Cultural Expansion Doesn't Work

[Lyoncet]

I'd question the accuracy of the "some people think the logic is fine" assertion, but I certainly agree that strategic resources should be valued on gameplay and realism grounds. Gameplay is obvious, and in terms of realism, it can be viewed as people going where the jobs are. And mines and oil rigs do bring in the jobs.

 

[spicytimothy]

Civ V is not the real world. Arguments in favor of reality at the expense of gameplay are very, very tiresome.

I know that... I'm just pointing out that it makes sense for a city in this game to focus expansion based on food/luxury, and leave strategic expansion to the player at the macro level, and that such a design would make as much sense in the real world as in the game.

Going along with your example, I would imagine the player as a ruler decides that iron is coveted for strategic development, then the player acquires it proactively, THEN the people in the city utilizes it by becoming "steel manufacturers" so to speak... It's the same logic as a player's decision in placing a new city that someone else mentioned already in this thread.

 

[learner gamer]

In this game I did not realize any "bad expands" and that is the nature of the draw.

Actually, you didn’t hit upon them because your example shows the very time when this won’t be an issue: when the resource in the third ring adjoins a resource in the second ring. When this kind of clustering occurs, the resource in the third ring (of which you only have one in the screenie, the cattle to the west) will get accessed early(ish) – because the cattle tile next to it in the second ring (which will be accessed early) will open up access to it. This is precisely why I mentioned this line in my earlier post:

As it stands, it looks as if these non-resource tiles need to be purchased to encourage the code to then consider popping borders into the next ring to secure an early resource.

IMHO, it's a key line, because the problems will occur whenever the third ring resource tile is surrounded by non-resource tiles in the second ring. Those non-resource tiles assume lower priority (depending on the type of terrain) in the border popping code, so securing the precise 2nd ring non-resource tile needed to open up access to a third ring resource tile can literally take ages, as you’ve witnessed in your other games.


@spicytimothy: Your point re: the value of food is a well made one – and indeed, the phrase “food is life” has been mentioned many times on these boards.

IMHO, what your point illustrates very nicely is that border popping logic is never going to please all the people all the time. Perhaps this is a reason for Firaxis to consider adding the ability to select borders manually as a game option: those who want the micro can turn it on, those happy to leave border popping to the PC can leave it off.

Simply put, my perspective is that there are a few keys to the design of a strategy game such as Civ, one of which is that the gamer should work their best tiles ASAP. Now admittedly, what constitutes your best tiles will vary on a case by case basis – sometimes food to generate specialists, other times hills for production and so on. However, one thing that’s clear from the code is that Firaxis recognises the value of resource tiles by assigning them a huge negative cost.

In Civ 5, resources are of course valuable for various reasons, one of which is their scarcity (especially re: strategic resources), another concerns the ability of some to provide happiness. Indeed, the latter has become key in Civ 5 thanks to the decision to make happiness a global (empire wide) constraint. Given the desire to defend your civ (which attaches some value to strategic resources) and the role of the happiness mechanic, my starting premise is a very simple one: I confess that I genuinely don’t understand why the gamer should be denied access by the border popping code to resources that their cities have been deliberately settled to obtain. That’s not to say that food or hills (for hammers) aren’t important by the way - they are as you rightly point out. However, bear in mind that farms no longer require access to fresh water, so food is now easier to come by than say in Civ 4.

Consider too that accessing resource tiles not only gives you the militaristic or happiness benefit derived from those resources, it gives you another advantage too in the case of luxury resources: the ability to generate gold, either by working the hex or by trading the resource (for luxuries and strategics). Armed with that gold, the gamer then has the ability to buy tiles to secure extra food and / or hammers if they so wish. By contrast, prioritising food at the expense of resources deprives the gamer of that gold, along with the happiness and / or military benefits the resource can provide. IMHO, that kind of comparison completely justifies a border popping code which prioritises accessing resources in all three rings of the BFH.

 

[joyous_gard]

It doesn't make sense. And it is poorly programmed. And it shouldn't expand to the 4th ring like that. But those are not, repeat not, the same as being random.


