I don't think D1 is a gameoption but I placed D2 in the list.
I'll move the list to one of my posts on the first page of this thread.
Breaking Save Game Compatibility for v37
- Thread starter Thunderbrd
- Start date
I'll move the list to one of my posts on the first page of this thread.
What about options that are already hidden, but should really never be set/unset. Like
By now these options should be removed from the core, to make things easier for the modders.
And then there is the option "Divine Prophets": Sounds very nice, but makes a mockery of the tech tree, seems to be bug-ridden and was IIRC the original reason to un-line the religion techs.
- assimilation
- usable mountains
- (perhaps) new seed on loading
By now these options should be removed from the core, to make things easier for the modders.
And then there is the option "Divine Prophets": Sounds very nice, but makes a mockery of the tech tree, seems to be bug-ridden and was IIRC the original reason to un-line the religion techs.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
See my Edited post above. I listed more.
And D1. is Still an Option, albeit a broken one. And Civics will likely get an overhaul soon too.
JosEPh
What's the tag-name of D1 then?
What about no positive/negative traits? I think they should stay as options.
There are three other trait related options, but I have no idea which does what:
GAMEOPTION_PURE_TRAITS
GAMEOPTION_COMPLEX_TRAITS
GAMEOPTION_LS612_TRAITS
... Can someone expand my knowledge about the three?
Any changes to the traits gameoptions must consider the future direction for traits; TB would have a better picture of that future than me.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Traits Options:Again these were created out of the Uproar of Sgt Slicks' Original set, which is no longer in the Mod by the way.
Both T-brd and ls612 made these extra Trait Options as a way of mitigating the impact of Slick's set.
T-brd authored the Negative, Positive, and the Pure, (and I think) Complex. Although has Complex been hidden? As I don't recall seeing it in the list lately.
ls612's set was a counter to Slick's outrageous set and a much more toned down set. And is a playable set.
Again, to repeat myself, almost all of these Trait Options were Reactions to Slick's Original set that is No Longer in the Mod. Therefore they All are redundant, yes even T-brds Neg and Pos Options.
But I can see some thinking they are good as they were also designed to work with Developing Leaders. Again another attempt by T-brd to mitigate Slick's and add his own take on Traits. And an Unfinished Option that both DH and T-brd have discussed but put on their collective back burners so to speak.
JosEPh
Both T-brd and ls612 made these extra Trait Options as a way of mitigating the impact of Slick's set.
T-brd authored the Negative, Positive, and the Pure, (and I think) Complex. Although has Complex been hidden? As I don't recall seeing it in the list lately.
ls612's set was a counter to Slick's outrageous set and a much more toned down set. And is a playable set.
Again, to repeat myself, almost all of these Trait Options were Reactions to Slick's Original set that is No Longer in the Mod. Therefore they All are redundant, yes even T-brds Neg and Pos Options.
But I can see some thinking they are good as they were also designed to work with Developing Leaders. Again another attempt by T-brd to mitigate Slick's and add his own take on Traits. And an Unfinished Option that both DH and T-brd have discussed but put on their collective back burners so to speak.
JosEPh
Taxman66
King
I'd like to keep the no traits option; at least until they are balanced and the AI isn't overly crippled by them.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
AFAIK, by Not selecting any Trait Options you get the default set. What you are referring to as the No traits. By removing All the others that is what you would still get. It's what you, DH, and myself usually use all the time. And I would guess a lot of other players as well.
JosEPh
strategyonly
C2C Supreme Commander
Since we are talking about traits, does anyone want to get rid of the Negative Traits, and just play with the normal traits??
what about assimilation, i thought that was a great thing??
Nightmare is 2 levels ABOVE each level listed?? what are u talking about??
what about assimilation, i thought that was a great thing??
Nightmare is 2 levels ABOVE each level listed?? what are u talking about??
So if not a single trait option is selected there won't be any traits in the game; good to know. I thought there was some default set, hence I always choose the No neg/pos traits options; don't have to do that anymore then.
