1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

New Beta Version - February 18th (2-18)

Discussion in 'Community Patch Project' started by Gazebo, Feb 19, 2020.

  1. RankLord123

    RankLord123 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    I’m having an issue playing as Mongolia. I have all mods but I can’t heavy tribute from city states. I can only regular tribute for like 10 gold
     
  2. Acaerus

    Acaerus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, i don`t know what to do anymore. I constantly experience crashes to desktop now, it started with last beta build. Everything working fine at home where i have steam licensed version. I tried like 5-6 different versions now, tried to install on brand new clean PC and even tried to move Assets folder from steam licensed version. Nothing helps. Game just crashed at random turn and loading save does not help.

    P.S. Never had crash to desktop with VP before...
     
  3. Voremonger

    Voremonger Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2018
    Messages:
    68
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    I personally don't care if AI snowballing mechanics are changed.
    Since the snowballing AI is almost always on another continent than me they are not a serious threat in terms of military.
    Since such AI are also heavy on the top side of the tech tree while I'm typically heavy on the bottom side it's also possible for me to still get some wonders.
    I usually just disable Science Victories; I don't like the idea of a victory condition that requires no interaction with the other players anyways.

    Also, for the AI building wonders is a zero-sum game: any bonus that one AI gets for building a wonder is a bonus that all other AI are not getting.
    Therefore, if an AI on another continent is stacking wonders they are denying the accompanying instant yields to the AI that I have already weakened.
    I think if the instant yields the AI are getting were distributed evenly it would make the mid game harder and the late game easier (at least for warmongers).
     
  4. SuperNoobCamper

    SuperNoobCamper Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2017
    Messages:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    I thought there was some sort of agreement that fun and balance trumps realism; the presence of a story is cool if it does not -unfortunately it does- mess with the game balance ... a player getting +20 wonders built while the rest get none because that player was the first to build one is not ideal imo.
     
  5. Asterix Rage

    Asterix Rage Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,089
    2x (F-22)Jet Fighter come up with Pentagon WWonder !
    Looks like a bug to me :huh:
     
  6. Tugboatspotter

    Tugboatspotter Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2019
    Messages:
    97
    Yes.

    How does the wonder production penalty work? is it civ or city based? Either way, it seems the penalty should be higher, and if it is civ based, then would not a city based penalty make more sense?

    Perhaps it could be both. A smaller civ penalty and a larger city penalty.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2020
  7. Roamy

    Roamy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    Messages:
    11
    Hello friends. I'm a bit at my wit's end with the beta (emphasis for dramatic comedy, not actually at my wit's end).

    Playing with the newest hotfix, long time civ deity player but relatively new to the more recent Vox Populi versions (which are awesome, entirely reinvigorated civ for me and makes for the best 4x experience I've ever had so far, major kudos).

    Couple of things I've noticed in my most recent game on emperor:

    -For some reason barbarians seemed to be more akin to raging barbarians than what I'm used to with the more recent versions. I was getting utterly decimated by hordes of them and my warrior archer combo were getting slammed by a single camp that kept spamming warriors/spearmen (it was on a forested hill, so they had extra CS).

    -Managed to JUST snag a stonehenge, Ai managed to grab every other wonder in quick succession. No chance at hanging garden or mausoleum even though I had a pretty strong start.

    -Ai was several techs ahead, but I had a weak early game (ottomans tradition, for the record) due to barbarian issues and losing out on two wonders I tried to get).

    -This is unrelated to feedback, but definitely noticing just how little I know about optimized Vox Populi play, especially in terms of early build order. AI is just a lot stronger than in last beta, it feels like, and I fall behind quickly. Perhaps building too many buildings, or getting too many superfluous techs at the start, but they all seem so useful and strong! I went monument/(shrine)/switch to stonehenge/settler (buy warrior/archer)/worker/granary/council/settler in my capitol. I wish I could find a high level VP streamer to watch and learn from to better evaluate the opportunity cost of things I'm doing, but hey.

    For the record, much love for all the work, big fan. <3
     
  8. Edaka

    Edaka King

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    703
    I think Immortal and Deity being super hard, even harder than before, is fine, as long as the difficulty is consistent throughout different eras, playstyles, civs, etc (which may not be the case right now). I wanted to say that because I think we should aim to eliminate inconsistency, not overall dificulty. If somebody's usual difficulty level has recently become too hard, it should be perfectly fine to step down a level or two. I mean, Deity is supposed to be near impossible, right? (Again, as long as there's consistency). Not long ago there were complaints about Deity being too easy. Just a thing to keep in mind.
     
  9. Bromar1

    Bromar1 King

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2015
    Messages:
    802
    I feel like it's pretty easy to predict the snowballers though. If an AI gets early wonders, I automatically know that they are going to snowball harder than the rest. This goes double for Petra because I know whoever has it is going to start completing trade routes earlier which gives them more difficulty bonuses earlier which let's them snipe more wonders which gives more difficulty bonuses, etc etc.
     
  10. Gidoza

    Gidoza Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,150

    I'd be content with a difficulty bonus every so many turns...because the current system is silly.
     
    Heinz_Guderian likes this.
  11. crdvis16

    crdvis16 Emperor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    1,033
    I agree that it's possible to predict run aways. I'm not sure how useful it is, though, if you aren't in a position to do something about it. Even if you can militarily intervene to slow that one runaway do we want most games of VP to be "militarily stop the runaway or lose"? It would be nice if a generally peaceful playstyle were possible.

