Status
Not open for further replies.

LarryAR

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
81
Location
Tennessee-Kentucky Border
I do not prebuild roads mostly because It’s a management pain to stop and start them. However ...

What is an exploit? If part of a road is built, it costs time to do that same as real life. By not opening the road, you do not gain the benefit of nor should you be charged the total cost of a road you can’t use. IRL it is not unusual for a construction project to cease because of lack of funding. It starts again when banks or government decide to support it.

Why some folks want to dictate how others play is beyond me. Adjusting the playing level to chieftain is an exploit. Modifying an sql file is an exploit. Installing a mod that buffs your favorite unit or civilization is an exploit. If you think something is an “exploit” then don’t do it.

It is an exploit to play solitaire with the whole deck of cards spread out face up. If you can restrain yourself at solitaire, why not restrain yourself in Civilization?
 

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
Why some folks want to dictate how others play is beyond me. Adjusting the playing level to chieftain is an exploit. Modifying an sql file is an exploit. Installing a mod that buffs your favorite unit or civilization is an exploit. If you think something is an “exploit” then don’t do it
So you really can't tell the difference between choosing a difficulty and an exploit that we talk about? Your definition of "exploit" is so inclusive that it's losing it's meaning, so it's just worthless.

With your attitude, no exploit should be removed from a single player game, because you could just not do it, right? Well, I disagree with that. I think the game (or any game) is better without exploit. For some reason we have the term "exploit". Have you ever thought why?

The analogy with Solitaire doesn't make sense, because playing with whole deck of cards spread out faced up is against rules. In Civilization is not against rules to use an exploit, because rules are embedded in the game mechanics in code. Basically, if you can do sth, it's not against the rules. However, mistakes during game development happen.
Removing an exploit is essentially removing it from the code, thus removing it from rules and that's what are talking about.
 

4CV

Warlord
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
257
Location
Germany
.... For some reason we have the term "exploit"
It's not easy to find out which meaning of "exploit" is meant, there seem to be so many of them and I am not quite sure you are discussing the same topic...
exploit___www.google.com_search.jpg exploit - linguee.de_.jpg
 

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
We are discussing cheesy way of playing. Or are you saying that we cannot call it "exploit", because it's not in a dictionary?
 

Rekk

Emperor
Joined
Dec 9, 2017
Messages
1,638
It's not easy to find out which meaning of "exploit" is meant, there seem to be so many of them and I am not quite sure you are discussing the same topic...
To help you out, in the context of video games, exploit is derived from:
2. To make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage

It has of course, evolved further from the dictionary definition to be more specific to the video game medium, but that's the root.
 

Ranslee

Chieftain
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
62
This is not an exploit, it's a microoptimization. Even if the community as a whole was to consider this an exploit, it's a really minor one.

The problem with software development, and especially with game development, and even more so with a non profit fan project, is that there isn't enough work time to do everything. So you do the most important things first, because they will have the highest impact on the experience.

It's not that you're wrong, @CppMaster, - there is just a lot of things people would like to see done before that, for many reasons already mentioned (low impact, not sure if it's an exploit, it's something you can choose not to do, cascading effects and potential bugs).

And this is on top of our awesome modders choosing to work on things that interest them the most, because it's their free time and they have no obligation to work on anything they don't want to. Please be respectful - this is one of the best strategy game community projects out there.
 

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
@Ranslee Yep, I agree with every word. And I do have respect for devs, community and the project. That's why I prefer to discuss such things instead of ignoring. There just maybe a chance that it's not a major work for devs and if they do it then great! If not then... nothing changes. So is there a downside to discussing even minor things?
 

4CV

Warlord
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
257
Location
Germany
As I had hoped, we agree this is still about playing, not working. Which means, the relevant aspect is having fun, and unnessessary restrictions can only lead to less fun, not more.
That's why I strongly support a "If You Don't Like It Just Don't Do It" policy.
 

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
As I had hoped, we agree this is still about playing, not working. Which means, the relevant aspect is having fun, and unnessessary restrictions can only lead to less fun, not more.
That's why I strongly support a "If You Don't Like It Just Don't Do It" policy.
Isn't it like not balancing OP units, because if you don't like them, you don't need to play them?
 

4CV

Warlord
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
257
Location
Germany
Isn't it like not balancing OP units, because if you don't like them, you don't need to play them?
Yes, and no. Yes, because I actually don't play them if they are really unfun. No, because trying to achieve better balance is a necessary work, as long as we don't overdo it.
 

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
Also, it's similar to the case of AI surrending really easy. Sure, you could just not use it if you don't want to, but it doesn't change the fact that it's better to fix it.
 

looorg

King
Joined
Dec 22, 2010
Messages
671
What updates? Needs updates are only when a city grows, no?

I hadn't played in a few days so I couldn't screenshot this. But what is the difference between these two ...

civ5vp-rus-supply3.png vs civ5vp-rus-supply4.png

Spoiler :
It's fairly obvious. I clicked to lock growth. This for some unknown reason now recalculates unit-supply, and a few other things. Nothing has changed in the city. All tiles are locked, they were before to. So no pop was moved about or some unemployed worker was created or anything like that. Nothing was spent. Nothing changed. Except click the growth lock recalculates a few things.

You can keep clicking it and also do things like click a tile worker and assign it to another tile or flip a specialist on/off a few times, invest some gold in a building or buy something (in the last two things you spent something tho) and it will keep recalculating these values. It's kind weird and wonky.

