[Modmod]Dawn of Knoedel - Comprehensive Rebalance Project
- Thread starter Imperator Knoedel
- Start date
merijn_v1
Black Belt
That would be very cool indeed.
Just give me a minute...
Just give me a minute...
civcivcivcivciv
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
- Messages
- 274
unit skin of marine is black
i think there s something crash.
and i can't make knight in this mod.
i think there s something crash.
and i can't make knight in this mod.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
You got a problem with racial integration? 
When does it crash exactly?
Are you running Vassalage?
When does it crash exactly?
Are you running Vassalage?
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
By the way I just uploaded a new commit, which pretty much exclusively deals with civics. Oligarchy, Caste System, Serfdom, Collaboration, Tolerance, State Ideology, go and play with them!
Now there might be some initial wonkiness as I'm sure I've overlooked the odd Python file here and there and who knows what's hidden in the DLL relating to civics that I've inadvertently broken. Just report any bugs you encounter and I'll do my best to fix them. Of course the new set of civics is probably not very well balanced right now and could use some playtesting. Also I'm unsure if the AI actually adopts any of the new civics...
Here's the changelog:
Some things I'm considering now:
Two Statesman slots from Courthouse instead of just one, also give one to Palace.
Change starting plot of China in 3.000BC, suggestions as to where exactly are welcome.
Drafting with Standing Army?
Add penalties to all or most civics?
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to learn how to compile a DLL, which is like my second least favorite aspect of modding, the absolute worst of course being graphics. *shudders*
Now there might be some initial wonkiness as I'm sure I've overlooked the odd Python file here and there and who knows what's hidden in the DLL relating to civics that I've inadvertently broken. Just report any bugs you encounter and I'll do my best to fix them. Of course the new set of civics is probably not very well balanced right now and could use some playtesting. Also I'm unsure if the AI actually adopts any of the new civics...
Here's the changelog:
Spoiler :
Some things I'm considering now:
Two Statesman slots from Courthouse instead of just one, also give one to Palace.
Change starting plot of China in 3.000BC, suggestions as to where exactly are welcome.
Drafting with Standing Army?
Add penalties to all or most civics?
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to learn how to compile a DLL, which is like my second least favorite aspect of modding, the absolute worst of course being graphics. *shudders*
windman
Chieftain
Thanks for the updated one!
I played China 3000BC start. When I capitulated Russia and Poland, they both became 'Tributary Zhou State'. In the meanwhile, I am 'Zhou Empire'. Not sure if it is a bug on the dynamic civ names, or with intentions?
I played China 3000BC start. When I capitulated Russia and Poland, they both became 'Tributary Zhou State'. In the meanwhile, I am 'Zhou Empire'. Not sure if it is a bug on the dynamic civ names, or with intentions?
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
That doesn't strike me as too weird, but then again I don't know enough about Chinese dynasties to judge one way or the other. As far as dynamic names are concerned I made it so that Oligarchy gives a republican name with Representation or Egalitarianism and a monarchical name with any other Organization civic, which come to think of it isn't really what I want for Rome or Greece, so I'll probably have to look into that again anyway.
Edit: According to Wikipedia the Zhou dynasty ruled in the first millennium BC, so never mind me, that really is weird.
Edit: According to Wikipedia the Zhou dynasty ruled in the first millennium BC, so never mind me, that really is weird.
civcivcivcivciv
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2013
- Messages
- 274
your mod is awesome
can you change unit skin of submarine to attack submarine please ?
attack submarine is wwii version. and submarine is modern version.
but even modern submarine can't bring missiles but wwii version can do it ?
i think that s not realistic.
i mean, u-boat can bring missiles but submarine (modern submarine skin) they can't.
how do u think ?
i tried to change it
i mean i tried to edit about CIV4UnitInfos
<Class>UNITCLASS_SUBMARINE</Class> in this class
<SpecialCargo>SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE</SpecialCargo>
<DomainCargo>DOMAIN_LAND</DomainCargo>
<iCargo>1</iCargo>
and
<Class>UNITCLASS_ATTACK_SUBMARINE</Class>
<SpecialCargo>SPECIALUNIT_MISSILE</SpecialCargo>
<DomainCargo>DOMAIN_AIR</DomainCargo>
<iCargo>3</iCargo>
like this
i changed. i want to change attack submarine can bring missiles
and submarine can bring just spy.