Ring cost: 100
Water cost: 25
Improvement cost: -5
Route cost: 0
Resource cost: -105
Natural Wonder cost: -105
Yield point cost: -1

Grass: 1
Plains: 1
Desert: 2
Tundra: 2
Snow: 2
Ocean: 3
Mountain: 0
Hill: 0

Ice: 2
Jungle: 1
Marsh: 1
Oasis: -1
Floodplains: -1
Forest: 1
Atoll: -1
Natural wonders: -3

Assuming the game follows that coding, which I see no reason to believe it does not, randomness is out of the question. We (or at least I) don't know how it strings those together to spit out a result, unless you can prove that it actually doesn't follow those (admittedly poor) parameters, I don't see why we're still using the word.

Well, that image I attached on the previous replay showed 5 "potential" culture expands at the next border pop...All 5 are in the 3rd ring, three were "no water grassland" (+1), 1 was no water plains (+1), and one was forested hill (+1). How it chooses 1 of those 5 I assumed was random but it might be chosen to select "All things being equal" expand to grassland or something. I didn't follow what actually popped after I took that image.

I attached a before and after of this "equal probability" scenario. I wanted marble, and I got marble.

EDIT: THat previous screen pic showed more than 5 potential border expands... it showed like 8 and one was a second ring unforested grassland hill but I digress. Also, since I fall into the "negative on Civ 5" crowd it probably means they will release a DLC Civ with the ability to choose what borders to expand to.

 

[Lyoncet]

I assume that means that all things are equal. If that's the case, it's a matter of setting the proper parameters so that when it judges all things to be equal, the things really are more-or-less so. Of course there's no way you could ever whittle it down to make every border pop the exact optimal one you want, but I don't think that (relatively minor) flaw necessitates redesigning the system.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Simplest way I can see it
Strategic or Luxury Resource: +100
Bonus Resource in range of 3: +100
Total Yield IF in range of 3: +10 per Yield
*Focus Yield IF in range of 3: +10 for Focus Yield

Tile Distance: -5 per Tile Distance from city
Tile is Rough: -10
Tile is across River: -5
Tile is Coast: -10
Tile is Ocean: -20
Tile is Mountain: -100


* For Balanced Focus...
Focus on Food if Growth< Production/2
Focus on Production if Production< Growth/2
Focus on Gold if Civ is in deficit.
otherwise no "Focus" value for tile.

 

[Polycrates]

IMHO, it's a key line, because the problems will occur whenever the third ring resource tile is surrounded by non-resource tiles in the second ring. Those non-resource tiles assume lower priority (depending on the type of terrain) in the border popping code, so securing the precise 2nd ring non-resource tile needed to open up access to a third ring resource tile can literally take ages, as you’ve witnessed in your other games.

As we've seen the game's actual border popping weight codes posted here, would it perhaps be sufficient to add some small amount of weight to a tile for every resource it's adjacent to? Not enough so that it's chosen ahead of an actual resource tile, obviously, but enough so that there will be a trend to pop the two second-ring tiles next to a resource before the others, unless there's other second-ring tiles with a strong claim to being chosen next (e.g. riverside grassland would still take precedence).

 

[chazzycat]

If the oil is farther than 3 tiles out that could be your problem. I'm pretty sure cities are hard coded to expand to ALL tiles it can actually work (i.e. 3rd ring) before grabbing tiles in the 4th ring.

Ok feel free to ignore my post...hadn't realized there was already such thorough analysis done. I should read the entire thread next time.

 

[Graven]

Maybe it's trying to add a little bit of randomness...sort of simulating your city's citizens exerting their free will?

Randomness is a euphemism for lack of strategy in this case. The devs want the game to be more casual and that's why we can't control the culture spread.

 

[learner gamer]

As we've seen the game's actual border popping weight codes posted here, would it perhaps be sufficient to add some small amount of weight to a tile for every resource it's adjacent to? Not enough so that it's chosen ahead of an actual resource tile, obviously, but enough so that there will be a trend to pop the two second-ring tiles next to a resource before the others, unless there's other second-ring tiles with a strong claim to being chosen next (e.g. riverside grassland would still take precedence).

Very close...but actually, given the inability of the current border popping code to see the value of a resource tile in the next ring whenever it&#8217;s adjacent to a (currently unpopped) non-resource tile in the inner ring, the solution would be to add a (negative given the current code) term to every tile it can currently see that's adjacent to a resource tile located in the next ring. The ring based qualification is necessary to prevent the code from increasing the attractiveness of a tile based on the availability of an adjacent resource located in an inner ring to which the Civ will already have access. IMHO, another (negative) term would then also need to be added, further increasing the attractiveness of popping the non-resource tile, if the outer ring resource was not currently possessed by the Civ.

