I think not. In k-mod the number of cities appears only for those cities that you really know. Send your spies and discover the right number.
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
K-Mod: Far Beyond the Sword
- Thread starter karadoc
- Start date
I think not. In k-mod the number of cities appears only for those cities that you really know. Send your spies and discover the right number.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 25,324
Ah..ok...that does make sense. I do think it is a good change, just wasn't sure if it was a BUG or specific change with the mod.
JujuLautre
Deity
Though you can know how much cities an opponent have as soon as you can trade them, so in this case it's not a cheat, is it ?
In K-Mod you can't.
As I understand it, the original justification for including the city counts in the BUG mod is that the number of cities could be easily counted by opening the trade screen. (Indeed, if the leader of the civ refuses to talk, then the BUG mod actually reverts to only displaying the number of mapped cities.)
In K-Mod, cities are only listed in the trade screen in particular situations, and so that source of information is no longer available. Also, in general I think it's probably better if players don't automatically know how big another civ is without exploring. And so I've changed the scoreboard city counter so that it only count cities which have been mapped. However... I am aware of at least one other way that the player can reliably know of the existence of cities which have not been mapped; and I know it's often possible to be confident (but not certain) about the exact number of cities each other civ has without mapping them. So in that sense the cities counter on the scoreboard is not really using all of the information available - but I don't particularly want to change it again. I figure that if players know of some tricks they can use to work out the number of cities, then good for them... I don't think it's necessary to collate that information automatically; and one good reason not to is that in future versions the tricks used to get the hidden information may fail, due to new game mechanics, or changes in the old game mechanics, or special situations, or whatever.
Deducing information about rivals civs based on other bits of knowledge is a bit different to having that information explicitly revealed in the UI.
In K-Mod, cities are only listed in the trade screen in particular situations, and so that source of information is no longer available. Also, in general I think it's probably better if players don't automatically know how big another civ is without exploring. And so I've changed the scoreboard city counter so that it only count cities which have been mapped. However... I am aware of at least one other way that the player can reliably know of the existence of cities which have not been mapped; and I know it's often possible to be confident (but not certain) about the exact number of cities each other civ has without mapping them. So in that sense the cities counter on the scoreboard is not really using all of the information available - but I don't particularly want to change it again. I figure that if players know of some tricks they can use to work out the number of cities, then good for them... I don't think it's necessary to collate that information automatically; and one good reason not to is that in future versions the tricks used to get the hidden information may fail, due to new game mechanics, or changes in the old game mechanics, or special situations, or whatever.
Deducing information about rivals civs based on other bits of knowledge is a bit different to having that information explicitly revealed in the UI.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2008
- Messages
- 25,324
Thanks, K. Makes sense.
By the way, here is a link to the SG we just started using Kmod, in case K or anyone else cares to lurk:
Rise of the Pasha [K-Mod]
By the way, here is a link to the SG we just started using Kmod, in case K or anyone else cares to lurk:
Rise of the Pasha [K-Mod]
@Lymond (and others) This thread is now part of a whole K-Mod subforum now. If you'd like, you can create a thread to talk about that mod.
Also, since not everything will be in this thread now, I suppose that people who are interested in following K-Mod related stuff should subscribe to the new subforum rather than just to this thread. (I'm not really sure how a subscribing to a forum works, but I guess I'm about to find out.) I guess we'll soon find out if having a separate subforum is useful or not. Hopefully it doesn't just result in a everyone talking to themself in their own thread...
Also, since not everything will be in this thread now, I suppose that people who are interested in following K-Mod related stuff should subscribe to the new subforum rather than just to this thread. (I'm not really sure how a subscribing to a forum works, but I guess I'm about to find out.) I guess we'll soon find out if having a separate subforum is useful or not. Hopefully it doesn't just result in a everyone talking to themself in their own thread...
JujuLautre
Deity
After my mod got its own subforum, I found it useful to branch out the main discussion into a few new threads, organized by topic. For example, a bug report thread or a "weird AI behavior" thread could remove clutter from this one without requiring people to open a new thread when they see the AI do something but are not sure if that's intended behavior or not.
