C2C Combat Mod Option: Hide and Seek

[Toffer90]

TRIBAL GUARDIAN NOT SET TO STANDOUT DOES NOT DEFEND THE CAPITAL

Spoiler :

I saw some earlier comments regarding Tribal Guardians losing their visibility and therefore no longer defend the city. When you load the file you'll see Bangkok has a Tribal Guardian and a Great General. When you hit 'Next turn', the Tribal Guardian dissapears and no longer defends the city. Performing a Recalculation does NOT reveal the Tribal Guardian; the Guardian only appears by saving and reloading the game. In 21750bc I am able to walk into Bangkok with my Wooden Spearman, overrunning the Great General.

This one will be completely resolved when this is made possible:

Would it be problematic to add support for NegatesInvisibilityTypes as a tag to unitcombat? I want to define:

Spoiler :

		<UnitCombatInfo>
			<Type>UNITCOMBAT_VISIBLE</Type>
			<Description>TXT_KEY_UNITCOMBAT_VISIBLE</Description>
			<OnGameOptions>
				<GameOptionType>GAMEOPTION_SIZE_MATTERS</GameOptionType>
				<GameOptionType>GAMEOPTION_HIDE_AND_SEEK</GameOptionType>
			</OnGameOptions>
			<NegatesInvisibilityTypes>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_CAMOUFLAGE</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_SUBMARINE</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_STEALTH</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_INVISIBLE</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_CLOAKED</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_DISGUISED</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_POLITICAL</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_SUBMERGED</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_NAVAL_DISGUISE</InvisibleType>
				<InvisibleType>INVISIBLE_SIZE</InvisibleType>
			</NegatesInvisibilityTypes>
			<Button>Art/Buttons/Promotions/StandOutStatus.dds</Button>
		</UnitCombatInfo>

And give it to tribal guardian and remove their access to standout. I could alternatively just have standout be a free promo to the guardian... What do you think, does it seem unnecessary?
Not sure how many units this would be used for in the end; only a few I guess.

It's a planned unitcombat that certain units will have.

 

[Thunderbrd]

SAME TILE VISIBILITY
Toffer90 has some suspicions regarding visibility on the same tile. I may have an example of this condition. If you look at Atapuerca, I have two Spiked Clubmen on Standout Status. I also have a Tracker on Standout Status, with Build Up (Observation) III.

In the city screen, I am unable to get any resources from the city tile itself. By switching Civs to Mao Zedong (the original city owner), it turns out there are two Neanderthal Trackers with Build Up (Concealment) III. They are not visible to me.

I actually noticed this condition (no city tile resources) much later in this game. I built dogs, ambushers, took promotions to improve visibility, but I was never able to reveal the 2 Neanderthal trackers, trying from the same tile or adjacent tiles. I could not get any promotions or build-ups to reveal the Neanderthal trackers and recover the city's resources.

By saying 'Neanderthal trackers' are you saying Neanderthals or Barbarian Trackers? I'm not aware of a Neanderthal tracker.

That said, it's a scenario I'll certainly look into and do the math to see what's up and further evaluate in the code.

TRIBAL GUARDIAN NOT SET TO STANDOUT DOES NOT DEFEND THE CAPITAL
I saw some earlier comments regarding Tribal Guardians losing their visibility and therefore no longer defend the city. When you load the file you'll see Bangkok has a Tribal Guardian and a Great General. When you hit 'Next turn', the Tribal Guardian dissapears and no longer defends the city. Performing a Recalculation does NOT reveal the Tribal Guardian; the Guardian only appears by saving and reloading the game. In 21750bc I am able to walk into Bangkok with my Wooden Spearman, overrunning the Great General.

If the guardian is set to standout and still didn't defend, something is definitely not right there that may have nothing to do with visibility. However, if it didn't then Toffer is right that it needs to be addressed... more below.

CITY MILITIA DID NOT PREVENT THE CITY CAPTURE
City Militia appeared as I marched into Bangkok, but only after I entered and took over the city. I liked it better when the City Militia prevented the capture; has the intent of City Militia changed or is this an unanticipated effect of Hide and Seek?

Don't think it ever did cause them to appear and defend the city, only after... and I've never seen it happen until much later in the game so that's an interesting effect I'm not aware of in the first place.

