Orion's Grand Inquisition

[OrionVeteran]

Some suggestion: I think Tech tree would be revised a bit, some technologies appear too early, too easily without prerequisites. For an example, Mine warfare appears very early, in Rennaisance, though it's an industrial technology doubtless.

We try hard to maintain historical accuracy, to the extent that is possible. If you notice the tech tree: Mine Warfare requires Gunpowder. Gunpowder appears in the Renaissance era and is required to research Mine Warfare. History records one of the earliest uses of mines was in 1689, when French forces blew up the towers and walls of Heidelberg Castle in Germany.

Resuming, I have the impression there is access for too many techs simoustaneously, without other than should be necessary. I'll play a bit more, to see if i can be more concrete (Mine warfare it's the most obvious, it's the first that I've encountered, recently started Renaissance era)

Simoustaneous access to many techs. Hmmm. What this means is you have a lot to choose from at any one time. Correct? That is exactly our intention, with the development of OGI: Lots of choices. In fact, you must make many strategic choices throughout the game. Do you go for a religious tech or do you research agriculture? Do you construct a building or do you train a new unit? Do you build a settler or a Wonder? Do you build a ship or an aircraft? Do I want more research or more gold? It's all about making choices. ...and we want to make sure you have a lot of choices, when you play OGI.

 

[SR-71]

We try hard to maintain historical accuracy, to the extent that is possible. If you notice the tech tree: Mine Warfare requires Gunpowder. Gunpowder appears in the Renaissance era and is required to research Mine Warfare. History records one of the earliest uses of mines was in 1689, when French forces blew up the towers and walls of Heidelberg Castle in Germany.

Yes, but general use it's later on. And sincerely it's a bit bizarre for me to see a MineSweeper alongside sloops of war or frigates... or worst, a mine detector besides Musketmen...

Simoustaneous access to many techs. Hmmm. What this means is you have a lot to choose from at any one time. Correct? That is exactly our intention, with the development of OGI: Lots of choices. In fact, you must make many strategic choices throughout the game. Do you go for a religious tech or do you research agriculture? Do you construct a building or do you train a new unit? Do you build a settler or a Wonder? Do you build a ship or an aircraft? Do I want more research or more gold? It's all about making choices. ...and we want to make sure you have a lot of choices, when you play OGI.

I see your point, but I dislike a bit because I'm a realistic fan, so I don't feel comfortable with the case above: ancient units together with modern ones... Anyway, I understand what you say, you can choose to play researching technologies with somewhat historical accuracy, or have a narrow-minded militaristic research or so

Apart of these minor issues, there is one that I consider more important: the arrow barrage makes archer units too overpowered and unrealistic. I'll try to explain... the flanking damage from horse arches it' perhaps interesting, but in attacking cities it's absurd. Also, I don't see how archers firing at walls can reduce a city defenses. Perhaps you want to represent fire arrows, but for game purposes I don't see it works. And which it's worse, horse archers attacking a city and doing collateral damage to defenders behind the walls... weird And i'm not yet got Modern Era, but I don't even want to think that I'll find my Main Battle Tanks flank-damaged by an horde of enemy horse archers...

I saw a similar issue in another mod, so my suggestion are: forget the barrage, or at worst limit it to field battles, and make some units arrow-proof, or do limit in time, and plesae leave siege warfare for siege weapons, as in real world is

And I'm waiting anxiously that you add some more land units, as I said it's a pity to evolve from an arquebusier directly to a rifleman, without Musketmen (matchlock to flintlock to rifle it's the right evolution for an example), and nearly all mods add this.

 

[SR-71]

More about: only there are roads and railroads, no paved roads nor highways or so... I suppose you want to make it a bit like Civ1 spirit, but IMHO this means to downgrade the game a lot... If I remember well, even vanilla BTS had paved roads, so I cannot understand why you deleted these features

 

[SR-71]

About land mines: if you move a land mine on a enemy occupied square THE ENEMY MOVES TO OTHER ADJACENT! So I can move the enemy armies wherever I want only pushing them with a bunch of mines... what is this? checkers?

