Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall - Dawn of Civilization' started by Leoreth, Sep 11, 2014.
They don't? Can you give an example?
I started a game (600AD, current SVN) as Japan and went for the usual route (Monotheism -> Alphabet -> steal all of Chinas/Mongolias techs), stealing 6+ techs. never did my spies get any XP for it.
I always let them wait for the -50% bonus, maybe thats the cause?
However i think I once stole some gold from their treasury and maybe got 1 XP point for it...definitely not enough for a promotion but i think the great spy counter moved.
sorry, will be away from my PC until Sunday, so cant provide saves until then
The XP calculation takes mission cost and success chance into account, so that you cannot farm Spy XP off cheap and easy missions (the Fresol method). I might have gone overboard there, it's rather hard to determine a reasonable cut off point.
Will wait for the saves.
Maybe it should be by espionage point cost? It's reasonable for spies to get more experience from a riskier mission than a safer one that also comes at a huge cost. However, tech steals are the most expensive mission, even with the -50% wait bonus, so not getting any exp for that at all feels wrong. I don't think i've noticed the AI getting spies either and they are actively using spies.
I am already using costs. The problem lies in finding the number of espionage points that makes a mission "too cheap" to be worth experience.
One strange aspect of trade is that the AI nowadays cancels a trade agreement and if you chose to renegotiate, the AI offers more than the previously deal.
That has been around a while. The ai almost takes a deal it just cancelled, or give you more if you ask what would make it work
Yeah, I have a note for this. Looks like the negotiation AI has to be updated, I thought it was flexible enough to handle the different value calculation.
The calculation for determining when a deal should be cancelled must use other values than the calculation for entering a new deal.
Okay, another thing on the agenda is to nerf processes (production to commerce conversion). Currently, they convert to production to commerce types at a 2 to 1 rate.
I think a nerf to 25% efficiency is a bit too much though, especially because in my experience conversion isn't imbalanced in the early game and I don't want to hurt it too much.
So my idea to affect only the late game was to exclude conversion from commerce modifiers, but that is already the case. Conversion however does benefit from production modifiers where I think the late game imbalance comes from, so what do you think about removing that instead?
Can we make Polynesia historical area for French please?
Just a quick note on the resource trade AI: I've played around with it for a bit and I think unreasonable AI demands often come about because the AI (for good reason) doesn't think your happiness/health resources will be valuable to it and therefore doesn't assign much value to them. However, with the deal suggestion AI as it is, it will still suggest those first, demanding heaps of resources that are useless to it. To address this, I could do the following:
- if resources have only marginal value, mark them as red
- let the AI prefer gold to round out deals if an additional resource doesn't do it
- lessen restrictions on available gold at least for the player (i.e. if you have 0 income because 100% goes into research, you will still have some gold available for deals)
- I'll also look into the AI value calculation to see if it maybe undervalues resources considering later growth
Should still be within the scope of stuff before release.
I haven't played since a year ago, my last game with 1.12 SVN. I read some of the 1.13 new features but nothing is the same as playing it myself.
What I see is that history is more unpredictable and many things happen and I don't know if you really wanted it to be like that but it's crazy.
China's uber AI, on Emperor AI China had Rifling before 1200 and we had congresses at 1400.
They conquered a city on the Black Sea and had a good army sitting there, they made Korea , Khmer and even Mongolia tributary states.
In other gams China just collapse.
Japanese UP is OP if China is OP.
AI likes to conquer far away cities and send armies to conquer independent cities, like French Baghdad or Polish Trapezous
In my crazy Monarch start with Turkey Byzantium already had Gunpowder Patronage and Divine Right, a vassal named Poland, a super Athene with Leaning tower, Sixtine Chapel , Notre dame and many classical wonders including The Great Cothon. Taoism holy city was in Egypt but the Egypt initial capital was nowhere to be found(razed?) The Holy Romans built the Apostolic Palace at 1290 and then got Printing Press before 1400 and Rifling and Liberalism before 1600 so I thought that Europe's research was going fast but nobody wanted to research Astronomy before 1650 so England, France and Portugal had a really low score and 0 colonies. Spain declared war on Holy romans for no reason at the same time they did on moors and collapsed around 1200. More than 300 years of Turkey Golden Age and always 1 GP every 7 turns.
