History Rewritten (Original Thread)

[Lirvan]

Quote:
"Can we make Baths require Aqueducts or Wells?"

"Annoyingly no."

Would it be possible to make baths take a fresh water source? If you could do this, you may be able to get it to work partially by having aqueduct also provide fresh water.

Also, just a thought: is it possible to have workers build a remote harbor for a city, and give the city water trade access? Kind of like how harbors worked in Rome: total war, if you played that.

 

[Simon_Jester]

Quote:
"Can we make Baths require Aqueducts or Wells?"

"Annoyingly no."

Would it be possible to make baths take a fresh water source? If you could do this, you may be able to get it to work partially by having aqueduct also provide fresh water.

That would create the same problem that the Well already created- making free fresh water sources available early in the game, from any city that can put in the shields to build one, is overpowered.

Also, just a thought: is it possible to have workers build a remote harbor for a city, and give the city water trade access? Kind of like how harbors worked in Rome: total war, if you played that.

It's perfectly possible- just build a port city and integrate it into your road network.

As to doing it by tile improvement or something, any place that would represent a logistically significant port should probably be modeled as a city, and the distances are a little long: a city one tile inland is, IRL, 100 km or more from the coast. Certainly in premodern times, that's a gap that's going to be difficult to bridge with a road to a port.

Cities like Rome and Athens were much closer to the sea, enough so that their ports at Ostia and the Piraeus really were "part of the city" for a modern-sized definition of "city:" only a few hours' walk from the city center, at most.

So I wouldn't recommend this change.

 

[Howard Mahler]

So eventually workshop would have 1 unhealthiness and +3 production,
with a potentially an additional +1 production and/or commerce based on civics.

This compares to currently -1 food and +3 production, with potentially an additional +1 food and +1 commerce based on civics. So the revision is slightly stronger on balance.

This also compares to current Mines, which are eventually +3 production, with potentially +1 commerce more based on civics. I believes mines will also be getting +1 unhealthiness in the next version. Of course, mines also improve some special resources, where the bonus are larger than for just ordinary tiles, and they should be.

"Workshop
Requires Artisanry
• +1 production
• +1 unhealthiness
• +1 production with Investment
• +1 production with Chemistry
• +1 production with Caste System
• +1 commerce with Professionalism

I'm a little tempted to drop the Chemistry bonus and bake it in elsewhere: +2 with Investment (that tech does little atm), add it one of the civic bonuses, or just make it baseline. Any further suggestions for improvement of Workshops? How about for Professionalism?:

Professionalism
Requires Artisanry
• Unlimited Merchants
• +1 commerce from Workshops
• +2 happiness from Market"

 

[Simon_Jester]

Why do you want to drop the Chemistry bonus for workshops again, Howard?

 

[Howard Mahler]

I was quoting Xyth.
I expressed no desire.

Why do you want to drop the Chemistry bonus for workshops again, Howard?

 

[Xyth]

I'm wanting workshops to ramp up in strength a bit faster than they do currently, thus the shift from Chemistry to Guilds.

Howard it would help if you consistently use quote tags [ QUOTE ] and [/ QUOTE ] (without the spaces) rather than " " around stuff you're quoting. It can be tricky to tell at a glance which text is quote and which is new.

 

[Azoth]

So, Xyth, what do you think of 0.9.4 so far? Are there any outstanding issues you want addressed or discussed further? (How are the leader traits coming, by the way?) At some point, I suppose you'll want to wrap up this version and begin planning 0.9.5. (Are we there yet?) In the meantime, here are some more incremental changes to consider:

Ritual: Ritual was much more interesting as a minor stop on the religious branch of the tech tree than as one of the prerequisites to Property. Players had to make a decision in the early game. They could either (a) move quickly through the middle "economy" branch, picking up Monarchy, Agrarianism, Tradition, and Redistribution in quick succession; (b) focus on the upper "military" branch, zeroing in on Copper, Iron, and Horses; or (c) take a one- or two- tech detour to the lower "culture" branch, for Cemeteries and Monuments. The point being that by chasing early religions and culture, players would be sacrificing city growth and research efficiency. (BtS worked the same way. In the early game, you could focus on worker techs or pick up one of Buddhism, Hinduism, or Judaism. You couldn't manage both.) Currently, Cemeteries and Monuments are available almost immediately, no hard decisions required. But since you're planning to move Weavers to a later era anyway, I suggest you remove the Textiles tech, and revert to the better 0.9.2 tech tree.

