History Rewritten (Original Thread)

[Xyth]

Caravel and early Naval Units

Been thinking this through and decided that adding an additional unit is more trouble than it's worth for the moment. Instead here are a few proposed changes:

• Caravel still requires Navigation but cannot enter ocean until Compass
• Caravel attack animation changed to arrows
• Caravel strength decreased to 2 but given a 20% withdrawal chance
• Trireme strength increased to 3, loses bonus vs. Galleys
• Galleass strength increased to 5
• Polynesian Waka still a Galley replacement but unable to enter ocean until Navigation
• Portuguese Carrack redesigned as a Galleon or Frigate replacement

My rationale is that in the earlier game the Caravel serves a fast coast-running exploration ship that can also prey on Workboats and Galleys in times of war. Trireme will defeat them if they can catch them but they have a moderate chance of escaping. Later they can leave the coast and explore new lands like they normally do.

The Polynesians will still have an ocean crossing advantage, but much later than they currently do (Navigation will have additional tech prereqs in 0.9.4). The Carrack change is because it doesn't suit being available so early compared to the Dhow, Dharani and Tongkang.

Let me know what you think.


Traits unlocking Civics

I've been doing some testing and monitoring how the AI behaves with the new traits. Unfortunately, traits unlocking civics isn't working. The problem is, while for the human player the strength of unlocked civics is flexibility earlier, for the AI it's causing the opposite. Every Progressive leader is choosing Monarchy (no problem here), every Financial leader is choosing Mercantilism (huge problem), every Spiritual leader is choosing Fundamentalism (huge problem) and every Tactical leader is choosing Warrior Code (problem that can probably be fixed). Why? Because at the very start of the game with only one city and no infrastructure or units these are the civics the AI deems to have the most benefit. What this means is that the AI then bases its strategy on these civics being in place from then on - in other words its making all leaders with these traits play almost exactly the same.

This is particularly problematic for Financial. Basically since the AI starts with no trade network it sees no negatives from Mercantilism, switches to it and then doesn't try to build a trade network at all and not once did I see the AI switch away from Mercantilism (I only tested up to the Renaissance). This doesn't mean Mercantilism is too powerful, rather it's a situational civic and having it available too early effectively forces the AI into that situation. In a nutshell, every Financial leader will be Mercantilist, completely negating the entire point of civic flexibility. Because of this I am going to rule out unlocking the Economic civics with traits. Financial will need to be redesigned.

The problem with Spiritual is a bit different. I think it's choosing Fundamentalism early because it has no units but it wants to build units and thus it desires the experience bonus. Same reason why a Tactical leader is always choosing Warrior Code. Fundamentalism also gives unlimited priests meaning that Spiritual's other bonuses (1 priest slot, faster Cemeteries) are mostly redundant and a Spiritual leader founds a religion even faster due to all those priest slots. The worst part though, is these Spiritual leaders found 1-3 religions, choose one as their state religion and then the others never get spread at all (Fundamentalism stops the spread of non-state religions). This effectively removes 1 religion per Spiritual leader from a game, literally once they can build Inquisitors. I did see Spiritual leaders switch away from Fundamentalism eventually (far later than desirable) but by then the damage was done.

I then temporarily removed Fundamentalism as a civic to see what would happen. The AI all chose Rationalism and never founded a religion at all. Unlocking Religious civics is thus ruled out; Spiritual needs to be redesigned.

As mentioned earlier, Tactical leaders are always choosing Warrior Code. I've seen them switch away eventually (well into the Medieval era and almost always when under attack) but never to Clan Warfare or Professional Army. Unlike the aforementioned issues, in this case I feel that the problem is the balance of the civics themselves. I'm going to remove/reduce Warrior Code's culture bonus and Clan Warfare's maintenance penalty and see how that goes. More testing needed but I think it will be okay to allow Tactical to unlock the Military civics.

Unlocking Government civics seems to be working fine without any noticeable balance or AI issues.

Back to the drawing board on some of these traits, I have a few ideas but suggestions welcomed.

 

[Simon_Jester]

Caravel and early Naval Units

Been thinking this through and decided that adding an additional unit is more trouble than it's worth for the moment. Instead here are a few proposed changes:

• Caravel still requires Navigation but cannot enter ocean until Compass...
• Polynesian Waka still a Galley replacement but unable to enter ocean until Navigation

You can implement this? "No ocean crossing with this ship until X tech?" If so, fine.

• Galleass strength increased to 5

I don't disagree, but why?

• Portuguese Carrack redesigned as a Galleon or Frigate replacement...
The Carrack change is because it doesn't suit being available so early compared to the Dhow, Dharani and Tongkang.

Hmm. I'm not so sure about this. I'm afraid I can't remember all the unique unit traits; could you explain in a bit more depth?

Historically, the Portuguese competitive advantage came in the early Age of Exploration, and began to decline as the larger ships modeled by Galleons and Frigates took over the world oceans. Though that was in part because the Spanish proved strong enough to dominate them on the landward side, something that wouldn't necessarily happen in a Civ game.

