Caveman 2 Cosmos

[Dancing Hoskuld]

So it seems that something like 60% of the active modders actively dislike (at best!) the current trait system, which makes me wonder why this discussion hasn't happened earlier.

Probably because we are all busy on things and don't want to add more work. That and the fact that the people who were working on them did their work in fits and starts so may have returned to complete it at any moment. Unfortunately them moved on to other things.

To improve the mod, I think you have to occasionally break save game compatability. Initially it only effects SVN users - most (not all), probably restart on a regular basis anyway.

Those that want to keep playing long games, do not need to update to the break save version.

I currently keep a version from last May and (an almost) up to date one.

To not do something, that is really needed, just because it breaks saved games. Seems the wrong approach IMO.

Most mods do not have save game forward compatibility. C2C does, it is one of the things that makes us different. Hence the reluctance to do something that breaks saves.

Having said that there are getting to be quite a number of things hanging around which could break save games that we want to be rid of. Perhaps we now have enough to consider the break.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I think we should give it a bit so when we do break saves we can do so with a full list of things we want to accomplish with it. I know adding Animals as an NPC nation and leaving room for other NPC players in the enums is something that will break saves and something I'd want to ensure gets done if we do.

Just so much other stuff to do at the moment.

 

[Harrier]

Most mods do not have save game forward compatibility. C2C does, it is one of the things that makes us different. Hence the reluctance to do something that breaks saves.

Having said that there are getting to be quite a number of things hanging around which could break save games that we want to be rid of. Perhaps we now have enough to consider the break.

I agree - forward compatibility, is a great feature of this mod, and I love it (when using the SVN). Especially when it solves CTDs etc. and allows you to keep playing.

But consider this. You do a version release (not SVN) approx. once per year or 18 months. So a game breaker (if it tackles a number of major issues) after say 3 years - is not that bad.

Just a thought.

 

[Soulmate]

I think there's a boolean setting on the Worldview - Slavery that can be removed. Might as well do that for now until the AI can be improved.

BTW, Focused Traits was supposed to work fine with Developing Leaders so if it doesn't then something was left incomplete there. I don't use focused traits so Developing Leaders and Start without Positive is quite a nice combination to play with imo.

Well, I am sorry for posting inbetween serious discussion , but I would realy like some more explanations about how to remove the setting mentioned, or at leaast some directions. I gues its somewhere in the XML ?

Also, I find Developing Leaders and Start without Positive is quite a nice combination to play with a cool feature aswell I hope you guyz figure everything out with traits settings.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Sacrificing of population to hurry the build queue has nothing to do with the World View stuff. It is a value set somewhere in the Civics. In detail Assets/XML/GameInfo/CIV4CivicInfos.XML

OK, I can't find anywhere where the hurry using population is allowed.

There are a number of places where a unit can be sacrificed to hurry production but nowhere is the population one set. So how is it happening?

 

[climat]

Here.
In your module folder/Captives/Captives_CIV4BuildingInfos:

		<BuildingInfo>
			<BuildingClass>BUILDINGCLASS_WV_SLAVERY</BuildingClass>
			<Type>BUILDING_WV_SLAVERY</Type>
			<Hurrys>
				<Hurry>
					<HurryType>HURRY_POPULATION</HurryType>
					<bHurry>1</bHurry>
				</Hurry>
			</Hurrys>

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Maybe then the whole slavery mechanic needs to be removed and put back as a civic.

 

[Noriad2]

Sacrificing population to gain hammers is not necessarily a bad action. If the pop is used on city tiles, the best tiles are used first, and the worst ones last. Specialists can be useful but there is a limited number of slots. One extra pop also means extra crime and extra disease, more education needed, and 4 food eaten. And an extra pop unit also needs one health and one happiness point. Especially the crime can be costly, either by suffering it or fighting it (which also costs money).

Many buildings require a minimum city pop level, but when those buildings are built or the city pop is way over that minimum anyway, additional pop can be of negative net value.

For example, if all the good city tiles are taken, and the next best city tile is 3 food 1 hammer, then adding a pop to get that additional tile hammer, will cost 1 food (+3 produced but 4 eaten), 1 health (which may cost another food), 1 happiness resource, and will cause the city to suffer more crime, unhealth and pollution, and cost the city more education. The education loss alone may cost more hammers than the one gained. To counter those costs, you'll need more buildings and units, which costs both upkeep and hammers to build. So that is a VERY expensive +1 hammer income, especially because you also get a bunch of hammers from sacrificing the pop, which you miss out on if you decide to keep the pop.

Basically any city has an optimum pop level, based on immediate surroundings, available health and happiness resources and tech level. If the city pop is above that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a good action. If the city pop is below that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a bad action (emergency defense excluded of course).

