Thunderbrd
C2C War Dog
So, continuing to put Aggressive under the microscope, under SGT Slick's current proposal we have:
Which, translated, means:
Aggressive
I believe, under this proposal, Aggressive stays at +10% Combat bonus.
The negative here is some crime penalty if crime is allowed to get out of hand (it gets even moreso at that point).
Now, I presume that if we're making a game option for Devil's Advocate Traits, then the Purist version would thus be:
Aggressive
Now then, before we start getting irate about our statements not being heard, lets give Slick the benefit of the doubt in that I don't think he's had all the time in the world to follow all the comments made so far.
But I'll note, for the sake of review, the following points that have been brought up here (and a couple more of my own) that I think should be taken into further consideration:
In regards to the malus (which would be based on a game option - I have an idea how to set this up btw that is a completely new approach... more on that in a bit.)
Take note, too, that I'm currently working out ALL of your proposed new tags, as noted a few posts back. What applications on those tags did you have in mind for Aggressive?
Spoiler :
Code:
<TraitInfo>
<Type>TRAIT_AGGRESSIVE</Type>
<Description>TXT_KEY_TRAIT_AGGRESSIVE</Description>
<ShortDescription>TXT_KEY_TRAIT_AGGRESSIVE_SHORT</ShortDescription>
<iHealth>0</iHealth>
<iHappiness>0</iHappiness>
<iMaxAnarchy>-1</iMaxAnarchy>
<iUpkeepModifier>0</iUpkeepModifier>
<iLevelExperienceModifier>0</iLevelExperienceModifier>
<iGreatPeopleRateModifier>0</iGreatPeopleRateModifier>
<iGreatGeneralRateModifier>20</iGreatGeneralRateModifier>
<iDomesticGreatGeneralRateModifier>0</iDomesticGreatGeneralRateModifier>
<iMaxGlobalBuildingProductionModifier>0</iMaxGlobalBuildingProductionModifier>
<iMaxTeamBuildingProductionModifier>0</iMaxTeamBuildingProductionModifier>
<iMaxPlayerBuildingProductionModifier>0</iMaxPlayerBuildingProductionModifier>
<!-- Revolution Trait Effects Begin -->
<iRevIdxLocal>0</iRevIdxLocal>
<iRevIdxNational>0</iRevIdxNational>
<iRevIdxHolyCityGood>0</iRevIdxHolyCityGood>
<iRevIdxHolyCityBad>0</iRevIdxHolyCityBad>
<fRevIdxNationalityMod>0</fRevIdxNationalityMod>
<fRevIdxBadReligionMod>0</fRevIdxBadReligionMod>
<fRevIdxGoodReligionMod>0</fRevIdxGoodReligionMod>
<iRevIdxDistanceModifier>0</iRevIdxDistanceModifier>
<bNonStateReligionCommerce>0</bNonStateReligionCommerce>
<bUpgradeAnywhere>0</bUpgradeAnywhere>
<!-- Revolution Trait Effects End -->
<PropertyManipulators>
<PropertySource>
<PropertySourceType>PROPERTYSOURCE_CONSTANT</PropertySourceType>
<PropertyType>PROPERTY_CRIME</PropertyType>
<GameObjectType>GAMEOBJECT_CITY</GameObjectType>
<RelationType>RELATION_ASSOCIATED</RelationType>
<iAmountPerTurn>8</iAmountPerTurn>
<Active>
<Greater>
<PropertyType>PROPERTY_CRIME</PropertyType>
<Constant>200</Constant>
</Greater>
</Active>
</PropertySource>
</PropertyManipulators>
<ExtraYieldThresholds/>
<TradeYieldModifiers/>
<CommerceChanges/>
<CommerceModifiers/>
<FreePromotionUnitCombatTypes>
<FreePromotionUnitCombatType>
<PromotionType>PROMOTION_COMBAT1</PromotionType>
<UnitCombatTypes>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_MELEE</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_GUN</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_HITECH</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_ASSAULT_MECH</UnitCombatType>
</UnitCombatTypes>
</FreePromotionUnitCombatType>
<FreePromotionUnitCombatType>
<PromotionType>PROMOTION_AGGRESSIVE</PromotionType>
<UnitCombatTypes>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_MELEE</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_GUN</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_HITECH</UnitCombatType>
<UnitCombatType>UNITCOMBAT_ASSAULT_MECH</UnitCombatType>
</UnitCombatTypes>
</FreePromotionUnitCombatType>
</FreePromotionUnitCombatTypes>
</TraitInfo>
Aggressive
- +20% Great General Emergence
- Free Combat I and Aggressive promotions to Melee, Gun, HiTech and Assault Mech units
- +8 Crime per turn in each city that already has more than 200 Crime
I believe, under this proposal, Aggressive stays at +10% Combat bonus.
