, is pretty much a double nerf to Carthage. (As well as unit purchases as a whole as baseline).

I made a post about it in the patch thread, but in case of no change, how about buffing Great Cothon in some way? Someone mentioned TR scaling but it could just be +3 TR rather than +2.