If you tinker with vassals, did you think about changing the way capitulation at war works ?
Now, if yourself and civ B (at peace) are at war with civ C and that civ C capitulates to B, you are automatically at peace with C. You can for sure re-declare war on both, but your units have been teleported, usually not a good thing.
What I'd crave to see is something like, from B: "we are taking C under our protection; do you really wish to continue the war and thus war with us?"
Not sure at all it's feasible though.
That's not a bad idea. I think it might be possible to implement, but it might be a bit tricky; and there might be some bad side effects in simultaneous turn mode. I'm not going to try to implement it right away, but I'll keep it in mind.
On the topic of modifying diplomacy, here's a different idea that I've had in mind for some time: when the AI asks you to change civics, currently if you agree to it then you are forced to change immediately. Usually you won't want to do this, even if you don't mind adopting the civic - because you'll want to switch some other civic as well. My idea is to change it so that when you agree to switch civics, it doesn't immediately switch, by rather forces you to switch by the end of the turn. So you can either just have your turn normally and let it switch automatically; or you can manually switch civics, and perhaps choose a different civic in another branch at the same time. This would also allow you to do some final slave-whipping before being forced out of slavery...
Anyway, that's another idea that I think would be good, but probably difficult to implement.
While I'm on the topic of possible changes, here are a couple of UI things that I've changed for the next version. Let me know if you think any of them would be bad for any reason:
- Amphibious landings can now be executed even if the group isn't ready to move. (eg. if you have a transport on the coast, with no moves left, ording it to move onto the land will now cause it to unload its cargo.)
Automated units will wait until the "automoves" phase before moving rather than doing it as soon as it is their turn. For example, if you press "automate" on a worker, it will queue what it's action is going to be - but not actually start doing it until you've cycled through all of your units. So if you want, you can select the worker and see what it is actually going to do - and perhaps decide that you don't want it to be automated after all!
I can't think of anything wrong with the first point, but for the second point I'm less sure. One issue is that if you have some workers automated and some still on manual control, you might tell your manual workers to build an improvement that the automated workers wanted to build -- or worse, you might try to build a different improvement on the same plot! That would suck.
Another example to consider is that you might have an airship on autoexplore. The new system would have the advantage of letting you turn off autoexplore before the airship actually moves. So, of some enemy units have just showed up, and you want to bomb them instead of doing recon, you can do so. But the disadvantage is that if you actually do want to do recon, you'll probably want it to happen before you move your other units... so you'll have to tell everything to "wait" so that the autoexplore airship gets a chance to do its automoves... --
So... It's a change that I'm in two minds about. Let me know what you think. Maybe I should make it a 'BUG' option. [edit] On second though, I can't make it an optional feature - at least not with the current implementation - because it would cause OOS errors.[/edit]
Hi Karadoc,
after some time I re took Civ IV ( so many problems in real life
)
and I noticed two bugs in 115:
1) Victory condition panel: disappered info about voting poll (Bug mod)
2) on attached save, Rotterdam has 12 pop point but only 4 are showed. Next turn all 12 pop point are displayed again.
A suggestion: why explorers can't update to rifleman or better? (I know that is a Firaxis decision)
Always a great job!!!
Here's my guess for what happened in Rotterdam: on the previous turn, there was a cultural revolt in that city. The cultural revolt made them lose access to most of the tiles that they were working, and so they automatically stopped working those - and thus had a bunch of spare citizens. Usually, those spare citizens would be reassigned somewhere else; but for efficiency, K-Mod does not automatically assign citizens when the city is in disorder. (eg. a cultural revolt, or a revolution).
Notice that although in your screenshot it says it is going to lose a heap of food, if you check again on the next turn, it hasn't actually lost that food. So the Mali must have assigned the citizens during their own turn. So it looks like the city came out of revolt at the start of your turn, but only had its citizens fixed during the Mali turn a bit later on. It kind of sucks that you see the unassigned citizens in between the revolt and the reassignment, but that's a pretty minor problem - I'm not sure if I'll bother trying to fix it. (I'm not even sure what the "fix" would look like. Would it show the city still in revolt?)
Regarding the missing voting info -- I think I removed that when I first started K-Mod. (If it was there in previous versions, then I remembered wrong.) From memory, my reason for removing it was that I it basically told you who the other civs were going to vote for. I thought that was a bad feature. The AI may be stupid and predictable, but I don't think we should mock them by predicting their votes in the victory screen!
In any case, I did like that the BUG screen told us when the next vote would actually happen... So I should probably edit the screen a little bit and then bring it back.
Goodluck with the real life stuff. I wish I could edit the source code for that...
[edit]
I forgot to mention: one side effect of allowing explorers to be upgraded to something is that they would keep their free promotions... Another is that when you can build every upgrade path for a unit, the base unit becomes unavailable - so if explores could only upgrade to riflemen, then riflemen would make explorers unbuildable - which is bad because riflemen aren't necessarily better. (explorers get two moves, better goody-huts, and they ignore terrain costs.) So those are a couple of technical reasons for why explorers can't upgrade. -- One idea that I've been toying with though, is to allow explorers to get the woodsman 3 promotion. (currently they are not allowed to get it, for who-knows what reason). If they could get woodsman 3, then they would probably make good medics.
-- Anyway, the answer is no. I haven't changed that stuff.
I don't always help people though... which reminds me, I forgot to respond to Radio Noer.
