incremental patch discussion

[Deliverator]

But, the next release will be 1.6, because it contains a new fpk file. This is a little unusual because an X.Y release implies more, bigger changes than an X.Y.Z release. This will be relatively small in gameplay, but large in file size.

Does it seem OK? Does anybody else have changes planned for the next few days? More new building art, etc?

Well, a lot of changed since 1.5 so it feels like the right time. The only thing from me likely to be ready soon is a new version of Arrakis.py and re-tuned bonus placement. This will resolve the no insect bonuses on Arrakis issue.

 

[davidlallen]

I know the flavors are messed up, and I will look at redesigning those at some point (and the leaderhead flavor weightings), but are there separate AI weights other than the flavors? Or just the flavors?

There are both, for techs. If the flavors are messed up like they are, adjusting the weights is the wrong solution. Let's get the flavors right. Then if there is any visible problem, we may adjust the tree itself. Only if both of those are shown to have failed, should we "patch" with weights. Also, I think the leaderhead effects are much less important and maybe keldath will be looking at those anyway.

Does the AI just look at flavors when choosing techs, or does it also try to evaluate how useful a tech is?

No idea, sorry. The AI routines are known to be long, undocumented, and scary.

Can we also look into increasing settler cost? I know its hard but I think that would have a very large gameplay improvement.

I continue to think this is the wrong solution. You have commented that early city growth is too fast. That is the reason you are getting too many settlers. I have scaled down the water bonus from the techs, but I guess, not enough. If we solve the problem of cities growing too fast initially, the settler problem will go away on its own. What can we do, to slow down initial city growth a little bit more?

 

[davidlallen]

The only thing from me likely to be ready soon is a new version of Arrakis.py and re-tuned bonus placement. This will resolve the no insect bonuses on Arrakis issue.

Excellent. Is it obvious how the shield wall works? If you could turn that up a little so it is more visible, while turning down the overall mesa percentage, that would be great too. Let me know if you want the function which will remove one of a 2x2 chunk of mesa.

I want to finish the next homeworld update. And having a new fpk is my chance to clean up the homeworld art directory.

I can't tell what is needed or not needed in that directory. Civcheck can't find where the files are called so it tells me none of them are needed. I have just copied everything from 1.5.5 into the 1.5 fpk directory, so probably I have duplicates. Probably the best bet is for me to remove my directory interface/screens/homeworld altogether, and then you could send me a zip with the entire set of files you need.

 

[Deliverator]

Let me know if you want the function which will remove one of a 2x2 chunk of mesa.

Yes, it would be great to have the function to do this and then I can include it. I tried reducing the mesa percentage, but it leaves large completely flat areas. Thinning out using your declumping code is probably going to give a better result.

 

[davidlallen]

I tried reducing the mesa percentage, but it leaves large completely flat areas. Thinning out using your declumping code is probably going to give a better result.

I'm having some trouble following the order of operations in arrakis.py. Redirected onto the mapscript thread, maybe cephalo is still listening.

 

[Deliverator]

In order to increase Settler cost by 30% - I have changed this parameter from 20 to 26 in GlobalDefines.xml.

<Define>
<DefineName>BASE_CITY_GROWTH_THRESHOLD</DefineName>
<iDefineIntVal>26</iDefineIntVal>
</Define>

As well as controlling settler build time this also affects city growth. I would like some other people to make this change locally and playtest to make sure that the slow down is not too much.

 

[Ahriman]

You have commented that early city growth is too fast. That is the reason you are getting too many settlers. I have scaled down the water bonus from the techs, but I guess, not enough. If we solve the problem of cities growing too fast initially, the settler problem will go away on its own. What can we do, to slow down initial city growth a little bit more?

Settlers seem like they are cheaper than in vanilla, though I haven't tested that.
Certainly they are much much cheaper than in FFH and similar mods.

As well as controlling settler build time this also affects city growth. I would like some other people to make this change locally and playtest to make sure that the slow down is not too much.

Made the change, it certainly didn't seem too slow. Am I correct that this will also increase the amount of food required to increase each city size by 30%?

Another potential change that might help: reduce the water stored by the water cache building from 50% down to 30%. And/or make that building more expensive.

 

[koma13]

Probably the best bet is for me to remove my directory interface/screens/homeworld altogether, and then you could send me a zip with the entire set of files you need.

Exactly, I will send you a complete set of files needed for homeworld screen. But only 24h? Maybe I have to delay that unit info stuff into a future patch...

 

[Deliverator]

Am I correct that this will also increase the amount of food required to increase each city size by 30%?

That's what I assume.

 

[Ahriman]

Well, the game is still a blinding flash on regular speed. I'll test it on Epic, which I think this mod is better suited to.

 

[Deliverator]

Well we can increase it still more. It's easy as changing that single number.

 

[davidlallen]

Exactly, I will send you a complete set of files needed for homeworld screen. But only 24h? Maybe I have to delay that unit info stuff into a future patch...

The purpose of this thread is to help synchronize and choose the best date. I will be leaving town for a few days on Thursday, and I would hate to release something Wednesday which has some problem I missed. So, how's Tuesday?

 

[koma13]

Sounds better.
Btw, do you can think of any reason why I can't overload the getWidgetHelp() function? I tried to add it to the homeworld screen, but it doesn't do anything...

