Quick Questions / Quick Answers

Could someone explain me the China's unique ability? Super confused especially by the "these bonuses decline 50% every era", like the 1 gold 1 gold bonus? Is the We love the empress day same thing as we love the king day?
 
Gampela said:
Could someone explain me the China's unique ability? Super confused especially by the "these bonuses decline 50% every era", like the 1 gold 1 gold bonus? Is the We love the empress day same thing as we love the king day?
Click to expand...
Each new city and new great work gives +1 food +1 gold to all your existing cities. If you found 5 cities in a row, the first one will have +5, the second +4, the third +3, sfsf. On new era, these bonuses get halved: +2 the first, +2 the second, +1 the third, +1 the fourth...
WLTED is exactly the same as WLTKD, except for the extra bonus. Anything that triggers with a WLTKD will trigger with WLTED.
 
I just wanted to post a quick follow up to my post about having issues loading saves. After much googling, I found an odd but so far totally effective solution. Steps:
  1. Launch Civ. Select mods. Hit next.
  2. Setup and start a game (I've been starting a game using the same settings as the save I want to play, not sure if that matters.)
  3. Exit to main menu.
  4. Select mods. Hit next.
  5. Load problematic late game save.
  6. Profit!
I'm not a computer science major but my theory is that starting a fresh game first loads a bunch of mod assets/stuff into memory so that it's cached, and then the game doesn't choke/crash when it has to load all that + a late game save.

As for the game in question, I'm playing on the Mediterranean map that Martin Fencka played as Rome recently. It's my second attempt at the map and I don't think I'll be playing it again. The map is locked to 10 players and even with that many civs it's huge. The strategic resource placement is awful. I play with raging barbarians and this is the 2nd time I've discovered civ's capitals surrounded by barbs and them stuck in the ancient era.

It's turn 588, epic speed, emperor, I'm playing as the Huns, and I've conquered/vassalized 3 (about to be 4) civs. Indonesia is the runaway with 29(!!!) wonders. They're 4 techs ahead of me and we've both just entered in the information era. We've warred on and off in Turkey but I've avoided pushing in because of his tech lead. Once the war with Greece is over in the Iberian peninsula, I'll finally be able to bring all my forces east and hopefully get the domination victory before he wins with Science.

upload_2019-10-7_19-32-4.png
 
Is settling on Marble supposed to provide 15% from the get go?
I would have thought it required construction but it seems not, also any lux settled on seems to instantly provide happy (calendar resources, elephants etc).

upload_2019-10-9_0-13-38.png
 
andersw said:
Is settling on Marble supposed to provide 15% from the get go?
I would have thought it required construction but it seems not, also any lux settled on seems to instantly provide happy (calendar resources, elephants etc).

View attachment 536252
Click to expand...
Yes, both marble and stone give the ability to build wonders faster as soon as you have them connected. This seems like a nice move if you want to wonder whoring and you have marble in sight.
 
tu_79 said:
Yes, both marble and stone give the ability to build wonders faster as soon as you have them connected. This seems like a nice move if you want to wonder whoring and you have marble in sight.
Click to expand...

No kidding got a very fast stonehenge with this start, testing france and want to settle on lux, something I've clearly neglected in most of my prev games.
 
Stalker0 said:
How much does each of those give you?
Click to expand...

I'm working on understanding that code ATM, there's a number of factors involved, such as military strength, shared religion, WC resolutions etc.

I will say that:
- No warmonger penalties are applied with players you haven't met;
- Attacking City-States gives a smaller penalty than major civs;
- Capturing cities has a substantially higher penalty than declaring war;
- The penalty decays over time;
- AIs have a leader-specific flavor which determines how much they hate warmongers, and therefore how much warmonger penalty you will accumulate with them. Montezuma is extremely tolerant of warmongering, while Gandhi is extremely intolerant;
- As you know, you can see how much each player will care about a city capture on the city tooltip.
 
Any quick guidelines on whether to annex or puppet a city in the mid-late game, e.g. when you're getting into Imperialism?
 
Recursive said:
I'm working on understanding that code ATM, there's a number of factors involved, such as military strength, shared religion, WC resolutions etc.

I will say that:
- No warmonger penalties are applied with players you haven't met;
- Attacking City-States gives a smaller penalty than major civs;
- Capturing cities has a substantially higher penalty than declaring war;
- The penalty decays over time;
- AIs have a leader-specific flavor which determines how much they hate warmongers, and therefore how much warmonger penalty you will accumulate with them. Montezuma is extremely tolerant of warmongering, while Gandhi is extremely intolerant;
- As you know, you can see how much each player will care about a city capture on the city tooltip.
Click to expand...