This one will be completely resolved when this is made possible:
It's a planned unitcombat that certain units will have.

An automatic unitcombat for that is certainly an interesting proposal. I know I have an item on the list here to add ai to take standout if defending a city though I did not suspect that the problem would be so severe that tribal guardians aren't visible to nearly all attacking units. I'm not sure how they would be unless its a size invisibility but I figured the quality of any units used for attacking would be good enough to see any medium unit of any group size unless the TG is actually a solo, which I don't THINK it is. I'm wondering if its on a hill and thus (was) camouflaged... or something else.

Frustrating.

I'll be looking into all of this as soon as I can.

 

[WimpyTheWarrior]

By saying 'Neanderthal trackers' are you saying Neanderthals or Barbarian Trackers? I'm not aware of a Neanderthal tracker.

The city was the capital of the Neanderthal civilisation available in the game. Atapuerca is the capital and Wrub is the leader when playing with fixed leaders. (I use Unrestricted Leaders at start-up so Mao Zedung was assigned as the leader.)

I've noticed with Hide and Seek the AI seems to place two trackers in their capital with maximum Build Up (Concealment); Bangkok also has two Trackers.

I'll be looking into all of this as soon as I can.

Thanks! This is a very interesting addition.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ah... trackers of the Neanderthal civ... that makes sense now. Those in the capital are likely awaiting their ordered escorts. Those hunkered down are also likely hiding out awaiting an escort.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Looks like I didn't save the unitcombat file after adjusting invisibility on hills and peaks so it didn't go in on the last adjustment. This MAY account for the non-defending tribal guardian except that 1 pt of camouflage shouldn't have made it completely invisible to any combatant and most non-combatants cannot invade cities so... not sure if that's the solution or not to that.

 

[Thunderbrd]

@Toffer: <InvisibilityIntensityTypes> was bugged for unitinfos.xml. That's been resolved. However, I found this bug in the process of testing same tile visibility and after a thorough review, that is confirmed to be working properly. Keep in mind, however, that same tile visibility modifiers are not given to promos or units, just unitcombats alone. If we need it for either of the other two, not a problem to add it.

 

[Toffer90]

@Toffer: <InvisibilityIntensityTypes> was bugged for unitinfos.xml. That's been resolved. However, I found this bug in the process of testing same tile visibility and after a thorough review, that is confirmed to be working properly. Keep in mind, however, that same tile visibility modifiers are not given to promos or units, just unitcombats alone. If we need it for either of the other two, not a problem to add it.

OK, good to know.
I see no need to add that just yet.

 

[Nevets_]

I've been noticing alot more city-razing by the AI's, at first I thought it might be a new strategy, or maybe the bug fixed in SVN 8926 resurfaced, but now I'm wondering what happens if a camouflaged unit captures a city? I haven't seen it on my city captures, but my high strength attackers are all merged up into x3 or x9 size units and have stand out on so maybe I wouldn't.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I've been noticing alot more city-razing by the AI's, at first I thought it might be a new strategy, or maybe the bug fixed in SVN 8926 resurfaced, but now I'm wondering what happens if a camouflaged unit captures a city? I haven't seen it on my city captures, but my high strength attackers are all merged up into x3 or x9 size units and have stand out on so maybe I wouldn't.

Well... interestingly enough it's been shown that units that cannot be seen by the player that owns the city that is entered will not capture the city at all, thus the option for razing would not exist there.

What MIGHT be an influencing factor could be some manipulations to NumCitiesUpkeep or distance to city upkeep but from what I gather those have been reduced rather than enhanced so it may not be suspect at all. Might just be that the game you're playing is finding the AI making this determination more than they were in other previous games. Not much has been done that would pull at that string I don't think.

I'm currently working on some AI for status promos that will at least clear up a lot of potential problems for AI working with this option.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Note: Status AI has been implemented. Please take note of any poor decision-making from the AI regarding Standout usage or failure to use when they should. There's a few I've noted already that seem like poor decisions but may not actually be as bad as it may seem. Example: They tend to like setting their wanderers to standout - but then again, those wanderers are set to exploration AI and this would mean they would benefit more from being visible and soaking up as many animal attacks as they can.

 

[JosEPh_II]

SVN 8958 is broken. See Bug thread. Instant CtD at EoT.