Leaving the sarcasm away, sure this is only a bug, hope you'll fix it easily

 

[OrionVeteran]

About land mines: if you move a land mine on a enemy occupied square THE ENEMY MOVES TO OTHER ADJACENT! So I can move the enemy armies wherever I want only pushing them with a bunch of mines... what is this? checkers?

Leaving the sarcasm away, sure this is only a bug, hope you'll fix it easily

Nope. It's not a bug, it's intentional. You can't move a land mine to a plot, arm it and expect it to blow up a unit that is currently there. No. That would be an exploit. The enemy must move into a plot with a previously armed enemy mine to trigger detenation. What we can do is prevent a mine from being armed while a unit from another civ is on the plot. That would be a good change. Update: I have created a new check function to verify that a plot does not have any units owned by player who does not match the owner of the mine. If the plot does have units belonging to another player, you won't be allowed to arm the mine. ....Done for ver 255E.

 

[OrionVeteran]

More about: only there are roads and railroads, no paved roads nor highways or so... I suppose you want to make it a bit like Civ1 spirit, but IMHO this means to downgrade the game a lot... If I remember well, even vanilla BTS had paved roads, so I cannot understand why you deleted these features

OGI is a BTS mod and there were no changes, (no deletions) to how the roads and railroads work. The roads work the same way as they do in standard BTS. Additional road types might be considered in future OGI versions.

 

[OrionVeteran]

Yes, but general use it's later on. And sincerely it's a bit bizarre for me to see a MineSweeper alongside sloops of war or frigates... or worst, a mine detector besides Musketmen...

I see your point, but I dislike a bit because I'm a realistic fan, so I don't feel comfortable with the case above: ancient units together with modern ones... Anyway, I understand what you say, you can choose to play researching technologies with somewhat historical accuracy, or have a narrow-minded militaristic research or so

The MineSweeper unit is applicable to 4 different eras and is the only one in the game. Unfortunately, the sweeper graphic can't have a perfect look for all 4 eras. So we picked one nice looking unit and went with it.

Apart of these minor issues, there is one that I consider more important: the arrow barrage makes archer units too overpowered and unrealistic. I'll try to explain... the flanking damage from horse arches it' perhaps interesting, but in attacking cities it's absurd. Also, I don't see how archers firing at walls can reduce a city defenses. Perhaps you want to represent fire arrows, but for game purposes I don't see it works. And which it's worse, horse archers attacking a city and doing collateral damage to defenders behind the walls... weird And i'm not yet got Modern Era, but I don't even want to think that I'll find my Main Battle Tanks flank-damaged by an horde of enemy horse archers...

Have you tried building the Oil Tower? City defenses are increased by +50 percent. Have you tried building Chariots? Chariots have an increase of +50 percent combat vs Archery units. The combat strength of a tank is 28, while a horse archer only has a combat strength of 6. I would expect a large hoard of archers might get lucky and take out a tank, but it is unlikely.

I saw a similar issue in another mod, so my suggestion are: forget the barrage, or at worst limit it to field battles, and make some units arrow-proof, or do limit in time, and plesae leave siege warfare for siege weapons, as in real world is

What units do you believe should be immune to the Archer's arrows?

And I'm waiting anxiously that you add some more land units, as I said it's a pity to evolve from an arquebusier directly to a rifleman, without Musketmen (matchlock to flintlock to rifle it's the right evolution for an example), and nearly all mods add this.

It might be some time before more units are added and ver 255E is released. For now, I want to see how well ver 255D does. If you want to list all of your recommended units, we will consider each one for inclusion.

 

[SR-71]

Nope. It's not a bug, it's intentional. You can't move a land mine to a plot, arm it and expect it to blow up a unit that is currently there. No. That would be an exploit. The enemy must move into a plot with a previously armed enemy mine to trigger detenation. What we can do is prevent a mine from being armed while a unit from another civ is on the plot. That would be a good change. Update: I have created a new check function to verify that a plot does not have any units owned by player who does not match the owner of the mine. If the plot does have units belonging to another player, you won't be allowed to arm the mine. ....Done for ver 255E.

Sorry, you're wrong. It's a much bigger exploit than the case you want to prevent, so at present doesn't work properly. See the screenshots below...

