I'm on the fence about this. I find that it is a bit too obscure a mechanic to keep it. I think it'll be reverted in the next version, unfortunately, though I don't have another mechanism to replace it with.
G
City-States Mod in CBP: Praises, Criticisms, and Suggestions
- Thread starter Gidoza
- Start date
I'm on the fence about this. I find that it is a bit too obscure a mechanic to keep it. I think it'll be reverted in the next version, unfortunately, though I don't have another mechanism to replace it with.
G
PurpleMentat
Videographer
Just had a thought about this while reading this thread: how about keep it in, but allow a player's diplomats to bypass the 'at-war' protection if:
A) The player is at peace with the city state, and;
B) The player has a Spy in the city-state.
Lord Yanaek
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,642
You know what : forget everything i said. I have a better idea.Lots of useless stuff
There is nothing wrong with CSD diplomatic units. What's wrong (in my view) is how you acquire them.
- Keep everything as is with one (big) change : diplomats (of any level) can't be produced nor bought. Instead, they are born when some hidden (or visible) yield (let's call it "diplomacy") reaches some values (much like prophets with faith, but without the random part).
- Now the interesting part : you can't produce diplomacy, you must earn it.
- You get some diplomacy each turn for every embassy you have with a major civ, and more if you have a DoF (good reason to keep everyone alive i guess)
- You get some each turn for every CS friend/ally. Snowballing effect, but slow so you would have to start early.
- You loose a big lump diplomacy if you DoW someone (more if you DoW a CS?)
- You gain a big lump if you broker some peace
- ...
It just gets more and more opaque with things like that, though, which is why I'm considering just pulling all that out entirely.
A fair idea, but I think this benefits the human a bit too much, and places the capacity of a player to win a diplo victory in the hands of other players. This would be especially problematic in multiplayer, as no one would ever willingly do a DOF (same problem with Sweden in G&K).
Plus, hooking things into deals means the AI has to be opportunistic, which is insanely hard to code.
As it stands now, I think a few tweaks to the existing CSD system would be easier to balance in order to achieve a comparable result. If we increase paper costs a little bit for each unit, and increase unit costs by about 25%, we end up with a system where diplo players have to dedicate quite a bit of their civ's energy to getting those units up and out, which means that being friendly with other civs is more vital (as your military may suffer). I'm also going to increase the GPT costs of diplo units, so that the more you have up, the more your economy hurts, thus you need Trade Routes (and peace) to really benefit from large amounts of diplo units.
Lord Yanaek
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,642
Well, true about multiplayer. In fact i didn't even consider the possibility to play CBP in multilayer (last time i checked, mods were a big no for multiplayer)
In single player, it wouldn't be such an issue. Some AIs are already acting diplomatically, signing DoF with everyone they can. Embassies are something they do naturally. It would probably be possible to choose other actions AI already does and give some diplomacy points for those.
As for the kingmaking part, well, to give you some context, i tend to consider that i really got a diplomatic victory when an AI votes for me. Yes, currently it often requires some wars, but those are wars i wage to liberate occupied civilizations so i guess it's OK.
Mhh, i still feel like it would simply require a stronger empire rather than more diplomacy. Not sure how it would be possible to actually have a diplomatic victory be anything else than an economic victory, especially if multilayer is part of the equation (denying diplomatic options would be easy to do for human players).
Well, true about multiplayer. In fact i didn't even consider the possibility to play CBP in multilayer (last time i checked, mods were a big no for multiplayer)
In single player, it wouldn't be such an issue. Some AIs are already acting diplomatically, signing DoF with everyone they can. Embassies are something they do naturally. It would probably be possible to choose other actions AI already does and give some diplomacy points for those.
Mhh, i still feel like it would simply require a stronger empire rather than more diplomacy. Not sure how it would be possible to actually have a diplomatic victory be anything else than an economic victory, especially if multilayer is part of the equation (denying diplomatic options would be easy to do for human players).
The diplo victory is partially an economic victory - it was in BNW, and it is in the CBP. That's why I changed the 'World Leader' bits in the CSD to make it more about 'seizing control' than 'being elected.' Super-economic-diplomatic powerhouse domination = diplomacy victory.
G
Gothic_Empire
AKA, Ramen Empire
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,502
I think you can trust our user-base to deal with some obscura. We're already going a step above just to play the mod.
Perhaps I can help work on an implementation of the explanation rather than it getting pulled out? I think a tool-tip could be very clear on this point, and the Civpedia could mention it specifically on UU pages. I'd be happy to do the writing for this, though my coding is lackluster at best; citystate wartime alliance protection really does add a fun layer of extra depth, and forces a different perspective on global politics in game. I think possibly giving spies a bonus in these cities might be called for, but I see this as one of the coolest features that's made it into CBP.
If it's ultimately got to go, perhaps it can instead of leaving share a space near research agreements on the list of pre-game tickboxes. Perhaps call it "Wartime Citystate Alliances."
We'll keep an eye on it. I'm taking it out for now, but we'll keep an eye on the issue. I agree that it was cool, but it was a little obscure and could be exploited a little too easily.
G
Lord Yanaek
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,642
Yes it is, and that's what annoys me. It annoyed me in Vanilla CiV, and it still annoys me in CBP.
I never said your changes made the situation worse, i just don't think it's better, and that makes managing diplomats rather than gifting gold more of a burden than an improvement to me. Now, if those diplomats were tied to some "interesting" mechanics (interesting for me, might not be interesting for other players of course), i would probably enjoy sending them to CS, but as it stand, it's just an additional click when really all that matter is your economic power.
