After a quick glance, you still have some odd values for Warlord, where the AI gets more bonus than for the next difficulty levels... Same with Emperor, as well as <iAttitudeChange> for Immortal.
Also, you may want to put -5 to <iAIPerEraModifier> for Immortal (or Emperor) for a leaner difficulty increase. The difference between 0 and 10 is actually quite huge (10% cumulative bonus in many areas for the AI at new era).
Actually Warlord is the old Prince, i didnt change anything there. Same goes for Monarch which is the old Deity.
Now when you say "the differnece between 0 and 10 is actually quite huge (10% cumulative bonus in many areas for the AI at new era)"
you do know i have it at (minus) -10, correct??
Noble diff should have the human values normalized, i.e. at 100 (build, research, maintenances, and so on) as that's the Diff the AI uses, always. Setting Noble to 110 Research takes some away from the 160 set on Diety, making the Diety actual cost be 145 as it's derived from the noble being counted as 100 so setting it at 110 is like dividing Diety's 160 by 1.1 for a final difficulty grade.
Likewise the 85 Maintenance makes Diety's 130 act as 152 in comparison, making it that much harder rather than at 130 harder.
So SO, try to use Noble as the "median" and go easier down and harder up from Noble.
Noble diff should have the human values normalized, i.e. at 100 (build, research, maintenance's, and so on) as that's the Diff the AI uses, always. Setting Noble to 110 Research takes some away from the 160 set on Deity, making the Deity actual cost be 145 as it's derived from the noble being counted as 100 so setting it at 110 is like dividing Deity's 160 by 1.1 for a final difficulty grade.
Likewise the 85 Maintenance makes Deity's 130 act as 152 in comparison, making it that much harder rather than at 130 harder.
So SO, try to use Noble as the "median" and go easier down and harder up from Noble.
I am lost here, because from Emperor and below is the "normal" what the handicap has been for a looong time??
Settler is the old Warlord
Chieftain is the old Noble
Warlord, Prince
Noble, Monarch
Prince, Emperor
Monarch, Immortal
Emperor, Deity
Immortal (Blue Genie's (i believe?)
and Deity, should be the brand new one??
You have 9 levels but rather than going from level 1 through level 9 you actually have an offset of 3, thus having the difficulties set as level -3 through to +5, where Noble is level 0.
In any attempts to change the levels you always have to keep Noble at level 0 as that is the middle, the median, and most especially because that is the level the AI gets it's base values from.
For instance: Human plays Settler, wanting an easy game.
Settler gives the Human a 25% reduction in research costs to facilitate this (iResearchPercent@75).
This 25% should be in comparison to the AI which is why there is no <iAIResearchPercent> at all as the AI uses the generic Noble Difficulty (where iResearchPercent should be 100)
Setting the Noble (level 0) to 110 iResearchPercent effectively changes the Human's handicap from 25% cheaper to (75/1.1=68.2) 31.8% cheaper.
The same Human now tries an Immortal Game and should have 50% more expensive research BUT since the AI uses 110 as a normalized (aka 100%) cost the actual handicap given to the AI is (150/1.1=136.4) 36.4% higher research costs.
The same goes for all the other values. Though:
When it comes to values starting with iAI it is alright to modify the Noble level as well as it is there to design a more competetive AI rather than set a handicap level, and is a modification on a Base not set by Noble settings.
Some values are global, meaning that the highest handicap in the game is used to determine what is used. Among those are the Barb and Animal spawn rates.
Actually Warlord is the old Prince, i didnt change anything there. Same goes for Monarch which is the old Deity.
Now when you say "the differnece between 0 and 10 is actually quite huge (10% cumulative bonus in many areas for the AI at new era)"
you do know i have it at (minus) -10, correct??
You have 9 levels but rather than going from level 1 through level 9 you actually have an offset of 3, thus having the difficulties set as level -3 through to +5, where Noble is level 0.
In any attempts to change the levels you always have to keep Noble at level 0 as that is the middle, the median, and most especially because that is the level the AI gets it's base values from.
For instance: Human plays Settler, wanting an easy game.
Settler gives the Human a 25% reduction in research costs to facilitate this (iResearchPercent@75).
This 25% should be in comparison to the AI which is why there is no <iAIResearchPercent> at all as the AI uses the generic Noble Difficulty (where iResearchPercent should be 100)
Setting the Noble (level 0) to 110 iResearchPercent effectively changes the Human's handicap from 25% cheaper to (75/1.1=68.2) 31.8% cheaper.
The same Human now tries an Immortal Game and should have 50% more expensive research BUT since the AI uses 110 as a normalized (aka 100%) cost the actual handicap given to the AI is (150/1.1=136.4) 36.4% higher research costs.
