Gedemon's Civilization, development thread

[Gedemon]

Real upload to gitHub this time, that version should be stable, and I've reintroduced all changes to districts/buildings.

If confirmed, back to adding new features...

 

[Gedemon]

Speaking of new features, let's talk science.

I'm not talking about a specific tech tree yet, but how to progress in a research for a technology.

I'd like to try blind research again, and adapt the eureka system to something more progressive.

There have been a lot of discussions on the subject on the forum, here are a few links for reference:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/different-approach-to-science.615544/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-featuring-probability-of-discoveries.522699/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/a-new-model-for-science.522298/


Early draft for research:

• multiple fields for research (science, military, production, economy, culture...)
• prerequisite could be something else than another tech (resource, combat XP, date, ...)
• research is based on your actions at the beginning of the game, for example:
  • working a plot with wheat/rice give points for pottery
  • working a plot with cattle give points for animal husbandry
  • a city on the coast give points for sailing
• certain buildings will allow to complete projects to advance in a specific field of research (barracks = military, library = civics/science, workshop = production...)
• higher cost for research
• tech diffusion from contact with other civs (depending on relation, distance, trade routes, ...)

And small update on GitHub:

add equipment name to units flags
add unit's requirements (personnel, materiel, horses, equipment) to construction panel

 

[heinous_hat]

Bug report

I've reached the Modern period in my game with the previous update (standard speed, no autoplay)... no crashes thus far, with city ownership changes happening normally. That goes for occupation, as well as returns and gifts via diplomacy. Save and load causes no apparent issues.

In a prior game, with the older update (the one with the housing yields, but not the TEST_REQ buildings) I ran into a crash where I attempted to capture a city (capital) which had 2 previous owners. I noticed the city wasn't selectable for transfer via diplomacy, and in the tuner it showed the valid flag set to 'false'. I haven't been able to recreate that scenario in my current game... very AI and map dependent... but I'll keep looking to do so.

In both games, city population became globally stuck around 6. Growth pretty much flatlined, despite having full stores of food with housing at the maximum level (none left to build). No nearby armies or combat pulling food. This is true for myself and all AI players. I'm guessing this needs adjustment after your recent revamp.

No other obvious problems or log errors.

-----

Gameplay feedback

On combat...it's playing relatively well. I've had numerous scenarios with extended border battles where I needed to replace depleted units and tune nearby cities so they provide adequate supply (rush build herbalist or blacksmith; increase local food supply; etc). This is a fun element. The AI seems to do reasonably well, despite being naive to the system. At least, that's true when combat occurs within supply range... so it defends well enough. It also manages to capture cities if they're close enough, or it has an abundance of units. Of course, the usual (mildly ********) army operations will sometimes break otherwise good performance. Such as where a unit will simply play dead, or a bunch of embarked melee units try to surround a ship... vanilla things . AI players do, however, typically make good moves that are accentuated by the limited stacking allowance. Ranged units are frequently protected with stacked melee, which works well with the AI tendency to swap out low health units. I also think the extended combat time afforded by continuous "healing" from reserves and supply covers many tactical mistakes, at least in the short term. It does seem to lead to sustained aggression early to mid combat, while reserves are high.

Overall, combat is much more entertaining in this configuration... sound tactical maneuvering is more important, and you have to keep an eye on how it's affecting city development. And weak city development will affect local combat. Good stuff.


On housing... I know the model is very basic at the moment, so not much to say... other than constantly upgrading housing is extremely tedious . I don't know that it needs to be quite so granular, and what you had mentioned about city expansions (i.e. re-purposed, adjacent districts) sounds like a good way to go. Perhaps, instead of deliberately building specific classes of housing, population stratification could be accomplished strictly by "needs fulfilled"

On research... will give the ideas you outlined some thought and read the linked discussion. I've always favored the idea of less deterministic research outcomes. You should certainly be able to nudge things in a particular direction, steer the ship towards a long range goal. But turn-to-turn behavior, along with external factors, should impact progress, sometimes unexpectedly. I think the vanilla eureka concept suffers from absolute predictability, but was nonetheless a step in the right direction.

