How to raise/lower production for different civs

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Creation & Customization' started by sman1975, Jan 12, 2017.

  1. sman1975

    sman1975 Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    1,246
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Hello - me again...

    I'm working on a mod (scenario) with 7 different player civs set in Napoleonic Europe. These civs differ vastly in their technical evolution - e.g. France in 1799 has quite a higher production capability (building for building) than say Ottoman Sultanate, Austria might be between these two extremes. Ultimately, I'd like to impose some form of economic handicap on less sophisticated civs.

    I'm looking for an XML solution to lower global total production (as a percentage) for some player civs, and raise production for others.

    Ideally, the solution would behave something like the unit supply behavior ("Production Penalty") that kicks in when you have too many units - a global reduction percentage.

    I tried to use the "MaxPlayerBuildingProductionModifer" in Traits table, but that only seems to impact Wonders, not normal buildings.

    I tried using a negative value in the "CapitalBuildingModifier" from the Traits table (the opposite of the normal Rome UA) -- but the game ignores a negative value for this element.

    I'm also considered raising unit maintenance costs, but that only penalizes gold, not production. It's a last-ditch surrogate, but not as proper as hitting production.

    Appreciate any suggestions!

    sman
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  2. Enginseer

    Enginseer Salientia of the Community Patch Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    3,229
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Somewhere in California
    I don't know if dummy buildings accept negative production modifiers? Test it out.
     
    sman1975 likes this.
  3. PawelS

    PawelS Ancient Druid

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,803
    Location:
    Poland
    There is a Trait_YieldModifiers table. But it's not used for any civ in unmodded game, so I'm not sure if it works. But if it does, it's an easier way than using dummy buildings.
     
    sman1975 likes this.
  4. LeeS

    LeeS Imperator

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2013
    Messages:
    7,241
    Location:
    Illinois, USA
    You can also create custom versions of the Palace for each civ if the Trait_YieldModifiers does not work. You then give each custom palace a different setup for <Building_GlobalYieldModifiers>. As far as I am aware the buildings schema _SomethingYieldChanges and _SomethingYieldModifiers tables all accept and implement negative numbers, though they often display as +- in the city view for the _SomethingYieldChanges tables.
     
    sman1975 likes this.
  5. sman1975

    sman1975 Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    1,246
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    PawelS and LeeS - thanks for the suggestions.

    I did start by looking at the Trait_YieldModifier table - it was empty, so I figured it was a Vanilla or G&K legacy artifact no longer used and/or operational.

    The custom version of the Palace did work, but I'm using a modified "Future Tech" in the scenario that adds production and gold to existing palace yields each time it's researched. Because of this, I needed to keep the "Palace" building type as a single DB entry, which prevents me from using a unique building type for each civ to set the handicap for that civ at the desired higher or lower level.

    I went back to experimenting with the Trait_YieldModifier and found it really does work - for both positive and negative numbers. For example, I added a modifier for France (+50) and Spain (-50) - a wild exaggeration to test the principle. Here is the city production value before and after the change.

    City / Before / After
    Paris / 19 / 34
    Marseilles / 12 / 20

    Madrid / 25 / 6
    Barcelona / 16 / 5

    I guess the formula for city production must include several factors that impact the calculation, so it isn't a true + or - 50%, but it's trending in the right way. It also appears the positive numbers move the totals less than the negative numbers. This is something I'll have to tweak during play testing.

    Thanks again for getting me close to the finish line!

    sman
     

Share This Page