Caveman 2 Cosmos

[Wrabbit]

For the most part it works but it depends what you are trying to do. For example placing manufactured resources on the map will crash the game to desktop.

i was trying to place down unites to see what they all have and what unites there is like merchant and engineer

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

i was trying to place down unites to see what they all have and what unites there is like merchant and engineer

Should work. Would not the pedia be as good? There are unit classes for merchants (and engineers?) that list the units in those categories.

There are two lines of land merchants one that acts as both merchant and engineer (see Early Merchant and upgrades) and the food merchant that moves food around. There are sea going merchants also, but they are only merchants not engineers.

 

[Wrabbit]

sorry was talking about the great persons but for me it does not matter what i try nothing from world builder works at all

 

[JosEPh_II]

As far as I recall no civic changes where made... Maybe your cities are more educated this time? I know that increases anarchy times.

Being more educated should not increase anarchy time. It should be the other way around.

In this new game I finally got a religion Andeism. And he Anarchy period to convert was 12 turns! For a mid Ancient era Religion? On a Long GS game? That's Horrible. What is it like for an Eternity game? 60 turns of Anarchy? Holy Cow!

No something was changed because the other Long Game never had Anarchy like this for converting to a Religion or changing a Gov't type. If it had I would not be posting about this now.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Being more educated should not increase anarchy time. It should be the other way around.

The smarter people are the less they agree on how things should be. Governments of the world that operate under more tyrannical governments that tolerate the will of the people the least will want their people's level of understanding to be at a minimum or it can threaten them. The less people understand, the more they take on face value what lies they are sold by their leaders to explain various needs for changes. We must assume that any period of anarchy is going to be made longer and more arduous by a more knowledgeable public, each of whom is more empowered to think for themselves and have an opinion, one which likely conflicts with others, and the strength of those opinions are more powerful when you feel you have reason to believe in them due to what you know. There are downsides to having smart people, and this is one of them.

In this new game I finally got a religion Andeism. And he Anarchy period to convert was 12 turns! For a mid Ancient era Religion? On a Long GS game? That's Horrible. What is it like for an Eternity game? 60 turns of Anarchy? Holy Cow!

No something was changed because the other Long Game never had Anarchy like this for converting to a Religion or changing a Gov't type. If it had I would not be posting about this now.

It does seem a little high as there are limits to how much anarchy modifier you can get from education that grows over the eras and this seems like more than I would ever expect, particularly on a Long gamespeed. Something sounds a bit 'off' and worth looking at the modifiers directly over.

To see the anarchy length modifiers you are getting from education, it should only be applying to the capital's education level. Check the special buildings there. (And if you are getting the ones that influence anarchy from other cities then that would be a potential source of the problem but I don't know what would've changed to allow that now.)

Traits can bring anarchy modifiers. Other buildings can. Try to piece together the sources to explain it from the base up. I'm curious to know what's causing it to be THAT long myself.

 

[JosEPh_II]

The smarter people are the less they agree on how things should be

Really? I don't think so. That is really backwards.

Traits can bring anarchy modifiers

I did random on my Civ and got the Ottomans. I'm using default traits, ie no trait options selected. I think the negative trait might be Anti-Clerical. I'll need to check that out better.

EDIT: Yeah I've got Anti-Clerical and it gives a 500% increase in Anarchy Time for Religions. I also Have Expansive which give another whammy. And even the "Good" trait Philosopical gives increased Anarchy time for Civic changes. This is a Horrible set of Traits. And players wonder why some Leaders struggle so badly and their Empire don't expand well. This one even gives an extra 5 Crime per turn to pop when any city gets it's pop over 20.

I hope your new Trait set is a Whole Lot Less Convoluted.

 

[Snofru1]

I think Anarchy is absolutely no fun. I´d find it much better to have other negative effects on changing civics or religions like having it cost a lot of money or something similar, but having my cities not produce anything is simply boring. Having an option to reduce Anarchy times to zero or at least a very short time would be appreciated.
I always mod it out but I also don´t exploit it and change civics and religions only seldom.

 

[JosEPh_II]

On Higher Difficulty levels, now as the human player, you have to really work to even get a religion in the Ancient Era. Or you end up adopting a neighbor's religion. Heck I just used a Stalker to capture Tengrii Shaman and a Shamanism one as well so I could get these 2 religion going in some of my cities.

But this Anti-Clerical Trait is zapping all the good out of that effort too. Now I remember why I stopped using the Negative Traits by Selecting the No Negative Trait Option for so long. And was just using the 2 "good" traits. Or disabling Traits altogether.

