( Tchey )
Chieftain
Now you merge with Active City Defense and some parts of Larger Scale, and you make me happy.
Art of War mod
- Thread starter Ordian
- Start date
The A.I. will attack cities when they have a vast majority I've found. Getting DoWed early in Deity will do it, especially if you get 2 Declaration of Wars at once (i.e. exit to main menu time). They do wander aimlessly for two or three turns, but I've been looking at the tactics xml and there's nothing to fix this. The priorities can be changed but the "Is this unit/city too tough?" part of the A.I. is hardcoded. Probably the sillyiest thing is that it seems archers have the "Is this unit too tough" problem, even when they get no retaliation!
Yea this seems consistent with what I have observed. The problem has made my Immortal and King games go from fun to silly in a hurry. Great results until the opposing army stands around and just gets shelled by my cities while they wait for reinforcements.
I couldn't find anything in the XML either, but I'm going to try and turn the city defense and HP back down a little to make them a slightly more attack-able target. Maybe there is a tipping point that will allow the AI to attack, but still let sieges be more prolonged. I'll let you know how it goes.
@Kismet28: In addition to what Slowpoke said truth be told I really have not been able to complete a full game since I started the mod which is not all that surprising considering I am a marathon player. Work has picked up to the point where time is constrained and have only enough time right now to mod and do some prelemanary testing, but that is why I have my playtesters such as yourself. I did get some time together to start a game, but the more I played the more I wanted to mod it, so I abanoned it and went back to writing code. And if you would let me know how your testing goes then that would be awesome.
@ (Tchey): Priority right now is to get a good balance on my mod before I throw another wrench into the mix, but I do have plans on making versions of the mod that are more compatible with the others out there.
@Slowpoke: Just wanted to say thanks for taking it upon yourself for answering questions, and that your signature freak'n rocks!!! Got a signature guiding people to the Art of War mod before I did, and it was I who spawned this demon.
@ (Tchey): Priority right now is to get a good balance on my mod before I throw another wrench into the mix, but I do have plans on making versions of the mod that are more compatible with the others out there.
@Slowpoke: Just wanted to say thanks for taking it upon yourself for answering questions, and that your signature freak'n rocks!!! Got a signature guiding people to the Art of War mod before I did, and it was I who spawned this demon.
@Kismet28: In addition to what Slowpoke said truth be told I really have not been able to complete a full game since I started the mod which is not all that surprising considering I am a marathon player. Work has picked up to the point where time is constrained and have only enough time right now to mod and do some prelemanary testing, but that is why I have my playtesters such as yourself. I did get some time together to start a game, but the more I played the more I wanted to mod it, so I abanoned it and went back to writing code. And if you would let me know how your testing goes then that would be awesome.
@ (Tchey): Priority right now is to get a good balance on my mod before I throw another wrench into the mix, but I do have plans on making versions of the mod that are more compatible with the others out there.
@Slowpoke: Just wanted to say thanks for taking it upon yourself for answering questions, and that your signature freak'n rocks!!! Got a signature guiding people to the Art of War mod before I did, and it was I who spawned this demon.
Heh, yeah. For whatever reason it seems you don't get signature rights till X amount of posts (whatever gets warlord.) I was puzzled for a while and then "wait what? edit signature magically appeared..."
Edit: Also, I'm honestly liking playing the game a lot now, so I'm basically abandoning my own total war mod, I'm going to work on just modding and playtesting based on your mods.
One thing I'm considering trying is lowering strength considerably for cities, but massively buffing their hp. This should considerably slow down domination, but at the same time might make the A.I. attack cities more often. One could keep the danger alive by upping the city ranged attack percent to 100 (I think it's like 40 now?).
Btw, you might want to go down to epic, the game starts lagging when you get a lot of units, which art of war certainly doesn't help with
Using my small test scenario for a classical age battle I found out the AI's reluctance to attack is because of the city HP.
I would load my scenario with different HP values and let their army attack without interference. Below are the number of turns it took to kill me with different city HP values.
10HP - 9 turns
20HP - 10 turns
40HP - 14 turns
50HP - 14 turns
60HP - This is where the AI would surround my city and never attack.