Do you plan to do cultural migration this time around? Similar to the Revolutions component of the RED project, you could have relevant ideas (research points) diffuse via the same system that spreads cultural unrest. That's more interesting than generic diffusion, since it's proximity based. Even better with trade routes allowing deliberate "pull" alongside what you get naturally from proximity or conquest.

 

[Gedemon]

Thanks for the report

In both games, city population became globally stuck around 6. Growth pretty much flatlined, despite having full stores of food with housing at the maximum level (none left to build). No nearby armies or combat pulling food. This is true for myself and all AI players. I'm guessing this needs adjustment after your recent revamp.

I've just launched a new autoplay game, I'll check the logs for city growth.

There will be housing upgrades (or new) in later eras, but in theory size 9 should be possible I think. The UI for housing will help to check that.

Edit: the limit is indeed 6 with current settings, I'll raise the housing capacity of the 2nd and 3rd building a bit for testing.

On housing... I know the model is very basic at the moment, so not much to say... other than constantly upgrading housing is extremely tedious . I don't know that it needs to be quite so granular, and what you had mentioned about city expansions (i.e. re-purposed, adjacent districts) sounds like a good way to go. Perhaps, instead of deliberately building specific classes of housing, population stratification could be accomplished strictly by "needs fulfilled"

Good point.

But we need to give the player ways to prevent revolt/revolution if a city growth too fast relatively to the quantity of food available when the stability mechanism is added.

Or I could remove/minimize unhappiness from lacks of food but that's a primary need (and unhappiness from lack of housing will be limited on the other hand)

Yet, I'd like to minimize micromanagement, what about buildings (governor house, council) that would allow the AI to auto-select the next construction in a city ?

Maybe a governor house would allow the player to change production, while a council won't (and this could be a "need" for cities with a high percentage of separatists)

I'm open to suggestion stratification can indeed be limited to "needs fulfilled", the type of "available citizen slots" and some buildings (other than housing), the problematic is how to control city growth in relation to fulfilling needs and empire stability.

Do you plan to do cultural migration this time around? Similar to the Revolutions component of the RED project, you could have relevant ideas (research points) diffuse via the same system that spreads cultural unrest. That's more interesting than generic diffusion, since it's proximity based. Even better with trade routes allowing deliberate "pull" alongside what you get naturally from proximity or conquest.

I want routes to be a factor for science diffusion, yes.

Revolution will work in a similar way than the civ5 component, "citizen needs" being used to calculate the base "local stability"

 

[heinous_hat]

Yeah, I hesitated to comment on the housing model too much at this point, due to the absence of the other systems that will impact it. Also, I'm running test games at standard speed, which is fast for me. Along with the low threshold for housing needs in that particular build, I think it just felt like I was "mashing the housing button"... in turn based terms .

Incidentally, could you add a print statement to the CityScript log output for housing needs that shows city name? Like what you have for city growth (births/deaths etc)... it makes it much easier to read if it's broken up like that.

I like the concept of city council vs governor admin, tied to separatist population unrest. It could work both as optional automation, and as a solution to high separatist %. Since policies are global though, I would guess you'd need a way to change admin locally (e.g. destroy the building).

 

[Gedemon]

Yes, I've cut down some of the output as the lua.log was becoming to big even for Notepad++, I've restored enough of the city turn logging to show the names in the next version.

The UnitScript.lua and CityScript.lua use a simple function that can switch on/off comments, search for DEBUG_UNIT_SCRIPT and DEBUG_CITY_SCRIPT at the beginning of the files and local DEBUG_CITY_SCRIPT or local DEBUG_CITY_SCRIPT at the beginning of some function to set the output to true or false


Question @everyone:

I'm actually coding the constructions restrictions in cities using "unlocker" buildings.

My initial thought was to prevent construction if the city hadn't enough components (material/personnel,...) to produce 1 turn of the building/units (for example a Scout requires 350 personnel and 20 materiel, and would be locked in a city that could build it in 5 turns if the city doesn't have 1/5 of the components, ie 70 personnel and 4 materiel, those components being consumed each turn during construction)

But I'm afraid of the potential problems from the user perspective (you can have the stock for the first turn but not enough supply for sustaining production during 5 turn), and the necessity of micromanaging production if one supply source of the city is cut and the production is halted because of that.

