In my latest test game I've just reached Ren Era and if you let crime get over 300 you can be in for a rough time till you get it back under control. My 1st iteration makes you be more aware of when and which techs that will release the Next big wave of Crime. Survive the wave and then you can ride the lull till the next wave appears. The highest mincrime level has been reduced from 1500 to 1000. And there are 15 crimes of the 78 in the 10 to 100 range. I eliminated 6 of Hydro's 84 because of redundancy or what I saw as only a very recent minor crime like Toilet papering. Which in many places isn't even considered a crime but a prank or nuisance. And we all ready have littering in the same time frame.
But what I'm also watching is how well the AI handles it. One of my allies now has 90+ policing and/or healing units in it's nearest large city (pop 20+). That concerns me especially with the upgrade cost on healer to Apothecary which is soo out of line it's rather ridiculous. 500+ Gold Plus another Gold/turn to do that upgrade. There are not that many other units that have That outrageous a level of cost on upgrading to the next level. It's one of the 1st things I'd like to adjust as a new member of the team.
In my latest test game I've just reached Ren Era and if you let crime get over 300 you can be in for a rough time till you get it back under control. My 1st iteration makes you be more aware of when and which techs that will release the Next big wave of Crime. Survive the wave and then you can ride the lull till the next wave appears. The highest mincrime level has been reduced from 1500 to 1000. And there are 15 crimes of the 78 in the 10 to 100 range. I eliminated 6 of Hydro's 84 because of redundancy or what I saw as only a very recent minor crime like Toilet papering. Which in many places isn't even considered a crime but a prank or nuisance. And we all ready have littering in the same time frame.
But what I'm also watching is how well the AI handles it. One of my allies now has 90+ policing and/or healing units in it's nearest large city (pop 20+). That concerns me especially with the upgrade cost on healer to Apothecary which is soo out of line it's rather ridiculous. 500+ Gold Plus another Gold/turn to do that upgrade. There are not that many other units that have That outrageous a level of cost on upgrading to the next level. It's one of the 1st things I'd like to adjust as a new member of the team.
If I'm not mistaken, upgrade costs are based on unit value analysis in the code. Not sure that's easily adjusted.
But the benefits of the units are. I'm putting both law and health care units to a full charting out at the moment. I'll present the 'plan' on that as soon as I can so we can discuss that progression, tweak if needed, and then perhaps share in the weight of implementing it. Fair 'nuff?
What I'll need from YOU is the analysis you've done to develop this side of things. I'd be interested to see the old structure and the new as best as possible.
Also... your Pests modifications... I think we need them. Getting a bit tired of pop 6 being a panic button for cities.
Are they tied to the units iCost?
For example Wise Woman (which can Upgrade to Healer or Sheperd) has an <iCost>18. Healer has <iCost>40. But Apothecary jumps wildly to <iCost>270, thus the upgrade cost from Healer to Apothecary is in the 530 to 550 Gold range. Upgrading from Wise Woman to Healer is much more reason able. But I didn't write down what the actual range is, less than 100 iirc.
The whole healer line has some very arbitrary numbers for <iCost>. 1st time it doubles, next it almost 7 times as much as the previous, than it calms down to Only 3 times that. Then we get a period since the iCost has now reached into the 1500 range were it only increases by 300 one time, 1100+ the next, 900+ after that, back to 1100+, and then back to Tripling that, to adding 11,000+for the next, to finally adding 6500+ for the final one. Someone just threw numbers up and made a mishmash of it.
But the benefits of the units are. I'm putting both law and health care units to a full charting out at the moment. I'll present the 'plan' on that as soon as I can so we can discuss that progression, tweak if needed, and then perhaps share in the weight of implementing it. Fair 'nuff?
What I'll need from YOU is the analysis you've done to develop this side of things. I'd be interested to see the old structure and the new as best as possible.
Also... your Pests modifications... I think we need them. Getting a bit tired of pop 6 being a panic button for cities.
That concerns me especially with the upgrade cost on healer to Apothecary which is soo out of line it's rather ridiculous. 500+ Gold Plus another Gold/turn to do that upgrade. There are not that many other units that have That outrageous a level of cost on upgrading to the next level. It's one of the 1st things I'd like to adjust as a new member of the team.