Taxman66
King
No, I'm referring to the option set that prevents all traits. It requires the following settings:
No Negative Traits - On
Start without Positive Traits - On
Developing Leaders - Off
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
Correct. This is and was meant to mean 'no traits at all'.
Joseph is almost right about a lot of things there but let me clear up the record on this:
GAMEOPTION_PURE_TRAITS(Pure Traits)
All tags on all traits are given to be declared inside the code as having a positive and negative value. In this regard positive and negative meaning beneficial or penalizing. A negative number on some tags may mean a positive benefit.
We introduced the idea of having Positive and Negative traits. If you ever play developing leaders it becomes clear that there are positive traits (the 'blue set') that are overall beneficial to the leader and the negative traits (the 'red set') that are overall a penalty to the leader. By default, leaders in C2C are supposed to be assigned 2 Positive Traits and 1 Negative Trait. These are those they start with under most game option configurations.
This concept still exists.
Where the disagreement took place was when the traits were being redesigned, many of us wanted Positive Traits to have some small percentage of negative penalties within the trait profile and to have Negative traits also have some small percentage of positive value within the trait profile. There were many who felt this was dramatically overcomplicating things.
Those like myself who argued FOR this blend of benefits within traits individually argued that no personality feature a person can have is all good or all bad itself. All have strengths and weaknesses but also all can be generally more beneficial or more detrimental as a whole.
To quell the argument and out of respect for my opponents in the discussion, I created Pure Traits.
The trick behind Pure Traits is to have the code take all harmful values on a positive trait and disable those tags in that case and to take all the beneficial values on negative traits and disable those tags in that case. Thus the traits are 'Pure'. They are uncorrupted by the slight introduction of negativity on Positive traits and the slight introduction of benefit on Negative traits.
This option is still entirely valid and fundamental to trait design in C2C no matter what form the traits would take (hopefully any trait designer would understand the philosophy of course.)
GAMEOPTION_COMPLEX_TRAITS(Hidden and disabled currently by default - awaiting my design approach implementation)
I created this as the shell of the way in which I would introduce my own trait set so as to not stomp all over Slick's efforts with my own vision. I dramatically disagreed with he and ls612 over so many design decisions that I was in the process of designing these traits when SO asked me to just drop it and get back to the Combat Mod. The option could be removed but I would leave it there so that I can introduce, eventually, my set AS an option first so that those who dislike it could go with the core instead. And whomever works the core traits I can simply not care if I disagree with them.
GAMEOPTION_LS612_TRAITS(Focused Traits)
ls612 had his own vision of how traits should be designed. Can't blame a guy for having such a strong conviction that he cannot accept the direction Slick and I (also in nearly as intense disagreement with each other) wanted to go. I patently disregard this option myself since I know the fundamental disagreements between us that he infused into it. But I don't mind the option's existence ... I do still mind the offensive insinuation in its text that it's 'obviously superior'.
Start with No Positive Traits offers us the following toggles:
1) On Developing Leaders it allows you to start off with no traits at all and earn your way into both positive and negative traits. If No Negative traits is on then you will not earn any negative traits along the way.
2) With Developing Leaders off you either get only the default negative traits leaders are assigned in their definitions, or you have No Negative traits on and thus simply play with no traits at all. Which of late has been popular for some because of the imbalances I pointed out to both slick and ls612 whom were unfortunately the only ones to implement their sets.
To clarify: SGT Slick's set is the core default. However it has been tweaked a bit since initial introduction by himself (without announcing all tweaks as he went on the forum) and other modders given that it is the 'core' set. It is Focused Traits that is ls612's alternative set.
I don't think its time to try to address these options and initiate the removal of any of them yet. I want to complete my set first and see how it is received by playtesting. I also don't mind if people are playtesting ls612's philosophies. I would hope people can tell the difference enough to comment on those differences. They seemed pretty dramatically different to me.
