Current v1.13 Development Discussion

[Leoreth]

Thanks for the feedback. I think strategic resources and gold are out of balance with happiness resources now, will adjust that a bit.

 

[BenZL43]

Just updated my SVN now from unknown revision (last time I'm opening Civilization IV was December 12)
Is this red 'conflicted' thing harmless? Just wondering.

Spoiler :

 

[Leoreth]

Conflicted means that the file has been changed by you (or automatically by your game), so SVN does not know if you want to keep these changes or adapt those that I have made.

If you right-click on it, the SVN section should have options like "resolve conflict using theirs" (my recent change) and "resolve conflict using mine" (your current state before the update). Alternately, you can use my changes by deleting the file and updating again

The BUG Main Interface file is likely about the graphical paging feature. So I suggest you update to my changes.

 

[BenZL43]

Thank you. I never played around with BUG settings though, so no idea how haha. There's also several more conflicted files that due to VD incompatibility but solved as well.

 

[NerfCothons]

I guess this is intended... the AI values happiness ressources very high (1700 Regent America game, AI doesn't trade them below 100 gpt, or something like 1 iron, 1 tobacco, 80 gpt). OTOH, the AI is also willing to give you a lot if you offer happiness ressources (china offered 11 gpt, 1 iron, 1 banana for 1 tobacco)

This is consistent with my Byzantine game over the last few days.

Trading for Silk with China was nigh impossible without offering numerous luxury resources. The result was that at time I was simply unable to cobble together enough resources to even get one unit of silk and when I did it required six to eight resources often including multiple luxury and strategic resources. It makes sense that Silk would be so highly valued as it is part of the corporation, I had zero, and gets double happiness with markets at a time when few other luxury resources are available. This stopped being a problem once I got my own source of domestic silk, at which point the price of Chinese silk dropped dramatically. Early AD Chinese silk should probably be prohibitively expensive for most European civilizations but this still felt over tuned to start.

Generally, sometimes I would offer comparable a luxury resource for another luxury resource and see a demand of hundreds of gold in addition. Thank god I didn't misclick any such deals.

I also found civilizations that could have benefitted greatly from relevant strategic resources (i.e. middle age horse or iron) were unwilling to pay much for such a resource.

I wonder if the expectation of higher payment for a resource you lack access to versus a resource you only want to power up a corporation is flawed. I am not suggesting that the price for uncontrolled resources be dropped to match those of stockpiled resources but that the AI just shouldn't care whether you have the resource or not and charge a high rate regardless.

Overall I spent less time throughout the game resource brokering due to more prohibitive costs. On balance I found this to be a refreshing change although my Byzantine wine monopoly probably went further than it should have.

 

[Leoreth]

Thanks for the feedback. This is consistent with my perception of the problem. I changed how happiness, health and corporation effects are valued so their actual effects are considered (cities that are already happy, effects from Markets and so on). However, I did not adjust the weights associated with happiness and health, making the AI overvalue them compared to strategic resources and gold right now.

I'll try something with the next update.

 

[Leoreth]

New commit:
- made the AI value strategic resources more
- scaled down AI gold value for resources
- fixed a bug that caused Mongolia (and possibly other civs) to start without techs
- fixed the Japanese UP so that it does not apply to their initial starting techs
- implemented Afforess' fix for the never ending turn bug

Please continue to report back if AI gold values for health/happiness resources are appropriate now, and if strategic resources are valued appropriately.

 

[LacsiraxAriscal]

I remember reading on one thread or another that you weren't sure if the independent civs changing all units to 1 longbowman thing had stopped or not. Just as a heads-up, I don't see any difference in the current SVN.

 

[Leoreth]

What exactly do you mean?

If you are talking about how on a collapse all units disappear and are replaced with Longbowmen, I haven't changed anything about that. This is more difficult because it's not as easy as letting them keep these stacks at all times.

What I was likely talking about is independents disbanding units they actually do receive, or build themselves.

 

[Leoreth]

I took some time today rolling starts and looking at the tech pace, but everything seems to be okay there. More okay than expected actually, and my impression is that it's more accurate now than before I started fiddling with the modifiers.

So I'll drop this for now, unless someone has a specific case where things are off.

 

[Tigranes]

Mongol bug has been resolved! Me happy now

 

[LacsiraxAriscal]

Has it? Still buggy in my last game.

@Leoreth, ah okay I misunderstood the SVN update in which case. I think some indies should be a bit stronger. Okay, I'm basically talking about Rome. I just want to see Italy appear in some games

 

[Oregon Lee]

Has it? Still buggy in my last game.

@Leoreth, ah okay I misunderstood the SVN update in which case. I think some indies should be a bit stronger. Okay, I'm basically talking about Rome. I just want to see Italy appear in some games

Speaking of that, why is Mongolia missing from the 1700 map?

 

[Leoreth]

What do you expect to be there?

 

[ozqar]

A China-sized Mongolia is expected! jk

 

[Oregon Lee]

What do you expect to be there?

Well I expected indies, but looking into the history I suppose it makes sense.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

There should be something there though, as otherwise Korea settles all over Mongolia and it looks ugly. I'd suggest China should have one city at least in Mongolia and one in Manchuria.

 

[Oregon Lee]

That is true. Korea is the one to settle Mongolia. Perhaps add Ulan Bator and Ulan Ude?

 

[Leoreth]

Did you know that Ulaan means red and is a left-over from communist Mongolia?

 

[DC123456789]

Ulaanbator could still be there as Örgöö.