Quick Questions , Quick Answers

[Toffer90]

I mean v44 is near and I can't wait for it...

Sorry, v44 is unfortunately far away still, it's not long ago that we released v43.

 

[Leodim]

v43.1:
I dont know if it is the case in every situation or just on my particular case. I don't know if it is intended either, but I noticed that, in my experience with "no rng blabla average", it's best to remove the "fortify auto heal" promotion before attacking, so far. The heal bonus doesn't compensate the increased hp loss on fight in terms of time to heal aftewards. In other words : keeping it for fighting means both being more damaged (and so more likely to get killed in the first healing turns, that part is totally logical) AND more time to heal.

It might be a particular case I'm facing, is it? Or even intended: player should think to remove it when reached full hp.

 

[Leodim]

There are a bunch of buildings that sundenly got disabled at turn end. Income dropped significantly.
Should I get another version for stable release? Or it is just normal? Even though I wouldn't have spent time building them, I suppose same goes for AI civs.

Also some disabled buildings are still showing some maintenance cost. I don't know if it's UI that's wrong or what. Is there a way to destroy/sell a building?

 

[Maltazard]

You can remove buildings while in the city screen by using ctrl+A then selecting the building. Careful, you can also abandon the whole city in that interface.

I think it's normal: sometimes you lose access to a prerequisite for a bunch of autobuilds, such as a resource or a civic, and they all turn disabled from one turn to the other. If you can figure out why it happened chances are you can also revert this.

 

[Leodim]

Thanks for the tip for destroying!

Well it wasn't some autobuilds, and if I end turn with the C2C I got from civfanatics link, they don't get disable. If I switch to the 43.1 branch from github and reload and redo the same end turn, they do. So I'm pretty sure I didn't manage to get the same version compare to which I started the game with (which is my fault).

EDIT : nvm, they all get back online the turn after anyway.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Yes, I admit I'm prone to reload and change attack order when losing a 80+% battle. Which makes me piss at myself for "cheating" when I do, so all in all, I find more fun in less rng. Really personnal way to play I admit.

At this point, and I cannot really tell how far I will push it, only the basic damage rolls are affected. I praise the dedication of the modders here, I'll try to upload something when it's nice enough though.
So yes, withdraw is still odds-based (so "rng" so to say, on a given fight), same goes for other mechanics. That's also more tricky cause they are decided in one roll at one point (in BTS at least), not a sequence.

Btw I was surprised to see that a 98.60% odds attack (which I was actually losing without modmod, which kind of pissed me off for the nth time ) actually ends up with still a 40-50% hp loss on the attacker, which does indeed correspond to what was expected in ALT losses preview. I can't remember how it was in BTS but my bet would be less hp loss for such an advantage.
EDIT : ofc it is totally possible depending on mechanics (even 100% could mean some heavy losses every time).
So yes, weakening much stronger units should work really well here actually, I suppose.

I already explained a bit but if you're interested, here how it works in more details:

Spoiler :

Each roll being one in a sequence (ie one fight = one sequence), instead of being random 0 to 1 (actually * 1000, just easier to explain on 0-1), they go like this:
1/2, 1/4, 3/4, 1/8, 7/8, 3/8, 5/8, 1/16, 15/16, 7/16, 9/16, 3/16, 13/16, 5/16, 11/16, 1/32, 31/32, and so on (using binary counting which I was kind of proud to find as a "clever" way to generate that, getting older and such )
In C2C this applies to both attacker and defender actually (both rolls it seems).
So the more and smaller rounds, the more accurate, but all in all, you already get the expected outcome +/- some "small" unexpected hp loss due to "rounding".
The advantage of the method is that it is NOT a new combat mechanic (just rolls average sequence), and it can be applied to nearly every combat mod in civ4 without changing its own cool mechanics. You just get the average of the mechanic, each sequence. It only requires rounds per fight to be large enough so the "rounding" is small enough.

This has always been an interesting proposition really. All the moreso WITH the deeper combat mod stuff and the recalculations between rounds, particularly with more of the combat mod applied such as increasing % mods per rnd and decreasing mods per round, power strikes, and other criticals, poisonings and so on playing a role. It could still be not so easy to judge outcomes - first strikes and stealth strikes could really twist what looks to be the initial assessments still. I think I'd still prefer rng included, but it would certainly make the deeper stuff and reading into how it influences fights mean more of a skill based complex system evaluation capability is all the more important, rather than just reading odds and thinking it should be totally accurate.

