We could disallow settling on forests or jungles until they are chopped. I was always slightly bothered that you could build a city on a jungle, clearing the jungle before IW. However, for those players who get a forest or jungle heavy start, I think it's unnecessarily hampering them to require them not to build on forests/jungles.
Changing something like this would have a MASSIVE impact on the game. On Immortal/Deity you are pretty much forced to settle in the Jungle at times to block off enough land to even stand a chance against the AI.
I don't think this is a problem at all. What I generally do if I have workers to spare for it is chop the forest where I'm going to settle a city. The nearest city will get some of the , although at a reduced yield.
This is a non-issue that don't need tampering with
I don't know... why are we trying to boost the Grenadier again? Riflemen are harder to get tech-wise and it's also way-off the tech path of the extremely powerful Cannon. Are we trying to enable Grenadiers/Cannons to rip Rifles a new one?
As for +1 for jungle, I like this from a game balancing aspect for players stuck in the middle of the jungle. On the flip side, it seems odd to have jungle be -1 on all the tiles surrounding your city yet +1 on the city's tile itself. I'm happy to sacrifice logic for fun and game balance, though.
When you settle on a jungle tile you "clear" the jungle.
+1 from jungle is unnecessary and probably changes a lot of things that you can't envision easily. We've already given a small chopping bonus for jungles (which is fine and works well in gameplay) we don't want to start making jungle tiles food neutral also.
To settle in/near the Jungle you need Ironworking and a lot of workers. This is a basic and fundamental civ4 "rule" that most are aware of. I don't see the gameplay benefit of changing this.
PoM: Before you really start working on all these changes, lets review teh complete list of possible changes and ask our selves the question three or four additional times: Do we really need to do this and does it make gameplay more interesting?
We don't want to alienate players that are used to the standard civ4 setup with unnecessary changes that don't really improve gameplay (but just changes it).
Would make colosseums a stable equivalent. The problem is then you probably need to boost stables, as well. I think they're fine as is (+1 happy and +1 XP for melee is still pretty strong, especially for creative civs).
Upon review I throw away my earlier statement that a +2 EXP Colosseum is a good change and instead I'd say I agree with UWHabs here. Leave it as it, it's fine.
Since Forests would typically boost the city tile +1/+2 from its normal 1 while Jungles would have no effect, Afforess proposed that Jungles provide +1 to the city. I assume he meant it to work just like settling on a Flood Plains does now: a city tile with a 3 yield (on grassland). Again, all this applies only to the city tile itself when you settle on a feature (normal Civ4 rules once you stop auto-clearing all features).
This is not about making Jungles food neutral or changing non-city Forest/Jungle tiles.
I did not know FP was previously removed when you settled on it. This actually makes sense though as you cannot remove FP with a worker like you can jungles/forest. A minor and almost irrelevant change, however.
Since Forests would typically boost the city tile +1/+2 from its normal 1 while Jungles would have no effect, Afforess proposed that Jungles provide +1 to the city. I assume he meant it to work just like settling on a Flood Plains does now: a city tile with a 3 yield (on grassland). Again, all this applies only to the city tile itself when you settle on a feature (normal Civ4 rules once you stop auto-clearing all features).
This is not about making Jungles food neutral or changing non-city Forest/Jungle tiles.
Oh right, I understand now. I still think it's an unnecessary change more likely to just confuse vanilla BtS players (not confuse perhaps, but adds an additional little perk you cannot easily learn about by reading a building description), however.
@AveiMil EDITAnd I see several more posts again which I'll reply to shortly...
Ok it's getting hard to write lengthy posts because this internet connection is dodgy, so I'll be brief and to the point.
Explorers...
Ok, I'll leave them as vanilla but with ability to attack barbs. This is something that will require some coding I don't know how to do so I really hope it is the change that would make single players say they are useful again. If not, we need to decide now if something else is better to go with.
Priests yields...
So this is what you are suggesting?
Standard Priest: 2 and 1
Theology Priest: 2 and 2
Divine Right Priest: 2 and 3
The 2 from the two techs will both expire with Scientific Method?