So I may go to the simplest solution, which would be to allow the construction only if all the components are available, and lock those components during the production (so they couldn't be transferred/exported), either by consuming them immediately at the end of the turn (but would raise problems when you switch construction and require additional coding) or consuming them at the end of construction (but their is a potential design problem if some components are pillaged by an attacking unit when that will be implemented).

 

[heinous_hat]

If I understand the problem correctly...

- Consuming fractional resources per turn... you have to track consumption, and notify the player if there's supply disruption. Player must intervene. Partial stock used is "in limbo" along with hammers invested.

- Requiring all resources stocked initially... you have to reserve the stock in the event the player cancels/delays the build. Player intervention is implicit (i.e. they already changed the build). I'm assuming stock is returned... or does it stay "in limbo" along with the hammers invested?

- Requiring all resources stocked terminally... you have to notify the player if they no longer meet the requirements. This is similar to the first case, except you don't have to track consumption. Player still needs to intervene. No stock is consumed until build is complete. Hammers invested are still "in limbo".

From a player perspective, I think I'd prefer the first option. One of the mod's main concepts is the importance of supply. I don't think having to solve problems with supply disruption creates excessive micromanagement, in that context. Provided you can give enough feedback to the player as to what's gone wrong, this becomes an interesting dilemma.

Doesn't this happen in civ4? You lose access to a resource in mid-build, and the item is bumped down the queue. I guess a better queuing mechanism would probably be of use here... if there's disruption, player gets notified, and can go solve the problem while the next item(s) build.

 

[Gedemon]

I've gone for the first option. In the base game the hammers are not lost IIRC, you can change production and you don't lose progress (or only a fraction), so using the resource each turn is going along well, as you're not going to lose what's already invested in the unit.

I've tested a bit the limitation on full resources at once, but it would require a rethinking of the global values for resources and balance, to prevent the situation where everything is locked until you have build enough stock. The AI would not perform well under those conditions...

Here is a first version to test, without much UI feedback again, you'll only have the full requirements in the tooltip on the production screen, you'll have to do the maths (requirement/turns to build) to check if the locked/unlocked units/buildings seems right.

Don't mind the "require UNLOCKER_..." text, that will go, and will be replaced by the real requirement if a building/unit has a prerequisite building.

The filter for units shown in the list is a custom one as the game's wouldn't list units locked by a building prerequisite (while it happily do so for buildings...), it's very basic and still show some units that you shouldn't see.

Changing the city yields doesn't affect the locked/unlocked elements until the next turn, I'll try to find a workaround.

And yes, more buildings producing materiel are required and will come in future releases.

Test version uploaded on GitHub, as usual...

add components requirements for units/buildings production in cities
lower culture diffusion rate
add small barracks to city center (mutually exclusive with Small Stable)
raise Housing for lower/middle/upper extensions
give Materiel and Personnel stock to Palace
tweak rationing values
raise base materiel production in cities
raise base resources stock in cities
add equipment name to units ("unknown" means that the equipment is not defined yet)
a few bug fixes (but more added to compensate)

Edit: I've forgotten, I'll have to remove the capacity to buy units/buildings, it's incompatible with the actual mechanism until we have access to the source code or some change to the API (I can't set a different condition for buying only if the full stock required is available)

 

[dunkleosteus]

Speaking of new features, let's talk science.

I'm not talking about a specific tech tree yet, but how to progress in a research for a technology.

I'd like to try blind research again, and adapt the eureka system to something more progressive.

There have been a lot of discussions on the subject on the forum, here are a few links for reference:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/different-approach-to-science.615544/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-featuring-probability-of-discoveries.522699/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/a-new-model-for-science.522298/


Early draft for research:

• multiple fields for research (science, military, production, economy, culture...)
• prerequisite could be something else than another tech (resource, combat XP, date, ...)
• research is based on your actions at the beginning of the game, for example:
  • working a plot with wheat/rice give points for pottery
  • working a plot with cattle give points for animal husbandry
  • a city on the coast give points for sailing
• certain buildings will allow to complete projects to advance in a specific field of research (barracks = military, library = civics/science, workshop = production...)
• higher cost for research
• tech diffusion from contact with other civs (depending on relation, distance, trade routes, ...)