The same goes for all the other values. Though:
When it comes to values starting with iAI it is alright to modify the Noble level as well as it is there to design a more competetive AI rather than set a handicap level, and is a modification on a Base not set by Noble settings.
Some values are global, meaning that the highest handicap in the game is used to determine what is used. Among those are the Barb and Animal spawn rates.
I guess i am not still getting it, because i do have a reading disability that if more than a sentence long i dont understand stuff, it gets all mumbled jumbled, sorry.
So can you take that chart the Rwn kindly made for me in the above post and make the correction, that way at least there will be a "test working copy" for everyone to use, thx.
@BG,
Have you checked the files to be sure that Noble is "0" level?
Reason I ask is before ls612 departed from C2C we had discovered that the "0" level was actually between Prince and Monarch. ls612 made some adjustments but iirc Noble was still 1 step below "0" level.
This is why I play Monarch all the time for C2C for testing now vs Noble level like DH and I did in the past.
@ Joe: I can't check that as that is in the coding, what level the game gives the AI as base when you start a new game. If it hasn't been changed then it's still Noble as that is what it was in Vanilla and BTS. If it has been changed then I have missed the info about that.
@ SO: Use Noble as a base line, just like Thunder pointed out in his post:
While that's a really cool idea SO (We can call it the "Nightmare Mode" option ) I think Rwn actually made a valid point. If you adjust the Noble setting then you will adjust the difficulty for the AI as well, making the option also make the game more difficult for them too, so if you only replace those settings above Noble you'll have more success with what you're intending there. Make sense?.
In short the only real important entries to not tamper with on Noble difficulty are:
<iUnitCostPercent>
<iResearchPercent>
<iDistanceMaintenancePercent>
<iNumCitiesMaintenancePercent>
<iColonyMaintenancePercent>
<iRevolutionIndexPercent>
Keep these at 100 for Noble and adjust up for higher and down for lower.
@BG, there is a file that gives or take away AI bonuses for each Difficulty level. ls612 adjusted it a year or so ago. (right around the time Sgtslick was working on Leader traits) C2C doe not match vanilla BtS in that regard.
If I can remember where the file is I'll look at it and tell you where it's located.
Edit: I found the file and ls612 Did restore AI Noble to = level with player. So disregard my blatherings and warped memories....this time.
@ Joe: I can't check that as that is in the coding, what level the game gives the AI as base when you start a new game. If it hasn't been changed then it's still Noble as that is what it was in Vanilla and BTS. If it has been changed then I have missed the info about that.
@ SO: Use Noble as a base line, just like Thunder pointed out in his post:
In short the only real important entries to not tamper with on Noble difficulty are:
<iUnitCostPercent>
<iResearchPercent>
<iDistanceMaintenancePercent>
<iNumCitiesMaintenancePercent>
<iColonyMaintenancePercent>
<iRevolutionIndexPercent>
Keep these at 100 for Noble and adjust up for higher and down for lower.
<iDistanceMaintenancePercent> sputters along, no consistency at all.
I suggest either simply matching it to <iNumCitiesMaintenancePercent> above and forget about it,
OR,
considering that C2C is about bigger maps as well as bigger everything else,
slightly (10%) decreasing the costs for distance overall so it's easier to spread cities out slightly and being able to actually utilize that 3rd ring more often,
thus suggesting 63 - 72 - 81 - 90 - 95 - 99 - 104 - 108 - 117
<iResearchPercent> makes a weird jump around Warlord level. Keep it simple with this suggestion: 80 - 85 - 90 - 100 - 110 - 120 - 130 - 145 - 160
<iUnitCostPercent> makes the same weird jump. Suggestion is 85 - 90 - 95 - 100 - 105 - 110 - 115 - 120 - 125
More isn't needed as highest diff in game sets AI's unit costs and support costs to give the AI higher handicap on higher diffs anyway so this one is a straight between players handicap.
Other than that:
I would suggest NOT lowering <iFreeUnits> under 7, or even 8, under any circumstances, even on Diety. There are a few reasons why:
1. In prehistory units were assigned out of necessity and we not paid. Often, probably, getting their own weapons too.
2. Once income starts flowing the difference on 7 or 0 Free Units is negligible anyway so will not make a difference.
3. In prehistory with maintaining defenses when under attack the difference in even 2 extra free units is huge and could mean being able to split resources between money/research rather than going all out money.
4. In the early Prehistory each 1 coin is only worth 0.35 coins, meaning that it takes 3 coins for every extra unit you have to pay for, not 1.
