C2C Options

[Thunderbrd]

T-brd,
Please, I pointed out that both the 1st culture level NONE and POOR Originally had Threshold values of 0 (zero) for all GS.

This is why when I 1st talked about adjusting Culture levels, a month or so ago, that I said we have 2 starting levels with no values, that they were Redundant. So when I started looking into that file I decided to add very low levels to Poor so it was not just an empty set. Then came the surprise and delight that a founded city would only start with 1 tile Until those low Threshold levels I put in Poor were reached. Are you following me still?

I have tried your every suggestion up till this afternoon. Your last commit enabled the Option to show up. But every things else is not working with the Option. I propose that something was left out if these Replacement and ReplacementConditions worked for Other Options. And we know they do for the Option Upscaled Costs where in the CIV4GameSpeedinfo.xml there was an ALT Set made for that Option (Upscaled) to work.

Does there need to be somethng similar put in there for CultureLevelInfo.xml with an alt set to work?

JosEPh

Now that I'm home I've been able to look at the compare between your files before and after the adjustment and I'm not confused by you so much as by the way it takes place in the code and how it's interacting with the replacements. I'm going to look at this the way I've been itching to all along, which is to evaluate what's happening in the code now that I can get hands on here. One thing you said earlier showed that the replacements are working so I don't think the coding issue is there exactly... I'm not sure. I'm going to test this till I get it working and let you know what I found out.

I don't want you to think I was thinking you were necessarily doing something wrong but I was probing - this issue is a little confusing in itself.

 

[Thunderbrd]

@Joseph:
I didn't look at your game option file because that was the least suspect since I didn't know at the time exactly how the 'magic' happens. But looking there...
See any problem with this?

		<GameOptionInfo>
			<Type>GAMEOPTION_</Type>
			<Description>TXT_KEY_GAMEOPTION_1_CITY_TILE_FOUNDING</Description>
			<Help>TXT_KEY_GAMEOPTION_1_CITY_TILE_FOUNDING_HELP</Help>
			<bDefault>0</bDefault>
			<bVisible>1</bVisible>
		</GameOptionInfo>

Otherwise it looks like I just have to take out the bOnGameOption and bNotOnGameOption lines in the xml you provided me yesterday and it should work... testing now.

EDIT: Ok, I ran into another issue, which is that a modular option is stuffing up the ability to make new options work without putting them into the code as well as the xml. That wouldn't be your fault at all. I'm testing to prove the theory.

 

[JosEPh_II]

I'll be a dirty white boy!

JosEPh

 

[JosEPh_II]

I put the rest of the <Type>GAMEOPTION_</Type> in <Type>GAMEOPTION_1_CITY_TILE_FOUNDING</Type>

And it still doesn't work. I'm out of suggestions.

JosEPh

 

[Thunderbrd]

I put the rest of the <Type>GAMEOPTION_</Type> in <Type>GAMEOPTION_1_CITY_TILE_FOUNDING</Type>

And it still doesn't work. I'm out of suggestions.

JosEPh

Testing shows there's more to the story that further testing must eventually reveal. Hang tight.

EDIT: Ok, part of this was on your end (which I showed) and the other part was that I did miss a small very important step in the dll. Replace ONLY the poor culture level for the option, just as you I believe have come to understand, and after my next commit, this will work.

 

[JosEPh_II]

JosEPh

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ok. You should be ready to rock. I proved it to work on my end but I wanted you to do the honors of committing the xml changes.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Thank you.

JosEPh

 

[JosEPh_II]

The New 1 City Tile Founding Option is now available for play.

During it's inception and inclusion there were some harsh posts.

1st I want to Apologize for a post were I refuted a statement Dancing Hoskuld had made about Culture Levels not changing for a long time and I emphatically refuted him. I misunderstood what he was telling us and me in particular. You were right in what you were saying DH and I Apologize for my abrupt response. Normal game play Culture level advancement before this new Option of mine can, and still does, take hundreds of turns to achieve. Sorry DH.

2nd Apology goes to T-brd who made this Option a reality for me. Our debates got heated and some mud was slung. Sorry T-brd for my poor explanations and my obvious frustrations with what I thought at the time was obstruction.

This new Option will be a major visual and perceptional change for how the Game starts and how later cities are placed and developed thru Culture and surrounding tiles. It is currently scaled for the New Game Speeds.

As with any new Option in this Mod there will be those that like it, those that could care less, and those that will Not like it. But remember it is just another choice to enliven your gameplay. You the Player always have the final say on how you want to play. And this mod, as StrategyOnly has said time and again, is about choices.

For those of you that try it, I Hope you enjoy it and see the strategic value.

Finally I have been testing this for the past 4+ weeks. But I am only 1 player. And all feedback and constructive criticism is welcome (rants will be ignored).