And small update on GitHub:

Was very happy to see my post linked and even happier when it looked like my idea inspired the direction you're heading! This mod keeps getting better and better

Since it looks like the research is heading in the direction of my original idea, I want to expand on it a bit more or at least talk about WHY I thought this approach would be good: the main goal was to change the WAY you play depending on what you want to do: currently, advancing in technologies is just about getting more science than anyone else. Having harbors is mostly only for getting great admiral points (for example) and if you wanted to advance in your naval tech, you wouldn't even HAVE to build the harbours or even a single ship: you'd only have to get campuses. With the system that divides techs into difference categories, you really have to focus on the area that you want to pursue: if you want to advance your naval tech, you'd have to earn Military (naval) points. That means building on the coast, making harbours, building ships and FIGHTING with ships. Possibly also having naval trade routes. I think it will add a ton of nuance and diversity to gameplay by encouraging players to build their civ in useful and divergent ways.

Another idea that I don't THINK I had in that thread was to have a separate list of "inventions" or "innovations" that are tied to techs. Basically, they're supposed to be smaller unlockables that are a lot cheaper than real techs but increases yields, strength or unlock new abilities for units. There are a number of reasons I think innovations are a good idea: with the above example of naval tech, there aren't REALLY that many techs in the naval tech branch, really it's only Sailing, Celestial Navigation, Shipbuilding, Cartography, Square Rigging, [sort of] Steam Power, and a few others, but by steam power you're really in a lot of shared territory. I don't even like steam power as a naval tech because steam-powered boats are merely an innovation of steam power: it was invented originally as a way to pump ground water out of mines and later developed for factories and railways. In fact, steam-ships are really only something you'd expect a naval empire to develop.

And that's sort of my point and where I'm getting at: some of the broader or more niche applications of techs would be changed to innovations, but we'd also add new innovations for flavour and fun.

Some notes on innovations: many innovations are designed to be unlockable when you first research the tech. The tech itself obviously has some basic bonuses and units or buildings unlocked, but innovations may be things like an extra point or two on certain buildings or maybe lower management or more efficient operation of another system.

Some innovations will actually be unlocked much later however, and may require more advanced techs or be a requirement for later techs.

Here are some examples:
Mathematics is a tech that unlocks the petra (does it do anything else? I forget, although it really should). An innovation on mathematics (that would be unlocked much later, perhaps requiring banking) might be Calculus, or something else related to e, which was a number worked out by a mathemetician working on infinite interest with respect to banking. Calculus and advanced maths of that sort are clearly more advanced than the sorts of maths referred to in the mathematics tech. They aren't important enough to warrant their own tech but are more flavourful. Calculus could for example improve banks or markets and might be required for economics which requires more complex math.

But back towards the naval tech angle, innovations could be used to improve the gun-power of ships, their speed, defences or something of that nature. Some way that a military power could invest points WITHIN an era to increase the value of their ships compared to un-invested ships of the same tier. Additionally, some "techs" that we currently have would be more useful as innovations on previous techs: square-rigging is more like an innovation of ship-building or sailing and stirrups are an innovation of horseback riding. Surely, they're important but in this context where innovations exist as improvements in a subset of a broader field, they fit the bill very well.

 

[Gedemon]

I had some kind of "application" mechanism in my WWII mod, in it the tech tree was replaced by "projects" that were unlocked around specific dates to simulate the tech advancement during the war and unlock new units. It was similar to the normal research, just transposed to cities.

But it also had other projects, to unlock new units that were upgrade of a previous unit and required a specific amount of combat XP (and also a date for some) from the previous unit. For example you needed to gain enough XP during combat with your Spitfire V before unlocking the Spitfire IX.