Fewer Religions: I didn't get around to saying so earlier, but I thought the ratios you picked for the 'Fewer Religions' option were just right. You should probably add an entry under the Concepts section of the Civilopedia stating exactly how many religions are available on each map size when that option is selected, so players can plan accordingly.

GP Tech Preferences: Speaking of which, it would be extremely useful to have a list of Great People tech preferences in the Concepts section. The in-game tooltip is very limited: oftentimes, Great People cannot research any of the currently available techs; and it is hard to know how long it will be before they reach something useful. Ideally, we would modify their tech preferences such that every Great Person could research something relevant to their field at nearly every point in the game; once I take a look a the current list, I can see whether that is feasible. I also think Great Generals and Great Spies should be able to research technologies. (At the moment, I don't think they can.) But that's a matter for 0.9.5. For now, I just want the list of tech preferences.

 

[Howard Mahler]

When you get a chance, some more work on the early part of the Tech tree would not hurt. However, it is not a pressing issue. I would leave it alone for now.

So, Xyth, what do you think of 0.9.4 so far? Are there any outstanding issues you want addressed or discussed further? (How are the leader traits coming, by the way?) At some point, I suppose you'll want to wrap up this version and begin planning 0.9.5. (Are we there yet?) In the meantime, here are some more incremental changes to consider:

Ritual: Ritual was much more interesting as a minor stop on the religious branch of the tech tree than as one of the prerequisites to Property. Players had to make a decision in the early game. They could either (a) move quickly through the middle "economy" branch, picking up Monarchy, Agrarianism, Tradition, and Redistribution in quick succession; (b) focus on the upper "military" branch, zeroing in on Copper, Iron, and Horses; or (c) take a one- or two- tech detour to the lower "culture" branch, for Cemeteries and Monuments. The point being that by chasing early religions and culture, players would be sacrificing city growth and research efficiency. (BtS worked the same way. In the early game, you could focus on worker techs or pick up one of Buddhism, Hinduism, or Judaism. You couldn't manage both.) Currently, Cemeteries and Monuments are available almost immediately, no hard decisions required. But since you're planning to move Weavers to a later era anyway, I suggest you remove the Textiles tech, and revert to the better 0.9.2 tech tree.

Fewer Religions: I didn't get around to saying so earlier, but I thought the ratios you picked for the 'Fewer Religions' option were just right. You should probably add an entry under the Concepts section of the Civilopedia stating exactly how many religions are available on each map size when that option is selected, so players can plan accordingly.

GP Tech Preferences: Speaking of which, it would be extremely useful to have a list of Great People tech preferences in the Concepts section. The in-game tooltip is very limited: oftentimes, Great People cannot research any of the currently available techs; and it is hard to know how long it will be before they reach something useful. Ideally, we would modify their tech preferences such that every Great Person could research something relevant to their field at nearly every point in the game; once I take a look a the current list, I can see whether that is feasible. I also think Great Generals and Great Spies should be able to research technologies. (At the moment, I don't think they can.) But that's a matter for 0.9.5. For now, I just want the list of tech preferences.

 

[Simon_Jester]

Howard, on forums I'm familiar with, the convention is to quote someone's statements on top, then write your response afterwards. I read a page from top to bottom; as a rule, I'm expecting to see the quotations that explain why you say something before I see you say it.

 

[Xyth]

So, Xyth, what do you think of 0.9.4 so far? Are there any outstanding issues you want addressed or discussed further? (How are the leader traits coming, by the way?)

0.9.4 is progressing slowly but steadily. The todo list is much shorter now but there's still a few things on there there that could potentially be very time-consuming (fixing the broken mapscripts being the big unknown factor). Some things will inevitably get bumped to 0.9.5 too - I'd like to have 0.9.4 finished sooner rather than later. I'm estimating early next month for release.

Traits are the biggest task still not done and I'm working on them at the moment. I hope to post a draft list very soon. They haven't changed too drastically from previous discussion, there's just a couple I'm not happy with and a few more mechanics to test.

Fewer Religions: I didn't get around to saying so earlier, but I thought the ratios you picked for the 'Fewer Religions' option were just right. You should probably add an entry under the Concepts section of the Civilopedia stating exactly how many religions are available on each map size when that option is selected, so players can plan accordingly.

That's a good idea and easy to do.

Ritual: Ritual was much more interesting as a minor stop on the religious branch of the tech tree than as one of the prerequisites to Property.

