1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

SMAN's The World at War

Discussion in 'Civ5 - Scenarios' started by sman1975, Nov 12, 2018.

  1. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    balancing the identity of both mods is critical. let twaw be twaw just as let vp be vp. the best compromise here is how to balance the combat unit values and unit-tech-building-wonder costs. i stand by with the current tree-units-buildings-wonders that includes all of twaw, no one will be opt out. :)

    as for the wonder. it makes sense. wonders are special buildings. it should take time to build otherwise it isn't a wonder anymore. great engineer one time boost will be of value. but then again this is another conflict of philosophy of tWaW and VP.

    will keep you posted on this new game.... :thumbsup:

    edit:
    looks like the tree bee lining is what i initially (but you simplified the prepreque) made but SMAN you will have a massive problem here regarding balance.
    - will need to relocate those units that will not obsolete/bypass/unrewarding. for example, LBE-precision engineering tech, armor frigate (40[2]-35) and protected cruiser (50[2]-35) are on the same tech. that is why i put more prepreque to not let those units be obsolete on the spot and feels rewarding purchasing and upgrading. i relocated armor frigate to steam power. before you can research precision engineering you need steam power.

    just like before you can unlock manufacturing, you need dynamite first. another example would be on GWE- motorized logistics and combustion. oil is discovered on combustion and iron landship (55) is on that tech while land iron clad (45) is on motorized logistics just above combustion. that is why i put a prepreque before you can get combustion, you have to get motorized logistics first.

    And moved oil to replacable parts because that is where all basic land units that needs oil.
    so basically on prepreque,
    replacable parts < motorized logistics < combustion
    replacable parts < flight

    just my thoughts though. its up to you to have it balanced. i'm dead sure you'll have headache where to place and combat values the way you are going now.

    edit2:
    playing now only with tWaWcVPv0.1 and VP(1-6)(11-21-3-1)-EUI. no other mods.
    communitas, standard size, standard time, prince (best gauge in knowing AI sucks or not)

    edit3:
    aww.... policies are fused now. :eek: half twaw, half vp. it was full vp before.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
  2. XxPun12h3rxX

    XxPun12h3rxX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2018
    Messages:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah I'm going to try another game to see if the unhappiness was just a fluke. I rushed the bottom of the tech tree and missed out on the porcelain tower, so the massive illiteracy I got might be explained that way. But I was playing as rome and although I conquered half the world and built every building in my core cities, they were the ones suffering most with unhappiness. I guess my new cities were smaller and since they didn't have to go through the rebuilding phase (thanks to romes new UA) that might have made a difference. Idk ill try again and figure this out.
    Edit: I was playing with the new 11-21-3 hotfix and apparently people had problems with happiness in that. Ive updated and ill see what changes.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
    ofmiciv5 likes this.
  3. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Yes, the tWaW TT was greatly expanded to allow for progression of units from their earlier versions to their latter ones. All the blank space was intentional. Compressing it from 4 columns to 2 columns may just squeeze too much progression out of it.

    The basic unit design revolved around having 3 versions of (almost) every "type" of unit: Early Era, Main Era, Late Era. That's where the 3 dots on the unit flag came from.

    I'm thinking, as a "big picture" idea, perhaps the TT should be reconfigured along that line as well - where techs are arranged on the tree as early/main/ or late. Would make aligning the units on the tree relatively simple, and maybe add some "harmony" between the VP and tWaW tech trees? Since I reconfigured how the prereqs are assigned, rearranging them now is quite trivial. A 3 column tree may not look as cool as the 2 column version, but it may be necessary to properly align units to tech.

    Just a thought. Still digesting the rest.


    EDIT: just a suggestion, but for the VP-compatible version, I think it might be appropriate to nerf happiness in the tWaW buildings - just so it doesn't completely break what is obviously a thoroughly worked dynamic. My intent with happiness in tWaW was to diminish it's overall impact on game play, as I thought of the civs historically in the World Wars, and how they seemed to hang together, even if the going was grim. I didn't want to eliminate happiness completely, but sharply reduce its impact on game place.

    With a different framework at work in VP, this approach probably over-mitigates in late game.