That's a part of what I want to take from R.E.D. WWII and implement in the mod, it has similarities with what you call "innovations" (but in that case were military specific only)

The tech tree will need an overhaul, but as I said, that come last, once we have all mechanisms defined, to know were to place what and how we should unlock this or that.

But we can already work with the current techs (and add or modify some) to test those ideas.

Here is an update to the draft:

• multiple fields for research (science, military, production, economy, culture...)
• prerequisite could be something else than another tech (resource, combat XP, date, ...)
  • city on the coast or discovering sea resource unlock sailing for example
  • a technologie that has been developed by another civilizations you have meet can be unlocked without the other prerequisite
    • use a bucket to fill the "unlocker" for that tech faster depending on the relation or spy access level with the other civilization
• research is based on your actions at the beginning of the game, for example:
  • working a plot with wheat/rice give points for pottery
  • working a plot with cattle give points for animal husbandry
  • a city on the coast give points for sailing
• science points are distributed each turn in all unlocked tech, independently of their specific fields
• "field points" are distributed each turn in all unlocked techs related to that field (a tech could be dependent of multiple fields)
• certain buildings will allow to develop projects to advance in a specific field of research (barracks = military, library = civics/science, workshop = construction...)
• higher cost for research
• tech diffusion from contact with other civilizations (depending on relation, distance, trade routes, spying...)
• applications/innovations are projects depending of a specific tech but with different prerequisite
  • first civilization to find a tech could get a free application/innovation from that tech
  • no "tech diffusion" for those (for an actual example the Manhattan Project is an application of Nuclear Fission, a civilization could potentially get Nuclear Fission from tech diffusion only in the mod, but would have to complete the project to get the application)
  • as for tech, application could be researched faster by developing projects in cities
  • unlike tech, only "field points" are distributed each turn in all unlocked application/innovation of that field, science points aren't used on those

Now for the application in game, let's use Sailing as an example:

unlocked by: city on coast or find a maritime resources or have relation with a civilization that has already discovered it
specific fields : ?
specific research points: +2/turn for each city on coast, +5 (one time) for each maritime resource discovered
application/innovation : ?

 

[dunkleosteus]

What's the current plan for resource management? In civ5, each unit consumed one quanta of the necessary resource, so for example 3 swordsman required 3 iron. Civ 6's approach is 2 resources to build a unit in a city without an encampment/harbour and 1 resource to build with an encampment or harbour or to upgrade. Losing access to your last copy of the resource prevents those units from repairing except through promotion.

I'd like to see a middle ground between these: units consume resources on the turn they are being built, upgraded or being repaired. For example: selecting to build a swordsman in a city "consumes" 1* iron resource for however many turns it takes to produce. If you switch production during that time, the iron is released until you resume production again. When you upgrade a warrior into a swordsman, 1* iron is consumed on that turn, but released the following turn. This limits how quickly you can upgrade. When a swordsman is damaged and being repaired, it consumes 1 iron, which is released when repairs are complete.

This is a compromise between the two systems from 5 and 6: the number of each resource you have does not force a hard cap on the number of units you can produce, as in 6 but not 5, but it DOES put a hard cap on how many you can produce or repair simultaneously, which 6 does not do. What do people think about this?

Also, I'd personally like to see all unique units require strategic resources. Playing as Rome without any iron mines feels dirty inside.

Also also, does anyone else not really like niter? It's hardly the limiting component of an army- sure it's necessary but niter itself is very common, and in historical instances when it wasn't, replacements like guano or manure were sufficient. I'm not an expert, but based on what I know of metallurgy, the bullet or shell (or shot) was probably more difficult to get than the gunpowder was. Saltpeter/niter is good-to-go almost right out of the earth.

Also also also, talking about innovations or applications, I'd honestly be in favour of having guns as an innovation on gunpowder. From what I understand, gunpowder was first only used to make fireworks. Later, rocket propelled arrows were developed, and at some point grenades, landmines and other bombs were made. It was hundreds of years before canons came around though and longer still before canons were miniaturized enough to be held in one's arms. Muskets are more like an end result of a long chain of innovations of gunpowder. Realistically though, it would probably be easier to do something like gunpowder itself gives some sort of firework-related culture bonus and canons are an innovation of gunpowder and muskets are an innovation of canons (or of gunpowder that requires canons). Unlocking canons would be required to outfit ships with them (you could still BUILD the ships, they just wouldn't have any firepower beyond arrows or bolts).