My rationale is that in the earlier game the Caravel serves a fast coast-running exploration ship that can also prey on Workboats and Galleys in times of war. Trireme will defeat them if they can catch them but they have a moderate chance of escaping. Later they can leave the coast and explore new lands like they normally do.

Potentially- are you keeping them as Strength 3?

 

[Xyth]

You can implement this? "No ocean crossing with this ship until X tech?" If so, fine.

Yep, it's used by the Workboat in standard BTS.

I don't disagree, but why?

I kinda feel the Galleass needs a bit more of a role. With strength 5 they will demolish anything prior to them but also have a decent chance at taking out a Galleon that lingers too close to the coast as well.

Hmm. I'm not so sure about this. I'm afraid I can't remember all the unique unit traits; could you explain in a bit more depth?

The main reason is that Navigation is a late classical technology and while those other units suit that era the cannon-toting, multi-masted and mixed-sail Carrack is horribly anachronistic. The Caravel art is generic enough to look fine with its attack animations changed and thus represent a longer history of European ships, but the Carrack really does not even if it made sense to do so.

Historically, the Portuguese competitive advantage came in the early Age of Exploration, and began to decline as the larger ships modeled by Galleons and Frigates took over the world oceans. Though that was in part because the Spanish proved strong enough to dominate them on the landward side, something that wouldn't necessarily happen in a Civ game.

I'm thinking of making one of the bonuses of a redesigned Carrack's is it being available at Compass rather than Charter. Thus the Portuguese would still set out into the oceans at the same time as all other non-Polynesian civs but they would do so in a ship closer to a Galleon's stats than a Caravel's.

Potentially- are you keeping them as Strength 3?

No I'd lower Caravel strength to 2 and raise the Trireme to 3.

 

[Simon_Jester]

The main reason is that Navigation is a late classical technology and while those other units suit that era the cannon-toting, multi-masted and mixed-sail Carrack is horribly anachronistic. The Caravel art is generic enough to look fine with its attack animations changed and thus represent a longer history of European ships, but the Carrack really does not even if it made sense to do so.

I'm thinking of making one of the bonuses of a redesigned Carrack's is it being available at Compass rather than Charter. Thus the Portuguese would still set out into the oceans at the same time as all other non-Polynesian civs but they would do so in a ship closer to a Galleon's stats than a Caravels.

Yeah, that works. I still lose track of which techs are available when in this mod. Waiting on 0.9.5 before I try another play again, to tell the truth.

 

[Xyth]

Yeah, that works. I still lose track of which techs are available when in this mod. Waiting on 0.9.5 before I try another play again, to tell the truth.

0.9.4 is the forthcoming version, do you mean that? Fair enough though, 0.9.3 (the currently released version) has a few significant design flaws. I hope to get 0.9.4 finished as soon as possible, though the aforementioned issue with the traits will delay things a bit. Still, better that I discover and fix the problem before releasing it

 

[Azoth]

Back to the drawing board on some of these traits, I have a few ideas but suggestions welcomed.

Have you tried adjusting the AI leaders' favourite civics? Give every Spiritual leader a favourite Religion civic and maybe you'll see more diversity in their T0 civic choices. As far as I know, that's how vanilla Civ IV kept the Pyramids balanced: almost every leader had a favourite Government civic, so they wouldn't all adopt Universal Suffrage if they built the Pyramids. (In BtS, most leaders' favourite civics are drawn from the other columns, so they will, in fact, switch to and stay in Representation if they build the Pyramids.) Ultimately, I have no problem with Isabella embracing Fundamentalism on T0, adopting the first religion to spread to her cities, and purging every other religion her people found. We should just make sure that every Spiritual leader doesn't behave that way.

If that's not possible, then I agree that the Spiritual trait should be redesigned. I'm less sure about the Financial trait: I think the problem there might be that Mercantilism, like Warrior Code, is simply the strongest civic in its column for most of the game. Of the other four choices, two were weakened recently: Redistribution, with the GPP penalty and the "camps may not be built on hills" rule; and Professionalism, with the workshop health penalty, which is offset by bonuses that don't fully arrive until Investment. The remaining two work best in the late game: Free Markets, with the corporation discount; and Environmentalism, with the health bonus to offset penalties from factories and power plants. The AI is wise to stick to Mercantilism until the Renaissance; though, once again, maybe a change in their favourite civics will help Financial leaders see differently.

 

[Xyth]

Have you tried adjusting the AI leaders' favourite civics? Give every Spiritual leader a favourite Religion civic and maybe you'll see more diversity in their T0 civic choices. As far as I know, that's how vanilla Civ IV kept the Pyramids balanced: almost every leader had a favourite Government civic, so they wouldn't all adopt Universal Suffrage if they built the Pyramids. (In BtS, most leaders' favourite civics are drawn from the other columns, so they will, in fact, switch to and stay in Representation if they build the Pyramids.) Ultimately, I have no problem with Isabella embracing Fundamentalism on T0, adopting the first religion to spread to her cities, and purging every other religion her people found. We should just make sure that every Spiritual leader doesn't behave that way.