    I'm not sure I'm 100% on board with this one. Since VP encompasses the whole game length/TT, it's probably better to adjust tWaW to fit more seamlessly into VP, than to leave it too far afield. I think you've already done all the main work by adjusting combat strength/cost/tech relationships with the tWaW units. Otherwise, players will be facing incongruencies like the variety of Wonder costs, which I think break down the realism/immersion we're trying so hard to provide.


    Policies - tWaw only adjusts 2 policies (Trade Unions and Collective Rule) in the basic game - making minor adjustments to what these policies actually do and say. I'm not sure what you mean by "fused" but, overall, the footprint from tWaW should be pretty small.

    If VP makes a complete rework of Policies, I'll have to look at this more closely.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
  4. MariusMagnus

    MariusMagnus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2018
    Messages:
    73
    The reasoning behind this (or so I think) is that wonder costs increase for each wonder you've built throughout the game. According the VP wiki, it's a 25% increase per wonder from the same era, 15% for wonders from the previous, and 10% for wonders from the last two eras.
     
    sman1975 likes this.
  5. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    currently on this game, saving, will continue playing later. got to get some sleep. :sleep:
    civasofnow.png

    ah, okey. i suggest you take a screenshot of each era of vp so you will have an idea of where they place the techs, buildings, units and wonders (so you'll get the grasp of the balance). you might even consider overhauling the whole tree again.

    vp does a complete rework on all, literally all, total overhaul of civ5. pretty much you can say that vp is balanced on all aspects. victory conditions are even, same as going tall or wide. with twaw, it will not be anymore because of the number of techs being added. while you can adjust the tech cost to compensate, the problem arises now that units are obsolete easily, feels unrewarding. in short, one change, leads to another change. after all these years, vp has been patching over and over again, to improve balance, squash the roaches and balance realism. now you introduce twaw to vp, it will even be more 'tasking' to balance.

    what i'm trying to say here is, you will eventually have to draw the line. will twaw be a slave to vp's gameplay or twaw will offer a decent compatibility with vp?

    just like JFDLC vs VP. they are both oil and water but they meet half way and not forcing each other to change. jfdlc is jfdlc, vp is vp. i see twaw as another alternative in my opinion to those 2 core mods. if you're being too accomodating to vp, you will be swallowed by the big fish. i just cared about twaw.

    edit:
    fused because when i looked at the social policy, it isn't 100% vp as before. hover the mouse on each social policies (from tradition to rationalism), you will understand why.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
    sman1975 likes this.
  6. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Well, now you've done it. Forcing me to actually have to THINK about this.... :crazyeye:

    Your point is valid and is to me self-supporting. It's true with all compatibility efforts involving mods with more than a few lines of code. The way I see the relationship between the mods is more utilitarian in nature: VP makes changes all over the Civ5 game design. I'm trying to align the new WAW content to this framework - particularly in terms of "cost." Things should cost about the same for their VP counterparts. To me, this is what 90% of "balancing" means.

    The other things - the real problems -will focus on both normal game content and VP content (as well as normal game content VP changes) - what does the compatibility script need to change to ensure a consistent gaming experience. For example, if I make changes to the TT, moving techs forward or backward, what does that break? Is there a unit that now becomes obsolete to a tech that is before it is even available? Is there a building that has a prereq building with a tech later than its own prereq tech? These are the things I'm hoping testing will tell us.

    TBH, I think most of this discussion is moot, and most of these issues already solved by the stellar work the @ofmiciv5 has already done - most of which is already in the mod.

    I wasn't going inside the game to figure out the various pricing, relationships, etc. - I use SQLite Spy - a tool that lets me look at the actual databases after the mod is enabled (even before the game is set up). The way VP is set up, it's not hard to see how it sets up its data. And TBH, I made the adjustments to tech, buildings, and unit prices. The only mystery to me was why wonders "looked" so cheap. But @MariusMagnus explained that in post #84. I'll look at the other wonders in the game, get a "base cost" for that era for wonders, then make the changes in WAW. This takes care of that issue for me. I can change the cost of WAW Wonders so they align with other Wonders of their Era.