You can see how moving land mine I'm able of not only to make the enemy going wherever I want, but moving the mine into a city, the enemy units left apart, so I can conquest the city without any opposition

IMHO land mines are very interesting, but the way you want them to perform is completely unrealistic in Civ4... You want mines to be able of getting into enemy occupied plots, then prevent them from arming. This is absurd, because you shouldn't be able of moving mines through the enemy troops like Spies, they are not covert units, or at least SHOULDN'T BE. As you desire them to work, you can build the mine, move it completely unseen deep into enemy territory (even surround the enemy capital with mines) so arm it wherever you want and... wait. So they are not working no way like mines, but like covert operations.

My suggestion is to treat them like PARATROOPERS OR STATIC LOADED TROOPS (AMMUNITIONS). The concept it's much more simple and much more realistic. This should work as this:
- You build the mine (much properly "Minefield")
- You load it on an unit (artillery or helicopter for an example), being the minefield unable to move if not loaded, or deploy it in a specific radius (like paratroops)
- You move the mine-transport wherever you want, then deploy the minefield, which then becomes again static.
- Then, if unarmed cannot be seen by enemy players, but can be passable (as spies) by all units
- If you arm it, then... BOOM

This is IMHO, the proper way a land mine should work: Easy and realistic

Hope this idea will help solving this issue

 

[SR-71]

OGI is a BTS mod and there were no changes, (no deletions) to how the roads and railroads work. The roads work the same way as they do in standard BTS. Additional road types might be considered in future OGI versions.

Yes, you're right Sorry, I'm completely accostumed to mods (never play vanilla BTS from ages) and nearly all of them add paved roads, highways, ecc.

I'm glad you consider adding them, taking from any mod

 

[SR-71]

Have you tried building the Oil Tower? City defenses are increased by +50 percent. Have you tried building Chariots? Chariots have an increase of +50 percent combat vs Archery units. The combat strength of a tank is 28, while a horse archer only has a combat strength of 6. I would expect a large hoard of archers might get lucky and take out a tank, but it is unlikely.

What units do you believe should be immune to the Archer's arrows?

One problem it's the flanking damage inside cities. Does Oil tower prevents units from receive flanking damage? I suppose not, so it's the same.

But the main wrong issue its this: a) Archers have "arrows barrage" b) but then Gunpowder units should have also "lead barrage" from firearms, and c) Armor "guns barrage", and d) ships "cannons barrage" and e) battleships "main guns barrage" f) even slingers "slings barrage"...... the list it's endless...

So the main issue it's why much modern units are in disavantage fighting with ancient archers only because the first have not "barrage" capability? Musketman 0 - Archers 1 (barrage), Rifleman 0 - Archers 1 (barrage), Tanks 0 - Archers 1 (barrage)... So the only units that can fight 1vs1 with archer are artillery units, beacuse you are giving archers a long-range fire capability... a nonsense, it isn't? So IMHO best delete archer barrage And please leave SIEGE AND ARTILLERY units the only capable of Long range fire.

Eliminating this annoying issue (IMHO) would solve the "arrows immunity" issue mentioned by me. About flanking damage, I think it's already implemented ingame that the flanking damage it's only for certain units, and some others are immune. If not, please limit flanking damage to proper units (all modern units should be immune of course)

 

[SR-71]

It might be some time before more units are added and ver 255E is released. For now, I want to see how well ver 255D does. If you want to list all of your recommended units, we will consider each one for inclusion.

Oh, it's easy, only the most common yet included in other mods :
- Arquebusier - Musketmen - Trench infantry - Modern Infantry (a bit before and alongside with Mech inf, does not need oil)
- Early tank - Light Tank (upgrade for Cavalry, not Helicopters!) - perhaps Air Cav
- Modern Anti-Tank (After A-T)
- Put Grenadiers in proper site, not so early
- Helicopters a class apart (except Air Cav)

Are not many, aren't they?

 

[OrionVeteran]

Sorry, you're wrong. It's a much bigger exploit than the case you want to prevent, so at present doesn't work properly. See the screenshots below...

You can see how moving land mine I'm able of not only to make the enemy going wherever I want, but moving the mine into a city, the enemy units left apart, so I can conquest the city without any opposition

IMHO land mines are very interesting, but the way you want them to perform is completely unrealistic in Civ4... You want mines to be able of getting into enemy occupied plots, then prevent them from arming. This is absurd, because you shouldn't be able of moving mines through the enemy troops like Spies, they are not covert units, or at least SHOULDN'T BE. As you desire them to work, you can build the mine, move it completely unseen deep into enemy territory (even surround the enemy capital with mines) so arm it wherever you want and... wait. So they are not working no way like mines, but like covert operations.