All the leaders I tested are going Fundamentalism immediately, even those with a favourite Religious civic. Maybe some are changing later but Hatshepsut never once switched to Organized Religion (her favourite) for the entire test game (which I ended in the Renaissance). Favourite civics are just preferences in BTS, the AI will aim for them early and stay in them as long as is feasible but it won't ever override an obviously better choice.

There are other aspects of leader AI that could possibly be tweaked to help but that's a ton of work and testing. In the end the traits are meant to complement a leader's AI, not the other way around.

I'm less sure about the Financial trait: I think the problem there might be that Mercantilism, like Warrior Code, is simply the strongest civic in its column for most of the game. Of the other four choices, two were weakened recently: Redistribution, with the GPP penalty and the "camps may not be built on hills" rule; and Professionalism, with the workshop health penalty, which is offset by bonuses that don't fully arrive until Investment. The remaining two work best in the late game: Free Markets, with the corporation discount; and Environmentalism, with the health bonus to offset penalties from factories and power plants. The AI is wise to stick to Mercantilism until the Renaissance; though, once again, maybe a change in their favourite civics will help Financial leaders see differently.

Mercantilism needs to be powerful as it has a significant drawback that requires careful consideration in the Medieval era when its unlocked. In the early game that drawback is almost a non-factor. No favourite civic is going to overcome this. I don't particularly want to redesign Mercantilism as I feel it works very well in the eras it's intended for, and that's the basis that the entire Economic civic category works on. I intended it to be similar to the Labour category. In comparison, the Government and Military categories were designed to be more universally useful era-wise.

Ultimately I want Traits to be interesting but they're tricky enough to balance against each other without having them intrinsically tied to the civics as well. I'll keep Government and Military but Economic and Religious definitely have to go sorry. I'm sure we can come up with interesting mechanics to replace them.

 

[Simon_Jester]

0.9.4 is the forthcoming version, do you mean that? Fair enough though, 0.9.3 (the currently released version) has a few significant design flaws. I hope to get 0.9.4 finished as soon as possible, though the aforementioned issue with the traits will delay things a bit. Still, better that I discover and fix the problem before releasing it

Yes, I meant 0.9.4

It's mostly just a matter of personal desire to play the game at all, along with external considerations, not anything specifically connected to HR, though. Dunno; I'm funny like that.

 

[Xyth]

Okay here is second draft of the traits. Changes since the last draft are in red.

AGGRESSIVE
• +100% wealth from pillaging and capturing cities
• Commando promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder
• +1 happiness from Barracks, Stadium

CHARISMATIC
• -25% war weariness
• +1 combat experience per battle
• +2 happiness per city

CREATIVE
• Allows 1 Artist in every city
• +50% Wonder production
• +1 happiness from Theatre, Tavern

DIPLOMATIC
• +1 espionage per specialist
• +2 relations with other civilizations
• +50% commerce from trade routes

ENTERPRISING
• Allows 1 Merchant in every city
• +1 trade route in every city
• +1 movement for Naval units

EXPANSIVE
• +1 food per city
• 50% faster production of Settler
• Double production speed of Harbour, Sewer

FINANCIAL
• +1 commerce per city
• 3% interest earned on wealth reserve during Golden Ages
• Double production speed of Market, Bank

HUMANE
• 100% longer Golden Ages
• +2 health per city
• +1 happiness from Aqueduct, Bath

IMPERIALIST
• No resistance in captured cities
• -33% hurry production cost
• +100% Great General emergence

INDUSTRIOUS
• +1 production per city
• +50% faster production of Worker, Workboat
• Double production speed of Forge

JUDICIAL
• All Government civics available
• +50% defense against espionage and spies
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse

ORGANIZED
• Workers build improvements 50% faster
• -50% civic upkeep
• Double production speed of Library, Courthouse

PHILOSOPHICAL
• +1 culture per specialist
• +100% Great Person birth rate
• Double production speed of School

PROGRESSIVE
• Allows 1 Scientist in every city
• Free Great Person when advancing eras
• -50% unit upgrade cost

PROTECTIVE
• Units heal to 80% after combat victory in cultural borders
• Improvements cannot be pillaged
• +1 happiness for Walls, Castle

SPIRITUAL
• No anarchy
• Allows 1 Priest in every city
• Double production speed of Cemetery, Great Temple

TACTICAL
• All Military civics available
• Units earn wealth from combat victory in enemy territory
• Combat I promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder units

TRADITIONAL
• +5 happiness in capital
• -25% production for buildings already constructed in capital
• +1 free specialist per Wonder



Notes:

Financial: That 3% is compound interest per turn. Over the normal 8 turn Golden Age this would add a little over 1/4 of your starting amount to your treasury. So for example, someone with 1000 wealth at the start of the golden age would earn 266 wealth over the 8 turns in addition to their normal golden age boosted income. It's all compounded so the actual amount earned would be a bit higher. A player could earn even more by cranking the wealth slider up to 100% during the golden age but in doing so would not benefit from the golden-age boosted research/culture/espionage. The interest rate may need to be adjusted but I think this makes for a really interesting mechanic.

