Feedback: Civics

[Nightstar]

As a replacement for the currently bugged Clan Warfare python effect of +2 for enemies when at war, how about a +100% increase in enemy war weariness? This could probably be implemented via a fake wonder that duplicates the effect of the Statue of Zeus.

 

[Xyth]

As a replacement for the currently bugged Clan Warfare python effect of +2 for enemies when at war, how about a +100% increase in enemy war weariness? This could probably be implemented via a fake wonder that duplicates the effect of the Statue of Zeus.

That effect will stack for every civ that is running Clan Warfare, so it suffers the same problems as the current effect, even if set much lower than 100%. I'm going to give "No War Weariness" back to Clan Warfare and think of something else for Mercenaries.

 

[platyping]

Actually not really.
2 unhappy is painful because you get it instantly and affect you greatly early game.
Extra war weariness is not so painful as ww is effective only when war is long.
Also affected by population n what u do during the war etc.
So it does not affect early game that much.
Also, war with 5 civs is not a big deal since ww is based on individual basis.
If 4 of them are far away and fighting others, you dont suffer anything.
Clan warfare on the other hand will give you 10 unhappiness straight

 

[Xyth]

Extra war weariness is not so painful as ww is effective only when war is long.
Also affected by population n what u do during the war etc.
So it does not affect early game that much.
Also, war with 5 civs is not a big deal since ww is based on individual basis.
If 4 of them are far away and fighting others, you dont suffer anything.

Hmm, I forgot that war weariness is calculated for individual opponents. That may not be so bad then. Looks like it's possible to implement directly in Python without needing a fake wonder too. Question is, could it be handled completely in onCivicChanged or would there need to be additional checks elsewhere? Unless I'm overlooking something, I think it could be.

 

[platyping]

If you are thinking of the python function, it is a team function though.

If a team has A, B and C:
When A runs the civics, EWW of whole team is increased by X.
Thus, when I declare war on ABC, I get the extra WW as intended.
However, if A is defeated while B and C still alive, I will still suffer the same WW since the effect was increased for whole team.

 

[Xyth]

If you are thinking of the python function, it is a team function though.

If a team has A, B and C:
When A runs the civics, EWW of whole team is increased by X.
Thus, when I declare war on ABC, I get the extra WW as intended.
However, if A is defeated while B and C still alive, I will still suffer the same WW since the effect was increased for whole team.

In other words, requiring an additional check to clear it from the teammates. A civic benefitting an entire team does seem a bit weird too. Does the Statue of Zeus effect apply to the player's team as well?

 

[platyping]

Most wonders do, because there is a XML tag that determines whether they do

 

[Xyth]

Most wonders do, because there is a XML tag that determines whether they do

Heh, I've never noticed that before.

Also, do you know if there's a way to replicate Reciprocity's city defense boost in Python? Or is reinstating the fake wonder the only way? (If so, I'll probably just replace that bonus).

 

[platyping]

Plant a forest in the city lol

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Plant a forest in the city lol

That wouldn't work; it could burn down, and it would also provide health.
And you could probably chop it, too, so a spiritual leader could just switch in and out of it for hammers.

 

[Xyth]

Plant a forest in the city lol

That wouldn't work; it could burn down, and it would also provide health.
And you could probably chop it, too, so a spiritual leader could just switch in and out of it for hammers.

Hehe! I could make a fake forest, without art or any other forest features. Not ideal still, sadly, it would clash with the Aqueduct for starters and require a number of checks to function properly. No worries, I'll think of something simpler to replace that bonus.

 

[platyping]

Plant a Fort then

 

[lindsay40k]

If a fort is planted, might issues arise if a Spy tries to sabotage it?

 

[Xyth]

If a fort is planted, might issues arise if a Spy tries to sabotage it?

It wouldn't be an actual fort, Platyping is just suggesting I could use a fake improvement similar to a fort to achieve the defense bonus because it wouldn't clash with the Aqueduct's reservoir effect (which is a terrain feature rather than an improvement). May be side effects I'd need to investigate though - assuming I don't just replace the defense bonus entirely of course.

 

[platyping]

Personally I will suggest that all those that require change of civics check to be redesigned.
Especially those that have to do city acquired checks, like state religion yields, all the corporation ones.

Capturing a city while you are changing civics on the same turn is bound to be problematic.

Those that do not require city acquire checks, like repriocity, are less problematic, but you might as well scrap those together, so that there is no turn check required at all.

Currently, every single turn, you are checking every single player whether there is a change of civics, which involves a loop through every single civics, plus comparison etc.

In short, it is a 19 player * 30(forgot how many) civics checks every single turn, regardless of whether there are any civic changes.

Which means, at least 600 checks done every turn.

 

[myclan]

Personally I will suggest that all those that require change of civics check to be redesigned.
Especially those that have to do city acquired checks, like state religion yields, all the corporation ones.

Capturing a city while you are changing civics on the same turn is bound to be problematic.

Those that do not require city acquire checks, like repriocity, are less problematic, but you might as well scrap those together, so that there is no turn check required at all.

Currently, every single turn, you are checking every single player whether there is a change of civics, which involves a loop through every single civics, plus comparison etc.

In short, it is a 19 player * 30(forgot how many) civics checks every single turn, regardless of whether there are any civic changes.

Which means, at least 600 checks done every turn.

Totally agree, the +1 food civic has caused so many bug, its value just doesn't worth its complexity, unless we change the dll file.

 

[Xyth]

Before I make any decisions, Platyping could you please clarify for me the issues still remaining with civics and corporations:

1. Changing civics on same turn as another check (e.g onCityAcquired) gets things out of sync
2. Capturing corporation HQs isn't handled
3. UN forcing changes of civic aren't handled
4. Performance with so many checks done per turn

Anything I've missed? Is foreign corporation handling working properly (other than capture of HQs)? Thanks.

 

[platyping]

Corporation is pretty weird. It seems that when city is conquered, somehow corporation spread code may activate which complicates things

 

[platyping]

Actually 1 other thing I didn't like about civics requiring checks:
No matter how beautifully you manage to solve everything, in the end you still require a turn check such that effects will only take effect next turn.
It looks weird especially for spiritual leaders who do not suffer from anarchy. (Not sure whether still the same here).

Instead of making your life difficult trying to kill each bug, redesign may be much simpler and bugless.
Take religion yield for instance.
There are many things you can do, without change of civic check.
1) Cities start with state religion
2) Free promotion for units built in cities with SR
3) Do something when religion spread, such as +1 Population or Free Temple
4) 100% success rate for spreading religion
5) Missionaries return to cities after spreading religion

 

[Xyth]

I'm fine with getting rid of religion yield (Paganism). Plenty of other options and it was only added because the onCivicChange framework was already in place. Palace commerce (Reciprocity) is a bit more important as it's there for balance reasons, but it can still be done without onCivicChange.

The corporation civics are much less straight forward and would potentially require me rethinking my whole corporation system, and some future plans too. So I'm not too keen on giving those up quite yet, at least for 1.20. I knew the onCivicChange framework had some flaws but I didn't realize the full implications of them. Tricky.