Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
Only in C2C no other Civ IV or mod of it uses that interpretation. =0 says that the building is not needed in the city. That is the meaning of the words in the tag "Needed In City"!
Balance Factors
- Thread starter Thunderbrd
- Start date
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
In any other mod or Vanilla it's the same. If you use the 0 it's the same as not using the tag at all. Not Needed in City is still Not Needed in City. I just verified this by reading the CivIV BtS original code.
If you disagree, then tell me this, what does not using the tag at all mean then?
Nah, I looked in base beyond the sword dll, and if that value is set to zero then that's exactly the same as not having the BuildingClassNeededs tag in the buildingInfo xml.
0 is the default for all buildings in the game, 1 is the only other state it can be in. There is no third state that says the building must be in another city.
This is Vanilla BtS DLL:
0 means not needed in this city (it does not mean needed anywhere else either because then all buildings in the game would need all other buildings in the game built within the nation)
1 means needed in this city.
I guess you were way overthinking on this.
There is absolutely NO difference between two exampled below and newer was.
Two buildings "X" are needed anywhere in empire.
Code:
<PrereqBuildingClasses>
<PrereqBuildingClass>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<iNumBuildingNeeded>2</iNumBuildingNeeded>
</PrereqBuildingClass>
</PrereqBuildingClasses>
<BuildingClassNeededs>
<BuildingClassNeeded>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<bNeededInCity>0</bNeededInCity>
</BuildingClassNeeded>
</BuildingClassNeededs>Two buildings "X" are needed anywhere in empire.
Code:
<PrereqBuildingClasses>
<PrereqBuildingClass>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<iNumBuildingNeeded>2</iNumBuildingNeeded>
</PrereqBuildingClass>
</PrereqBuildingClasses>------------------------------------------------------------
Difference is only in this case:
Two buildings "X" are needed anywhere including one in same city.
Code:
<PrereqBuildingClasses>
<PrereqBuildingClass>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<iNumBuildingNeeded>2</iNumBuildingNeeded>
</PrereqBuildingClass>
</PrereqBuildingClasses>
<BuildingClassNeededs>
<BuildingClassNeeded>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<bNeededInCity>1</bNeededInCity>
</BuildingClassNeeded>
</BuildingClassNeededs>Two buildings "X" are needed anywhere in empire.
Code:
<PrereqBuildingClasses>
<PrereqBuildingClass>
<BuildingClassType>BUILDINGCLASS_X</BuildingClassType>
<iNumBuildingNeeded>2</iNumBuildingNeeded>
</PrereqBuildingClass>
</PrereqBuildingClasses>That is <bNeededInCity>0</bNeededInCity> is default state of things, and there is no need to include that, unless you are overriding building in module or something.
It is like this anywhere.
<bNeededInCity> like any other <bTag> is just on/off switch.
Last edited:
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
I'm finding that average research times per tech are still dropping quite a bit through progressive ages so I'm making an adjustment to era research cost modifiers to add another cumulative 10% per age after prehistoric. That should hopefully help. Maybe enough, maybe not enough still. Feedback is desired. @raxo2222 I'm not sure if this will help with your new time table or require yet more fiddling but I suspect it will help some.
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
12-18 turns per tech in Renaissance (Eons, Deity) seems pretty slow to me. I'm sure the earlier eras were livelier, at least most of the time. With the tech leader in Industrial teching twice as fast, I don't feel I need any more millstones around my neck. Then again, I'm not really a Deity-level player and have no desire to be. I only play it because it's the highest difficulty I can handle (only by starting on Monarch btw), and maybe I shouldn't be able to...
It should help here.
Emperor/Immortal players easily outrun calendar.
Eons is 16k turns so you should research tech per around 16 - 18 turns.
I guess you should stay at Immortal then.
Also nice keeping pace behind AIs - Joseph on Immortal fell two eras behind AI, and that never happened to him in quarter game - recent changes here and there gave boost to AI.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Are you hogging all the Wonders (NW, WW, and DH's )? Especially the early ones That makes a Huge difference. Did you get your favorite Religion (s) early too. That too makes a huge difference. If No to both then you will feel the pinch. If Yes to both then you see what you are reporting.
