A Modder's Guide to the Advanced Disease Structure of the Combat Mod

[Pepo]

I honestly think that the intelligent design theory even fall short on theological/philosophical grounds. What we consider "intelligent" or "complex" are just human concept that should not be aply to nature as they will become meaningless. Wouldn't be more intelligent to create a system with a set of initial commands and let it evolve (evolutionary systems are one of the most interesting mathematical models out there)? With enough time and energy, is life inevitable? If we were created by alien life( not very probable due to the age of the universe), from where did that life emerge?

Also the notion of evolution being intelligent doesn't make much sense unless we are creationist or lamarkians. Life doesn't need a guiding hand nor impulses to evolve: rather time and a change in circumstances. Our eyes for example comes from the primordial fish and they haven't fully adapted to surface life since then , they suffer problems that under an intelligent creator we wouldn't suffer.

Regardless I think we may have derail the topic too much, but I just find the reactionary (against Darwinism) intelligent designer theory so baseless that I needed to speak my opinion

 

[Toffer90]

I agree with Pepo on this, though I do see the entertainment value in playing with the though TB brings up, that reality is a lifeform where galaxies may work as a neuron and the universe may have thoughts in a weird kind of way; basically pantheism.
^^ I just don't see the point in discussing something so far fetched with such enthusiasm seen in this thread lately. It ends up a mess with layers and layers of assumptions holding the structure of the discussion together.

If the universe had some sort of consciousness it would probably be as unaware of any lifeforms within it as we are unaware of the quarks positions in the atoms that build up our cells.

 

[Thunderbrd]

We do need to get back on track though about the design of the system itself. I'm waiting for DH to comment on This earlier post

I'm not taking the bait any further. If people cannot look around them and see plainly that there must be something more than just mere math afoot than that's fine. To me it's obvious, but that's because I look at the details AND the big picture. And I'm not trying to prove one way or another. The nature of this discussion is about whether it is likely or unlikely that life from other planets could infect us with disease and vice versa and I feel there's evidence to say there is while others disagree. I say you can never know for sure and all arguments have been valid so should we not then religate this discussion to the realm of accepting that either answer is science fiction until discovered to be fact? None of the arguments here have swayed either side so we are left with... which is the more enjoyable answer from a game perspective?

We're FAR further off from having to worry about the answer to that question than we are to having to determine whether or not the system I want to finalize the construction on (which is entirely generic) is going to be acceptable enough for DH to support rather than feel the need to distance himself and start a whole new mod over. As Joe pointed out, THAT's the important discussion to have here and the rest is becoming a far too enjoyable side distraction that's trivializing the real issue.

Honestly guys... nobody is as zealous as an atheist... and this discussion sure shows that to be the case.

DH.. PLEASE answer to that post when you can!

 

[Pepo]

Moving on, I think there is another interesting topic: would neanthertal (spell that wrong for sure)diseases be transmitted to humans and vice versa? And if a civ get's neanthertal culture, what diseases would it ge

 

[Toffer90]

The nature of this discussion is about whether it is likely or unlikely that life from other planets could infect us with disease and vice versa and I feel there's evidence to say there is while others disagree.

Right, I never stated my opinion on the matter.
If we implement alien life in the mod it is then obvious to me that we should have alien diseases that are devastating.
We don't have to be specific when describing the nature of the disease in pedia,

 

[Thunderbrd]

Moving on, I think there is another interesting topic: would neanthertal (spell that wrong for sure)diseases be transmitted to humans and vice versa? And if a civ get's neanthertal culture, what diseases would it ge

Neanderthals are so similar to humans that they were bred out as much as killed off. I'm sure nearly every disease available to human would be able to infect them and vice versa. In fact, there are some diseases we can show we get because of their lineage, but those are generally genetic diseases and disabilities. I can't remember which ones... but it talks about them on the wikipedia page for neanderthals.

 

[Harrier]

We do need to get back on track though about the design of the system itself. I'm waiting for DH to comment on This earlier post

The nature of this discussion is about whether it is likely or unlikely that life from other planets could infect us with disease and vice versa and I feel there's evidence to say there is while others disagree. I say you can never know for sure and all arguments have been valid so should we not then religate this discussion to the realm of accepting that either answer is science fiction until discovered to be fact?

DH.. PLEASE answer to that post when you can!

Well, as I may have kick started this long discussion (post 52). I have an idea.

One option would be to have a tech - "AlienPunk". like "SteamPunk" etc.

Then all the controversial things such as diseases etc. could be added to that tech.

