Caveman 2 Cosmos

Going on a tangent here, but can the AI recognize that certain units can create worldviews (but not that others can abolish them)? And do they know to send them to the capital to do so?
AI recognizes that, problem is with building unit to do special actions.
That is AI doesn't know, that unit X can be built to do action Y (mostly placing buildings).

Otherwise AI could build multiple tamed animals of each kind to boost new city for example (as extra company to property control, anti-animal patrol and workers together with settler).
Or it would build food/production caravans.
 
Last edited:
Steel by itself isn't critical resource before Industrial era.
Sorry but I disagree strongly. Crucible Steel was added when it was because for realism reasons, steel is vital at that time. I guess you mean it's not critical gameplay-wise, but imo that's another bug, because it should be.
As for factory there is ordnance like kill-switch building called "Emancipation Proclamation", that nukes all worldviews (so AI can shut down worldviews as AI is too dumb to build units for specific special actions).
This building is buildable before you unlock factories.
Um yeah don't remind me...:p
The AI seems to need it, but I think it's vital that players and AIs have the option to keep slavery going as long as they can stand the various disincentives. Which means that the disincentives should not include depriving them of resources AT ALL.
 
Sorry but I disagree strongly. Crucible Steel was added when it was because for realism reasons, steel is vital at that time. I guess you mean it's not critical gameplay-wise, but imo that's another bug, because it should be.
Yeah, I meant gameplay-wise as all units, that require steel are Clockpunk or are buildable in Industrial and later eras on earliest tech unlock.
Buildings require other metal wares as alternative to steel wares - very few of them needs steel wares exclusively.

So late medieval/renaissance units should use steel too it seems.
 
It is absolutely unforgivable and unplayable imo in the case of the Steel Smelter, because it makes Crucible Steel an empty tech, and because neither rationale justifies depriving you of a resource. Same goes, much later, for the Factory, which deprives you of dozens of resources once their earlier source buildings obsolete (as well as preventing you from making most of the 20th century's advances). I've begged for the buildings to be made more expensive and have their yields drastically reduced by slavery instead, but no-one wants to make the change.
I agree. Adjust the factory rather than ban it. It's too resource generation critical.
So late medieval/renaissance units should use steel too it seems.
Agreed.
 
I agree. Adjust the factory rather than ban it. It's too resource generation critical.
There is nice tag used by wonders.
Code:
<GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
               <BuildingExtraCommerce>
                   <BuildingClass></BuildingClass>
                   <CommerceType></CommerceType>
                   <iExtraCommerce></iExtraCommerce>
               </BuildingExtraCommerce>
           </GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
This is used by wonders to globally adjust :gold::culture::science::espionage:.
Can be extended so it can modify :food::hammers::commerce::gp: too?

Also version that uses modifiers not just flat adjustment could be made.

If I used it on regular building X, and change was coming from wonder, then each regular building would have modified output if wonder is present.

Spoiler :

Civ4BeyondSword 2019-04-29 22-16-06-61.jpg
Civ4BeyondSword 2019-04-29 22-16-01-13.jpg
Civ4BeyondSword 2019-04-29 22-15-46-41.jpg



Code:
        <!-- Severe penalties if slavery is active -->
        <BuildingInfo>
            <Type>BUILDING_STEEL_MILL</Type>
            <AndDependencyTypes>
                <DependencyType>BUILDING_STEEL_MILL</DependencyType>
            </AndDependencyTypes>
            <GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
                <BuildingExtraCommerce>
                    <BuildingClass>BUILDINGCLASS_WV_SLAVERY</BuildingClass>
                    <CommerceType>COMMERCE_GOLD</CommerceType>
                    <iExtraCommerce>-20</iExtraCommerce>
                </BuildingExtraCommerce>
            </GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
        </BuildingInfo>
        <BuildingInfo>
            <Type>BUILDING_FACTORY</Type>
            <AndDependencyTypes>
                <DependencyType>BUILDING_FACTORY</DependencyType>
            </AndDependencyTypes>
            <GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
                <BuildingExtraCommerce>
                    <BuildingClass>BUILDINGCLASS_WV_SLAVERY</BuildingClass>
                    <CommerceType>COMMERCE_GOLD</CommerceType>
                    <iExtraCommerce>-100</iExtraCommerce>
                </BuildingExtraCommerce>
            </GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces>
        </BuildingInfo>
    </BuildingInfos>
 