JosEPh

 

[TrippedOnACloud]

Is there a full description of the effects of the Nightmare Mode option floating around anywhere? I can't seem to find it. For that matter, is there a detailed list of what the various effects game difficulty has on both the AI and the player at each difficulty?

Also, regarding the 1 city tile founding option, I rather like it myself, and have no issues with it the way it is. That said, the immediate starvation issue is a bit of a problem. I wonder though, is it possible to address the issue not from a culture standpoint, but from a food one? That is, what if cities were founded with some small amount of food already stored? That would provide a bit of a buffer against immediate starvation, and it makes sense for the settlers to have brought a bit of food with them to meet immediate needs until the new city is somewhat established. I'm not sure if doing so would help the AI or not, but either way it would provide a few turns of time to deal with the problem through either culture bombing or food sources. Not sure if it would work better to have some small flat amount or some small percentage of amount needed to grow.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Is there a full description of the effects of the Nightmare Mode option floating around anywhere? I can't seem to find it. For that matter, is there a detailed list of what the various effects game difficulty has on both the AI and the player at each difficulty?

This is StrategyOnly's baby. Basically he upped the malus for the player by 2 levels for Nightmare Mode.

Also, regarding the 1 city tile founding option, I rather like it myself, and have no issues with it the way it is. That said, the immediate starvation issue is a bit of a problem. I wonder though, is it possible to address the issue not from a culture standpoint, but from a food one? That is, what if cities were founded with some small amount of food already stored? That would provide a bit of a buffer against immediate starvation, and it makes sense for the settlers to have brought a bit of food with them to meet immediate needs until the new city is somewhat established. I'm not sure if doing so would help the AI or not, but either way it would provide a few turns of time to deal with the problem through either culture bombing or food sources. Not sure if it would work better to have some small flat amount or some small percentage of amount needed to grow.

I've been doing some testing about the starvation issue, basically because of the "worry" over Whomever gets The Great Bath of Mohenjandaro that they would lose their Free 2nd pop to starvation.

One of the things I feel needs changed is starting the game with the auto-building Homeless. It adds enough and to eat up 1 . And I feel it is coming into the game at the wrong time. When the 1st city is founded the Band of Homo Sapiens have No idea they are Homeless. This building should not show up until after Shelter Building is researched.

Suggestion for you, as a test find Homeless in the, iirc, SpecialBuildings_CIV4BuildingsInfo.xml and Add the Prereq tech ShelterBuilding and start a game. See how it plays out for you. If it would be enough.

I have always contended that Hydro put too much burden on the early game with various sources of and so that you have negative growth at the start of any game that lasts for way too long. Of course the big one, because it's effects are game long, is making the pop require 4 instead of the old 3 requirement. Players especially Deity level were pitching Fits over cities with 100 pop late game.

There was more at game start because originally Disease "Cold" started at the 0 level. So you started the game with another +1 . I got opposition when I originally moved the disease level for Cold to +25. But I've actually had no Player dissent from this move.

There are several things that can be adjusted for game start. Later on you have many more options to ensure that that new city can have more than 1 tile to use when founded.

JosEPh

 

[strategyonly]

Is there a full description of the effects of the Nightmare Mode option floating around anywhere? I can't seem to find it. For that matter, is there a detailed list of what the various effects game difficulty has on both the AI and the player at each difficulty?.

Basically all that changed was really i "upped" each level by 2 is all.



DEFAULT -- NIGHTMARE

Noble -- Monarch

Prince -- Emperor

Monarch -- Immortal

Emperor -- Deity

Immortal -- up 2 levels

Deity -- up 2 levels

 

[TrippedOnACloud]

This is StrategyOnly's baby. Basically he upped the malus for the player by 2 levels for Nightmare Mode.

So it's an increased (maintenance//) penalty for the player, but without any additional bonuses to the AI beyond those it was already getting from the base difficulty setting?

One of the things I feel needs changed is starting the game with the auto-building Homeless. It adds enough and to eat up 1 . And I feel it is coming into the game at the wrong time. When the 1st city is founded the Band of Homo Sapiens have No idea they are Homeless. This building should not show up until after Shelter Building is researched.

I disagree with you on this one. Housing(Homeless) is, IMO, reflecting that your little band is suffering ill effects from exposure to the elements. That said, I almost always settle my first city near Caves and rush for Cave Dwelling for that lovely +2/+2 autobuild, so it doesn't affect me nearly as much due to my play style. Side note, Cave Dwelling appears to never obsolete, so you get that +2/+2 even into the far future.

I have always contended that Hydro put too much burden on the early game with various sources of and so that you have negative growth at the start of any game that lasts for way too long. Of course the big one, because it's effects are game long, is making the pop require 4 instead of the old 3 requirement. Players especially Deity level were pitching Fits over cities with 100 pop late game.

