Existing Buildings Discussion

[AIAndy]

Beware adding too many plot-based property manipulations, as they are time consuming. Perhaps we could have an object type that is city-plot or owned-plot, which includes only those plots within a city cultural radius/worked plots/owned plots or whatever? That way disease etc would still exhibit spread across 'urbanised' areas, but not have to be processed 'in the wilderness' so to speak??

Similarly for crime - if we had game objects that represented well-defiend subsets of the entire set of map plots the system would internally be essentially unchnaged, but would run much faster within a slightly more limitted domain.

Alternatively the disease property could be on city objects only.
Anyway, you can already limit a property manipulator to owned plots or city plots with an Active expression.
The expression for owned plots would look like this (I might add TAG_OWNED for the Is tag if this is used often):

<Active>
  <IntegrateOr>
    <RelationType>RELATION_ASSOCIATED</RelationType>
    <GameObjectType>GAMEOBJECT_PLAYER</GameObjectType>
    <Constant>1</Constant>
  </IntegrateOr>
</Active>

The one for city plots would look similar but with RELATION_WORKING and GAMEOBJECT_CITY.

 

[Koshling]

Alternatively the disease property could be on city objects only.
Anyway, you can already limit a property manipulator to owned plots or city plots with an Active expression.
The expression for owned plots would look like this (I might add TAG_OWNED for the Is tag if this is used often):

<Active>
  <IntegrateOr>
    <RelationType>RELATION_ASSOCIATED</RelationType>
    <GameObjectType>GAMEOBJECT_PLAYER</GameObjectType>
    <Constant>1</Constant>
  </IntegrateOr>
</Active>

The one for city plots would look similar but with RELATION_WORKING and GAMEOBJECT_CITY.

Maybe we should do this for crime too (owned plots). Does the evaluation of this expression happen early on (i.e. - it would filter what gets queued for evaluation) or late on (it gets evaluated only when figuring out contributions)? Obviously it only benefits the performance in the first case.

 

[AIAndy]

Maybe we should do this for crime too (owned plots). Does the evaluation of this expression happen early on (i.e. - it would filter what gets queued for evaluation) or late on (it gets evaluated only when figuring out contributions)? Obviously it only benefits the performance in the first case.

Early, it checks if the manipulator is active on an object before instantiating it.

 

[Snofru1]

The Capital Administration comes later than the Metropolitan Administration (Social Contract/Representative Democracy). As the Met. Adm. cannot be built in the same city as Palace it means that your capital con only grow to size 3 much later than other cities. That doesn´t make sense to me.

My suggestion is:

Remove the "cannot be built in same city as Palace" tag for the Met. Adm. so that it can be buit in the Capital.
As the Cap. Adm. already replaces the Met. Adm. there will be no "overpowering" of the capital.

 

[ls612]

I have two issues so far with the prehistoric era.

1. The Creation Myth and an earlier building (knowledge inheritance?) are exactly the same stat-wise, ie same benefits and cost. This is bad, buildings should be slightly more unique.

2. The Dining hall is OP. +2 Food and +1 Health on one building that early in the prehistoric era is a bit too much, I'd remove the health bonus if it was up to me.

I'm going to make the following changes to these assuming no one objects.

1. Creation myth will have +1 and +5% , making it more unique as a Prehistoric building

2. Dining Hall will require Sedentary Lifestyle in addition to it's current requirements.

Does this sound good?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The Capital Administration comes later than the Metropolitan Administration (Social Contract/Representative Democracy). As the Met. Adm. cannot be built in the same city as Palace it means that your capital con only grow to size 3 much later than other cities. That doesn´t make sense to me.

My suggestion is:

Remove the "cannot be built in same city as Palace" tag for the Met. Adm. so that it can be buit in the Capital.
As the Cap. Adm. already replaces the Met. Adm. there will be no "overpowering" of the capital.

I think the two should be available at the same tech. However I live in a capital that was "placed in the wilderness" to placate two cities which both wanted to be the capital.

 

[Hydromancerx]

I'm going to make the following changes to these assuming no one objects.

1. Creation myth will have +1 and +5% , making it more unique as a Prehistoric building

2. Dining Hall will require Sedentary Lifestyle in addition to it's current requirements.

Does this sound good?

Please leave my buildings alone. I will deal with them. You worry about other things like techs, units and game speeds.

 

[ls612]

Please leave my buildings alone. I will deal with them. You worry about other things like techs, units and game speeds.

OK, fine.

 

[strategyonly]

Please leave my buildings alone. I will deal with them. You worry about other things like techs, units and game speeds.

OK then on a side note, what do YOUR buildings consider as a "vicinity" area, 1, 2 or 3 tiles away from the city before you can make Cultures, and resources that can effect the way you get certain buildings to build?

 

[Hydromancerx]

OK then on a side note, what do YOUR buildings consider as a "vicinity" area, 1, 2 or 3 tiles away from the city before you can make Cultures, and resources that can effect the way you get certain buildings to build?