But yes, that change in name help make more sense of this victory, yet i still miss some real diplomatic victory, just like i miss the strong alliances from SMAC where you could form a "pact" with an AI and if you didn't betray them, both would stay allied for the whole game and share victory or defeat. The diplomatic system of CiV is more advanced than that of previous games, yet it seems like their have never been as few diplomacy. The whole point of diplomacy seems to exploit your "friends" and betray them at the first occasion. GoT diplomacy i guess, but i hate it.
Well, maybe it's just impossible to have the sort of real diplomatic victory i hope for. Diplomacy in multilayer games is always broken as players won't use real diplomacy with other players
Seems like the entire idea of multiple winners is wrong to most players. Don't you already win if your civilization prospered and "stood the test of time" ?Lots of ramblings there, but it's there to let you know where my frustration comes from. It's not your mod that's flawed. I just hoped you could actually change some of this and was sort of frustrated that it did not. Unfortunately multilayer balance probably makes this impossible
I just have a small complaint with the "kill the barbarians in our territory" quest. Every time I send some units to protect a city state, I end up playing cat and mouse with some horseman that will retreat when I attack it just to turn around and attack the CS again as soon as I send my units back. It's frustrating to chase around a barbarian for like 15 turns with no benefit. If I could get a small influence boost for attacking a barbarian in or adjacent to CS territory, it would help ease that situation.
Yes it is, and that's what annoys me. It annoyed me in Vanilla CiV, and it still annoys me in CBP.
I never said your changes made the situation worse, i just don't think it's better, and that makes managing diplomats rather than gifting gold more of a burden than an improvement to me. Now, if those diplomats were tied to some "interesting" mechanics (interesting for me, might not be interesting for other players of course), i would probably enjoy sending them to CS, but as it stand, it's just an additional click when really all that matter is your economic power.
But yes, that change in name help make more sense of this victory, yet i still miss some real diplomatic victory, just like i miss the strong alliances from SMAC where you could form a "pact" with an AI and if you didn't betray them, both would stay allied for the whole game and share victory or defeat. The diplomatic system of CiV is more advanced than that of previous games, yet it seems like their have never been as few diplomacy. The whole point of diplomacy seems to exploit your "friends" and betray them at the first occasion. GoT diplomacy i guess, but i hate it.
Well, maybe it's just impossible to have the sort of real diplomatic victory i hope for. Diplomacy in multilayer games is always broken as players won't use real diplomacy with other players
Lots of ramblings there, but it's there to let you know where my frustration comes from. It's not your mod that's flawed. I just hoped you could actually change some of this and was sort of frustrated that it did not. Unfortunately multilayer balance probably makes this impossible
I agree that it isn't easy, and that the current concept of the diplomacy victory isn't perfect. It is tough to have a non-aggression victory that is both engaging (from a 'just one more turn' perspective) and also useable in AI hands. The current model is, I think, much better than the previous one, as there are a lot of different ways to achieve the votes needed to shoehorn yourself into the 'World Leader' victory. Religion, CSs, UAs, Ideologies, Policies, etc. all play a role, whereas BNW was exclusively concerned with CS votes.
G
After a playthrough with this, I find myself agreeing with these ideas. It's kinda bunk that a major civ that is at war can dump diplomats on a neutral CS that I'm allied with and essentially lock me out of an alliance that I could easily regain otherwise.
Same issue applies - this is a very obscure mechanic, which is why I'm discarding all of it.
G
mikes61293
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2015
- Messages
- 107
Is there a way to make diplomats create a high value city state quest? I'm envisioning it something like this.
- You send the diplomat/envoy/ambassador to the city state.
- Upon using the unit a popup appears that allows you to select a quest (the pop up would be like the Shoshone ruins selection).
- Upon completing the quest you receive influence that's a higher value than a normal quest.
I think this solution has several advantages.
- It's a more involved system than just spamming diplomats
- It make it easier to ally city states that are closer to you
- It scales with Patronage
- It's a more realistic system
- You send the diplomat/envoy/ambassador to the city state.
- Upon using the unit a popup appears that allows you to select a quest (the pop up would be like the Shoshone ruins selection).
- Upon completing the quest you receive influence that's a higher value than a normal quest.
I think this solution has several advantages.
- It's a more involved system than just spamming diplomats
- It make it easier to ally city states that are closer to you
- It scales with Patronage
- It's a more realistic system
Deadstarre
Expert
I'd like to see the same feature implemented but for a slightly different reason- i havnt seen any runaway horsemen but i always have to "game" the system for rewards. i say well, if i attack this unit but can't Kill it then the CS will kill it on their turn, and i'll get nothing for my effort.
then you need to wait for it to get damaged a little, so You can be the one to make the kill
it takes the fun out of bashing barbs and makes it more about how to figure out how to get the killing blow at all costs, which anyone who's ever played an MMO knows- the kill rewards shouldnt only go to the person who got the finishing hit.
then again, it seems like it'd be a lot of work to code in... but this poster is right on about how it should be in the ideal.
this poster is onto something. i dont think the idea is perfect yet, but somehow tying quests into diplomats definitely seems like a natural.
It is an interesting idea, but it'd be extremely beneficial to humans at the expense of the AI. It'd also be a ton of work, designing dozens of quests to prevent the same 3 quests from being done over and over. I hate to say no, but there are limits to what I'm willing to do in terms of new features.
G