When you get a chance, some more work on the early part of the Tech tree would not hurt. However, it is not a pressing issue. I would leave it alone for now.

I don't want to make any tech tree changes to 0.9.4 as they're pretty time consuming. They'll have to wait til 0.9.5 (along with changes to the Labour Unions section).

GP Tech Preferences: Speaking of which, it would be extremely useful to have a list of Great People tech preferences in the Concepts section.

This is actually one of the reasons why altering the tech tree is so time consuming, assigning 'flavours' to techs is a real pain. Such a list would be a good tool for me as well as players but this will also need to wait til 0.9.5 sorry.

 

[Keinpferd]

Howard, on forums I'm familiar with, the convention is to quote someone's statements on top, then write your response afterwards. I read a page from top to bottom; as a rule, I'm expecting to see the quotations that explain why you say something before I see you say it.

It's funny, how an individual can't get away with his mannerisms, if that individual appears otherwise as so sober and no-nonsense completely unmannered type of guy. I personally think, it's also possible to state something and then let follow why it's good and sound, what was just stated. Maybe the convention is the mannerism, sometimes.

Okay, what about History Rewritten. I haven't played much yet, becaused I spiced up the rennaissance to enlightenment era with unit art from Realism Invictus, because I wanted a fully eurocentric epic temped game on the 90 by 90 Europe map with extended wars with loads of Thirty-years-war style units. Mod size closing to 1 GB eventually…

One thing, I'd like to get rid of: Stack sizes – due to unit costs and maintenance – are too big to my taste. It's a pure battle of material that subtracts from your limited gaming time. A thirdgrader could see, that these are numbers that could be reduced arithmetically.

Regarding the 90 by 90 map, the rivers on that map are a mess and the creator of that map needs to study a river tutorial and redo it from scratch. Otherwise, this map, although good, with that, doesn't deserve to be included in HR, in my opinion.

 

[Xyth]

Okay, what about History Rewritten. I haven't played much yet, becaused I spiced up the rennaissance to enlightenment era with unit art from Realism Invictus, because I wanted a fully eurocentric epic temped game on the 90 by 90 Europe map with extended wars with loads of Thirty-years-war style units. Mod size closing to 1 GB eventually…

There's a lot of good new art in Realism Invictus. I intend to go through it and borrow some eventually.

One thing, I'd like to get rid of: Stack sizes – due to unit costs and maintenance – are too big to my taste. It's a pure battle of material that subtracts from your limited gaming time. A thirdgrader could see, that these are numbers that could be reduced arithmetically.

Reducing stack sizes is unfortunately not a trivial exercise, at least without the SDK. There have been a few attempts made so far but, as far as I can tell, the AI has struggled to cope even with modest changes. I'll look into it at some point but my first impressions tell me it would be a massive amount of work to do well.

Regarding the 90 by 90 map, the rivers on that map are a mess and the creator of that map needs to study a river tutorial and redo it from scratch. Otherwise, this map, although good, with that, doesn't deserve to be included in HR, in my opinion.

Is there a good alternative you would recommend?

 

[Xyth]

Okay, here is the first draft of the traits. They still need some balancing but rather than bias your opinions with my mine I won't comment on which. Note that there were some interesting ideas that I had to leave out due to technical difficulty (e.g: culture flip immunity, free unit upkeep, bonuses to specific specialist types).

AGGRESSIVE
• +100% wealth from pillaging
• 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 specialist per city
• +50% Wonder production
• +1 happiness from Theatre

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

ENTERPRISING
• +1 trade route in every city
• Allows 1 Merchant specialist per city
• Free promotion (Navigation I) for Naval Units

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

FINANCIAL
• Enables all Economic civics
• +1 commerce per city
• Double production speed of Market, Bank

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

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

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

JUDICIAL
• -50% civic upkeep
• No anarchy
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse

ORGANIZED
• -25% city maintenance
• Workers build improvements 50% faster
• Double production speed of Library, Courthouse

PHILOSOPHICAL
• +100% Great Person birth rate
• Double production speed of School

PROGRESSIVE
• All Government civics available
• -50% unit upgrade cost
• Allows 1 Scientist specialist per city

PROTECTIVE
• +25% defense in all cities
• Free promotions (March, Sentry) for Melee, Archery, Gunpowder units
• +1 happiness for Walls, Castle