My suggestion is to treat them like PARATROOPERS OR STATIC LOADED TROOPS (AMMUNITIONS). The concept it's much more simple and much more realistic. This should work as this:
- You build the mine (much properly "Minefield")
- You load it on an unit (artillery or helicopter for an example), being the minefield unable to move if not loaded, or deploy it in a specific radius (like paratroops)
- You move the mine-transport wherever you want, then deploy the minefield, which then becomes again static.
- Then, if unarmed cannot be seen by enemy players, but can be passable (as spies) by all units
- If you arm it, then... BOOM

This is IMHO, the proper way a land mine should work: Easy and realistic

Hope this idea will help solving this issue

Wow! Facinating! I'm working the issue. I believe I have a possible solution, but it needs testing. Add the following XML change to all 6 mine units in the CIV4UnitInfos.xml file:

<bNoCapture>1</bNoCapture>

This change "should" prevent any mine from entering into a foreign city. If it fails, let me know. The next issue is preventing mines from entering foriegn territory, whether at war or peace. The AI will avoid it, but I did not know, a human could do it. This is something we wanted to prevent from the time we first developed Mine Warfare. It is great to have someone test the issues. So I thank you very much.

This should have prevented the unit from entering the city. hmmm.

<bOnlyDefensive>1</bOnlyDefensive>

 

[Rusty Edge]

I'd like to propose an alternative for the musket issue. Sure muskets were around for centuries, common in the Spanish invasion of the New World right through the American Civil War. There was a big difference between the early matchlocks and the flintlock, and later the percusion lock in reliabillity.

Likewise, with the invention of bayonets, muskets were able to defend themselves against mounted forces and engage melee units, they didn't need a mix of pikemen in the formation anymore. Of course I would urge you to check this with your historian.

I don't know the perplexities of python, but it seems to me that rather than create new classes of units, you might be able to add a bonus against melee and a defense against mounted bonus with military science or tradition to represent bayonets. Add a first strike with replacable parts to represent improved locks.

Of course this could be done with something like the #84 smokeless powder random event using promotions and a 100% probability. The drawback to promotions is it would carry forward with upgrades, and could potentially disrupt the balance in later eras, although the only thing that would matter much is the Drill promo, because melee and mounted are becoming obsolete in later eras anyway.

Maybe more unit classes and art are easier, but as for realism, I figure you wouldn't know how good an enemey's musket was until he started using it against you.
And you would still know how dangerous he was with the mouse-over when he got too close.

 

[OrionVeteran]

I'd like to propose an alternative for the musket issue. Sure muskets were around for centuries, common in the Spanish invasion of the New World right through the American Civil War. There was a big difference between the early matchlocks and the flintlock, and later the percusion lock in reliabillity.

Likewise, with the invention of bayonets, muskets were able to defend themselves against mounted forces and engage melee units, they didn't need a mix of pikemen in the formation anymore. Of course I would urge you to check this with your historian.

I don't know the perplexities of python, but it seems to me that rather than create new classes of units, you might be able to add a bonus against melee and a defense against mounted bonus with military science or tradition to represent bayonets. Add a first strike with replacable parts to represent improved locks.

Of course this could be done with something like the #84 smokeless powder random event using promotions and a 100% probability. The drawback to promotions is it would carry forward with upgrades, and could potentially disrupt the balance in later eras, although the only thing that would matter much is the Drill promo, because melee and mounted are becoming obsolete in later eras anyway.

Maybe more unit classes and art are easier, but as for realism, I figure you wouldn't know how good an enemey's musket was until he started using it against you.
And you would still know how dangerous he was with the mouse-over when he got too close.

Thanks Rusty Edge. I will certainly discuss all your thoughts with the historian.

 

[OrionVeteran]

Sorry, you're wrong. It's a much bigger exploit than the case you want to prevent, so at present doesn't work properly. See the screenshots below...