If you don't want them, don.t research the tech.

 

[tmv]

The usual treatment of "punk" techs might not be good for that. If these diseases are in, they should be valid for all civilizations, whereas "punk" techs have no effect for anyone other than the civ who built the "culture" building.

A slight variation could be if it was possible to spread the diseases everywhere, but they hit the civ building the culture first - which might be a bonus in the long run as it was already pointed out.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

@TB I will get back to the discussion shortly but I want to document in detail my idea on two types of disease first

• Plagues - no more than 4 of these including biological warfare. They cause population loss
  
• Compound debilitating - max of two of these. They cause an increasing loss of production and food required to grow proportional to the population. A mathematical but not realistic example would be -5% per population production loss such that a city size 20 or above would have no production.

Plagues

Smallpox -

• contagious;
  
• spreads along trade routes very fast;
  
• started by being the first to get a tech or a bovine resource;
  
• first outbreak is devastating; subsequent outbreaks are almost minor since they happen frequently and so inherited immunity stays high;
  
• eventually a world project to eliminate.

Black Death -

• contagious;
  
• spreads along trade routes but blocked from spreading by deserts and jungles except during cool periods.
  
• started each time by having Culture African or Culture Asian and having access to bovine, sheep, goats or pigs
• all outbreaks are the same being inversely proportional to the inherited immunity.
  
• This makes subsequent outbreaks in some places much worse since immunity will have dropped.
• eventually a world project to eliminate

Cholera -

• not contagious;
  
• chance to occur is based on the population and its source of fresh water; sanitation will exaggerate the chances of an outbreak either increasing or decreasing it greatly depending on buildings.
• starts in a nation from Sedentary Lifestyle
• all outbreaks kill a small proportion of the population every time
  
• Finding the cause will require the presence of the disease and doctor and Maths School in the city. Finding the cause will reduce the chances of an outbreak in all your cities by 50%. The knowledge is tradable to other nations.
• Finding a cure comes later and it can be eliminated in a city with the building Modern Sanitation

Biological warfare -

• contagious
• immunity uses a system similar to the Spy action in enemy city "counter espionage". In this case the mission, if successful, gives you the antidote to that nations biological weapons.
• if not immune this is devastating each outbreak is new and has an effect similar to smallpox or worse
  
• there will need to be a diplomatic mission/trade to enable you to give the antidote to your friends and alies
• probably will need a building or something to make the antidote

Compound debilitating

Malaria

Modern equivalent​

 

[Thunderbrd]

IMO, placing maximums on these is an unnecessary bracket. We should just model one disease at a time to see how accurately we can make it behave. Why establish any kind of guideline limits on ourselves at the onset when exploration will determine how much we can put in before it becomes unreasonably overfocused on this side of the mod?

I wouldn't even mention this except that I think it's putting the cart before the horse. Let's just get some diseases designed and we'll see where we're at. Fair 'nuff? I'd like to start with the common cold myself. But it's not that important where we start.

You are explaining 2 categories.

According to the system I'm looking at finalizing the code design on, they would both exist but would not have hard line definitions between them.

Plague diseases would take out population when they hit. I can see the benefit in having it work that way. They COULD pass quickly but how quickly we have the disease run its course will be a matter of how we define the disease's xml tags (and how well the player responds if it's not setup to run its course overnight). While there, they should contain the elements of a debilitating disease anyhow.

Compound debilitating diseases can be modelled as well.

My intention is to make it possible to design any kind of disease through this system, defining HOW easy it spreads, how hard it sticks, how much resistance it leaves the population with after running its course, how damaging it is and in what ways, how much it opens up the population to other diseases in the process (or makes it easier for the population to resist other diseases in the process)... pretty much anything, all by XML rather than individually defined dynamics.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The main problem I see is that there is no relationship between Diseases and the Disease property. Every time I look at a disease I can see no use for the property at all. Each disease is based of definable conditions about the city and the technical level of the nation without referring to the property at all.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The main problem I see is that there is no relationship between Diseases and the Disease property. Every time I look at a disease I can see no use for the property at all. Each disease is based of definable conditions about the city and the technical level of the nation without referring to the property at all.

I get this. The problem is that you're not seeing the disease property for what it is. It is the vulnerability to disease that results from not having enough caretakers and monitors and public attention to ways known to reduce the likelihood of contracting a disease.

A high disease property = a public environment in which disease of any kind finds itself easier to spread. More opportunities for one person to pass a disease to another, more opportunities for a disease to go undiagnosed longer due to symptoms being ignored etc...