SPIRITUAL
• All Religious civics available
• Allows 1 Priest specialist per city
• Double production speed of Cemetery, Great Temple

TACTICAL
• All Military civics available
• Combat I promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder units
• Double production speed of Barracks, Castle

TRADITIONAL
• No unhappiness in capital
• +1 free specialist per Wonder
• +2 culture per specialist

 

[Howard Mahler]

Putting the draft proposed 18 traits into five categories from weakest to strongest, in my opinion:

1. Charismatic, Protective, Traditional.

2. Diplomatic, Humane, Imperialistic, Organized.

3. Aggressive, Creative, Expansive, Industrious.

4. Enterprising, Judicial, Philosophical, Tactical.

5. Financial, Progressive, Spiritual.

Category one are those I think are weakest, while category 5 are those I think are strongest.
I think there is a very significant difference between categories 1 and 5.

Okay, here is the first draft of the traits. They still need some balancing but rather than bias your opinions with my mine I won't comment on which. Note that there were some interesting ideas that I had to leave out due to technical difficulty (e.g: culture flip immunity, free unit upkeep, bonuses to specific specialist types).

AGGRESSIVE
• +100% wealth from pillaging
• 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 specialist per city
• +50% Wonder production
• +1 happiness from Theatre

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

ENTERPRISING
• +1 trade route in every city
• Allows 1 Merchant specialist per city
• Free promotion (Navigation I) for Naval Units

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

FINANCIAL
• Enables all Economic civics
• +1 commerce per city
• Double production speed of Market, Bank

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

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

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

JUDICIAL
• -50% civic upkeep
• No anarchy
• +1 happiness from Jail, Courthouse

ORGANIZED
• -25% city maintenance
• Workers build improvements 50% faster
• Double production speed of Library, Courthouse

PHILOSOPHICAL
• +100% Great Person birth rate
• Double production speed of School

PROGRESSIVE
• All Government civics available
• -50% unit upgrade cost
• Allows 1 Scientist specialist per city

PROTECTIVE
• +25% defense in all cities
• Free promotions (March, Sentry) for Melee, Archery, Gunpowder units
• +1 happiness for Walls, Castle

SPIRITUAL
• All Religious civics available
• Allows 1 Priest specialist per city
• Double production speed of Cemetery, Great Temple

TACTICAL
• All Military civics available
• Combat I promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder units
• Double production speed of Barracks, Castle

TRADITIONAL
• No unhappiness in capital
• +1 free specialist per Wonder
• +2 culture per specialist

 

[Azoth]

Your proposed leader traits look really good: fun, interesting, and full of flavour. I've suggested a few balance changes below; but, honestly, I would be quite satisfied keeping your first draft as is. (Don't get me wrong: the traits aren't balanced in the sense that they are all equally powerful. That would be impossible. They are, however, balanced to the extent that they are all genuinely attractive options.) In fact, I have nothing further to say about the Aggressive, Charismatic, Diplomatic, Financial, Imperialist, Industrious, Judicial, Progressive, and Spiritual traits; that's half of them right there! As for the rest:

Suggested
CREATIVE
• Allows 1 Artist specialist per city
• +50% Wonder production
• +1 happiness from Theatre,Tavern

ENTERPRISING
No suggested trait changes.
Trading Post gives a free Navigation II promotion.

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

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

ORGANIZED
No suggested trait changes.
No Assyrian, German, or Zulu leaders. Ashurbanipal and Frederick are reassigned leader traits.

PHILOSOPHICAL
• +100% Great Person birth rate
• Double production speed of School
• +1 happiness from Monastery

PROTECTIVE
• Double production speed of Granary
• March promotion for Melee, Archery, Gunpowder units
• +1 happiness for Walls, Castle
Also, Walls and Castles do not go obsolete (for anyone.)

TACTICAL
• All Military civics available
• Combat I promotion for Melee, Mounted, Gunpowder units
• +100% gold upon city capture

TRADITIONAL
• +5 happiness for Palace
• +1 free specialist per Wonder
• +2 culture per specialist

Notes
CREATIVE: +2 happy/city is a good trait effect. Charismatic leaders begin with it and many others can reach it with the right buildings. Creative, a weak trait to begin with, had only +1 happy. Adding the Tavern improves balance.

ENTERPRISING: Both Viking leaders are Enterprising. The Trading Post UB currently gives Navigation I for free. Can you say 'redundant'?

EXPANSIVE: Did you overlook this suggestion?

