1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Caveman 2 Cosmos' started by strategyonly, Sep 3, 2010.

  1. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    28,054
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    There's a few factors here.

    1) When the AI can achieve it and, as the player can, achieve it too quickly, then it is just as imbalanced. Our game is down to one other major contender in the whole globe and it's still the ancient era. When we come to blows with that contender and one of us gets the upper hand over the other, the game's pretty much already over. They've stomped their entire continent already and are double our point score.

    2) This game is taking place on Size Matters where many strength limitations, particularly in offensive efforts, for the standard game can very easily be overcome. To balance this out, the AI needs a stronger defensive AI (not stats so much but response planning). I also believe that ongoing training xp is going to be necessary to really balance it out as well.

    3) So in the main game I don't think that defenses are TOO strong because if done right defenses needs to be capable of trumping even great offensive campaigns so that the runaway is much more difficult to achieve. However, I don't think it necessarily needs to be made any stronger... I think the balance is there. Though I do think the defenders still need some better response AI strategies overall.


    So is this to say that Size Matters has been found to have a flaw? To some extent the answer is currently yes because after my recent AI adaptations to size matters, I'm finding that it puts a lot of favor in the hands of the invader since cities are much harder to build as strong a defense as they need to have to handle the strength of oncoming powerful stacks. However, if the AI were taught to have one or more very strong mobile defensive stacks, it could resolve the problem and would make things a bit more like the real world. If an army marched into Las Vegas NV and we had to make a stand with nothing but the local National Guard, we'd be toast pretty quick. But in such a scenario, the US Gov would be routing defenses to the site of the battle so as to make a stand. The AI needs to consider this strategy as well and original CivIV combat arrangements never enforced the need for this much.



    As for your suggestion to rework the longest game speed... I think those that favor that game speed would be the ones to defend it or not. I don't personally want the game to take THAT long myself either but some seem to be fans. Those are the ones I'd listen most closely to... IMO gamespeed adjustments should all be in equal ratios to one another for the most part so that a longer gamespeed just means a bit more unit movement can take place but otherwise the game should pretty much pace the same throughout the eras.
     
  2. Sparth

    Sparth C2C Team Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,311
    Its main problem with all Civilizations games. When player Empire take lead there 0% chances that game will be loose. Fighting for first place its major fun factor in Civ but when you get it - fun its over. I think we should think how to fix it in V37.
    In reality empires are never eternal. Roman Empire colapse because has major internal problems, so British Empire, Soviet, Mongol etc. Ofcourse in C2C we can got internal problems for example with Crimes but they are small nuisance. They cannot break apart any empire in our mod. I think player in C2C cannot feel safe and comfortable in any part of the game.

    RevMod tried this and was great but if you know how to play with this mod then you dont have any problems with revolutions. We need more sophisticated tool :)
     
  3. Noriad2

    Noriad2 Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,153
    Gender:
    Male
    Revmod is currently lackluster; it is too balanced. Even at deity/nightmare if you build a few stability buildings, and you keep crime down, your empire is rock stable.

    There is also the balance issue of players collecting religions and stacking the religious bonus buildings. Having more religions in the game is currently always positive; while this is "politically correct", it is very far from the real world. There are plenty of examples in the world today and in history where religious diversity (either between religions or between schisms) caused bloody civil wars. Or rulers like Tokugawa who actively kept Christianity out of Japan to increase the stability of his country.

    How about solving both problems at the same time by making religious diversity in a city cause revolutionary instability. If you have more than one religion in a city (or if that religions isn't state religion) you get a instability malus that increases exponentially with the number of religions (and gets worse with difficulty level). With polytheist religions being a bit more tolerant and monotheist religions being the most intolerant. The severity of religious tension depends of course on civics also.

    Then add a religious civil war event to REV mod that causes a number of turns of city anarchy and removes one religion (including buildings) from that city.

    It adds another layer of strategy to the game: balancing benefits of religion vs. the risk of religious revolutions. As the AI plays on a low difficulty level, the AI will suffer much less from this than a player at high difficulty level.

    And sending missionaries can be as dangerous to the opponent as sending armies "the pen is mightier than the sword". Closing borders and preaching bans (in many islamic countries you get thrown in jail if you try to convert people away from islam) help against foreign missionaries.
     
  4. Sparth

    Sparth C2C Team Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,311
    I think reasons of Empire instability can be dozens and for sure religions its one of them (and major one).
     
  5. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    16,273
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    @Noriad2,
    I'm not sure who is in charge of REV code anymore. It was koshling for some time.

    My question to you is, does the AI also handle Revs as well as you?

    If Rev is still breaking up the leading Civs (AI) then impo it's still flawed. If Rev could ever be made to just affect the human player then it would be an ideal Player handicap. But as long as it destroys the AI Civs it dilutes the games challenge, horribly so. This is why I've never supported Rev in any fashion that involves the AI Civs.

    I have similar reservations over Super Spies as well in this regard. If the AI can't use it properly then the player needs to be handicapped in it's use as well.

    As I look harder at crime I'm finding that the buildings that combat it come in clusters. So you have an early period in the game were it's a real struggle to control it but then you hit a period were a new group of anti-crime building open up and boom you build them you're stable/under control for sometime. So it's a peak and valley thing. But when you hit that peak you often have to build multiple Crime fighting units to maintain control. That is why you see the AI with massive amounts of TW, Guard, etc in their cities at time during a games course. They will also once crime has subsided move some of the crime fighting units outside the city. Partly for diffusion effects and partly for the defensive capabilities these units provide. Promotions do accelerate this usage as well. And so do the cost of the unit vs the cost of a building in regards to crime fighting. Same for :yuck: and :health: and the usage of the healer units.

    JosEPh
     
  6. MacCoise

    MacCoise Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    457
    Is this not what Rise of Mankind has done? In their options there is a setting where you can change the Revolution difficulty to 0, 2.5, 5 or 10, I think...

    I think I read it only affected the human player
     
  7. Noriad2

    Noriad2 Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,153
    Gender:
    Male
    In my games, most AIs don't suffer from Rev, some large civs occasionally lose one city or at most a small number of cities. Rev does and should affect higher difficulties more, and since the AI always plays on a low difficulty, that protects that AI a bit.

    Furthermore, in general I don't like rules "only against humans" other than self-chosen difficulty level. For example, the AI performance could be much improved by the following rules: 1) always declare war on a human player 2) never declare war on other AIs.
    However that would be a less fun game. The AIs should each try to win on their own, as if they were actual individually played nations, and not make a difference between human opponents and other AI opponents. Same for game rules.

    Collecting religions and stacking bonuses from religious buildings is typical behaviour of competent human players. So having multiple religions in the same city is a good subject to attach extra penalties to. The AI is mostly protected against those penalties because it doesn't stack religions as much and plays at a lower difficulty level than competent human players.
     
  8. Cosmic Fox

    Cosmic Fox Civ 6 Addict - TB Mod Collaborator

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    453
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Well put, I agree with you, exactly how I feel when friends of mine come to me with little hissy fits how the game is going. (I wanted to stick by you as backup). :)
     
  9. Dancing Hoskuld

    Dancing Hoskuld Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    23,541
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    Conflict between religions in the same city is not simple. Awhile ago I suggested something to Hydro which would work towards making getting all religions in your cities less good. It is not simple to implement as I also wanted some other things to do with it that used the Judge, Lawyer, Diplomat (not yet available) and Great Statesman (not yet available) units.

    Firstly we need a grid of how each religion tolerates each other religion by Civic and not just the Religion Civic and proposes new religion civic.

    My suggestion was that
    1. each religion temple has a small anti crime value (as per Joe's suggestion)

    2. for each pair of temples in a city there is a small unhappiness and apparent crime because people of the non state religion see crimes not being punished in the way they should be or ignored totally eg Mormon's may consider the drinking of wine sinful and hence a crime but the state only punishes drunkenness. The value here would be based on the religion tolerance of the state religion and the religion civic.

    3. Diplomats, Judges, Lawyers and Statesmen can to some extent reconcile these differences based on the Legal civic.
     
  10. strategyonly

    strategyonly C2C Supreme Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    20,599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    MN
    Sounds good to me, i dont like ALL religions in a city anyways.

    Also again< WHY is there a bombardment unit attached to the Warlord Corporal and others IF there is no bombardment avail to bombard?? (see attached)
     
  11. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    28,054
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I like the suggestions regarding religions and Rev except that it only targets Rev which I feel is a can of worms to work with. It's design challenges those who would try to work with it. It's so python/dll interwoven with little bug points throughout as it is that trying to manipulate anything about it is difficult to say the least. But maybe something along those lines you suggest could be good still, rev or not.

    I have a few other ideas on how to really address those issues too.

    First, I love enhancing defense. It's more fun for a player to find it tough to expand and outgrow opponents than it is do achieve it and just get shattered apart for succeeding.