Did you immediately settle at game start? Did you have to search a few turns for a better spot? Makes a difference.
So far in the series of test games on Normal and Long GS, and 1 Snail (which I hate to play), the AI is in need to adjustment not so much the player. Or conversely the player needs a bit of a break to at least stay 1 to 1 1/2 era, not 2 and 1/2, behind the AI on Emperor or Immortal Diff.
Kudos to Yudishtira for being able to stay within 1+ era of the AI on Deity. Well done Yudishtira, well done!
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Not my game but she's a bit behind actually.
She's now starting to be caught up and getting some but it's been a sensation in a lot of games that the average turn to tech is decreasing as the game goes and that's before this Medieval point she's at. It's getting too fast for her to keep up with construction at all and we've already adjusted the construction cost curve.
She's getting techs in 2-3 rnds on Epic/Emperor and I'm thinking the goal was to get techs a round or two slower than that (Avg target is 4 right?). The problem gradiates through time so that's the purpose of that modifier is to address the tech cost curve so that it does fairly well at meeting the tech generation curve.
It will help with the AI a bit but it's not really the goal of this particular adjustment so much as it is for the player's experience.
If the AI needs to be held back some, fine, but I'm not yet entirely convinced - I know they are doing exceedingly well on the super hard setting you're on. Not yet sure if that's just appropriate for the difficulty level.
I'd prefer to see Noble eventually become the normal game difficulty one wants to play thanks to the AI playing nearly as well as the player does. This is the point at which the AI isn't handicapped at all and should thus be exactly what even a good player will want to play at IF the AI can play with nearly the skill of a human.
The reason the AI is so far ahead right now on these games we've been seeing is because we removed some major points of stupidity for them and they've been thriving as a result. We MAY be able to get away with reducing the handicap values for them a bit but for the most part handicaps aren't not applied against the AI as much as it is applied against the player - not saying there's not a little of both depending on what kind of handicap we're talking about of course. I'm explaining this more for those who are reading - I know you know a lot on the subject and perhaps you can make a proposal as to what specifically you're thinking should be adjusted.
Thing is, on Emperor, also a very elite setting, again, Medieval era, she's starting to catch up and surpass them in research, so I think it might take a little more evaluation. She's using tech diffusion so that may have helped her catch up faster - no tech trading - no WFL.
Anyhow, Rax was already saying that the time table is being beaten a bit too easily so theoretically due to that alone, this should be an appropriate next step to take to try to balance things back out.
I'm sure you've noticed a gradual decrease in the turn times to reach a tech since the Prehistoric right? I mean, yes it's supposed to waver a bit as the tech cost steadily increases on a curve and the tech output varies a lot based on buildings, number of cities and so on, but if we're seeing an overall gradual reduction in how many turns it takes to earn a tech as the game goes on, this is the way to react to recalibrate things and we're still looking for zeroing in on these calibrations on a fine tuning level at this point.
If it ends up feeling too severe, let's discuss, but again, this is based on speculative prediction and we'll have to see if it is felt much and if it corrects appropriately.
Last edited:
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Next time either of you start a new game don't use any of the Tech helping or hindering Options. Turn Tech Diffusion Off, leave WFL Off , leave Beeline Stings Off, and finally do not turn on Tech handicaps for human. Then you will see how well the AI is performing. You have been getting a glimpse in my save game as there is no tech help for anyone in it. Everyone is on their own. But I do allow Tech Trading and Tech Brokering. Makes Diplomacy matter that much more.
I know that if I had put Tech Diffusion On I would not be (now) 3 full eras behind the AI tech leaders (plural intended). At least 2 of the AI are Now in Modern Era and I just researched Papacy in Medieval.
Are these adjustments directed to only the player? Or are they across the board, AI and player both?
