Alternate Leaders for VP project thread

[Hinin]

Hello everyone.

I wanted to ask you your opinion concerning the UA Oscar II of Sweden. I am not satisfied anymore by it, and would like to rework it.

Here are the some ideas I have in mind for this rework :
- a virtuous GAge/WLTKD cycle
- bonus geared toward not letting technological advancement lower your happiness too much
- bonus toward culture and science

I'll keep the Swedish GGeneral bonus ("+15 % CS bonus to GGeneral aura") though, so that Oscar II can fare well militarily, even without being as agressive as GAdolphus.

 

[Moi Magnus]

Hello everyone.

I wanted to ask you your opinion concerning the UA Oscar II of Sweden. I am not satisfied anymore by it, and would like to rework it.

Here are the some ideas I have in mind for this rework :
- a virtuous GAge/WLTKD cycle
- bonus geared toward not letting technological advancement lower your happiness too much
- bonus toward culture and science

I'll keep the Swedish GGeneral bonus ("+15 % CS bonus to GGeneral aura") though, so that Oscar II can fare well militarily, even without being as agressive as GAdolphus.

Suggestions for Sweden:
- While WLTKD, unit originated in the city have a unique promotion.
- While WLTKD, unit produced in the city have bonus XP
- Units killed in friendly territory gives Great Person points (to the nearest city, random type).

Also, suggestion for India: Something in the idea of the vanilla "unhappiness from population halved, unhappiness from city doubled". So "needs halved but unhappiness from specialists increased to one per specialist". Or something similar.

 

[Hinin]

Suggestions for Sweden:
- While WLTKD, unit originated in the city have a unique promotion.
- While WLTKD, unit produced in the city have bonus XP
- Units killed in friendly territory gives Great Person points (to the nearest city, random type).

One problem I have with this is that I wanted Oscar II to incarnate a more peaceful version if Sweden, so I considered the "Swedish GGeneral bonus" to be enough on that side. Since the Swedish UB gives a lot of science and culture (the UB2 of the 3/4 UC modmod also gives science and culture, with a bonus during GAges) I thought that these two yields should be the focus of Oscar's UA. At the same time, since there is no UA for now which allows a synergy between WLTKD and GA, this should also be a focus of the UA, to my mind. The GP generation is the only focus I'm not sure about, so I think I'll begin modifying Oscar's UA on this side.

It could be something like this :

Sweden – Oscar II – Nothing Exceeds the Limits of the Stars

- Great Generals gives +15 % more CS.

- When unlocking a technology, enter a GAges whose duration scales with the number of unlocked policies

- When unlocking a policy, all cities enter a WLTKD whose duration scales with the number of unlocked technologies

=> This UA has both "win easier" and "win more" (to use pineappledan's vocabulary) aspects, but is, at its core, based on a virtuous cycle : unlocking technologies allows to trigger GAges, which make you gain more culture, that you use to unlock policies that trigger WLTKD in your cities, making you gain food (and the Swedish UBs scales really well with high population, particularly science). With specific beliefs and policies, both WLTKD and GAges can provide additionnal yields, allowing you to focus on one aspect or the other (or even both, if you think taking both Fealty and Artistry is a good idea). It would be a UA that takes time to have a noticeable effect, but, once it has taken momentum, it would provide stable and multiple benefits.
=> Of course, a certain number of unlocked policies/techs will be required for each turn of WLTKD/GAge (to be determined, for there are around 80 techs and 35 policies to unlock in a game). => for now, I think 1 turn of GAge per 3 policies, and 1 turn of WLTKD per 5 technologies could be enough

Something in the idea of the vanilla "unhappiness from population halved, unhappiness from city doubled". So "needs halved but unhappiness from specialists increased to one per specialist"

The idea I had for India was to give Chandragupta Maurya as a second leader, with a UA tailored toward conquest and gaining advantages from having multiple religions in your cities.

Something like :

India - Chandragupta Maurya - Chakravarti

- Start with a pantheon and gain the benefits of the pantheons beliefs of all religions present in a city.

