krazykaz1983
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2011
- Messages
- 9
Hi just a small problem I noticed. Why is Amber an Ocean resource? Activated by Fishing Boats?
Feedback: Resources
- Thread starter krazykaz1983
- Start date
From the original thread:
Page 51 if you want to look it up.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=353049&page=51
krazykaz1983
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2011
- Messages
- 9
Thanks didn't see this!
Except historically Amber has been gather on the shore of the Baltic, but also mined
It was mined too but most of it was scavenged from beaches or fished/dived for. I thought about placing it on land as well but there are no 'coast land tiles', just 'water coast tiles'. So it wouldn't be restricted to near the ocean, it could show up anywhere.
I had the same issue with seals, I originally hoped to place them on coastal tundra and snow but it just wasn't possible.
fair enough
KaneofEgypt
Chieftain
I recently noticed that neither jade nor bison show up on the world map. Are you planning to edit the map and send out the improved version with 0.9.5?
None of the 15 new resources are placed on any of the included real world maps yet. This is primarily because I'm making some terrain changes in 0.9.5 and I prefer to wait until those are done. I also want to review/prune which maps are included, to make it an easier task to keep them updated. I'll set up a poll.
Howard Mahler
Since Civ 1
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2003
- Messages
- 619
Based on the one game I have played in version 0.9.4.
Early game: Health was a little bit easier to come by than in BTS.
Happiness was a little bit easier to come by than in BTS.
Middle game: Once I was able to trade with enough partners, health and happiness were no problem at all.
Later game: In Auth. civic happiness is no problem at all.
Health is nuisance in my very biggest cities; mainly for two reasons:
I captured that useless inquisition wonder that gives -2 health in all cities
and I delayed researching Biology to go after more warlike techs.
Early game: Health was a little bit easier to come by than in BTS.
Happiness was a little bit easier to come by than in BTS.
Middle game: Once I was able to trade with enough partners, health and happiness were no problem at all.
Later game: In Auth. civic happiness is no problem at all.
Health is nuisance in my very biggest cities; mainly for two reasons:
I captured that useless inquisition wonder that gives -2 health in all cities
and I delayed researching Biology to go after more warlike techs.
Howard Mahler
Since Civ 1
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2003
- Messages
- 619
The AI does not seem to consider Salt to have any value in trades.
Howard Mahler
Since Civ 1
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2003
- Messages
- 619
Based on playing another game in version 0.9.4, I think health and happiness are too easy by a significant amount.
We need significantly more unhealthiness and unhappiness.
This is just one person's opinion, and other player's opinions would help alot.
Possible areas that might help:
1. Cap the effect per city of the Authoritarianism Civic.
(In any case, the 0.9.4 Codification can not compete with the 0.9.4 Authoritarianism.)
2. Have population have a larger effect on health.
(While it is apparently a pain in the neck to program, adding unhealthiness for sizes 5, 10, 15, etc., or even 2, 4, 6, 8, etc. would help.)
Large cities were extremely unhealthy until relatively recently.
3. Have population have a larger effect on happiness.
(While it is apparently a pain in the neck to program, adding unhappiness for sizes 5, 10, 15, etc., would help.)
I think a fundamental change is needed to restore balance.
Then some other tweaks may be needed depending on what changes are made.
We need significantly more unhealthiness and unhappiness.
This is just one person's opinion, and other player's opinions would help alot.
Possible areas that might help:
1. Cap the effect per city of the Authoritarianism Civic.
(In any case, the 0.9.4 Codification can not compete with the 0.9.4 Authoritarianism.)
2. Have population have a larger effect on health.
(While it is apparently a pain in the neck to program, adding unhealthiness for sizes 5, 10, 15, etc., or even 2, 4, 6, 8, etc. would help.)
Large cities were extremely unhealthy until relatively recently.
3. Have population have a larger effect on happiness.
(While it is apparently a pain in the neck to program, adding unhappiness for sizes 5, 10, 15, etc., would help.)
I think a fundamental change is needed to restore balance.
Then some other tweaks may be needed depending on what changes are made.
What size are your cities getting to in these eras (on average)?
By taking Authoritarianism you keep your citizens in line but you miss out on the other benefits of that tree. You're also paying a lot of upkeep for all those units. Works for some strategies/playstyles but not others.
The Holy Office is not meant to be captured, I've fixed that and lowered the health penalty for 0.9.5. If I don't remove the stupid thing altogether by then...
That's a bug. Fixed for 0.9.5.
Can't be done directly. What I could do though, is make Authoritarianism increase unit upkeep. There'd still be no limit on unhappiness quelled but it would get more and more expensive to do so as cities grew. If we did this we might need to give the civic another benefit to compensate a bit.
