Extra Traits for C2C

[Sgtslick]

*deleted

 

[ls612]

I really don't think it makes all that much difference either way, all the traits are pretty good and its more about player/AI decisions rather than what traits they have, overall I tend to agree with you though thunderbrd.

Anything that unnecessarily makes the AI play less optimal is a bad thing IMO, and we should work to eliminate it. I see Thunderbrd's current AI implementation of Leveling Leaders as bad for the AI and so recommend against using it for now, especially given it also hasn't been fully balanced yet.

 

[RidetheSpiral23]

Anything that unnecessarily makes the AI play less optimal is a bad thing IMO, and we should work to eliminate it. I see Thunderbrd's current AI implementation of Leveling Leaders as bad for the AI and so recommend against using it for now, especially given it also hasn't been fully balanced yet.

I think anything that unecessarily adds to the AI "think time" (like calculating traits to pick based on situation) is a bad idea. If the AI leader plays based on its normal tendecies than why would the idea of the AI picking traits based on its normal personality be a bad thing? How much could that possibly hamper the AI? I would be more concerned about the AI's use of heroes, surrond and destroy, hunting, etc unbalancing the game and those have been game options/features for a long time. Correct?

If you are recommending players not toggle on that option than basically you are advising people not to use half of the game options based upon the fact that the AI cannot effectively use those features compared to a human player.

 

[ls612]

I think anything that unecessarily adds to the AI "think time" (like calculating traits to pick based on situation) is a bad idea. If the AI leader plays based on its normal tendecies than why would the idea of the AI picking traits based on its normal personality be a bad thing? How much could that possibly hamper the AI? I would be more concerned about the AI's use of heroes, surrond and destroy, hunting, etc unbalancing the game and those have been game options/features for a long time. Correct?

If you are recommending players not toggle on that option than basically you are advising people not to use half of the game options based upon the fact that the AI cannot effectively use those features compared to a human player.

Adding this to the AI would amortized over the course of the game add a few milliseconds per turn. Koshling just reduced AI 'think time' by 8% yesterday, which translates to 10 or more seconds in the later game. It is not a big deal really.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Adding this to the AI would amortized over the course of the game add a few milliseconds per turn. Koshling just reduced AI 'think time' by 8% yesterday, which translates to 10 or more seconds in the later game. It is not a big deal really.

Perhaps it wouldn't be... but the vast complexity of even attempting to get the AI to evaluate for a trait selection entirely based on its current situation would lead to FAR more processing than is necessary and would still not likely produce much more effective leaders but would certainly keep leaders from having any individual personality.

Would you really prefer all leaders start off with Nomadic so they can get faster scouting while the map is unrevealed? Having all leaders react to having been attacked by selecting Defensive? Having all leaders choose Aggressive simply because they're planning for a war? Where is the diversity of playstyle in this approach? Furthermore, it would impede them further this way unless we ALSO then add in a consideration, based on entirely more complex than necessary analysis of how they can get the best synergy with the traits they already have... It's just madness to try to take it in this direction!

Furthermore, even human players won't rely mostly on current situations to make their trait choices. Even they rely more on how their playstyle, or strategic approach to the game is in general.

Actually... I don't know why I say anything in response to these comments. Given that I'm not getting any direct counter-arguments on the points I'm making, it seems my primary opponents on this issue are most likely not even taking the time to consider what I have to say on the matter.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I just noticed Foriegn aren't receiving their free point per city.
Nor are deceiver's receiving their free per city for that matter

I think the free trade routes are bogus too.
Currently in my game as Meiji (who should get +2 trade routes)
Cities get 1 trade route free if im not mistaken, then I have trails +1 trade route, and im using open borders +2 trade routes.
All these cities have 4 trade routes though, not the 6 they should have.
So seafaring +1 trade routes and foreign +1 trade routes isn't working.

Thats all the examining I got time for today sry.

Could you do me a favor and upload a savegame so I can evaluate for that?

I do have another one that was reported along with the notification that no foreign trade routes were working at all that I need to look into that may indicate some of this but in pure code analysis, I could not find anywhere in the code where these problems could be easily seen to be caused.

However, it does appear that there may be a cutoff switch on some espionage elements when you haven't met another civ... could that be a possible cause for that 'bug'?

 

[Sgtslick]

The game I was going by was on an out of date GEM map so I don't think u'll be able to load that. If you just start a game as a foreign trait on quick/tiny u'll soon see you don't get the free espionage point same goes with deceiver.

If you have any games where you are seafaring or foreign civ just load that to see about the trade routes.

 

[Thunderbrd]

hmm... the code all reads pretty straightforward so its a bit mysterious there. But, on review of the saves I have, I believe I do have a save I think I might be able to use to identify those issues actually.

BTW: what are you working on right now?

 

[Sgtslick]

If you really need a save I can give u one, would be easier just to speed through a game, even auto-play on quick speed or whatever. I got a million saves but they are all old pretty much and no idea what traits they are.

At the moment im not working on anything, just playing , mainly ROM-AND tho
Truth be told im waiting for you to do all the work with your mod-mod trait thingy and then I was just gonna steal it all
Not all that much spare timeis a factor too.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Ok. I was wondering if you were working on generating a set of 'core' advancing traits but I can understand you waiting to base it, at least, on the concepts I utilize there. Knowing you're waiting on that does help me to structure my priorities. Which is why I was asking.


