Some Feedback on CivUP v2.3 & GEM V1.12

[mystikx21]

In civipedia Subs have +25 and +50% attack.

Railroadstation in capital gives +25% to all yields and two times +25% production (one from city, one from RR-connection).

Subs it looks: didn't remove the sub 50% attack bonus promo correctly. It's a typo in the promo file as just the 50% attack bonus but not the 50% attack bonus no upgrade version that they get when converted from silent hunter.

I'm looking into the railroad station bug.

Update: RRC doesn't appear to actually add to other yields, but it appears as a listed modifier. That's Tool Tip bug rather than the production one where it is actually doubling itself. It should also say 25% instead of just 25 on the tip (+25 could be insane per city after all...)

What appears to be happening is that the railroad connection is actually established on the building, giving +25%, and then it has a default +25% on top of that. I will test to see if that's the case (by removing the building's bonus), and if so, the 25% effect on the building itself could be removed.

 

[SlothACID]

But everyone gets tech, while only a handful of civs, if any, will get particular Pantheon beliefs that buff a particular tile improvement.

I think this presents the player with the strategic option of whether to pursue religion early in the game or not. Why should ALL bonus resources be super tiles?

And let's not forget about opportunities. Those tend to provide the player with super tiles for a cost. Even if you take the "let the mayor handle this option" you still get +1 or 2 gold on a tile.

 

[Ahriman]

Why should ALL bonus resources be super tiles?

They're not super-tiles, they give yield 1 higher than regular tiles. Why should all bonus resources give higher yields than normal? Because they're bonus: that's the whole point. They're there to make some city sites better than others, to make the map actually have some meaningful variation.

A big part of the problem is that wheat (and fish) are excellent bonus resources, because they benefit from all kinds of bonuses from techs and policies, while cows, sheep, deer, stone and bananas are not.

And let's not forget about opportunities. Those tend to provide the player with super tiles for a cost. Even if you take the "let the mayor handle this option" you still get +1 or 2 gold on a tile.

I dislike the opportunities system, but I also don't see how it's relevant here, it has nothing to do with bonus resource vs regular tile balance.

 

[Thalassicus]

Pastures get +1 from technologies, same as farms. The other resource improvements get similar bonuses. I'd be okay with moving those bonuses to earlier tech columns, but it can't be on the same tech as farms. We're limited to 5 bonuses per technology because of a design flaw with the tech buttons.

Deactivate pop-ups for civ x protects or stops to protect CS y, if possible. If players want to bully a CS they will see who proctects it anyways.

I think this might be possible with a core mod, but I have not done any core modding yet.

Make animals a requirement for stable again. AI had build them in nearly every city I have conquered even if they are nearly useless (only give the cav-bonus).
(I observed this in an older version, pre-christmas, not the actual.)

This is due to how the AI builds things solely based on something called "flavors," which cannot analyze nearby terrain. It's a problem with many things in the unmodded game too like granaries, lighthouses, etc, but I feel these buildings make the game more fun for the human so it's okay.

Is it possible to see how long a DoF still lasts? If not it would be nice to add this to the excellent trade screen.

Sadly, Firaxis made a mistake and did not do alliances as trade deals, so it's impractical to get the duration of these deals.

For much of the game, a freshwater farm grassland gives 4 food, while a freshwater pasture cow grassland gives 3 food and 1 production

The time spans 4 columns of the 17-column tech tree, so "much of the game" might be a bit hyperbolic.

 

[mystikx21]

The difference between stables and lighthouses or granaries is this:

1) Granaries are always useful, they can ultimately provide at least one additional population (~2 with specialist policies), and can add to overall growth speed. This is true even if there is no wheat/spices/sugar around to make them somewhat better at it. Growth is always important for cities and allows the city to do other things than farm (use mines, build villages, use specialists). It provides strategic options as a result both for the AI and the player.

2) Lighthouses add a merchant slot and cost less upkeep than the other two. They're also limited by coastal cities, which not all of the AI's cities will be in most cases.

It can also add +2 from policies, usually not long after we'd have them built. Not all AIs would use the later function, but some will and all CAN use the merchant slot, even if not all will.

3) Stables have no specialist slot, add only +1 production if there's nothing around for a cost 2 upkeep (versus +2 on the granary) and are built everywhere by the AI. Literally everywhere. I could see building them if you're the Huns very early on regardless of city tiles, but that's about it.

I find I want at least two generic livestock tiles or at least one horse to build it. Limiting it to having livestock around would eliminate on some standard sized maps probably 10-15 otherwise useless stables that are just money sinks for the AI (depending on how much jungle there is).

By comparison, if it builds a barracks somewhere inefficient to raising armies, it still could add XP to any units, and still would add production and a specialist slot, for less upkeep. All the stable does along those lines is let it build a handful of strategic units somewhere slightly faster, it doesn't really need that function everywhere in a wide empire as it can only build so many mounted units in most cases. It is probably fine to have it not quite everywhere as a result. Only mostly dead if we could do it would be better.