I tried to use an appropriate era specific mixture of units for the AI against the 15 strength test city. On typical games where the AI isn't coming at you with advanced tech I suspect the cities aren't going to be able to have anywhere near 4x HP. Now that I have this tweaked to 40HP I'll try the mod in a real game as soon as I have time.
Additionally I tried some tests trying to fight the AI at my city and in the open. Archers kept suicide themselves and melee units had no sense of self preservation. Typical bad AI. But, then I added Elvince's battle AI with some promising results. Archers were not nearly as suicidal. A couple came around flanks at strange times, but none barreled themselves up the middle. Calvary was still awful about running into spearmen. Seige units fired on cities before the melee engaged. Finally, I don't know if it was a glitch, but the units started running away when things were looking bleek. When I started to run them down and got out in the open his units turned around and slaughtered me when I was in bad position. I wish I would have seen if they were going to keep running back to their cities without my movement.
I think it might have went even better for the AI as well if they didn't have big penalties because I didn't give them Iron to go with their units. I need to re-balance the scenario so it is more typical of a game situation.
Anyway, soon as I get some more free time I'm going to put these two mods together for a King game and I'll report back soon with comparison to Vanilla AI.
I would load my scenario with different HP values and let their army attack without interference. Below are the number of turns it took to kill me with different city HP values.
10HP - 9 turns
20HP - 10 turns
40HP - 14 turns
50HP - 14 turns
60HP - This is where the AI would surround my city and never attack.
I tried to use an appropriate era specific mixture of units for the AI against the 15 strength test city. On typical games where the AI isn't coming at you with advanced tech I suspect the cities aren't going to be able to have anywhere near 4x HP. Now that I have this tweaked to 40HP I'll try the mod in a real game as soon as I have time.
Additionally I tried some tests trying to fight the AI at my city and in the open. Archers kept suicide themselves and melee units had no sense of self preservation. Typical bad AI. But, then I added Elvince's battle AI with some promising results. Archers were not nearly as suicidal. A couple came around flanks at strange times, but none barreled themselves up the middle. Calvary was still awful about running into spearmen. Seige units fired on cities before the melee engaged. Finally, I don't know if it was a glitch, but the units started running away when things were looking bleek. When I started to run them down and got out in the open his units turned around and slaughtered me when I was in bad position. I wish I would have seen if they were going to keep running back to their cities without my movement.
I think it might have went even better for the AI as well if they didn't have big penalties because I didn't give them Iron to go with their units. I need to re-balance the scenario so it is more typical of a game situation.
Anyway, soon as I get some more free time I'm going to put these two mods together for a King game and I'll report back soon with comparison to Vanilla AI.
Im a long time Civ player, new poster though, and after only spending a short amount of time <(30hrs) with Civ 5 I can see that there are some glaring weaknesses in the game play. I've already resorted to using some mods to balance out the economy that have worked out really well. Now I'm looking to combat.
It seems to me that the Art of War mod is moving in a good direction towards improving combat. I like the 1UPT and the ranged combat but I still think capturing cities is too easy. I have a suggestion that you might want to include.
I'd like to see an additional combat option for defending cities on top of Bombard which would be Attrition. The concept stems from the many historical sieges which decimated the city population as they helped defend the city.
The main points are:
1. City always fights at full strength on defence (similar to Bushido). (this might be too much of an advantage.)
2. In one turn if the cities strength is reduced to<50% then it loses population. On the next turn it returns to full strength. I chose 50% because I didn't want an exploitation where a single weak attack would cause the population to decrease.
3. Population loss can be proportional to the current size of the city so it can scale through the eras.
4. When a City is in Attrition mode it cannot Bombard. This is mainly a game mechanism so the player needs to make a choice between attrition and bombard. Combined with this, Attrition takes 1 turn to set up, similar to siege units needing to set up.
In addition there may be a happiness penalty on top of the population decrease. I think this will make capturing cities more difficult, at a calculated cost to the defender, and it will also increase the importance of siege units so you don't waste your meele units on weakening the city since it can re-heal.
