Getting Started
- Thread starter Thalassicus
- Start date
Txurce
Deity
It doesn't seem as if one is necessary. The patch was small enough that I haven't read of any being outdated by it here.
Dunkah
Emperor
Is it possible to add a City Hex Border outline of somekind that can be viewed in the city view and more importantly in the City view when "Viewing City" before deciding to Puppet or Raze the city after a hostile takeover?
Especially late game it's impossible to tell weather that cache of spices in the remote corner location belongs to your city or the one you have yet to take over...
Especially late game it's impossible to tell weather that cache of spices in the remote corner location belongs to your city or the one you have yet to take over...
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
I think it might be possible. Cseb did something like it in his component (included in CiVUP)... holding shift while hovering over a city highlights which tiles the city is working. There's a function to get which tiles a city can work, so presumably I could swap them out and add it while in city view.
Keep in mind puppets can be razed, so you can just puppet it and then decide to raze it later if it doesn't have what you need. I think that would be simpler.
Keep in mind puppets can be razed, so you can just puppet it and then decide to raze it later if it doesn't have what you need. I think that would be simpler.
Dunkah
Emperor
Didn't realize you could do that... either the hover shift thing or the Raze a puppet. I guess by the time I have made that decision in the past I just stuck to it.
Just thought it would be easier with like a glowing pink outline border.
Just thought it would be easier with like a glowing pink outline border.
Baleur
Prince
Playing this with the lates civ patch no prob
I must say it is amazing how much more it feels like Civ4 BUG now.. Amazing.
I've tried playing and tried forcing myself to love Civ5 for a long time now, once a month i give it a try lol.
But i've not played this one for a few months (although it always was my fav, due to the similarities in ideas to BUG). And damn it is a fine piece of work..
I'm actually enjoying the game now.. lol
Borders spread, buildings build in reasonable times, tech takes time, gives more interesting choices. Wonders are superb. And most importantly, the AI does not act like psychopaths anymore. They realize the equal value of open borders for open borders, or 1 luxury for 1 luxury.
Finally, at last, they act like reasonable leaders!
*virtual hug*
I must say it is amazing how much more it feels like Civ4 BUG now.. Amazing.
I've tried playing and tried forcing myself to love Civ5 for a long time now, once a month i give it a try lol.
But i've not played this one for a few months (although it always was my fav, due to the similarities in ideas to BUG). And damn it is a fine piece of work..
I'm actually enjoying the game now.. lol
Borders spread, buildings build in reasonable times, tech takes time, gives more interesting choices. Wonders are superb. And most importantly, the AI does not act like psychopaths anymore. They realize the equal value of open borders for open borders, or 1 luxury for 1 luxury.
Finally, at last, they act like reasonable leaders!
*virtual hug*
lindanealmck
Chieftain
Enjoying the random features on version 128. No problems noted. The events are usually fun and mostly positive. (no tsunamis that wipe your city!) I also like the choices they offer. Still enjoying Civ 5 thanks to Thal!
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
@Brom
In this file:
/CiVUP/Core/CiVUP - General.sql
Search for "MovementRates" and remove this section:
In this file:
/CiVUP/Core/CiVUP - General.sql
Search for "MovementRates" and remove this section:
Code:
UPDATE MovementRates SET
TotalTime = 0.5 * TotalTime,
EaseIn = 0.5 * EaseIn,
EaseOut = 0.5 * EaseOut,
IndividualOffset = 0.5 * IndividualOffset,
RowOffset = 0.5 * RowOffset;Hephaistion
Warlord
Great mod! Got me back into playing Civ5 after a long hiatus. Improvements on so many fronts that have already been mentioned by other folks. A few observations:
1) love the reimplementation of events, but I would actually enjoy more NEGATIVE events to balance out the extra bonuses the positive events are giving out. I think at the moment all the positive events are making the game easier (though they give bonuses to the AI as well, we all know that any bonus the game gives grants more of an edge to the human player).
2) diplomacy AI is more interesting and playing the political game is actually engaging in this mod, unlike vanilla. Tactical and strategic AI could still use some tweaking, however. I know this is always the case, but AI still doesn't fight wars very well, seeming to prefer cat-and-mouse games rather than pushing to achieve definite combat objectives. Economic AI seems to prefer piling up huge amounts of cash to investing in its own economy (Harun al-Rashind in my last game accumulated something like 80,000 Gold ... why didn't he use that money to buy buildings, upgrade/strengthen his military and gain the allegiance of city-states?).
3) in my version, I've moved Research Agreements further down the tech tree, as some other mods have done. Tech progress is still way too fast, IMO, not giving enough time to enjoy Classical and Med eras.
Great job on this mod, Thal ... certainly the best version of Civ5 I've yet played! In fact, I'm going to go start a new game right now ...
1) love the reimplementation of events, but I would actually enjoy more NEGATIVE events to balance out the extra bonuses the positive events are giving out. I think at the moment all the positive events are making the game easier (though they give bonuses to the AI as well, we all know that any bonus the game gives grants more of an edge to the human player).
