Probably Improved Gameplay Mod

I can't make the influence-driven warmod to work. It seem activated on the XML but IG there is no effect.

It may be due to the thing that it's not under the name "pig mod" but "pig mod v0.5 pre-release", I'm trying to tweak to make it work.
 
BUG and other mods use a file called CvModName.py that contains a variable called modName that gets set to the name of the mod. BUG no longer requires it to match the mod folder, but all other mods do. Try changing it to the directory name where you installed PIG.

@PoM - Can you post the whole function as it stands now? I read over the code block I posted several times without finding any problems.

Oh, in the XML do the tags have 1, 2, and 3 in the element name as in <OrPrereq1>? If so, make sure that you are using 1 before you use 2 before you use 3. The code as I wrote it assumes that if you don't have the 1 field you can't have the 2 or 3 field; same for 3 requiring 2.
 
It seems like I can promote my units immediately after they gain battle exp...

Normally, if you can promote a unit before attacking then you can promote it up to the level the experience gained makes available.

For example, say you have a unit with 7 experience that you promoted only once to Combat 1. It will be displayed as 7/5. If you promote first it will say 7/10. If you instead attack and gain +3 XP it will say 10/5 and you will be able to promote twice immediately.

Are you saying that you had a unit that said 7/10 and could not be promoted, attacked with it for +3 XP, and could then immediately promote it? That would be a bug if it was unintended.
 
Appreciate the response EmperorFool!

I understand what you are saying, the situation here however was a unit (a maceman) of mine that had 3/5 exp (unpromoted). The battle was at 98% odds so I elected to wait until after the battle to promote my base level maceman. After I won I was at 5/5 exp, promoted him once to heal, and then was presented immediately with the chance to promote again! I didn't do it... I'll try to see if it comes up again.
 
Appreciate the response EmperorFool!

I understand what you are saying, the situation here however was a unit (a maceman) of mine that had 3/5 exp (unpromoted). The battle was at 98% odds so I elected to wait until after the battle to promote my base level maceman. After I won I was at 5/5 exp, promoted him once to heal, and then was presented immediately with the chance to promote again! I didn't do it... I'll try to see if it comes up again.

What you are describing is how the game usually works already. :)

Don't ask me why it works that way, but it's one of the small reasons to not promote a unit before you attack.
 
PIG version 0.5 has been released

I laughed when I zipped up the source files this time and called it PIG source.:)

Changes in v0.5 since v0.4:
Spoiler :
-Granary back to 60:hammers: (as it was originally)
-Added new ACO xml file with French translations, thanks to LoneTraveller
-Merged Lead From Behind modcomp
-Merged BBAI 0.81 (unfortunately this version causes a known MP bug but it will be fixed in next release)
-Castles and Citadel now obsolete with Corporation.
-Merged Show Hidden Attitude Mod
-Allowed 3 promo prereqs
-March is now available with Medic 1, Combat 3 and Drill 3
-Sentry is now available with Combat3,Flanking1,Drill3

-Vassalage now includes -25% number of cities cost.
-Merged Lead From Behind 1.1
-Forest preserves now available with Monarchy.
-Forts returned to unmodded status.
-W3 now only 10 healing but 60 attack.
-Cereal Mills now consumes Sugar
- 1:yuck: added to every city under Slavery
-CvModName.py has had the mod's name changed to PIG.



To do:
+Need to fix the code relating to the 3 promotions in the civilopedia.
 
PIG Mod (the much anticipated update has finally been released 24/10 - v0.5)
:thumbsup:
That's very exciting! The changes look interesting to be sure...
I'd like to comment quickly on these three:
-Forest preserves now available with Monarchy.
-Forts returned to unmodded status.
- 1:yuck: added to every city under Slavery

1) Did you make the happy bonus for forest preserves delay until Sci Method?
2) It's interesting, the AI actually really seemed to like the modded forts haha, at least in this playthrough. It's a good improvement for the AI since it keeps its forests for so long. Hopefully it will get some benefit from the forest preserves, will be fun to see. ;)
3) I'd be interested in why you chose unhealthiness to balance slavery. In essence it's a - 1 :food: in an unhealthy city, which eats into slavery's efficiency a bit, that makes some sense to me.

Just my 2 cents, I will probably give it a try once this game is done! :)
 
About the slavery stuff, I like it seen from here. However, did you consider the latest discussions in the BetterAI forum? If I am correct, they said that, for the purpose of choosing civics, the AI saw minus as plus; so basically, it sees +1:yuck: as +1:health:. Was that corrected in the latest BetterAI perhaps? I'm not sure about that.
 
1) Did you make the happy bonus for forest preserves delay until Sci Method?
No. I'm interested to see what the effect will be of leaving the happy bonus in. Forest preserves are a relatively expensive worker build for that time and it might make things like temples less necessary, but it does strength Monarchy a bit more and leaves more reason to keep forests. I'm curious to see how the AI will handle it.
2) It's interesting, the AI actually really seemed to like the modded forts haha, at least in this playthrough. It's a good improvement for the AI since it keeps its forests for so long. Hopefully it will get some benefit from the forest preserves, will be fun to see. ;)
Was the AI actually building forts for the commerce? i.e. inside its BFCs?

