NEW Handicap's

[BlueGenie]

As per your request SO, changes to increase maintenances correctly with C2C being a mod with many more cities as well as much more stuff to increase income with too some small changes need to be done to certain areas to facilitate this.

First off in Civ4WorldInfo.xml;
the entries for <iDistanceMaintenancePercent> and <iNumCitiesMaintenancePercent> need increasing in my opinion to make the games more challenging. How much I am not fully aware of yet as I am still testing though half of teh changes I have made should probably be good. My changes are:
Original My Changes
Size Dist # Dist #
Duel 50 45 380 1000
Tiny 60 40 360 950
Small 70 35 340 900
Std 80 30 320 850
Large 90 25 300 800
Huge 100 20 280 750
Giant 150 15 260 700
Giga 175 10 240 650

Next up is Civ4HandicapInfo.xml. Here it is the same areas and now also added <iMaxNumCitiesMaintenance>. My numbers are now;
Difficulty Dist # Max
Settler 63 70 20
Chief 72 80 25
Warlord 81 90 30
Noble 90 100 35
Prince 95 105 40
Monarch 99 110 45
Emperor 104 115 50
Immortal 108 120 60
Deity 117 130 70

But other than this, and to make it work at all, a lot of things need changing in Civics too, as per the txt file in the info given to T-brd on my save, and a special building is required to reduce maintenance in teh early, early game as otherwise both players and the AI will start off by going negative in income right away, hampering a part of the game where I feel money should not be of any concern at all.

Either get that file to look through and see what you think, and later on I can post the updated version together with the XML files once I have tested it through a bit more.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

As per your request SO, changes to increase maintenances correctly with C2C being a mod with many more cities as well as much more stuff to increase income with too some small changes need to be done to certain areas to facilitate this.

I am not understanding this: i only have 1 <iMaxNumCitiesMaintenance> per setting??
ie: settler 1
warlords 1 etc etc

but you have 3 listed per setting??above

 

[BlueGenie]

In World Info there are 4 numbers, 2 are teh original so you can compare to what I have set, and the other 2 are what I have set:
Duel. Dist (Original DistMaint): 50. # (Original NumCityMaint): 45. Dist (My DistMaint):380. # (My NumCitiesMaint): 1000

In Handicap Info 3 numbers, first DistanceMaint, then NumCitiesMaint, then MaxNumMaint:
Settler. Dist (DistanceMaint): 63. # (NumCitiesMaint): 70. Max (MaxNumCitiesMaint): 20.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

In World Info those are some drastic changes ref:

Giga:

175 to 240

10 to 650

Also in the Handicap one, the last one changed alot also?? what do you think was the main problem we had there before then in WorldInfo and HandicapInfo??

 

[BlueGenie]

The problem was not so much in there as in the added incomes in C2C. To keep the same and add more income bildings all the time the costs also need to increase to compensate. This was never done so the drastic changes are reflecting not only a change to the current changes but a change from the start of C2C.

The added maintenance costs for Anarchy, Chiefdom, and a lot of other civics were there to somewhat compensate and hinder early expansion. but did not do the job at all really as once past those highly increased maintenance civics expansion was just too fast and too easy. They only served to delay when the rapid expansions would come.

So if changing the base line on Maintenance costs at all those Civic additions need to be removed or changed a lot. My numbers are just a test so far and better ones can probably be set up. I am also thinking taht by removing puyre maintenance costs from most civics they also need greater effects in the other areas to keep the line on "newer civic = better civic" where that is supposed to be, and also increases the potential of having more Civics in the same category work towards the late games too, just different and giving different bonuses, not worse or better, just depending on playstyle and circumstance.

My + cost for military units in Anarchism I added as I think Anarchism also means unable to really hold a military force at all. That is also why I added +10 free units as base, so one in Anarchism still can have some animals and units.
What I would want to do is to remove Unit Costs completely, setting it to 0, and instead go though every unit and add Extra Cost factor to them instead, at least to most, thus being able to keep animals, entertainers, and some early units, possibly others too, free of upkeep costs.
Not only for the Anarchism Civic, also because so many units are already coming with an extra cost, making it hard to see the real costs for building a unit, and because I feel some units should not have upkeep costs.

I also set 5 per population to grow. Just feels better.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

But you didnt answer my other question??? Do we also need a different set of the above for the NEW Handicap System we put together?? Or are those you put there only for the core?