but i couldn't play the game.
there was xml load.
i don't know what s wrong.
if i don't load any mod, if i just play in bts, then it plays well.
but only this mod , rfcd mod, there s xml error.
can you change unit skin of submarine to attack submarine please ?
attack submarine is wwii version. and submarine is modern version.
but even modern submarine can't bring missiles but wwii version can do it ?
i think that s not realistic.
i mean, u-boat can bring missiles but submarine (modern submarine skin) they can't.
how do u think ?
i tried to change it
i mean i tried to edit about CIV4UnitInfos
<Class>UNITCLASS_SUBMARINE</Class> in this class
<SpecialCargo>SPECIALUNIT_PEOPLE</SpecialCargo>
<DomainCargo>DOMAIN_LAND</DomainCargo>
<iCargo>1</iCargo>
and
<Class>UNITCLASS_ATTACK_SUBMARINE</Class>
<SpecialCargo>SPECIALUNIT_MISSILE</SpecialCargo>
<DomainCargo>DOMAIN_AIR</DomainCargo>
<iCargo>3</iCargo>
like this
i changed. i want to change attack submarine can bring missiles
and submarine can bring just spy.
but i couldn't play the game.
there was xml load.
i don't know what s wrong.
if i don't load any mod, if i just play in bts, then it plays well.
but only this mod , rfcd mod, there s xml error.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
Hey Imp, what do you think of my old idea of Evolving UBs?
As in UBs that gain additional traits or bonuses on reaching certain Eras/techs?
I've been thinking recently, and it might be great to make them modular too,
like having different benefits active if you're running different civics.
Of course, I don't know how hard/how possible what I'm suggesting is.
A Ger for instance could:
-Provide additional Culture in the Modern Era
-Increase healing by 10% for all stationed troops if running State Property
-Provide an extra Horse Resource if running Capitalism
As in UBs that gain additional traits or bonuses on reaching certain Eras/techs?
I've been thinking recently, and it might be great to make them modular too,
like having different benefits active if you're running different civics.
Of course, I don't know how hard/how possible what I'm suggesting is.
A Ger for instance could:
-Provide additional Culture in the Modern Era
-Increase healing by 10% for all stationed troops if running State Property
-Provide an extra Horse Resource if running Capitalism
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Regarding the submarine thing I don't know, I would have to look into it.
Re TD, that's a nice idea at all but in case you are not aware I am not a wizard and thus have so far been unable to even compile DoC's DLL, neved mind actually coding new game mechanics. Once I know enough magic the first priority will be implementing my ideas for buffing culture, followed by UHV adjustments.
In either case the new semester has just begun and I'm busy busy busy. Why, I am typing this very post sitting in uni after I just spent the last two hours spreading communist propaganda on the streets. And I got up at 7AM, like a medieval peasant or something! Who can live like that on a daily basis?
Re TD, that's a nice idea at all but in case you are not aware I am not a wizard and thus have so far been unable to even compile DoC's DLL, neved mind actually coding new game mechanics. Once I know enough magic the first priority will be implementing my ideas for buffing culture, followed by UHV adjustments.
In either case the new semester has just begun and I'm busy busy busy. Why, I am typing this very post sitting in uni after I just spent the last two hours spreading communist propaganda on the streets. And I got up at 7AM, like a medieval peasant or something! Who can live like that on a daily basis?
merijn_v1
Black Belt
UHV are all python. No need for recompiling the DLL there.
(Ergo you could start already
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
You sure about that? There are several conditions where in the Python file there is literally nothing but a comment.
You've probably been looking only in the method that does periodic checks (i.e. once per turn), where most goals are and the remaining ones are noted as comments for completeness's sake (and documentation). The others are triggered by more immediate causes (city conquest, tech discovery, building completion etc.), but they're still in the same file.
Victory.py is probably a good way to familiarize yourself with how event triggers work in Civ4 modding, because it probably covers all of them.
Victory.py is probably a good way to familiarize yourself with how event triggers work in Civ4 modding, because it probably covers all of them.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
I hope I'll get around to actually doing something for this mod this weekend, but I don't promise anything.
