Balance Factors

[Toffer90]

@Toffer90: I don't recall your reasons for wanting to differ these scales of progression. Do you want to remind me what the logic for that is here so that I don't overlook your reasoning?

This is how handicap currently is:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
40 ▬ 40 ▬ 40
60 ▬ 60 ▬ 60
80 ▬ 80 ▬ 80
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100 (Noble)
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100

Only the AI is adjusted like this:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
130 ▬ 124 ▬ 115
120 ▬ 116 ▬ 110
110 ▬ 108 ▬ 105
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100 (Noble)
90 ▬ 92 ▬ 95
80 ▬ 84 ▬ 90
70 ▬ 76 ▬ 85
60 ▬ 68 ▬ 80
50 ▬ 60 ▬ 75

I think it's important that the AI is not boosted too much in tech directly because the unit and building boost (combined with other handicap benefits) indirectly boost tech progression; and I don't think high difficulty should mean the AI is always far ahead in tech. I believe that progression difference provides a more fun experience on the higher difficulties.

 

[Thunderbrd]

This is how handicap currently is:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
40 ▬ 40 ▬ 40
60 ▬ 60 ▬ 60
80 ▬ 80 ▬ 80
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100 (Noble)
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100

Only the AI is adjusted like this:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
124 ▬ 124 ▬ 115
116 ▬ 116 ▬ 110
108 ▬ 108 ▬ 105
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
92 ▬ 92 ▬ 95
84 ▬ 84 ▬ 90
etc.

I think it's important that the AI is not boosted too much in tech directly because the unit and building boost (combined with other handicap benefits) indirectly boost tech progression; and I don't think high difficulty should mean the AI is always far ahead in tech. I believe that progression difference provides a more fun experience on the higher difficulties.

Dear God thank you for putting it in a way that doesn't make my head hurt.

I think the question here is why the units and building costs vary in a different scale.

It looks like the tech costs aren't as severely differing as I might've suspected...

 

[Yudishtira]

The reason that the Deity player gets behind on tech should be because they have to turn the slider down regularly or else they run out of gold. Is there really nothing you can think of to address the 'too much gold' issue? Or is there some feedback that has convinced you not to touch it?

 

[Thunderbrd]

The reason that the Deity player gets behind on tech should be because they have to turn the slider down regularly or else they run out of gold. Is there really nothing you can think of to address the 'too much gold' issue? Or is there some feedback that has convinced you not to touch it?

It's something to address through Civics and buildings, not globals. Plus, if you aren't pulling in excess gold, you aren't making what you need to make to upgrade your troops, and really I find in play for me it just means that you've overgrown the empire too large for what you can handle at the time so it causes you to pull back on expansion efforts more than reduce the slider.

Since we've converted most things to working with gold as opposed to commerce, there's not much room on the slider for reacting to problems so when I have to start reducing the slider at all, it usually goes to 0 pretty quick. I think Joe's work on the civics is going to help with that.

Plus, in the early game so far I personally don't feel we have anywhere near too much gold but are right about on. As for later in the game I think it might be possible that at some point we do, like maybe starting at medieval or late classical somewhere.

 

[Yudishtira]

It's something to address through Civics and buildings, not globals. Plus, if you aren't pulling in excess gold, you aren't making what you need to make to upgrade your troops, and really I find in play for me it just means that you've overgrown the empire too large for what you can handle at the time so it causes you to pull back on expansion efforts more than reduce the slider.

Since we've converted most things to working with gold as opposed to commerce, there's not much room on the slider for reacting to problems so when I have to start reducing the slider at all, it usually goes to 0 pretty quick. I think Joe's work on the civics is going to help with that.

Plus, in the early game so far I personally don't feel we have anywhere near too much gold but are right about on. As for later in the game I think it might be possible that at some point we do, like maybe starting at medieval or late classical somewhere.

Upgrading troops is one place where the higher-difficulty player should extra-definitely need revenue-raising. It is ridiculously expensive after all - if you can afford that on Deity, you have too much gold. If the slider no longer works for revenue-raising sufficiently, well a. bummer!; and b. try something else: selling units, pillaging, maybe a bakesale

[Aside: in my 2013-2015 Aotearoa Maori game, in Modern (Monarch ^ Deity, Marathon), I could still only afford to upgrade my troops gradually, basically only the most experienced ones.]

Yeah agree gold is fine for early game. In this game I stopped having to build wealth after the 2nd Tapestry Maker (Textile Loom wasn't it?), but I was still rationing upgrades for another dozen or so turns (possibly more - I forget how quickly turns were going back then).

 

[JosEPh_II]

Since we've converted most things to working with gold as opposed to commerce, there's not much room on the slider for reacting to problems so when I have to start reducing the slider at all, it usually goes to 0 pretty quick.