 

[davidlallen]

Another potential change that might help: reduce the water stored by the water cache building from 50% down to 30%. And/or make that building more expensive.

You can adjust this in xml/buildings/civ4buildinginfos, search for "Water Cache", underneath that search for <iFoodKept> and adjust to taste. You can also change the food yield values of the improvements in xml/terrain/civ4improvementinfos. Search for the type, such as "Shallow Well", below that you will find

<BonusTypeStruct>
	<BonusType>BONUS_GROUNDWATER</BonusType>
	<bBonusMakesValid>1</bBonusMakesValid>
	<bBonusTrade>0</bBonusTrade>
	<iDiscoverRand>0</iDiscoverRand>
	<YieldChanges>
		<iYieldChange>2</iYieldChange>
		<iYieldChange>0</iYieldChange>
		<iYieldChange>1</iYieldChange>
	</YieldChanges>
</BonusTypeStruct>

The iYieldChanges represent food, hammers, commerce. So a shallow well on groundwater yields +2 food and +1 commerce.

 

[Slvynn]

Another issue that catched my attention - Hardened Bladesman can be built without having tech that enables regular bladesman, and thats bit odd. Also there is no big tech difference between those techs. And HB is bit owerpovered, being so early CR unit, that need not even prequisite of tech that enables previous unit of same line.

 

[davidlallen]

Ahriman has also suggested reducing the strength of BM and HBM. In the next version I will reduce the strength of bladesman from 6 +10% city attack, to 5 +25%. I will also reduce hardened bladesman from 8 +20% to 7 +25%. The attack strength is not decreased much but they are more vulnerable to quads. Do you think that is enough?

Regarding the tech, it is true that they are along completely different tech lines. HBM is at the end of a tech line; we could add Fanaticism as an AND-prereq for Harsh Conditioning. I know that Ahriman has put a lot of thought into the tech lines, so let us get his comment about this change.

 

[Slvynn]

Ahriman has also suggested reducing the strength of BM and HBM. In the next version I will reduce the strength of bladesman from 6 +10% city attack, to 5 +25%. I will also reduce hardened bladesman from 8 +20% to 7 +25%. The attack strength is not decreased much but they are more vulnerable to quads. Do you think that is enough?

Regarding the tech, it is true that they are along completely different tech lines. HBM is at the end of a tech line; we could add Fanaticism as an AND-prereq for Harsh Conditioning. I know that Ahriman has put a lot of thought into the tech lines, so let us get his comment about this change.

Yes i think that change + adding more prereq for HBM unit (not tech) will suffice.
I mean that you will be able to tech HC without Fanaticism, but to build HBM you need to have Fanaticism as well. Thats seems to me most correct.
Added - that will also make some sense for Mahdi fighters, espesially if you stoneage backward in tech, Btw those guys lack any kind of combat animation.... may be just to take another unit from other mod, wearing robe...

 

[Ahriman]

Do you think that is enough?

This seems like a good start point at least. So maula pistols will actually have an advantage over bladesmen in a straight flat terrain fight (cos of first strike).

Regarding the tech, it is true that they are along completely different tech lines. HBM is at the end of a tech line; we could add Fanaticism as an AND-prereq for Harsh Conditioning. I know that Ahriman has put a lot of thought into the tech lines, so let us get his comment about this change.

Well, it was originally intended that Fanaticism be an optional tech. If you're religious, or you want to be able to build Mahdi structures, you get Fanaticism and Jihad; if not you don't have to. So an in-character Duke Leto could get neither Fanaticism nor Harsh conditioning, and instead beeline for tier2 aircraft units.

But gameplay needs may dominate here. Maybe we could move the Mahdi temple and units to Jihad tech (which is a bit weak atm) and have fanaticism as an AND requirement for harsh conditioning. I suppose I could argue that to develop elite fighter-dudes you need a somewhat fanatical mindset.

Another alternative though is just to increase the cost of the Internment camps tech by say 40% or so. This might be a better fix. It still leaves those techs optional while making it harder to beeline them so easily, and crush your neighbors with fast-teched hardened bladesmen.

Another thought: should Corrino have improved Hardened bladesmen, rather than improved maula guardsmen? The harsh-conditioning tech is designed to be very much like the Salusa-Secundus style training regimen, and shock troops are more a Corrino speciality than city defenders.

Shaddam is an aggressive military imperialist.

 

[keldath]

hey everyone,

im happy to say that revdcm 2.6 is out,
ill start merging the latest version of the mod inside, its gonna be a large merge,
it has many many good stuff inside.

so, i hope that youll hold off on the new patch till i finish,
my eta will be Friday tops.

kel.

 

[davidlallen]

I will be unavailable from Thursday night till Sunday night, and I usually only have enough time to cut a release on the weekends. I can either release 1.6 tonight, or delay it two weeks. If I release 1.6 tonight, we can put revdcm 2.6 into a 1.6.1 patch.

Release note for revdcm 2.6: this thread. The only thing that sounds interesting, or even relevant to DW, is updating Better BTS AI to 0.81:

Release note for BBAI 0.8: this post. Some general improvements, one key one is fixing "improvement cycling". I don't see that much in DW, but I do see it a lot in vanilla.

Release note for BBAI 0.81: this post. Seems like the main point is speedups using CAR. I see this comment, which will probably hurt the Fremen even more: "- AI more likely to raze barb cities far from its empire"

What do you think?