You can see how moving land mine I'm able of not only to make the enemy going wherever I want, but moving the mine into a city, the enemy units left apart, so I can conquest the city without any opposition

IMHO land mines are very interesting, but the way you want them to perform is completely unrealistic in Civ4... You want mines to be able of getting into enemy occupied plots, then prevent them from arming. This is absurd, because you shouldn't be able of moving mines through the enemy troops like Spies, they are not covert units, or at least SHOULDN'T BE. As you desire them to work, you can build the mine, move it completely unseen deep into enemy territory (even surround the enemy capital with mines) so arm it wherever you want and... wait. So they are not working no way like mines, but like covert operations.

My suggestion is to treat them like PARATROOPERS OR STATIC LOADED TROOPS (AMMUNITIONS). The concept it's much more simple and much more realistic. This should work as this:
- You build the mine (much properly "Minefield")
- You load it on an unit (artillery or helicopter for an example), being the minefield unable to move if not loaded, or deploy it in a specific radius (like paratroops)
- You move the mine-transport wherever you want, then deploy the minefield, which then becomes again static.
- Then, if unarmed cannot be seen by enemy players, but can be passable (as spies) by all units
- If you arm it, then... BOOM

This is IMHO, the proper way a land mine should work: Easy and realistic

Hope this idea will help solving this issue

I solved the arming issue. If you can't arm the mine, it won't detonate. So, I have made a python change in the CvMainInterface.py file:

if StandardFunctions.isTypeInList(iUnitType, MineWarfare.MasterMineList):
	# Is this Mine unarmed?
	if not MineWarfare.isMineImmobile(g_pSelectedUnit):
		iPlotOwner = g_pSelectedUnitPlot.getOwner()
		# Can't arm a mine on a plot owned by another player.
		[COLOR="red"]if iPlotOwner == iUnitOwner or iPlotOwner == -1:[/COLOR]
			# ##### Arming Switch for ALL unarmed Mines - Button ######
			screen.appendMultiListButton( "BottomButtonContainer", ArtFileMgr.getInterfaceArtInfo("INTERFACE_ARMING_SWITCH").getPath(), 0, WidgetTypes.WIDGET_GENERAL, 776, 776, False )
			screen.show( "BottomButtonContainer" )
			iCount = iCount + 1
			return

This turned out to be an easy fix. The red line checks the ownership of the plot. If the plot is owned by another civ, the icon to arm the mine will not be visible. Thus, the mine can't be armed in foreign territory. If you can't arm the mine, it won't detonate. This was our intention to begin with. Don't know how I missed it before now.

This still leaves the exploit, that makes the AI abandon the city, to be solved. I'm still working it.

 

[SR-71]

I solved the arming issue. If you can't arm the mine, it won't detonate. So, I have made a python change in the CvMainInterface.py file:

if StandardFunctions.isTypeInList(iUnitType, MineWarfare.MasterMineList):
	# Is this Mine unarmed?
	if not MineWarfare.isMineImmobile(g_pSelectedUnit):
		iPlotOwner = g_pSelectedUnitPlot.getOwner()
		# Can't arm a mine on a plot owned by another player.
		[COLOR="red"]if iPlotOwner == iUnitOwner or iPlotOwner == -1:[/COLOR]
			# ##### Arming Switch for ALL unarmed Mines - Button ######
			screen.appendMultiListButton( "BottomButtonContainer", ArtFileMgr.getInterfaceArtInfo("INTERFACE_ARMING_SWITCH").getPath(), 0, WidgetTypes.WIDGET_GENERAL, 776, 776, False )
			screen.show( "BottomButtonContainer" )
			iCount = iCount + 1
			return

This turned out to be an easy fix. The red line checks the ownership of the plot. If the plot is owned by another civ, the icon to arm the mine will not be visible. Thus, the mine can't be armed in foreign territory. If you can't arm the mine, it won't detonate. This was our intention to begin with. Don't know how I missed it before now.

This still leaves the exploit, that makes the AI abandon the city, to be solved. I'm still working it.

That's a good work. At least you prevent to use them like covert ops...

The exploit it's the same annoying issue that makes AI units retire from the plot, which was exactly the absurd capability that I pointed at first

BUT I must point that ALL the problems mentioned would solve themselves making them static and transportable. Even could be armed in foreign territory without problems, because they would reach wherever your armed forces can reach as in real war!! Can be airborne, ship-borne, artillery launched.... Absolutely realistic !!!!