Really? I hope not.

I still use the slider extensively. And it only stays on 100% in the early game at most. I start adjusting it by Ancient Era. Currently in the Long game it's been on 85% research and 5% Esp with an occasional 5% to Culture. It has been as low as 70% research. But that is because I needed to keep a certain level of Gold/turn to upgrade or buy a new city(s) a needed early building or 2.

 

[raxo2222]

Really? I hope not.

I still use the slider extensively. And it only stays on 100% in the early game at most. I start adjusting it by Ancient Era. Currently in the Long game it's been on 85% research and 5% Esp with an occasional 5% to Culture. It has been as low as 70% research. But that is because I needed to keep a certain level of Gold/turn to upgrade or buy a new city(s) a needed early building or 2.

This was done very long ago.
I guess this is source of too much gold problem.

This is how handicap currently is:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
40 ▬ 40 ▬ 40
60 ▬ 60 ▬ 60
80 ▬ 80 ▬ 80
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100 (Noble)
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100

Only the AI is adjusted like this:
Units - Buildings - Techs (from Settler → Deity)
124 ▬ 124 ▬ 115
116 ▬ 116 ▬ 110
108 ▬ 108 ▬ 105
100 ▬ 100 ▬ 100
92 ▬ 92 ▬ 95
84 ▬ 84 ▬ 90
etc.

I think it's important that the AI is not boosted too much in tech directly because the unit and building boost (combined with other handicap benefits) indirectly boost tech progression; and I don't think high difficulty should mean the AI is always far ahead in tech. I believe that progression difference provides a more fun experience on the higher difficulties.

Well I guess you forgot to scale units like buildings are scaled.
This is how AI handicaps are scaled.

            <iAITrainPercent>90</iAITrainPercent>
            <iAIWorldTrainPercent>90</iAIWorldTrainPercent>
            <iAIConstructPercent>92</iAIConstructPercent>
            <iAIWorldConstructPercent>92</iAIWorldConstructPercent>
            <iAICreatePercent>92</iAICreatePercent>
            <iAIWorldCreatePercent>92</iAIWorldCreatePercent>
             <iAIResearchPercent>95</iAIResearchPercent>

I was talking about scaling down unit/building costs in handicaps with @Thunderbrd, that they should scale like tech costs.
I wonder if Deity should be 1.5x step and then Nightmare be 2x step as usual.

Dear God thank you for putting it in a way that doesn't make my head hurt.

I think the question here is why the units and building costs vary in a different scale.

It looks like the tech costs aren't as severely differing as I might've suspected...

I guess I should have deleted other lists and leave only one with AI handicaps as defined in file.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Really? I hope not.

I still use the slider extensively. And it only stays on 100% in the early game at most. I start adjusting it by Ancient Era. Currently in the Long game it's been on 85% research and 5% Esp with an occasional 5% to Culture. It has been as low as 70% research. But that is because I needed to keep a certain level of Gold/turn to upgrade or buy a new city(s) a needed early building or 2.

This is kindof an overall C2C thing that's been this way for a while. I'm pointing towards how hard gold is to balance because what used to be a large grey zone is a much finer line now thanks to the switch to buildings playing with gold as opposed to commerce. For example, in Vanilla, Banks and Marketplaces gave +% to commerce rather than gold. This meant the commerce pool was larger and thus the slider had a lot more room to give with each shift. When we start making gold super challenging in c2c, it tends to go from 100% research to 0% research fairly quickly.

Besides, the way I play, I try to eat as much gold reserves and run in the negative for as long as I can without using the slider so it tends to be that if I'm using it at all, it means I'm in a budget deficit. If I need gold later, I just drop the slider to 0 and save up for a few rounds. So it's hard to push me into anything less than 100% research. I've used criminals and merchants and gold process in cities to run at a constant deficit without dropping that slider on many occasions so it's just not in my nature to feel comfortable running at less than 100% but I do have to admit that in the last game I ran at about 90% for quite a few rounds recently during the Ancient.

Well I guess you forgot to scale units like buildings are scaled.
This is how AI handicaps are scaled.

@Toffer90 hasn't answered my question as to what his original thinking was on setting it up this way but I've been remembering more and more about the conversation we had on it and it seemed like a rational decision (not an oversight) at the time. He was saying, back then, that the AI should be able to field more forces and use them on a whim on a harder setting than the tech to production ratio would normally allow, that the harder the setting, the more production overflow should be available for the AI. Kinda makes sense. It's possible that it's more severe of a difference than perhaps it should be.

I guess I should have deleted other lists and leave only one with AI handicaps as defined in file.