 

[Thunderbrd]

It might be a particular case I'm facing, is it? Or even intended: player should think to remove it when reached full hp.

Would be a mistake to leave it on after full HP as it represents a unit on rest and relaxation mode completely. I do have an idea that there will be morale mods eventually that will make a player think they might want to let units go slacking just to reward them to increase morale as well which could have a double edged effect but useful if you can see the greater current need.

 

[Leodim]

Would be a mistake to leave it on after full HP as it represents a unit on rest and relaxation mode completely. I do have an idea that there will be morale mods eventually that will make a player think they might want to let units go slacking just to reward them to increase morale as well which could have a double edged effect but useful if you can see the greater current need.

It does make sense indeed!
In my mind it was like "less powerfull, so might die easier BUT will heal faster after a won fight", so I was kind of surprised to see 0 benefit to leaving it on. I didnt think about what it meant RP-wise I admit, self-aid study instead of combat study maybe?

It's really fine as it is yes.

This has always been an interesting proposition really. All the moreso WITH the deeper combat mod stuff and the recalculations between rounds, particularly with more of the combat mod applied such as increasing % mods per rnd and decreasing mods per round, power strikes, and other criticals, poisonings and so on playing a role. It could still be not so easy to judge outcomes - first strikes and stealth strikes could really twist what looks to be the initial assessments still. I think I'd still prefer rng included, but it would certainly make the deeper stuff and reading into how it influences fights mean more of a skill based complex system evaluation capability is all the more important, rather than just reading odds and thinking it should be totally accurate.

Yeah there is no "good" way to play. Some are more popular, that's all.

Digression, personnal thoughts:
- clearly make it an option, not a default setting, I bet I'm the minority taste here.
- one is not forced (tempted though) to look at ALT odds. Just like you're not forced to reload or use WB, if one doesn't want to. Personnaly I do like to look instead of assessing odds myself, then understand why and try to get better odds next time (promotions, unit types, terrain, etc.). A bit more like simple chess and a bit less like a great general thinking. Both are perfectly fine.
- some strategy games goes way way further than civ4/c2c on the rng side. Crusader kings series mechanics for example has always amazed me as how it choses "storytelling" over expectable outcome in pretty much every mechanic of the games. I still like the games though, but I could like them better because of my tastes on the matter. Again, totally personal.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I didnt think about what it meant RP-wise I admit, self-aid study instead of combat study maybe?

Laying around loafing and not actually acting as if one was ever intending to go back to work, lol. There's an auto-heal that lets you use the benefits of this buildup but then ends it as soon as the unit is finished. When other units are grouped into the auto-heal, those that can establish a buildup to help others heal will also go on those until no longer useful for the stack as well.

Yeah there is no "good" way to play. Some are more popular, that's all.

Digression, personnal thoughts:
- clearly make it an option, not a default setting, I bet I'm the minority taste here.
- one is not forced (tempted though) to look at ALT odds. Just like you're not forced to reload or use WB, if one doesn't want to. Personnaly I do like to look instead of assessing odds myself, then understand why and try to get better odds next time (promotions, unit types, terrain, etc.). A bit more like simple chess and a bit less like a great general thinking. Both are perfectly fine.
- some strategy games goes way way further than civ4/c2c on the rng side. Crusader kings series mechanics for example has always amazed me as how it choses "storytelling" over expectable outcome in pretty much every mechanic of the games. I still like the games though, but I could like them better because of my tastes on the matter. Again, totally personal.

This would blend in VERY interestingly with an option that doesn't SHOW the odds at all to the player. So it's not random BUT it takes the player making an assessment based on what they know about the unit details.

 

[Somebody613]

Laying around loafing and not actually acting as if one was ever intending to go back to work, lol. There's an auto-heal that lets you use the benefits of this buildup but then ends it as soon as the unit is finished. When other units are grouped into the auto-heal, those that can establish a buildup to help others heal will also go on those until no longer useful for the stack as well.

This would blend in VERY interestingly with an option that doesn't SHOW the odds at all to the player. So it's not random BUT it takes the player making an assessment based on what they know about the unit details.

And it would get the players PISSED very quickly, lol. I get annoyed even WITH the shown odds (when I lose a 80% battle, ya know).

 

[Nimek]

I am preparing to start new game with patched v43 (thanks @Toffer90 for turn time improvement patch).

I really like revolutions since it is making game way more challanging.
Question is Gigantiic Earth MAP + REv playable with v43
I remember that some time ago turn times with REV on was so long.

Maybe @JosEPh_II you have any exp. with it?

