FinalLegendZero
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2013
- Messages
- 548
That doesn't happen anymore; conquerors now target geographical regions, not specific civs.
I agree with the basic message of the post, though.
Current v1.13 Development Discussion
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
That doesn't happen anymore; conquerors now target geographical regions, not specific civs.
I agree with the basic message of the post, though.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
Ah, I didn't know it was patched out. Thank you for the correction.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,413
Great commit!
I don't know if code allows to check how many foreign cities a civ can see. Basically if Maya can see 1 Old World city while Old World can see 0 Mayan cities goal is met. Or perhaps it can be done easier with tiles covered by culture (same as cities). If caravels run into each other in open sea -- nothing happens.
I can check that, but in that case I'm missing the trigger for when to do the check. Visibility usually means iterating the entire map, so I don't want to do it every turn. And as you said, civs can make contact on the open sea in the worst case, where nobody knows the cities of the other.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,413
Beam back was a side note. I have no solution for that. And I don't press for realism on expense of gameplay, as you will see bellow.
My main annoyance are the map trades. It is tedious and unrealistic, and always leaves you with guilty feelings after every turn when you did not make smart trades. Seriously. I am the Czar of Russia, why should I worry about not buying few extra map tiles from China to sell them to Europeans 5-10 gold each and making 50 gold maybe every other turn? I want game engine do it for me. I am not playing Monopoly, I am playing the best world history simulator in the history of the world!
I want to send Ivan Petlin to China, bring presents to Emperor (RL life Petlin came with no presents and was not admitted), establish embassies and forget about map trades with them. Every tile I know -- they learn about also, and vice versa.
AI spends a lot of computing time during map trades. With 20 civs knowing each other -- it is 20*20 deals each turn. Embassy would allow to update tiles for both civs once every 10 turns, and speed up late games.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,413
What about the conquerors event? The moment Spanish see Mayan culture they get adventurous fellows arriving to the new world. If they see work boat or scout on neutral hill in Brazil they get nothing. Can we reverse it for Maya? The moment they see (most likely) Portuguese culture their UHV triggers, given it did not fail, say, a turn earlier when Spanish Caravel saw Mayan culture.
Some additional proposals:
*Fix a date for the mayan goal i.e: "Discover astronomy by 1530AD." OR
*An updated version of the old goal "Control aztec and incan cities in 1200AD." OR
But discovering the new world is good too. In any case remove meditation as mayan starting tech. Its existence costs 7-10 turns.
Trading maps is exploitable. I suppose AI round the amount of money upwards. Maybe they should round it downwards, so no exploitation.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
Update. Actually, in my current Persia game, the Mongols skipped Persia proper,
and teleported outside Budapest to attack me.
Do they just appear near whichever city is the least garrisoned?
New commit:
- positive stability from good relations is now properly displayed in the financial advisor
- reduced stability from open borders
- removed stability from trade
Trade stability has been disabled for now because it scales badly with your era, the trade volume increases geometrically as both number of trade routes and their value increases over the course of the game so it is hard to determine what a "good" amount of trade is. Also considering that OBs are now already rewarded in the foreign category that was just a free stability boost for everyone, so it's better to remove it.
Another thing with trade is that it is entirely passive in the economic sense, you don't really have to do anything to get it besides engineering a favorable diplomatic situation, so it makes sense that it is rewarded there and not in economy.
I plan on redesigning trade in some way in the future, although no concrete plans exist. I'd like to change it so that you have actually more control over favorable trade incomes, in that case a stability factor reflecting that might come back. But that also depends on whether I want to go that far and find a way to make that happen without too much micromanagement.
- positive stability from good relations is now properly displayed in the financial advisor
- reduced stability from open borders
- removed stability from trade
Trade stability has been disabled for now because it scales badly with your era, the trade volume increases geometrically as both number of trade routes and their value increases over the course of the game so it is hard to determine what a "good" amount of trade is. Also considering that OBs are now already rewarded in the foreign category that was just a free stability boost for everyone, so it's better to remove it.
Another thing with trade is that it is entirely passive in the economic sense, you don't really have to do anything to get it besides engineering a favorable diplomatic situation, so it makes sense that it is rewarded there and not in economy.
I plan on redesigning trade in some way in the future, although no concrete plans exist. I'd like to change it so that you have actually more control over favorable trade incomes, in that case a stability factor reflecting that might come back. But that also depends on whether I want to go that far and find a way to make that happen without too much micromanagement.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,413
I don't think any immigration is happening after Canada commit. Certainly not in Canada. I used Great Spies to check American situation, they too have no nationalities from Old World. Canada badly needs her UP to ever get a chance with UHVs. Please investigate!
Chep
Emperor
okay, I guess this will be my last post here for a while seeing as Leoreth seems to be too swamped to deal with all the bugs, so all these things are probably really low on the priority list, anyway:
1. The Indonesian UP is pretty useless, I played 2 games where I made <50 gold total until 1500AD with it (had to abandon the first one due to update with Canada, 2nd one is bugged and the bug is not yet found).
It is a really nice and cool UP, but it just doesn't work out in most cases.
After 1500AD the 5gold are not really noticeable (compared to the total amount of commerce you have) so basically the UP gives ~0.5% more commerce over the course of the first half of your game.
Also the Indonesian UU sort of counters the UP since it sinks enemy ships which otherwise could - maybe - one day pass through your territory.
Still, I like both, the UP and the UU but the UP is just so incredibly weak that it is barely noticeable.
2. Your approach to stability feels really unfair. Almost no boni for "good" behaviour, only mali for "bad" behaviour. Removing the stability from trade and decreasing the stability from open borders without any compensation since "trade routes are basically determined by open borders so you get rewarded twice" might be logical from your point of view but just removes 2 pilars of stability. Military can't be kept positive, neither can expansion, and domestic is pretty negative as well.
In my current game with Japan I am running 90% culture (to meet the UHV) thus have >20 happiness in every city but still only get a +4civics-4unhappiness (probably due to whipping) in the domestic stability column.
I have 10-15 more happy faces in my cities than unhappy ones and yet I dont even get a bonus that nullifies the whipping unhappiness. And now the stupid Incas let their cities grow, thus collapse and cause crisis after crisis in my empire, yay thats fun -.-
3. What do you think of changing the Spiral Minarett to "+1 gold per islamic building" (instead of: +1 per state religion building), this would allow the Arab/Ottoman-civ controlling it to switch to Free Religion in the later stages of the game and makes it less of a target for the human player (since your catholic temples won't all of a sudden give you gold when you conquer the wonder)
4. The Slavetrade mechanic is still somewhat buggy. Mansa & Mbemba will give you the slaves for free (or 3/13 gold) if they think you can't use them but you can sell them for a lot of gold to the Euros or settle them in your American/African cities (only 1 per city now?). Give them a minimum value for trades, so they always charge you either 25 or 50 gold for them, to make it a bit less of an exploitable mechanic without removing its impact.
1. The Indonesian UP is pretty useless, I played 2 games where I made <50 gold total until 1500AD with it (had to abandon the first one due to update with Canada, 2nd one is bugged and the bug is not yet found).
It is a really nice and cool UP, but it just doesn't work out in most cases.
After 1500AD the 5gold are not really noticeable (compared to the total amount of commerce you have) so basically the UP gives ~0.5% more commerce over the course of the first half of your game.
Also the Indonesian UU sort of counters the UP since it sinks enemy ships which otherwise could - maybe - one day pass through your territory.
Still, I like both, the UP and the UU but the UP is just so incredibly weak that it is barely noticeable.
2. Your approach to stability feels really unfair. Almost no boni for "good" behaviour, only mali for "bad" behaviour. Removing the stability from trade and decreasing the stability from open borders without any compensation since "trade routes are basically determined by open borders so you get rewarded twice" might be logical from your point of view but just removes 2 pilars of stability. Military can't be kept positive, neither can expansion, and domestic is pretty negative as well.
In my current game with Japan I am running 90% culture (to meet the UHV) thus have >20 happiness in every city but still only get a +4civics-4unhappiness (probably due to whipping) in the domestic stability column.
I have 10-15 more happy faces in my cities than unhappy ones and yet I dont even get a bonus that nullifies the whipping unhappiness. And now the stupid Incas let their cities grow, thus collapse and cause crisis after crisis in my empire, yay thats fun -.-
3. What do you think of changing the Spiral Minarett to "+1 gold per islamic building" (instead of: +1 per state religion building), this would allow the Arab/Ottoman-civ controlling it to switch to Free Religion in the later stages of the game and makes it less of a target for the human player (since your catholic temples won't all of a sudden give you gold when you conquer the wonder)
4. The Slavetrade mechanic is still somewhat buggy. Mansa & Mbemba will give you the slaves for free (or 3/13 gold) if they think you can't use them but you can sell them for a lot of gold to the Euros or settle them in your American/African cities (only 1 per city now?). Give them a minimum value for trades, so they always charge you either 25 or 50 gold for them, to make it a bit less of an exploitable mechanic without removing its impact.
It's based on happiness and food.
Not all UPs are created equal in terms of usefulness I guess.
Weren't you the person who posted a huge Greek empire somewhere recently?
Trade stability was in no way related to good behavior, because trade income basically generates itself without any particular skill involved. Especially with the threshold I put in place for what consituted rewardable amounts of trade. And currently I see no way of determining a threshold that is balanced.
As far as OBs go, it is still a net source of stability unless you are a warmonger who has annoyed everyone on the planet.
Don't overuse the whip then. Penalties for that kind of strategy are entirely intentional, as is the fact that it cannot be countered by happiness.
Why is Free Religion desirable for Arabs and Ottomans? In general, both of these civs have too many sources of extra gold anyway, which is why they are still tech monsters in ahistorical stages of the game.
Also, please wait for my religion changes, it doesn't make sense to turn these little gears when the big ones will be replaced anyway.
I know.
Chep
Emperor
I didnt post any Greek empires, only an Indonesian one which I cannot continue since the game crashes and so far no one is able to tell me how to avoid it (see bug-thread).
But that's not quite the point.
Yes, the current mechanisms allow for big empires (but thats more related to their values than the mechanisms themselves), it just feels weird that the best you can get in most stability columns/factors is a 0. Like for example happiness can never give you any boni just prevent you from getting a malus for unhappiness.
Why don't you just cap the trade bonus instead of removing it? Being able to get maximal 3points per era or maybe 5/10 max seems a lot friendlier than just plain removing it while at the same time shrinking the bonus of OBs significantly.
It just feels way out of proportion, when I compare it to the -16 I get for other civilizations overexpanding. (in my current game the Aztecs with 4 cities in Mexico and the Inca with 4 cities in Peru are both collapsing giving me -10 since they are my vasalls while Indonesia and the Mughals just overexpanded giving me another -6 without me ever having done anything to them besides opening borders)
Also the expansion column in the advisor is just useless, since it doesn't warn you before you overexpand.
Why not make it a +2/3 (something tiny) bonus for low values of expansion beyond the core then going down towards the -25 maximum? this way there would always be something displayed and you'd have more of a hint when you reach your limit.
But that's not quite the point.
Yes, the current mechanisms allow for big empires (but thats more related to their values than the mechanisms themselves), it just feels weird that the best you can get in most stability columns/factors is a 0. Like for example happiness can never give you any boni just prevent you from getting a malus for unhappiness.
Why don't you just cap the trade bonus instead of removing it? Being able to get maximal 3points per era or maybe 5/10 max seems a lot friendlier than just plain removing it while at the same time shrinking the bonus of OBs significantly.
It just feels way out of proportion, when I compare it to the -16 I get for other civilizations overexpanding. (in my current game the Aztecs with 4 cities in Mexico and the Inca with 4 cities in Peru are both collapsing giving me -10 since they are my vasalls while Indonesia and the Mughals just overexpanded giving me another -6 without me ever having done anything to them besides opening borders)
Also the expansion column in the advisor is just useless, since it doesn't warn you before you overexpand.
Why not make it a +2/3 (something tiny) bonus for low values of expansion beyond the core then going down towards the -25 maximum? this way there would always be something displayed and you'd have more of a hint when you reach your limit.
Not true.
Free points deserve only one cap and that is 0.
Bolded for emphasis.
That's a good point though.
Chep
Emperor
wait, closing the borders to collapsing/unstable civs removes the malus? Oo
Is there anything I can do to prevent getting a malus from my vasalls being so stupid as to settle in their historic areas and then collapsing from the overexpansion? also close borders? (yeah, I mean besides not vasallizing them in the first place. Just plain exterminating every other civ seems very ahistorical)
and it doesn't change the fact that the malus here is in no relation to everything else. I mean having open borders with every civ on the planet gives a +4/5 bonus (around 1600AD, so not at a time when there are only 2-3 civs alive^^)
and how can happiness give a positive stabiity bonus if I dont get one when even in my "unhappiest" city there are >10 more happy faces than unhappy ones? Do I need 20 more on average? 40?...
Is there anything I can do to prevent getting a malus from my vasalls being so stupid as to settle in their historic areas and then collapsing from the overexpansion? also close borders? (yeah, I mean besides not vasallizing them in the first place. Just plain exterminating every other civ seems very ahistorical)
and it doesn't change the fact that the malus here is in no relation to everything else. I mean having open borders with every civ on the planet gives a +4/5 bonus (around 1600AD, so not at a time when there are only 2-3 civs alive^^)
and how can happiness give a positive stabiity bonus if I dont get one when even in my "unhappiest" city there are >10 more happy faces than unhappy ones? Do I need 20 more on average? 40?...
- Status