HUMANE: See Creative. +3 happy/city on an already strong trait is too much. Removing the Hospital improves balance.

ORGANIZED: The Karum, Rathaus, and Ikhanda already reduce city maintenance costs. They would be too powerful in combination with Organized.

PHILOSOPHICAL: Philosophical can't compete with all the new and improved leader traits. The bonus GPP only matters in the few cities that regularly produce Great People; and the building discount doesn't come into play until the Renaissance! +1 happy/Monastery helps round out the trait: it fits well thematically, encourages players to acquire multiple religions for multiple monasteries, but can't be abused because monasteries eventually become obsolete.

PROTECTIVE: I am least satisfied with the Protective trait. Giving units both the March and Sentry promotions makes little sense: are they mobile, lightly armed reconnaissance divisions or massive, heavily armed regiments prepared for long foreign campaigns? Since neither Melee, Archery, nor Gunpowder units can normally take the Sentry promotion, I suggest you cut it. (I would still like to see free Sentry promotions in the game and I have some idea where. Stay tuned.) Meanwhile, +25% defence makes little difference to mature cities with Walls and a Castle. It doesn't make much difference for newer cities, either, since it can be so easily reduced to zero. Once again, I suggest double speed Granaries for Protective leaders. It gives them some economic power and does make a difference during city sieges. (If enemy units have camped on your food sources, you can survive on the +25% food saved for a few turns while you clear them out.) Frankly, I would prefer something even stronger: maybe a free Granary in every city. Finally, Protective leaders should not lose their +2 happy/city. (None of the other leaders do.) Since Gunpowder units ignore Walls and Castles anyway, I suggest that these buildings never go obsolete (for anyone.)

TACTICAL: Thinking about it, double speed Barracks and Castles aren't terribly useful. Barracks are only needed in military training centres; Castles, in border cities vulnerable to attack. +100% city capture gold is much more interesting. It contrasts nicely with +100% pillage gold: Aggressive leaders are raiders while Tactical leaders are conquerors.

TRADITIONAL: No unhappiness in the capital is problematic for a number of reasons. It can easily lead to very unrealistic size 20 capitals in 1000 BC. These monster capitals would generate far too much commerce and production via the Monarchy civic. Furthermore, players would be discouraged from developing their infrastructure: there's little point in building Stadiums, Theatres, and Temples if you don't need the happiness. +5 happy/Palace keeps the bonus at a more manageable level. (As a side note, I worry that +1 specialist/Wonder and +2 culture/specialist will make Cultural Victories too easy. Put another way, it may not be possible to conquer a Traditional leader on another continent before (s)he wins by Culture. What do you think?)



Edit: My mistake, I did want to mention one more trait.

SPIRITUAL
No suggested trait changes.
Shwedagon Paya gives +1 food/state religion building.

I've said it before:

With the changes to the Spiritual trait, this religious wonder becomes pointless for the very leaders who should be eager to build it. I suggest changing it to +1 food/state religion building, filling a natural gap left by the Apostolic Palace, Spiral Minaret, Sistine Chapel, and University of Sankore.

 

[Xyth]

Category one are those I think are weakest, while category 5 are those I think are strongest.
I think there is a very significant difference between categories 1 and 5.

Please let me know which particular aspects of the category 1, 2 and 5s you deem too strong/weak. I'm assuming for the 5s its that they unlock civics. I don't think these will be as overpowered as you are worried; they're bonuses that effectively become obsolete once other civs reach the appropriate techs and a lot of the unlocked options are only useful once you've reached that level of the tech tree anyway. I'd like to try them out and review them later, it's the only way to know for sure.

Your proposed leader traits look really good: fun, interesting, and full of flavour. I've suggested a few balance changes below; but, honestly, I would be quite satisfied keeping your first draft as is. (Don't get me wrong: the traits aren't balanced in the sense that they are all equally powerful. That would be impossible. They are, however, balanced to the extent that they are all genuinely attractive options.)

Equally balanced traits would be impossible and dull. Still, I want to ensure that there are no major outliers in either direction.

CREATIVE: +2 happy/city is a good trait effect. Charismatic leaders begin with it and many others can reach it with the right buildings. Creative, a weak trait to begin with, had only +1 happy. Adding the Tavern improves balance.

Tavern fits well, I'll add it.

ENTERPRISING: Both Viking leaders are Enterprising. The Trading Post UB currently gives Navigation I for free. Can you say 'redundant'?