So why Sweet Zombie Jesus is the unit-supply recalculating cause I lock growth (or do some other minor tweaks, and if I don't like the new value I can click a few more times until I get one that I like?!

So yes it does seem like Needs and such are now recalculated as soon as you basically push anything on screen and not just when the pop grows. It's kind of annoying.

It doesn't really do much if you just lock growth but you can see the Needs recalculating if you instead put various Processes into the queue (food, science, culture, money, whatever ...) then you can see that they recalculate and unhappiness/happiness can change due to it. But with clicking lock growth NOTHING changes but yet it keeps recalculating back and forth.
 
Last edited:

CppMaster

Emperor
Joined
Feb 13, 2018
Messages
1,606
Location
Poland
So you if uncheck lock growth, supply limit reverts back? If not then maybe it's just UI that is updates.
 

looorg

King
Joined
Dec 22, 2010
Messages
671
So you if uncheck lock growth, supply limit reverts back? If not then maybe it's just UI that is updates.
Well it's a bit unknown at the moment if it is just UI or visual or not I would say. Everything does get recalculated which includes build time and growth etc since you then sometimes go into 'red' supply (not here but it happens). So the question is if it counts or if it's just a temporary visual. I'm inclined to think it counts. It's just here, in this case, it doesn't matter as much since both supply values are still good in that regard -- you are in supply for both values. But even if you "adjust" it to your favor and into the green again it gets recalculated while the turn is processed to so it can then jump a bit back and forth.

It's not guaranteed that it will revert back on one click but you can usually just click a few times, unlock a worker/specialist, lock him to a tile again and such thing and it will revert to one of the two stages. So it basically goes back and forth between two values and it can't really make up it's mind which is the correct one and which is not. I guess they could both be correct but at different times and settings. It's somewhat weird and annoying. Not so much in this case since you are shifting between two values that are still "in supply" so to speak. It's worse then you cross over the supply limit and it aborts all your unit constructions when it processes the turn. That is very annoying. Or if you thought that some cities was growing a pop etc and then all of a sudden it doesn't cause you just went out of supply and growth time slowed down.
 

4CV

Warlord
Joined
Jan 9, 2017
Messages
257
Location
Germany
Also, it's similar to the case of AI surrending really easy. Sure, you could just not use it if you don't want to, but it doesn't change the fact that it's better to fix it.
I think these are two completely different scenarios. First one is single players actions only, AI is not involved, other players just don't do it (like 'prebuilt roads'): No action needed.
Second scenario involves AI behaviour in any regard (like 'AI surrender'): Bug report advisable.
 

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,163
@Recursive can you confirm this?

We lost them, because they were considered exploit, right? In that case, this was an improvement.

Gifting units to civilizations was removed because the AI couldn't use it and humans could.

My lack of response is because I'm on a hiatus from modding work. I'm still merging others' changes but life is busy right now.

This is not an exploit, it's a microoptimization. Even if the community as a whole was to consider this an exploit, it's a really minor one.

The problem with software development, and especially with game development, and even more so with a non profit fan project, is that there isn't enough work time to do everything. So you do the most important things first, because they will have the highest impact on the experience.

It's not that you're wrong, @CppMaster, - there is just a lot of things people would like to see done before that, for many reasons already mentioned (low impact, not sure if it's an exploit, it's something you can choose not to do, cascading effects and potential bugs).

And this is on top of our awesome modders choosing to work on things that interest them the most, because it's their free time and they have no obligation to work on anything they don't want to. Please be respectful - this is one of the best strategy game community projects out there.

Well said.
 

AndreyK

Prince
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
535
Location
Yakutsk, Russia
But as far as I can recall you can't. You can't be more unhappy then there are citizens, it used to be that you can't be happier then there are citizens to. But that ceiling is now broken, don't know if the bottom floor for unhappiness is broken either but I have not seen any cities that are producing more unhappiness then there are citizens in the city.

Normally that is. You could create such a situation by just working a lot of specialists, or more specialists then there are free once and then push it so that the city produces more unhappiness. But as far as I know that is the only way to push beyond that lower border. Cities in resistance (or hurricane season) doesn't produce more unhappiness then there size of the city. It's not that there isn't sometimes a benefit to working more specialists then there are free slots, after all if you have excess happiness you could work a few extra once before dragging the city down. Still I don't think this occurs naturally.

You can have unhappiness much more than size of the city, all unhappy from urbanization can exceed number of citizens. In late game when you conquer many cities, unhappiness from other sources equals to number of citizens and many of my newly conquered cities for many turns unhappy more than their size.
 

Zanteogo

King
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Messages
946
Gifting units to civilizations was removed because the AI couldn't use it and humans could.

Is there any chance we could get an option to turn gifting back on?

I really miss the old days when you could have a "cold war" with another civ by gifting units to their enemies.

I am aware the AI doesn't understand it, and that it can be exploited, but I can't see the harm of having it an option?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4CV

Recursive

Already Looping
Moderator
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
3,163
Is there any chance we could get an option to turn gifting back on?

I really miss the old days when you could have a "cold war" with another civ by gifting units to their enemies.

I am aware the AI doesn't understand it, and that it can be exploited, but I can't see the harm of having it an option?

It is an option already.

(1) Community Patch > Core Files > CoreChanges.sql
Code:
-- No major civ gifting exploit fix
UPDATE CustomModOptions SET Value = 1 WHERE Name = 'NO_MAJORCIV_GIFTING';

Set to 0.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom