C2C - Civics Discussion Thread

I would say the opposite on both as I rarely see either. Foxes yes there are too many of them and pigeons also but that is true in RL also. Musk Ox is the one I see far to many of.
 
I would say the opposite on both as I rarely see either. Foxes yes there are too many of them and pigeons also but that is true in RL also. Musk Ox is the one I see far to many of.
I definitely agree with this also . .i guess that could have been foxes and not dog units, sorry. . .
 
Last edited:
I've seen s a few possible reasons why a couple of overpowering spawns may be that way. I'm going to read the entire code to determine how we can make some simple improvements (probably the code is basically fine but we could use some other established xml methodology to improve things. We'll see.)
 
I've seen s a few possible reasons why a couple of overpowering spawns may be that way. I'm going to read the entire code to determine how we can make some simple improvements (probably the code is basically fine but we could use some other established xml methodology to improve things. We'll see.)
If u have other stuff to do, do that first ok, this can wait for awhile, thx . .
 
I've seen s a few possible reasons why a couple of overpowering spawns may be that way. I'm going to read the entire code to determine how we can make some simple improvements (probably the code is basically fine but we could use some other established xml methodology to improve things. We'll see.)
Some simplification would be nice. Using the current set of parameters to set values is to difficult to balance. I don't know if it would be possible to set up something that is more based on animal rather than the terrain generated for the map. Using the old D&D standard of COMMON, UNCOMMON, RARE and VERY_RARE or something a bit simpler than we now have.

I tried to set it up that the Ngorongoro Crater natural wonder would spawn all the animals in the region that the crater was generated to represent the fact that it is a place of plentiful wildlife in the Real World but all I got was Brown Bears.
 
Some simplification would be nice. Using the current set of parameters to set values is to difficult to balance. I don't know if it would be possible to set up something that is more based on animal rather than the terrain generated for the map. Using the old D&D standard of COMMON, UNCOMMON, RARE and VERY_RARE or something a bit simpler than we now have.

I tried to set it up that the Ngorongoro Crater natural wonder would spawn all the animals in the region that the crater was generated to represent the fact that it is a place of plentiful wildlife in the Real World but all I got was Brown Bears.
OMYGOD!!!!! DH HAS AN AVATAR!!! Very cool one at that! Rather cerebral and meaningful. Much respect bro!

I was thinking something similar as far as the frequency goes. BUT there's another factor that I've immediately noticed, and this is the prerequisite plot factors. Ex: a Bison can only come from a plot with a Bison resource but a Jaguar can spawn from any Jungle, Forest or Savannah. Obviously, you're going to have a lot more Jaguar than Bison. I'm also not sure a few tags were employed by the xml designer in the manner the programmer intended. The situation you give about the crater also helps to illuminate that there are a few other things to take a look at in the coding as well - should be easy to spot how this happens when I review it more closely. I quite like our spawning but I do see need for system improvement.

IMO, this is one of the most serious issues the mod has right now. All this wonderful diversity and we get swarmed by bears, foxes and eagles. This is not just a problem in the frequency of spawn results for one group of animals or another (and there's a few creatures that need to have their team changed as well.) I also find some of the strength disparities still not adding up. Jaguars are cool at 4 str (maybe... with all the benefits big cats get they maybe shouldn't be THAT high) but they're stronger than bears? I'd like to see a Jaguar TRY to take down a bear. That said, for as common as bears are, I'm glad they aren't as powerful as they should be. And a Jaguar certainly isn't as dangerous or as powerful as a Lion, which has a 2 or 3 str... Things like that need review.
 
Speaking of animals and herds and such, one thing I'm a bit annoyed at is that poultry is such a relatively difficult thing to get. But it's not so much about animal spawning, ducks are common enough that you'll likely get atleast one city with it, but the fact that you can't spread it around when chickens and ducks are in reality the animals most frequently and readily brought with human colonisation. But there is some imbalance in spawning aswell as one tends to get more turkeys and ostrichs than ordinary poultry (And ofcourse eagles galore as already mentioned). Also I'm playing on a huge archipelago map, and there are a number of very important resources that only spawns at a single location in the whole world, things like copper, horses, sulphur, iron e.t.c. I opened up the world-builder and added a few stuff, especially as some resources didn't exist at all, I think it was Tin especially which ironically has spawned twice through event since then. I have noticed that a few things have spawned since then but it's all resources I already had before, so I'm wondering if the mining resource events are tied to what resources you already have connected because I don't think they should be.
 
I have not read all the way back but what does Animal spawns have to do with Civics?

JosEPh
 
I have not read all the way back but what does Animal spawns have to do with Civics?

JosEPh
Nothing, just s secondary talk, because now they left off the "OFF TOPICS" icon . .our bad . . .
 
@SO: can we get at least a little anarchy starting with all civics from the Ancient forward? I have to also admit that I feel we've lost one of the best features of the early era and that was the test of timing skill with the first golden age from the controlled fire wonder being called on at just the right moment to minimize the revolts from the anarchy on the earliest civic changes.
 
@SO: can we get at least a little anarchy starting with all civics from the Ancient forward? I have to also admit that I feel we've lost one of the best features of the early era and that was the test of timing skill with the first golden age from the controlled fire wonder being called on at just the right moment to minimize the revolts from the anarchy on the earliest civic changes.
I thought everyone wanted to get rid of that?? It's easy to put back . .