Last edited:
Is there a GlobalBuildingExtraYields?
That's what it would take. Rather than add another tag, I've been considering getting rid of this one and using autobuildings that are given to all cities for all global effects. It might be a little slower but I THINK it's a little more memory efficient since it doesn't require a whole new tag.

BTW, I do think it's more important to mute the benefits of the building rather than making it more costly. I'm not sure how I can rationalize it being more expensive, but the concept that it doesn't help as much if you have slavery in place does make sense to me.
 
Is there a GlobalBuildingExtraYields?
That's what it would take. Rather than add another tag, I've been considering getting rid of this one and using autobuildings that are given to all cities for all global effects. It might be a little slower but I THINK it's a little more memory efficient since it doesn't require a whole new tag.

BTW, I do think it's more important to mute the benefits of the building rather than making it more costly. I'm not sure how I can rationalize it being more expensive, but the concept that it doesn't help as much if you have slavery in place does make sense to me.
Such tag doesn't exist.

GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces is used by 157 wonders and two regular buildings, that i added tag in module.
It was either vanilla tag, or added long ago as even vokayra wonders have this tag.

So for example there would be one autobuilding for SlaveryFactory, other building for Slavery+Smith, third for something else and so on?
 
Last edited:
Or you could just force Slavery off when you get the tech that allows that resource. You would have to make the "start slavery" action obsolete with that tech. It is not intended to be a viable World View past a certain tech anyway.
 
Or you could just force Slavery off when you get the tech that allows that resource. You would have to make the "start slavery" action obsolete with that tech. It is not intended to be a viable World View past a certain tech anyway.
Well I did something similar: instead of tech there is building called Emancipation Proclamation, it shuts all worldviews.
This tech is right before factories are unlocked.

Now slavery doesn't block factories and steel smiths anymore, just makes them expensive to run.

I don't think you can obsolete unit actions, just that sometimes don't appear when should when you have "hide obsolete unit actions" or something like that in BUG settings.
 
I agree. Adjust the factory rather than ban it. It's too resource generation critical.

What about having two buildings? You'll have the main building, the one that is currently banned while slavery is active. Add a second one that is:
- more expensive
- less productive (and/or with other malus)
- still provides the resource
- available at the same tech
- replaced by the equivalent "No Slavery" building
- only buildable with Slavery active (worldview slavery in city?)

In this way, you have an equivalent building that can be built while slavery is active, but if you don't have slavery, this weaker and more expensive equivalent building is replaced by the completely superior non-slavery building. Possibly, you could have the slavery-enabled building only buildable while the city has worldview slavery present?

As for the other resources, is there a reason they out-and-out obsolete at the factory tech, as opposed to just being replaced? Wouldn't that allow you to research the tech without those buildings simply vanishing? Does it cause issues with AI?

As for making slavery less viable as you progress, perhaps add further maluses to it, and reduce the output of its specialists, at the capstone/era change techs? Sort of the opposite of how higher tourism, education, etc autobuildings open up with new eras. I'm concerned this might be somewhat hidden from the player, though. While the adjustments would be listed in the tech, there won't be any easy way of communicating to future players that slavery becomes less and less productive (or has more and more negatives) unless they read through the era techs closely. I suppose it could be mentioned as part of slavery's strategy text in the pedia.
 