Honestly, I think the heavy negative at the start of the game is fine, though there does appear to be a pretty major advantage in negating it quickly if you have the appropriate nearby features (Caves, Natural Wonders, River) or resources. Not only do you start the long slow growth to your second population sooner, but perhaps more importantly negating the - allows you to actually retain and make use of the from hunting, instead of having it wasted.

I don't understand the fuss about 3/pop compared to 4/pop. There's so many more sources of food in C2C that it's almost irrelevant past the early Prehistoric, and becomes even more so once Food Merchants become buildable. I think the only time I've had my capital's growth significantly affected by lack of food was one time I had several hundred slaves, production slaves, and military production slaves settled, without settling any as food production. I wound up with something like -1000 from specialists before noticing. Although, it should probably be said that I build either the Druid or Shaman building--elimination building 100% of the time, which accounts for well over 100 in my capital. I also try to grab the No-population- wonder from Buddhism most of the time, though by that point games are already won.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I've been doing some testing about the starvation issue, basically because of the "worry" over Whomever gets The Great Bath of Mohenjandaro that they would lose their Free 2nd pop to starvation.

One of the things I feel needs changed is starting the game with the auto-building Homeless. It adds enough and to eat up 1 . And I feel it is coming into the game at the wrong time. When the 1st city is founded the Band of Homo Sapiens have No idea they are Homeless. This building should not show up until after Shelter Building is researched.

Suggestion for you, as a test find Homeless in the, iirc, SpecialBuildings_CIV4BuildingsInfo.xml and Add the Prereq tech ShelterBuilding and start a game. See how it plays out for you. If it would be enough.

I have always contended that Hydro put too much burden on the early game with various sources of and so that you have negative growth at the start of any game that lasts for way too long. Of course the big one, because it's effects are game long, is making the pop require 4 instead of the old 3 requirement. Players especially Deity level were pitching Fits over cities with 100 pop late game.

There was more at game start because originally Disease "Cold" started at the 0 level. So you started the game with another +1 . I got opposition when I originally moved the disease level for Cold to +25. But I've actually had no Player dissent from this move.

There are several things that can be adjusted for game start. Later on you have many more options to ensure that that new city can have more than 1 tile to use when founded.

1)The great bath issue (which would apply from other potential sources of any additional starting population) would have no impact at all from housing homeless because it takes the first round to have homeless or any other housing for that matter kick in. This takes place after the food calculation and thus after starvation has already occurred. Homeless also only really ever applies to the first city as there's rarely ever any reason it would happen for later cities.

2)I don't see why you want to speed up the ability of a player to end the game faster. The deeper we make the unhealth deficit in the beginning of the game the more we delay growth. The more we delay and inhibit growth the longer we keep the game going and thus the more likelihood to reach later eras. You keep pushing to allow faster growth and thus allow a player to shut down the game earlier and earlier when the goal of C2C is to draw this thing out to the future and keep the game competitive the entire time. The unhealth deficit is one of the most innovative and brilliant tricks involved in this mod and helps to encapsulate the first chapter of struggles as it becomes an initial and early (and should be tough) goals to overcome, keeping the player locked in the confines of their era until they've earned their way out of it. Your 1 tile start does actually help with this, I know, but a player should feel like their strategies are what puts them ahead of the curve as they overcome the forces arrayed against them, not just their ability to wait.

3) Early anger IS a problem because a population that's not working is a huge burden where it should more commonly be a positive thing. In the early game, even a single unhappiness over is a much stronger penalty to a 1 or 2 population city than it is to a 10-300 population city by percentage of the population impacted. Thus a small amount becomes overwhelming. This doesn't just slow growth but makes growth actually bad, increasing crime and disease, decreasing education, at the cost of food for absolutely no gain. Early sources should be reigned in a bit because we spent a long time with this mod being playtested without the capital even being capable of becoming unhappy so we got rather out of whack being able to assign unhappiness to things that the capital would have but not be affected by. With civics making the capital being capable of unhappiness again, we have some occasional problems here yes.

4) The problem that got me to add another food cost was that such populated cities were taking place a little too quickly and were thus headed for nationwide int overflows by the end of the game. It was also upsetting a sense of gradiation in growth as pretty much after a couple of eras all cities were getting a population every round. This much escalation of inflated food sources demanded the added food cost for a population to balance things back to the sense that a game was being played and to give population growth a little meaning again. It does, admittedly become a big part of the reason for the Great Bath issue being an issue. But even at 3 food cost per pop, it's still an issue if you have no tiles to work that provide at least 2 food at that point, so if you have no tiles to work at all it's still a problem.

5) I personally dissented against the move on the common cold. I suppose I'm not considered a player as well as a modder eh? lol Nice to know that there's a couple reasons I've been finding it too easy to get out of the food deficit.