DH/Joe/ everyone thoughts??
 
@SO: can we get at least a little anarchy starting with all civics from the Ancient forward? I have to also admit that I feel we've lost one of the best features of the early era and that was the test of timing skill with the first golden age from the controlled fire wonder being called on at just the right moment to minimize the revolts from the anarchy on the earliest civic changes.

What about when you don't have a Golden Age to offset the piled on built up anarchy from switching multiple Civics?

And has everyone forgotten how we had the AI going into multiple Anarchy periods because they Don't change multiple Civics at one time? There was a Big out cry over this one.

Because of the time scale for the earliest Eras anarchy periods that last longer than 1 turn up on GS up thru Snail is too long for these Eras. The request for Anarchy to start at Ancient is not bad, just should not be piled up into 5+ turns or more like in the past impo.

Just watch out for overduing it and we go back to AI stagnation thru multiple Anarchy periods like we've had before. That is Why anarchy for earliest Civics up thru 2nd tier was removed or reduced to 1 turn.

JosEPh
 
What about when you don't have a Golden Age to offset the piled on built up anarchy from switching multiple Civics?
I'd like to eventually make Golden Ages only halve anarchy times anyhow. But first I have to ensure that there's a benefit to GAs otherwise, or that I can prove there to be since I experience major benefit from them anyhow. DH has challenged that they don't currently do anything BUT eliminate anarchy. My playtesting shows otherwise but I have a few other things to read in the code to see how it pans out in other ways to what I have been able to visually see in game.

And has everyone forgotten how we had the AI going into multiple Anarchy periods because they Don't change multiple Civics at one time? There was a Big out cry over this one.
Koshling did extensive work to get them to bundle when they switch civics and I may yet be able to figure out how to increase their tendancy to do so. Sometimes it's a matter of the civics design hitting just the right chords that once they switch they want to go back because of a mathematical grass is greener effect that can take place. I'm not promising being able to address those situations over night but I can review it and see if I can help them a bit more if it's still that big an issue.

Getting them to try to time their changes to a GA is tough because getting them to judge how soon they may have a GA active or to get them to relax on their willingness to switch when IN a GA can both be extremely difficult mathematical processes for an AI. But there are always going to be some things the AI can do nearly flawlessly over the player and vice versa.

And only the most experienced players are going to get good at timing GAs themselves really.

Because of the time scale for the earliest Eras anarchy periods that last longer than 1 turn up on GS up thru Snail is too long for these Eras. The request for Anarchy to start at Ancient is not bad, just should not be piled up into 5+ turns or more like in the past impo.
Yeah, I'm not asking for a huge # of anarchy turns. Modifiers from traits and education levels should play a bigger effect on otherwise moderate numbers established for the civics as a base imo. I wouldn't establish a base of more than 1 turn of anarchy per 2 eras into the game of the tech that unlocks the civic as a general rule.

And I'm also not against SOME categories not having any anarchy at all because they just aren't big enough policy shifts to cause governmental restructuring upheaval time.
 
Now you make me think there may be a real coding issue... maybe it has to do with many final results coming in less than 1 and thus ending up being 0. I may need to min 1 rnd if it's got 1 or more on the base.
 
Now you make me think there may be a real coding issue... maybe it has to do with many final results coming in less than 1 and thus ending up being 0. I may need to min 1 rnd if it's got 1 or more on the base.

There are places in the xml files were anarchy is done by % not integer. I found at least one if not 2 sets, iirc, of files that did it by % while doing the GS changes.

JosEPh
 
Speaking of animals and herds and such, one thing I'm a bit annoyed at is that poultry is such a relatively difficult thing to get. But it's not so much about animal spawning, ducks are common enough that you'll likely get atleast one city with it, but the fact that you can't spread it around when chickens and ducks are in reality the animals most frequently and readily brought with human colonisation. But there is some imbalance in spawning aswell as one tends to get more turkeys and ostrichs than ordinary poultry (And ofcourse eagles galore as already mentioned). Also I'm playing on a huge archipelago map, and there are a number of very important resources that only spawns at a single location in the whole world, things like copper, horses, sulphur, iron e.t.c. I opened up the world-builder and added a few stuff, especially as some resources didn't exist at all, I think it was Tin especially which ironically has spawned twice through event since then. I have noticed that a few things have spawned since then but it's all resources I already had before, so I'm wondering if the mining resource events are tied to what resources you already have connected because I don't think they should be.
Bonuses marked as Stratigic in the map scripts get 1 resource per player plus one put on the map. What is strategic is defined in Python; of the Map Utility code. I think we can also say that in the XML if we like as long as we don't make all strategic.
 
There are places in the xml files were anarchy is done by % not integer. I found at least one if not 2 sets, iirc, of files that did it by % while doing the GS changes.

JosEPh
Numerous places, yes. And that's understood but when the base integer is 1 or more, then the minimum needs to come out to 1 and I may have done something to break that at some point and then some adjustments take place to reveal the issue much later and then I'm thinking it's the base integers having been removed and it was something I'd done long ago all along (maybe). I'll be taking a look later tonight!

Bonuses marked as Stratigic in the map scripts get 1 resource per player plus one put on the map. What is strategic is defined in Python; of the Map Utility code. I think we can also say that in the XML if we like as long as we don't make all strategic.
Given the numerous complaints, can we make this 2 per player rather than just 1? When they clump in a particular area they deny too many players access still.
 
Top Bottom