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
In my consideration here, I'm able to keep Tech Diffusion, the only of the ones mentioned that she's playing with, out of things because she's not getting any. She's ahead. I'm not thinking about the AI's progression here either. I'm also not really looking at the timeline and trying to get it to match but that's more of a secondary concern. The primary goal is to get the turn times back up to about 4 rounds to reach a tech, given that's the goal average of her game speed and where she's at she was absolutely solidly sitting at 2 rounds per tech. I got them up to 3 rounds each here and I won't add more for now without seeing how things play out as the game continues to progress. Just looking at one era, it might be due to her being ahead of a curve in growth and development that's causing the turns to tech average to be off from the norm so I'm taking care to try not to overpower things and the real danger is that noteable shifts to the curve here could mean far too severe balance adjustments taking place later.
The adjustment is to the cost of all techs for all players.
@Thunderbrd you should reach ancient era at 10% mark - 9% to 11% is good enough place.
Half of all players should be in Ancient era at 10% of game.
I scaled globals for Monarch players.
Half of all players should be in Ancient era at 10% of game.
I scaled globals for Monarch players.
Last edited:
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Good. Thanks
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
I reached Renaissance on turn 3869/272AD (Eons: 10% = 1600). I shouldn't be half way through Classical, correct? I started on Monarch, but have been on Deity since t2800. Which should presumably slow me down further. Weirdly I was slow reaching Ancient (t1889), and I think I was at Monarch all that time - certainly never above Emperor. Since then it's been accelerating: 1200t to Classical; 400 to Medieval; 365 to Renaissance.
Sorry to be so negative, but to me it suggests not only that the global scaling isn't working, but that it just doesn't work. There are too many other factors.
I would love the calendar to keep up with me, but I'm no closer to that this version than in the past (my 1st custom game was on then-Normal speed and I remember being in Renaissance around 1100AD, so that was the closest: that was v29 or was it 27?).
And now I've got the runaway tech leader in Modern before 400AD, so the calendar was clearly never intended to keep up with him...
Last edited:
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Is this on a new game since the adjustment that was just made over the weekend? There's nothing to say the global scaling isn't helping but I still suspect it's not nearly applied strongly enough. I just didn't want to keep adding to it at this point without feedback so is this a clean sample?
You should be somewhere in Classical era.
AI gets lower research/construction costs, if players chooses higher handicap - that was inverted since V38.5
Scaling of building/unit costs is stronger than techs - that is if on Nightmare tech is 1.5x cheaper, then buildings and units are 2.5x cheaper for AI than for players.
Eons is 16 000 turns, so you should get tech per 16 - 17 turns.
Actual values:
Research speeds were virtually unchanged and even scaled down for Deity/Nightmare.
For AI building/unit costs are lowered much harder than tech costs:
Nightmare AI construction discount is 56% and tech discount is 35%
Immortal AI - 32/20% respectively.
Nice experiment would be halving tech research steps to 2 and increasing building steps to 10.
Last edited:
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
Sorry but is that a serious question?
How would I have got to Renaissance on Eons since the weekend?
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Never know...Sorry but is that a serious question?
Did you notice an uptick in the turns it takes to research a tech with the adjustments I made this weekend?
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
That's what I thought. Well, I'm not. I don't have another post-38.5 game to compare with, but roughly speaking, I'm still as far ahead of the calendar as in previous games/versions. Which is why I say the scaling doesn't work: because I agree it should be having an effect... it just doesn't.
And if it's keeping to the calendar we're talking about, it should be the tech leader who the calendar keeps pace with, don't you think? The Renaissance was the renaissance of the tech-leading Italian princedoms, not of (for example) sub-Saharan Africa, or Australia, which were still prehistoric.
Yudishtira
Spiritual/Creative
Oh that's right. The latest SVN makes my life even more unpleasant. You think I should be teching even slower, and I think Toffer made it so I can't build espionage as efficiently (after research, espionage is the area I'm most in danger of falling behind on).
Lucky me that I don't get new SVNs all that often
.For the record, I have too much gold (300K, +2K/turn), and no problems with properties. So I would welcome balance tweaking in those areas (within reason...)
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll