Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)
- Thread starter strategyonly
- Start date
Taxman66
King
Then, when making peace, how come I can ask for those things in vanilla but not c2c?
The vanilla diplomacy screen, when not at war, allows the player (and the AI, as the AI demands tech all the time) to threaten another (i.e. 'give me this for free or else'), in c2c that is often not possible as the items are marked red with the hover text, "we will never trade with our worst enemy." That makes some sense if the opponent is on equal or near equal ground, but not when totally out classed. There is also too often/much 'worse enemy' even if relations are not that bad.
The vanilla diplomacy screen, when not at war, allows the player (and the AI, as the AI demands tech all the time) to threaten another (i.e. 'give me this for free or else'), in c2c that is often not possible as the items are marked red with the hover text, "we will never trade with our worst enemy." That makes some sense if the opponent is on equal or near equal ground, but not when totally out classed. There is also too often/much 'worse enemy' even if relations are not that bad.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
I believe all this IS handled in the code. I just do not know where. Koshling used to manipulate values on various diplomacy screen options and from that I figure what options are available can be found in the dll as well.
I suppose, why not? You could trade your cities to them for example. If they felt they were getting the better end of the bargain, even when driving a REALLY hard bargain because they don't want to take the diplo hit for trading with the enemies of their allies, they should still have a point that they'd be willing.
This is not to say that you should have the ability to find a price that works for the negotiation from what you can manage to pay.
Hi all, great mod. It truly is. Some things could still be even better.
Revolutions seem to be all over the place. Brazil has long ones while many cultures had practically none, one or two turns at most.
Naval movement issues/needed carrier dominance over battleships is truly needed fix. Also, as nice as the size matters is, it is too broken for me to use simply because the units costs nullify when units are merged. Thus it is far too cheap to own massive stacks of units and distorts the game ridiculously. For example, a nation of 500000 population can have 10000000 in armed forces.
There really should be a price tag on those merges, maybe not quite as much as the same units in individual ones but still clearly a firm financial acknowledgement that nine (let alone more) units are not as cheap to maintain as one.
Cheers, hope these get fixed.
Revolutions seem to be all over the place. Brazil has long ones while many cultures had practically none, one or two turns at most.
Naval movement issues/needed carrier dominance over battleships is truly needed fix. Also, as nice as the size matters is, it is too broken for me to use simply because the units costs nullify when units are merged. Thus it is far too cheap to own massive stacks of units and distorts the game ridiculously. For example, a nation of 500000 population can have 10000000 in armed forces.
There really should be a price tag on those merges, maybe not quite as much as the same units in individual ones but still clearly a firm financial acknowledgement that nine (let alone more) units are not as cheap to maintain as one.
Cheers, hope these get fixed.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
It really is only a discount you get. A merged unit does cost more than 1 unmerged but a little less than 3 unmerged due to the efficiency of managing a larger unit.
Really ? Are you sure ? I have tested this quite extensively through the economy screen and the unit costs number. No matter how large unit I create by merging, it always costs only the price of one according to the economic advisor screen. Mod version is patched V37. I am also able to financially support much larger armies by merging than your statement and any realistic logic should allow.
It goes like this : lets say I have one military unit and unit cost of 5. I build two more and have unit cost of 7. I merge the three and unit cost is again 5. Then I build three more and now the unit cost is 8. I merge the three new ones and the unit cost is 6. Again I build three more and now the cost is 9, then I merge those three units and the unit cost is 7. Then I merge three merged units into even larger one and the unit cost is 5 again as there is only 'one' unit on the map so at this point I have one unit holding 9 smaller ones and with a same cost as one small.
It would be nice if you could check this one because I certainly have tested it and this is how is works and I don't think it is right. I would love to use size matters but cannot when it works like this.
There should be a 20% unit upkeep cost increase for each merge they perform.
I personally think it should be closer to 100% or even 150% upkeep cost increase for each merge.