    At least, at that point - all the buildings/wonders, techs, and units will "look" quite similar to all the other buildings/wonders, techs, and units in VP. To me, this means that almost all the balancing work is completed, and we're back to basic compatibility issues, such as Policies not working correctly because WAW changes a couple of small things.

    The thing I'm concerned about now is the unit upgrade path with the compressed tech tree. WAW was designed around a "constant upgrading" feature where chances to upgrade came early and often, and didn't cost a fortune. This principle doesn't sit comfortable with a TT squeezed so closely together. I'm really starting to warm up to my idea from yesterday about moving to a 3 column per Era TT. For example, there are 18 techs in 2 columns now for the first 3 Eras. I'm proposing moving to the "Early/Main/Late" approach with a 5-9-4 layout. We'll still have the same number of techs, but now I can assign units to techs, based on where they fall into the Era (early-Era units move to early-Era techs). And since the techs are now set up to have 3 prereqs, it will still slow down beelining, without the need to constantly upgrade units.

    This approach will work with the first 3 Eras (BE/GW/WW2), although GW will use a 4-9-4 setup. CW already has 3 columns, but needs some tinkering to balance it along a 6-9-5 setup. FW will probably use a 3-9-3 arrangement that leads to the initial Advanced Living tech.

    I realize that VP stacks war techs to the bottom of the tree, and peace techs towards the top. I'll try to keep that going. Here's a rough idea of where I'm going with this thought:

    upload_2018-12-3_6-39-34.jpeg

    This approach solves the unit upgrade problem, and I can probably have it ready in a couple of hours. Just curious how a seasoned VP player would feel about how the layout works for them.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
    ofmiciv5 likes this.
  7. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    The only difference I saw between the VP and VP+WAW versions were the two Policies (Trade Unions & Collective Rule) that WAW changed to the original game. Those changes were made after VP loaded, so of course the WAW changes would be the ones left in the game. It begs the question about how to make the change conditional in the first place. I'll look into it, but it probably is a simple fix. Will have to convert the XML file to SQL, then add the test from the compatibility file - only making the Policy changes if VP isn't loaded. I don't see it as much of a problem.

    If I'm missing something else, please let me know.
     
  8. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    i think that approach on the tree is better, having 4-5 columns, for having such things as early-mid-late on each era. just dont forget to relocate the units and buildings properly that it doesn't get obsolete before even it is being made. :thumbsup:

    for the policies (tradition, authority, rationalism, imperialism, industry and artistry) :shifty:
    was lazy to screen shot rationalism, industry and artistry but pretty much the same issue as these 3.
    these are waaaaaaaaay significant changes. either be tooltip 'error' or so.

    vp
    vp-trad.png vp-auth.png vp-imp.png

    twaw
    tw-tradition.png tw-authority.png tw-imperialism.png
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
  9. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    The text errors are also caused by clarifications carried over from thecrazyscotsman's Omnibus mod. I can move the text changes from the Misc Text Adjustments file into the new Policies.sql file and make the text changes conditional as per the compatibility script. It won't be a problem.

    Begs the question as to whether ANY of the WAW policy changes should occur with VP loaded. Since VP reworks the entire Policy setup, I think I'll simply move all the changes into Policies.sql, then make every change dependent on VP NOT being loaded, then move on from there. No need to try and "harmonize" the VP and WAW policy changes. Especially, since I don't really care all that much about the WAW changes.... (well, other than saving a fortune when building maintenance costs are reduced by 33%).... :lol:

    I'll put those changes in the next version.

    Any thoughts about the 3 column per Era TT set up?
     
  10. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    that 3 or more column per era TT was my first thought in mind too, see #24. pretty much a better way of doing it like you've said. its just it's more cool looking if its condensed, seems the game is fully loaded with goodies. hahaha! :o so yes, i guess it would be better if you do your way. :thumbsup:

    this has been battling on my mind, being as twaw, i support the idea of being twaw and not being absorbed to vp. but then again as a long time vp user, it begs to have it fully compatible. that being said, i remember when i chat with JFD on discord regarding JFDLC and VP, he is promoting JFDLC as stand alone though they made a bridge together to make it compatible as to JFDLC is open to 3rd party mods. looking back, i was really annoying to JFD and Chrisy15 when I keep talking about VP when in fact it is a JFDLC channel. though they didn't say anything bad against me or so, it took time for me to realize that i was way out of line and felt embarrassed at my actions. pretty much what i was saying there was, why is it like this, why is it like that, vp is like this, jfdlc shouldn't remove that feature etc etc. in short, i want that time that jfdlc will adapt to vp's gameplay, not realizing i was trampling on their mod. it took days before i realized that i shouldn't force and play JFDLC the way VP does as this is compatibility offered by JFDLC and not by VP. JFDLC should be played like JFDLC with VP compatibility, just as I would suggest tWaW should be played like tWaW with VP and not the other way around. tWaW is making the compatibility here, not VP, therefore, tWaW rules must apply first. but then again, i'm torn between the two. i like twaw to be twaw but i also like twaw to be vp. :undecide:

    it's really up to you. i'm just one voice of the community and others will heavily disagree on my opinion. we may disagree or not, all that matters is what is best for twaw. hopefully, others will voice out their opinion so you can take the proper course of action. :grouphug:
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
    sman1975 likes this.
  11. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    I hear what you're saying - and I've felt both sides of this, back and forth, again and again, as the discussions have progressed. The reason I'm currently leaning towards pushing WAW towards VP, is that if you play a full game (as opposed to starting in Renaissance or BE - they I really thought most WAW games would be best started), there would be a drop off in continuity between Renaissance and BE if we didn't lean towards VP as the priority mod.

    From the looks of things, VP touches a wider variety of game dynamics and at a deeper level than WAW. WAW was never meant to be this ambitious - more of enabler for a death-match style of domination games, focused on when the units actually are more interesting than basic rock throwers. Where your main survival strategy involves racing to the main islands of military tech, then quickly using those incremental improvements to gain a quick advantage on your rivals...

    For this reason, it makes more sense to push WAW's numbers towards VP, and remove things in WAW that "break" VP's design (like these minor policy changes).

    But, I think that's about the limit of my ambition for this version of the mod. You're right, @ofmiciv5 - don't want to completely lose that barbarity that WAW is trying so hard to inject.

    I like the "numbers" where they are for units, but may have to make a few small adjustments if I move things to a different tier on the TT - but will keep things consistent. Will also normalize the Wonders costs along the average Era Wonder cost for VP. Will make the new 3 column tech tree, "fix" the Policy breakages in WAW, and then publish the new version, hopefully today.

    At that point, I think it's time to turn it over to testers and let them tell us what they think needs fixing, then take it from there.

    Will take a few, am heavily involved in building Civ-specific customized units for the WW2 scenario. Grueling. Could use a break....
     
    ofmiciv5 likes this.
  12. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    New TT, with the Early-Main-Late Era arrangements.

    upload_2018-12-3_13-36-24.jpeg


    Now, the hard part - reworking the unit prereq techs....

    Still, once it's done, I believe the new version will simply make more sense, and probably play a lot better...
     
    ofmiciv5 likes this.
  13. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    New version posted. Has all the changes we've discussed the past couple of days. Probably a thing or two I've missed..... But still, it should be OK for wider testing.
     
  14. XxPun12h3rxX

    XxPun12h3rxX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2018
    Messages:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Just reached the point in the tech tree where the game crashes in my testing game. Played as India, and I did manage to keep the happiness back, although G hasn't been nice to tall empires as of late. The happiness a constant fight, but I think that the new tech tree and re-balanced wonder costs will help with that until you decide how you want to address VPs happiness system. The biggest problem I took away from this game was the confusing upgrade system. I understand that you want to keep this mod fairly separate, and that the changes to the tech tree ought to help, but there are a few things that remain confusing:
    1. Pikemen upgrade into musketmen that upgrade into line infantry. In VP, musketmen are a ranged unit, so this should probably be fixed. The middle unit in VP is the tercio, which is the renaissance era unit melee unit available to all.
    2. VP adds the skirmisher type unit, which is a mounted unit with one tile range, while making Gatling guns and their line consistent with a two tile range. I didn't get far enough to see if the range carries over, or where the skimisher line goes, but its an easy fix on the Gatling gun line (which starts at archers) and the skirmisher line is sometjing to play with I guess.
    3. Building costs were another thing that I noticed, but I assume that might change with this update.
    All in all everything handles quite nicely its just a manner of ironing out a few beta bugs. Everything comes down to constant play-testing, which is yielding promising results.