JosEPh

 

[Toffer90]

Something is still not quite right, might be connected to when visibility/invisibility values goes above 10 or/and below 0; scenario:
Unit with -9 size visibility cannot see much of what's around them (tested, world seems desolate to this unit) but for some odd reason he can see units with 17 (and 14, and other values at 10 or above.) size invisibility, but nothing else (except for units on standout).

I'm guessing negative visibility values makes some weird stuff happen at the mathematical level and that this could be fixed if the code considered visibility below 0 to really be 0 visibility before any math take place.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Something is still not quite right, might be connected to when visibility/invisibility values goes above 10 or/and below 0; scenario:
Unit with -9 size visibility cannot see much of what's around them (tested, world seems desolate to this unit) but for some odd reason he can see units with 17 (and 14, and other values at 10 or above.) size invisibility, but nothing else (except for units on standout).

I'm guessing negative visibility values makes some weird stuff happen at the mathematical level and that this could be fixed if the code considered visibility below 0 to really be 0 visibility.

I'll take a look. Negatives need to be tracked so that when removed they don't become positives left behind. But this is really an odd bug I can't theorize a reason for at the moment. Will take some code investigation.

EDIT: It looks like visibility was never intended to be able to go beneath 0 - will mess up some caching if it does. Maybe. I'll have to continue to evaluate the logic of the caching I'm seeing here - I set it up but it's been a little bit since then now. I might be able to come up with an alternative method. And it may not even be the issue. I'm not sure I'm seeing anything that would explain that effect.

 

[cammcken]

Technically this is a question for the Without Warning mod, but I can't seem to find the thread.

In your descriptions, the Stealth Modifier only applies to stealth combat. Does "stealth combat" refer to the stealth strikes that occur before regular combat, or the entire engagement, from stealth strikes to defeat or withdrawal?

Also, is there a list of all the invisibility types with their icons?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Technically this is a question for the Without Warning mod, but I can't seem to find the thread.

There isn't one since Without Warning was more a mod I made for the core then later decided should be optioned out for players that still prefer more vanilla settings.

In your descriptions, the Stealth Modifier only applies to stealth combat. Does "stealth combat" refer to the stealth strikes that occur before regular combat, or the entire engagement, from stealth strikes to defeat or withdrawal?

Great question! Stealth Combat modifiers apply to the entire engagement, and do not replace any other modifiers that may apply to the battle. Once a combat is determined to be a stealth combat, the stealth combat modifier applies the whole way through.

Stealth Strikes do replace all first strikes on both sides once the battle is determined to be a Stealth Combat.

Also, is there a list of all the invisibility types with their icons?

You bet: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/player-how-to-documentation.455542/page-4#post-14144882 This post is linked to on the first page of the Player's documentation thread.

 

[Chaotic Paladin]

What does Stand Out do?

I find the promotions hard to understand.

 

[Toffer90]

What does Stand Out do?

I find the promotions hard to understand.

It removes all invisibility from the unit.

 

[Thunderbrd]

What does Stand Out do?

I find the promotions hard to understand.

It removes all invisibility from the unit.

Which allows you to defend units that may come under attack on that plot.

Example: You have a rogue trying to protect a worker. The rogue is not visible to most units. As a result, enemy units, seeing the worker, may move onto the tile to capture the worker and if they don't see the rogue, the worker is going to be captured. Since you want the rogue to protect the worker, you could set him to using Stand Out so that he is no longer hiding and must be killed before the worker can be captured.

 

[Raledon]

Which allows you to defend units that may come under attack on that plot.

Example: You have a rogue trying to protect a worker. The rogue is not visible to most units. As a result, enemy units, seeing the worker, may move onto the tile to capture the worker and if they don't see the rogue, the worker is going to be captured. Since you want the rogue to protect the worker, you could set him to using Stand Out so that he is no longer hiding and must be killed before the worker can be captured.

Shouldn't the rogue attempt to ambush the incoming unit, defending with his stealth bonuses? (In the normal case, without stand out)

 

[Thunderbrd]

Shouldn't the rogue attempt to ambush the incoming unit, defending with his stealth bonuses? (In the normal case, without stand out)

If Without Warning is on, and they are set to ambush, then yes. But its not in time to deny the capture or death of the bait powerless units on the tile.