 

[Soulmate]

Thanks climat I would never find it there

Basically any city has an optimum pop level, based on immediate surroundings, available health and happiness resources and tech level. If the city pop is above that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a good action. If the city pop is below that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a bad action (emergency defense excluded of course).

Well I doubt that droping city pop from 23 to 1 is a good action in any possible way. So it's more about AI using the mechanics wrong than the mechanic itself.

I kind of love the Slavery as a world view instead of civ though.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Maybe then the whole slavery mechanic needs to be removed and put back as a civic.

It wouldn't change whether the AI is using it well or not. That's the problem, not where it's coming from. (Took a lot of work to make that possible btw!)

Sacrificing population to gain hammers is not necessarily a bad action. If the pop is used on city tiles, the best tiles are used first, and the worst ones last. Specialists can be useful but there is a limited number of slots. One extra pop also means extra crime and extra disease, more education needed, and 4 food eaten. And an extra pop unit also needs one health and one happiness point. Especially the crime can be costly, either by suffering it or fighting it (which also costs money).

Many buildings require a minimum city pop level, but when those buildings are built or the city pop is way over that minimum anyway, additional pop can be of negative net value.

For example, if all the good city tiles are taken, and the next best city tile is 3 food 1 hammer, then adding a pop to get that additional tile hammer, will cost 1 food (+3 produced but 4 eaten), 1 health (which may cost another food), 1 happiness resource, and will cause the city to suffer more crime, unhealth and pollution, and cost the city more education. The education loss alone may cost more hammers than the one gained. To counter those costs, you'll need more buildings and units, which costs both upkeep and hammers to build. So that is a VERY expensive +1 hammer income, especially because you also get a bunch of hammers from sacrificing the pop, which you miss out on if you decide to keep the pop.

Basically any city has an optimum pop level, based on immediate surroundings, available health and happiness resources and tech level. If the city pop is above that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a good action. If the city pop is below that optimum pop level, sacrificing is a bad action (emergency defense excluded of course).

There are times when the city has overgrown the nation's ability to manage it, particularly in C2C. So yes, slaving CAN be useful for that - but usually gives a temporary penalty of unhappiness to match what you're trying to avoid. But overloading your ability to manage some properties is certainly another reason.

The MAIN reason to slave is if you are being invaded and need immediate response units.

Now, if I'm not mistaken, the AI understands that to be the main reason as well. However... they believe themselves in such a sieged situation when an invisible unit is terrorizing its citizens inside its own borders. And that's where I've seen the AI slave endlessly to address something they cannot.

One of my very next projects will give players a way to manage this but regardless when I look at the AI at the end of this cycle, I'll see if I can't somehow isolate the 'threat' register that prompts such emergency slaving and make it a bit more selective.

 

[Soulmate]

Setting this line to zero caused repeating infinite loop for me.
<HurryType>HURRY_POPULATION</HurryType>
<bHurry>1</bHurry>

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Setting this line to zero caused repeating infinite loop for me.
<HurryType>HURRY_POPULATION</HurryType>
<bHurry>1</bHurry>

You need only set the 1 to 0 ie

					<HurryType>HURRY_POPULATION</HurryType>
					<bHurry>[B]0[/B]</bHurry>

 

[Soulmate]

You need only set the 1 to 0 ie

					<HurryType>HURRY_POPULATION</HurryType>
					<bHurry>[B]0[/B]</bHurry>

That's what I meant, maybe phrased it wrong ? I obviously changed only the define value.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Try to recalculate after loading after that change. Might get the AI to stop thinking it has the ability when it doesn't. Otherwise, it's apparently not a safe change mid-game.

 

[Soulmate]

Try to recalculate after loading after that change. Might get the AI to stop thinking it has the ability when it doesn't. Otherwise, it's apparently not a safe change mid-game.

Done that aswell. It's a shame that it didn't work out =( Guess I'll have to wait for another way or continue to manualy add pop .

 

[Thunderbrd]

You could worldbuilder out the slavery worldview building then save and exit and change the value and then reload. You'd probably be good to go from there.

 

[Soulmate]

Would it remove the slave specialists from AI cities ? Or just render them inactive like with buildings ? Because at least 1 civilization has quiet a few(my previous empire).

 

[Thunderbrd]

Might... not sure.

 

[Soulmate]

Update on the infite loop problem, it turns out the sacrificing might be not the problem. It looks like the loops are still in place but they are somehow random(by random I mean that I can't see the pattern). I will make few more turns to identify how often that is and will submit the savegame(or logs) then, if the problem continues.

 

[Thunderbrd]

If there's a huge stack in play you will see tremendous slowdowns unless you've updated to the latest SVN (even then it can still be fairly impressive with slowdown spots but much better anyhow.)