Caveman 2 Cosmos

[JosEPh_II]

Thanks, I also noticed that the mod is now much better optimised in SVN 9634, the SVN that I'm now playing.
Edit: typos

And you are still 200 SVN version behind! We are at 9880 now. When you finally catch up you will be playing an entirely different mod!

 

[Thunderbrd]

Joe... if you want my help to clean up the handicaps file I can offer my assistance with that but I'm about to dive back into where I left off last night with a few last things here. Let me know if time to address it is a factor today. I think we can at least make a few adjustments that help to correct what is really quite buggy behavior between various difficulty settings.

 

[JosEPh_II]

@JosEPh_II So the lack of use of the construction cost variable on difficulty seems to be our primary bugbear here. See above. With our tests so far seeming to see the balance correct at Immortal level, I suspect we'll need to also shift the overall global on all costs down by 20% once we bring UP the costs by difficulty according to the normal chart progression.

Do you concur?

I agree with the 1st part "we'll need to also shift the overall global on all costs down by 20%" but I'll need to think and study on the 2nd part. Not sure what "the normal chart progression" is. Especially after the post I mad about upgrade costs seeming to have been changed recently.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Not sure what "the normal chart progression" is.

The same for buildings as we have for units. At the moment the buildings are unmodified by difficulty.

 

[JosEPh_II]

iConstructPercent ? Cause Handicaps does not use this tag.

It does have an iAIConstructPercent though.

ErasInfos does, as of course does GSInfos.

 

[raxo2222]

This makes sense and seems to fit. However:

This could be a problem and part of why someone on Noble would complain they are not getting their buildings built fast enough while on Immortal, buildings are, in comparison to tech achievement rates, much cheaper (since they haven't been adjusted.) By playing on Immortal for our tests, Joe and I have seen comparatively cheaper feeling buildings by a long ways compared to the tech achievement rates, which are stretched out. These need to be given the same arc as the units! (which incidentally matches the same arc as difficulty has for tech acheivement rates.)

Only the AI. And the bug is at prince, not monarch. Should be 95% if we're going off the other charts and patterns of progression as a guide. I'm not convinced this doubling of benefit for the AI is necessary to be honest. Maybe all these should be just a flat 100 to keep the AI set at what noble is set at without being adjusted further by game difficulty of the player. I think Joe would agree with me on that. But if we want the harder settings to be even harder, I can see why this is setup this way.

Removing map size tech modifier would make difficulty modifier tech cost much more predictable, as it wouldn't sum with map size modifier.
Instead of 0.1x - 2.5x mapsize/difficulty combined tech cost modifier we would have 0.4x - 1.5x tech cost modifier depending solely on difficulty (bee stinger would only increase costs of techs in earlier eras).

[Cumulative Tech Modifier] = ( iResearchPercent WorldInfo ) + ( iResearchPercent EraInfo ) + ( iResearchPercent HandicapInfo ) + ( iBeelineStingsTechCostModifier EraInfo )
[Base tech cost] = ( iCost TechInfo ) x ( TECH_COST_MODIFIER ) x ( iTechCostModifier EraInfo, depends on what era the tech is in )

[Tech Cost] = [Base tech cost] x [Cumulative Tech Modifier] x ( iResearchPercent GamespeedInfo ) x ( TECH_COST_EXTRA_TEAM_MEMBER_MODIFIER )

As of that bug for AIconstruct modifier I marked where consistency breaks, if its bug at Prince, then its fine too.

@Joseph
IConstructPercent isn't in difficulty modifier, but most likely it can be added to handicap infos.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Not if its being played on v37 and Not the current svn. Iirc MagnusIlluminus does not use the svn to play his games on. He can correct me if I'm wrong.

And me who uses a fairly up to date SVN. The Engineer School that comes at the same time as Castle will take almost twice as long to build as it will take me to research the next tech. Playing with No Traits on as with traits on I can reach that ratio a lot earlier.

 

[JosEPh_II]

On snail for iConstructPercent for building buildings you have the same % as any other GS because of it's scaling. iReseach is similiarly scaled but should take more turns. Snail can not have the Techs coming in at every 10+ turns. Buildings should or at least used to get built every 5 turns. Of course that was before the Re-Costing projects And the new Cumulative Tech Modifier formula was put in that you see in Raxo's post above yours.

Both these changes have changed the scaling imho in strange ways.

EDIT: And Yes leader Traits and Developing Leaders that allowed more than 3 traits skews the whole picture with out a doubt.

 

[JosEPh_II]

@Joseph
IConstructPercent isn't in difficulty modifier, but most likely it can be added to handicap infos.

I know I edited my post, while you made yours.

As for adding the modifier to handicapInfos, that's not up to me to decide. Just like I wanted Era Infos to have the iGoldModifier tag for more flexibility but was told no.

 

[JosEPh_II]

@T-brd,
CIV4WorldInfos has a large effect on Research rates. And If Mangus test game on duel/Settler/? was done on SVN 9445 then Yes his research speed would be what he posted. That's the way it was back then.

But you and Toffer changed the whole formula so that map size and related Research speeds by map size were supposed to have less significance. Now it's a problem from 1 post?

You have to know the SVN version these reports are played on before you caN USE THE DATA GIVEN (stupid caps key!)

EDIT: Settler Difficulty ggets a 40% reduction in research costs/turns to complete Tech. WorldInfos on Duel gives a 50% reduction. SO yes using these 2 rarely played setting lets you have multiple Techs researched by each turn. This was a given forever. Now it's a big concern???

