Ideas, Requests, and Feedback

[Sjru]

Can't add a promo, as to do that from within the DLL would require hardcoding. I despise that, and will not do it where a different option is available.

I see... (But modules, like mekara's have promos that grant another promos that fade within a turn to lead to another promo).

Though, I have another request: Overcouncil have several heroes that add a vote, however, currently Undercouncil only has one hero that grant a vote (Gibbon Goetia). Could you make some already made heroes to provide a vote (More likely, Alazkan the assasin, rathus denmora, or anything related to or being alike the undercouncil)

 

[Valkrionn]

I see... (But modules, like mekara's have promos that grant another promos that fade within a turn to lead to another promo).

Though, I have another request: Overcouncil have several heroes that add a vote, however, currently Undercouncil only has one hero that grant a vote (Gibbon Goetia). Could you make some already made heroes to provide a vote (More likely, Alazkan the assasin, rathus denmora, or anything related to or being alike the undercouncil)

....Those modules do that entirely in the xml. They do not trigger the effect from within the DLL, which is what would require hardcoding. It is nowhere near the same thing.

Not sure about the Undercouncil. I'd prefer going a different route... And no, won't explain that atm.

 

[Sjru]

....Those modules do that entirely in the xml. They do not trigger the effect from within the DLL, which is what would require hardcoding. It is nowhere near the same thing.

I was referring, that, instead of having a secret immortal hidden between Greater Shade, that unit could, when the requeriments are met, be given a separate "Blood of the phoenix" promo that last for 1 turn. That way you could emulate the latter, with the benefits of that being more clear.
Or it still needs hardcoding?

Not sure about the Undercouncil. I'd prefer going a different route... And no, won't explain that atm.

Why? Are you a secret agent or something? It is a state-only secret?
Or just you want to surprise everybody? (Hard to do, one of your members soon or later will speak more than allowed)

 

[Valkrionn]

Absolutely ANYTHING that refers to a specific promotion, unit, building, whatever (any xml object) in the DLL requires hardcoding. So yes, that is still hardcoding.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Just a question, I think it is possible to code it so that if my race acquires a certain unit, for example Brigit they get a golden age. But is it possible to make it modular?

Edit: dam, wrong thread. I wanted to post it somwhere else. Sorry, 3AM.

 

[mythkin]

quick question did you mean to get rid of the jotnar sea farms and not let them make use of the food in the water

 

[shoggi]

Jotnar not being able to build any improvements on water is not intended. It's a bug and already known.

 

[Milaga]

Though, I have another request: Overcouncil have several heroes that add a vote, [/quote[

If by several you mean two, I agree with you. Chalid and Teutorix are the only heroes that add votes the Overcouncil. They are the Empyrean and Malakim heroes, respectively.

however, currently Undercouncil only has one hero that grant a vote (Gibbon Goetia). Could you make some already made heroes to provide a vote (More likely, Alazkan the assasin, rathus denmora, or anything related to or being alike the undercouncil)

My word holds no authority, but I see no reason to add another Undercouncil voting hero. Can you cite lore than might explain why this would be a good idea? The Lore behind Alazhkan and Rathus does not attach them directly to the Undercouncil.

 

[black_imperator]

i'm pretty sure Corlindale also adds a vote to the Overcouncil

 

[Sjru]

My word holds no authority, but I see no reason to add another Undercouncil voting hero. Can you cite lore than might explain why this would be a good idea? The Lore behind Alazhkan and Rathus does not attach them directly to the Undercouncil.

Well, I do not know much lore about the undercouncil, but I think the hero doesn't really have to be related to give a vote. Why? Because it isn't likely that they're adding extra heroes for the undercouncil just for the sake of fitting the lore. Yes, perhaps, an extra hero related to Esus could work (It has only 1, compared to other religions).

The fact is, that Svartalfar is related to the undercouncil, and their hero, maybe is not related to it, but they don't have anything else to use as an excuse to give another vote. And the sidar, well, is kinda the same story.

But Valk already explained that he doesn't care, so... nothing is likely to happen.

i'm pretty sure Corlindale also adds a vote to the Overcouncil

Yes, he does.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Why not just give the Major leaders of the Svartalfar and Sidar one extra vote? But only the main leaders.

