The thing is, that unit is the Gatherer, which is a one-use unit anyway. So there I don't see an issue, but if that is true for other units I'll look at it.
Extra Traits for C2C
- Thread starter strategyonly
- Start date
The thing is, that unit is the Gatherer, which is a one-use unit anyway. So there I don't see an issue, but if that is true for other units I'll look at it.
Taxman66
King
It's as much, if not more, a lack of gold issue as it is a costs more to upgrade issue. That makes it trait issue, does it not?
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
From that angle I suppose so.
The Traits Civic costs runs from a -40% (Organized) up to 80% (Protective, Imperialist, and Seafaring). But Total civic costs for most of the Leaders is above 100%. Of the 68 Leaders I've checked so far only 11 have a Civic cost increase < 100%. Of these 11, 6 are 55% or below on Increased Cost and only 1 has a Civic Maint. cost reduction, Hammurabi, by -5%.
38 of these same 68 have a Civic Cost increase of 130% up to the Highest of 170% (Charlemagne).
But I have not finished totaling all leaders either.
But the stats are pretty clear now. The vast majority of Leaders will double your Civic maint. costs. And you run a 50% chance or better of getting even more than that.
JosEPh
The Traits Civic costs runs from a -40% (Organized) up to 80% (Protective, Imperialist, and Seafaring). But Total civic costs for most of the Leaders is above 100%. Of the 68 Leaders I've checked so far only 11 have a Civic cost increase < 100%. Of these 11, 6 are 55% or below on Increased Cost and only 1 has a Civic Maint. cost reduction, Hammurabi, by -5%.
38 of these same 68 have a Civic Cost increase of 130% up to the Highest of 170% (Charlemagne).
But I have not finished totaling all leaders either.
But the stats are pretty clear now. The vast majority of Leaders will double your Civic maint. costs. And you run a 50% chance or better of getting even more than that.
JosEPh
It 'sounds' like a lot, +170% but it shouldn't affect your game too much. I only know from my games on deity that in like the medieval era it was the equivalent of about $150 maybe even $200, $250 worse case scenario I think. This was about 5-10% of my research %.
In prehistoric it shouldn't cost anything maybe $10 if your unlucky. In ancient and classical it should be manageable at around $30-$50 I think.
Also it scales with difficulty level. The percentage of civic maintenance you pay is assigned in the civ4handicap.xml, noble is 80% and deity is 100% for example.
In prehistoric it shouldn't cost anything maybe $10 if your unlucky. In ancient and classical it should be manageable at around $30-$50 I think.
Also it scales with difficulty level. The percentage of civic maintenance you pay is assigned in the civ4handicap.xml, noble is 80% and deity is 100% for example.
If you have surplus gold, it is better to upgrade but if you have surplus production, it is better to build a new unit. Sounds right to me.
Faustmouse
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,524
I am in the late renaissance now and I my civics cost me 4000 gold now, according to my civic advisor (V27, giant map, deity, snail, Frederick [Germany])
To put that in context it would be good if you also mention your income and other costs at that point.
Faustmouse
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,524
I can do this until tomorrow morning (in 21 hours). I think the income was at 4000 per turn. I uploaded a savegame in the single player bug thread recently if you want to have a look at it. Its the "Independence war."
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Have you played as Charlemagne(170%), Joao, Qin Shi Huang, Victoria(160% group), Menelik, Curtin, Wangkon,or Churchhill (150% group) and the 12 in the 145% group?
Just like Hydro stated, he uses Julius Caesar (15% increase) to do all his testing with, did you try any of the top 8?
Noble should not be as high as 80% imo. Or Deity should be More than 100%, say 200% to scale properly. Because none of this is about helping the AI be more competitive. It's only about increasing the cost for the player so Deity level players have more challenge. It will and does actually handicap the AI except if the AI is Hammurabi, Julius Caesar, Deganawida, or Roosevelt.
JosEPh
I never set these its simply the default and its not my place to change them. Perhaps ls612 would be the man to speak to regarding this. I tend to agree with you though, like Noble 60% - Deity 120% would be better.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Did not know that. Seems a conversation with ls612 is forthcoming then.
I was thinking more like this Noble 10% with Prince 50%, Monarch 100%, and Emperor 150% and Deity 200%.
This way the AI does not carry but a small percentage of the burden it all rests on the player's shoulders.
JosEPh
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Organized would need to lose it's value of -40. Or have more traits with - value instead of the +.
I can see what is being attempted, I just don't think the AI needs this burden. The player can adapt.
So maybe the adjustment to the
JosEPh
I can see what is being attempted, I just don't think the AI needs this burden. The player can adapt.
So maybe the adjustment to the
is the place to start?
JosEPh
No. I've done some testing and it seems for some strange reason that the engine balks at new tags being added to the GameInfoSchema. I have a way to do it by gamespeed, that would make things much better for faster speeds, and would compensate for the excess of gold on slower gamespeeds. As part of that I would support halving the upkeep percentages, both positive and negative, on all Traits.
I have added plenty of tags to the GameInfo schema so there is nothing different about it.
Hm maybe I'm doing something else wrong then.
Edit: I'm stupid, I put the tag under the erainfos, not the gamespeedinfos. Need to be more careful about that.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Why do you nneed new tags in the Schema? When all you need to do is change the xml value in the civ4handicap.xml file? Doesn't make much sense to me not to try this 1st.
JosEPh
JosEPh
Remember, the AI already has a gold advantage over you on higher difficulties, all -
is now treated as maintenance, and the AI pays less maint than a high diff human.
JosEPh_II
TBS WarLord
Well that's what Sgtslick iss trying to do, give the player more burden to bear as the Difficulty levels increased. He is constantly complaining Deity is too easy.
Make the simple changes 1st. Then if Other Deity players start complaining it's too Tough make your suggested adjustments.
Just don't burden the AI.
JosEPh
Make the simple changes 1st. Then if Other Deity players start complaining it's too Tough make your suggested adjustments.
Just don't burden the AI.
JosEPh
Yes, I agree. However, I don't think the issue is related to the handicap, it's because Slick plays on a very slow gamespeed. And as you very well know, there is a disparity between gold flows on Eternity and gold flows on Normal. THat is what I want to address this version.