I think you need to ask Afforess since he set up the city vicinity code.

 

[BlueGenie]

From what I've gathered via experience in C2C is that City Vicinity counts all plots your civilization has Culture in and the city in question could legally make use of.
If your city doesn't yet have the 3 radius it's the BFC, as long as you have any culture there (or taken by Fixed Borders). If you have the 3 radius then it's those plots that count but still only if you own the plots in question.
You also need to have a correct improvement on the resource to get it to count in City Vicinity, i.e get access to the resource.

The only ones that don't count like that but use BFC regardless of ownership of plot are those that use Features or Terrain instead of Resources, for instance buildings wanting Bamboo or Marsh in City Vicinity.

Culture requirements work the same way. If you need Forest and Rabbit you need a Camp type improvement on the Rabbit and own the plot within the BFC of the city but the Forest only needs to be within the BFC even if you do not own the plot.

Cheers

 

[Thunderbrd]

My previous playtests suggest that if the city has access to a terrain plot, its considered in the city vicinity where evaluations for terrain objects go for buildings.

 

[JosEPh_II]

I think you need to ask Afforess since he set up the city vicinity code.

Have you had recent contact with Afforess?

JosEPh

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

My previous playtests suggest that if the city has access to a terrain plot, its considered in the city vicinity where evaluations for terrain objects go for buildings.

The herd buildings should also be considered in the vicinity.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Have you had recent contact with Afforess?

JosEPh

Nope.

The herd buildings should also be considered in the vicinity.

I disagree. Herd buildings only give access to the resource but are not are requirements for city vicinity. It would be odd to have a Deer Herd that triggered a Deer Hunter's Camp. Or even weirder Deer Herd + Mammoth Resource = Megaloceros Hunter's Camp instead of Deer resource + Mammoth resource.

If you want that you go ...

1. Subdue Deer.
2. Build Deer Herd
3. Build Great Farmer
4. Place Deer Resource
5. Build Deer Hunter's Camp

Now you have both a Deer Herd and a Deer Hunter's Camp based on one subdued deer.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

It seems very strange that a herd of animals available in a city is not in the vicinity of the city is all.

 

[Hydromancerx]

It seems very strange that a herd of animals available in a city is not in the vicinity of the city is all.

What do you mean? In most situations they are. Fir instance the Deer Trainer requires a Deer Herd or a Deer Hunter's Camp. Since the Deer Herd provides Deer resource then any building that grains a benefit from Deer such as the Zoo gets it from either the Deer Herd or an actual Deer resource (nearby or not).

The only times the Herd is not used directly in in situations such as the Civ Wonders, in which the resource itself is not the important part. If you eat apples you do not become English nor if you have a Bison herd that you will become Sioux.

They are just used as abstractions so you cannot build every culture in any city. Thus having a Horse Herd or Horse Breeder or even a Horse Farm doesn't mean you should be Mongolian culture.

If it was somehow possible to have cultures appear like resources on the map I would do that instead. But this is the next best thing I could figure out.

 

[Thunderbrd]

My wife's playtesting revealed an enormous imbalance issue on the Garbage Dock. -5 food on EVERY water space in the city its built in? Wow... nowhere near worth no unhealth from population and a huge increase in water pollution.

I would suggest a +.3 health per population and a -1 food per water space instead. I feel NO unhealth from population is a bit too deuce ex machina to overutilize in such a manner anyhow. I don't think the unhealth from pop is ALL about garbage really... that's only one factor.

On a side note, since she wasn't aware of how to sell off buildings until I told her, she was desperate to get rid of at least the effect, and in the process discovered that changing civics didn't stop the building from functioning, despite it only being constructable on Waste to Sea. I found that a bit interesting as Vokarya had earlier stated that all civic buildings stop functioning when the enabling civic was abandoned.

Sooo... I'd go way out of my way to increase food by one on every water space... how far do you figure I'd go to avoid losing even one? It'd have to be worth a hell of a lot to opt into even that. -5 is just plain epic man!

EDIT: In fact, the more I think about it, the more I believe that NO food reduction per water space would be more appropriate. Instead, as it adds to the water pollution level, that property, as it grows, should cause penalty buildings to emerge that gradually create the - food effect.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

In my latest few games I have not bothered to move off the "waste anywhere" garbage civic because it is by far the best. "Waste to sea" has a -1 per water tile which makes harbour cities economic drains. The maintenance costs on these civics alone make them no go civics and their "special" buildings just make things worse not better.

 

[LumenAngel]

Not false... But I prefer ebe in Landfill without building Landfill. Upkeep is low and this civics have no unhealthy/food issue.

But I think this is a civic problem : garbage anywhere must have a +1 unhealthy with some building (house and/or factory building)
I dont build Landfill because in classical/medieval era, it's just big malus with just an +1health.... Even pollution increase because you build it! So I dont.