- Religions with less than one follower in a city gain double the pressure in this city.

- +5 % Production toward military units per religion in a city
=> I'm really not sure about this bonus. Do you have an idea ?

 

[Moi Magnus]

One problem I have with this is that I wanted Oscar II to incarnate a more peaceful version if Sweden, so I considered the "Swedish GGeneral bonus" to be enough on that side. Since the Swedish UB gives a lot of science and culture (the UB2 of the 3/4 UC modmod also gives science and culture, with a bonus during GAges) I thought that these two yields should be the focus of Oscar's UA. At the same time, since there is no UA for now which allows a synergy between WLTKD and GA, this should also be a focus of the UA, to my mind. The GP generation is the only focus I'm not sure about, so I think I'll begin modifying Oscar's UA on this side.

It could be something like this :

Sweden – Oscar II – Nothing Exceeds the Limits of the Stars

- Great Generals gives +15 % more CS.

- When unlocking a technology, enter a GAges whose duration scales with the number of unlocked policies

- When unlocking a policy, all cities enter a WLTKD whose duration scales with the number of unlocked technologies

=> This UA has both "win easier" and "win more" (to use pineappledan's vocabulary) aspects, but is, at its core, based on a virtuous cycle : unlocking technologies allows to trigger GAges, which make you gain more culture, that you use to unlock policies that trigger WLTKD in your cities, making you gain food (and the Swedish UBs scales really well with high population, particularly science). With specific beliefs and policies, both WLTKD and GAges can provide additionnal yields, allowing you to focus on one aspect or the other (or even both, if you think taking both Fealty and Artistry is a good idea). It would be a UA that takes time to have a noticeable effect, but, once it has taken momentum, it would provide stable and multiple benefits.
=> Of course, a certain number of unlocked policies/techs will be required for each turn of WLTKD/GAge (to be determined, for there are around 80 techs and 35 policies to unlock in a game). => for now, I think 1 turn of GAge per 3 policies, and 1 turn of WLTKD per 5 technologies could be enough

I'm not sure if entering a GA is still an historical event. But if it is the case, then having a HE every tech (even if it is 1 turn of GA) would be an exploit.
I would rather choose "when you enter a new era" and "when completing a policy branch".

The idea I had for India was to give Chandragupta Maurya as a second leader, with a UA tailored toward conquest and gaining advantages from having multiple religions in your cities.

Something like :

India - Chandragupta Maurya - Chakravarti

- Start with a pantheon and gain the benefits of the pantheons beliefs of all religions present in a city.

- Religions with less than one follower in a city gain double the pressure in this city.

- +5 % Production toward military units per religion in a city
=> I'm really not sure about this bonus. Do you have an idea ?

It feel pretty bad. And from what I remember "gaining the benefits of multiple pantheon" was not something easily feasable trough the code.
I'm not fan of rewarding having multiple religion, because it is very difficult to handle for the AI, and quite dependent on your neighbourg behavior.
(And to be fair, I don't like production boost toward units either, since a lot of your units will be bought / given by CS / given by authority)

Some other suggestions (uncomplete):

Instead of free pantheon, gain faith for each discovered tech
=> You have a pantheon at your first (or second, depending of the faith we give) tech, which mean you can chose your pantheon knowing more ressources around you.*

When settling/conquering a city (or maybe when a city reach a certain number of citizen, or every multiple of a certain number). Recieve a free religious building (at random from all the faith-bought religious buildings).

 

[Hinin]

I'm not sure if entering a GA is still an historical event. But if it is the case, then having a HE every tech (even if it is 1 turn of GA) would be an exploit.
I would rather choose "when you enter a new era" and "when completing a policy branch".

GAges are only counted as historical events if you finish the Artistry tree, but I understand your concern. However, choosing to give bonus when finishing a policy tree doesn't seem a good idea (for, in the endgame, when this UA is meant to be the strongest, players must unlock ideology policies, and so no policy tree will be finished).
Because of this, the new UA should look something like this :

Sweden – Oscar II – Nothing Exceeds the Limits of the Stars

- Great Generals gives +15 % more CS.