I did some investigation and personal changes in this area about a year ago. At that time (and quite likely now):

- The no penalty with unmet civs didn't work
- The tooltip on the impact of capturing a city used a different calculation and was pretty worthless (I removed it as useless clutter)

I also found:
- The 'economic value' of the city compared to an average city is used as a scaler. As a result, there was virtually no penalty for capturing new/small cities. (I smoothed the function to 25 + 75% of value)
- The penalties were almost double (1.9 times) if you declared the war. (Some comments and variable names suggest it should be 1 for the aggressor and 0.9 for a non-aggressor, but the implementation is not consistent with that)
- The penalty is much higher with the previous owner - seems fair enough :)
- Decay is very slow and penalties very high such that even a very modest amount of warmongering gave factors that totally dominated diplomacy. I increased decay and greatly reduced penalties - if I play as a true warmonger the numbers are still high. This was a change that made my games more enjoyable as it gave me more flexibilty in stategy, but won't be to everybodies liking.
- Penalties increase with era a bit.
- Code to avoid repeat penalties when a city changes hands a few times didn't work

Best of luck with your work and thanks for everything you already sorted.
 
Recursive said:
- Capturing cities has a substantially higher penalty than declaring war;
Click to expand...

Man no kidding. In a recent game England settled my back corner. After a declare on them, killing one unit, and taking the city...I was already at 39% antiwarmonger penalty (immortal diff).

At those numbers, swordsman start beating knights!
 
Stalker0 said:
Man no kidding. In a recent game England settled my back corner. After a declare on them, killing one unit, and taking the city...I was already at 39% antiwarmonger penalty (immortal diff).

At those numbers, swordsman start beating knights!
Click to expand...
Yes after I've gone up to emperor the wars have started to become crazy grindy because .... warmonger penalty all my units just tickles the AI.
edit: especially in my first AI I try to conquer.
 
psparky said:
I did some investigation and personal changes in this area about a year ago. At that time (and quite likely now):

- The no penalty with unmet civs didn't work
- The tooltip on the impact of capturing a city used a different calculation and was pretty worthless (I removed it as useless clutter)

I also found:
- The 'economic value' of the city compared to an average city is used as a scaler. As a result, there was virtually no penalty for capturing new/small cities. (I smoothed the function to 25 + 75% of value)
- The penalties were almost double (1.9 times) if you declared the war. (Some comments and variable names suggest it should be 1 for the aggressor and 0.9 for a non-aggressor, but the implementation is not consistent with that)
- The penalty is much higher with the previous owner - seems fair enough :)
- Decay is very slow and penalties very high such that even a very modest amount of warmongering gave factors that totally dominated diplomacy. I increased decay and greatly reduced penalties - if I play as a true warmonger the numbers are still high. This was a change that made my games more enjoyable as it gave me more flexibilty in stategy, but won't be to everybodies liking.
- Penalties increase with era a bit.
- Code to avoid repeat penalties when a city changes hands a few times didn't work

Best of luck with your work and thanks for everything you already sorted.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the encouragement and pointers to problem areas.

I've already fixed warmongering so it doesn't apply to unmet players (was a bug), I'll look into how they can be more fair once I get a complete understanding of the mechanics - the code is scattered through a few files.
 
Can anyone explain how the mechanism/code works for the positive diplo modifier of having been in a war with the same leader? I've been noticing that it seems to be erratic. Sometimes it appears after you've been at war with the same civ, sometimes it doesn't. (I'm playing without transparent diplomacy, if that makes a difference).
 
LifeOfBrian said:
Tu_79, can you post a screenshot? It seems like a bug, at first glance.
Click to expand...
Well, no. I reloaded and things went back to normal. If it helps, do you know the production queue that has three possible items in queue? There's a red X at the left corner of each item, rigth? When this thing happens, there's a "recycle" symbol right next to the X that is not usually there. It looks like it is some kind of feature, actually, but I don't know how to activate it.
 
Quick question about difficulty settings. In the xml file there are two lines about bonus vs barbarians. For instance, King setting is :

<BarbarianBonus>20</BarbarianBonus>
<AIBarbarianBonus>15</AIBarbarianBonus>

Does this mean we have 20% bonus against barb whereas AI only got 15% vs barb? Or does AI get 35% (20+15) vs barb?
 
How does the City State diplomatic mission “improve a resource” work? I am the ally of the CS, have researched the necessary tech, have the appropriate funds, but the mission is grayed out. It is an oil resource with a village on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Late game scaling
Replies
8
Views
2K
pochesun
P
A
4UC Integration: Non-database implementation coordination thread (COMPLETE)
Replies
18
Views
7K
azum4roll
A
Z
Big Industrial cities opinion needed
Replies
6
Views
380
ZergMazter
Z
C
Just a few random questions...
Replies
3
Views
328
Evolena
Evolena
C
Some Questions
Replies
11
Views
900
J437
J
Back
Top Bottom