The way things were labeled and arranged were confusing and yes, what used to be is rather irrelevant to the discussion at this point.

 

[Toffer90]

@Toffer90 hasn't answered my question as to what his original thinking was on setting it up this way but I've been remembering more and more about the conversation we had on it and it seemed like a rational decision (not an oversight) at the time. He was saying, back then, that the AI should be able to field more forces and use them on a whim on a harder setting than the tech to production ratio would normally allow, that the harder the setting, the more production overflow should be available for the AI. Kinda makes sense. It's possible that it's more severe of a difference than perhaps it should be.

I did answer you, and you quoted my answer.

I think it's important that the AI is not boosted too much in tech directly because the unit and building boost (combined with other handicap benefits) indirectly boost tech progression; and I don't think high difficulty should mean the AI is always far ahead in tech. I believe that progression difference provides a more fun experience on the higher difficulties.

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I was talking about scaling down unit/building costs in handicaps with @Thunderbrd, that they should scale like tech costs.

Well don't do that, that would make the higher difficulties far too easy.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well yeah I suppose that was an answer but it wasn't the justification you gave back when I asked about that originally.

 

[Yudishtira]

A lot of this is from the Shock of the AI jumping out ahead as it has done. Now is this a bad thing? Not really, but...it worries players obviously when they get the tables turned on them. I'm just waiting for one of the Super Power AI's to finally Invade in the Long game. My co-inhabitants on my continent while ahead and are a good match up are not my real threat. It's the 4 AI on other continent(s) that are the "worry". So extrapolating, that by the time I get gunpowder units, I could be facing Mechanized Infantry and Modern Tanks and Jet fighters/Bombers and still have rudimentary gun powder units to face them with. I just don't think I could produce enough units to overcome the Arms superiority.

Of course that would finally be "Payback" from all the years of doing it to the AI!

Does Theodora still have that city on your continent? I've never seen a dangerous naval invasion in this game. I think if you can take the tech leader's 'beachhead' you'll be a lot safer.

Then again, do you have nukes turned off? With nukes they could defeat you without invading.

It's an interesting one-off experience having the AIs SO far ahead in tech. It's (arguably) the first attempt at making the hard difficulties hard again that has something to show for it. But it is very one-dimensional. The 'tech difficulty' has been raised 4-6 notches, but in other respects Deity still plays like what should be Noble or Prince.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Does Theodora still have that city on your continent? I've never seen a dangerous naval invasion in this game. I think if you can take the tech leader's 'beachhead' you'll be a lot safer.

Then again, do you have nukes turned off? With nukes they could defeat you without invading.

It's an interesting one-off experience having the AIs SO far ahead in tech. It's (arguably) the first attempt at making the hard difficulties hard again that has something to show for it. But it is very one-dimensional. The 'tech difficulty' has been raised 4-6 notches, but in other respects Deity still plays like what should be Noble or Prince.

Understand that the global balance factors that the AI are utilizing haven't changed much. The AI has improved because it improves its territory now and doesn't get stuck not doing it as it was doing. And it's constructing buildings that it needed but bugs were making it unable to see this need for these buildings. They are simply playing better. Therefore they are ahead. If you mean the strategic side of the AI still sucks, well sure. It's going to take a lot of dedicated and highly skilled coding work to get that solved. I'm getting to the point where that's possible and there's a lot of deficiencies to address that amounts to the need for a massive overhaul in a lot of areas. What we have makes them capable of playing the game and that's a huge improvement over what they once were at least. But as far as how they are handling the interior of the nation, they are doing much better now and that's why they are so much more threatening than they were. There are still some things to address with property control but it's currently better than it has ever been before the stage we're at now with that, so again, a lot of victories here.

 

[Yudishtira]

The main concrete thing I'm talking about from my game (apart from too much gold) is that the few civs who are two eras ahead are lagging behind the leaders in score and power. When Yagan (HRE, second in tech apart from some small vassals) last declared on me, he didn't even seriously contest naval superiority. I'm not asking for tactical genius - all he needed to do was have as many Frigates as I had Sloops of War, and that would be game over.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The main concrete thing I'm talking about from my game (apart from too much gold) is that the few civs who are two eras ahead are lagging behind the leaders in score and power. When Yagan (HRE, second in tech apart from some small vassals) last declared on me, he didn't even seriously contest naval superiority. I'm not asking for tactical genius - all he needed to do was have as many Frigates as I had Sloops of War, and that would be game over.

Well the problems are such that to improve them means to overhaul them entirely.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Does Theodora still have that city on your continent? I've never seen a dangerous naval invasion in this game. I think if you can take the tech leader's 'beachhead' you'll be a lot safer.