Judicial and Organized: I restored the civic upkeep bonus to Organized and got rid of the city maintenance reduction - it was able to stack with a variety of similar bonuses from buildings/civics/etc and proving a pain to balance as a result. 50% espionage and spy defense is the same as a Security Bureau and should mean that a Judicial leader is almost immune to espionage in many cases.

Progressive: Assuming I can make it work, the Great Person you get would be determined by the normal % ratios your civ is generating Great People at.

Protective: Some more experimental ideas for this trait. I don't want this trait to give offensive benefits (like March promotions) as it's not in theme and there are other traits for that. I chose these bonuses to be defensive but also to directly alleviate some of the flaws of playing defensively. Feedback needed for the right % to heal units to. Let me know what you think.

Spiritual: This trait was proving a struggle to find effective new bonuses for so I restored the "no anarchy" bonus. This also allowed me to shift the Government civics bonus to Judicial which suits it more than Progressive.

Tactical: The wealth earned from combat will be based on experience earned, i.e tougher units yield more wealth. I think this suits Tactical better than increased wealth for capturing cities. I gave that to Aggressive as it needed a boost and it fits in perfectly with the theme of that trait.


Anyway, let me know what you think, especially if any still strike you as much too strong or too weak. Some of these bonuses will take some time to code and test but hopefully it won't delay 0.9.4 too long.

 

[davidtylr]

I think with the protective trait the improvements cant be pillaged is a bit strong. I think unlocking civics with judicial is too strong too.

 

[Keinpferd]

Okay here is second draft of the traits. Changes since the last draft are in red.

The changes that I set in italics seem especially fresh and convincing to me. I like the 3%, makes perfect sense.

FINANCIAL
• +1 commerce per city
• 3% interest earned on wealth reserve during Golden Ages
• Double production speed of Market, Bank

IMPERIALIST
• No resistance in captured cities
• -33% hurry production cost
• +100% Great General emergence

JUDICIAL
• All Government civics available
• +50% defense against espionage and spies
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse

TRADITIONAL
• +5 happiness in capital
• -25% production for buildings already constructed in capital
• +1 free specialist per Wonder

I think with the protective trait the improvements cant be pillaged is a bit strong.

Right, and a freshly landed band of berserkers wouldn't turn to vegetarianism and leave the enemy's property untouched, just because their leader is Protective. Why was the simple BTS defensive promotion ruled out? Either return to that, or put the faster GG-emergance-in-own-boarders or the increased-EP-rate-in-own-boarders here and find something else for where these items are now.

 

[Xyth]

The changes that I set in italics seem especially fresh and convincing to me. I like the 3%, makes perfect sense.

It's certainly been challenging to come up with defined and interesting bonuses for 18 traits. There's been lots of good suggestions from people recently which has helped. Coding some of these is quite the mental exercise too.

Right, and a freshly landed band of berserkers wouldn't turn to vegetarianism and leave the enemy's property untouched, just because their leader is Protective.

The idea is that a protective leader makes sure that the improvements are defended and not easy pickings for pillaging. It's not perfect but I'm trying to solve the problem with this trait (see below) in a more creative fashion. I could certainly word it better.

It is strong but it is it too strong for a military trait that gives no offensive benefit and has no direct economic benefit other than 2 happiness? All it does is help you keep your economy intact if under siege, which to me suits the theme and function of Protective perfectly. A protective leader should be harder to conquer and the BTS trait really doesn't achieve that. I could possibly tone it down by making it a % chance based on the culture ratio of the tile, that way it would be less effective in your borderlands.

Any thoughts on units healing in cultural borders? This one I'm less sure of.

Why was the simple BTS defensive promotion ruled out?

Because sitting in cities while invaders tear up your farms and mines is bad gameplay and those free promotions encourage the AI to do this more than it already does. It's not smart enough to send units out to destroy the pillagers, it instead adopts a siege mentality and wonders why it's economy dies. This is why Protective is generally viewed as very weak in standard BTS.

Either return to that, or put the faster GG-emergance-in-own-boarders or the increased-EP-rate-in-own-boarders here and find something else for where these items are now.

I don't want to use faster GG as it's already used by Imperialist and Tactical (via Warrior Code). Increased experience is already used by Charismatic.

 

[Azoth]

My thoughts on the second draft:

AGGRESSIVE
• +100% wealth from pillaging and capturing cities
• Commando promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder
• +1 happiness from Barracks, Stadium

I would remove the pillage bonus entirely to reduce clutter. Pillaging plays a very small role in the game: it is always better to capture (or raze and rebuild) cities directly and keep the tile improvements. I play most of my games without pillaging a single tile, and even the AI keeps pillaging to a minimum. The city capture bonus works just as well thematically; I say it is enough. (I would even replace +100% pillage gold with +100% city capture gold on the Clan Warfare civic.)

