Extra Traits for C2C

[strategyonly]

Overall the only sticky point for me is the negative at start, its not a huge issue or anything, I just would much prefer that there be no negative trait at the start (for balance and game play reasons).

Interesting. So no negative at start, does that mean that back then they didnt know whether it was a bad thing then to eat raw meat? (in the realm of things)

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sounds good.

When you say aggressive III does that mean no just plain aggressive, they'll start as aggressive I? I hope so coz 4 is much too much

Overall the only sticky point for me is the negative at start, its not a huge issue or anything, I just would much prefer that there be no negative trait at the start (for balance and game play reasons).

My trait toolkit is ready to go thunderbrd, just need to put your new tools on my belt and you to let me at 'em

Ok. Let me do up a few suggestions, not a whole trait proposal, once the new tools are complete, just to highlight the concepts that struck me as possible design methods we could employ to keep ourselves on a track that can not only keep our traits in balance with each other, but also easily translate into AI trait selection code. That's really what the 'valuations on tags' were mostly about anyhow..

The methods that came to me last night would enable us to keep some guidelines in place for standardization throughout the various trait levels.

III seems enough for now but we MAY want to go into a fourth rung as ls612 proposed to me... for now it shouldn't be necessary I don't think because we want to leave room for some creative branching and combining and unlocking of various other trait sets to come DOWN the road.

So yeah, some of what I want to say can't be said so easily in text as it can be by showing you the ideas for the various stages of a couple example trait chains. Hopefully you'll see what I mean when I can share it with you.

In the meantime, perhaps you can start by making whatever adjustments you feel should be necessary to the proposal that I already put in front of you as YOUR proposal for the CORE traits that would be in effect if the game is not using the developing leader option at all. I figured out how I'm going to code that in... and ls612's suggestion to make the CORE traits (being traits balanced for a static selection on each leader as our normal game has always been) set at a linepriority of 0 will give me the filter I need to make it work in code. (They won't be coming into play at all in a developing leaders game so for them... go to town as you wish and I'll give you a few added tags this weekend... sound good?)


As for your opinion on not starting with the negative trait... I think I can work something out there along those lines then.

 

[Sgtslick]

Interesting. So no negative at start, does that mean that back then they didn't know whether it was a bad thing then to eat raw meat? (in the realm of things)

I think the no housing thing hydro introduced addresses this fact adequately enough.. Just shutup SO your not helping

@thunderbrd sure ok. Keep in mind I don't want to have the level up system to be associated with increments or %'s in your mind; we'll do them each individually like i've said. It's way too big of a corner to cut imo. It doesn't help balance it hinders it.

 

[Hydromancerx]

And this year i intend to add 50 more Civs well maybe less, but that adds in another 50 (maybe less) Leaderheads then also. Main word being: Intend.

Maybe i'll shot for 20 or so then . .? 10?

Well it should give you a lot more choices in what negative trait Leaders are given. I suspect with more choices we can get their true personalities better represented.

 

[ls612]

@ TB

Can you do all this in a MODULE format, and for NOW make it a modmod, i think that this would presently be the best for this, because it seems like a BIG change in gameplay?

That infact is how CIVPlayer8 got the Civics started, and with another person (DH) looking through and seeing if the OLD Civics were ok for installation into the core of C2C, (Which it WAS at that time.)

I agree with this completely. However we DO need to redo traits now somehow because the state they are in now is really a transition state that I don't really want to be in release. How about that we add my trait ideas (as I posted the first 3 earlier) for now (without leveling, that has some code kinks to work out), and Thunderbrd can make a modmod with the Leveling traits?

 

[Sgtslick]

Its all under control, it maybe be a 'big' change but that's not a bad thing. It'll work out just fine, we are certainly not at a point where I want to just throw my hands in the air and drop it over to you like its a hot potato Is612. Just let thunderbrd finish his coding so that we can actually start implementing some xml changes - then you'll see it take shape. No use judging it now and making rash decisions when its not even half finished.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Agreed. We still have time to smooth things out enough to get this done before the next release date. The additional tags and 'code kinks', which are mostly a result of my willingness to concede to some of your design points, are actually pretty minimal and should be completed by the end of this weekend and a re-proposal of a few example traits and trait chains should be complete by then as well. That gives plenty of time to finish the rest and make sure its all functioning absolutely correctly.