 

[BlueGenie]

Oh, right, no, the changes to Handicap would be needed in the Core as it is in all games, basic and Nightmare, where one can expand way too much after the first 6-10 cities. Needs increasing, though if as much as I put for MaxCities I do not know. That might be for Nightmare and hold Core at half of those values.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

Oh, right, no, the changes to Handicap would be needed in the Core as it is in all games, basic and Nightmare, where one can expand way too much after the first 6-10 cities. Needs increasing, though if as much as I put for MaxCities I do not know. That might be for Nightmare and hold Core at half of those values.

Cheers

OK so what i am reading then, no changes for the Nightmare one and only changes to the core for the civics and stuff then??

 

[BlueGenie]

That is what I am testing, yes. WOuld be good with extra test done, if others want to test it too at different levels of game diff and speed and size. Should probably hold off having it in Core until after the freeze and v35, so for v36 once tested out a bit.
It is looking good so far for me in my test, just reached Classical and struggling to keep 18 cities, needing to build Wealth in once city until I get the economy under control again.
Once reaching higher income buildings my cities will have increased in size, and thus costs, and should only be able to slowly expand with this system I set up. Rather that than being able to suddenly rapidly expand and add 20 cities with no incuring penalty.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

That is what I am testing, yes. Would be good with extra test done, if others want to test it too at different levels of game diff and speed and size. Should probably hold off having it in Core until after the freeze and v35, so for v36 once tested out a bit.
It is looking good so far for me in my test, just reached Classical and struggling to keep 18 cities,(thats what i like) needing to build Wealth in once city until I get the economy under control again.
Once reaching higher income buildings my cities will have increased in size, and thus costs, and should only be able to slowly expand with this system I set up. Rather that than being able to suddenly rapidly expand and add 20 cities with no incurring penalty.

Cheers

Yeah i had to delete the WorldInfo, it was having a -(negative 28 and STRIKE next turn on turn 1.

 

[JosEPh_II]

<snip> Rather that than being able to suddenly rapidly expand and add 20 cities with no incurring penalty.

Cheers

People keep saying things like this But I never see it. Just once I'd like for someone who makes these type statements to back it up with a series of Screen shots.

You can Not add 20 cities in a short period of time ever. To say otherwise is exaggeration. You can not add 10 cities in a short time frame without going into Strike.

I'm a super expansionist and the Mod just will Not let this happen. I maybe able to add 3 or 4 in rapid succession but it drains the economy and I have to rebuild it (economy) before I can do the next surge. The same happens with the AI even with it's bonuses.

Cheers

JosEPh

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I have to agree with Joe here. I can rapidly add 5 cities but need to spend time consolidating before the next surge. The AI has the same problem. I think I did manage to do 10 rapidly at one time via captives but it crippled me for quite a while.

 

[Harrier]

I set up. Rather that than being able to suddenly rapidly expand and add 20 cities with no incuring penalty.
Cheers

Your playing your modified version of C2C - are you sure non of the changes you made may be causing this? Just a thought.

 

[strategyonly]

That is what I am testing, yes. WOuld be good with extra test done, if others want to test it too at different levels of game diff and speed and size. Should probably hold off having it in Core until after the freeze and v35, so for v36 once tested out a bit.
It is looking good so far for me in my test, just reached Classical and struggling to keep 18 cities, needing to build Wealth in once city until I get the economy under control again.
Once reaching higher income buildings my cities will have increased in size, and thus costs, and should only be able to slowly expand with this system I set up. Rather that than being able to suddenly rapidly expand and add 20 cities with no incuring penalty.

Cheers

See TB\s statement on Deity playing?? i agree -50 seems way overboard??

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=13337835&postcount=2128

 

[BlueGenie]

It is. Like I have stated previously: When fixing the Worldinfo to be set up better for C2C the added maintenance setups in a lot of Civics
(almost all of them in attempts to increase early maintenances for reduced expansion in the early game)
have to be changed or even removed,
and Anarchism has to be set up to be able to maintain almost no costs from cities, at least the two first or the AI with 2 cities will be crippled, and any player getting a second early city by conquest (or low handicap starting with 2 Band of Homo Sapiens).

I am currently doing a different playtesting; Noble diff, unchanged C2C, Standard Size, Play Now, Eons game, in an attempt to kick out 20 cities in a game not set up in any way to handle it at all, to show that it does work. Taking a few days though but might be worth it if it it proves my point.