Oh well old forbidden territory revisited!

 

[raxo2222]

Really? I don't think so. That is really backwards.


I did random on my Civ and got the Ottomans. I'm using default traits, ie no trait options selected. I think the negative trait might be Anti-Clerical. I'll need to check that out better.

EDIT: Yeah I've got Anti-Clerical and it gives a 500% increase in Anarchy Time for Religions. I also Have Expansive which give another whammy. And even the "Good" trait Philosopical gives increased Anarchy time for Civic changes. This is a Horrible set of Traits. And players wonder why some Leaders struggle so badly and their Empire don't expand well. This one even gives an extra 5 Crime per turn to pop when any city gets it's pop over 20.

I hope your new Trait set is a Whole Lot Less Convoluted.

Would be dividing anarchy time from traits by 5 and halving crime values good?

 

[JosEPh_II]

Would be dividing anarchy time from traits by 5 and halving crime values good?

Personally I have never liked how Crime was added to Traits in the 1st place. Sure several Negative Traits can foster Crime. But the usage of multiples of 5 was overboard imho. And some Crime property was just tacked on without seemingly much thought. Though I will say that when this set was being placed it was an explosive time for the Crime Property. Hydro was wanting it everywhere! And the Property system was a New Toy back then too. Plus we had the Hugely divisive Trait set that Sgt Slick implemented that T-brd had to mute.

Now today we are still combing out the nits so to speak.

As to your question, you probably better let T-brd weigh in before you even think about making any changes.

 

[raxo2222]

Personally I have never liked how Crime was added to Traits in the 1st place. Sure several Negative Traits can foster Crime. But the usage of multiples of 5 was overboard imho. And some Crime property was just tacked on without seemingly much thought. Though I will say that when this set was being placed it was an explosive time for the Crime Property. Hydro was wanting it everywhere! And the Property system was a New Toy back then too. Plus we had the Hugely divisive Trait set that Sgt Slick implemented that T-brd had to mute.

Now today we are still combing out the nits so to speak.

As to your question, you probably better let T-brd weigh in before you even think about making any changes.

I'll screenshot all traits (non-developing set), that do something with properties.
It seems like they aren't much different from buildings here property-wise.

Spoiler :

 

[Thunderbrd]

Really? I don't think so. That is really backwards.

See what I mean?

I hope your new Trait set is a Whole Lot Less Convoluted.

It's certainly more balanced and measured out. There's a massive sense of randomness among what we have now and I feel a lot of the current design misses the point of what traits are supposed to bring to the game, which are ways to compel you to play your game to different strengths.

I have tried to keep anarchy from commonly being THAT severe, but although it may be possible to get a special 'perfect storm' of negatives in that department, like what you have found with this particular set, there are also combinations you can select that can eliminate anarchy altogether for the most part. I consider anarchy modifiers to be pretty weighty, not a minor thing, meaning a small amount goes a long ways in balance weight against other factors.

Whether you would call this set convoluted or not sure remains to be seen of course. Thanks to your previous points of feedback about trait design in general, and the statements of many others, I have taken the concern to keep the number of factors that each trait brings down to what I feel is a minimum. Of course, it still might be on a high end of some preferences when some have argued for traits to only have 2 effects each. I estimate the number of tags in use probably averages out to about 10 per trait or so.

The thing I know I may struggle with on these traits myself is that they are so well balanced and there are so many of them that it may take a very long time to find the ones you will rely on as 'go-to' traits That's part of the purpose of it, of course, because I wanted them to be able to help to make each game feel very different since you can select deeply varied skillsets as leaders.

At least all should be roughly equivalent in power - imo that's the most important thing. However, on some tags I do allow for large variations where future game developments can change these balances significantly, such as how many buildings apply that get construction cost modifiers and how many techs get direct research mods.

One of the strategic keys of the coming set is to decide if you want to proliferate and take a wide array of benefits and spread out your penalties to be as painless as possible, though frequent, or if you want to get a few really strong ones, sometimes where trait benefits overlap, or there are powerful synergetic benefits between them, but also take some very painful hits on certain areas in the process. This is where some rare combos can produce some evil painful detractions, such as potentially multiple hits of Anarchy Time penalties.

Suffice it to say, if you DID get a terrible anarchy time modifer penalty built up in your selections, you'd want to plan your game approach around that, knowing that you are in that position because you've been granted tremendous benefits in just as powerful ways elsewhere. So if you were to only switch civics on golden ages or if the traits are designed to make you favor one religion the whole game through, for example, the traits help to craft your best strategic approaches to the many 'interesting choices' the game presents a player, if you respond well to what you have at least.