And congrats to the new forum of course
And congrats to the new forum of course
Cities are listed on the AI's trade list whenever they would not flat-out refuse to trade them. (Originally, all cities except the capital were listed but disabled, and the mouseover text said something like "over my dead body". Now the cities simply do not appear on the list if the AI would deny trading them like that.) -- This basically means that the cities will be listed when at war, or when a particular city could be 'liberated' to your team. That's about all.
That sounds like sound advice. A bit of organisation / anti-clutter would probably be good. ... but...After my mod got its own subforum, I found it useful to branch out the main discussion into a few new threads, organized by topic. For example, a bug report thread or a "weird AI behavior" thread could remove clutter from this one without requiring people to open a new thread when they see the AI do something but are not sure if that's intended behavior or not.
And congrats to the new forum of course
.. Well actually I'm starting to regret having the sub-forum created. There are potential benefits to it, but I think that to unlock those benefits I'd have to take on a bit more work to organize and advocate different branches of discussion and so on - but I'd prefer not to have to think about it. 
Also, since this main thread is now in the sub-forum, K-Mod is no longer represented anywhere in the Mod-pack forum. I could create a new thread there to announce updates and so on, just for visibility; but again that would be a bit of extra work to maintain; and I think it would create some confusion about where things were meant to be discussed. -- And in general, I think the existence this sub-forum may have an effect of isolate K-mod players from other parts of the civ4 community - which isn't really what I wanted. K-Mod is so similar to the base game that there isn't much reason why it couldn't simply be discussed in the main forums...
I suppose what I'm kind of expecting to see in this subforum is some separate threads to discuss particular game mechanics (eg. are the Global Warming mechanics working well are there enough / too many warming events; does it happen too early / late in the game; does it scale properly with map size / type and with game speed?); and discussions about potential balance changes and so on; and perhaps some threads about certain K-Mod based mods. But for that kind of stuff to be worth while, there have to be enough interested people to actually start and carry out the discussions...
Anyway, I guess we'll just see how it goes.
In the mean time, I've just uploaded version 1.36; which most consists of bug fixes. There are a couple changes that have not been thoroughly tested, but I'm not expecting any problems.
One minor change in v1.36 which I really like is the city names change. When I first starting playing Civ4, I sometimes liked to change some particular city names into funny variations on the default name.. but this quickly became very tedious, because whenever a city was renamed; the original name would be selected again by default for the next city founded. For example, suppose I didn't want to have a city called "Rome", and so I rename it to "Roam" or whatever.. in the previous system, I would then I have to manually rename every city I founded after that, because "Rome" would be the suggested name every time. -- That's the problem I've fixed in v1.36. In the new system, "Rome" would only be suggested for the first city until enough cities have been founded for the names to loop around again. -- I reckon this is a great change, and I'm now wondering why no one thought of doing this sooner...
Mattygerst
Prince
I really think if you start subforums here it will help out. Like:
-DownLoad Link & ChangeLog
-Bug Reports
-Suggestions & Discussion
-MultiPlayer
-Mod-Mods
-DownLoad Link & ChangeLog
-Bug Reports
-Suggestions & Discussion
-MultiPlayer
-Mod-Mods
Subforums? There are only two threads here at the moment. Most of the stuff you suggest there could be easily handled with one thread each (a bug report is usually worth only one post, not an entire thread).
Karadoc, I know how you feel, I also feared that I had to organize things too much, but it really didn't turn out that way. I created several threads for specific purposes at the beginning, and once in a while I make a new thread about the aspect of the game I'm currently working on in case I need peoples' input, and that's it.
I understand your fear that there might not be enough traffic here at the moment, but there seems to be a dedicated base of K-Mod players and one/two dozen people are definitely enough to carry a mod forum. People just don't know what to discuss at the moment I guess
Karadoc, I know how you feel, I also feared that I had to organize things too much, but it really didn't turn out that way. I created several threads for specific purposes at the beginning, and once in a while I make a new thread about the aspect of the game I'm currently working on in case I need peoples' input, and that's it.
I understand your fear that there might not be enough traffic here at the moment, but there seems to be a dedicated base of K-Mod players and one/two dozen people are definitely enough to carry a mod forum. People just don't know what to discuss at the moment I guess
TheOnlyDJCat
Warlord
Sometimes I simply forget to ask, because the games are so exciting 
Anyway, there was a discussion a few weeks ago about archer rushes.
Yesterday I was the victim of that in two games, the second game being a restart from the 4000BC save.