The negative here is some crime penalty if crime is allowed to get out of hand (it gets even moreso at that point).
Now, I presume that if we're making a game option for Devil's Advocate Traits, then the Purist version would thus be:
Aggressive
- +20% Great General Emergence
- Free Combat I and Aggressive promotions to Melee, Gun, HiTech and Assault Mech units
Now then, before we start getting irate about our statements not being heard, lets give Slick the benefit of the doubt in that I don't think he's had all the time in the world to follow all the comments made so far.
But I'll note, for the sake of review, the following points that have been brought up here (and a couple more of my own) that I think should be taken into further consideration:
- Hydro strongly wishes to remove any free promotions that are already existing promotions in the game because of overlaps with other buildings, cultural units, mission bonuses, event freebies and so on overlapping so much as it is making those of the above that give out promotions that we already have, like Combat I, less valuable to leaders who are already receiving such a bonus from the trait.
- I've brought up that while I'm not entirely against this, it does, especially in this case, mean that we're violating Vanilla custom and could be disrupting player expectations of the mod by removing Combat I from the Aggressive trait, which is usually selected by players for the very reason that it gets them closer to unlocking many other promos that Combat I leads to. On the merit of its bonus alone, Combat I is rather weak in comparison to most promos so the actual immediate unit bonus from taking the Aggressive trait is usually not so much what Aggressive selecting players are usually after.
- However, I've also proposed that if we are to remove Combat I from Aggressive, then the Aggressive promo, standing alone, should be +20% Attack, +10% Defense. I'm happy to try this.
- ls612 stated a preference for Combat I and Aggressive combined as it shows in this proposal. However, he agreed he'd be fine with giving the +20%Attack, +10%Defense Aggressive promo a chance to stand alone as the only bonus promotion from this trait.
- My previous proposal, if we keep the Combat I here, was to put the Aggressive promo at +15% Attack, -10% Defense. Now, I'll adjust that proposal, based on feedback from others who balk at the idea that an Aggressive leader would be a total slouch at defense due to a general overall improved unit training, to a mere +10% Attack only. Note that this in combination with Combat I presents the same benefits to the unit fresh out of training but with Combat I, that unit is closer to qualifying for a host of other, better promos.
- I like the GG bonus. I don't think many others have commented on that from the previous proposal rounds. Its good its not too strong though because I think we'll need to make the differentiation between Aggressive and Imperialistic clear albeit give them a nice symmetry for the player who wants an excessive war benefit at the cost of lacking good civil bonuses.
In regards to the malus (which would be based on a game option - I have an idea how to set this up btw that is a completely new approach... more on that in a bit.)
- We have received very strong worded opposition to crime penalties on Aggressive.
- Some of this may be accounting for the strong opposition to having any malus on positive traits.
