I'm back!

[Decimatus]

I'm finally making some headway on my mod. I've got the CulturePerPopulation component completed! Now monuments, Opera Houses, and Museums all add culture based on the city's population! As do many of the other unique buildings that also add culture. Everyone has been balanced to provide the same amount of culture for a city of 5. For larger cities, they'll produce even more culture!

Nice. Surprised that you are the first person to come out with this functionality.

This includes the XML to update building culture levels including a brand new XML table, new help texts to inform about income these buildings provide, as well as Lua script to update each city's culture generation each turn in case it has grown.

Does this mean if a building gives X Gold/Culture/etc per pop that a tooltip tells you how much that will be when you are looking to build it? That would rock.

 

[Sneaks]

Sounds like you are making great progress!

 

[Mylon]

Does this mean if a building gives X Gold/Culture/etc per pop that a tooltip tells you how much that will be when you are looking to build it? That would rock.

Unfortunately, this is not done automatically. I had to adjust the tooltip manually for each building. I believe someone has done a better tooltip code to help with this like in The Economy Mod, but I can't be sure.

 

[Mylon]

I had no luck trying to upload this to the Mod database. Modbuddy crashed while trying to log into Gamespy. So I'll post my mod component here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=16680

 

[Mylon]

Another idea: Replace the increasing social policy costs per city with a 'maintenance' cost of social policies based on the number of cities. A bit divided on this, as this will step on the toes of wonders and policies that reduce the costs of policies (and why do policies reduce the cost of policies anyway? They're only filler to complete that branch, in the end they cost more than any imagined benefit). Also, what buildings would reduce this penalty in the same style of courthouses for Civ4 maintenance? Media outlet?

 

[Mylon]

Priority idea: Ranged counterattacks. Melee can 'attack' an infinite number of times by being the defender (health notwithstanding) but archer units have no defense against ranged, which seems silly. There will have to be a special exception so gunpowder units can shoot back at archers, too.

 

[Sneaks]

Disagree with that. The only reason to build ranged units now is for that exact reason. By making ranged units take damage when they attack, it simply discourages ever building ranged units.

 

[Decimatus]

Make it a promotion. And if possible, make it so that it is limited to 1-2-3 counter attacks per promotion.

 

[Mylon]

Part of the issue is that ranged units have 2 different strength numbers. Thus, when they shoot another archer, they're attacking that pitiful strength number, not the archer's ranged attack's number. Make them fight on equal grounds and it should be fair. Archers in general shouldn't be shooting melee troops right next to them and taking no damage when melee troops do not get a similar 'attack first' boost.

And this problem is especially rampant with naval ships. Since movement range is so great later on, it's quite possible to stumble upon an enemy navy and focus fire about 1/3rd of their ships down before they can even counterattack. By allowing the ships to counterattack, it would still be possible to kill 1/3rd of the enemy navy as before, but this would incur damage and the retaliation attack would be more significant.

 

[Sneaks]

I think the problem here is a perception of scale.

If an archer is in a hex next to a warrior, it does not mean the two are next to each other. When archers attack, they do not enter the hex of their opponents. This is very different from melee, where the units literally run into the other hex.

 

[Pazyryk]

I think the problem here is a perception of scale.

If an archer is in a hex next to a warrior, it does not mean the two are next to each other. When archers attack, they do not enter the hex of their opponents. This is very different from melee, where the units literally run into the other hex.

Civ is always weird in that it mixes small and large scales, both spatial and temporal (and I like that but it is still weird). If an archer is shooting at you, it must be "close enough" to be hit back by another archer (never mind that 2 tiles is 500 miles or whatever). Of course, the current system allows return fire on the next turn (again, never mind that 1 turn might be 20 yrs). But it does give a very lopsided advantage to the first attacker.

 

[Mylon]

I think the problem here is a perception of scale.

If an archer is in a hex next to a warrior, it does not mean the two are next to each other. When archers attack, they do not enter the hex of their opponents. This is very different from melee, where the units literally run into the other hex.

Eh, I just find it odd that a melee unit can make participate in several combats per turn but ranged units cannot. Specifically attacking a foritified unit, one could surround and flank it and still suffer more damage overall than the defending unit has HP if it was fortified and in favorable terrain.

 

[Mylon]

I got a few mod components going on now. Specifically I added counterattacking for naval units. I would like some feedback to see if this would work well for ranged units as well: http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=16773