With engineers now being a specialist that provide 3, I think it would be ok for late-game priests to have 21. Is that what you are suggesting?
Your alternative suggestion for the priest was the same except with another and one less . Which is preferable as a change and why?
Changing something like this would have a MASSIVE impact on the game. On Immortal/Deity you are pretty much forced to settle in the Jungle at times to block off enough land to even stand a chance against the AI.
I don't think this is a problem at all. What I generally do if I have workers to spare for it is chop the forest where I'm going to settle a city. The nearest city will get some of the , although at a reduced yield.
This is a non-issue that don't need tampering with
I also said earlier it's easy enough to have a worker clear the forest before-hand. Now in PIG it might be worthwhile clearing a jungle too but I can't imagine too many times that I'd bother.
I'm curious to see how Afforess' modification works but until then I'm not committing to anything.
I don't know... why are we trying to boost the Grenadier again? Riflemen are harder to get tech-wise and it's also way-off the tech path of the extremely powerful Cannon. Are we trying to enable Grenadiers/Cannons to rip Rifles a new one?
Hmmm I do agree and I think I'll take back my proposed change for grenadiers. I was under the impression a lot of players dislike them because are on a niche tech, are weak on defense against most things including rifles, and are not particularly cheap.
I also don't think they should "rip rifles a new one", as you put it, which my change would have done.
When you settle on a jungle tile you "clear" the jungle.
+1 from jungle is unnecessary and probably changes a lot of things that you can't envision easily. We've already given a small chopping bonus for jungles (which is fine and works well in gameplay) we don't want to start making jungle tiles food neutral also.
To settle in/near the Jungle you need Ironworking and a lot of workers. This is a basic and fundamental civ4 "rule" that most are aware of. I don't see the gameplay benefit of changing this.
PoM: Before you really start working on all these changes, lets review teh complete list of possible changes and ask our selves the question three or four additional times: Do we really need to do this and does it make gameplay more interesting?
We don't want to alienate players that are used to the standard civ4 setup with unnecessary changes that don't really improve gameplay (but just changes it).
Actually I don't understand the whole +1 with jungle suggestion. Jungles don't provide +1 anyway - they provide -1 so I have no idea why settling on them should provide 3. Maybe people are thinking of them as a terrain that is 1 and when you chop them grass magically appears. Actually they are a feature that costs the terrain 1 as I am probably repeating at this point.
Upon review I throw away my earlier statement that a +2 EXP Colosseum is a good change and instead I'd say I agree with UWHabs here. Leave it as it, it's fine.
Yeah I already took back this idea. Partly because the temple boost is not enough to make colosseums too weak in comparison. Also, a colosseum would then be able to produce 5xp units without even a GG or civic, which could become too powerful for war-mongering players.
@AveiMil EDITAnd I see several more posts again which I'll reply to shortly...
Explorers...
Ok, I'll leave them as vanilla but with ability to attack barbs. This is something that will require some coding I don't know how to do so I really hope it is the change that would make single players say they are useful again. If not, we need to decide now if something else is better to go with.
I find Explorers semi-useful in their current state. If you want to make them even more specialized and useful you can bump up their movement point to 3. Scouting and scouting quickly it quite useful. Besides, I think its fine that some units are highly situational.
Priests yields...
So this is what you are suggesting?
Standard Priest: 2 and 1
Theology Priest: 2 and 2
Divine Right Priest: 2 and 3
The 2 from the two techs will both expire with Scientific Method?
With engineers now being a specialist that provide 3, I think it would be ok for late-game priests to have 21. Is that what you are suggesting?
I think the additional is preferable as alone will get you nowhere quick if you don't have enough cities that are producing enough commerce that can be turned into science beakers anyway. Remember a Priest specialist setup will require a lot of farms to fuel the food requirements leaving you scarce on cottages and thus scarce on commerce which means you'll probably produce a low number of science beaker per turn with the added bonus that you'll probably be able to run close to 100% on the slider at a higher frequency.