This is where I feel we currently are imbalanced - often where there are strong penalties there are not commensurate benefits, and as a result, in the end evaluation, only a few traits are worth taking and quite a few are flat out lackluster.

Would be dividing anarchy time from traits by 5 and halving crime values good?

I don't care what anyone does with the core traits. I have my design realm on this which is going to be an option set I call 'Complex Traits' (more due to how many of them there are and how they can piece together with each other like puzzle pieces than due to individual trait complexity). I'm about half way through putting them to XML (and it's taken about two months I think to get this far) and then I need to work on the labels and the button arts. So we're a couple of months of solid effort out still - I'm working on this almost every day for as much time as I can find. Then I expect it may require a bit of debugging here and there and at least some diagnostics tests to ensure it's all working as intended - there are quite a few new tags being put to use. IF we all find it delivers exactly what I'm hoping it will and adds enjoyment to the game while improving balance considerably, we can possibly consider making it core and then going through all our leaders and re-appraising their base trait selections.


EDIT: Note on properties in my trait set: I do not appreciate the use of various thresholds of population or property levels to be reached before a modifier applies. I instead strongly prefer simple ratios of x per y population amount modifiers. Thus, +1 Crime per 4 population or +1 Education per population are common, though I've tried to be highly varied with what properties are manipulated, and there are new traits that have manipulation of particular properties as their direct specialty. Where they are applied, they should make intuitive sense as to why they apply there to that trait and they should be a more predictable and measured modification to how that trait influences your game throughout your nation. The current core set established them to be sucker punches that suddenly kick in, often hurting you further for allowing things to be a little out of control. I've never really liked that approach much either. This may be one meaning that the term convoluted is applying to our core set right now.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

.. some have argued for traits to only have 2 effects each...

Yep, traits should have one major and one or at most two minor effects. Developing should only affect one of these at each level or perhaps add another minor effect allowing a branching set of choices for the player. With the tags we now have that allow percentages we could even go look at the original vanilla traits again.

There are some religious stuff I would like to have that requires one or more traits not is influenced by traits as we now have.

 

[Thunderbrd]

There are some religious stuff I would like to have that requires one or more traits not is influenced by traits as we now have.

There is a boolean on traits called bCivilizationTrait. This takes it out of the realm of a Leader trait that can be selected during the normal leader trait assignment process. We also have a building tag in place which allows you to give a trait as a result of constructing the building. This is how the Ancient Ways works. Largely, it is intended for applying Civilization Traits. I'm sure you can probably achieve your goals with this approach given the wide assortment of modding agility this provides us with traits. I don't think we've tapped this REALLY interesting potential much yet at all.

Yep, traits should have one major and one or at most two minor effects. Developing should only affect one of these at each level or perhaps add another minor effect allowing a branching set of choices for the player. With the tags we now have that allow percentages we could even go look at the original vanilla traits again.

You'd find even the vanilla traits are a LOT more complex than 3 tags in use. I do agree that traits should be 'about' an easily understood playstyle benefit and that their themes should be simple and clear. Each trait is basically a superpower for a leader and it comes with side effects and detractions as well (so long as you're not playing with Pure Traits at least, which removes the negative penalties from positive traits and the positive benefits from negative traits.) That said, an effective superpower is not represented usually by a singular tag but by a basic recipe of them. This is like cooking - the end flavor should not be overly intricate but should be clear and purposeful.

 

[raxo2222]

I don't care what anyone does with the core traits. I have my design realm on this which is going to be an option set I call 'Complex Traits' (more due to how many of them there are and how they can piece together with each other like puzzle pieces than due to individual trait complexity). I'm about half way through putting them to XML (and it's taken about two months I think to get this far) and then I need to work on the labels and the button arts. So we're a couple of months of solid effort out still - I'm working on this almost every day for as much time as I can find. Then I expect it may require a bit of debugging here and there and at least some diagnostics tests to ensure it's all working as intended - there are quite a few new tags being put to use. IF we all find it delivers exactly what I'm hoping it will and adds enjoyment to the game while improving balance considerably, we can possibly consider making it core and then going through all our leaders and re-appraising their base trait selections.


EDIT: Note on properties in my trait set: I do not appreciate the use of various thresholds of population or property levels to be reached before a modifier applies. I instead strongly prefer simple ratios of x per y population amount modifiers. Thus, +1 Crime per 4 population or +1 Education per population are common, though I've tried to be highly varied with what properties are manipulated, and there are new traits that have manipulation of particular properties as their direct specialty. Where they are applied, they should make intuitive sense as to why they apply there to that trait and they should be a more predictable and measured modification to how that trait influences your game throughout your nation. The current core set established them to be sucker punches that suddenly kick in, often hurting you further for allowing things to be a little out of control. I've never really liked that approach much either. This may be one meaning that the term convoluted is applying to our core set right now.