2) diplomacy AI is more interesting and playing the political game is actually engaging in this mod, unlike vanilla. Tactical and strategic AI could still use some tweaking, however. I know this is always the case, but AI still doesn't fight wars very well, seeming to prefer cat-and-mouse games rather than pushing to achieve definite combat objectives. Economic AI seems to prefer piling up huge amounts of cash to investing in its own economy (Harun al-Rashind in my last game accumulated something like 80,000 Gold ... why didn't he use that money to buy buildings, upgrade/strengthen his military and gain the allegiance of city-states?).
3) in my version, I've moved Research Agreements further down the tech tree, as some other mods have done. Tech progress is still way too fast, IMO, not giving enough time to enjoy Classical and Med eras.
Great job on this mod, Thal ... certainly the best version of Civ5 I've yet played! In fact, I'm going to go start a new game right now ...
Txurce
Deity
This is an interesting idea. It would slow the game down - almost always a good thing - and probably feel more realistic as well. (Although I assume other mods have delayed RA's appearing because they have more of an impact than VEM's diluted version.)
Baleur
Prince
Tech progress will always be too fast until Firaxis releases an overpriced expansion that adds more technologies in the first place.
No wonder they took out tech trading, but research agreements kinda fill a similar role.
There simply are not enough techs per age to stretch the game out. The only possibility would be to add new techs (something i presume this mod is not about, since it is about vanilla enhancement), or simply remove research agreements completely.
It's a shame really. Perhaps in 1-2 expansions worth of content we'll have a more epic scale to play with.
No wonder they took out tech trading, but research agreements kinda fill a similar role.
There simply are not enough techs per age to stretch the game out. The only possibility would be to add new techs (something i presume this mod is not about, since it is about vanilla enhancement), or simply remove research agreements completely.
It's a shame really. Perhaps in 1-2 expansions worth of content we'll have a more epic scale to play with.
Hephaistion
Warlord
I'm currently playing with Research Agreements becoming available with Archaeology, following Darkhour's realism mod and seeming consistent with the creation of an international academic system in the 19th century. This slows tech down for early and mid-game, but lets all players invest money (which they have more of) later on when tech progress becomes more expensive and historically tech moves forward in leaps and bounds. I'd still make Research Agreements more expensive if I knew how, though, to reflect the larger sums of money players have to throw around in this mod.
Txurce
Deity
That is certainly realistic, and could well make for a better game. Adjustments VEM would have to make include otherwise boosting the PT Wonder, and finding other value for DoF's which currentyl (and excellently) boost RA's.
EmperorFool
Deity
I'm not convinced yet one way or the other. With a threshold you only have to deal with the issue at discrete points in the game. However, dealing with it can be far more drastic. With a point-for-point basis, it's always there and becomes more pronounced the more you let it go, one way or the other. While you don't have these catastrophic changes all of a sudden, it's may be harder to plan for. This will stand out better one way or the other if we had a truly point-for-point system. As you point out, that's not possible without the SDK.
I suspect that I lean toward a point-for-point system, however, as a) it's more logical and b) it doesn't cause those "OMG
let me buy a ... not enough money ... ack! buy some luxeries ... no one likes me! Arrrrrgh! <reload>" moments. 
I don't like the idea of the bonus applying to just the capital, though. It doesn't make any logical sense (only the citizens living in the capital are happy?), and it pushes the capitals to become uber-cities even more than they are now. I'm not adamant against it, but I would love to hear a reasoning for it. I'll warn you that I don't normally buy "It's easier to code" as a valid reason to drive the implementation.
I would warn against constraining excess happiness to benefit a single style of peaceful play. I haven't read that thread you linked yet (and will shortly), but it seems like bad form to design a feature specifically for a singular play style. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it, though.
Sadly, SC2 held my attention for only two games. As with Civ5, it seemed like exactly the same game with better graphics. Very disappointing to say the least. That being said, I played SC multiplayer LAN exclusively with three other friends and never bothered with the single player campaign, so that definitely colors my experience.
I suspect that I lean toward a point-for-point system, however, as a) it's more logical and b) it doesn't cause those "OMG
let me buy a ... not enough money ... ack! buy some luxeries ... no one likes me! Arrrrrgh! <reload>" moments. I don't like the idea of the bonus applying to just the capital, though. It doesn't make any logical sense (only the citizens living in the capital are happy?), and it pushes the capitals to become uber-cities even more than they are now. I'm not adamant against it, but I would love to hear a reasoning for it. I'll warn you that I don't normally buy "It's easier to code" as a valid reason to drive the implementation.
I would warn against constraining excess happiness to benefit a single style of peaceful play. I haven't read that thread you linked yet (and will shortly), but it seems like bad form to design a feature specifically for a singular play style. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it, though.
Sadly, SC2 held my attention for only two games. As with Civ5, it seemed like exactly the same game with better graphics. Very disappointing to say the least. That being said, I played SC multiplayer LAN exclusively with three other friends and never bothered with the single player campaign, so that definitely colors my experience.
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
The capital-only part is not critical and can be dropped in favor of an empire-wide bonus. A surplus happiness bonus favors peaceful empires, and peaceful favors tall, so surplus happiness favors tall regardless of what else is involved. The dummy building I use to do this can just as easily apply a global modifier to all cities instead of only the capital.