But aside from that 'alternative set' the rest of the leader options are not just to quell old arguments but to keep those old arguments from ever being a contestable issue again. It was proven that we could not come to consensus on these divisions of design philosophy. It is where this happens that options must be defined.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
The limits to number of cities needs to be increased and enforced much more. There should also be more limits on units. Unfortunately the only way to do that is by making units national units and there is an option to remove it. As Joe indicated elsewhere this is the only way to ensure the game is playable beyond the Renaissance.
Assimilation and Usable Mountains have to be on for C2C so they can be removed.
New seed on loading and the other random one need to be combined as one but with the warning that no debugging of problems will be possible if you use it.
Trait options should be cut back. To get no traits you have to select no positive and no negative why not juts no traits? I would like one static set and one Developing Leader set. So that there are only three Trait options of which only two will be displayed as the default is what you get if you don't select the others.
Maximum Population may have been one of mine. In all Civ versions prior to Civ IV your city population could not grow above a certain number if you did not have the infrastructure to allow it. In Civ III iirc it was an aquaduct to get above pop 6 and hospital to get above pop 12. I liked the implementation in the BtS mod Total War which was a bit more flexible with a couple of buildings allowing a small increase in that limit. An alternative is a reduction in hammers with excess population as more and more people are involved in moving the necessities of life around the city eg water and food.
Assimilation and Usable Mountains have to be on for C2C so they can be removed.
New seed on loading and the other random one need to be combined as one but with the warning that no debugging of problems will be possible if you use it.
Trait options should be cut back. To get no traits you have to select no positive and no negative why not juts no traits? I would like one static set and one Developing Leader set. So that there are only three Trait options of which only two will be displayed as the default is what you get if you don't select the others.
- Static traits (default for now)
- No traits
- Developing Leaders (this will be the default eventually)
Maximum Population may have been one of mine. In all Civ versions prior to Civ IV your city population could not grow above a certain number if you did not have the infrastructure to allow it. In Civ III iirc it was an aquaduct to get above pop 6 and hospital to get above pop 12. I liked the implementation in the BtS mod Total War which was a bit more flexible with a couple of buildings allowing a small increase in that limit. An alternative is a reduction in hammers with excess population as more and more people are involved in moving the necessities of life around the city eg water and food.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
As you know we have a dramatic disagreement in this design direction (and necessity for it) so we must allow the option to enable your vision and mine at the same time. I do not wish to try to come to a middle ground on that because I think we can both agree that this would be an unsatisfactory solution for both of us. I don't think you're position invalid but I think we both need the room to see if we can accomplish our balance goals in the ways we wish to go about it. We can both learn a lot by enabling this.
Better to turn off and make invisible so make them solid defaults. The code would need a lot of rewriting to remove all the condition switches these options create there and would be kinda a waste of time to do at the moment.
Again, there's a lot of unnecessary work to be done to make this a reality when both have their own 'backdoor' cause for existing even if they should not be used in general.
Because on Developing Leaders you have the option of having the leaders start with their default traits or no traits and simply build your leader from the ground up. Furthermore, the disagreement over whether there should or should not be Negative Traits in play at all needs its own option.
I can understand why you want that - it's simpler. But design philosophies could not be negotiated to find common ground which is why Pure Traits is necessary. Believe me... it really IS necessary! If a new trait set I do have in the works (or anyone else's trait design) makes for a set we can all agree on as being 'the core' set, then we could make it the core and eliminate Complex Traits and Focused Traits but until then, I'm pretty sure we're picking what our opinion of the best of two evils is between Focused Traits on and Focused Traits off. Thus for now, since we do not have consensus on which set to use, Focused Traits remains.
Dancing Hoskuld
Deity
I turn all traits off at the moment because they are not balanced. If I play with my favorite leader they get the science trait and before long I am almost two eras ahead of my nearest rival because of my play style.
Yes I play Noble level but that is because all the harder levels make big of combat something I am not interested in.