Disregarding the whole dreadful SDK magic for now, I am thinking about pulling a 180 on civic upkeep. As I probably already explained somewhere, there are two possibilities as to what civic upkeep actually represents: What your state has to pay in order to maintain a civic, or how easy it is for a state to maintain it. I put that horribly and nobody will understand what I am trying to say, but I'm tired and not exactly sober, so bear with me. Basically the first option would mean that civics that require significant hand holding by the central government, such as Totalitarianism or Central Planning, should have high upkeep, while civics which are more laizess fair (I know I spelled that wrong) like City States, Vassalage or Free Market ought to have low or no upkeep. The second option would mean that the civics which were in real life often used by poorer or backward nations or huge empires (wide? Autocracy, Totalitarianism) which incur significant upkeep costs should have low or no upkeep while civics used by rich or advanced or small nations (tall? Republic, Egalitarianism) should have high upkeep.
Neither Vanilla nor DoC consistently took one approach, instead they both chose one path for wome civic categories and the other for the rest. In Vanilla for example the Government column follows the "upkeep is high because the state has a lot to do" reasoning, making Police State expensive (lots and lots of beaurocracy god dammit how hard can it be to program an actually working spellchecker I don't believe for a second that's the right spelling) and Hereditary Rule low (no complex bureaucratic election system, the line of succession is as simple as can be). The economy column however follows the other paradigma, making State Property of all things the civic with the lowest upkeep (it is good for large empires with a relatively bad ratio of development to land) and Environmentalism ("good" though it actually sucks and Free Market is better for small advanced nations with few resources and a relatively good ratio of development to land) the one with the highest. In DoC oddly enough it's the other way around, with Government/Organization following the second paradigma (Autocracy/Totalitarianism low, Republic/Egalitarianism high) and Economy the first (Central Planning High, Free Market low).
I already addressed this in my modmod, by making all civics follow the second paradigma. The starting civics, City States, Guilds etc. all have high upkeep not because the central government has a lot of things to do, but because they are not supposed to be run by huge inefficient empires. Those should be totalitarian mercantilistic autocracies, while democracy is better suited for smaller nations, hence why the authoritarian civics have low upkeep and the democratic ones medium. Even so I made Free Market, Central Planning and Public Welfare all medium upkeep, because they should be not as nice for big empires as Mercantilism but not so bad as Guilds, which should be outdated anyhow. On an intuitive level I knew that making both Free Market and Central Planning cost exactly the same in upkeep is wrong on so many levels. It doesn't matter on which side of the capitalism versus communism debate you stand, everybody would agree that CP and FM should be on opposite sides of the upkeep spectrum, whichever it turned out to be, and yet here I went and made them equals in order to remain consistent with the paradigma I had chosen.
I now think that was a mistake, and would prefer to move towards a "upkeep represents how much the central government has to pay" model instead, along with more trade offs (instead of straight bonuses, I've talked about this a million times already). However there is an additional twist I want to throw in there, the reversal of the polarity of the connection between city upkeep versus civic upkeep. In DoC (and to a lesser extent in Vanilla) civics which increase city upkeep have high upkeep themselves (City States) while civics that decrease city upkeep have no upkeep themsleves (Totalitarianism). In my new paradigma I would do it the other way round: City States and Vassalage and Free Market (for example) have no or low upkeep because the central government if there even is one barely does anything, however those civics would actually increase city upkeep as it is the more local entities that have to pick up the slack. On the other end Totalitarianism and Central Planning have high upkeep, but remove or reduce city upkeep, as here it is the central government that has to do everything.
However this would implicitly mean that default civics, at least Tribalism and Subsistence, would have to be bumped down to low upkeep again. To compensate for that I might give them a penalty to commerce.
Incidentally Castles should reduce city upkeep, to jive even better with Vassalage.
Something else that occurred to me is long term versus short term benefit. Imo Autocracy should be the best government civic short term, as an ambitious and competent dictator can get a lot of stuff done very quickly compared to the slow bureaucratic grinding of republics. However dictatorships are notoriously bad once the first leader is dead and you almost always have a succession crisis. Democracies and monarchies are a lot better in that regard. I am not sure that is adequately captured by the game. Imo Autocracy should have some short term bonus that goes away after some turns, so you can hop into it for a while when you really want to get something done and then switch to another civic that's better for the long term. Honestly I don't know what this bonus should be, and I guess Drafting kind of does the job, but at the same time I feel drafting shouldn't be exclusive to dictatorships. Eh.