- When entering a new era, enter a GAge whose duration scales with the number of unlocked policies

- When unlocking a policy, all cities enter a WLTKD whose duration scales with the number of unlocked technologies

It feel pretty bad. And from what I remember "gaining the benefits of multiple pantheon" was not something easily feasable trough the code.

This is something I feared. Well...

I'm not fan of rewarding having multiple religion, because it is very difficult to handle for the AI, and quite dependent on your neighbourg behavior.

The goal isn't to have different main religions in your empire, but to have 1 followers of each religion in your cities. The second bonus is meant to allow that.

(And to be fair, I don't like production boost toward units either, since a lot of your units will be bought / given by CS / given by authority)

I don't like it either, but I have difficulties finding an interesting military bonus.

Instead of free pantheon, gain faith for each discovered tech
=> You have a pantheon at your first (or second, depending of the faith we give) tech, which mean you can chose your pantheon knowing more ressources around you.*

I'm not sure about that, but I'll keep it in mind.

When settling/conquering a city (or maybe when a city reach a certain number of citizen, or every multiple of a certain number). Recieve a free religious building (at random from all the faith-bought religious buildings).

You like random bonus, don't you ?

 

[Noob Fanboy]

Guys, i want to make a suggestion to the project: What about creating new leaders to Russia?

For example, some people here know the classic Stalin vs trotsky discussion. What about creating (just like in Hearts of Iron 4), the possibility to play Stalin or trotsky?

 

[Jarula]

Trotsky wouldn't work his permanent revolution theory is so bogus it won't even work on civ 5...

 

[Noob Fanboy]

It works in HOI4 ^^:

I don't plan to discuss about his theory here, i think he can be a good alternative leader.

Or maybe Lenin if we want to avoid the classic trotsky vs stalin discussion.

 

[Hinin]

Sorry for the late answer (I was a bit busy).

Since I only want to add 2 leader per civilizations (so that I have to be a little diverse in my choices), I would have prefered to choose Ivan IV (the Terrible) as a faith/conquest-oriented Russia (with a UA named 'The Pogrom of Novgorod', Pogrom designating a 'sanctioned purgative attack', or more simply 'Tsar of all Russias').

To me, the USSR should almost be its own civ.

 

[kenneth1221]

So if it's alright, I thought I'd throw my hat into the ring and make a few early-stage suggestions for civs that don't have alternate leaders at the moment. I'm trying to tackle leaders without any existing discussion, so as to not step on any toes.

First: a Venice more strongly oriented towards warmongering and/or religion. Venice had a significant role in the 4th Crusade and it regularly tried to get more territory on the Italian peninsula via military means. There are already several "crusader" civs, so I'm not sure what could be done to differentiate Venice from them. (Also, timewise, choosing a leader isn't easy because Enrico Dandolo was Doge during the 4th Crusade.)

Proposed UA: Cannot found/annex cities. Can spend gold in puppeted cities, and these cities do not suffer yield penalties. Puppeted cities give additional supply cap, and units bought in puppeted cities do not suffer XP penalties. (Also, some suitable bonus to gold generation, but not sure what would be appropriate. Gold on conquest, with a bonus for conquering holy cities? Leave the double trade routes? Leave in the Great Merchant rate?)

Second: a Carthage more strongly oriented towards warmongering, under Hannibal. This one would be based more on the march from the Alps. The bulk of the changes would be in leader flavor. I may be drastically underestimating the value of resource diversity as opposed to crossing mountains, though.

Proposed UA: 175 gold on city founding, scaling with era. Owned coastal cities receive a free lighthouse. Units within range of an owned Suffet can cross mountain tiles (or gain extra movement through rough terrain?).

Third: ideas for Cetshwayo of the Zulus. From a quick read of Zulu history, by the time Cetshwayo came around the Zulus were basically about to get crushed by the British empire, with the exception of one major victory. Cetshwayo also had the benefit of a good deal of sympathy from the British public. Since this is Civ, we usually don't emphasize the bad parts of civs, so I'll focus on the good.

