Rome

[chicorbeef]

No one is saying Rome shouldn’t retain more buildings. I’m only talking about changing how the under-the-hood code works. Rome won’t keep UBs, but they will keep walls, barracks, monuments, etc.

In that case, I support this idea.

 

[Rekk]

interesting. It also fixes the issue with cities flipping back and forth. You could just implement a unique capture, but a courthouse takes at least 10 turns of holding that city.

it also gives players more control. You can just choose to leave a city with a ho-hum or obsolete UU as a puppet. This also addresses @azum4roll ’s concern that free UUs could sap your strategic resources if they all come at once from a tech unlock. This gives another lever in the player’s control to determine the number of free units you could get.

Is there a check for IsEverBuiltBulding? Do we care if the Player decides he wants to build-sell-build courthouses for continuous UUs? Sounds like behaviour we wouldn't want to encourage, even if it's non-optimal.

Even then, just checking for something like this would mess with the case where the city is captured, you build a courthouse, lose the city, then regain the city, all before the relevant tech is researched.

 

[KlHannibal2]

i could argue the tile expansion on city capture overlaps with Shoshone to the same degree, and that’s pretty random in its own right. Huns can capture ALL units, while Rome just gets 1 UU per city. Huns capture units at 15 hp and with 0 XP while Rome’s appear in a city, away from combat, at full hp, and get XP based on the city they appear at. Overall that makes them less plentiful than Huns’ free units, but much more survivable and useable. Huns’ converted units usually just result in sacrificial meat shields, sapping the attacks of the enemy to take them off the board permanently, with the side benefit of essentially letting you draw back your horsemen from riskier kills by 1 tile.

From my post above, I would argue it is substantially LESS random than what Rome has now. I would also suggest that by virtue of being units that can move and do actions on a map, rather than icons in a list in some tertiary city, free unique units are exactly as unique as UBs, but more “special”. Not only are there more of them to collect, so you get more unique things more often, you get to do more with them.

this change would also serve to give Rome a bit more consistency in being a conqueror too, because free military units augment your military production, while free tiles… don’t. And captured UBs could do all manner of things that Rome just doesn’t really care about or have a complimentary kit to take advantage of. Why should Rome care about a more % GPP from a coffeehouse in some backwater captured Austrian city? He could meaningfully use a free, no-supply Hussar though. Foreign UUs just fit Rome’s existing kit more naturally.

Well, I didn't say the building capture is better than the free units. And the free tiles...what is more random? Get rid of that please.


The free units sound interesting, but what do you think about the limit of only getting each UU a single time? I think this would make not so much impact as getting a unit for every city capture, once per city. And it would give roman conquest a strong momentum once they are rolling.
Is one unit per city too strong? What do you guys think? Other civs also get things from each city taken like a free tech (Assyria) or gold and faith (Spain). Having a few copies of a UU feels much more fun than just a single one and they can rally have an impact.

And the auxilia theme and costing no supply feels quite accurate. Auxilia got lower pay than legionaries.

One detail about ships: is there a way to get ships in a coastal city insted of not getting them? And instead of getting them on a fake inland sea or lake coastal city where they are useless?

 

[pineappledan]

The free units sound interesting, but what do you think about the limit of only getting each UU a single time? I think this would make not so much impact as getting a unit for every city capture, once per city. And it would give roman conquest a strong momentum once they are rolling.

One UU per city is exactly what I proposed. If you captured 5 Aztec cities you could get 5 free Jaguars.
Furthermore, I proposed that Each UU, in the case of >1 UU, be counted separately. So Rome would get 2 UUs per city with 4UC. If you captured 5 Aztec cities you could get 5 free Jaguars and 5 free Eagles.

One detail about ships: is there a way to get ships in a coastal city insted of not getting them? And instead of getting them on a fake inland sea or lake coastal city where they are useless?

Yes. Rek's suggestion of making the trigger to give the UU when a courthouse is constructed would make it so all UUs could spawn in the captured city. If the captured city is on a coast then it can spawn a Naval UU.

Is there a check for IsEverBuiltBulding? Do we care if the Player decides he wants to build-sell-build courthouses for continuous UUs? Sounds like behaviour we wouldn't want to encourage, even if it's non-optimal.

There is GetNumTimesOwned. Not the same thing, but close.

To refresh, this is what we are discussing for a new Roman UA:

Pax Romana
- 15% towards Buildings already present in your Capital.
- Captured cities retain more Buildings
- Captured cities provide a free Unique Unit when a Courthouse is Constructed and the prerequisite technology is researched.