I've dabbled in programming but I think these types of additions would be too time consuming for myself. I imagine a new icon needs to be included when an enemy is close to the city similar to the bulls-eye for bombard. Also, I have no idea how to make the AI use this in their own city defence. If someone else can implement this idea I'd be happy to see it in action.
It seems to me that the Art of War mod is moving in a good direction towards improving combat. I like the 1UPT and the ranged combat but I still think capturing cities is too easy. I have a suggestion that you might want to include.
I'd like to see an additional combat option for defending cities on top of Bombard which would be Attrition. The concept stems from the many historical sieges which decimated the city population as they helped defend the city.
The main points are:
1. City always fights at full strength on defence (similar to Bushido). (this might be too much of an advantage.)
2. In one turn if the cities strength is reduced to<50% then it loses population. On the next turn it returns to full strength. I chose 50% because I didn't want an exploitation where a single weak attack would cause the population to decrease.
3. Population loss can be proportional to the current size of the city so it can scale through the eras.
4. When a City is in Attrition mode it cannot Bombard. This is mainly a game mechanism so the player needs to make a choice between attrition and bombard. Combined with this, Attrition takes 1 turn to set up, similar to siege units needing to set up.
In addition there may be a happiness penalty on top of the population decrease. I think this will make capturing cities more difficult, at a calculated cost to the defender, and it will also increase the importance of siege units so you don't waste your meele units on weakening the city since it can re-heal.
I've dabbled in programming but I think these types of additions would be too time consuming for myself. I imagine a new icon needs to be included when an enemy is close to the city similar to the bulls-eye for bombard. Also, I have no idea how to make the AI use this in their own city defence. If someone else can implement this idea I'd be happy to see it in action.
Chiyochan
King
Sorry, the idea of roads requiring entire deforestation of tiles the size of a large city is laughable in my opinion, this adds an unnecessary and unsatisfying element to the game. other changes seem just as silly in my opinion, i guess the Mongols never captured any cities with their all cavalry army.
@kismet: awesome post. I will definately do some testing of my own.
@slyyt: interesting concept but not really sure at this time if it can be done, but rest assurd I will look into it and see what I can do.
@Chiyochan: The reason you cannot see why roads requiring deforestation is because like so many others I have seen in this forum post on scale assume that cities are in fact the correct size, but all other units are way off. If you think of it at a different angle, such as it requires the same size as a unit of archers, or a cupple of tanks, then the concept makes more sense. If I could increase the size of cities to realistic levels I would. For now just look at it in a different angle and it makes sense.
Also, when trying to make a historical reference, in order for it to be taken seriously it is always best that the civilization you are refering to actually exists in game. Making such a reference is the same as me saying that everyone should have amphibus units in the early medieval era because that is the way the vikings did it. If the Mongols actually existed in game, I might consider the ability to capture cities as bonus unit abilities for their civilization, but alas they do not.
In the future make your posts somewhat useful and not just a stupid attempt to pubilcally bash it. If you don't like the changes I have made then don't download it, what the hell do I care.
@slyyt: interesting concept but not really sure at this time if it can be done, but rest assurd I will look into it and see what I can do.
@Chiyochan: The reason you cannot see why roads requiring deforestation is because like so many others I have seen in this forum post on scale assume that cities are in fact the correct size, but all other units are way off. If you think of it at a different angle, such as it requires the same size as a unit of archers, or a cupple of tanks, then the concept makes more sense. If I could increase the size of cities to realistic levels I would. For now just look at it in a different angle and it makes sense.
Also, when trying to make a historical reference, in order for it to be taken seriously it is always best that the civilization you are refering to actually exists in game. Making such a reference is the same as me saying that everyone should have amphibus units in the early medieval era because that is the way the vikings did it. If the Mongols actually existed in game, I might consider the ability to capture cities as bonus unit abilities for their civilization, but alas they do not.
In the future make your posts somewhat useful and not just a stupid attempt to pubilcally bash it. If you don't like the changes I have made then don't download it, what the hell do I care.
Well, I too feel the horsemen not capturing cities might not be a good idea, but for different reasons. Basically, it doesn't really nerf horses at all, you just bring one soldier along for capping. Sorta like late game civ2, where one would just take a bunch of bombers, bomb the crap out of a city, and paratroop onto it. Didn't stop bombers from being absurdly powerful in killing cities.