DIPLOMATIC
• +1 espionage per specialist
• +2 relations with other civilizations
• +50% commerce from trade routes

PHILOSOPHICAL
• +1 culture per specialist
• +100% Great Person birth rate
• Double production speed of School

Looks good.

ENTERPRISING
• Allows 1 Merchant in every city
• +1 trade route in every city
• +1 movement for Naval units

I have a great idea for this trait. Instead of "+1 movement for Naval units", how about "All units can explore rival territory without Open Borders"? It's a good fit for Enterprising leaders: their ships cannot sail any faster, but their determined explorers and entrepreneurs don't let political boundaries get in the way of business. Currently, only Caravels, Great Merchants, and Spies can ignore Open Borders; but it should be possible (using a unique promotion?) to extend this ability to all units. The units would still be kicked out after a declaration of war, so there's no potential for abuse.

FINANCIAL
• +1 commerce per city
• 3% interest earned on wealth reserve during Golden Ages
• Double production speed of Market, Bank

Earning interest on gold reserves: what an interesting mechanic! Bad puns aside, I don't think you should limit the bonus to Golden Ages. What do you think of a permanent 1% interest on gold reserves? Every turn, Financial leaders would earn 1 gold for every 100 gold in the treasury. I don't think it would be too strong: spending the gold on research or unit upgrades would generally bring a higher return. But it would make trade missions that much more attractive. To balance it out, I might remove double Markets. (Banks are a strong building anyway; they should stand alone, just like Philosophical Schools and Industrious Forges.)

JUDICIAL
• All Government civics available
• +50% defense against espionage and spies
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse

ORGANIZED
• Workers build improvements 50% faster
• -50% civic upkeep
• Double production speed of Library, Courthouse

You've made Organized too strong (fast workers, reduced upkeep, and double production on two critical buildings) and left Judicial too weak (basically just an earlier-than-usual Monarchy.) Part of the problem is that I have no clue what +50% defense against espionage actually means. Does it increase the cost of spy missions? Does it reduce their chance of success? Does it increase spy interception chances? Does it only work in cities? How does it stack with Security Bureaus? (As I've said before, the BtS espionage system is not well designed.) If your intention is to make Judicial leaders "almost immune to espionage in many cases," I suggest you try coding that directly: replace +50% defense against espionage with Immune to Espionage. Then, to fix the balance issues, I would give the espionage bonus to Organized leaders and move -50% civic upkeep to Judicial.

PROGRESSIVE
• Allows 1 Scientist in every city
• Free Great Person when advancing eras
• -50% unit upgrade cost

Giving away free Great People based on existing GPP ratios is a bad idea. Civilizations that build the Pyramids and Hanging Gardens would receive extra Great Engineers and gobble up every Wonder. Those that build a handful of Cemeteries would give birth to a stream of Great Prophets and found half the world's religions. And six free Great People (across the seven eras) would overshadow the GPP bonus from Philosophical. What do you think of +50% cottage growth instead, on the theory that Progressive leaders spurred urbanization? It takes 70 turns for a Cottage to mature to a Town on Normal speed; with the proposed bonus, it would take 48 turns, as compared with 35 turns with the Codification civic.

PROTECTIVE
• Units heal to 80% after combat victory in cultural borders
• Improvements cannot be pillaged
• +1 happiness for Walls, Castle

Immunity to Pillaging is perfect. But healing after combat is awkward. If you thought free March promotions were too strong, why not return to free Medic I promotions for Melee, Siege, and Gunpowder units? It's easy to code and easy to understand. And unless you insist I stop, I will continue to make the case for double Granaries: useful, thematic, strong but not too strong.

TACTICAL
• All Military civics available
• Units earn wealth from combat victory in enemy territory
• Combat I promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder units

Let's keep it simple: how about +3 gold/battle?

TRADITIONAL
• +5 happiness in capital
• -25% production for buildings already constructed in capital
• +1 free specialist per Wonder

Quick question: will National Wonders get a free specialist?

 

[Xyth]

I would remove the pillage bonus entirely to reduce clutter. Pillaging plays a very small role in the game: it is always better to capture (or raze and rebuild) cities directly and keep the tile improvements. I play most of my games without pillaging a single tile, and even the AI keeps pillaging to a minimum. The city capture bonus works just as well thematically; I say it is enough. (I would even replace +100% pillage gold with +100% city capture gold on the Clan Warfare civic.)

I want to keep the pillage bonus, it's very simple to implement and works so well thematically. Coding the bonus for capturing cities on the other hand is proving far more challenging than I expected, I think I can still do it but it might need to be granted as a separate sum of gold using the same calculation rather than just doubling the capture amount. I can add it to Clan Warfare too.

I have a great idea for this trait. Instead of "+1 movement for Naval units", how about "All units can explore rival territory without Open Borders"? It's a good fit for Enterprising leaders: their ships cannot sail any faster, but their determined explorers and entrepreneurs don't let political boundaries get in the way of business. Currently, only Caravels, Great Merchants, and Spies can ignore Open Borders; but it should be possible (using a unique promotion?) to extend this ability to all units. The units would still be kicked out after a declaration of war, so there's no potential for abuse.