Another way to have this would be by stability. Autocracy should make your civ immune to negative stability effects or severely lessen their impact shortly after it is adopted, but become more and more unstable as time goes on.
Of course you could argue against that that dicators can be better at long term projects than democracies because political parties that need to be re elected every four years must focus on the short term in order to gain votes whiod a dictatorship can be certain that it will still be ruling in 20 years, but eeeeeeeeh.
I hope somebody somewhere can make something of this tired rant.
Disregarding the whole dreadful SDK magic for now, I am thinking about pulling a 180 on civic upkeep. As I probably already explained somewhere, there are two possibilities as to what civic upkeep actually represents: What your state has to pay in order to maintain a civic, or how easy it is for a state to maintain it. I put that horribly and nobody will understand what I am trying to say, but I'm tired and not exactly sober, so bear with me. Basically the first option would mean that civics that require significant hand holding by the central government, such as Totalitarianism or Central Planning, should have high upkeep, while civics which are more laizess fair (I know I spelled that wrong) like City States, Vassalage or Free Market ought to have low or no upkeep. The second option would mean that the civics which were in real life often used by poorer or backward nations or huge empires (wide? Autocracy, Totalitarianism) which incur significant upkeep costs should have low or no upkeep while civics used by rich or advanced or small nations (tall? Republic, Egalitarianism) should have high upkeep.
Neither Vanilla nor DoC consistently took one approach, instead they both chose one path for wome civic categories and the other for the rest. In Vanilla for example the Government column follows the "upkeep is high because the state has a lot to do" reasoning, making Police State expensive (lots and lots of beaurocracy god dammit how hard can it be to program an actually working spellchecker I don't believe for a second that's the right spelling) and Hereditary Rule low (no complex bureaucratic election system, the line of succession is as simple as can be). The economy column however follows the other paradigma, making State Property of all things the civic with the lowest upkeep (it is good for large empires with a relatively bad ratio of development to land) and Environmentalism ("good" though it actually sucks and Free Market is better for small advanced nations with few resources and a relatively good ratio of development to land) the one with the highest. In DoC oddly enough it's the other way around, with Government/Organization following the second paradigma (Autocracy/Totalitarianism low, Republic/Egalitarianism high) and Economy the first (Central Planning High, Free Market low).
I already addressed this in my modmod, by making all civics follow the second paradigma. The starting civics, City States, Guilds etc. all have high upkeep not because the central government has a lot of things to do, but because they are not supposed to be run by huge inefficient empires. Those should be totalitarian mercantilistic autocracies, while democracy is better suited for smaller nations, hence why the authoritarian civics have low upkeep and the democratic ones medium. Even so I made Free Market, Central Planning and Public Welfare all medium upkeep, because they should be not as nice for big empires as Mercantilism but not so bad as Guilds, which should be outdated anyhow. On an intuitive level I knew that making both Free Market and Central Planning cost exactly the same in upkeep is wrong on so many levels. It doesn't matter on which side of the capitalism versus communism debate you stand, everybody would agree that CP and FM should be on opposite sides of the upkeep spectrum, whichever it turned out to be, and yet here I went and made them equals in order to remain consistent with the paradigma I had chosen.
I now think that was a mistake, and would prefer to move towards a "upkeep represents how much the central government has to pay" model instead, along with more trade offs (instead of straight bonuses, I've talked about this a million times already). However there is an additional twist I want to throw in there, the reversal of the polarity of the connection between city upkeep versus civic upkeep. In DoC (and to a lesser extent in Vanilla) civics which increase city upkeep have high upkeep themselves (City States) while civics that decrease city upkeep have no upkeep themsleves (Totalitarianism). In my new paradigma I would do it the other way round: City States and Vassalage and Free Market (for example) have no or low upkeep because the central government if there even is one barely does anything, however those civics would actually increase city upkeep as it is the more local entities that have to pick up the slack. On the other end Totalitarianism and Central Planning have high upkeep, but remove or reduce city upkeep, as here it is the central government that has to do everything.
However this would implicitly mean that default civics, at least Tribalism and Subsistence, would have to be bumped down to low upkeep again. To compensate for that I might give them a penalty to commerce.
Incidentally Castles should reduce city upkeep, to jive even better with Vassalage.
