Requests for new components (and features)

[phungus420]

Still need a BUG Options button on the top left instead of hitting ctrl-alt-o.

The Legends of Revolution delegation supports the motion.

 

[ruff_hi]

ok, ok. How about I had a hot panel that takes up the top 3rd of the screen? Everyone ok with that?

 

[Afforess]

ok, ok. How about I had a hot panel that takes up the top 3rd of the screen? Everyone ok with that?

Why bother with a button then. Just make the BUG config screen always active and always on top.

 

[ruff_hi]

duh (facepalm) ... I should have thought of that! And change the name of the mod to BnP ... Blo..dy no Play

 

[Afforess]

duh (facepalm) ... I should have thought of that! And change the name of the mod to BnP ... Blo..dy no Play

You know what else BUG needs (besides the Kitchen Sink)? In multiplayer games, the other players take so long, so it would be nice to have a game of tetris going too. That way I don't get bored.

Heck, how about a whole game suite. Like solitare, and pacman. Oh, could you embed Newgrounds in too?

Heck, just give me a web browser in-game. That would be awesome.

 

[civ_king]

You know what else BUG needs (besides the Kitchen Sink)? In multiplayer games, the other players take so long, so it would be nice to have a game of tetris going too. That way I don't get bored.

Heck, how about a whole game suite. Like solitare, and pacman. Oh, could you embed Newgrounds in too?

Heck, just give me a web browser in-game. That would be awesome.

homepage set to CivFanatics please

 

[ruff_hi]

Still need a BUG Options button on the top left instead of hitting ctrl-alt-o.

I'll second this request...

Cheers,
ripple01

The Legends of Revolution delegation supports the motion.

Done! Revision 2093. Current button is a placeholder. Any suggestions for a suitable button? How about a check box?

You know what else BUG needs (besides the Kitchen Sink)? In multiplayer games, the other players take so long, so it would be nice to have a game of tetris going too. That way I don't get bored.

Heck, how about a whole game suite. Like solitare, and pacman. Oh, could you embed Newgrounds in too?

Good idea. I'm thinking of a small pop up game where you start in the distant past with 1 city. The aim of the game is to build your city into a global spanning empire.

 

[Afforess]

Good idea. I'm thinking of a small pop up game where you start in the distant past with 1 city. The aim of the game is to build your city into a global spanning empire.

Dang, that's a good idea. I wonder if a smart computer geek like Sid Meier would think it's a good idea. Now, if you could just get Soren Johnson to join the bug team to dev it...

For the icon for the BUG menu, how about a ladybug?

 

[ripple01]

I haven't downloaded the SVN version yet, so I can't see the new icon, but IMO it seems natural that the ladybug you use for the BUG icon should be used for the button if at all possible. Thanks for adding it, BTW.

Cheers,
ripple01

 

[MadmanAtW]

Good idea. I'm thinking of a small pop up game where you start in the distant past with 1 city. The aim of the game is to build your city into a global spanning empire.

You win one (1) internet.

 

[DrakenKin]

Feature request : The ability to manage automated workers more precisely. Things like dwitching a worker to "clear jungle" exclusively, or "Build roads" mode only. Automated workers are less than optimal, manually controlling all of them is too micro intensive... there is room for more detailed automation to get them to do what you want.

Another similar feature would be the ability to "force lock" a city to work a tile. You can let the governor do his thing, but he won't be able to change the tile you locked. (Useful if you want to lock a mine or a specific cottage for example.)

 

[EmperorFool]

I would like to be able to see who they are worst enemy of while hovering on the scoreboard.

Done in r117. Also, holding the CTRL key lists the trade deals you have with that player, and these are always shown in the Trade Network hover.

 

[obsolete]

I did lose a deity game I had locked up recently, because just when I razzed Ghandi's third city about to go legondary, I found out to my shock & horror that he had a 4'th about to hit too! There was no time to react to this.

The problem is the terrible GUI only shows you the top 3 cities, and furthermore, you have to guess a lot, etc, depending on what other civs out there may be going after culture as well.

 

[ruff_hi]

Someone else mentioned this - or was it you? Any suggestions to what we do about it ... keeping in mind that your solution must be based on:

1) data from vanilla BtS and that you can pick off the map and / or advisor screens
2) data from vanilla BtS and that you can observe and compare from 1 turn to the next

 

[_alphaBeta_]

BULL idea:

When a group of workers is assigned a task, BULL ungroups the workers and assigns each one to complete the task individually. The net result is the same - all the workers building the improvement. BUT, this would address a long standing problem I've had with worker groups:

Assume workers A,B,C & D are assigned the task of building an improvement while they are all selected (grouped). They get to it. A couple turns later the improvement is constructed and workers A & B contributed to it that turn so they are out of movement points. Workers C & D weren't needed to complete the improvement that turn and have all of their movement points. Problem is: they're still grouped with A & B so they won't show up as needing new instructions during the unit cycling and they won't keep the end-turn indicator green.