That is a good idea but unfortunately I can't use it. It's possible but it involves placing code in the routine that tests where a unit can and cannot move. As you can imagine, this is called a LOT (multiple times by every unit belonging to every civ every turn) and it would significantly slow down turn times. It can't be done via a promotion either sadly. It's one of the standard unit xml options but we can't use this without replacing all ships for Enterprising leaders with alternate versions. This gets too messy when handling UUs, promotions, upgrades and such.

Earning interest on gold reserves: what an interesting mechanic! Bad puns aside, I don't think you should limit the bonus to Golden Ages. What do you think of a permanent 1% interest on gold reserves? Every turn, Financial leaders would earn 1 gold for every 100 gold in the treasury. I don't think it would be too strong: spending the gold on research or unit upgrades would generally bring a higher return. But it would make trade missions that much more attractive. To balance it out, I might remove double Markets. (Banks are a strong building anyway; they should stand alone, just like Philosophical Schools and Industrious Forges.)

I considered a permanent 1% interest rate but I decided it would be too hard to balance across different game speeds. It would have to be every 2nd or 4th turn on the slower speeds but given yield is still on a turn by turn basis it's suddenly takes a lot of math to work out the possible implications. It's a bonus that gets effectively gets stronger as a game progresses so I want to be careful. Golden Ages provided a natural pacing mechanic so I decided to attach it to that instead. I'll see how it goes and we can revisit it later maybe.

You've made Organized too strong (fast workers, reduced upkeep, and double production on two critical buildings) and left Judicial too weak (basically just an earlier-than-usual Monarchy.)

I'm not particularly happy with the fast worker bonus, especially with it being granted by the Pyramids as well. I think I'll replace it with something else that's a bit weaker.

Part of the problem is that I have no clue what +50% defense against espionage actually means. Does it increase the cost of spy missions? Does it reduce their chance of success? Does it increase spy interception chances? Does it only work in cities? How does it stack with Security Bureaus? (As I've said before, the BtS espionage system is not well designed.) If your intention is to make Judicial leaders "almost immune to espionage in many cases," I suggest you try coding that directly: replace +50% defense against espionage with Immune to Espionage.

I'm still working out and testing the exact mechanics myself. I'm don't think it's possible to code complete immunity to espionage (active maybe, passive no). I agree that in order to be powerful enough that this bonus needs to be as close to immunity as possible though. I'll keep you posted on this one.

Then, to fix the balance issues, I would give the espionage bonus to Organized leaders and move -50% civic upkeep to Judicial.

I thought of that but I don't think it feels right thematically. I'll consider it though if I can't find a good replacement for Organized's fast workers.

Giving away free Great People based on existing GPP ratios is a bad idea. Civilizations that build the Pyramids and Hanging Gardens would receive extra Great Engineers and gobble up every Wonder. Those that build a handful of Cemeteries would give birth to a stream of Great Prophets and found half the world's religions. And six free Great People (across the seven eras) would overshadow the GPP bonus from Philosophical.

No worries, turns out I can't make this mechanic work anyway.

What do you think of +50% cottage growth instead, on the theory that Progressive leaders spurred urbanization? It takes 70 turns for a Cottage to mature to a Town on Normal speed; with the proposed bonus, it would take 48 turns, as compared with 35 turns with the Codification civic.

I'd like to use this mechanic but I can't see any easy method of coding it outside of civics.

Immunity to Pillaging is perfect. But healing after combat is awkward. If you thought free March promotions were too strong, why not return to free Medic I promotions for Melee, Siege, and Gunpowder units? It's easy to code and easy to understand.

March is a powerful promotion but my main concern is that it's very offensive in nature and doesn't suit the theme well enough. The heal after combat was an idea I threw out there to see if anyone could see any merit in it, I think I will indeed replace it with free Medic I.

And unless you insist I stop, I will continue to make the case for double Granaries: useful, thematic, strong but not too strong.

It's a good idea but I'm averse to having too many building related bonuses, especially both +happiness and double speed buildings. In this case I think the happiness for Walls and Castle is stronger and more important to keep.

Let's keep it simple: how about +3 gold/battle?

Could do but I don't think a bit of variation hurts. It's not hard to code (e.g goldbonus = xpvalue + X).

Quick question: will National Wonders get a free specialist?

No but it's not hard to change that if need be. I think that would be too strong though.

 

[Azoth]

I considered a permanent 1% interest rate but I decided it would be too hard to balance across different game speeds. It would have to be every 2nd or 4th turn on the slower speeds but given yield is still on a turn by turn basis it's suddenly takes a lot of math to work out the possible implications. It's a bonus that gets effectively gets stronger as a game progresses so I want to be careful. Golden Ages provided a natural pacing mechanic so I decided to attach it to that instead. I'll see how it goes and we can revisit it later maybe.