SureYouCan
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 109
As an Iroquois player myself I have to ask how this mod affects their unique unit and civilization as a whole considering start bias often places them in forests as far as the eye can see.
If mohawk warriors can't enter forests what compensation have they been given? What about when you upgrade mohawks into longswords? Is that 50% bonus for forest/jungle combat now useless?
If mohawk warriors can't enter forests what compensation have they been given? What about when you upgrade mohawks into longswords? Is that 50% bonus for forest/jungle combat now useless?
SureYouCan
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2010
- Messages
- 109
Ah lol. I heard armor and pictured swordsman/great swordsman chugging along in their armor =). thanks for the answer though.
Qin Shi Huang
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2010
- Messages
- 83
sounds good
commenting just to subscribe lol
commenting just to subscribe lol
Its funny that you say that because now they are in the game
All mounted units should have a penalty when going cross forests, cause they don't really do that very well, but no city malus
Also can you make it so that spearmen/pikemen/musketmen are treated as light infantry(Weaker but faster than their conterparts) and swordsmen/longswordsmen/whatever replaces longswordsmen as heavy infantry (stronger, slower)
I hope this gets noticed because I made an account just to get this message across!
I am so excited about what you are doing with this mod, I feel like there is very little incentive in creating a veriety of units which not only makes combot less fun but less realistic.
Firstly IMO nothing with wheels or tracks should be allowed in forest or jungle without a road (things like anti tank guns and AA should be exempt because their size means they can realistically move through this type of terrain... well at least through forests). My dream solution would to have this rule applied but also give all infantry the ability to build "paths" which would provide no movement benefit beyond allowing for the movement of siege equipment, armor and mech infantry through rough terrain. This not only makes infantry more important ,increases the difficulty of offensive campaigns and the relevance of pillaging but it is realistic. Armies throughout history have had to build roads for this very purpose. Furthermore in the modern era its pointless to try to make mech infantry fill another roll than basic infantry because in reality they fill the same niche (BTW if this idea is to work properly there would need to be a "modern infantry" unit cheaper but same str as paratrooper). But as history will show us heavily wooded or jungled areas such as Vietnam make the use of mech infantry and armor basically impossible forcing the US to use modern infantry. This situation can be recreated by limiting movement as I have described and you have already suggested and the introduction of one new unit.
Sorry if something like this has already been brought up but I have been thinking about a mod like this since civ II and I got too excited to read through the entire thread.
I am so excited about what you are doing with this mod, I feel like there is very little incentive in creating a veriety of units which not only makes combot less fun but less realistic.
Firstly IMO nothing with wheels or tracks should be allowed in forest or jungle without a road (things like anti tank guns and AA should be exempt because their size means they can realistically move through this type of terrain... well at least through forests). My dream solution would to have this rule applied but also give all infantry the ability to build "paths" which would provide no movement benefit beyond allowing for the movement of siege equipment, armor and mech infantry through rough terrain. This not only makes infantry more important ,increases the difficulty of offensive campaigns and the relevance of pillaging but it is realistic. Armies throughout history have had to build roads for this very purpose. Furthermore in the modern era its pointless to try to make mech infantry fill another roll than basic infantry because in reality they fill the same niche (BTW if this idea is to work properly there would need to be a "modern infantry" unit cheaper but same str as paratrooper). But as history will show us heavily wooded or jungled areas such as Vietnam make the use of mech infantry and armor basically impossible forcing the US to use modern infantry. This situation can be recreated by limiting movement as I have described and you have already suggested and the introduction of one new unit.
Sorry if something like this has already been brought up but I have been thinking about a mod like this since civ II and I got too excited to read through the entire thread.
Yeah I think art of war will be one of the great mods, just wish Ordian would come back :O The main kink in the mod is the A.I. milling around the cities if the city defense gets too high, and there doesn't seem te be much in the way of being able to stop that. There's also a couple minor issues, like japan being wtf too powerful with 20 hp.
ttaylor0024
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3
Where can we download this?
