Jobs & Homeless

[Thunderbrd]

I'm for it H. And if you need me to set up a gameoption for you to work with, just let me know. With just the simple defining of a gameoption, as I understand it, you can define your xml changes as conditional to that option, which would make the entire system function only under the option. Does it present some issues from a multiple game balancing effort perspective? Sure. But it could help the sanity of some C2C fans.

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Thunderbrd

Well there are 2 problems if made optional ...

1. Balance, the stuff was put in to counter the over abundance of health and happiness. And to a less extent gold.

2. Making it work. Can events be made optional? Can properties be turned off? I know we can turn off the effects and even removed the effects from buildings but what about the effects on terrain, events and it being there in the first place?

In short I would like to hear a good reason why it should be optional before spending the time and effort to do so. Its a lot easier to put them in the game than it is to take them out and even harder to make them optional.

 

[Thunderbrd]

1) The balance you're including will affect things for those who choose the option, which would usually be the more advanced players who require the improved balance anyhow. Without it, you'd have a simpler, easier game in general and the gamebalance differences will naturally reflect this. (I'm just guestimating but I'd say this would be the outcome.)

2) Events need triggers. If the triggers are only coming up optionally, then the events made for them are just as optional as they won't trigger with the values that trigger them not existing. And I do believe python can easily adapt to an option being present or not, just as dll programming does. When establishing a gameoption, the correct procedure will report the option as tagable for use in python. Properties are xml initiated and thus should be roughly the same in ease. However, if there are any factors to establishing properties in the dll, I'm pretty confident the on/off switch for the option would be easily implemented there. Any of those of us modding the dll could do that for you provided we had a clue where the properties are mentioned in the codes or had enough time to figure that out. Making it work should be quite easy really. What I'm not perfectly confident on is how to optionalize in the xml. I know DH has told me one or two times before but since I've yet to apply it, I'm still a bit fuzzy on quite how. Perhaps this is also how you feel? That I could understand.

I do think that this increasing degree of micromanaging detail is going to appeal to some greatly (I'm on this side of the fence) and to others be just as equally unappealing (My wife offers some reflection on this for me).

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

What don't you like about them?

The crime and flamibility properties don't add much to C2C. In fact they seem more work to get in than value in game. In game they provide a little bit of micro management at the expense of working alternative warfare by thieves et al.

I just saying you wasted time on two things that did not add to the game why do more.

I'm for it H. And if you need me to set up a gameoption for you to work with, just let me know. With just the simple defining of a gameoption, as I understand it, you can define your xml changes as conditional to that option, which would make the entire system function only under the option. Does it present some issues from a multiple game balancing effort perspective? Sure. But it could help the sanity of some C2C fans.

You don't need to do anything. He could do it all with WoC. If you turn on the pollution mod in MLF then the rest follows with exactly that stuff you mention but using and dependancy on the property value.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Wow... I completely disagree that they didn't add to the game. I LOVE them!

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Dancing Hoskuld

So wait, you don't like them, yet you think they don't do much?

In my current game I have a huge crime way going on and most of my cities are and . I got them under control but not after having to spend some post-war recovery on them. I would say they play a much larger role I was expecting they would. Which is a good thing.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

@Dancing Hoskuld

So wait, you don't like them, yet you think they don't do much?

In my current game I have a huge crime way going on and most of my cities are and . I got them under control but not after having to spend some post-war recovery on them. I would say they play a much larger role I was expecting they would. Which is a good thing.

They have almost no affect on how I play the game except I don't use the thieves etc units because they are not available to play with. In my last game I did not have a city with crime above 100 (or maybe 300 - I don't look) except maybe those I captured but I did not look at crime as I only wanted to keep the cities long enough to build all the cultures and to get that nation to capitulate so I could make it my vassal. If I had the vassal wonder working well I would keep the cities less long.