I don't understand why the interest rate needs to be balanced against different game speeds. On the slower speeds, cities still collect commerce and pay expenses every turn; and the per city trait bonuses (+1 hammer/city, +1 trade route/city, +50% trade route yield, etc.) are also applied every turn. Why shouldn't Financial leaders earn interest every turn? To prevent the bonus from becoming too strong in the late game, I would suggest a hard cap of, say, 50 gold/turn. Assuming a permanent 1% interest rate, it would take 5000 gold in the treasury to earn maximum interest. I suspect most Financial leaders won't accumulate that much gold until the Renaissance, at which point civic upkeep might already cost more than 50 gold/turn.

An alternative to interest on gold reserves is reduced inflation. As I understand it, inflation is set to 0 for the first 100 turns (on Normal speed), then rises slowly each turn until it hits 100% on the final turn of the game. Halved inflation values would make for a nice trait bonus. I think I prefer a (permanent) interest rate for Financial, so maybe you could move reduced inflation to another trait?

I'd like to use this mechanic but I can't see any easy method of coding it outside of civics.

I can think of a number of indirect ways:
1. Allow Progressive leaders to build Hamlets directly. This would actually be weaker than +50% cottage growth, as it would only save 10 turns of Cottage to Hamlet growth, reducing the total time to Towns from 70 turns to 60.
2. If you want to expand on this mechanic, you could allow Progressive leaders to build Cottages, Hamlets, Villages, and Towns directly, but tie each successive improvement to a later technology. This would mainly allow new cities to catch up to older cities, making for a nice contrast with the Traditional trait, which focuses on the capital.
3. Alternatively, you could give +1 commerce to Villages. Villages would be just as strong as Towns (only without the railroad bonus), thus mimicking the effects of faster cottage growth.
4. On the other hand, you could give +1 commerce to Cottages and Hamlets, making these improvements more competitive with farms and mines in the early game, and thus more tempting for Progressive leaders.

You could also make a case for moving either +50% worker speed or halved inflation to Progressive. +50% worker speed, in particular, is a solid trait bonus that should probably be used somewhere.

Could do but I don't think a bit of variation hurts. It's not hard to code (e.g goldbonus = xpvalue + X).

It may not be hard to code but it might be hard to balance. If X refers to the base strength of the attacker, then I worry the gold bonus would grow too large as the game progresses. In the Renaissance, a mere 6 Riflemen could earn roughly 100 gold/turn, thus recouping not only their own unit and supply costs, but also the entire turn by turn expenses of their civilization. (We don't want to encourage players to farm the AI armies for gold, either.)

However, I do like the idea of linking the gold bonus to XP gain. What do you think of goldbonus = 2*xpvalue?

No but it's not hard to change that if need be. I think that would be too strong though.

No, I agree with you; including National Wonders would be too strong. I would simply relabel the bonus as "+1 free specialist per World Wonder" for clarity, since I assume the Creative +50% Wonder production bonus does apply to National Wonders.

 

[civ_king]

Is there a way you could set maximums per turn by era?

 

[Simon_Jester]

Good trait choices, Xyth.

Because sitting in cities while invaders tear up your farms and mines is bad gameplay and those free promotions encourage the AI to do this more than it already does. It's not smart enough to send units out to destroy the pillagers, it instead adopts a siege mentality and wonders why it's economy dies. This is why Protective is generally viewed as very weak in standard BTS.

Hmmmm. What about- this is questionable, but what about giving out free Drill promotions to certain units? Roughly balanced with the Tactical choice's Combat promotions, makes the troops significantly tougher. As I recall, baseline BTS already does that- perhaps you could have the promotion give Drill I and Drill II or something. It'd toughen the units up considerably, making the AI more confident in sallying from its cities to take on pillaging units.

The disadvantage, of course, is that this bonus would apply to troops attacking your empire as well. Don't know what to say about that.

And honestly, the appeal of the whole idea to me may just be from me imagining a thin* defensive line of musketeers athwart the line of advance of said pillaging horde of berserkers- "Ready... Fire!"

*Color of your choice...

 

[Howard Mahler]

Here is a proposed revision to the early tech tree, and some additional changes.
(See attached pdf file.)

I have added 14 new techs, so that 5 columns become 7.
This spreads the benefits out and also adds some room for new buildings and wonders. I have suggested some.

In order to not slow down tech progress, one would also need to cut the cost of techs in the first column significantly. For example, if one multiplied the column one costs by 25%, then the costs for a tech in the new 7th column such as Currency would be the same as currently (where it is in the 5th column.)

One could consider giving each civ 3 rather than 2 starting techs.

Please note that I have maintained the basic geometry of the current tree, columns of 7 techs each.
There are plenty of cross connections.
As with the current tree, not all of the prerequisites are logical necessities.

You can consider this for a future version of HR.
Even if the whole thing does not pass muster, some of the ideas may be useful.

 

[Simon_Jester]

What I don't like, at first glance, is that the logical flow of one tech to the next is disrupted. It makes sense that you have a progression like

Mining -> Copper Working -> Masonry -> Bronze Working...