Edit: You mentioned getting a free application for being the first to research a tech. I'm not sure if that balances in the long run- it means you need at least one innovation for every single tech and none of them can be overly powerful of expensive without giving a powerful and free advantage to the tech leader. Civ 5's culture/tourism system is different to the literal tourism system that civ 6 uses, but if we sort of take a more 5-ish approach and talk about cultural influence, I could see that it would make sense that when another civ learns a tech from you, that increases your influence over them. Whether that entails economic advantages such as more lucrative trade or some other tourism-related system, I think that would be a just reward for being at the front of the pack: increased trade and cultural power over those behind you.

 

[Gedemon]

What's the current plan for resource management? In civ5, each unit consumed one quanta of the necessary resource, so for example 3 swordsman required 3 iron. Civ 6's approach is 2 resources to build a unit in a city without an encampment/harbour and 1 resource to build with an encampment or harbour or to upgrade. Losing access to your last copy of the resource prevents those units from repairing except through promotion.

I'd like to see a middle ground between these: units consume resources on the turn they are being built, upgraded or being repaired. For example: selecting to build a swordsman in a city "consumes" 1* iron resource for however many turns it takes to produce. If you switch production during that time, the iron is released until you resume production again. When you upgrade a warrior into a swordsman, 1* iron is consumed on that turn, but released the following turn. This limits how quickly you can upgrade. When a swordsman is damaged and being repaired, it consumes 1 iron, which is released when repairs are complete.

This is a compromise between the two systems from 5 and 6: the number of each resource you have does not force a hard cap on the number of units you can produce, as in 6 but not 5, but it DOES put a hard cap on how many you can produce or repair simultaneously, which 6 does not do. What do people think about this?

Also, I'd personally like to see all unique units require strategic resources. Playing as Rome without any iron mines feels dirty inside.

see https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...development-phase.615222/page-3#post-14763543

basically "equipment" is required to build and heal some units, the equipment itself is made using strategic resources. See the other previous posts for the resources economy.

The mechanism is coded, but the "data" is only set for chariot and swordsmen units.

I plan to remove the tech prerequisite for all units (except maybe for some very high tech), the tech being a prerequisite for the building that will make the equipment.

This way we can have a civilization not knowing Iron Working, but using Iron Equipment gained from another civilization to build and "heal" Swordsmen units (ATM trade is unlimited as long as you have open border, but I'll add relations in the mix, for example friendly for strategic resources, DoF for equipment...)

Still about strategic resources, I plan to make it so you gain a small quantity of almost any strategic resource you know from your mine, at a higher cost than if the resource is available on the plot. See strategic resource on the map as rich deposit, but the resource itself being available everywhere.

 

[Gedemon]

Small (but important) update on gitHub

can't purchase buildings and units
fix a bug with unknown equipment creating a nil entry in the resource stock table

that nasty bug was corrupting the whole city data around turn 50.

 

[Leyrann]

Speaking of new features, let's talk science.

I'm not talking about a specific tech tree yet, but how to progress in a research for a technology.

I'd like to try blind research again, and adapt the eureka system to something more progressive.

There have been a lot of discussions on the subject on the forum, here are a few links for reference:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/different-approach-to-science.615544/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-featuring-probability-of-discoveries.522699/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/a-new-model-for-science.522298/


Early draft for research:

• multiple fields for research (science, military, production, economy, culture...)
• prerequisite could be something else than another tech (resource, combat XP, date, ...)
• research is based on your actions at the beginning of the game, for example:
  • working a plot with wheat/rice give points for pottery
  • working a plot with cattle give points for animal husbandry
  • a city on the coast give points for sailing
• certain buildings will allow to complete projects to advance in a specific field of research (barracks = military, library = civics/science, workshop = production...)
• higher cost for research
• tech diffusion from contact with other civs (depending on relation, distance, trade routes, ...)