The point you make re: food and riverside grassland having a greater value than resource tiles is an interesting one. Indeed, it&#8217;s essentially the same issue that @spicytimothy mentioned earlier: when does the value of a resource tile trump a non-resource tile? FWIW, I&#8217;m going to stick to my original notion &#8211; that resource tiles trump non-resource tiles &#8211; for the reasons that I mentioned earlier, but I can certainly appreciate your alternative view.

EDIT: I wonder, is there a solution based on: (i) increasing the value of tiles adjacent to resources as you suggest Polycrates and (ii) partly (relative to (i)) decreasing their value if the empire already has that resource available to it, to simultaneously increase the value of popping resources to which the civ currently doesn't have access and lessen the likelihood that a non-resource tile is attractive purely because the adjacent resource tile is inside it? Before we can get more specific, my guess is that we probably need to acsertain the point made by @jdog5000 and @Lyoncet: exactly how the game combines all these weights to choose the next hex to access.

Simplest way I can see it...

As it happens, a variation of this kind of conditionality &#8211; in which the code looks secure access to resources, food or hammers depending on various criteria - or maybe IMHO even the tile focus in the city management screen - flashed into my mind briefly the other day, but I didn&#8217;t explore it further because I couldn&#8217;t establish what I regarded as sound criteria for the set of if statements at the end of your post. But, barring being able to implement the solutions just noted above, I think this is precisely what&#8217;s needed Krikkitone &#8211; a focus on popping borders to secure resources, food, hammers or gold according to various if...then... criteria. IMHO, the lack of if...then... statements (or equivalent) in the border code rather works against the notion of &#8220;intelligence&#8221; referred to in the OP.

I won&#8217;t comment on the specific figures you&#8217;ve mentioned because, to be honest, as I&#8217;ve mentioned in a few posts recently, I really want to spend far more of my limited leisure time going forward playing more EU3 as opposed to Civ 5 and posting on cfc. To help those that continue to take this issue forward though, I wonder if you could explain a point re: your approach: does it (i) essentially maintain the approach used in the current code &#8211; gradually establish a circular border a hex at a time, save for prioritising resources, food, production or gold according to various criteria or (ii) actually look to start by ranking all tiles in the BFH (which is what the &#8220;range of 3&#8221; hints at), and then expand out to the most valuable tiles. If the former, then I&#8217;m not sure that the &#8220;range of 3&#8221; will suffice &#8211; see my reply to Polycrates above for more on this one. If the latter, how would expansion out to the valuable tiles occur?

 

[Bibor]

I need oil. On the edge of three of my puppet cities borders is oil. The manual or someone, somewhere says "Cultural expansion expands intelligently based on what your civilization needs." Every civilization needs oil. That is what the 20th century was about. Oil.

The game's cultural border expansion is either broken or it's intentionally trying to avoid oil. It doesn't make any sense.

Oil that is further than 3 squares away from city is impossible to get except by cultural expansion and my cultural expansion is headed towards desert, forested mountain, mountain. But it doesn't expand to oil? That is just ridiculous.

The culture gain engine will try to fill up the 3-hex radius before venturing outisde of it. Once all 3-hex radius tiles are claimed (or unavailable), it will aim straight for resources in the 4th ring. Try purchasing the remaining 3rd ring tiles, although it might be cheaper to just buy oil from someone.

Oh, and if you want the forested resource faster, chop the forest. The engine will immediately switch to it. This works for 2nd ring as well.

 

[Rex_Mundi]

To improve the picking algorithm, only lux and strat resources should be counted in the 4.th and 5.th ring.
Also water resources should maybe count for more, because they usually have great benefits.

 

[Montov]

It is fairly predictable imho, based on costs of tile and resources.
But I would like to see that the governor focus should also influence the next expansion.

 

[jbevermore]

I really don't have a problem with border pops the way it is, if you urgently need something, buy it. The system is there for a reason.

I feel your pain on the city state issue though, I really wish we could do more to interact with them. Maybe a way to buy them tiles? Gift them settlers to expand their territory?