Proposed UA: Melee and Gun units cost 50% less maintenance, and all units require 25% less experience for promotions. Whenever you enter combat (or kill a unit, or a unit is killed) with a Civilization (with more technologies or policies than you?), gain tourism with that civilization scaling with era.

I hope these ideas are to your liking!

 

[Hinin]

I hope these ideas are to your liking!

Any participation that is serious is to my liking.

First: a Venice more strongly oriented towards warmongering and/or religion. Venice had a significant role in the 4th Crusade and it regularly tried to get more territory on the Italian peninsula via military means. There are already several "crusader" civs, so I'm not sure what could be done to differentiate Venice from them. (Also, timewise, choosing a leader isn't easy because Enrico Dandolo was Doge during the 4th Crusade.)

To me, Enrico Dandolo would be the perfect leader for a warmonger Venice. The problem would be to find a suitable replacement for the 'peaceful' version.

Proposed UA: Cannot found/annex cities. Can spend gold in puppeted cities, and these cities do not suffer yield penalties. Puppeted cities give additional supply cap, and units bought in puppeted cities do not suffer XP penalties. (Also, some suitable bonus to gold generation, but not sure what would be appropriate. Gold on conquest, with a bonus for conquering holy cities? Leave the double trade routes? Leave in the Great Merchant rate?)

The problem with this idea is that Venice has already, to my mind, all the cards to be a fearsome warmonger civ, if it wants, and that version of the UA would simply be a bit more focused, losing a part of the polyvalence of the original UA. I perfectly understand your position nonetheless, and am still open to further debate.
Plus, the "no xp penalties when buying" bonus is already a part of the Tophet (Carthage UB2 in the MUCfVP modmod).

Second: a Carthage more strongly oriented towards warmongering, under Hannibal. This one would be based more on the march from the Alps. The bulk of the changes would be in leader flavor. I may be drastically underestimating the value of resource diversity as opposed to crossing mountains, though.

Proposed UA: 175 gold on city founding, scaling with era. Owned coastal cities receive a free lighthouse. Units within range of an owned Suffet can cross mountain tiles (or gain extra movement through rough terrain?).

If I had to focus on one aspect of Hannibal, it would be his tactical genius : he was a master of ambush, of logistic (he stayed and fought within enemy territory for several years), had to use warriors from various cultures, all of this while being threatened by Carthaginian oligarchs. After the Second Punic War, and also became known has a capable statesman, who managed to reform the Carthaginian political system, very tyrannical and corrupt at that time (until, of course, he was exiled...).
Because of this, I think focusing on rough terrain combat and mobility would be better (maybe a unique promotion for his land units would be good enough ?).

Third: ideas for Cetshwayo of the Zulus. From a quick read of Zulu history, by the time Cetshwayo came around the Zulus were basically about to get crushed by the British empire, with the exception of one major victory. Cetshwayo also had the benefit of a good deal of sympathy from the British public. Since this is Civ, we usually don't emphasize the bad parts of civs, so I'll focus on the good.

Proposed UA: Melee and Gun units cost 50% less maintenance, and all units require 25% less experience for promotions. Whenever you enter combat (or kill a unit, or a unit is killed) with a Civilization (with more technologies or policies than you?), gain tourism with that civilization scaling with era.

I like the general concept. Thank you for your ideas.

 

[kenneth1221]

To me, Enrico Dandolo would be the perfect leader for a warmonger Venice. The problem would be to find a suitable replacement for the 'peaceful' version.

The problem with this idea is that Venice has already, to my mind, all the cards to be a fearsome warmonger civ, if it wants, and that version of the UA would simply be a bit more focused, losing a part of the polyvalence of the original UA. I perfectly understand your position nonetheless, and am still open to further debate.
Plus, the "no xp penalties when buying" bonus is already a part of the Tophet (Carthage UB2 in the MUCfVP modmod).

