Caveman 2 Cosmos (ideas/discussions thread)

[mosesj]

Got any advice on how to handle it for now then? my guess was just spamming the units and figuring it out from there or keeping it infinite until I was satisfied with the amount I got, or just build small stacks for an army untill I had three in the doomstack and grouping them up there

It would be a long time before I'll have the capability of designing something along these lines. I'm sure eventually somehow I can work something out but it's low priority in comparison to many other goals at the moment.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Got any advice on how to handle it for now then? my guess was just spamming the units and figuring it out from there or keeping it infinite until I was satisfied with the amount I got, or just build small stacks for an army untill I had three in the doomstack and grouping them up there

That's usually how I go about it myself, though I'll count them in 3s. If I'm prepping for a war, I'll set them to repeat build and every time I merge I move them one space further out from the city so that I can easily keep track of how many of various volumes I have. Once I near the maximum grouping, I take it off repeat and count out how many I still need into the queue.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I use the "report to" function of the city that sends all units produced in a given city to a particular plot. Then when the plot has enough I group them and move the group to where it is needed. This works well when I am building a stack for city settling and have different units being produced in differing cities. It could work well for SM grouping also.

 

[strategyonly]

I use the "report to" function of the city that sends all units produced in a given city to a particular plot. Then when the plot has enough I group them and move the group to where it is needed. This works well when I am building a stack for city settling and have different units being produced in differing cities. It could work well for SM grouping also.

Dang ur right, i keep forgetting about that darn function. . .

 

[Divizor]

Played anyone in Europa universalis 4? There is a setting autonomy,it ranges from 0 to 100,with 0 the Governor gets high with the province,while 100 gets nothing.
Why not enter this in C2C? He will characterize the lack of government representatives in the city. But unlike ЕУ4,for example, to this parameter dependent on the distance from capital,number of cities and population,the bigger they are the higher authority. If 0, the city will give the same as now but with added points of the revolution when 100 will cease to give money, science,production, military units will be reduced by 50-100%,food,culture and great people will be produced 25% more points of the revolution will be reduced. To reduce the autonomy of the will special units like lawyers,as guardians to reduce crime,but this reduction will also increase the points of the revolution. To reduce it will be civics forms of government and technology.
You can do to limit time in 50 moves,so that players do not abuse this opportunity.
Additionally, you can add window 2 buttons:the first increases the autonomy and happiness,but reduces points of the revolution,the second the opposite.

I apologize if the text is not too clear,English is not my native language.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I apologize if the text is not too clear,English is not my native language.

I followed some of it but it seemed a little scattered and rather complex, like a project that could take some years to complete.

 

[strategyonly]

I followed some of it but it seemed a little scattered and rather complex, like a project that could take some years to complete.

ahahhaa isnt that the norm for you, lol . . . .

 

[Thunderbrd]

ahahhaa isnt that the norm for you, lol . . . .

yeah... when it's my idea

 

[Cyborgsgaming]

Has there been any discussion about assigning prerequisites to religions besides the techs? Maybe not to the extent that cultures have. I was originally thinking something like the basic starting culture, such as European or South American. Pretty much every religion in world history has been based somehow on something that was already part of that nations culture or in the environment around them. Something like having cattle or a volcano in the cultural borders could also be a requirement. Do the mechanics not allow for it?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Has there been any discussion about assigning prerequisites to religions besides the techs? Maybe not to the extent that cultures have. I was originally thinking something like the basic starting culture, such as European or South American. Pretty much every religion in world history has been based somehow on something that was already part of that nations culture or in the environment around them. Something like having cattle or a volcano in the cultural borders could also be a requirement. Do the mechanics not allow for it?

They could. Fairly easily. However, it could also screw up game balance a bit and there's some interesting details one would have to consider on the tech tree. I don't think it would be wise but it could be tried at some point. The Ideas project contains some concepts that may make for better prerequisites if we were to break some religions down into core beleifs that compete and to form a religion, the local city that does so really needs to have some strength in the core beliefs of those religions.

DH has another plan he's been working on for a while and I'm intrigued to see what he comes up with.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Has there been any discussion about assigning prerequisites to religions besides the techs? Maybe not to the extent that cultures have. I was originally thinking something like the basic starting culture, such as European or South American. Pretty much every religion in world history has been based somehow on something that was already part of that nations culture or in the environment around them. Something like having cattle or a volcano in the cultural borders could also be a requirement. Do the mechanics not allow for it?

Linking religions to a Culture group is possible but will require many more religions and will be unbalanced unless matching religions exist for the various religions. Otherwise only Middle Eastern nations would be able to build Christianity. Oceania would miss out on a lot.

They could. Fairly easily. However, it could also screw up game balance a bit and there's some interesting details one would have to consider on the tech tree. I don't think it would be wise but it could be tried at some point. The Ideas project contains some concepts that may make for better prerequisites if we were to break some religions down into core beleifs that compete and to form a religion, the local city that does so really needs to have some strength in the core beliefs of those religions.

DH has another plan he's been working on for a while and I'm intrigued to see what he comes up with.

I am having a bit of a problem with getting a screen similar to the tech tree but one for culture and another for piety. These are related to religious ideas or resources which form requirements for specific religions and so on.