I'll nerf religious anarchy then.

And what is difference between "complex traits" and "developing traits" that was WIP frozen in time?
I'm not sure how to make traits hit harder with properties as population grows.

Also it seems like traits were defined four times: Twice in modules and twice in main assets...

 

[Thunderbrd]

And what is difference between "complex traits" and "developing traits" that was WIP frozen in time?

Developing Leaders is not a trait set but a process.

Also it seems like traits were defined four times: Twice in modules and twice in main assets...

This is necessary but it's hard to explain until you see the difference between non-developing leader traits and developing leader traits - at the moment there is no difference but it was never really the end intention for it to be that way. On developing leaders you select many traits and will end up with a lot more of them in total, therefore they should be more gradual and individually not as strong as they are without developing leaders where you have a small number of static traits assigned. To get started with Developing Leaders, all traits were duplicated straight across.

Traits with iLinePriority of 0 (which the tag has apparently been removed since it's default so if you don't see the tag in use on the trait at all, it's to be understood that it's a 0) are the non-developing leader versions of that trait.

Traits with an iLinePriority of 1 (or -1 for negative traits) are the Developing Leader version of that trait.

LS612 also made his own optional trait set, Focused Traits, his attempt to simplify the trait system as a whole. Many of those are option replacements of the existing traits, thus you do have 4 versions of pretty much each trait.

I'll be adding my own through the Complex Traits option.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'm not sure how to make traits hit harder with properties as population grows.

Here's an example of -1 Crime per 4 population:

            <PropertyManipulators>
                <PropertySource>
                    <PropertySourceType>PROPERTYSOURCE_ATTRIBUTE_CONSTANT</PropertySourceType>
                    <PropertyType>PROPERTY_CRIME</PropertyType>
                    <GameObjectType>GAMEOBJECT_CITY</GameObjectType>
                    <RelationType>RELATION_ASSOCIATED</RelationType>
                    <AttributeType>ATTRIBUTE_POPULATION</AttributeType>
                    <iAmountPerTurn>
                        <Div><!--Pick one this is .5 per pop-->
                            <Mult>
                                <AttributeType>ATTRIBUTE_POPULATION</AttributeType>
                                <Constant>-1</Constant>
                            </Mult>
                            <Constant>4</Constant>
                        </Div>
                    </iAmountPerTurn>
                </PropertySource>
            </PropertyManipulators>

 

[Tajo]

The smarter people are the less they agree on how things should be.

This indeed applies only if their government is selling lies and tyranny to them.

 

[raxo2222]

Here's an example of -1 Crime per 4 population:

            <PropertyManipulators>
                <PropertySource>
                    <PropertySourceType>PROPERTYSOURCE_ATTRIBUTE_CONSTANT</PropertySourceType>
                    <PropertyType>PROPERTY_CRIME</PropertyType>
                    <GameObjectType>GAMEOBJECT_CITY</GameObjectType>
                    <RelationType>RELATION_ASSOCIATED</RelationType>
                    <AttributeType>ATTRIBUTE_POPULATION</AttributeType>
                    <iAmountPerTurn>
                        <Div><!--Pick one this is .5 per pop-->
                            <Mult>
                                <AttributeType>ATTRIBUTE_POPULATION</AttributeType>
                                <Constant>-1</Constant>
                            </Mult>
                            <Constant>4</Constant>
                        </Div>
                    </iAmountPerTurn>
                </PropertySource>
            </PropertyManipulators>

I'll set those in such way, that they would be at same strength as they were originally defined.
That is if this was +5 crime for cities >20 pop, then now it would be +1 crime per 4 pop.

I guess there is no need to adjust traits in module, since Focused Traits option is disabled since forever.

Edit: Joseph hid Focused Traits (module traits) in SVN 9328 back in December 2016.

 

[Tajo]

See what I mean?This is where I feel we currently are imbalanced - often where there are strong penalties there are not commensurate benefits, and as a result, in the end evaluation, only a few traits are worth taking and quite a few are flat out lackluster.

I personally don't mind notable anarchy times because it forces the player to plan ahead and think if the revolution is worth it just now. I also don't understand some who hate this feature so much because it brings another great aspect into the game that has to be taken into careful consideration.

Btw, any idea when V39 will be out?