A closer comparison to the stable is the hydro plant because of how both work by scanning for terrain and thus both really only add meaningful production per certain tiles. There are some cases you CAN build one, but since it might only add 1-3 raw production for a 3 upkeep cost, why bother? There again, it's limited by at least being on a river in the first place.

 

[Thalassicus]

I like to fix AI problems directly, instead of changing human options. The straightforward solution here is to simply refund the AI for stables built in cities without livestock.

 

[mystikx21]

I find there's probably only a couple cities that wouldn't get it in a normal sized empire if it were limited. Other than some coastal cities, they're unlikely to be in your best production area (often in heavy jungle with luxuries for trade around).

I can only recall one game where I built a stable somewhere "useless" because I always park the hero epic in a high production coastal city (to boost the navy) and it somehow had no livestock around. Otherwise, livestock is very commonly spread out that there's at least one deer, cow or sheep around if there aren't horses or ivory.

That said, if AI gold can be boosted instead, that's an option too.

It mostly boosts MY economy right now is the problem as I get to sell off all these useless stables on conquest.

 

[Naeven]

I like to fix AI problems directly, instead of changing human options. The straightforward solution here is to simply refund the AI for stables built in cities without livestock.

Agreed, but lowering stables to 1 upkeep (or give another +1 up to 2) seems justified.
I rather see the -building time in horses removed in favor of this, if it gets to good.
But maybe that's just becouse I rarely train my units with production these days.

 

[mystikx21]

Stable has +1 already, do you mean raise that to +2? I don't think it grants XP either, just faster build times for horses. (Civ4 did more XP on horses).

 

[Naeven]

Stable has +1 already, do you mean raise that to +2? I don't think it grants XP either, just faster build times for horses. (Civ4 did more XP on horses).

I have edited the post above to make more sence, don't mind me

 

[mystikx21]

Lol. Nice.

I'd rather it keeps building horses faster. I don't think I'd build them at all in almost any cities without that advantage. You'd have to have a livestock rich area that it would add a lot of raw production for me to care, which is rare. Reducing upkeep would help the AI somewhat, but it doesn't really do enough to make the building useful, it just makes it less harmful when the AI builds it stupidly. If we can work around that in some other way, I'd be fine with that.

The mounted unit bonus gives it some flavor while providing some advantages to the city alongside it. Otherwise it's just a generic "production" building.

Note: I could see adding other bonus production (or food or gold) to the building itself, possibly as a tech effect? This would make it slightly less useless as well in these AI cities.

 

[Naeven]

Imagine how useless it's to me that doesn't even produce my units, I mostly purchase them.
I'm fine with it being a generic building, that's pretty much how the other resource enhancing buildings work.

Tho I disagree about livestock being rare, most cities have 1-2 resources buffed by stables. While 3-4 is rarer, it still happens. That's the only reason I tend to build stables.

Let's take circus into account here as well. I'd like 1 of the buildings to be a generic livestock buffer. And other to be the situational with horse/Ivory requirement, / -horse production. It makes sence to require horses for - horse production.

 

[Stalker0]

Honestly, the AI gets enough gold that I don't think the little extra maintenance for those stables is a big deal. Sure I would rather them build more smartly, but I don't consider this a big issue.

 

[mystikx21]

Every other building that's a generic boost to tiles provides a pretty clear bonus and/or is limited by those bonuses. Eg: You can't build stoneworks except with stone/marble, but it also provides happiness plus production, plus production on tiles. That's not simply a generic production building. A mint isn't just boosting a few gold tiles, but also a necessary gold building to build banks. A stable isn't necessary for anything, doesn't add any happiness, doesn't add any % modifiers, etc. Hydro plants are the closest parallel I can think of to a generic stable and they're late game, don't cost that much more, and only buildable on rivers. I'd say I'd be fine with stables staying as a mounted unit bonus to give a clear bonus as a result.

I tend not to bother buying units except very early (buildings are cheaper to maintain and cheaper to rush-buy per production). If it reduces purchase costs as well that could help in your case. I'm not sure that it does or does not as I don't buy units often enough to notice (blast furnace/warehouse would be in the same category, along with honor policies increasing unit production).

I don't think livestock is rare. My point was that a very effective building site would be necessary for me to use it if it was stripped of the building flavor of horse unit production, eg those same places you build them. Those are rare even if you can usually get some deer or sheep or something in the city radius for most cities. Relative to the AI building it everywhere (including places where it did almost nothing), I'd be building it in maybe 10-15% of my cities, maybe 33-50% if its upkeep was lowered too (which is probably about the amount I presently build it). That seems off or pretty weak as a building.