Since I've decided to reduce this bonus to just +1 movement, perhaps I should return to a passive "+1 Movement for Naval Units" rather than the promotion? I forget now why I decided to change it.

EXPANSIVE: Did you overlook this suggestion?

Hmm, seems I put it in game but neglected to record it in the list.

HUMANE: See Creative. +3 happy/city on an already strong trait is too much. Removing the Hospital improves balance.

I was planning on removing one of the three, I just kept changing my mind which. Hospital probably makes the most sense being later than the other two.

ORGANIZED: The Karum, Rathaus, and Ikhanda already reduce city maintenance costs. They would be too powerful in combination with Organized.

Yep, on my todo list.

PHILOSOPHICAL: Philosophical can't compete with all the new and improved leader traits. The bonus GPP only matters in the few cities that regularly produce Great People; and the building discount doesn't come into play until the Renaissance! +1 happy/Monastery helps round out the trait: it fits well thematically, encourages players to acquire multiple religions for multiple monasteries, but can't be abused because monasteries eventually become obsolete.

Good idea, added. EDIT: Actually, this turns out to be surprisingly nightmarish to code so I'd rather have have something else here instead.

PROTECTIVE: I am least satisfied with the Protective trait. <snip> Protective leaders should not lose their +2 happy/city. (None of the other leaders do.) Since Gunpowder units ignore Walls and Castles anyway, I suggest that these buildings never go obsolete (for anyone.)

This one is always a pain to get right and keep in theme. I'll get back to you on it but I think I will make Walls and Castles not obsolete. Will make several UBs more appealing if nothing else.

TACTICAL: Thinking about it, double speed Barracks and Castles aren't terribly useful. Barracks are only needed in military training centres; Castles, in border cities vulnerable to attack. +100% city capture gold is much more interesting. It contrasts nicely with +100% pillage gold: Aggressive leaders are raiders while Tactical leaders are conquerors.

That seems doable but strikes me as fitting much better with Imperialist. I'll have a think about it, might be room for some shuffling.

TRADITIONAL: No unhappiness in the capital is problematic for a number of reasons. It can easily lead to very unrealistic size 20 capitals in 1000 BC. These monster capitals would generate far too much commerce and production via the Monarchy civic. Furthermore, players would be discouraged from developing their infrastructure: there's little point in building Stadiums, Theatres, and Temples if you don't need the happiness. +5 happy/Palace keeps the bonus at a more manageable level.

I wondered about that but thought I'd throw the idea out there to see what people thought. Here's an alternate idea: a % discount to production of buildings already present in Capital.

(As a side note, I worry that +1 specialist/Wonder and +2 culture/specialist will make Cultural Victories too easy. Put another way, it may not be possible to conquer a Traditional leader on another continent before (s)he wins by Culture. What do you think?)

I'd like to change what you get for each Wonder from a specialist to something different. The other mechanic I could use instead is providing a bonus of some sort each time a city expands its cultural borders. Any ideas for either of these?

SPIRITUAL
No suggested trait changes.
Shwedagon Paya gives +1 food/state religion building.

That's on my todo list as well. I'm not sure that's an ideal wonder/bonus match but it will do until such time that I review and create new wonders.

 

[Keinpferd]

Quote:
PHILOSOPHICAL: Philosophical can't compete with all the new and improved leader traits. The bonus GPP only matters in the few cities that regularly produce Great People; and the building discount doesn't come into play until the Renaissance! +1 happy/Monastery helps round out the trait: it fits well thematically, encourages players to acquire multiple religions for multiple monasteries, but can't be abused because monasteries eventually become obsolete.

Good idea, added.

I know, the XML isn't laid out for linking a free building to a leadertrait, but on the German forum, someone provided the related Python code. A trait MARITIME sets a lighthouse in all costal cities (which you know doesn't need to be implemented with an actually visible lighthouse building).

In HR, I could imagine the trait PHILOSOPHICAL giving libraries in all cities. Thus the trait pays off at the time, when emerging philosophy really boosted all other areas of science by new methods. Would that be too strong? This way a philosophical leader will at least get a chance to build an academy in historical due time.

There's a lot of good new art in Realism Invictus. I intend to go through it and borrow some eventually.

Really a lot. I couldn't stop myself shoveling them into HR. But for my private use I may shop here and there a bit and fortunately don't need to add Polynesian and Tibetan flavour dragoons.