From playing experience the upgrade cost is based on the difference in cost between the units. The only way to reduce such would be to introduce an intermediary unit or reduce the cost of the unit being upgraded to.
From playing experience the upgrade cost is based on the difference in cost between the units. The only way to reduce such would be to introduce an intermediary unit or reduce the cost of the unit being upgraded to.
That was my experience too, but wanted someone with more info/knowledge on the subject to speak up.
Impo Apothecary's <iCost> should be 80+ not 270. A doubling of cost instead of almost 7x's more than a Healer. Then the rest could be adjusted accordingly instead of the hodgepodge it is now. Mil units and even Workers have nowhere near a steep increase as this line that early in the game.
Yes it plays on Win 10. So do our Pbem Games thru the SVN.
@SO, has to be an update after 8616. That's the SVN version I'm still playing. Just have not gotten around to getting the latest. Maybe now I won't till your Bug/CTD gets fixed.
Are they tied to the units iCost?
For example Wise Woman (which can Upgrade to Healer or Sheperd) has an <iCost>18. Healer has <iCost>40. But Apothecary jumps wildly to <iCost>270, thus the upgrade cost from Healer to Apothecary is in the 530 to 550 Gold range. Upgrading from Wise Woman to Healer is much more reason able. But I didn't write down what the actual range is, less than 100 iirc.
The whole healer line has some very arbitrary numbers for <iCost>. 1st time it doubles, next it almost 7 times as much as the previous, than it calms down to Only 3 times that. Then we get a period since the iCost has now reached into the 1500 range were it only increases by 300 one time, 1100+ the next, 900+ after that, back to 1100+, and then back to Tripling that, to adding 11,000+for the next, to finally adding 6500+ for the final one. Someone just threw numbers up and made a mishmash of it.
It's actually not haphazard at all although most other units ARE therefore you get an understandable misperception that the haphazard increase is taking place on these units.
Relatively few unit types have been truly reviewed and properly updated where costs are concerned. Healers have undergone that review.
Around mid-game (late classical through modern) most units are far too cheap and are thus being enabled to be hyper-built in comparison to the beginning and ends of the tech tree. ALL units need to eventually undergo a similar review.
The base cost progression by the accessing tech grid X was charted out and delivered to the team on the 2nd to last page of the Modder's Documentation thread. Once most game objects are falling into line with that charted cost progression we can then take a look at adjusting the chart itself if it needs to be adjusted for better game balance. I could see that happening.
One issue is there's a long gap between those two upgrades. As DH stated, another way to help mitigate the jump is to have a unit between. This is part of the reason to add the Medicine Man unit between Healer and Apothecary. Because there is a really really large number of x grid layers between the Healer and Apothecary as it currently stands. (Healer: gridX 8; Apothecary: gridX 36!) So yeah, huge. Spans more than an entire age.
The way I've been determining unit costs in a measured manner is to:
1) Establish a clean progression chart based on the latest accessing tech to form the base cost.
2) Modify the entire unit line by a percentage based on whether it should compare to the standard size and complexity building at that tech.
People Healing units are adjusted by -10% the normal building cost for the final unlocking tech.
So the chart ends up looking like this for healers (warning, will stretch the screen severely):
As more unit and building chains get evaluated based on this sort of charting the rest of the game objects will begin to seem more rational by cost and we can look at either adjusting the chart or making adjustments to production output factors.
-10% is actually expensive as far as units go, particularly for such small group volumes. But then again, it takes a 6-10 yr degree for modern medical doctors and a lifelong of learning for even early wise women to be fully qualified for their trade... so yes, they should be expensive to build compared to some unit types.
But the discord is detected in how they relate to units and buildings that haven't yet been put through such analytical cost assignment processes.
Hopefully this makes a little more sense at this point. It's possible too that once this gradual evaluation process is completed, we'll find we want to reduce the cost evaluation for upgrades themselves. For production I'm thinking this is actually appropriate but for gold we're already going all out to stretch the player at the moment (which is good but we don't want to make it TOO woeful!)