The AI does get a lot of gold, but I don't think it gets any major gold boosts from the mod, and if it has a big enough empire, 5-6 buildings at 2 gpt early on is a lot of money being wasted. Some of its gold effects are on cheaper unit upkeep and overall smarter gold management than on economic boosts, so a quick fix seems okay there as it wouldn't make it that much better off that we'd notice.

In any case, my main concern is that it's a free chunk of gold for me on top of city conquest most of the time as stables are, it seems, never destroyed on conquest, and the AI builds them everywhere regardless of whether it's useful or not, which it is often not. That problem could be modified by making them destroy-able on conquest? That it's wasting a chunk of gold per turn is a problem but much less so than the free money for me whether I'm going to raze a city or not.

 

[mitsho]

I've always wanted the stable to go back to civ4 and give a experience bonus rather than a speed building bonus for mounted units. Would make them more unique and buff horses and thus anti-horse units importance without much ado. I also can't think of any uber-promotion like blitz for ranged units for mounted units. Also, the cumulative bonus experience that really hits home (barracks+armory+Brandenburg+Autocracy Policy) really only add up by the Industrial era where these become obsolete. It'd give us more options in any case.

But yes, make them destroyed on conquest as a quick fix if possible, why not. Seems like a minor and dumb issue, but there's no way around it. Normally I just say, ignore it and don't use the bug/cheat/feature for yourself and presto, problem solved. But it'd be irrational to keep the stables as they cost you gold... How much upkeep are they anyway?

 

[mystikx21]

2 upkeep. Not very much gold in the scheme of things for me (unit upkeep is more noticeable), but they're often doing nothing other than the +1 production because of how many cities the AI sets up as a wider civ or later in the game, even on top of the number of 1-2 tile improved cities that are marginal. Seems like a requirement would do fine to limit it to at least marginal use to them but conquest destruction would at least minimize the benefit to me.

Brandenburg is cumulative with military academies too, another 30. (total 80-110 xp?)

 

[mitsho]

or free upkeep, but that's a very unelegant solution.

 

[mystikx21]

It's also unrealistic. Prior to the invention of electric trolleys and "horseless carriages", industrialising cities required large numbers of people cleaning up after all the horses involved in city life. I would suspect ancient Rome had similar problems.

Sounds like destroy on conquest is a decent solution, and giving the AI some kind of mulligan for free upkeep when it builds them wastefully is a secondary goal if possible that shouldn't do very much to imbalance it.

 

[Bernd-das-Brot]

On stables:
I agree that it is a bad idea to remove human options "just" to help the AI. But is building a stable in a city which has not one of the animal-ressources really a considerable option for a human player?
You would have to pay 2 gold every turn and invest 140(?) hammers just to build some horses 20% faster? I don't think this will happen very often or at all.


Some other bugs I encountered in my actual game (ver 2.3, 1.12):

Commerce opener seems buggy: Got only 2.6 gold from policies per turn after chosing it.
(67,3 gold of all cities/126 total without the 2,6 from policies)
I had similar iussues with the arabian UA (in a game I made in Nov/early Dec).

The +25% culture from Sistine chapel does not work.

Ironclad has 2x +50% def and attack on cities.

Submarines still have penalty on defense -25/50.

Religious community is displayed in city screen, but not taken into account.

Lancer still has a penalty on defense.

On the railroad-capital-issue: Capital gets +25 from railroad connection even without having the railroad-connection-building! +25 is displayed too all yields except food, but not added to the total.

Maybe I misunderstand something in this, but it seems to me as if culture from CS is given two times.
Once you get culture added to the city (where it is multiplied with the +x% factors) and added to the per city total and you get an extra +x from CS to your total per turn amount added (can be seen in the tool-bar).
I don't think this is intended?

 

[Naeven]

Every other building that's a generic boost to tiles provides a pretty clear bonus and/or is limited by those bonuses. Eg: You can't build stoneworks except with stone/marble, but it also provides happiness plus production, plus production on tiles. That's not simply a generic production building. A mint isn't just boosting a few gold tiles, but also a necessary gold building to build banks.

I'd say both of these examples goes under my generic "pretty much"
The requirement on stoneworks are just because of the happiness, it still requires the same resources it buffs and give basic yields, that's not intressting effects IMO. It's a no brainer to build both, stables are not.

I tend not to bother buying units except very early (buildings are cheaper to maintain and cheaper to rush-buy per production). If it reduces purchase costs as well that could help in your case. I'm not sure that it does or does not as I don't buy units often enough to notice (blast furnace/warehouse would be in the same category, along with honor policies increasing unit production).

The reason I mostly buy units is because my city is also my military city and is mostly busy with wonders/buildings. I also like to buy units to get them just when I need them and not a turn earlier, to save upkeep money.
Either way, it doesn't really matter. I think both styles should be equally supported by the liverstock boosting building.

I wasn't really that botherd by the AI at all, I just think the stables needs some fine tuning to make more sence.