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. (Solo) → 0 (currently -80)
2. → 100 (currently -60)
3. → 200 (currently -40)
4. → 300 (currently -20)
5. → 400 (currently 0)
6. → 500 (currently 20)
....
13. (Countless) → 1200 (currently 160)
Quality Level → Upkeep cost percent modifier
0. (Incapable) → -75 (currently -100)
1. → -50 (currently -80)
2. → -25 (currently -60)
3. → 0 (currently -40)
4. → 25 (currently -20)
....
10. (Divine) → 175 (currently 100)
Divine-Trillions Should then cost 33
in upkeep ( 1 * 12 * 2.75 )
Divine-Countless should then cost 35 upkeep per unit ( 1 * 13 * 2.75 )
Merging three Divine-Trillions would reduce upkeep from 99 → 35
@Thunderbrd : I'm guessing the formula used in the code would do this "( 1 * {(1200 + 175 + 100) / 100} ) → ( 1 * 14.75 = 14 )", if so, it would make more sense if it did like I suggested above.
I personally think it should be closer to 100% or even 150% upkeep cost increase for each merge.
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. (Solo) → 0 (currently -80)
2. → 100 (currently -60)
3. → 200 (currently -40)
4. → 300 (currently -20)
5. → 400 (currently 0)
6. → 500 (currently 20)
....
13. (Countless) → 1200 (currently 160)
Quality Level → Upkeep cost percent modifier
0. (Incapable) → -75 (currently -100)
1. → -50 (currently -80)
2. → -25 (currently -60)
3. → 0 (currently -40)
4. → 25 (currently -20)
....
10. (Divine) → 175 (currently 100)
Divine-Trillions Should then cost 33
in upkeep ( 1 * 12 * 2.75 )Divine-Countless should then cost 35
upkeep per unit ( 1 * 13 * 2.75 )Merging three Divine-Trillions would reduce upkeep from 99 → 35
@Thunderbrd : I'm guessing the formula used in the code would do this "( 1 * {(1200 + 175 + 100) / 100} ) → ( 1 * 14.75 = 14
)", if so, it would make more sense if it did like I suggested above.
Last edited:
Heh, in my modmod I use these numbers:
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. → -50
2. → 0
3. → 50
4. → 100
5. → 200
6. → 400
7. → 800
....
12. → 25600
13. → 51200
Divine gives 100% increase in the modmod.
Divine-Trillions should cost 53
Divine-Countless should cost 104 per unit.
Merging three Divine-Trillions would reduce upkeep from 159 → 104
So I tried to be careful with my suggestion in the post above.
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. → -50
2. → 0
3. → 50
4. → 100
5. → 200
6. → 400
7. → 800
....
12. → 25600
13. → 51200
Divine gives 100% increase in the modmod.
Divine-Trillions should cost 53
Divine-Countless should cost 104
per unit.Merging three Divine-Trillions would reduce upkeep from 159 → 104
So I tried to be careful with my suggestion in the post above.
Last edited:
There should be a 20% unit upkeep cost increase for each merge they perform.
I personally think it should be closer to 100% or even 150% upkeep cost increase for each merge.
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. (Solo) → 0 (currently -80)
2. → 100 (currently -60)
3. → 200 (currently -40)
4. → 300 (currently -20)
5. → 400 (currently 0)
6. → 500 (currently 20)
13. (Countless) → 1200 (currently 160)
Quality Level → Upkeep cost percent modifier
0. (Incapable) → -75 (currently -100)
1. → -50 (currently -80)
2. → -25 (currently -60)
3. → 0 (currently -40)
4. → 25 (currently -20)
10. (Divine) → 175 (currently 100)
Divine-Countless should then cost 35
@Thunderbrd : I'm guessing the formula used the code would do this "( 1 * [1200 - 100 + 175-100 +100]/100 ) → ( 1 * 12.75 = 12
Heh, in my modmod I use these numbers:
Group size → Upkeep cost percent modifier
1. → -50
2. → 0
3. → 50
4. → 100
5. → 200
6. → 400
7. → 800
12. → 25600
13. → 51200
Divine still gives only 100% increase
Divine-Trillions should cost 53
Divine-Countless should cost 104
Merging three Divine-Trillions would reduce upkeep from 159 → 104
So I tried to be careful with my suggestion in the post above.