Indeed, all very fair points. I feel like the Venice depicted in CiV, if you look at its history, is a warmonger civ at its heart, and there's no real way around that. unless you're changing the depiction of the civ entirely So maybe secondary flavor? For Dandolo, you could have Venice as a faith-centric warmonger, while with the other leader you could have Venice as a CS/trade-centric warmonger. I was thinking maybe Francesco Foscari could be the more peaceful leader because of his role in helping found the Italian League after extensive wars, though I'll admit he's not the greatest choice for the existing UA because he managed to ruin trade with the east. So Foscari would have all the advantages of Venetian trade, but Dandolo could have some bonus to faith. Maybe always being able to faith buy units? Or having a reduced cooldown when faith-buying units, but with reduced trade routes or merchant generation. The idea becomes that faith-warmonger Venice generates less gpt but makes up for it by using faith to fund armies. That might require some faith generation bonus, though, and it might be too OP.
Do faith-bought units have an XP penalty? That might be a way to resolve the conflict

If I had to focus on one aspect of Hannibal, it would be his tactical genius : he was a master of ambush, of logistic (he stayed and fought within enemy territory for several years), had to use warriors from various cultures, all of this while being threatened by Carthaginian oligarchs. After the Second Punic War, and also became known has a capable statesman, who managed to reform the Carthaginian political system, very tyrannical and corrupt at that time (until, of course, he was exiled...).
Because of this, I think focusing on rough terrain combat and mobility would be better (maybe a unique promotion for his land units would be good enough ?).

Probably. It would depend on what parts of the Carthage UA would be kept. I think gold on founding and free lighthouses is a reasonably good abstraction for logistic skill. If those parts of the UA are kept, then the promotion needs to be significantly weaker than similar UAs. I would compare it to the Iroquois in this case--Hiawatha also gets free city connections, mobility in forest and jungle, a mobility promotion for forest and jungle, and a natural wonder bonus that's basically irrelevant. A Hannibal Carthage with a promotion could get all of these and an additional gold bonus on top of that. So maybe it would be best if Hannibal didn't get gold on city founding, (though that might make him much weaker during the early-game snowball), and instead got some other way of abstracting logistical skill. Maybe increased yields/healing from pillaging, since he lived off the land for years during his campaign, and increased flanking bonus in rough terrain. Or we could just give him what the Inca have, but that would be as boring as just giving him Woodsman.

The thing is, if it's a promotion that affects all units unconditionally, it needs to be fairly weak because of snowballing. Look at Mongolia and Sweden! Really small changes, yet super strong. But in general I think the idea of a unique promotion is a good one.

What's the philosophy for choosing alternate leaders? Try and make sure as many civs as possible have one? Or exploring all the possible uses of a civ? (In other words, tall or wide? )
There are also a few civs that just don't seem to fit. Polynesia, for example. With 3/4UC, Polynesia is a civ with a Hawaiian leader, one Hawaiian UU, one Maori UU, a Samoan UB and a Rapa Nui UI that's pretty much built around wide progress. Though now that I'm actually writing it out, a good jumping off point for alt leaders would be the guys from the Paradise Found scenario. But are there actually alternate playstyles to explore?

EDIT: Actually, More Civilizations has an interesting take on splitting up Polynesia. The question is whether all that can get VP'd.

 

[HungryForFood]

Actually, More Civilizations has an interesting take on splitting up Polynesia. The question is whether all that can get VP'd.

I am interested in doing a VP version of the Polynesia split eventually, as Firaxis' Polynesia is a weird frankenstein civ.

 

[Hinin]

I am interested in doing a VP version of the Polynesia split eventually, as Firaxis' Polynesia is a weird frankenstein civ.

I don't intend on doing an alternate leader for the Polynesian civ as it stands, but I would be happy to help you for a Polynesia split.

Also, are you still interested in coding Meiji, or does his "GA creation" bonus still doesn't please you ? Do you want to discuss about it ?

 

[Hinin]

What's the philosophy for choosing alternate leaders? Try and make sure as many civs as possible have one? Or exploring all the possible uses of a civ? (In other words, tall or wide? )

There are several elements I keep in mind when choosing a leader :
- first, and most importantly, I've chosen to not do concepts for more than two leaders per civilization : it forces me to make significant choices, and I want to keep it this way for the forseeable future.