Cheers

 

[strategyonly]

I am currently doing a different playtesting; Noble diff, unchanged C2C, Standard Size, Play Now, Eons game, in an attempt to kick out 20 cities in a game not set up in any way to handle it at all, to show that it does work. Taking a few days though but might be worth it if it it proves my point.

Cheers

Sounds like a plan.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Why would you play test on a game that long? On that Game speed you may very well be able to "kick out" 20 cities. But because of that game speed that's an aberration (if successfully accomplished) and not the norm even for C2C.

Sorry BG but I fail to see the soundness of this experiment. And adding it's results into the C2C mix seems unbalancing. Just sayin'. <shrug>

JosEPh

 

[BlueGenie]

That speed because Eons is a step below Eternity on which I usually play. For me this is not a "long" game but a short one, and with the no changes, pure SVN, game on Play Now without any changed options, and Standard Mapsize it is not all that easy (Monarchy allows for 12 cities before unhappy from cities kicks in) BUT the main point is showing that amount of cities maintenance (MaxCity) is too low for our beloved C2C as kicking out 20 new cities should cost an empire, not only a few cities working on Wealth, and should not be possible either way, and the current system to stop spamming cities is too artificial. Bascially want to show that city maintenances are not adjusted for C2C and need looking over even if not going quite as far as I have in my setup.

Cheers

 

[Thunderbrd]

That speed because Eons is a step below Eternity on which I usually play. For me this is not a "long" game but a short one, and with the no changes, pure SVN, game on Play Now without any changed options, and Standard Mapsize it is not all that easy (Monarchy allows for 12 cities before unhappy from cities kicks in) BUT the main point is showing that amount of cities maintenance (MaxCity) is too low for our beloved C2C as kicking out 20 new cities should cost an empire, not only a few cities working on Wealth, and should not be possible either way, and the current system to stop spamming cities is too artificial. Bascially want to show that city maintenances are not adjusted for C2C and need looking over even if not going quite as far as I have in my setup.

Cheers

How does # of city maintenance have much to do with having such a major deficit at game start? If some reasonable adjustments are proposed there I'm sure we'd be interested to hear them.

 

[JosEPh_II]

,snip>(Monarchy allows for 12 cities before unhappy from cities kicks in) BUT the main point is showing that amount of cities maintenance (MaxCity) is too low for our beloved C2C as kicking out 20 new cities should cost an empire, not only a few cities working on Wealth, and should not be possible either way, and the current system to stop spamming cities is too artificial.<snip>
Cheers

"Monarchy allows for 12 cities" says that you are Using City Limits.

"as kicking out 20 new cities should cost an empire," again have you actually been able to do this? Both DH and I agree this isn't really possible. Because even kicking out 3-5 new cities at a time will put you in a big hole. Especially on Marathon, Epic or Normal game speeds. And since DH uses Snail for his playtesting I'd add Snail in there too.

"not only a few cities working on Wealth, and should not be possible either way," And again I say it's not possible and has never been possible.

"and the current system to stop spamming cities is too artificial."
I agree, because it's based on eliminating the expansionistic trait from the game. And currently uses a flawed unneeded crutch by using City Limits by Civics to try to do so. Eliminating the eXpansionist from the game is to remove 1 of the basic 4 X's of Civ. And you cripple the game by trying to do so. The AI must be expansionistic to succeed.

I will wait to see when you report that you have successfully put out 20 settlers at one time and found 20 cities without breaking your empire. My bet is that you can not do so, even on Eon or Eternity. Maybe you will prove me wrong. But my experience with this Mod says you won't, because the mechanics of the mod will break you thru No money and going into Strike. And if you go into Strike for a prolonged period (even 20 turns) your empire will be in shambles. And the AI will eat you for lunch.

Maybe putting ALL your cities on Wealth may stave off bankruptcy and the Strike. Again this is conditional upon when and at what time frame of the game's progress you are at when you try to put out 20 new cities. But even having every previous working cities on Wealth will cause you Empire grave harm. So if you have Monarchy and have 12 cities when you spit out the 20 settlers, the question becomes, will those 12 cities produce enough income to fund the growth of those 20 new cities, maintain Empire defenses, and keep research going at more than a snails pace?

I'm actually looking forward to your report.

JosEPh