But then again, Im not really certain the exact effects the additional over will result in other than are probably more versatile (by building wealth you can even convert that 1 into 1 anyway. The most important part is that the Priest becomes a high yield specialist so that you can run a lot of them throughout your empire and still get a good return for the 2 they consume.
Hmmm I do agree and I think I'll take back my proposed change for grenadiers. I was under the impression a lot of players dislike them because are on a niche tech, are weak on defense against most things including rifles, and are not particularly cheap.
This may sound counter-intuitive since Grenadiers have + to attack against Riflemen but Grenadiers are actually a defensive counter to Riflemen in the hands of a human player. Not a city defender, but a culture defender, allowing you strike Riflemen or Riflemen stacks that enter your culture on an attack mission. Using roads and with Cannons you can decimate a Riflemen stack this way.
Offensivly you would always bring Cannons, which are so freaking good you don't even need Grenadiers to be effective, Musketmen can do the clean-up adequatly. Besides Military Science offer other advantages, the ability to build War Academy and to build Ship of the Line to dominate the seas make MS a strong tech (probably stronger in MP than SP though).
Actually I don't understand the whole +1 with jungle suggestion. Jungles don't provide +1 anyway - they provide -1 so I have no idea why settling on them should provide 3. Maybe people are thinking of them as a terrain that is 1 and when you chop them grass magically appears. Actually they are a feature that costs the terrain 1 as I am probably repeating at this point.
Yeah I already took back this idea. Partly because the temple boost is not enough to make colosseums too weak in comparison. Also, a colosseum would then be able to produce 5xp units without even a GG or civic, which could become too powerful for war-mongering players.
I also said earlier it's easy enough to have a worker clear the forest before-hand. Now in PIG it might be worthwhile clearing a jungle too but I can't imagine too many times that I'd bother.
Actually, it is very worthwhile in some scenarios because it enables me to chop out the basic, but extremely important, early buildings such as Monument and Granary.
I just wanted to also say that the more I read this change the more I hate it.
It does not make Walls anymore attractive, consider that the +25% bonus would only have an effect if the trade route yield was higher than 4 (+25% off 2 is less than 1 which means that the engine counts it as 0) it's rather pointless.
I hate how it clutters the building description text with something intuitively irrelevant that has no real gameplay effect anyway.
Actually, it is very worthwhile in some scenarios because it enables me to chop out the basic, but extremely important, early buildings such as Monument and Granary.
No I was talking about chopping the jungle before you settle on a tile. I realise chopping jungles in general is worth it for the hammer bonus to the city. Chopping the jungle on a city site will provide only a couple of hammers and cost several worker turns. You also would need to have your worker away from an existing city.
I just wanted to also say that the more I read this change the more I hate it.
It does not make Walls anymore attractive, consider that the +25% bonus would only have an effect if the trade route yield was higher than 4 (+25% off 2 is less than 1 which means that the engine counts it as 0) it's rather pointless.
I hate how it clutters the building description text with something intuitively irrelevant that has no real gameplay effect anyway.
I agree. It's been one the list of things to remove for a while actually. It's just been so long since I've been able to make an update. Thanks for reminding me in any case.
That said, with fractional trade routes it can be useful for cities with multiple trade routes even if they are individually less than 4. But I don't think fractional trade routes are in the latest released version.
No I was talking about chopping the jungle before you settle on a tile. I realise chopping jungles in general is worth it for the hammer bonus to the city. Chopping the jungle on a city site will provide only a couple of hammers and cost several worker turns. You also would need to have your worker away from an existing city.
If you can remember, see if you can change the shortcut to the Better AI "simulate X number of turns" command. I remember this feature is broken in PIG probably because something else is taking over the default shift+alt+x shortcut or somethnig. Perhaps assign it a different key combination?
That feature is actually quite usefull to simulate an AI game, could even be used to see how AI reacts to PIG changes if it worked.
Okay, PieceofMind, I finished the tweak for cities settled on Forests and Jungles and it is working perfectly. It involves editing 3 files, CvCity.cpp, CvPlot cpp/h.