I like to have homogenous looking armies on Epic speed with as few "wrong era" units as possible. However, that doesn't work on normal speed, where you would train baroque looking dragoons between knights and cuirassiers just for a couple of rounds. One way to reduce wrong era units and improve the "homogenous look" seems to be three or four Tech requirements rather than one or two. You can't beeline to one particular unit as easily, that is (and looks) much more modern than your average army composure.

90 by 90 map: I thought, the maps were part of The_J's modcomp? If it's easy to replace or add a map of his selection (which is quite good, I think), I'll have a look around the map subforum. I'm sure there are many Europe maps of decent quality. (And 90 by 90 is damn huge, I'm getting memory CTDs, when the Polish and Russians are flooding towards Spain…)

The latter issue reminds me of another annoyance, that as far as I know no modder has addressed yet: the distant war readiness of Civs, that keep sending their troops in the most remote areas of the map. When they arrive, they're outdated. There is a tag in the LeaderheadInfos, but I couldn't figure out how to change it in a way that clearly shows, it has an effect.

 

[Azoth]

Equally balanced traits would be impossible and dull. Still, I want to ensure that there are no major outliers in either direction.

My thoughts exactly.

Since I've decided to reduce this bonus to just +1 movement, perhaps I should return to a passive "+1 Movement for Naval Units" rather than the promotion? I forget now why I decided to change it.

Well, here's what I said when I proposed the change:

Enterprising
Current: +1 trade route/city, +2 move on Naval, double Market+Customs House
Suggested: +1 trade route/city, Navigation I+Navigation II on Naval, all Economy civics available on Turn 0
Comments: A fine trait with a clever name. The promotion change to naval units still leaves them with +2 movement but allows non-Enterprising leaders some chance to catch up if they promote their ships correctly. (Otherwise, both sides could take Navigation promotions, and Enterprising leaders would always be quicker.) The Economy civics allow for great flexibility: Enterprising leaders can pick between more commerce on improvements, a free specialist, another trade route, or more health. Haven't you ever wanted to rewrite history so that all nations embraced Environmentalism by medieval times, and Mother Nature was saved?

The point still stands. But, more importantly, free promotions are more transparent and elegant than passive bonuses. The Jaguar Warrior is better as a Swordsman with a free Woodsman I promotion than as a Swordsman with a passive Jungle bonus.

That seems doable but strikes me as fitting much better with Imperialist. I'll have a think about it, might be room for some shuffling.

I thought about this. In particular, I was very tempted to swap +100% Great Generals from Imperialist with +100% city capture gold from Tactical. In the end, I decided against, for fear of making Imperialist too much of a one-trick pony. If players want both halves of the city capture bonus, they must pick two different traits.

Good idea, added. EDIT: Actually, this turns out to be surprisingly nightmarish to code so I'd rather have have something else here instead. [...]

I wondered about that but thought I'd throw the idea out there to see what people thought. Here's an alternate idea: a % discount to production of buildings already present in Capital.

I'd like to change what you get for each Wonder from a specialist to something different. The other mechanic I could use instead is providing a bonus of some sort each time a city expands its cultural borders. Any ideas for either of these?

I like the 'percent discount for buildings in the capital' idea. But I also like the flavour of large Traditional capitals; and the free specialist/Wonder mechanic. You could replace the free specialist with extra gold or production but it wouldn't be the same. So how about this?
PHILOSOPHICAL: +100% GPP, double School, +2 culture/specialist
TRADITIONAL: +5 happy Palace, +1 specialist/Wonder, +25% production for buildings in capital

It seems strange that you can code percent discounts for buildings in the capital more easily than +1 happy on Monasteries. But this would be the way to do it. The percent discount must stay low because it will affect practically every building in the game. (That's a lot of hammers saved.) At the same time, moving +2 culture/specialist to a different trait means that +1 specialist/Wonder can stay. Players could pick a Philosophical/Traditional leader for Cultural victories, but that would still be a meaningful choice. They would have to forgo the equally tempting Creative, Spiritual, Expansive, and Humane traits.

That's on my todo list as well. I'm not sure that's an ideal wonder/bonus match but it will do until such time that I review and create new wonders.

Agreed.

 

[Xyth]

I know, the XML isn't laid out for linking a free building to a leadertrait, but on the German forum, someone provided the related Python code. A trait MARITIME sets a lighthouse in all costal cities (which you know doesn't need to be implemented with an actually visible lighthouse building).