Then again, do you have nukes turned off? With nukes they could defeat you without invading.

It's an interesting one-off experience having the AIs SO far ahead in tech. It's (arguably) the first attempt at making the hard difficulties hard again that has something to show for it. But it is very one-dimensional. The 'tech difficulty' has been raised 4-6 notches, but in other respects Deity still plays like what should be Noble or Prince.

Yes she does. In fact because of it I'm building a decent working relationship with her Empire. By doing so it's keeping Kim Jong and Cleopatra from doing much damage atm. And I got Deganawida to call a truce because of it as well. Theodora's Capital is not that far away from my Northern Coast line either. I allowed the exchange of Embassies. Really felt I had no real choice. But it is so far working out. And I've bought a couple of Techs from her too. So I'm now I am a bit of a cash cow for her empire.

And yes I turn Nukes Off.

I am also playing a game on Noble level and it's a cake walk.

Only real game problem with the Immortal Long game, atm, is the EoT wait times are now over 7 minutes long. I can get 3-4 turns an hour If I really hurry thru my cities build queues.

 

[raxo2222]

10374

• Another adjustment to the tech cost rates through the ages. Still far too cheap and getting worse as the game goes.

When did you reach prehistoric era?
It should be reached at 10% of game, so on 100th turn of Blitz, 200th turn - Normal, 400th turn - Long and so on.

I balanced it at slow side in globals - that I wasn't beelining when I was balancing Prehistoric era.

 

[Thunderbrd]

When did you reach prehistoric era?
It should be reached at 10% of game, so on 100th turn of Blitz, 200th turn - Normal, 400th turn - Long and so on.

I balanced it at slow side in globals - that I wasn't beelining when I was balancing Prehistoric era.

Prehistoric seems to be right on target so it hasn't been getting any adjustments. I'm not looking at Prehistoric->Ancient in this so much as I'm looking at what's happening farther in. Again, my concern is not the calendar but it's probably helping there too. I'm trying to get games to more regularly stay at the target amount of turns to reach a tech as expressed here:

I've been using these goals for turns per tech:

1 ▬ Blitz
2 ▬ Normal
4 ▬ Long
6 ▬ Epic
8 ▬ Marathon
12 ▬ Snail
16 ▬ Eons
20 ▬ Eternity​

 

[raxo2222]

Prehistoric seems to be right on target so it hasn't been getting any adjustments. I'm not looking at Prehistoric->Ancient in this so much as I'm looking at what's happening farther in. Again, my concern is not the calendar but it's probably helping there too. I'm trying to get games to more regularly stay at the target amount of turns to reach a tech as expressed here:

Well I guess goals are aligned, since eras will be roughly aligned to calendar when you keep up that constant tech rate for entire game.

There are 941 techs, so blitz (1000 turns) would be closer to 1.062 turns per tech.
You absolutely need to research 898 techs to reach future tech (1.114 turns per tech).
So middle pace would be 1.088 turns per tech on blitz.

Eternity would be 21.24/22.28/21.76 turns per tech depending how you research techs.
Free techs and tech trading can considerably speed up things. TD/WFL can double or in most extreme cases even triple pace of research.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well I guess goals are aligned, since eras will be roughly aligned to calendar when you keep up that constant tech rate for entire game

That's right. Since the tech progress in the prehistoric is about right according to plan, then if that doesn't match the calendar target, then a more overall global adjustment that affects all ages would be more in order at that point. I'm not sure yet how well this matches but it'll take a lot of games on all manner of options to get a clear picture on that imo.

TD/WFL can double or in most extreme cases even triple pace of research.

True but not as commonly for the tech leader who's the one who's supposed to be hitting the calendar landmarks at the appropriate junctures.

BTW, I found a severe problem with the tech tree but I'll bring it up in that thread.

 

[raxo2222]

That's right. Since the tech progress in the prehistoric is about right according to plan, then if that doesn't match the calendar target, then a more overall global adjustment that affects all ages would be more in order at that point. I'm not sure yet how well this matches but it'll take a lot of games on all manner of options to get a clear picture on that imo.


True but not as commonly for the tech leader who's the one who's supposed to be hitting the calendar landmarks at the appropriate junctures.

BTW, I found a severe problem with the tech tree but I'll bring it up in that thread.

Ah so tech leader is meant to reach Ancient era in 6000 BC?
I thought half of players are meant to be in Ancient era by 6000 BC.
That is example for Ancient era.

On Noble/Prince/Monarch its easy for player to be tech leader.
As for Nightmare with TD/WFL limited to AI it can end up with that scenario, where player is less advanced one.

Also what problems with tech tree?
Graphical issues in prehistoric era?
Eras being too easy to beeline trough?
Or some structural issue?