Oh no, 20 % is far too little maintenance burden as I suspected. Thanks for the reply Toffer, I guess the first commenter remembered wrong. I think this really needs fixing and until then, it is games without size matters for me.
Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
@Toffer: Adjust it how you see fit please.
Wonderful to see that this is getting fixed so fast, eagerly awaiting the V38 or another patch of 37 then. Did my latest message disappear ? I did send it... did I ? Anyways, thanks a bunch Toffer and say Hello to Piirka for me. 
Do you guys think that V38 will include naval movement/other reworking ?
Do you guys think that V38 will include naval movement/other reworking ?
Piirka?
-open CIV4UnitCombatInfos.xml in notepad.
-Search (ctrl+f) for " <iGroupBase>13< ", iGroupBase has a range between 1-13.
-Make the change you like to <iCostModifierChange>.
-Search for " <iGroupBase>1< ", 1-12 are all listed one after another down the xml sheet from there.
-Make the change you like to <iCostModifierChange> for the rest of the group size entries.
If you want to fix it yourself look in "Mods\Caveman2Cosmos\Assets\XML\Units" folder.
-open CIV4UnitCombatInfos.xml in notepad.
-Search (ctrl+f) for " <iGroupBase>13< ", iGroupBase has a range between 1-13.
-Make the change you like to <iCostModifierChange>.
-Search for " <iGroupBase>1< ", 1-12 are all listed one after another down the xml sheet from there.
-Make the change you like to <iCostModifierChange> for the rest of the group size entries.
Yes.
Norwegian does not know Piirka ?
Wow, thats just great info. I will fix it myself. There was no <iCostModifierChange>-line at all under groups 5 and 9 so I added them myself using the 2,5 multiplier so the group 13 has value of 317394. I'll test it now, thanks again very much Toffer.
Lol, I did not realize that you made a reference to one of the 17 characters played by Robert Stoltenberg in a strictly Norwegian comedy show; Piirka the Finnish Pirate Taxi driver.Norwegian does not know Piirka ?
@pepper2000
can't comment in SVN changelog, so what new buildings were added, that weren't in your
modmod?
Edit: It seems like Energy Beam Network becomes a thing just before travelling to first star - late Transhuman era.
It seems like in that beam network largest satelittes can handle up to TWs of power continously and being capable to send that power to outer planets (satelittes with biggest antennas and shortest produced wavelength)
In KSP mod, Interstellar Extended you can make simple energy beam network before colonizing other planets, when you unlock first fission reactors.
So i guess there could be smaller version of it right after Fusion technology somewhere in Nanotech era.
For example Cislunar Energy Beam Network, that its used to power ships travelling in cislunar space, where satelittes can transfer up to 1 - 10 GW of power from onboard fission/fusion reactors.
can't comment in SVN changelog, so what new buildings were added, that weren't in your
modmod?
Edit: It seems like Energy Beam Network becomes a thing just before travelling to first star - late Transhuman era.
It seems like in that beam network largest satelittes can handle up to TWs of power continously and being capable to send that power to outer planets (satelittes with biggest antennas and shortest produced wavelength)
In KSP mod, Interstellar Extended you can make simple energy beam network before colonizing other planets, when you unlock first fission reactors.
So i guess there could be smaller version of it right after Fusion technology somewhere in Nanotech era.
For example Cislunar Energy Beam Network, that its used to power ships travelling in cislunar space, where satelittes can transfer up to 1 - 10 GW of power from onboard fission/fusion reactors.