A community may avoid a breakout, not because nobody contracts the disease, but because those few that do are properly quarantined and cared for (with care) before it gets out of hand, aka, there were enough health services in place to deflect the opportunity for breakout.

A 0 disease property doesn't mean that disease cannot strike. Just means when it does it's harder for it to get out of hand and become a public 'issue'. I would envision 0 to be the minimum threshold for any given disease. It's almost impossible to keep it lower than that and if you do, you're probably spending a lot more on health care than any nation should and will suffer in other areas for over-budgeting there.

Someone made a comment earlier that the Hebrews were very good at avoiding sickness even in the early days because they had the wherewithal to wash their hands as a social practice. This is an example of the kind of thing that reduces disease ratings and why the disease level threshold would matter in terms of avoiding an outbreak.

However, when a new disease is introduced, even a terrifyingly horrific one (usually the worst indeed) it can be introduced at a very low threshold (even as low as 0) but once overcome, its resistance is measured by increasing the outbreak threshold for that community. So to re-experience it, either the resistance would have had to decay, or the city would have had to let its disease rating get out of hand. Resistance to a disease from fighting and overcoming that disease outbreak can continue to compile upon previous outbreaks and become pretty much an insignificant threat eventually.

But we can stage new diseases to enter the game at various points, and you've got those concepts down pretty good on how to shape those entry points.

Like crime, it's all too easy to let disease wander a little out of control. And when you do, you're rolling the dice as to how badly it would punish you.

 

[Toffer90]

Really looking forward to how this system will work in practice, it sounds like a neat tool to play with (play, as in modding with it playfully, and as the literal meaning in-game).

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I get this. The problem is that you're not seeing the disease property for what it is. It is the vulnerability to disease that results from not having enough caretakers and monitors and public attention to ways known to reduce the likelihood of contracting a disease.

A high disease property = a public environment in which disease of any kind finds itself easier to spread. More opportunities for one person to pass a disease to another, more opportunities for a disease to go undiagnosed longer due to symptoms being ignored etc...

A community may avoid a breakout, not because nobody contracts the disease, but because those few that do are properly quarantined and cared for (with care) before it gets out of hand, aka, there were enough health services in place to deflect the opportunity for breakout.

A 0 disease property doesn't mean that disease cannot strike. Just means when it does it's harder for it to get out of hand and become a public 'issue'. I would envision 0 to be the minimum threshold for any given disease. It's almost impossible to keep it lower than that and if you do, you're probably spending a lot more on health care than any nation should and will suffer in other areas for over-budgeting there.

Someone made a comment earlier that the Hebrews were very good at avoiding sickness even in the early days because they had the wherewithal to wash their hands as a social practice. This is an example of the kind of thing that reduces disease ratings and why the disease level threshold would matter in terms of avoiding an outbreak.

However, when a new disease is introduced, even a terrifyingly horrific one (usually the worst indeed) it can be introduced at a very low threshold (even as low as 0) but once overcome, its resistance is measured by increasing the outbreak threshold for that community. So to re-experience it, either the resistance would have had to decay, or the city would have had to let its disease rating get out of hand. Resistance to a disease from fighting and overcoming that disease outbreak can continue to compile upon previous outbreaks and become pretty much an insignificant threat eventually.

But we can stage new diseases to enter the game at various points, and you've got those concepts down pretty good on how to shape those entry points.

Like crime, it's all too easy to let disease wander a little out of control. And when you do, you're rolling the dice as to how badly it would punish you.

If it is about quarantine the the property wont come into effect until the concept is discovered somewhere in the late Renaissance.

If it is about the chance of a disease outbreak then maybe OK but I still don't see how it applies to the diseases I have looked at. Almost all are acts of nature (or gods) not something humans have any interaction with until the modern era ie post 1950 AD in our history.

If it is about the severity of an outbreak then perhaps that is something I can work with for some of the diseases. However I would prefer a simple set of "Inherited Immunity" properties, one for each disease. These would also be defined by the disease with starting at some maximum and decreasing each turn towards zero. eg

Smallpox

• Smallpox Inherited Immunity (SII) is set to 100 in the city when an outbreak happens. Each turn it drops by 1.
  
  
• Chance of new outbreak or outbreak spreading to this city is (100-SII) as a percentage
  
  Quarantine effectiveness will affect the chances of spread from this city the better the quarantine the less the likelihood of spread
  
  
• Severity of the outbreak is also based on (100-SII)
  
  In this case there is nothing any health care person can do until quarantine but at that stage your city health professionals will probably reduce the death rate somewhat - perhaps this is what you mean by the disease property?

