Current v1.13 Development Discussion

[BenZL43]

Agreed. Ancient civilization doesn't really contact each other that much anyway. Removing the permanent contact thing will give the game more authentic feels

 

[Tigranes]

I think removing them is the best solution. The best way to represent an embassy is just to park one of your units somewhere. This might reduce the total number of contacts but then again this will save turn time

I know we have been here before, but please consider the following comprehensive solution to all the diplo worries.

1. Embassies are the major part of doing something with another civ other than espionage and war. Kings did send embassies trying to contact distant civs. So please do not remove them. Scouts and Explorers already act as diplomats when they are visiting Goody Huts. Make them larger part of the game. Allow them to establish embassies, not as redundant buildings, but rather like inter-civ status, like "Open Borders" status. Sometimes Scouts and Exlorers fail to establish embassies, but consumed in the process. This will allow for lot's of cool travel and exploration.

2. So Embassy status will be visible in F4 screen and acts as intermediate layer between "Open Borders" status and Defensive Pact status. Overall I propose 5 levels of relations between civs: Contact, Open Borders, Embassy, Defensive Pact, Permanent Alliance -- the last one open to debate, but can be a very realistic representation of unions.

3. Contact will act as now and can be lost. Open Borders only allows non military land units to pass (ships are excluded). Military units can cross only with defensive pact, which is very realistic.

4. Embassy allows for permanent contact and automatic map trade/update once every 10 turns for the civ with Paper. If they don't have paper and you do, only you end up documenting their maps. No more silly map for gold mechanics. This will speed up "50 civ" target game a lot. War destroys embassy status like it does with Open Borders status.

 

[Chep]

for now, I think removing the embassies is the right choice.

However they could be a useful addition in the future, though I dont like the suggestion that military units may no longer cross friendly terrain. the ability to make defensive pacts comes rather late in the game and just declaring war in order to move troops seems a bit drastic (also: often you and another civ are fighting a 3rd, in this situation it could save your partners life if your units are able to pass through his lands)

 

[BenZL43]

I hope you're not mistaken between Embassies and Emissaries
Embassies are building built to communicate, which also requires at least Telephone or Postal Service imo. It is a modern invention as far as I know

Emissaries are people sent by kings and queens to communicate with others via letter of offer, etc. Much like a messenger but emissaries goes to other nation while messenger transmit King's message to the people.

There's another similar type: Trading post; but it's not embassy either.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

I have an idea for contact with the removal of embassies:

Building UN establishes permanent contact with all civs.

Since everyone has reps there, civs would always be in contact (plus it comes with mass media).

Also, maybe apostolic palace could allow for permanent contact with all catholic civs via church infrastructure? Unless that's too much.

 

[Tigranes]

I hope you're not mistaken between Embassies and Emissaries
Embassies are building

First and foremost embassies are diplomatic missions, my friend...

 

[Leoreth]

I have an idea for contact with the removal of embassies:

Building UN establishes permanent contact with all civs.

Since everyone has reps there, civs would always be in contact (plus it comes with mass media).

Also, maybe apostolic palace could allow for permanent contact with all catholic civs via church infrastructure? Unless that's too much.

The AP definitely does that, and I think the UN as well.

 

[Chep]

does the AP give its owner permanent contact? I thought I'd lose contact to its owner a few turns after votes (and the other catholics) when playing as Congo but then maybe I remember that wrong and only lost contact to the non-AP-owning-Catholics.

 

[Leoreth]

It doesn't enable permanent contact but every resolution establishes contact again.

 

[need my speed]

Is there a list somewhere, of all the hidden food / production / commerce / worker speed / et cetera modifiers? Or, how do I find it in the game's files, if possible?

 

[Leoreth]

None of the things you mentioned have hidden modifiers, but you can find the ones that do in CvRhyes.cpp in the CvGameCoreDLL folder.

 

[Novicenoble]

I thought there's a worker speed modifier, but I don't know whether it actually works and how it works.