 

[Hydromancerx]

The buildings that enable thieves, rogues, etc are not enabled by crime levels anymore. In fact they have not been for quite some time. They only add crime if you do decide to build those buildings. And I agree that most of the time I don't build those types of buildings, however I still get crime in my cities even without building a bandits hideout or mercenary camp.

However I think the bandit units are a separate issue from the crime property. You can still deal with crime having never built a single bandit unit.

 

[Sgtslick]

What about the Air and Water Pollution do you have any problems with those in the mod?

If you have extremely low pollution levels you should get a benefit- such as increased tourism and immigration. If some Civs have bad pollution compared to others who have very little, people might consider moving, (event perhaps?).

 

[Hydromancerx]

If you have extremely low pollution levels you should get a benefit- such as increased tourism and immigration. If some Civs have bad pollution compared to others who have very little, people might consider moving, (event perhaps?).

That might not be a bad idea. Especially if it went into the - range (since + = bad code wise)

 

[Hydromancerx]

Bumping for Nimek.

 

[Nimek]

@Hydro
I love your idea of crime and i hope that disease system will be as good as crime is. My idea of unemployment use both. So what do you think about it?

I think that wouldnt be hard to implement it in basic version and test it impact to the gameplay.
You must only change unlimited specialist bonus to percent number depending on city size and add negative effect to the citizen specialist.

Link to the idea http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=473875

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Nimek

Honestly I am not so sure about the way you proposed with the Citizen part. As for the rest I am far too busy at the moment to take up another project. Which is why unemployment and homelessness were set aside for later.

 

[Thunderbrd]

So give us a summary of where you stand on this project so far then? I do think this has always been an interesting concept...

 

[Hydromancerx]

Right now I want to focus on the Unemployment part. Population will give you +Unemployment each time it gets bigger. And then buildings that give jobs will provide -Unemployment. Likewise I would like to tie in civics to this.

There will be also Auto buildings. But unlike crime where its currently 1 sided it will have 2 sides.

Unemployment (+) = + and -

Not Enough Workers (-) = - and -

Thus it will be in your interest to get the "sweet spot" between the 2 extremes. Having enough buildings for your size city. I am thinking +/- 25 would be the sweet spot and anything beyond that would give incrementally more of each.

Note that this would work more like Flammability in that its a static value and not a dynamic value.

Interesting no?

EDIT: When I do end up trying this I would like to put in the Electricity and Structural Integrity icons as well even if the properties are not applied until later.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I like it. Straightforward, meets expectations of such a system both from a gameplay and reality standpoint. Brilliant!

 

[AIAndy]

Sounds good. From a mechanic point of view what is missing is a population source for static properties and for the AI to understand a property that is negative on both extremes.

 

[Faustmouse]

Will you use the a percentage of the population of the city that is shown when hovering over the pop in the city screen? Or will it depent of food and is more linear upgoing instead of big jumps?

 

[Hydromancerx]

Sounds good. From a mechanic point of view what is missing is a population source for static properties and for the AI to understand a property that is negative on both extremes.

Can the AI be programed to understand it? Or would it be better to make 2 seperate properties?

Will you use the a percentage of the population of the city that is shown when hovering over the pop in the city screen? Or will it depent of food and is more linear upgoing instead of big jumps?

I have been thinking about this. If I do many little jumps such as every 5% then its more accurate but also means that much more impact. However if I make BIG jumps then it will impact the player really hard once you reach the threshold.

I also am not sure how much the city should give per pop and the buildings themselves. Should buildings with potentially more jobs get more than just -1 Unemployment? Its hard to know without testing.

I probably should implement it in stages where the population and buildings gve +/- unemployment but the auto-buildings are not put in place. That way we can better gauge balance without them giving the actual effect.

Then once balanced we can put in the effects and see hwo they balance out.

 

[AIAndy]

Can the AI be programed to understand it? Or would it be better to make 2 seperate properties?

Not too hard to make it understand it (better than adding two properties for it).