 

[Thunderbrd]

If it is about quarantine the the property wont come into effect until the concept is discovered somewhere in the late Renaissance.

If it is about the chance of a disease outbreak then maybe OK but I still don't see how it applies to the diseases I have looked at. Almost all are acts of nature (or gods) not something humans have any interaction with until the modern era ie post 1950 AD in our history.

If it is about the severity of an outbreak then perhaps that is something I can work with for some of the diseases. However I would prefer a simple set of "Inherited Immunity" properties, one for each disease. These would also be defined by the disease with starting at some maximum and decreasing each turn towards zero. eg

It's about an amalgamation of all the above. Simply put, the higher the disease property, the more vulnerable the city is to contracting an outbreak. In general. How easily the disease strikes can be defined for itself.

Smallpox Inherited Immunity (SII) is set to 100 in the city when an outbreak happens. Each turn it drops by 1.

It would work very similarly. Let's say the outbreak threshold is 0 for Smallpox to begin.

A city with 0 Disease property would have a 50% chance of contracting it in a given round if the initial outbreak prerequisites were met.

A city with 50 Disease property would have a 100% chance of contracting it in a given round if the initial outbreak prerequisites were met.

A city with -50 Disease property would have a 0% chance of contracting it at the moment.

Once contracted, the disease would initially be at a lvl 1 outbreak (10% of the population has the disease.)

I'll ignore explaining how the rules would handle overcoming the disease as that get's complicated but suffice it to say you can make a disease easier or harder to overcome and you can set it to be possible for the disease to deepen and worsen to new levels of outbreak. Healers can be trained to provide recovery improvements and to help deny specific disease outbreaks, thus quarantining can be crafted by tech prerequisites and skill promotions. Buildings and techs can also have direct affects on a disease's threshold for overcoming and for an outbreak so can reflect quarantining and other strategies like inoculations and medications and such.

Let's say you make it really easy to overcome and it usually doesn't last more than 1 round and it takes out 10% of the population when it hits.

Then once overcome, it adds, say, 100 resistance. (the same as your SII).

Now, to get the disease to happen again, the disease threshold is at 100. At 100 Disease property the city would have a 50% chance of contracting the disease. At 50 Disease property, the city would have no chance of contracting the disease. At 150 disease property, the city IS contracting the disease.

If you wanted the resistance to be a lot more powerful than that then you could establish the resistance it leaves as being 500 or 1000. You'll also have a tag that allows you to set the resistance decay factor so that it's not just automatically 1 per round but however many per round you want it to be for THAT disease.

EDIT: One more thing if you get a chance to read this: if you want a disease to not care at all if your people have been disease control conscious or not, you can always put the outbreak threshold at less than 0... put it at -2000 and it WILL affect all cities.

I should probably allow us to set a different threshold for overcoming the disease. It's currently designed that it's the same amount (if your disease property level is less than the threshold then you have a chance to overcome it each round) but if you want to make it possible for the outbreak to not care if people are careful to avoid disease in whatever ways they have available to them, but then make it also possible for cities to overcome the disease based on their degree of healthcare and trying to avoid allowing it to worsen, then the Overcome theshold could be much higher than the Outbreak threshold.

AKA, a disease could have -5000 outbreak threshold to remove all chance of outbreak and make it absolutely automatic to any city exposed to the right conditions, then have 100 overcome threshold to make it so that every round the city has less than 100 overcome value (Disease rating - total local Aid amount, sometimes specific to a particular disease) it has a % chance equal to the amount less than 0 to overcome the outbreak. Worsening outbreak thresholds could vary as well.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Bump for Hydro and DH.

I need the greenlight to move forward on this project as this is next on my plate as soon as I get the few bugs I want to tackle here taken care of.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I have liked this one since I first read the thread years ago. Yes please make this. It is long overdue.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The debate that I think we haven't solved with DH is that he doesn't believe that the chance of outbreak should be a chance at all and certainly that it should not be based on the disease property amount in the city.

I struggle with this because then what's the point of having a disease property, except maybe to manage recovery? And are we seriously saying that a player shouldn't be able to strategically manage his empire in a manner that would keep diseases from striking?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Well I am in your camp that the Disease property should influence the chance of plagues. That if you had like a hyper hygienic society that all disease, including plagues would have a very low chance of occurring.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

And that is one of the reasons I am leaving this mod. It all boils down to irreconcilable differences of opinion on too many topics.