- second, I choose important political figures (so no important leaders that had no influence on political affaires... sorry Joan of Arc) within that civilization, preferably ones that have already been the subject of a mod.

- third, I see if the current leader of the civilization doesn't correspond very well with its UA (example : Alexander, Oda Nobunaga), and so can be swapped with someone else, and in that case, what leader would correspond the best to the current UA of that civilization.

Ex. : Oda Nobunaga, for example, was a ruthless warlord who managed to unify Japan and its daimyos after 150 years of civil war, so a UA representing this ruthless/opportunistic aspect of his personality, while bringing back the Daimyo of the original Meiji mod by JFD seemed the best course to me
=> Tokugawa Ieyasu, with a more isolationist/defensive and cultural playstyle seemed more suitable for the current Japanese UA.


I don't say that my method is the best (for example, I could choose to limit myself to only leaders that have already been the subject of mods, because several concepts have not a lot of chance to be produced right now), but I like working this way.

 

[pineappledan]

I am interested in doing a VP version of the Polynesia split eventually, as Firaxis' Polynesia is a weird frankenstein civ.

If you're interested in branching out from JFD ports, I was hoping to involve someone else to help me get another 4 civs into the game: Inuit, Khmer, Tlingit, and Canada. I was drawn to these specifically because they offer unique history, mechanics, and start locations. They also are entirely new civs, instead of splits, or alternate leaders, so they aren't pigeonholed into eras, and don't cannibalize other civs' UCs

PM if you're interested. @Hinin and I hashed out some ideas for it earlier, but I don't have much time to be modding these days

 

[kenneth1221]

So I was wondering if a more experienced modder could give me some insight on how much effort it would take to get from knowing a smattering of Python, MATLAB, and webdev languages to being able to start contributing on the code side of this project. Judging from the commits on github I'm guessing I'd need to learn C++ to make the necessary PRs to the Patch dlls for these civs. (And sql for the actual trait definitions, too.)
@Hinin is there room for more people who just contribute ideas, since learning C++ may be a bit much for me?

 

[Hinin]

So I was wondering if a more experienced modder could give me some insight on how much effort it would take to get from knowing a smattering of Python, MATLAB, and webdev languages to being able to start contributing on the code side of this project. Judging from the commits on github I'm guessing I'd need to learn C++ to make the necessary PRs to the Patch dlls for these civs.
@Hinin is there room for more people who just contribute ideas, since learning C++ may be a bit much for me?

As often with me, I can be a little authoritarian (I'm sorry for this), but I actually like when people participate, so your ideas are of course welcome, as long as they are realistic.

If you want to code some parts, I suggest, after learning the basics, to do one of the easiest leaders (to me, Louis XIV is the easiest). For the ideas, as I said, feel free to talk with us. Some ideas may be rejected, or heavily modified, but I always keep in mind things that have been said, so that they can be used later.

Welcome aboard !

 

[kenneth1221]

Louis XIV is the easiest.

In that case, I have a quick question. For the GWAM points, is it 50% to the next category for Writers, Artists, AND Musicians per city taken? That's the wording implied by the description. I think most of the functions of that UA exist somewhere in the code, but I'm not sure.

Also, do you have any further thoughts on my ideas for Venice and Carthage?

 

[pineappledan]

For my money, the Greece alternate with Alexander seems like the easiest one to cut your teeth on. There's lots of resources with the Greek split by Pouakai, and pretty much everything suggested can be done with SQL, except for the trigger for "leveling up" your GG.

Spoiler Greece – Alexander – To the World’s End :

- Great General aura has +1 Range. Free Great General at Philosophy. Great General Points increase the effectiveness of your current Great General, instead of generating more. If the maximum bonus has been reached, gain GDiplomat points. All units heal 25 hp on City Conquest.

Pericles replaces Alexander as the possessor of the "Hellenic League" UA.