I also truly believe that the manner in which I will propose these few examples should suit the desires, or at least demands, of everyone who's been a part of these conversations.

EDIT: @SgtSlick: You are aware we plan a release date of the 28th for this version right? Even with the above completed, this will take some diligence to finalize in time.

 

[WimpyTheWarrior]

Opps! (wrong thread!)

 

[strategyonly]

EDIT: @SgtSlick: You are aware we plan a release date of the 28th for this version right? Even with the above completed, this will take some diligence to finalize in time.

I thought the Australian Holiday was the 26th?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Erm... not sure... soon either way

 

[Yudishtira]

I thought the Australian Holiday was the 26th?

Australia Day is the 26th, but Saturdays are holidays already, so the holiday is the 28th.

I think

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Australia Day is the 26th, but Saturdays are holidays already, so the holiday is the 28th.

I think

Yea, who can tell since the Government decided that if a public holiday fell on a weekend then we would not get the extra day. Except Australia Day (I think) and.... Actually taking away a holiday from people is very hard. Also, as I am retired, I don't get any holidays

 

[strategyonly]

Also, as I am retired, I don't get any holidays

ahahaa Here, Here

 

[ls612]

Agreed. We still have time to smooth things out enough to get this done before the next release date. The additional tags and 'code kinks', which are mostly a result of my willingness to concede to some of your design points, are actually pretty minimal and should be completed by the end of this weekend and a re-proposal of a few example traits and trait chains should be complete by then as well. That gives plenty of time to finish the rest and make sure its all functioning absolutely correctly.

I also truly believe that the manner in which I will propose these few examples should suit the desires, or at least demands, of everyone who's been a part of these conversations.

EDIT: @SgtSlick: You are aware we plan a release date of the 28th for this version right? Even with the above completed, this will take some diligence to finalize in time.

Hm, I still like SO's suggestion to make it a modmod for now. We certainly do not have the time between now and the 26th to rebalance the proposal that you made earlier.

 

[Thunderbrd]

If we can't get it done, I don't mind turning the option invisible until we can and giving it a skip on this version. But I'd rather not have to. Its intended to work fine with simply widening base trait selections if that's all we have. So a note on the help text on the options that explains how incomplete and potentially imbalancing the option could currently be would be sufficient I think. I could use some feedback from players using the option to help aid with ongoing balance issues so I don't want to have it shut off on the next official release if I can help it. And even an imbalanced form of it would probably be more appreciated by most downloaders than no form of it at all, particularly with the warning being in place.

 

[hotrodlincoln]

Is there a reason that the Nomad trait no longer gives Flanking 1 to Cavalry units anymore? That was pretty much the whole reason to take the trait.

 

[ls612]

Is there a reason that the Nomad trait no longer gives Flanking 1 to Cavalry units anymore? That was pretty much the whole reason to take the trait.

SgtSlick changed it from what I had set it at? The traits aren't incredibly balanced right now (although they are better than in V27) and will see more changes in the future.

 

[hotrodlincoln]

SgtSlick changed it from what I had set it at? The traits aren't incredibly balanced right now (although they are better than in V27) and will see more changes in the future.

It may be an oversight. The version of Nomad that is currently in the SVN grants the Flanking 1 promotion only to Recon and Animal (Yay?) units. It grants a number of promotions to Recon, which makes Nomad useful very, very early in the game and then completely worthless beyond that. Curious decision if that was intentional.

 

[ls612]

It may be an oversight. The version of Nomad that is currently in the SVN grants the Flanking 1 promotion only to Recon and Animal (Yay?) units. It grants a number of promotions to Recon, which makes Nomad useful very, very early in the game and then completely worthless beyond that. Curious decision if that was intentional.

I disagree with a lot of the decisions being made about Traits now, but I can't really stop them unfortunately, I got in trouble last time I redid traits.

 

[Thunderbrd]

While I agree with what hotrod is saying here, I think I see where Slick was going with it. The traits are going to be overhauled but its hard to say at this point if they will be in time for the next release or not. I've not made quite as much progress as hoped so far this weekend (though the day is young...) and I simply hope to have some updates in place regarding new tags and some tweaks of the developing leader system (including LinePriority 0 promos applying to leaders without the developing leader option and LinePriorities 1 and -1 (pos and neg) and beyond, applying to leaders while playing with the developing leader option.)

I've also done the coding for the developing negative traits mechanisms as well.