Yes I play Noble level but that is because all the harder levels make big of combat something I am not interested in.
strategyonly
C2C Supreme Commander
How the heck do u get 2 era's ahead, i cant even keep up with the AI, i am Always behind on everything. Thats why i play on Epic or Marathon, its waaay better for the AI, IMPO. And by the time i hit Medieval era, i am waaaaaaay behind . .
But of course i do NOT build more than 2 cities in PreH, 4-5 cities in Ancient (unless there is a civ close, but he usually has 5X more troops than me also) , and so forth . .
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Current New game SVN 9102 I have No Trait Options On (all boxes unchecked) nor Developing Leader (box not checked). Yet if I mouse over my Flag, my Leader David of Israel will show 3 Traits all from the Main C2C set that T-brd made.
EDIT: Just read down to T-brd's explanation of the Traits and this set taxman is talking about.
I do use ls612's Trait set from time to time and have found it to be just as usable as the Core set.
Now I will pick at T-brd's statement here that the Core set is Slick's set. It's a Very pared down Slick's set (in fact if you would see Slick's original set and what we have now you would not recognize the current set as being from Slick). It was adjusted wholesale by T-brd for the most part until I did some adjustments with it's Crime giving conditions. T-brd's adjustments were to quell the Firestorm that was erupting over Slick's original set. Design impass that T-brd writes about.
From T-brd's post some of the missing elements for me and my comprehension of the Trait Options are now plainly written and eliminates some of my confusion.
All that said I would not mind if BtS default traits could somehow be accessed again in this mod. IF that means ls612's set Or the Core Slick/T-brd set has to go then so be it. Then T-brd can present his take on Traits ie his hidden Complex Traits and the further Development of Developing Leaders that only has 1 level currently that both DH and T-brd want to give more levels too. Warning though, I can guarantee that when T-brd fleshes out his Complex Traits it will most certainly live up to it's name. All of T-brd's Options are Complex. He can not help himself in this regards.
I don't recall ever saying this DH. In fact I stand opposed to City Limits of any kind.
I have said that the Option City Limits by Civics and ls612's Option City Limits by Map Scale are redundant and obsolete because other processes have been put into the game that Does limit early expansion and the number of cities now in comparison from the time and circumstances that precipitated those 2 Options being made and put into the Mod back then.
As for Unit limits, I have only a handful I'd like to see limited.
The real culprit for excessive units in the game is the fact that Cities have been made Way Too Hard to conquer especially early game. Coupled with the fact that the past set of Modders (with you being 1 of the lone exceptions) are all war mongers and not builders. Therefore the AI is Coded heavily on the war making side and will pump units out to accomplish this coding regardless of their empires lagging in financial, happiness, health, or production.
EDIT: One more edit, an Option that I find to Clearly set the AI back is the Mastery Victory condition. This overarching Victory set made by Afforess ill fits this Mod. Especially in the case that our longest game speed is 14,000 turns and AND's is 4800 turns. Even our supposed Main game speed Snail is over 1200 turns longer than AND's longest for which Mastery was designed. If Mastery is eliminated and players have to choose a set of Main Victory conditions you will have games with better AI participation. They will have fewer goals to focus on allowing them to have a focus. The AI is not built to try and accomplish every Victory condition. A limited set is better for it.
JosEPh
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Some of the Negative Traits if used on the longer game speeds can be AI killers. Certain Negative traits are why you can find an AI early to mid game with 1 or 2 cities while the rest of the AI have 10+.
In the game I was fighting T-brd over the proliferation of Rams and posted from, the AI I took out, Heke of the Maori, has one of those traits. I have to look again to see if it was the Cruel Trait.
When you say "normal traits" do you mean default BtS Traits. If so then yes for me.
JosEPh
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
I have floated the idea before that a game option be designed to either use the default bts set of traits or that we re-instill the default bts set of traits and allow alternative set options to allow players the viewpoints of other modders that have designed their own. I would not be against either approach.