I actually already have some code in HR that does just that. It's used to place a few 'invisible' buildings in cities that provide some trait effects that can't be achieved via the standard XML or Python scripting.

In HR, I could imagine the trait PHILOSOPHICAL giving libraries in all cities. Thus the trait pays off at the time, when emerging philosophy really boosted all other areas of science by new methods. Would that be too strong? This way a philosophical leader will at least get a chance to build an academy in historical due time.

I think a free library would be too strong and it doesn't feel right to have libraries existing long before said civilization discovers writing.

One way to reduce wrong era units and improve the "homogenous look" seems to be three or four Tech requirements rather than one or two. You can't beeline to one particular unit as easily, that is (and looks) much more modern than your average army composure.

Let me know which units you think are too easy to beeline to, there's bound to be some that could benefit from additional requirements or further techtree crosslinks.

90 by 90 map: I thought, the maps were part of The_J's modcomp? If it's easy to replace or add a map of his selection (which is quite good, I think), I'll have a look around the map subforum. I'm sure there are many Europe maps of decent quality. (And 90 by 90 is damn huge, I'm getting memory CTDs, when the Polish and Russians are flooding towards Spain&#8230

It's pretty easy to add or replace maps in the modcomp. The time consuming part is defining the tile coordinates for all the civilization starting locations. And from 0.9.3 onwards, placing all the new resources - something I've not done yet.

At some point I'd like to do a proper review of the maps, get rid of some, get some new ones, and update them. Not an immediate priority but let me know your recommendations regardless.

The latter issue reminds me of another annoyance, that as far as I know no modder has addressed yet: the distant war readiness of Civs, that keep sending their troops in the most remote areas of the map. When they arrive, they're outdated. There is a tag in the LeaderheadInfos, but I couldn't figure out how to change it in a way that clearly shows, it has an effect.

That tag may have a small effect but there are many factors that can easily override it. Ultimately this is handled in the AI code which is locked away inside the DLL and thus completely impossible to change on Mac.

The point still stands. But, more importantly, free promotions are more transparent and elegant than passive bonuses. The Jaguar Warrior is better as a Swordsman with a free Woodsman I promotion than as a Swordsman with a passive Jungle bonus.

The problem is that it's much easier to code a passive bonus for a trait than it is for buildings as the AI doesn't need to calculate the value of it during decision making. If we want the Trading Post to still give +1 movement to naval units then it needs to have a passive bonus, give Navigation II, or give Mobility. Navigation II is inelegant, especially if I ever add a non-Enterprising Scandinavian leader (Gustav Adolphus is on my maybe list). Mobility is problematic as I need to make the promotion available to all naval units or make Viking naval units their own (seperate but identical) unitcombat class.

For now I'll go with a passive trait bonus and leave the trading post as is, it's the simplest solution. We can review it again later.

I thought about this. In particular, I was very tempted to swap +100% Great Generals from Imperialist with +100% city capture gold from Tactical. In the end, I decided against, for fear of making Imperialist too much of a one-trick pony. If players want both halves of the city capture bonus, they must pick two different traits.

That's the conclusion I came to in the end as well.

PHILOSOPHICAL: +100% GPP, double School, +2 culture/specialist
TRADITIONAL: +5 happy Palace, +1 specialist/Wonder, +25% production for buildings in capital

That looks good. Note that it would be "+25% production of buildings already built in the Capital" - i.e, the capital doesn't get any bonuses but all other cities do if the capital already has the building. Wonders won't get a bonus as they can only be built once.

It seems strange that you can code percent discounts for buildings in the capital more easily than +1 happy on Monasteries.

Religious buildings (and Bunkers for some reason) are handled a little differently from other buildings. Doubling their production speed is supported but adding happiness isn't. It's possible via other methods but very messy.

 

[Azoth]

The problem is that it's much easier to code a passive bonus for a trait than it is for buildings as the AI doesn't need to calculate the value of it during decision making. If we want the Trading Post to still give +1 movement to naval units then it needs to have a passive bonus, give Navigation II, or give Mobility. Navigation II is inelegant, especially if I ever add a non-Enterprising Scandinavian leader (Gustav Adolphus is on my maybe list). Mobility is problematic as I need to make the promotion available to all naval units or make Viking naval units their own (seperate but identical) unitcombat class.

For now I'll go with a passive trait bonus and leave the trading post as is, it's the simplest solution. We can review it again later.

Not so fast! What if Trading Posts gave a free Morale promotion to Naval Units?