Last edited:
pepper2000
King
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 899
Hi raxo,
The Energy Beam Network is one of them. Most of them are Venus buildings, and I am trying to build up that section. There is sort of a smaller version of it already: the Breakthrough Starshot wonder, which unlike the Energy Beam Network is a real project under development today. Breakthrough Starshot will have the laser system based entirely on Earth. Maybe some sort of intermediate system for propelling solar sail craft throughout the Solar System would make sense; I'll think about it.
The Energy Beam Network is one of them. Most of them are Venus buildings, and I am trying to build up that section. There is sort of a smaller version of it already: the Breakthrough Starshot wonder, which unlike the Energy Beam Network is a real project under development today. Breakthrough Starshot will have the laser system based entirely on Earth. Maybe some sort of intermediate system for propelling solar sail craft throughout the Solar System would make sense; I'll think about it.
Hmm then there could be three stages:
First one is ground based microwave/infrared beam powered by late generation of nuclear fission and early nuclear fusion reactors.
It reduces cost of rocket launches due to increased ISP and thrust
Second generation makes possible use of optical wavelength for energy transfer.
Personal spacecraft should be possible by then - you don't have to carry reactor with you, just use beam network all time you want to fire your engines - high thrust thermal for ascent to orbit and high ISP low-ish 0.1g thrust for flying to space stations and all way to Moon in 24 hours without onboard reactors.
Such ship would have to refuel itself on Earth and Moon orbit before landing on other object.
Third generation beam generators operate in UV spectrum - while they waste a lot of energy, they can power distant ships with ease.
Solar system wide cheap-ish colonization and tourism should be possible.
Personal spaceplanes would be like short range cars and there would be space ferries able to travel from one planet to other planet.
Space public transport can use fission and fusion reactors.
Due to safety only unmanned ships can have antimatter onboard.
Even one mg of antimatter is dangerous - it contains around 90 GJ of energy
One microgram of antimatter is 90 MJ - that should be fairly containable explosion.
So first generation of beam network reduces cost of space programs, second one allows cislunar tourism and third one allows solar system tourism.
Also they give other various bonuses.
First one is ground based microwave/infrared beam powered by late generation of nuclear fission and early nuclear fusion reactors.
It reduces cost of rocket launches due to increased ISP and thrust
Second generation makes possible use of optical wavelength for energy transfer.
Personal spacecraft should be possible by then - you don't have to carry reactor with you, just use beam network all time you want to fire your engines - high thrust thermal for ascent to orbit and high ISP low-ish 0.1g thrust for flying to space stations and all way to Moon in 24 hours without onboard reactors.
Such ship would have to refuel itself on Earth and Moon orbit before landing on other object.
Third generation beam generators operate in UV spectrum - while they waste a lot of energy, they can power distant ships with ease.
Solar system wide cheap-ish colonization and tourism should be possible.
Personal spaceplanes would be like short range cars and there would be space ferries able to travel from one planet to other planet.
Space public transport can use fission and fusion reactors.
Due to safety only unmanned ships can have antimatter onboard.
Even one mg of antimatter is dangerous - it contains around 90 GJ of energy
One microgram of antimatter is 90 MJ - that should be fairly containable explosion.
So first generation of beam network reduces cost of space programs, second one allows cislunar tourism and third one allows solar system tourism.
Also they give other various bonuses.
Last edited:
GiuseppeIII
The Third Giuseppe
Was playing today and I wanted to transport a settler to a different island, but I couldn't board him on a ship. Was wondering if this was intentional and if so when I would be able to board settlers? I looked to see if the ship said only certain units could board but couldn't find anything...
Dr. Elephant
Warlord
Interesting, thanks for sharing the info.
Well, if Archery predate H.Sapiens it could been from H.Heidelbergensis, earlier H.Sapiens or, even, H.Erectus, for been there and then.
That could open huge possibilities for the future, when others NPC will be added.