I was on a continent with two other guys (Napoleon and Julius) and they both(!) decided to attack me around 2500-2000BC with archer stacks of around 10 units.
I saw that the first time since playing civ, and now two civs in one game and the same after restarting again, leads me into thinking, that this might be not pure bad luck.
----
And another small question. If I play team with another human against solo computer AIs. Is there everything correct with the cost of techs when negotiating tech trades?
Because tech costs are doubled for teams, there might be a bug when the tech costs are compared between teams and non teams.
Anyway, there was a discussion a few weeks ago about archer rushes.
Yesterday I was the victim of that in two games, the second game being a restart from the 4000BC save.
I was on a continent with two other guys (Napoleon and Julius) and they both(!) decided to attack me around 2500-2000BC with archer stacks of around 10 units.
I saw that the first time since playing civ, and now two civs in one game and the same after restarting again, leads me into thinking, that this might be not pure bad luck.
----
And another small question. If I play team with another human against solo computer AIs. Is there everything correct with the cost of techs when negotiating tech trades?
Because tech costs are doubled for teams, there might be a bug when the tech costs are compared between teams and non teams.
As far as i remember team games are supposed to work that way. So if both of u research the same tech it will have normal research cost. If u guys want to discover 2 different techs then they are more expensive (2x). Someone should confirm this.
Mattygerst
Prince
Sub-Threads (what you're talking about) is what I meant**
TheOnlyDJCat
Warlord
@en_dotter
Yes, that's absolutely right. Techs in teams cost double, so if both are researching the same everything is ok.
My question was, if the doubled cost is reversed to single cost during tech trading. So if we trade aesthetics as a team with an AI to get Alphabet, the tech costs should be the same?
Yes, that's absolutely right. Techs in teams cost double, so if both are researching the same everything is ok.
My question was, if the doubled cost is reversed to single cost during tech trading. So if we trade aesthetics as a team with an AI to get Alphabet, the tech costs should be the same?
Charles555nc
Prince
- Joined
- May 3, 2010
- Messages
- 522
Karadoc,
I was wondering if you could cause the automatic pop growth "selector" to NEVER make a citizen become a specialist, when a city cant then produce a great person in, say, 30 or less turns.
Basically I get most, if not all of my great persons from my cap. Yet, every turn, I have to fight with my numerous cities that grow, switching citizens constantly from producing a couple great person points back to actually productive tiles. I do play philosophic civs but still, this seems to be getting very micro heavy and seems like it should be very simple.
If you wont patch it, perhaps you could throw me some tips to avoid it.
I dont want specialists unless I, myself, and me, want that city to produce them! Ninja cities constantly sneaking in specialists that might make a great person in 200 turns!! Arghhhh.
Btw appreciate your recent updates
-Charles
I was wondering if you could cause the automatic pop growth "selector" to NEVER make a citizen become a specialist, when a city cant then produce a great person in, say, 30 or less turns.
Basically I get most, if not all of my great persons from my cap. Yet, every turn, I have to fight with my numerous cities that grow, switching citizens constantly from producing a couple great person points back to actually productive tiles. I do play philosophic civs but still, this seems to be getting very micro heavy and seems like it should be very simple.
If you wont patch it, perhaps you could throw me some tips to avoid it.
I dont want specialists unless I, myself, and me, want that city to produce them! Ninja cities constantly sneaking in specialists that might make a great person in 200 turns!! Arghhhh.
Btw appreciate your recent updates
-Charles
Hi Karadoc,
Maybe I have found a bug in 136:
I select 5 infantry units, 2 are wounded, 3 are full health. I click "heal" and all 5 units go to "heal mode". However the 3 at full health should go to "fortify", like happen when I have selected a group, I click to "fortify" and units inelegibles to fortify go to "sleep mode"
Maybe I have found a bug in 136:
I select 5 infantry units, 2 are wounded, 3 are full health. I click "heal" and all 5 units go to "heal mode". However the 3 at full health should go to "fortify", like happen when I have selected a group, I click to "fortify" and units inelegibles to fortify go to "sleep mode"
IMO - not a bug.
If you have a group of 5 units and select "heal" - you want all units to stay together - until all are healed. As for "fortify" - sleeping units will still "heal". If you want to be unit selective - do it unit by unit.
Similar threads