 

[Sjru]

Why not just give the Major leaders of the Svartalfar and Sidar one extra vote? But only the main leaders.

That's a great idea. Perhaps that's where Valk is going on.
It does require hardcoding?

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Hardcoding is only required for something that effects the DLL.
So yes, probably.


Also, if COE has a holy city and holy shrine in it, that should probably count for another extra vote as well.

 

[Valkrionn]

Why not just give the Major leaders of the Svartalfar and Sidar one extra vote? But only the main leaders.

I'd prefer not to. With heroes, the vote is open to whoever gets there first (though civ-heroes maybe should not affect it... ). With leaders, you can never avoid them having more voting power than you.

That's a great idea. Perhaps that's where Valk is going on.
It does require hardcoding?

It would not require hardcoding, as it's something that you could easily add a tag for.

That said, it's not what I'm thinking on. Undercouncil is all about money. Figure it out.

Hardcoding is only required for something that effects the DLL.
So yes, probably.


Also, if COE has a holy city and holy shrine in it, that should probably count for another extra vote as well.

The shrine I could see.

 

[dunedainjedi]

[wild speculation]
I think he means buying UC votes. Bribing other leaders with cold hard(digital) gold. Which would be awesome. And makes a lot of sense thematically.
[/speculate wildly]

 

[Valkrionn]

Correct.

No guarantee I'll do it, just saying that if I do anything with undercouncil votes that would be it.

 

[Sjru]

OK: Here is some ideas:

* Genesis (and perhaps, Blood of the phoenix too) could be national rituals, so everybody may have a chance to get it. Also, perhaps, rituals could be redone within a certain amount of time. (Seeing as Genesis and others are later game, the game probably could have almost ended the second time you get to complete it).

* Purgue the unfaithful is underrated / bugged (sometimes it causes exceptions). It does not have much sense if you are not seeking a religious victory or your civ is agnostic. Plus, the info says it can cause unrest, then, however priests with Inquisition promo are a much better choice and less painful one than this ritual. Also AI never completes it. Could you change this ritual to be more beneficial in a wider area?.

* Precision and Rage provides little to the game experience. Certains civs are directly banned to build such units. Perhaps, when you get to overhaul the tech tree, you could change the paths of this techs, or make them more useful for the overall experience besides adding an later game unit?

* When the next version is coming out? (Aproximately) (I shouldn't have asked that)

 

[dunedainjedi]

I think Blood of the Phoenix needs to remain a one time only thing. Giving it out multiple times(or letting multiple civs complete it) basically extends any game instead of shortening it. BotP is supposed to be an final nail in the coffin or a last ditch effort stay off the inevitable. If everyone gets it, it would no longer do either of these things. It just becomes something that everyone must get to be competitive and results in a longer endgame with one less way to get a definitive advantage.

I have no problem with multiple genesis'.

 

[Sjru]

I think Blood of the Phoenix needs to remain a one time only thing. Giving it out multiple times(or letting multiple civs complete it) basically extends any game instead of shortening it. BotP is supposed to be an final nail in the coffin or a last ditch effort stay off the inevitable. If everyone gets it, it would no longer do either of these things. It just becomes something that everyone must get to be competitive and results in a longer endgame with one less way to get a definitive advantage.

I have no problem with multiple genesis'.

Hmm, yeah, perhaps you're right, multiple Blood of the Phoenix is op, but every civ should have a chance to get genesis.

In other notes: I have another idea: On Blight strike (AC gets to 30), instead of getting some Death damage, all (Living, applicable, not immune) units gets a Diseased (or Plagued, in some of the worst cases) for 10 turns, or the entire duration of the blight, (Or naturally, if that unit is healed from the disease). It could make more sense, don't you think?

 

[Tsathoggua]

Hmm, yeah, perhaps you're right, multiple Blood of the Phoenix is op, but every civ should have a chance to get genesis.

In other notes: I have another idea: On Blight strike (AC gets to 30), instead of getting some Death damage, all units gets a Diseased or Plagued for 10 turns, or the duration of the blight, (or until that unit is healed from the disease). It could make more sense, don't you think?

Maybe Death Damage + a % chance of Disease/Plague/Withered. The Damage alone is generally of negligible impact when it can be healed back in a few turns.