Last edited:
What about having two buildings? You'll have the main building, the one that is currently banned while slavery is active. Add a second one that is:
- more expensive
- less productive (and/or with other malus)
- still provides the resource
- available at the same tech
- replaced by the equivalent "No Slavery" building
- buildable with Slavery active (worldview slavery in city?)

In this way, you have an equivalent building that can be built while slavery is active, but if you don't have slavery, this weaker and more expensive equivalent building is replaced by the completely superior non-slavery building. Possibly, you could have the slavery-enabled building only buildable while the city has worldview slavery present?

As for the other resources, is there a reason they out-and-out obsolete at the factory tech, as opposed to just being replaced? Wouldn't that allow you to research the tech without those buildings simply vanishing? Does it cause issues with AI?

As for making slavery less viable as you progress, perhaps add further maluses to it, and reduce the output of its specialists, at the capstone/era change techs? Sort of the opposite of how higher tourism, education, etc autobuildings open up with new eras. I'm concerned this might be somewhat hidden from the player, though. While the adjustments would be listed in the tech, there won't be any easy way of communicating to future players that slavery becomes less and less productive (or has more and more negatives) unless they read through the era techs closely. I suppose it could be mentioned as part of slavery's strategy text in the pedia.
Well Factory is indirect requirement for several tens if not few hundred of buildings.
Directly it is required for 20 or so buildings.
 
I don't think you can obsolete unit actions, just that sometimes don't appear when should when you have "hide obsolete unit actions" or something like that in BUG settings.
They are mission outcomes and you can obsolete outcomes. If there are no valid outcomes the mission does not show. There are some quite complex ones in Custom_World_Views. You can even have an outcome replace others.
 
Or you could just force Slavery off when you get the tech that allows that resource. You would have to make the "start slavery" action obsolete with that tech. It is not intended to be a viable World View past a certain tech anyway.
We have players, including myself, that feel that's not very realistic. There are numerous factions alive today that not only fought hard to keep it from ending, they also would fight for its return and do all they can to bring it back. I'm not sure why we should treat it as something that would face an inevitable end when it was actually unlikely to have ever been abolished and took a lot of lives laid on the line to achieve it.

Also, if you obsolete the ability to turn slavery on, will that somehow obsolete slavery for those who still have it?

What about having two buildings? You'll have the main building, the one that is currently banned while slavery is active. Add a second one that is:
- more expensive
- less productive (and/or with other malus)
- still provides the resource
- available at the same tech
- replaced by the equivalent "No Slavery" building
- only buildable with Slavery active (worldview slavery in city?)

In this way, you have an equivalent building that can be built while slavery is active, but if you don't have slavery, this weaker and more expensive equivalent building is replaced by the completely superior non-slavery building. Possibly, you could have the slavery-enabled building only buildable while the city has worldview slavery present?

As for the other resources, is there a reason they out-and-out obsolete at the factory tech, as opposed to just being replaced? Wouldn't that allow you to research the tech without those buildings simply vanishing? Does it cause issues with AI?

As for making slavery less viable as you progress, perhaps add further maluses to it, and reduce the output of its specialists, at the capstone/era change techs? Sort of the opposite of how higher tourism, education, etc autobuildings open up with new eras. I'm concerned this might be somewhat hidden from the player, though. While the adjustments would be listed in the tech, there won't be any easy way of communicating to future players that slavery becomes less and less productive (or has more and more negatives) unless they read through the era techs closely. I suppose it could be mentioned as part of slavery's strategy text in the pedia.
All of this sounds fairly reasonable at first glance.
 
Probably the ideas that there are increasingly negative autobuilds with each era while slavery is active, or reductions in slave specialist output, still have merit.

However, I did not consider that the factory building itself is a prerequisite for other buildings, so having an alternative building to replace the factory wouldn't be very helpful unless you went and added that secondary building as a possible prereq in the same place as the factory. But the point of the factory substitute was to have it meet the factory-requirement with lower economic benefits. It would not make sense to have this slave!factory open up normal!factory prereqs; these subsequent buildings would end up needing slave equivalents of their own. Which would be far too much work to accommodate a mechanic that is already very desirable because it is strong. If this were a more commercial project, you could consider such deep alt-building slave path as an alternative progression of technology/economy, but as it stands I would not recommend it for C2C.
 