    Also on a side note I red over a number of old posts and I might have a compromise for the happiness, because it does get punishing and I foresee problems for new players. Is there any way (keep in mind I'm terrible at coding so I don't know if this is possible) to either freeze or slow down the growth on happiness needs once the player enters La Belle Epoque? If that could be done you really wouldn't have to worry about kowtowing to VPs happiness system until far in the future. And also if youre worried about keeping happiness rational to stop massive warmongering and keep wars realistic, VP has a system to manage that that's actually really cool, so you don't have to worry about micro-managing happiness (and its something to build off of).
    Enjoying it so far from what I played. War against the mongols was satisfying.

    Edit: If I haven't already stated it the new tech tree makes the upgrades later on a lot less confusing, its just the transition ones that get a little odd.
     
  15. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Do you mean transitioning from units in Renaissance to Belle Epoque?

    I believe the 3 column per Era approach will mitigate most of the upgrade oddities. It just wasn't something we looked at in that version of the mod. The newest version actually has some effort behind it in that regard.

    I didn't realize the Musketman unit was ranged in VP. Seems odd to me - the effective range of a 75 caliber Brown Bess was what? About 50 meters (on a good day)? Not exactly what I'd call, "stand off...."

    So - the Tercio should uprade to the Musketman or Line Infantry?

    If you have a recommendation, you have to make it "idiot proof" for me. :crazyeye: Somthing like, "The Tercio should upgrade to the Musketman. The Musketman should upgrade to the Field Gun..." It's about the best way to make sure I don't misunderstand what you're suggestion and code it wrong.

    Any suggestions about how to best transition VP Renaissance units into their WAW upgrade classes would be a great help. Thanks!
     
  16. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    VP units
    Spoiler :


    land(move,combat)

    melee:
    med-pikeman
    ren-gunpowder-tercio(2,25)
    ind-rifling-fusilier(2,35)
    mod-replacableparts-rifleman(2,45)
    atom- combinedarms-infantry(2,55)
    info-mobiletactics-mechanized(3,70)

    cavalry-melee:
    med-chivalry-knight
    ren-metallurgy-lancer(4,35) horse
    mod-combustion-landship(4,55) oil
    atom-combinedarms-tank(5,70) oil
    info-lasers-modernarmor(5,85) oil

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    ranged(range,move,rs,s)
    med-machinery-crossbowman(2,2,21,15)
    ren-metallurgy-musketman(2,2,32,20)
    ind-dynamite-gatling(2,2,48,30)
    mod-ballistics-machine(2,2,63,40)
    atom-nuclearfission-bazooka(2,2,68,45)


    siege-ranged all iron
    med-trebuchet(2)
    ren-gunpowder-cannon(2,2,30,15) iron
    ind-rifling-fieldgun(2,2,40,25) iron
    mod-ballistics-artillery(2,3,50,30) iron
    info-advanceballistics-rocketartillery(2,3,80-56) iron

    cavalry-ranged
    ren-metallurgy-cuirassier(4,1,32,23) horse
    ind-militaryscience-cavalry(4,1,45,30) horse
    mod-ballistics-lighttank(4,1,62,50) alu
    info-mobiletactics-helicopter(6,1,70,56) alu

    ------------------------------------------

    navy
    melee(move,s)
    ren-navigation-corvette(5,36)
    ind-industrialization-ironclad(5,50) coal
    atom-rocketry-destroyer(6,65) coal
    info-stealth-missilecruiser(6,80) coal

    ranged(move,range,rs,s)
    ren-navigation-frigate(4,1,34,22)
    ind-dynamite-cruiser(4,2,50,34) iron
    atom-electronics-battleship(5,2,65,40) iron

    lazy to do the subs and air units... just take a look at it... hehe :D




    that is why i told you to screenshot the tree of vp first to know the balance. hehehe :)

    industrial.png modern.png atomic.png information.png

    the initial balance was twaw units have their own tree, upgrading their own path while vp upgrades on their own path. same as range characteristics, not unless you will totally make a streamlined compatibility on all.