These shouldn't be as hard to program as I initially thought, though I'd have to see how the AI responds. The hardest part is how to communicate the effect in the AI effectively. I think there's a few things to try first before resorting to this though.
Howard Mahler
Since Civ 1
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2003
- Messages
- 619
As far as city sizes go, you can look at the saved games I have posted.
I have now posted another set as Spain.
I think on health and happiness additional tweaks will not be enough.
I think you have to bite the bullet and do something fundamental.
Mine were such suggestions for possible things to do.
Any way to weaken Author. would be helpful.
Increased unit upkeep cost could work, and depending on how much of an increase, you could add some small benefit.
I have now posted another set as Spain.
I think on health and happiness additional tweaks will not be enough.
I think you have to bite the bullet and do something fundamental.
Mine were such suggestions for possible things to do.
Any way to weaken Author. would be helpful.
Increased unit upkeep cost could work, and depending on how much of an increase, you could add some small benefit.
I haven't got a copy of 0.9.4 installed at the moment, so I'm unable to load the saved games right now. The problem with releasing patches and experimental changes is that it becomes tricky to find the exact state each saved game requires. If you could give me a rough summary of city sizes it would save me a lot of time and effort.
The problem with doing something fundamental is it can all too easily break things in an unexpected way. For example, removing happiness and health from resources in 0.9.3 broke AI trading. I did a quick test with population causing double unhappiness just to see what would happen. Well, it completely messed up AI city management. It may be resolvable, it may not be, I don't know yet. But that's the danger in doing fundamental changes.
Howard Mahler
Since Civ 1
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2003
- Messages
- 619
Based on looking over the two games I have played with version 0.9.4,
I think one of these two would work:
Additional unhappiness and unhealthiness at populations: 6, 9, 12, 15, etc.
or Additional unhappiness and unhealthiness at populations: 6, 8, 10, 12, etc.
I do not know if these can be programmed.
Also they would have to be tried and then maybe a few tweaks one way or the other made.
There is a range of reasonableness, which I believe 0.9.4 is outside.
Within this range, different players would prefer more or less challenge from health and happiness.
It should go without saying, that such a fundamental change might affect the AI and other aspects of the game, which is why testing is important.
For my own style of play and type of map I suspect the following would work:
Additional unhealthiness at populations: 6, 9, 12, 15, etc.
and Additional unhappiness at populations: 6, 8, 10, 12, etc.
So for example, a city of size 10 would have 2 less health and 3 less happiness than currently.
Feedback from other players would help.
I think one of these two would work:
Additional unhappiness and unhealthiness at populations: 6, 9, 12, 15, etc.
or Additional unhappiness and unhealthiness at populations: 6, 8, 10, 12, etc.
I do not know if these can be programmed.
Also they would have to be tried and then maybe a few tweaks one way or the other made.
There is a range of reasonableness, which I believe 0.9.4 is outside.
Within this range, different players would prefer more or less challenge from health and happiness.
It should go without saying, that such a fundamental change might affect the AI and other aspects of the game, which is why testing is important.
For my own style of play and type of map I suspect the following would work:
Additional unhealthiness at populations: 6, 9, 12, 15, etc.
and Additional unhappiness at populations: 6, 8, 10, 12, etc.
So for example, a city of size 10 would have 2 less health and 3 less happiness than currently.
Feedback from other players would help.
They can be programmed for the player but not reliably for the AI. So far anyway. Adding additional health/happiness when a city grows is causing the AI to make some bizarre city management decisions and I'm not sure there's anything I can do to address it.
So it's looking very likely that this is not possible.
I agree that health/happiness are still too easy to obtain in 0.9.4. There are still plenty of adjustments we can make though.
Would it be possible in a future build to add a world generator that limits food/animal resources to single continents? For example, wheat and horses on one continent, potatoes and bison on another, and rice and tea on a third. Settling cities on multiple continents would cause cross-pollenation of resources (like potatoes irl) between the continents.
I've already set the majority of resources to work that way. It's not strict though and I'm not sure if all mapscripts support it. Some of them have 'resource balancing' components that could be overriding it. I'll do some investigating.
davidtylr
Chieftain
It wouldn't work with horses because it would give a too bigger advantage for the continent with horses on it.
Really? I've done pretty well with just iron before, but I'm guessing most pwoplw play at a higher difficulty than I do? What if horses can be set to always spawn in the old world (on map scripts like "world" which divide the map into old world and new world and give the option to spawn everyone in the old world)?
Similar threads