And small update on GitHub:

I could probably make a living "predicting" your plans by just writing out my own ideas. This mod is going to be so awesome. Whenever you start talking about something I'm like "oh I've got some ideas for that" and them I'm finished reading your post and I'm like "yup, that was what I was thinking about".

 

[heinous_hat]

Running today's build...

Looks like initial materials storage and/or supply rate could be a little higher... either that or the costs of some items adjusted. I'm having a lot of difficulty completing builders or settlers. I've tried lowering production (so the material cost per turn is lower), as well as alternately building items that cost less materials (to let stock replenish). So far though, I've managed only one builder and no settlers (150 turns @ epic). AI players are equally gimped with single cities. We're all friends though .

There might also be a problem where, after the 1st turn of an aborted build (due to materials), the build doesn't progress but still takes the materials. In other words, the item is dequeued on the next turn, but doesn't show as partially built in the list. This doesn't happen all the time though... continuing to look at it.

 

[Gedemon]

I'll add buildings to produce more materiel early.

I'm pondering to either give them for free to the AI, made the AI require less components to build things (scaled with difficulty) or start coding a simple AI helper for the choice of buildings...

Small update again on github

bug fix : construction of building having another building as a prerequisite was impossible

 

[Gedemon]

And another small update on GitHub

- Add Carpenter and Stonemason, two early and cheap building to produce Materiel from Wood and Stone.
- Raise conversion ratio from Iron/Copper to Materiel in Blacksmith.

 

[heinous_hat]

I'll add buildings to produce more materiel early.

I'm pondering to either give them for free to the AI, made the AI require less components to build things (scaled with difficulty) or start coding a simple AI helper for the choice of buildings...

Started a fresh game, with a bit more insight this time.

Presently, I think the only way to increase supply rate in the early game is through imports, conversion via blacksmith, or population+ (which is also the only way to raise storage). Copper isn't universal, so you can roll some pretty weak starts, like in my previous game. Woodcutter/stonecutter would probably be a good additional source that would benefit most player starts. These could maybe also raise the storage limit slightly, which might be too low for settlers and their high material requirement.

An alternate, or additional suggestion... instead of completely halting a build due to low materials supply, would it be possible to extend production time (e.g. subtract hammers) when material supply falls below threshold? This would more closely resemble a RL work efficiency problem (some workers have nothing to do). It would also avoid the problem where the player can deliberately assign workers to low hammer tiles in order to stretch out production (and thus continue to build)... the AI can only manage this approach by accident, I would think. That still leaves the player with an interesting efficiency puzzle to solve, while not knocking AI production of key units offline. It also doesn't constantly require player intervention... you could maybe display an "inefficiency" icon on the city banner.

- Add Carpenter and Stonemason, two early and cheap building to produce Materiel from Wood and Stone.
- Raise conversion ratio from Iron/Copper to Materiel in Blacksmith.

Lol, instantly ninja'd on point#1

 

[Gedemon]

An alternate, or additional suggestion... instead of completely halting a build due to low materials supply, would it be possible to extend production time (e.g. subtract hammers) when material supply falls below threshold? This would more closely resemble a RL work efficiency problem (some workers have nothing to do). It would also avoid the problem where the player can deliberately assign workers to low hammer tiles in order to stretch out production (and thus continue to build)... the AI can only manage this approach by accident, I would think. That still leaves the player with an interesting efficiency puzzle to solve, while not knocking AI production of key units offline. It also doesn't constantly require player intervention... you could maybe display an "inefficiency" icon on the city banner.

I had some thought about it too, the problem is a bit like the one I had with population variation in the mod making the "turns before growth" information something unreliable.

The UI will say 10 turns to make this, while it may takes 30 or 50 if the supply of materiel is lowered.

Still it has also a lot of advantage as you've listed, so, we can thought about implementation.

Maybe some limits to the extension like 20% more turns max (ie up to 20% of hammers/turn removed) after which the production is halted, so it doesn't bit back the AI (or a player that won't want to micromanage that part) with unlimited building time...

 

[1SDANi]

I'm constantly being forced to change production if I try to produce anything other than a scout.

Is there something I'm missing?