Of course this should probably be an option-controlled feature like the rest.

More to consider:

I think I uncovered a small quirk in the pre-chop improvement and forests functionality. Here's the scenario that results in the forest still being chopped.

Worker A is assigned to chop/improve. Worker B is then moved from a different tile and also set to chop/improve. Since there's only 1 turn left, worker B's chop order is cancelled as expected, but worker A's chop order remains. This results in worker A chopping the forest next turn.

I believe if the workers were grouped first before given their chop order, the logic would work since the cancel order would also apply to the group.

You may want to alter the logic a little to clear chop orders at the beginning of the next turn before and units move. Every worker on the tile would also need to be stopped. I believe the current logic fails because worker A had >1 turns to go at the time he was given the order. When worker B shortened the time, worker A was never checked again.

 

[EmperorFool]

I will definitely fix the problem with multiple ungrouped workers pre-chopping the same tile. The other idea, while great, sounds quite complex, and that area of code is rather obnoxious in its design. I can take a look at it, but I can't promise anything. You might try to get jdog interested in it as he's more familiar with that area of the code than me.

 

[_alphaBeta_]

Fair enough.

Something that could ease this (and other) pain - can a keyboard shortcut be introduced for the 'ungroup' key? I remember having difficulty finding this in the XML way back, but haven't looked recently. Is it an easy addition?


EDIT: This is a long-shot, but this is the thread to dream in. Had another idea regarding trade routes. Would it be possible for BUG/BULL to check whether or not you are able to establish trade routes with another civ before granting open borders? I'm not talking about the symbol in the scoreboard - that determines whether or not you're able to trade resources with the civ. Whether or not you can establish trade routes follows a different system of rules. More information, if you're not already aware:

Spoiler :

Is there a way to tell if you're able to have trade routes with another civ before granting open borders?

I know the symbol in the scoreboard indicates whether or not your capitals are connected for purposes of trading resources etc., but this does not always mean you'll be able to establish trade routes with them. One such example if when you do not have sailing, but your trade buddy does. The symbol will show, you'll be able to trade resources, but you will NOT be able to benefit from trade routes, while your sailing ally will be. This is assuming there's no land connections.

You can predict a lot about the availability of trade routes by reading and understanding this post, which explains the notion of a 'home plotgroup'. However, you don't have full information about the availability of trade routes between other civilisations and thus can't predict everything.

If you have read the linked post, then you'll understand that it not only depends on your 'home plotgroup' but also the connection of other civilisations 'home plotgroups'.

Anything in the SDK that could do a quick check? In the early game it's very difficult to tell who granting open borders to will benefit your trade income. Often times I will save, grant open borders, and then see what happens. If nothing, I will revert to the previous save. There must be a better way.

 

[obsolete]

Someone else mentioned this - or was it you? Any suggestions to what we do about it ..

What I suggested before was having a log of all projects so we don't have to write them down to remember who did this, who built internet, who built what space-ship parts, etc. And I see that's been added, and it works just great.

I guess from your post it's not so easy to increase the index from listing the top 3 culture cities to more? I keep feeling this was just bad Firaxis implementation again, and it was never supposed to keep you on a guessing game. They just figured that no one would need to know what's going on elsewhere, except for the closest guy to victory.

 

[ruff_hi]

@obsolete - I am thinking that we can include on the victory screen the number of cities that are in the cultural level below Legendary as long as the city plot is revealed (this isn't spoiler information as the player can work this out by looking at the cultural defense level). If you have enough EPs for 'investigate city', then we can show the 4th best cultural city that you can investigate as well.

So ... you would see something like ...

• City #1 amount of culture
• City #2 amount of culture
• City #3 amount of culture
• City #4 amount of culture (highest culture excluding cities shown above picked from cities that you can investigate - this might not actually be the 4th best cultural city)
• Total Number of cities in cultural level below Legendary (what ever that is called)

 

[phungus420]

That's a stretch that's not UG Ruff. The player can't work out the city culture just because the plot it's on has been revealed, as far as I can tell. If so, please show me the formula that gives the exact city cultural (and not tile culture as the two are separate issues!, and it's city culture that wins games not tile culture) just from having a plot revealed which a city is on. Now I'm normally on the opposite side of this, I was all for adding in examine cities on conquest even though it was non UG, because I thought it would have an unaltered real effect on gameplay, but just make things easier on the player. This change though drastically changes things, you're giving the player huge ammounts of data they normally would not have access too that will change their strategy immensely.

In short bad idea for a change. If a player as 4 cities that are approaching Legendary status, they have earned a buffer zone according to game rules, it's not on BUG to change this gamerule, and I'm against the change as I think it's a bad rule change. The only way BUG should provide this information to the player is if the player has enough EPs to see into the city, that's it, and that's the only case BUG should provide the information to the player.