- Additionally, some of the opposition to positive traits having any malus at all may also be a result of deep disagreements regarding some of the decisions as to what that malus would be. This may be one of those areas where the punishment for Aggressive leaders may not be fitting the crime to the perceptions of some players - but I'd like to hear what the rationale for crime being employed in this manner is because I think there probably is some meaningful rationale behind this proposal that has not been effectively expressed yet to those against it.
- Nevertheless, I'm of the opinion that when designing malus on positive traits, we need to make it entirely obvious why any given penalty is on that particular trait - not just in what we express here, but on first glance it should immediately make sense.
- Anyhow, it'd be interesting to hear more from those who have opinions here as to why they feel that crime is or is not fitting for Aggressive, with the understanding that in this game option scheme all positive traits will have some small negative element as a counterbalance. So the discussion is no longer on whether they should or should not have a hint of negativity, but rather if CRIME is the most rationale penalty. If you are against crime being put to use here, please offer what you feel would be more fitting. Consider balance too... Under the above points and discussions, how valuable do you feel the positive side of Aggressive would measure up to other positive traits as you see it? And take that into consideration with how strong to apply a negative.
- My previous suggestion for a Malus on Aggressive was to assign a War Weariness penalty as the Aggressive leader tends to wear down his nation's appreciation for war faster. There was initial opposition to that idea until I explained the thinking on the basis of it being a direct antitheses to the Aggressive benefits and some after the rationale was expressed on the basis of the mechanic of War Weariness naturally being more prevalent a problem for an Aggressive leader, which does make some sense there ls.
- So after some thought, my counterproposal for the malus is this: Aggressive, without Combat I, would not be a very strong trait in comparison to others, even if the Aggressive promo was +20% Attack, +10% Defense and it gains some GG bonuses. I think we should look at some more ways to benefit Aggressive leaders from the new tags. But for the malus, I think it could be as simple as a -1 Diplomacy penalty to all other leaders (We don't like how willing you are to strike at other nations.) I think that'd be enough to represent the drawback for aggressive unless we start pouring on a lot of other bonuses from the new tags that give cause for a balance reconsideration.
- I recall you stating, Sgt, that you had that in mind already too.
- I'm personally on the fence on the crime malus and am waiting patiently for the arguments for and against the idea there so I can consider it from new perspectives.
- On the 'for the crime' side of the fence, I can see how Aggressive leaders could inspire a more aggressive populace. More population tending to have been not only in the military, but in combat at some point, have developed a more fearless arrogance coupled with personal resent against the state that could lead to more crime.
- On the 'against the crime' side, there's a lot of justifications for crime modifiers on a lot of traits and if we aren't selective about which are compelling enough to apply any given modifier, including crime modifiers which are particularly easy to come up with arguments for, we would end up with too many traits interacting with crime. And the danger exists for other tags in use too which has been the biggest issue that's created controversy here when one type of tag is used too commonly throughout the traits structure. I'm thinking traits should stay clearly within their theme and that reflects views I'm hearing others expressing here as well. To me, a crime penalty may be a bit too good a fit for some other traits.
- You previously asked for feedback on the manner in which the crime penalty is applied, aka +8crime rate for cities with more than 200 crime, creating a runaway effect that's hard to control once you've let it go too far. Joseph's feedback there was pretty strongly against the sudden runaway effect, and I don't think he was the only one to say it. I personally think its a bit of a mean trap for the player but it also makes things more interesting in that it gives the player a point to say to himself, I CANNOT allow crime to exceed 200! So I can see good and bad in that design and I think its going to be controversial in a way we can't smooth over. Aside from the interesting game consideration this creates, I also wonder what the rationale is for it from a reflection of reality sense. I guess, as a result of being unable to answer that question, I personally think to veer more towards a stance where if we have a property manipulator, it should usually be a per population based rate manipulator. There's something to be said for the 'runaway trap' but I'm not sure what situations would call for that rationally yet.
Take note, too, that I'm currently working out ALL of your proposed new tags, as noted a few posts back. What applications on those tags did you have in mind for Aggressive?