Something else that occurred to me is long term versus short term benefit. Imo Autocracy should be the best government civic short term, as an ambitious and competent dictator can get a lot of stuff done very quickly compared to the slow bureaucratic grinding of republics. However dictatorships are notoriously bad once the first leader is dead and you almost always have a succession crisis. Democracies and monarchies are a lot better in that regard. I am not sure that is adequately captured by the game. Imo Autocracy should have some short term bonus that goes away after some turns, so you can hop into it for a while when you really want to get something done and then switch to another civic that's better for the long term. Honestly I don't know what this bonus should be, and I guess Drafting kind of does the job, but at the same time I feel drafting shouldn't be exclusive to dictatorships. Eh.
Another way to have this would be by stability. Autocracy should make your civ immune to negative stability effects or severely lessen their impact shortly after it is adopted, but become more and more unstable as time goes on.
Of course you could argue against that that dicators can be better at long term projects than democracies because political parties that need to be re elected every four years must focus on the short term in order to gain votes whiod a dictatorship can be certain that it will still be ruling in 20 years, but eeeeeeeeh.
I hope somebody somewhere can make something of this tired rant.
ezzlar
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,846
Interesting. Havent seen a perfect solution yet.
It would make sense that only developed nations could afford to adopt the "advanced" civics and get their bonuses. For the poorer civs you could pick less "advanced" civics while you grow and develop. You also get the chance to play "dirty" while developing.
Advanced civics would then be bonuses for trade, culture, specialists, health etc @high cost
Developing civics would be more like military, stability, production, happiness, espionage etc @low cost
It would make sense that only developed nations could afford to adopt the "advanced" civics and get their bonuses. For the poorer civs you could pick less "advanced" civics while you grow and develop. You also get the chance to play "dirty" while developing.
Advanced civics would then be bonuses for trade, culture, specialists, health etc @high cost
Developing civics would be more like military, stability, production, happiness, espionage etc @low cost
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
That's pretty much the way it works now, with Autocracy and Totalitarianism being the cheapest options in their respective categories while Republic and Egalitarianism are more expensive but give bonuses to towns. Here it's not too bad. The biggest issue is, of course, the economy. Should Central Planning have low upkeep because it was mostly used by less developed nations to catch up? Should Free Market then have high upkeep? But what about the likes of Chile? Figuring out which civics are supposed to be for less developed nations and representing that with upkeep requires a whole lot of thought, while making upkeep represent the influence of a central government is much more intuitive.
ezzlar
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,846
Well. Then Free market should have high upkeep to represent the requirements of a highly functional society. And then Central Planning would have low upkeep since it can be implemented on a fairly undeveloped society.
But it is hard to make such general assumptions. Then you also have to factor in what the bonuses are. The high upkeep civics should of course allow you to have an even greater wealth despite the increase in upkeep. Or just that the type of bonuses outweight the low cost civic bonuses.
But it is hard to make such general assumptions. Then you also have to factor in what the bonuses are. The high upkeep civics should of course allow you to have an even greater wealth despite the increase in upkeep. Or just that the type of bonuses outweight the low cost civic bonuses.
need my speed
Rex Omnium Imperarium
I do not see what is wrong with going by empire sizes - this seems the best solution to me? - nor with having both Free Market and Central Planning at 'medium'.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
I don't see why a Free Market shouldn't be able to be implemented in undeveloped societies.
It seems a bit arbitrary to me. And what about the likes of Absolutism? Shouldn't it have lower upkeep because it was mostly used by colonial empires?
ezzlar
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,846
Undeveloped societies could adopt free market. However, the costs could be greater than the benefits as institutions and legal codes are outdated and corruption of the market or rent seeking prevails.
This is of course a game mechanic choice, I do not know how true this proposition is. There is however plenty of examples where the free market fails.
And also. Commerce in this game is far better than production, happiness, drafting, health etc. What is the reason for not picking the trade civics? I would ask for huge production bonuses for sacrificing capitalism/free market trade boosts.
Edit: One could argue the same about Democracy. It requires highly functional societies to maintain. Not rich perhaps but functional.
This is of course a game mechanic choice, I do not know how true this proposition is. There is however plenty of examples where the free market fails.
And also. Commerce in this game is far better than production, happiness, drafting, health etc. What is the reason for not picking the trade civics? I would ask for huge production bonuses for sacrificing capitalism/free market trade boosts.
Edit: One could argue the same about Democracy. It requires highly functional societies to maintain. Not rich perhaps but functional.
Similar threads