I prioritize tasks based on cost effectiveness (impact on game / time to implement). Difficult tasks have high priority if they also give a high impact. For example, the automatic tooltip system in civup took hundreds of hours of work, but saves enormous amount of time in the long run. Improving the value of surplus happiness would have a similarly high impact, so it's worth the time investment.
I prioritize tasks based on cost effectiveness (impact on game / time to implement). Difficult tasks have high priority if they also give a high impact. For example, the automatic tooltip system in civup took hundreds of hours of work, but saves enormous amount of time in the long run. Improving the value of surplus happiness would have a similarly high impact, so it's worth the time investment.
EmperorFool
Deity
Let's look at it a different way. There is a policy to turn excess happiness into culture linearly, favoring a cultural victory. There's another policy to turn excess happiness into science in a binary fashion. I would like to see this new system turn excess happiness into something else, if for no other reason than diversity.
I agree that peaceful empires tend to have excess happiness moreso than conquering ones, but that's not always the case if you target the right cities. And I would say that tall empires lead to excess happiness rather than the other way around, but I admit that I haven't analyzed it all that much.
I'm looking for an orthogonal effect here, similar to unhappiness slowing your growth and production. Rather than "excess happiness -> science boost -> more excess happiness -> bigger science boost" I'd like to see "excess happiness -> X -> more possibilities." How's that for specifics?
I agree that peaceful empires tend to have excess happiness moreso than conquering ones, but that's not always the case if you target the right cities. And I would say that tall empires lead to excess happiness rather than the other way around, but I admit that I haven't analyzed it all that much.
I'm looking for an orthogonal effect here, similar to unhappiness slowing your growth and production. Rather than "excess happiness -> science boost -> more excess happiness -> bigger science boost" I'd like to see "excess happiness -> X -> more possibilities." How's that for specifics?
mitsho
Deity
Science seems to be the most reasonable single effect, since it's built up for Tall Empires. Also, the science policy for happy empires comes very late game, so the similar effect is not a problem.
Giving several yields may be a balance issue. If you give too big amounts, it gets imbalanced very soon. Food doesn't seem to be a good idea, since a) it counterbalances happiness gains, b) it can get negative when losing happiness. But I guess it's a try-game, so why not start with Science? If you want a second, I'd go with the Great People modifier.
A bonus in the capital is easier to calculate for the human player and also easier to balance. 1% bonus for one happines will have no effect, 5% in the capital will have a small one, 5% in 10 cities will be unbalanced, not? What I am trying to say, if you have a nation-wide bonus, you have 10 surplus happiness giving 10 %, which are distributed over the cities, so
- 10 happiness give 1% in all cities -> no effect
or
- 10 happiness give 100% in the capital -> too strong, not?
It would be very difficult to balance that over tall and wide empires, not? So a "flat percentage" bonus in the capital seems to be more sensible.
As for the Advanced Start bonus, I'm not actually sure about the numbers, so I am going to try it out just now. But they look good
Giving several yields may be a balance issue. If you give too big amounts, it gets imbalanced very soon. Food doesn't seem to be a good idea, since a) it counterbalances happiness gains, b) it can get negative when losing happiness. But I guess it's a try-game, so why not start with Science? If you want a second, I'd go with the Great People modifier.
A bonus in the capital is easier to calculate for the human player and also easier to balance. 1% bonus for one happines will have no effect, 5% in the capital will have a small one, 5% in 10 cities will be unbalanced, not? What I am trying to say, if you have a nation-wide bonus, you have 10 surplus happiness giving 10 %, which are distributed over the cities, so
- 10 happiness give 1% in all cities -> no effect
or
- 10 happiness give 100% in the capital -> too strong, not?
It would be very difficult to balance that over tall and wide empires, not? So a "flat percentage" bonus in the capital seems to be more sensible.
As for the Advanced Start bonus, I'm not actually sure about the numbers, so I am going to try it out just now. But they look good
Txurce
Deity
I lean towards an option C, a science-only benefit, because of the goals for peaceful-tall empires in the three playstyles thread. This science focus is the same reason RAs strongly favor peaceful empires in vem, with the 50% declaration of friendship bonus. It gives peaceful players a technological advantage to counter militaristic players' army advantage.
I think these thresholds are the reason people feel getting happiness isn't important. The only direct benefit of stacking large amounts of happiness is slightly faster golden ages, which is not enough, as you pointed out before.
This is why I like to use a direct 1-to-1 approach for rewards. I think it would improve things if each point of happiness gives an immediate, tangible benefit. I left the thresholds in place because most of that code is in the game core only Firaxis has access to.
After giving it more thought, and taking into account my recent outsized success with wide Science games*, I agree that we should start with a focus on major happiness benefiting tall empires via the (presumably large) capital. It gives the tall civ a reason to accumulate happiness; most of the time you're better off investing elsewhere (by not building happiness buildings or selling single luxuries).
* more on this soon in the "3 playstyles" thread.
Similar threads