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well now that you point it out that there isn't a construction modifier (iConstructPercent) in HandicapInfos, I'm a bit peeved. That seems to be an obvious duh so why wasn't this already in place I wonder? I will add it immediately so we can include it. It should be super easy to add but I won't have it on the SVN for a few hrs yet. Do you want me to start us off with the same values as the unit modifiers? Makes sense right?

WorldInfos does have a large effect and I think it should be pretty much eliminated. That will throw off the date matching by a bit but I think it's worth ejecting for reasons brought up in this discussion.

The concern isn't really that the techs are coming so fast on such settings but that the construction rates aren't equivalently bonused so it's making it harder and harder to keep up with technology the 'easier' the game setting is, which I think we can all agree is really a bad effect.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Just like I wanted Era Infos to have the iGoldModifier tag for more flexibility but was told no.

That's not all that bad an idea. It could help us with arcs like the production adjustment I made the other day. I don't think it's pre-release critical though, do you?

 

[Toffer90]

Settler Difficulty ggets a 40% reduction in research costs/turns to complete Tech. WorldInfos on Duel gives a 50% reduction. SO yes using these 2 rarely played setting lets you have multiple Techs researched by each turn. This was a given forever. Now it's a big concern???

I wouldn't say it's a big concern, duel / normal / settler is imo meant for debugging (debugging balance is better on Noble diff. though) so it is good that stuff is fast there.

But in the long run, it might be for the best to consider removing tech modifier from map size, and perhaps reduce it a bit for the handicaps.

 

[JosEPh_II]

But in the long run, it might be for the best to consider removing tech modifier from map size, and perhaps reduce it a bit for the handicaps.

I agree that the easier settings on handicaps don't need such big boosts like the added 60% that the player gets for research on Settler.

And as for maps sizes, well are they still that strong after you all's new formula? If so then yeah they can be toned down for the smaller sizes. But once you get above large, that's anther discussion.

 

[Toffer90]

And as for maps sizes, well are they still that strong after you all's new formula? If so then yeah they can be toned down for the smaller sizes. But once you get above large, that's anther discussion.

Difficulty and map size research modifier were more powerful "together" before the formula change but they are still powerful, and equally powerful as they were before if only one of them does any modifying.

 

[MagnusIlluminus]

@T-brd,
CIV4WorldInfos has a large effect on Research rates. And If Mangus test game on duel/Settler/? was done on SVN 9445 then Yes his research speed would be what he posted. That's the way it was back then.

But you and Toffer changed the whole formula so that map size and related Research speeds by map size were supposed to have less significance. Now it's a problem from 1 post?

You have to know the SVN version these reports are played on before you caN USE THE DATA GIVEN (stupid caps key!)

EDIT: Settler Difficulty ggets a 40% reduction in research costs/turns to complete Tech. WorldInfos on Duel gives a 50% reduction. SO yes using these 2 rarely played setting lets you have multiple Techs researched by each turn. This was a given forever. Now it's a big concern???

To give more information than what I gave on the last page, 9859 is what shows when I mouse-over on the flag. If there is a better way of figuring out the version, I have forgotten it.

If anyone wants to see what I mean by the enormous stack of Barbarian units that are just milling about, look just NE of the Northernmost borders in the attached savegame.

 

[JosEPh_II]

That's not all that bad an idea. It could help us with arcs like the production adjustment I made the other day. I don't think it's pre-release critical though, do you?

No it's not going to break v38. But it will help on doing some fine tuning.

In the HandicapInfos the iAIConstructPercent modifier we had a semi discussion over that a while back. I thought you or maybe Toffer said that it does affect the player? Am I remembering right? Or is it only applied to the AI? Kind of need to know.

 

[JosEPh_II]

To give more information than what I gave on the last page, 9859 is what shows when I mouse-over on the flag. If there is a better way of figuring out the version, I have forgotten it.

That would be the last SVN version that had a .dll change. That'd how it really displays. There may have another .dll change since then but I would have to look at the SVN log. Not hard to do.

Yes, seems 9875 was the last .dll change so you are a bit behind. Current SVN is up to 9884.

 

[Thunderbrd]

In the HandicapInfos the iAIConstructPercent modifier we had a semi discussion over that a while back. I thought you or maybe Toffer said that it does affect the player? Am I remembering right? Or is it only applied to the AI? Kind of need to know.

It does only affect the AI. I checked when I was looking at the code earlier. Also, that Unit Cost modifier in the HandicapInfos is for the upkeep, not the training cost. I'd read it wrong like DH read my 'cost' meaning wrong in the other thread. So both units and buildings needed a handicap modifier and they now have one. Additionally, I aligned things so that they would react almost exactly the same way as tech cost modifiers. This all should help a lot to keep things adjusting smoothly from one setting to the next in terms of research vs construction and training costs.


I'll get you that gold mod tag as one of the first v39 cycle efforts.

 

[Thunderbrd]

To give more information than what I gave on the last page, 9859 is what shows when I mouse-over on the flag. If there is a better way of figuring out the version, I have forgotten it.

If anyone wants to see what I mean by the enormous stack of Barbarian units that are just milling about, look just NE of the Northernmost borders in the attached savegame.

Thanks for the save - I'll look at it soon to see if I can figure out what's wrong with the Barb AIs there. Not a pre-release debug but it's on my tasklist.