BTW: I loaded a game that I saved the round before I got to make a trait selection so I could test the espionage issue you've reported. Before ending the turn I checked the amount of espionage being generated in the city (5). Then advanced a round and selected Deceiver which states it gives +3 Espionage per city. Then checked the amount of espionage being generated in the city (8 as expected). On a hoverover, it states the +3 is a free commerce bonus, which is the generic way of saying free from any number of possible sources, including Traits in this case. I suppose the display could be improved but the function is coming through correctly.

I don't, however, have a game established that I can test the trade routes. But I do have a save that I still have to look into where it was reported there were no foreign trade routes coming through so I'll see what's up with that one and it may be somehow related.

 

[strategyonly]

Does the hover over work any longer, i cant seem to get it to??

I held down the shift and hovered twice, no change.

see below for answer, thx.

 

[Thunderbrd]

From the pic, it seems you aren't playing with Developing Leaders in that game, as it would default to have that display for the traits there if you were.

There's an option on the Bug C2C page : Show Civilization Traits. If you turn that on you'll get the trait display on the flag even if you don't have Developing Leaders in play.

And its 'Shift-hover' to cycle through the expanded traits displays.

 

[Sgtslick]

BTW: I loaded a game that I saved the round before I got to make a trait selection so I could test the espionage issue you've reported. Before ending the turn I checked the amount of espionage being generated in the city (5). Then advanced a round and selected Deceiver which states it gives +3 Espionage per city. Then checked the amount of espionage being generated in the city (8 as expected). On a hoverover, it states the +3 is a free commerce bonus, which is the generic way of saying free from any number of possible sources, including Traits in this case. I suppose the display could be improved but the function is coming through correctly.

I don't, however, have a game established that I can test the trade routes. But I do have a save that I still have to look into where it was reported there were no foreign trade routes coming through so I'll see what's up with that one and it may be somehow related.

hmm that's weird i'll have another look at this when i get a chance.

 

[Sgtslick]

Tweaked traits for v29.

Removed slave specialist/citizen stuff from cruel and reworked the trait a lil bit.
Spiritual - removed bonus +1 hammer on priests.
Expansive - nerfed maintenance bonuses slightly.
Industrious - increased pollution but also increased the pop threshold.
Seafaring - extra -5% city defense

Probably a few other minor changes that I can't remember.

 

[strategyonly]

Tweaked traits for v29.

Removed slave specialist/citizen stuff from cruel and reworked the traits a lil bit.
Spiritual - removed bonus +1 hammer on priests.
Expansive - nerfed maintenance bonuses slightly.
Industrious - increased pollution but also increased the pop threshold.
Seafaring - extra -5% city defense

Probably a few other minor changes that I can't remember.

Just in time, thx.

 

[Sgtslick]

Hey thunderbrd, whats the purpose of the building modifiers being listed in the traitinfos.xml?
They never used to be, does it mean that to add buildings they would only need to be listed in the traitinfos.xml and not the building one, or does it mean they need to be listed in both now?

I was thinking of doing some tweaks today to the traits including -1 to scientific scientist specialists (that's a mouthful). Give political a slight buff etc. I particularly wanted to rework some of the negative traits but I might end up waiting for some new tags to be able to do it. Anyway im open to suggestions to any other tweaks people think are needed. Any perceived imbalances would be good to hear. Which traits do people think are the strongest/weakest?

Are there any new tags that im not aware of at this point Thunderbrd? Would it be possible to send me another list like you did before, with the order they need to be in and what they do. That'd be great.. No rush of course, but if you have some ready to go that'd be awesome.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well... again, that list is basically in the schema. Go through there and see if you can find any you need further clarification on and I'll fill you in on just those since I don't want to take the time yet to explain the ones your already familiar with.

And to answer your first question there, with the pure traits and option edits, I felt it would be highly beneficial if everything a trait could accomplish was moved to traits rather than keeping those tags scattered about throughout other file types. Made sense either way the way we had it, sure, but it made the option edits far more functional this way. Now, if you want an option edited trait to have different building modifiers than the core, you can without having to create an unusual option edits on all of the whole building objects you want altered on that one tag. Basically, this should be easier for you overall... ALL trait abilities now exist in the traitinfos entries.

One suggestion: it was said elsewhere and I'll back it up. The Industrious trait has next to no benefit in the early game and should probably have some to balance it out. There were other traits mentioned in this context but this one stood out to me in play.

 

[Sgtslick]

<ElementType name="iEspionageDefense" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iGoldenAgeDurationModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iHurryCostModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iEnemyWarWearinessModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iForeignTradeRouteModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iBombardDefense" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iUnitUpgradePriceModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>

These I wasn't aware of, nice

How exactly is Bombard Defense different to city defense?

 

[ls612]

How exactly is Bombard Defense different to city defense?

It reduces the amount of defense the city loses due to bombardment. So if a unit would do 20% damage to city defenses with 50% bombard defense that would get reduced to 10% bombard damage.

 

[Thunderbrd]

<ElementType name="iEspionageDefense" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iGoldenAgeDurationModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iHurryCostModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iEnemyWarWearinessModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iForeignTradeRouteModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iBombardDefense" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>
<ElementType name="iUnitUpgradePriceModifier" content="textOnly" dt:type="int"/>

These I wasn't aware of, nice

How exactly is Bombard Defense different to city defense?

ls612 is correct. Be careful with it though... its a very strong value if it gets too high.

Any of these others needing any clarification? (They're surely needing some thorough testing Just to make sure they are all behaving entirely as desired.)