    i get his confusion about range etc. he finds it inconsistent and wanted to make twaw units totally streamlined to vp, therefore, twaw units' identity will have a total overhaul to accommodate vp. Not to mention, the buildings needs to be updated for needs modifiers and mid to late game units for air strike offense and defense and standard resources. Literally twaw will end up like your LGUP (late game unit pack). :( now you will understand why i'm pushing the identity of your mod. :egypt:

    edit: more info on units
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2018
  17. XxPun12h3rxX

    XxPun12h3rxX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2018
    Messages:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah it might not be the best choice for historical accuracy but its best for balancing so crossbowmen don't get too squishy before they upgrade. But as @ofmiciv5 said (very helpfully actually) the upgrade tree does go pikemen-tercio-line infantry.

    Also I don't necessarily think that you should sacrifice what makes your mod great at the altar of VP. I do think that if you want to you can look into the cavalry tree and play with that if you want. It does add another layer to warfare, particularly blitzkrieg. Not only that, but its a little awkward to leave units an era behind sitting around. But then again, it is your mod, and I don't want you to loose too much.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2018
  18. sman1975

    sman1975 King

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2016
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Good info. I think I see the overall picture better. I guess, after thinking about it, my main (98%+) concern is the boundary line between the Renaissance and La Belle Epoque Eras. I think all I want to focus on are what specific Renaissance (normal/VP) units need to upgrade to what specific WAW units?

    From what I've seen (and put into the last version), @ofmiciv5 has already done Herculean efforts on getting the costs and combat strengths of WAW units in line with the rest of VP. Once we somehow intelligently connect the unit upgrade paths from REN -> LBE, then I believe that's "good enough....."

    Here are the "entry level" units that are the target for REN Era units:

    Land:
    - Melee: Line Infantry
    - Ranged: Volley Gun
    - Mobile: Cavalry

    Sea:
    - Melee: Ironclad
    - Ranged: Armored Frigate

    All the REN units would probably have to upgrade to one of these, unless it should upgrade later in LBE. That's the kind of suggestions I was fishing for earlier. Currently, WAW has most of this already in place for "normal" ingame units. It's the units VP adds or significantly changes are the ones that need the most attention.

    I think we're actually almost done with these kinds of things though. Can hopefully soon start looking at other areas that don't line up in the "good enough" standard. I'm sure there is still plenty that needs fixing.... :lol:
     
  19. XxPun12h3rxX

    XxPun12h3rxX Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2018
    Messages:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    One last thing I wanted to say that VP ranged naval units use iron instead of coal/oil (just the battleship and cruiser). If you can I would advise removing the cruiser completely from the tech tree since you have ships that fulfil its job (industrial ranged naval unit), and its easier to get rid of rather than work it in. Also it uses iron not coal like the other units so...

    (Also did the new patch replace the old one in the download link?)
     
    sman1975 likes this.
  20. ofmiciv5

    ofmiciv5 Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    Messages:
    180
    As for the proposal of, don't forget the location of these vp units and unit values, you will have to take another editing of values to make sure it fits well.
    Land:
    - Melee: Line Infantry VP( ren-gunpowder-tercio(2,25) > ind-rifling-fusilier(2,35)
    - Ranged: Volley Gun VP(ren-metallurgy-musketman(2,2,32,20) > ind-dynamite-gatling(2,2,48,30)
    - Mobile: Cavalry VP(has cavalry unit and it is under ranged-mobile, ind-militaryscience-cavalry(4,1,45,30) horse)

    Sea:
    - Melee: Ironclad VP(has its own ironclad, ren-navigation-corvette(5,36) > ind-industrialization-ironclad(5,50) coal)
    - Ranged: Armored Frigate VP(ren-navigation-frigate(4,1,34,22)> ind-dynamite-cruiser(4,2,50,34) iron)
     
    sman1975 likes this.

Share This Page