I'm no way modder, but I suppose would be a more simple coding than your present way... well, you know it better

 

[SR-71]

Though I don't like the present system for mines, that cause those annoying problems, I would want to ask you (only for having a little idea how mines work and perhaps give some suggestion)

When unarmed, do you treat mines like spies? They have the capabilities you want (unseen, able to tresspass...) and, which it's most important, don't make enemys retreat from the plot I don't understand why they do the annoying effect they do at present...

I suppose the problem shouldn't be when unarmed, as is at present, but when armed, because you want them to be undetected until the enemy it's already ON the plot, not like Explorers, which can only defend as mines but are detected if you try to move on... But if mine warfare works (Sorry I haven't been yet able to get seeing a mine exploding ingame) I think you have solved the main problem, are you?

 

[SR-71]

I'd like to propose an alternative for the musket issue. Sure muskets were around for centuries, common in the Spanish invasion of the New World right through the American Civil War. There was a big difference between the early matchlocks and the flintlock, and later the percusion lock in reliabillity.

Likewise, with the invention of bayonets, muskets were able to defend themselves against mounted forces and engage melee units, they didn't need a mix of pikemen in the formation anymore. Of course I would urge you to check this with your historian.

I don't know the perplexities of python, but it seems to me that rather than create new classes of units, you might be able to add a bonus against melee and a defense against mounted bonus with military science or tradition to represent bayonets. Add a first strike with replacable parts to represent improved locks.

Of course this could be done with something like the #84 smokeless powder random event using promotions and a 100% probability. The drawback to promotions is it would carry forward with upgrades, and could potentially disrupt the balance in later eras, although the only thing that would matter much is the Drill promo, because melee and mounted are becoming obsolete in later eras anyway.

Maybe more unit classes and art are easier, but as for realism, I figure you wouldn't know how good an enemey's musket was until he started using it against you.
And you would still know how dangerous he was with the mouse-over when he got too close.

Those are excellent ideas. They are already on a somewhat similar way on another mods (Example: Realism Invictus) and are called "doctrines".

But these good ideas shouldn't prevent you of adding more units. The land units tree it's really poor at present

 

[OrionVeteran]

That's a good work. At least you prevent to use them like covert ops...

The exploit it's the same annoying issue that makes AI units retire from the plot, which was exactly the absurd capability that I pointed at first

BUT I must point that ALL the problems mentioned would solve themselves making them static and transportable. Even could be armed in foreign territory without problems, because they would reach wherever your armed forces can reach as in real war!! Can be airborne, ship-borne, artillery launched.... Absolutely realistic !!!!

I'm no way modder, but I suppose would be a more simple coding than your present way... well, you know it better

In the early development of mine warfare, we wanted to transport mines and drop them off with a Mine Layer unit. The problem is: There are no units out there that can carry "Land" units. Much worse was the prospect of trying to get the AI to use mines and drop them off in the right locations. The transport capabilities called for huge SDK changes which we were unwilling to do, if we wanted to keep the mine warfare mod compatible with most other mods. So the decision was made to treat each mine as a separate unit and deploy them individually. It worked. The code for the AI prevents the deployment of mines on enemy territory. However, you discovered there was nothing to stop a human player from doing so. For the very reasons you stated, the movement of mines in foriegn territory must be prevented. My historian said he has some ideas, but we won't get to discuss them until Friday night. I have toyed with Air drops, which look cool, but still does not prevent the drops from taking place in foriegn territory. I suspect the reason why the AI abandons the city plot is because it detects the high strength of the mine, which is currently set to 35. Perhaps the fix is to lower the strength value, so the AI won't run. I will continue testing.

 

[OrionVeteran]

Those are excellent ideas. They are already on a somewhat similar way on another mods (Example: Realism Invictus) and are called "doctrines".

But these good ideas shouldn't prevent you of adding more units. The land units tree it's really poor at present

It took several weeks of development time for the Aviation mod and the Navy mod. Combined forces took even longer. But we will be adding more land units in 255E. Patients... Despite appearances, I do have a life outside of Civ4.