 

[Leoreth]

There was, but I have removed it.

 

[ezzlar]

Some problems with overall gameplay:

1. One of the European civs get Italy. They become far stronger than the rest of Europe.
2. The strongest civ, usually Spain, France or England starts to colonize. Germany isnt that powerful abroad. Portuguese can be strong but often tech backwards (which is fitting).
3. The strongest civ/s get huge empires. They tech insane.
4. New world civs spawn. No flip penalty for the old civs. They keep their tech advantage.
5. New world civs flip small areas. Old civs keep most of the cities. Old civs have tech, pop, city and military advantage. New civs cannot compete.
6. Old civ win.

Unless I play one of the European civs and kill off competitors. So what I am missing:

1. The old 10+ cities tech penalty. Or something similiar.
2. Stability penalty when many of your cities flip (imperialism penalty).
3. Larger flip areas for AI. Human can get historical areas despite smaller flip zone.
4. Would it be possible with a "civ that collapses within ten turns of spawn, spawns again within these ten turns" rule? Too many civs are destroyed on second turn.

 

[need my speed]

None of the things you mentioned have hidden modifiers, but you can find the ones that do in CvRhyes.cpp in the CvGameCoreDLL folder.

Ah, I was afraid of that. The SDK and I don't see eye to eye I'm afraid, so nevermind.

Although I mostly asked out of interest, not to modify it, but that'd still require me to open the file.

 

[ales_]

If I'm not mistaken, you can open it with Notepad.

 

[need my speed]

If I'm not mistaken, you can open it with Notepad.

You're actually right. Heh, guess you learn something new everyday.

It's interesting to look through it; some of the values rather surprise me.

 

[Leoreth]

Some problems with overall gameplay:

1. One of the European civs get Italy. They become far stronger than the rest of Europe.
2. The strongest civ, usually Spain, France or England starts to colonize. Germany isnt that powerful abroad. Portuguese can be strong but often tech backwards (which is fitting).
3. The strongest civ/s get huge empires. They tech insane.
4. New world civs spawn. No flip penalty for the old civs. They keep their tech advantage.
5. New world civs flip small areas. Old civs keep most of the cities. Old civs have tech, pop, city and military advantage. New civs cannot compete.
6. Old civ win.

Unless I play one of the European civs and kill off competitors. So what I am missing:

1. The old 10+ cities tech penalty. Or something similiar.
2. Stability penalty when many of your cities flip (imperialism penalty).
3. Larger flip areas for AI. Human can get historical areas despite smaller flip zone.
4. Would it be possible with a "civ that collapses within ten turns of spawn, spawns again within these ten turns" rule? Too many civs are destroyed on second turn.

First of all, I already have some plans to change how spawns and flips work (basically the entire Rise and Fall mechanic) to help new civs expand if they are supposed to while also protecting them from being rushed and destroyed in their early existence. This will also get rid of gamey, annoying and or arbitrary rules such as extended AI flips and unit desertion.

I see the problem and agree that large empires are still too good at teching ahead, which can lead to frustrating AIs and an easy late game for the player. I want to avoid both.

There are basically two ways of countering this. Either I increase the rubber band effect (increased tech costs for the tech leader) or I increase the penalties for large population (which has replaced number of cities penalties). I have to be careful with the large population penalty because if it is too severe it becomes frustrating for the player. But increasing the threshold while also increasing the impact after the threshold is passed might work.

If I'm not mistaken, you can open it with Notepad.

Yeah, source code is usually compatible with at least a text editor, if you don't want to compile it that is.

 

[ezzlar]

The number of population in core versus non-core is a good way of handling expansion stability instead of number of cities in negative penalty areas. But that hasnt got anything to do with research modifier?

 

[Leoreth]

Research costs also increase with increasing population. That's fairer than counting cities because that only encourages super cities and makes settling certain spots completely disadvantageous.