5. C2C wants a big focus on Naimals in the Prehistory, Myths, herds, even holding on to a few until able to use them. With less Free Units AND the option to escort animals this is being stunted with a lower number of free units. (Hunter goes out, gathers 8 animals, costs jump to -4 gold, Research has to drop to 0% research and only -1 gold for the next 10 turns until the Hunter and the animals reach home)
I would also like to suggest increase Health and Happy bonus for lower levels.
In this case level it after the highest difficulty, never lowering it under 4 happy and 2 health. I would actually suggest a more drastic but potentially more balancing way but I am tempted to say that that won't happen. I'll "spoiler" suggest it anyway:
Spoiler:
Increase Health Malus by Population to 2 while changing the iHealthBonus' to
Settler 50 Easier start. At city size 48 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Chief 45 Easier start. At city size 43 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Warlord 36 Easier start. At city size 34 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Noble 28 Easier start. At city size 26 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Prince 21 Easier start. At city size 19 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Monarch 15 Easier start. At city size 13 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Emperor 10 Slightly easier start At city size 8 It will even out, after that will grow faster and be hard to handle.
Immortal 6 Slightly easier start At city size 4 It will even out, after that will grow faster and be really hard to handle.
Diety 3 No change at start at all. will grow faster and be near impossible to handle.
I am not sure about 2x per city pop. That is I'm sure it could be set up and work to compensate the high that exists but how low and how high it should be set in the Difficulty iHappyBonus I am less sure of because the impact of is a lot harsher than that of . I could think something this might work, but only if there is also set more technologies giving + to all cities, increased by Era so each Era allows higher population due to both iHappyBonus and Tech bonuses:
Settler 24
Chief 22
Warlord 20
Noble 18
Prince 16
Monarch 14
Emperor 12
Immortal 10
Diety 8
I would also like to suggest increase Health and Happy bonus for lower levels.
In this case level it after the highest difficulty, never lowering it under 4 happy and 2 health. I would actually suggest a more drastic but potentially more balancing way but I am tempted to say that that won't happen. I'll "spoiler" suggest it anyway:
Spoiler:
Increase Health Malus by Population to 2 while changing the iHealthBonus' to
Settler 50 Easier start. At city size 48 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Chief 45 Easier start. At city size 43 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Warlord 36 Easier start. At city size 34 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Noble 28 Easier start. At city size 26 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Prince 21 Easier start. At city size 19 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Monarch 15 Easier start. At city size 13 It will even out, after that will grow faster.
Emperor 10 Slightly easier start At city size 8 It will even out, after that will grow faster and be hard to handle.
Immortal 6 Slightly easier start At city size 4 It will even out, after that will grow faster and be really hard to handle.
Deity 3 No change at start at all. will grow faster and be near impossible to handle.
I am not sure about 2x per city pop. That is I'm sure it could be set up and work to compensate the high that exists but how low and how high it should be set in the Difficulty iHappyBonus I am less sure of because the impact of is a lot harsher than that of . I could think something this might work, but only if there is also set more technologies giving + to all cities, increased by Era so each Era allows higher population due to both iHappyBonus and Tech bonuses:
Settler 24
Chief 22
Warlord 20
Noble 18
Prince 16
Monarch 14
Emperor 12
Immortal 10
Deity 8
Don't worry about it. It would have to be done via other definitions, not just handicap definitions, and would mean a somehwat big change in the game, or at least in how to go about certain things.
Just a wish from my side.
You don't think that might be a little bit... erm... overkill?
Looks like that game would become more 'barbs vs civs' than 'civs vs civs with a little barbarian annoyances now and then'. And if that's on Noble, are the AI's, who are always set to Noble, just as challenged as the player?
Again, I think Noble level should go completely unadjusted to allow the AI to be unaffected by any more difficult settings. I think only those settings ABOVE Noble should be adjusted. And really... who'd play a Nightmare Mode Settler level game anyhow?
You don't think that might be a little bit... erm... overkill?
Looks like that game would become more 'barbs vs civs' than 'civs vs civs with a little barbarian annoyances now and then'. And if that's on Noble, are the AI's, who are always set to Noble, just as challenged as the player?
Again, I think Noble level should go completely unadjusted to allow the AI to be unaffected by any more difficult settings. I think only those settings ABOVE Noble should be adjusted. And really... who'd play a Nightmare Mode Settler level game anyhow?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) I think Rwn actually made a valid point. If you adjust the Noble setting then you will adjust the difficulty for the AI as well, making the option also make the game more difficult for them too, so if you only replace those settings above Noble you'll have more success with what you're intending there. Make sense?.
while changing the iHealthBonus' to 
per city pop. That is I'm sure it could be set up and work to compensate the high 