    Second, I've been long considering a deep 'rev-like' mechanism for the mod that is based more on cultural emergence and clashes - religious conflicts could be woven into that fabric as it is developed.

    Third, penalizing the research of larger nations (not just diffusion to less developed ones) could help a lot. Make bigger not necessarily better and you have to work harder to succeed the more you grow.

    Fourth, I think we need to develop Nomadic Starts before we get too deeply into that stuff because it could really change early game progression a lot.

    There's more ways than this of course.
     
  12. Sparth

    Sparth C2C Team Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2013
    Messages:
    2,311
    Im not 100% sure we need RevMod. Maybe something simplier like this will do.
    Maybe crime should be more problematic in larger empires and "barbarian" crime units spawns inside your borders? I know know - Great Wall and barbarians inside cultural borders. Lets just scrap this stupid great wonder finally.
     
  13. strategyonly

    strategyonly C2C Supreme Commander

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    20,599
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    MN
    There finally a great thought, YEAH!!!!!:)
     
  14. arihant

    arihant Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Messages:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Slovakia
    totally agree
     
  15. Noriad2

    Noriad2 Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2014
    Messages:
    1,153
    Gender:
    Male
    Some more brainstorming: Civs blob hardest by conquering their neighbouring cities. An alternative way to penalize big civs might be to give a penalty to research based on culture of the city. If it is 100% your culture, you get 100% of your tech and money. If it is 100% not your culture, you get 0% of tech and only 50% of money.

    What messes up this idea is the rule that if you take all cities of a civ, its culture vanishes too. This is why it is better to kill all enemy cities instead of leaving one alive. "requires complete kills" option may make culture survive a bit longer but that is temporary and situational. Maybe giving all civs an off-map dummy unit plus "requires complete kills" option always on would do the trick, but I don't know if that would mess with victory conditions or other things.
     
  16. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    28,054
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Require complete kills is kinda annoying though.

    This thinking would work well with the individual cultural tracking mechanism I'd like to see employed, which then relates back to making this a part of #1 on the previous suggestion list. I'd not considered adding such a dynamic to that plan but I like it.

    ... perhaps both approaches would be good though too. Some civs just grow huge and fully own all their cities and become monsters that can hardly be challenged quite quickly. I think of the way Joe and Koshling play in saying this.
     
  17. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    16,273
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    There is merit to removing REVMod.

    This is already part of the mod and has been since City limits was introduced. It is contrary to the way Civ in general has been developed by Meier's and Co. thru the Civ series. Can you remake the core game? That is what this would entail. You can not make Civ have equal sized opponents through out the game. To even get close would require stripping away almost every Game set up Option. But that would "fly" real well for C2C. :p

    JosEPh
     
  18. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    28,054
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I'm not suggesting all nations need to be the same size. I'm saying even the way the core game was developed has the flaw that once a nation gains momentum over the others it's much harder for any other civs to compete. In fact, yes, the problem is more prevalent in the core game than it is here because some things have been done about it here.

    But when this happens in C2C, the problem is worse because we're hoping to enable a player to be able to enjoy a much longer game that goes through much more history (and future) til its end. So we MUST make it nearly impossible to get an edge up on all other players to make this goal a reality. And we can do MORE of what we've done to make this the case by increasing penalties for civs that have greater momentum. It's more fun that way than it is just shattering the nation the player has achieved... not saying that's not a valid way to also go about achieving this goal though.

    In particular, slowing the research rates the larger the civ becomes would be an appropriate way to truly hamper larger civs so as to give the smaller ones an opportunity to catch up or even surpass so they can attempt to make a real comeback.
     
  19. GoWay

    GoWay Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2013
    Messages:
    19
    Many very High Tech Technologies have no benefit. Will that change yet?
     
  20. Acularius

    Acularius King

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Messages:
    794
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Well... In regards to keeping civs around so culture stays. Why not keep them around as guerillas. The more angry their 'cities', the more active and strong they are. Furthermore, everything will automatically be at war until they have a city.

    That will keep the civ alive, and therefore their culture. If the culture is relatively happy, they are restricted to 'animal' units, and/or scouts so that hunters and the like still have a purpose.
    So its like a Barbarian almost... Lastly they could go after a different city altogether and 'migrate' there, like the Great Migrations starting from the Steppes into Europe following the fall of the WRE.

    It's just a thought to keep a civ alive and active, keep the player on his toes in recently conquered regions, or angry religious populations (Like the Romans in Judea) and such things like that.
     

Share This Page