Earlier trained Healer units should gain more value once ongoing training is implemented as well. At the moment, their lack of XP early on when they can get much more later will be a severe impediment for wanting to upgrade them when you can build more effective ones down the road.
So you need updated Tables. I think I can do that.
As you can see... I'm trying to get us to stop making guess work and start adhering to some project guidelines so that we can eventually get this thing truly balanced out. But there are admitted growing pains in this approach. I believe you've done a good job of promoting this sort of analysis based improvement to disease, crime and pests and I'm just wanting to see the breakdowns between the old and new so I can get a clear picture of your thinking. I'd say it's more than likely headed in the right direction from everything I've read here.
BTW, I'm TRYING to keep these kinds of charts published for the mod team in my sig linked google docs. I don't ALWAYS keep them as well updated as I'd like because Google Docs are slow and fiddly in comparison to working on an actual Excel sheet so I just need to remember to update the docs more often. I'm currently working on THIS cost analysis sheet at this very moment actually so it's interesting it's been brought up! If you feel we should adjust their costs by a greater or lesser percentage or adjust the progression chart itself, I'd be interested to know now that you have an understanding of what the process IS.
Trying to get a hand written list completed of each crime per Era and their respective minCrime levels. Also Checking the Prereq_Tech and/or if they have an Osolete_Tech.
On Prereq_Tech, I'm finding many are not "Named" the same as the actual Tech. 1st example is Arson. In the SpecialBuildings file it's listed as: <PrereqTech>TECH_THE_FIRE</PrereqTech> . But in the tech tree the Tech is Named Fire Making. Why are they not the same? Does this prevent the Crime from activating if it's minCrime level is reached? There are others like this one in the SpecialBuildings xml file.
Some of the levels, especially the higher level ones may need to be lowered a bit more too.
I will also be looking at Techtree placements and their respective X co-ord distance from each other.
The TXT_KEY_STRING can be anything you like and shouldn't affect the name of the Prereq_Tech. It's always the code itself, not the localisation, that you need.
In the CIV4TechInfos.xml it's also called TECH_THE_FIRE and all Text Key entries use the same.
So the Display for the Tech in the Techtree uses Fire Making. But the art file, the dds uses TheFire. This is.....confusing at best. How hard would it have been to keep the same name everywhere?
In Tech_Civ4GameText.xml, it will tell you that TXT_KEY_TECH_THE_FIRE displays as Fire Making, thus TECH_THE_FIRE is the necessary code and "Fire Making" is the localisation. You can check this easily enough for yourself by doing a Find in Files search for TXT_KEY_TECH_THE_FIRE in the C2C XML directory.
In Tech_Civ4GameText.xml, it will tell you that TXT_KEY_TECH_THE_FIRE displays as Fire Making, thus TECH_THE_FIRE is the necessary code and "Fire Making" is the localisation. You can check this easily enough for yourself by doing a Find in Files search for TXT_KEY_TECH_THE_FIRE in the C2C XML directory.
Okay that helps with understanding the "localisation" bit. Wasn't clicking with me before when you brought up localisation (spell checker hates this spelling by the way).
And you have to remember I'm a newbie with Notepad++. Double whammy there!
Okay that helps with understanding the "localisation" bit. Wasn't clicking with me before when you brought up localisation (spell checker hates this spelling by the way).
And you have to remember I'm a newbie with Notepad++. Double whammy there!
On Prereq_Tech, I'm finding many are not "Named" the same as the actual Tech. 1st example is Arson. In the SpecialBuildings file it's listed as: <PrereqTech>TECH_THE_FIRE</PrereqTech> . But in the tech tree the Tech is Named Fire Making. Why are they not the same?
At one stage the tech was added called TECH_THE_FIRE and it was called The Fire. Then later someone said it really should be called Fire Making.
Changing TECH_THE_FIRE to TECH_FIRE_MAKING would
1) break saves, although I think it has been fixed. However you may need to restudy the tech if you had the old!
2) Finding and changing all references to TECH_THE_FIRE is more time consuming that just changing the TEXT entry
The latter was a big issue before we started to merge everything; even more so when each modder was, quite correctly, reluctant to have other people change "their" files because they were working on them.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
with Notepad++. Double whammy there!