3) I'd be interested in why you chose unhealthiness to balance slavery. In essence it's a - 1 :food: in an unhealthy city, which eats into slavery's efficiency a bit, that makes some sense to me.
This change was based on the suggestion made at some point in this thread. If someone uses the whip very aggressively the 1:yuck: will have little impact. Where the 1:yuck: will have a very significant impact will be in those late-game slavery games where factories and dirty power really start to add up the :yuck: quickly. Given that most people build a granary before using the whip much, I think the :yuck: might get offset a bit by a grain resource that will give 2:health:.
 
About the slavery stuff, I like it seen from here. However, did you consider the latest discussions in the BetterAI forum? If I am correct, they said that, for the purpose of choosing civics, the AI saw minus as plus; so basically, it sees +1:yuck: as +1:health:. Was that corrected in the latest BetterAI perhaps? I'm not sure about that.

Good question. At worst it will make the AI want to stay in slavery when it shouldn't.

I remember seeing that discussion but have forgotten where it was. I think they might even have been discussing in the UP forum, right?

If the change is easy enough I can fix it myself for the next update.
 
I do believe the AI was indeed building forts (on things that already had roads?--don't remember off hand).

Looking forward to playing the update and giving the Forest Preserves a whirl!
 
No. I'm interested to see what the effect will be of leaving the happy bonus in. Forest preserves are a relatively expensive worker build for that time and it might make things like temples less necessary, but it does strength Monarchy a bit more and leaves more reason to keep forests. I'm curious to see how the AI will handle it.

Hmm good point, I didn't think of the expense part. How many worker turns is it to build one?
As an aside, it's pretty cool that my suggestion of boosting Monarchy turned out to be popular... :mischief: :D

Was the AI actually building forts for the commerce? i.e. inside its BFCs?

Yes, it was! I am quite impressed that the computer would pick up on that, and it was pleasant to see some variation in tile improvements.
 
PoM, you should have used Better AI 0.82 to fix the MP bug:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10720

When will PIG 0.6 be released addressing that issue? Will it be before 6th of November? We're having a LAN game then so unless 0.6 will be released by then fixing that we'll have to stay on 0.4.
 
Originally Posted by AveiMil
Found a minor bug.

You changes .txt reads:

-Removed GP from divine right and returned its price to before (1200 instead of 1300).

But the cost for Divine Rigth is set to 1000 now, instead of 1200.
Thanks for that. Now fixed for next release.

I checked in 0.51, this is still set to 1000 beaker cost and not 1200. Is it intentional?
 
Was the AI actually building forts for the commerce? i.e. inside its BFCs?

yes, the AI were rather fond of fortress spamming in BFC. I just finished a game with the previous version, and they were a lot of forest fortress in SB's BFC, mainly (a little less for other AI).

For Cereal Mills, I were trying to add sugar, spice, and cow, and still sid sushi were far superior, more food and some culture :p but you're right trying something not too drastic.

One last thing : skirmisher may need to get the +25% against axe removed. If anything, they don't need it to chop axeman, and trying to invade mali without catapult is something that even more wrong thabn trying to praetorian rush Sitting bull.
 
PoM, you should have used Better AI 0.82 to fix the MP bug:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=10720

When will PIG 0.6 be released addressing that issue? Will it be before 6th of November? We're having a LAN game then so unless 0.6 will be released by then fixing that we'll have to stay on 0.4.

Isn't 0.82 still a development version? I know it fixes the bug but unless you can point me to exactly which part of the dev version is that bugfix I can't go through with winmerge merging in all the comments made in the dev version.

I checked in 0.51, this is still set to 1000 beaker cost and not 1200. Is it intentional?
No. I must have missed that somehow. I'll try to post an update with that fix in the next day or so.
yes, the AI were rather fond of fortress spamming in BFC. I just finished a game with the previous version, and they were a lot of forest fortress in SB's BFC, mainly (a little less for other AI).

For Cereal Mills, I were trying to add sugar, spice, and cow, and still sid sushi were far superior, more food and some culture :p but you're right trying something not too drastic.

One last thing : skirmisher may need to get the +25% against axe removed. If anything, they don't need it to chop axeman, and trying to invade mali without catapult is something that even more wrong thabn trying to praetorian rush Sitting bull.

Yes, the skirmisher certainly doesn't need that defense bonus. Perhaps it'd be best to remove the 25% defense against axes from archers anyway, since axes were increased in cost.

I wonder if anyone would complain if I reduce the skirmisher to 1 first strike instead of 1-2... :mischief:

Regarding corps, Sid's sushi might still be considered the superior but Cereal does get 1:food: per resource consumed and is a better conversion of gold to food, if you don't want the culture. Let's just see how sugar goes first, and then re-assess whether it needs more boost.
 
Back
Top Bottom