• No more free tiles on conquest
• All regular buildings are kept, but UBs turn into default buildings. NWs and UNWs are not kept
• Replace foreign UB retention with foreign UU spawns, like CS unit gifts

 

[KlHannibal2]

One UU per city is exactly what I proposed. If you captured 5 Aztec cities you could get 5 free Jaguars.
Furthermore, I proposed that Each UU, in the case of >1 UU, be counted separately. So Rome would get 2 UUs per city with 4UC. If you captured 5 Aztec cities you could get 5 free Jaguars and 5 free Eagles.

Yes. Rek's suggestion of making the trigger to give the UU when a courthouse is constructed would make it so all UUs could spawn in the captured city. If the captured city is on a coast then it can spawn a Naval UU.

There is GetNumTimesOwned. Not the same thing, but close.

To refresh, this is what we are discussing for a new Roman UA:

Pax Romana
- 15% towards Buildings already present in your Capital.
- Captured cities retain more Buildings
- Captured cities provide a free Unique Unit when a Courthouse is Constructed and the prerequisite technology is researched.

• No more free tiles on conquest
• All regular buildings are kept, but UBs turn into default buildings. NWs and UNWs are not kept
• Replace foreign UB retention with foreign UU spawns, like CS unit gifts

Sounds legit! Small detail for clarification: also obsolete units spawn? I guess yes, as can happen for vassal tribute.

 

[pineappledan]

Yes, obsolete units by definition already have the prerequisite tech unlocked. They spawn when the courthouse is constructed, and you can either upgrade them or delete them then.

If you get 5 Aztec cities with 5 Jaguars, but you are in Medieval, you can upgrade them to pikes, and have Woodsman/heal on kill pikes.

 

[KlHannibal2]

The more I think about it, the more I like it. Conquer someone preferably before they get their UU. Get the courthouses. Then get the tech to unlock the UU and fill up your ranks with some badass units. Then conquer the next AI.

It gives the feeling of the diverse army Rome had. It frees up production in the capital so you can focus on the buildings for your UA. And it allows you to have a bigger and in some aspects better army than others, giving more of a longterm military edge.

After all, Rome beat its enemies not only with quality, but arguably even more with quantity. They rebuilt their legions faster thank Hannibal could kill them.

 

[Rekk]

There is GetNumTimesOwned. Not the same thing, but close

I guess that this is used in the code that controls buildings that give instant yields/effects? At least, I assume that constructing a circus, deleting it, then constructing it again won't give a second WLTKD.

 

[KlHannibal2]

If you get 5 Aztec cities with 5 Jaguars, but you are in Medieval, you can upgrade them to pikes, and have Woodsman/heal on kill pikes.

In your first post:

• "Units that are not in the pool of minor civ gifts are never given (eg. no Assyrian siege towers or Mongolian Khans)"

Is there a way to give a single unit of this type from the first conquered city but not from other cities? If you conquer the first assyrian city, you get a siege tower after completing the courthouse. If you conquer more assyrian cities, you don't get any more siege towers.
This way you can get units from every civ without getting too many of a unit type that is more limited for its original civ. But I have no idea how hard that is to implement.

 

[Gazebo]

I don't see a need to change the Rome UA - if anything, just include a tweaked version in a modmod dependency if you plan to use a bunch of custom civs. I for one like Rome's ability as-is, it is flavorful.

G

 

[pineappledan]

That's a shame. The uniques aside, I think free units for captured cities is more compelling than free tiles on capture.

 

[pineappledan]

I don't see a need to change the Rome UA - if anything, just include a tweaked version in a modmod dependency if you plan to use a bunch of custom civs. I for one like Rome's ability as-is, it is flavorful.

To clarify, you're suggesting we make a mod with a new Rome UA, and then modmodders can set that new Rome mod as a dependency for all their other content mods, so they don't have to deal with adding Rome into every UB lua function? Sounds pretty complex for players, if they need X modmod before they can use Y modmod.

 

[CppMaster]

To clarify, you're suggesting we make a mod with a new Rome UA, and then modmodders can set that new Rome mod as a dependency for all their other content mods, so they don't have to deal with adding Rome into every UB lua function? Sounds pretty complex for players, if they need X modmod before they can use Y modmod.

What if the change would be inside the modmod with a civ? If the same Rome change would be in several modmods with a civ and you install all of them, would it make a conflict? Or will it see that it's the same change, so no conflict detected?

 

[pineappledan]

That's a possibility. If you have it in several mods, you will be telling the machine to Change 'A' to 'A', which wouldn't cause a problem

 

[Thibix Magnus]

Aside from the UB or UU discussion, one thing that I wouldn't mind replaced is the additional tiles on conquest, unless it has some historical flavour? I would love something to help growing the capital, either some food for each new city founded or conquered, or a small buffs to internal trade routes going towards the capital.