Personally I feel that having to choose between steel and slavery is a good thing. You can have one or the other but not both.

Just as it should be that you have lacquer ware or glass ware not both. At least until the modern era and Chemistry.
 
Personally I feel that having to choose between steel and slavery is a good thing. You can have one or the other but not both.

Just as it should be that you have lacquer ware or glass ware not both. At least until the modern era and Chemistry.
Why should slavery not be possible throughout the modern and future eras as well though? And why would slavery keep us from having access to any given material resources? I mean... much of the point of slavery is to provide any known resources.
 
I was thinking of starting a new game relatively soon, and was considering some different options from my current game.

Do you recommend uncut Size Matters, if using Size Matters? How does Size Matters differ with/without this option?

Are there any changes to difficulties from BTS? I normally play on Noble for BTS, but even with Win For Losing and Tech Diffusion, I find the AI severely behind, while I'm blazing through the tech tree (unlocked Crucible Steel before 800BCE). What difficulty should I try? Should I use +40% tech cost? Does that only affect human players.

What map scripts do you recommend?
 
As the designer of Size Matters, I strongly suggest to NOT use uncut, which is largely a way to appease those who prefer some of the core unit game balances, which SM does adjust. Uncut makes all units start off at the same strength they start with in the core game, regardless of their beginning size categories, whereas without it, some units come into play stronger or weaker based on off-center size category assignments. Thus, WITHOUT Uncut, some units that are more useful for war application in the core may be less suited for the heavy lifting of warfare clashes but still valid for use in other ways, whereas some units that cannot merge are compensated by starting off naturally stronger as a result, and thus remaining more applicable as a fighting force, even though it can't fully keep up with the largest merged stacks.

If you can, play with the latest SVN version. The AI is doing much better at this point, so far as I have seen. Noble is nowhere near a balanced fight for most players who have the slightest idea what they are doing. Maybe try Monarch if you want to step it up. See how that goes for you.

So far, feedback suggests that the Complex Traits with Developing Leaders and No Positive Traits at Gamestart makes for a good game as well.
 
As the designer of Size Matters, I strongly suggest to NOT use uncut, which is largely a way to appease those who prefer some of the core unit game balances, which SM does adjust. Uncut makes all units start off at the same strength they start with in the core game, regardless of their beginning size categories, whereas without it, some units come into play stronger or weaker based on off-center size category assignments. Thus, WITHOUT Uncut, some units that are more useful for war application in the core may be less suited for the heavy lifting of warfare clashes but still valid for use in other ways, whereas some units that cannot merge are compensated by starting off naturally stronger as a result, and thus remaining more applicable as a fighting force, even though it can't fully keep up with the largest merged stacks.

If you can, play with the latest SVN version. The AI is doing much better at this point, so far as I have seen. Noble is nowhere near a balanced fight for most players who have the slightest idea what they are doing. Maybe try Monarch if you want to step it up. See how that goes for you.

So far, feedback suggests that the Complex Traits with Developing Leaders and No Positive Traits at Gamestart makes for a good game as well.

Thanks, my current game already has the trait options you recommend, and I really enjoy them. I'll use the base SM, and go for monarch. I am using an SVN version, but it's a couple of weeks old, so I'll make sure to update it when I start a new game.
 
Why should slavery not be possible throughout the modern and future eras as well though? And why would slavery keep us from having access to any given material resources? I mean... much of the point of slavery is to provide any known resources.

Well it is still happening in the UK today. People who want to enter the UK illegally pay smugglers lots of money to get here. When they do manage to enter the UK, they find that they are not free and have to work for the smugglers (as slaves) for very little.
 
Top Bottom