Since that fits a unified 'theme.' But to then have "Military Strategy" thrown in? Well, I suppose it works given that you don't make Iron Working dependent on it- but in that case, I really think we should have a few techs lying "in between" the main lines on the tree. Ones that don't fit thematically into the main lines, but instead 'stand apart' in some sense.

Though that's an aesthetic thing, you'd have

[TECH1]-->[TECH2]
|---------->[TECH3]

or something of that nature.

 

[Xyth]

I don't understand why the interest rate needs to be balanced against different game speeds. On the slower speeds, cities still collect commerce and pay expenses every turn; and the per city trait bonuses (+1 hammer/city, +1 trade route/city, +50% trade route yield, etc.) are also applied every turn. Why shouldn't Financial leaders earn interest every turn? To prevent the bonus from becoming too strong in the late game, I would suggest a hard cap of, say, 50 gold/turn. Assuming a permanent 1% interest rate, it would take 5000 gold in the treasury to earn maximum interest. I suspect most Financial leaders won't accumulate that much gold until the Renaissance, at which point civic upkeep might already cost more than 50 gold/turn.

Is there a way you could set maximums per turn by era?

1% permanent interest would probably be alright with a cap but much too risky without. It's not hard to code a cap that changes by era either, the real challenge is choosing effective caps. Not to mention trying to explain all this in a single tooltip line.

I haven't started coding this yet so I'll see how it goes and see if the technical aspects steer me in any particular direction. I was thinking I probably need to alter the financial advisor screen to include this interest. I'm not sure how hard that will be, I've not touched that screen before.

An alternative to interest on gold reserves is reduced inflation. As I understand it, inflation is set to 0 for the first 100 turns (on Normal speed), then rises slowly each turn until it hits 100% on the final turn of the game. Halved inflation values would make for a nice trait bonus. I think I prefer a (permanent) interest rate for Financial, so maybe you could move reduced inflation to another trait?

I looked briefly into altering inflation but it's quite a complex mechanic and difficult to change. I don't really understand it very well so I decided to leave it alone lest I break something.

1. Allow Progressive leaders to build Hamlets directly. This would actually be weaker than +50% cottage growth, as it would only save 10 turns of Cottage to Hamlet growth, reducing the total time to Towns from 70 turns to 60.
2. If you want to expand on this mechanic, you could allow Progressive leaders to build Cottages, Hamlets, Villages, and Towns directly, but tie each successive improvement to a later technology. This would mainly allow new cities to catch up to older cities, making for a nice contrast with the Traditional trait, which focuses on the capital.

This is an intriguing idea. It should be possible to code though I'm not sure I'll be able to make the worker action button change.

3. Alternatively, you could give +1 commerce to Villages. Villages would be just as strong as Towns (only without the railroad bonus), thus mimicking the effects of faster cottage growth.
4. On the other hand, you could give +1 commerce to Cottages and Hamlets, making these improvements more competitive with farms and mines in the early game, and thus more tempting for Progressive leaders.

I'm not keen to add yield bonuses to improvements via traits. It creates all sorts of scaling issues. Option 1 or 2 is a more interesting and balanced solution I think.

You could also make a case for moving either +50% worker speed or halved inflation to Progressive. +50% worker speed, in particular, is a solid trait bonus that should probably be used somewhere.

It's a good bonus, it's just that I changed the Pyramids to also give it. These bonuses stack, I'm not sure how problematic this is.

It may not be hard to code but it might be hard to balance. If X refers to the base strength of the attacker, then I worry the gold bonus would grow too large as the game progresses.

No, X refers to a constant, e.g xpvalue + 2. Basically a minimum amount you get regardless of how much xp you get.

However, I do like the idea of linking the gold bonus to XP gain. What do you think of goldbonus = 2*xpvalue?

Multiplying could work too. How high do xp awards from combat get?

No, I agree with you; including National Wonders would be too strong. I would simply relabel the bonus as "+1 free specialist per World Wonder" for clarity, since I assume the Creative +50% Wonder production bonus does apply to National Wonders.

I added that to the in-game description but forgot to add it to the list I posted.

What about- this is questionable, but what about giving out free Drill promotions to certain units? Roughly balanced with the Tactical choice's Combat promotions, makes the troops significantly tougher. As I recall, baseline BTS already does that- perhaps you could have the promotion give Drill I and Drill II or something. It'd toughen the units up considerably, making the AI more confident in sallying from its cities to take on pillaging units.

I'd kinda forgotten about the Drill promotion. Would Drill + Medic be too strong alongside the other bonuses?

Here is a proposed revision to the early tech tree, and some additional changes.
(See attached pdf file.)

I have added 14 new techs, so that 5 columns become 7.
This spreads the benefits out and also adds some room for new buildings and wonders. I have suggested some.

A lot of good ideas in there, you've put a lot of thought into it. I do feel that the ancient/classical era could benefit from at least 1 more tech column, not sure about 2 though. I'll go through it all thoroughly once 0.9.4 is done. Thanks!!