One of my cities seceded due to instability even if it was an area of my UHV and I had 0 cities in foreign area and I was at -20 instability (later on I was at 0 instability but the population was the nearly the same in core + more population in contested area).
Other things: even if you want spies to don't get exp on easy missions I still don' get exp with missions that have like 70% success rate. spies get caught easy now so every mission is a bit difficult. Which is the max % succes rate at which you get exp?
You only get 0 XP if the mission was too cheap in terms of cost. Otherwise, you get at least 1 XP, and one additional XP at below 50, 35, 20 and 10 percent chance respectively.
idk on which topic to ask this question:
What are the circumstances where the ottomans flip more than they should - Balkans , even sometimes whole Egypt ? The egypt thing happened once to me awhile ago but i am still curious how can this happen? Ive also seen the AI to flip indi Baghdad which is also quite strange to me.
How about removing the ability to build science from the entire game? Why should civs be allowed to build science at all? Just to build something when there is nothing to build? Or because vanila has it?
Original BTS Pedia explains the concept of how trade relates to science in a following way: as people trade they exchange ideas and contribute to the scientific developments in your empire. What does building science represents then? I can only find a good justification for building wealth -- federal government has some production abilities in local cities, it can chose to direct that abilities to train and equip military, to build public buildings or to sell some public goods and collect revenue.
Good point, I think the main reason is symmetry? From a balance perspective, is there much of a difference between building gold or science?
actually, I think it might be helpful, considering this is AI China in 750AD:
notice the Riflemen standing around and the Cannons being built while half of the cities build science.
(3000 BC start, normal speed. Paragon Difficulty)
Not much. Depends on what buildings have you built, the civics choice, the science/gold slider, development of cities, era, and probably more things I can't think of right now.
Building gold lets you put the research slider up, is better if you have cities with high commerce output. Building research and lowering research slider is better if you have low commerce cities and high productive cities.
In BTS gameplay at least it is preferrable to build Wealth while keeping the research slider at 100% as research modifiers like Academies and Libraries are easier, cheaper and earlier to come by than gold modifiers like Markets and Grocers. Building Research then is only really used when you have Alphabet but not Currency, when you are still having a positive income with 100% gold slider, or you need a key tech ASAP. This can/should be addressed by adjusting the hammer costs of the modifier buildings. Note that later in the game the balance gets inverted somewhat, as Banks are a lot more cost efficient than Universities, but by then players have already placed Libraries everywhere and Markets only in cities with slider independent gold income like shrines, so unless they want to go Universal Suffrage for rushbuying it just doesn't make sense to build gold buildings in most of your cities.
That at least is the meta gameplay in BtS.
Furthermore I must object to Tigranes' bogus capitalist drivel. Any and all research of importance has been conducted by governments, it is the private sector that siphons off this knowledge from the people and uses it to maximize profits. Just look at how much of our modern technology was developed by the United States government for the purposes of war and spacefaring. Frankly I'd rather add the option to build espionage than remove the ability to build research, though in any case they should be less efficient than in BtS.
This is a good point to bring up the balance of research vs gold buildings in general. Logically speaking gold buildings should make sense everywhere, while research buildings ought to be a lot more cost efficient in your developed core cities rather than in the periphery.
Thus I suggest the following:
Change Hammer Cost to 120
Remove one scientist slot
Change Hammer Cost to 120
Add +25% Trade Route Income (this is a lot less than it sounds, and even less than what a Lighthouse provides, but it's also buildable inland and slightly indirectly boosts research because it boosts commerce, which makes sense as markets also encourage the exchange of ideas)
Add +1 Culture
Change Hammer Cost to 120
Add one scientist slot
Making Markets and Grocers cost as much as Libraries is imo long overdue.
Separate names with a comma.