The system of "Give money get bonus" is a little stale to be frank.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Very close...but actually, given the inability of the current border popping code to see the value of a resource tile in the next ring whenever it&#8217;s adjacent to a (currently unpopped) non-resource tile in the inner ring, the solution would be to add a (negative given the current code) term to every tile it can currently see that's adjacent to a resource tile located in the next ring. The ring based qualification is necessary to prevent the code from increasing the attractiveness of a tile based on the availability of an adjacent resource located in an inner ring to which the Civ will already have access. IMHO, another (negative) term would then also need to be added, further increasing the attractiveness of popping the non-resource tile, if the outer ring resource was not currently possessed by the Civ.

The point you make re: food and riverside grassland having a greater value than resource tiles is an interesting one. Indeed, it&#8217;s essentially the same issue that @spicytimothy mentioned earlier: when does the value of a resource tile trump a non-resource tile? FWIW, I&#8217;m going to stick to my original notion &#8211; that resource tiles trump non-resource tiles &#8211; for the reasons that I mentioned earlier, but I can certainly appreciate your alternative view.

EDIT: I wonder, is there a solution based on: (i) increasing the value of tiles adjacent to resources as you suggest Polycrates and (ii) partly (relative to (i)) decreasing their value if the empire already has that resource available to it, to simultaneously increase the value of popping resources to which the civ currently doesn't have access and lessen the likelihood that a non-resource tile is attractive purely because the adjacent resource tile is inside it? Before we can get more specific, my guess is that we probably need to acsertain the point made by @jdog5000 and @Lyoncet: exactly how the game combines all these weights to choose the next hex to access.




As it happens, a variation of this kind of conditionality &#8211; in which the code looks secure access to resources, food or hammers depending on various criteria - or maybe IMHO even the tile focus in the city management screen - flashed into my mind briefly the other day, but I didn&#8217;t explore it further because I couldn&#8217;t establish what I regarded as sound criteria for the set of if statements at the end of your post. But, barring being able to implement the solutions just noted above, I think this is precisely what&#8217;s needed Krikkitone &#8211; a focus on popping borders to secure resources, food, hammers or gold according to various if...then... criteria. IMHO, the lack of if...then... statements (or equivalent) in the border code rather works against the notion of &#8220;intelligence&#8221; referred to in the OP.

I won&#8217;t comment on the specific figures you&#8217;ve mentioned because, to be honest, as I&#8217;ve mentioned in a few posts recently, I really want to spend far more of my limited leisure time going forward playing more EU3 as opposed to Civ 5 and posting on cfc. To help those that continue to take this issue forward though, I wonder if you could explain a point re: your approach: does it (i) essentially maintain the approach used in the current code &#8211; gradually establish a circular border a hex at a time, save for prioritising resources, food, production or gold according to various criteria or (ii) actually look to start by ranking all tiles in the BFH (which is what the &#8220;range of 3&#8221; hints at), and then expand out to the most valuable tiles. If the former, then I&#8217;m not sure that the &#8220;range of 3&#8221; will suffice &#8211; see my reply to Polycrates above for more on this one. If the latter, how would expansion out to the valuable tiles occur?

Well my method would prioritize good tiles over close tiles
[+10 per yield, +10 per focus, +100 for resource, -5 per distance]
compared to the normal
[+1 per yield, +105 per resource, -100 per distance]

(although they would still need to be adjacent... ie not adjacent= -1000 should be added)

However, that difference would only be second v. third ring.. at 4th and 5th ring, mine would be More "Terrain determined".... because the only effect would be resources+terrain, no Yield effects

So it would move to the best tile in the third ring, unless there was an available resource on the fourth (or unless the "best tile" in the third was so poor as to have -5 value, which is not possible... the -5 across river would also give a +10 for the riverside gold)

So the order would be
1. Best Resource tile available. (bonus only in ring 3)

2. Best Yield tile in ring 3 (slightly modified for Terrain, Distance+Focus,
production focus: Hills>Plains>Forests=Grassland>Jungle=Coast>Ocean,
otherwise: Grassland=Plains>Hills=Forests=Jungle=Coast>Ocean)

3. Best Terrain tile in ring 4+5 (4 gets slight priority)



The biggest changes I have are
1. Making Focus important (adds to the strategy)
2. Decreasing the "Ring penalty" (so cities can develop more naturally within the 3 rings)
3. Making Yield, and Bonus resources not valued if not in the 3rd ring. (so cities stay within the 3 rings, unless there is a strategic/luxury resource)