    I'm also just of the mind that the game is way more fun when there are multiple competitive AI through mid game and the end game most of the time. Chasing a single runaway while the rest of the AI field is largely uncompetitive feels very blah to me. It's so much more interesting if 50% of the field is competitive. You have to worry about multiple victory condition threats, ideologies become more interesting, diplomacy is more interesting, etc.

    Though again- I'm still not even sure if my 2 games so far were flukes or not. If I dropped to immortal and most of the AI were ahead of me then I'd just drop difficulty more. However, if I drop difficulty as is I'm just assuming that one AI will still outshine the other 6 and it'll be essentially a 1v1 again or if I drop difficulty too much I'll just be the runaway with no competition (which might be even worse than chasing an AI runaway).
     
  12. kenneth1221

    kenneth1221 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2016
    Messages:
    203
    Maybe there's a way to build in anti-localised snowballing, so that the AI gets bonuses but not specifically the kind that would help them snowball in the way they've started snowballing. For example, a Wonder would give all yields except for Production, while a TR would give all yields except gold/production/food depending on what kind of trade route. That way they're still winning but it's not as much a win-harder situation.

    Just a thought. Not even sure it's possible.
     
    Maxxim69 and crdvis16 like this.
  13. Gidoza

    Gidoza Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,150
    Or maybe if an AI is snowballing, all the other AI will be as brutal and domineering with that AI as they would be with us if us human players were in the lead.
     
  14. HeathcliffWarriors

    HeathcliffWarriors King

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm working on this, but there's only so much diplomacy can do in that equation.
     
  15. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,073
    No I don't think its a fluke, I generally see 1 strong runaway in the pack...on Immortal I expect them to be 5 or more tech ahead, and at least 2-3 policies ahead of the pack by Renaissance.
     
  16. Bromar1

    Bromar1 King

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2015
    Messages:
    802
    This is my sentiment exactly. It also makes diplomacy with non-runaways feel very unrewarding. Either I befriend the runaway ASAP or plan to conquer them. Why should I pour resources in befriending the non-runaway AI if I know they're going to be lagging behind for the rest of the game? They're never going to be a serious threat, if anything they are just going to feed the runaway more cities
     
    Heinz_Guderian likes this.
  17. HeathcliffWarriors

    HeathcliffWarriors King

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Male
    While I like the idea of event-based bonuses, I think my reasoning there is entirely emotional.

    Practically speaking and for better game balance, I think it would be better to have a consistent time-based bonus.

    Brainstormed idea: The bonus to Gold and Production could be scaled based on how many cities a civ has compared to the global average (more per city for Tall, less per city for Wide). Likewise, the bonuses for Food, Science and Culture could be larger for wide empires and smaller for tall empires. This would compensate for the weaknesses of each playstyle, keeping AIs challenging while avoiding snowballing.

    Alternatively, you could invert that and give more Food, Science and Culture bonuses to tall AIs and more Gold/Production to wide AIs. The idea there would be to make their strengths even stronger while leaving a weakness open.

    Either way, I think that would work better than a feedback loop for building World Wonders / founding cities / etc.
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2020
    Skidizzle, Maxxim69 and Rhys DeAnno like this.
  18. Stalker0

    Stalker0 Baller Magnus

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    6,073
    And again, there are plenty of ways to make a consistent baseline and add in some randomness for flavor in a way that doesn't auto create the snowball.

    1) Do X turns, +- Y turns
    2) Add a X% chance (like 1%) a turn to get yields every turn after turn 100 or so.
    3) When any wonder of the world is created, give a random civ yields.
    4) When the WC is called, give a random civ yields

    The last 3 might be better just for memory purposes. The first one you would need to track, but the others you could just call each round or when that event triggers.
     
  19. HeathcliffWarriors

    HeathcliffWarriors King

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    981
    Gender:
    Male
    2 and 3 allow for games to randomly become too easy or too hard, though.

    I think the best bet is a smaller bonus to yields every X turns, scaling quadratically with era. Randomness, if desired, can be obtained by varying X by +/- Y turns as Stalker0 suggests. The yield bonuses themselves could also be randomly modified by +/- some %.

    I also think my idea of more Gold/Production for Tall and Food/Science/Culture for Wide has potential.
     
    vyyt and Kim Dong Un like this.
  20. Kim Dong Un

    Kim Dong Un The One & Unly Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2017
    Messages:
    603
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pyongyang
    They are doing this in my current game, though... I'm in 2nd behind Siam who has 1000 score lead on me with 25+ wonders, the majority of the CS alliances, and is 6 tenets into Freedom while I'm not even into my Ideology: he's been sanctioned, decolonized, and now joint-warred on by 5 of the 8 players in game (Gandhi is still his buddy, of course...).

    Remember the AI are still looking out for their own interests, which should include leeching off of that snowballer for as long as possible, until they're hopefully in a better position to actually do something about the run-away. There's also the case of a snowballer having a greater military/navy, and we still want the AI to utilize common sense with regards to diplo and how they approach and interact with their situations and surroundings. A lot of times there's only so much they can do. If my neighbor Ethiopia (or any of the numerous civs with leader traits favoring peaceful play) with 2 cities and 5 less techs declares on Siam from across the ocean, people argue about AI declaring pointless wars. At the same time we're asking for Haile Selassie and the 6 other peaceful leaders in my current game to flip a switch and go into kamikaze mode. We can't have it both ways - not everyone is going to be satisfied.

    I think the diplo aspect of approaching powerful/run-away civs has come a long way and will continue to refine itself through the fine work of HCW, but the focus should be on addressing how the bonuses are implemented.
     

Share This Page