 

[JL1312]

And it would get the players PISSED very quickly, lol. I get annoyed even WITH the shown odds (when I lose a 80% battle, ya know).

All a matter of taste I suppose.
I have as a rule for myself that I don’t look at the odds, and I blame myself when I lose

 

[Somebody613]

All a matter of taste I suppose.
I have as a rule for myself that I don’t look at the odds, and I blame myself when I lose

Well, I hate reloading, and I also tend to prefer quality over quantity most of the time, so losing any units is a pain in the ass for me - and this is what causes it in a stupid way.
There are way too many factors affecting battles in C2C, which makes for a good GAME, but also for an annoying game PLAY, lol.

 

[JL1312]

Well, I hate reloading, and I also tend to prefer quality over quantity most of the time, so losing any units is a pain in the ass for me - and this is what causes it in a stupid way.
There are way too many factors affecting battles in C2C, which makes for a good GAME, but also for an annoying game PLAY, lol.

Well, in my perspective it’s the player who causes it, not the rng (like I said it’s a matter of taste).
If I make a dumb decision I’ll accept and face the consequenses. And if the rng screws me over making me lose a unit, then I see that as part of the game of risk/reward.

If I’m in a situation where I can’t afford losing a unit then I won’t attack with that unit unles I’m VERY sure I’ll win the fight.

Just like not gambling with money one can’t afford losing, don’t wage war with units one can’t afford losing.

 

[Thunderbrd]

And it would get the players PISSED very quickly, lol. I get annoyed even WITH the shown odds (when I lose a 80% battle, ya know).

It wouldn't be for everyone for sure, but you'd start feeling pretty good about your ability to translate an understanding of rules to an assessment of victory potential after a while.

 

[JL1312]

It wouldn't be for everyone for sure, but you'd start feeling pretty good about your ability to translate an understanding of rules to an assessment of victory potential after a while.

I’d love an option to completely disable the shown odds.
Especially if I’d be able to see tvem afterwards in the combat log or event log to evaluate my assessment.

But ofc only as an option. Wouldn’t wanna force my playstyle on anyone who doesn’t appreciate it.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I’d love an option to completely disable the shown odds.
Especially if I’d be able to see tvem afterwards in the combat log or event log to evaluate my assessment.

But ofc only as an option. Wouldn’t wanna force my playstyle on anyone who doesn’t appreciate it.

Yeah I was thinking it might be really quite fun with or without RNG in play. Will have to strongly consider this, possibly right away.

 

[Somebody613]

Like I said, it's annoying already when a 80% chance still fails - going in BLIND, well, NOPE.
And yes, I've had cases where the NUMBERS show that my unit is vastly superior, yet it loses due to RNG that has nothing to do with its stats.
I've seen that first-hand, believe me.
So, with the odds being shown, I can at least decide to only risk a 90% chance, while outright ignoring anything lower - but otherwise I'd be stuck indecisively almost forever.
Or would just keep losing units at random, making me angry.
Like I said: nice options, ugly experience.

 

[Leodim]

But err, isnt the option to not look at odds already present? I mean if you don't press alt manually, you just don't see it. Just like if you don't reload, well, you don't
I guess checking a checkbox that disable that behavior would change things *a bit* since you'll have to uncheck it AND then press alt to see them... But I admit I don't really see the difference in the end.
I might be missing something here though.

EDIT 1: ho btw I didnt forget you guys but I do have more work/stuff than expected in this end of week. I'll do my best! Later: I do have a working checkbox now, I'll have to look/ask at how to release it (github?).

EDIT 2: maybe you were talking about a mode where the checkbox is before game creation and then can't switch? I was going for a mode "no rng" that can be switched in-game. Not to encourage "cheating" or anything (I myself don't have a checkbox yet and simply enjoy the expected outcomes, per my tastes), but so pple don't have to start over to try it. Also if you don't like it and realize it after 20+hours into your game, it's kinda cool to not have to start over just to uncheck it.
And anyway, since there is a WB and mostly solo gaming, I don't really see the point in anti-cheat whatsoever; let people play how they want, trying to give them the best experience and that's it, but that is another point.

 

[Leodim]

I do a different post for a real "quick question" this time:
I got a merchant fleet through an event. It seemed to me I needed to send it to another civ city.
They do can get inside borders, no pb here, but the fleet can't seem to enter the city. So it has atm strictly no use.
Does it have to be the capital? Do I need a specific research? Open borders mb?
I don't have writing yet, beelining it a bit atm.