I disagree with you on this one. Housing(Homeless) is, IMO, reflecting that your little band is suffering ill effects from exposure to the elements. That said, I almost always settle my first city near Caves and rush for Cave Dwelling for that lovely +2/+2 autobuild, so it doesn't affect me nearly as much due to my play style. Side note, Cave Dwelling appears to never obsolete, so you get that +2/+2 even into the far future.

Agree with you completely.

Honestly, I think the heavy negative at the start of the game is fine, though there does appear to be a pretty major advantage in negating it quickly if you have the appropriate nearby features (Caves, Natural Wonders, River) or resources.

Which is why having it a little deeper than it is now might be beneficial to diminish the edge a player can get from one such source of benefit a little, enforcing all players get to that point where they can start building up their food buildings to get out of the hole. When one player doesn't need to build up any food buildings, that's a little too much benefit for that one player imo. But for any player who starts on those buildings, they've really graduated to a point where they should be able to now quickly get past the deficit even if they don't have the above noted gifts by their placement/traits.

Not only do you start the long slow growth to your second population sooner, but perhaps more importantly negating the - allows you to actually retain and make use of the from hunting, instead of having it wasted.

Absolutely which is why if some players are getting there nearly immediately it's too fast as all should have early hunting food negated for a bit.

I don't understand the fuss about 3/pop compared to 4/pop. There's so many more sources of food in C2C that it's almost irrelevant past the early Prehistoric, and becomes even more so once Food Merchants become buildable.

We've considered 5 food/pop...

And yes, Food Merchants are incredibly imbalancing to growth to the point that growth now becomes a choice to commit to rather than something to earn.

I think the only time I've had my capital's growth significantly affected by lack of food was one time I had several hundred slaves, production slaves, and military production slaves settled, without settling any as food production. I wound up with something like -1000 from specialists before noticing. Although, it should probably be said that I build either the Druid or Shaman building--elimination building 100% of the time, which accounts for well over 100 in my capital. I also try to grab the No-population- wonder from Buddhism most of the time, though by that point games are already won.

Still strongly feel that no building should be so powerful (especially when its not even a WONDER!) that it should pretty much negate an entire game concern for a city. When we rework disease, I believe it to be critical that we also rework these buildings that are eliminating this much unhealth.

 

[TrippedOnACloud]

Still strongly feel that no building should be so powerful (especially when its not even a WONDER!) that it should pretty much negate an entire game concern for a city. When we rework disease, I believe it to be critical that we also rework these buildings that are eliminating this much unhealth.

I actually agree, these two buildings are far, far too powerful. Having both Shamanism and Druidism basically means that 2/3 of your cities can completely ignore / concerns. The combination of one of these, the No- wonder from Judaism, the No--from-population wonder from Buddhism is the reason my capital city can support a population of 100+ with another several hundred settled slaves without any real issues aside from crime. Something else worth mentioning is that the effect "No from buildings" also applies to Crimes and Diseases.

Just tossing out an idea for a rework of the buildings, changing it to a fractional--per-population effect similar to the Sewer System or uh... Public Transportation, I think? buildings would work and offer a place for further nerfs or buffs if needed.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Mine is not the "common" view nor a deity player's view of How a game should flow.

JosEPh

 

[tmv]

Is it possible for the difficulty level to change building properties?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Is it possible for the difficulty level to change building properties?

Not directly in the XML. At least not that I have found.

 

[tmv]

That's a pity. Otherwise, this might be an even better way to have difficulty levels.

Another point: I think in an older thread someone said that Nightmare made the game harder for the AI as well, since Noble got harder. Is that right? Wasn't there a proposal that the AI should be set to Settler instead to make things harder for the player? I think someone pointed out that this would be much harder to implement, but I cannot remember the reason for that.

 

[strategyonly]

Another point: I think in an older thread someone said that Nightmare made the game harder for the AI as well, since Noble got harder. Is that right?.

Well i gave the AI a little advantage in "each" level even more by giving them more techs ahead of the player also to start with, and each level more and more the higher the level over the player ( i believe)ie:

<AIFreeTechs>
				<FreeTech>
					<TechType>TECH_NOMADIC_LIFESTYLE</TechType>
					<bFreeTech>1</bFreeTech>
				</FreeTech>
				<FreeTech>
					<TechType>TECH_GATHERING</TechType>
					<bFreeTech>1</bFreeTech>
				</FreeTech>
				<FreeTech>
					<TechType>TECH_SCAVENGING</TechType>
					<bFreeTech>1</bFreeTech>
				</FreeTech>
				<FreeTech>
					<TechType>TECH_LANGUAGE</TechType>
					<bFreeTech>1</bFreeTech>
				</FreeTech>
			</AIFreeTechs>