Here's the code:
Spoiler:
In
Code:
void CvCity::init(...)
...
CyArgsList argsList;
argsList.add(iX);
argsList.add(iY);
long lResult=0;
gDLL->getPythonIFace()->callFunction(PYGameModule, "citiesDestroyFeatures", argsList.makeFunctionArgs(), &lResult);
if (lResult == 1)
{
if (pPlot->getFeatureType() != NO_FEATURE)
{
pPlot->setFeatureType(NO_FEATURE);
}
}
Okay, now to make the variable do something. In CvPlot::doTurn() add this to the end
Code:
if (getExtraYieldTurns() > 0)
setExtraYieldTurns(getExtraYieldTurns() - 1);
else if (getExtraYieldTurns() < 0)
setExtraYieldTurns(getExtraYieldTurns() + 1);
And finally, in CvPlot::calculateYield(...), add the code to make it give extra yields:
Code:
CvPlot::calculateYield(...)
...
if (ePlayer != NO_PLAYER)
{
...
if ((getExtraYieldTurns() > 0 ) && (eYield == YIELD_PRODUCTION))
iYield++;
else if ((getExtraYieldTurns() < 0) && (eYield == YIELD_FOOD))
iYield++;
...
Now a brief explanation of what this code is actually doing. When you settle a city, it checks to see if there is a feature on the tile. If there is, it checks to see if it is a Forest or Jungle. If it is a forest, it calculate the hammers the player would have received if they had simply chopped the forest; same with the jungle. If it is a forest, it changes the plot's ExtraYieldTurns to the number of production it would have recieved, and each turn the tile counts down until it reaches zero; then the tile loses its extra . If It is a jungle, it sets the turn counter backwards, with a negative value, and if counts up to zero. This is just a trick to use one integer for two seperate events, so when the counter is negative, the tile gets an extra instead of .
Since this affects the read/write functions, this will break saves.
If you ever remove the FEATURE_FOREST or FEATURE_JUNGLE from your game, bad things will happen. However, I doubt you would, so I didn't check against that. If it bothers you, a simple != -1 check would prevent anything bad from happening if you did.
One last notable thing. If the city is razed before the counter reaches 0, the tile will still keep counting down, and the extra yield will still be there. I figured that the chances of this was remote, and that the effect of still counting down wasn't worth protecting against. If the player loses the city, I think the extra yield on that plot expiring is the least of their worries.
I've been playing with PIG mod and wanted to try out the Marathon Accelerated speed. The problem comes once I've built everything I possibly can with the current techs that I have. I always end up with absolutely nothing left to build unless I want to tank my economy by building a bunch of military units. To counter this I've been building military units and simply deleting them, which helps to keep my economy in check, but at the same time, is rather tedious and makes the game boring.
I recently read the description of the Marathon Accelerated stand-alone mod and the description says that mysticism should allow building research now instead of needing alphabet, however I just tried this out and with PIG Mod installed, at least, this is not true.
In addition to that, chopping/whipping is extremely overpowered while playing Marathon Accelerated. I think one population is worth around 120 hammer sand chopping a forest is worth 80 hammers (120 with mathematics), which is enough to build 3 or 4 military units in one turn.
Because of this, even if I have Bronze Working, I typically leave my workers sitting around idle because I don't want them to waste hammers by chopping forests when I have nothing worthwhile to build.
Not sure if this thread is the right place for these complaints, or if I should bring these over to the Marathon Accelerated thread, but since it's happening with PIG mod using the MA speed, I figured here would be the proper place. I guess I should try installing MA by itself and see how things go with just that to see whether PIG is the problem or if MA is just not implemented properly with the research building.
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.
, although at a reduced yield.
for jungle, I like this from a game balancing aspect for players stuck in the middle of the jungle. On the flip side, it seems odd to have jungle be -1
which I'll reply to shortly...
. Scouting and scouting quickly it quite useful. Besides, I think its fine that some units are highly situational.
(+25% off 2 is less than 1 which means that the engine counts it as 0) it's rather pointless.