After seeing Praetyre's ideas on including Sevo's mod in I have had a break through on the general religion flavours; Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism, Dualism and non-theism; and the general "preacher" organisational structure of inspired, shaman (=master and apprentice) and ordained as well as the national attitude and secular interactions including encouraging the spread, scapegoating and inquisitions. Currently I am thinking that Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism and Dualism should be removed from the tech tree or should require a Great Prophet to research or perhaps require certain religious ideas/resources before they can be learnt through .

I am working on the terrain improvements to do with the nomadic and early agricultural eras associated with religion and culture including "keeping up with the Jones's" style of improvement.

 

[Cyborgsgaming]

Linking religions to a Culture group is possible but will require many more religions and will be unbalanced unless matching religions exist for the various religions. Otherwise only Middle Eastern nations would be able to build Christianity. Oceania would miss out on a lot.

I am having a bit of a problem with getting a screen similar to the tech tree but one for culture and another for piety. These are related to religious ideas or resources which form requirements for specific religions and so on.

After seeing Praetyre's ideas on including Sevo's mod in I have had a break through on the general religion flavours; Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism, Dualism and non-theism; and the general "preacher" organisational structure of inspired, shaman (=master and apprentice) and ordained as well as the national attitude and secular interactions including encouraging the spread, scapegoating and inquisitions. Currently I am thinking that Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism and Dualism should be removed from the tech tree or should require a Great Prophet to research or perhaps require certain religious ideas/resources before they can be learnt through .

I am working on the terrain improvements to do with the nomadic and early agricultural eras associated with religion and culture including "keeping up with the Jones's" style of improvement.

I do like the way that the complete version of civ 5 had you basically build a religion from scratch. Is this kind of the direction that you are going? That is probably better than my thought anyway. I look forward to seeing what the future holds. Of course I'd also like it to be more feasible to keep a non-religious civ that doesn't have to go all North Korea. I myself am an atheist and feel a bit of guilt when I have my nation following any religion. I generally go for the smaller ones that haven't caused all the damage of the major religions in the real world.

 

[tmv]

Of course I'd also like it to be more feasible to keep a non-religious civ that doesn't have to go all North Korea.

There is also "secular" which means complete religious freedom. That way, people can follow a religion but the state doesn't have to get involved.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Atheist is one of the many non-theist codes or "way to live"/moral codes. It is the only way I could figure having Confucianism and Buddhism remain in game.. Additionally some of the group of religion belief sets lumped into Dreamtime are also non-theist.

I have not figured out a way of representing a state religion which is also secular yet. Currently you get no-state religion or a State Religion but many secular nations also have a state religion.

 

[Noriad2]

I do like the way that the complete version of civ 5 had you basically build a religion from scratch. Is this kind of the direction that you are going? That is probably better than my thought anyway. I look forward to seeing what the future holds. Of course I'd also like it to be more feasible to keep a non-religious civ that doesn't have to go all North Korea. I myself am an atheist and feel a bit of guilt when I have my nation following any religion. I generally go for the smaller ones that haven't caused all the damage of the major religions in the real world.

I hate Civ 5's fantasy religions. Just pick out the best bonus from an available list and slap a random available name on it. No historical immersion at all.

 

[JosEPh_II]

I'm not too keen on going in CiV's direction at all.

If we would get our Civics fixed a bit more to make Free Religion better I'd prefer that again. Back a bit to more early versions of Civ methods.

And to be perfectly clear I very much like how our Religions are Now. So No I'm not in favor of going the CiV route.

 

[Taxman66]

I have a suggestion that I hope wouldn't be too hard to include in the mod.

I would like the ability to enforce certain options when making a peace deal (sort of an enforce peace) with an opposing Civ.
I would like to enforce open borders, and trading any extra resources said civ has.

Often times I'm left with no choice but to wipe a civ out, when all I want is access through/around him or if I want some of his refined metals or his 'extra' marble. But whenever I go to the peace screen these options are not available at all to be chosen.

On a related note, I can't threaten to get these things like I can in vanilla (and in vanilla the AI often threatens to get Tech), it simply shows up in ted with "we will never trade with our worse enemy" hover text. I could sorta see that if on equal or near equal grounds, but not when AI Civ is overmatched.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I have a suggestion that I hope wouldn't be too hard to include in the mod.

I would like the ability to enforce certain options when making a peace deal (sort of an enforce peace) with an opposing Civ.
I would like to enforce open borders, and trading any extra resources said civ has.

Often times I'm left with no choice but to wipe a civ out, when all I want is access through/around him or if I want some of his refined metals or his 'extra' marble. But whenever I go to the peace screen these options are not available at all to be chosen.

On a related note, I can't threaten to get these things like I can in vanilla (and in vanilla the AI often threatens to get Tech), it simply shows up in ted with "we will never trade with our worse enemy" hover text. I could sorta see that if on equal or near equal grounds, but not when AI Civ is overmatched.

I like the suggestions. I'm not yet familiar with the diplomacy screens so it would be a long long time before I could get on this myself. I've always hated the flat refusal to negotiate as well... give the price to pay dangit! There should ALWAYS be a price one can pay.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The Diplomacy screen is coded in the exe. We can't change it.

We couldn not use it and code our own. Two years ago there was discussion in the general Civ IV forum about doing so but it never went anywhere. Platyping did come up with a Python screen but never published it and as far as I know none of the coding behind it had been done.

 

[tmv]

There should ALWAYS be a price one can pay.

Even for cities?