Sooo... Happiness.

[BiteInTheMark]

Also...you can't have it both ways, bud. So which is it - they're distorting (a strong word, mind you) the need calculations or they don't have much influence? If you tell me that by 'distorting' you meant 'not that much' then I'm not sure what you're trying to say.Yields have effects on things? Yup, they do. Boy howdy.

Sorry, Iam no english foreigner. The german word "stören" has 12 different translations into english, and I think the best translastion may be "influence in a negative way". This was what I wanted to say.
I still think we shoud watch this development and ask, if we want such direct translation by hammer into science and culture. If its inavoidable, me maybe could reduce the yields by events a bit in higher difficulties to smooth it.

After you are done with this, please, make sure that city governor knows how to grow cities best. I find myself removing workers from food tiles constantly.

For some reason, I often see cities with relative exactly 30 food excess. Atleast this is the food value my automatic goveneurs often try to reach and spend all excess food into specialists. How do goveneur decide which growth is right/healthy?

 

[Gazebo]

Sorry, Iam no english foreigner. The german word "stören" has 12 different translations into english, and I think the best translastion may be "influence in a negative way". This was what I wanted to say.

I have a Ph.D in Germanic history and culture, so you'll have to do better than an appeal to language. The best translation of 'stoeren' is not 'influence in a negative way,' it's 'disrupt', 'violate', or 'interfere.' Very strong language. In fact, 'influence in a negative way' doesn't even show up on leo.de's translation page. Come on, man.

Anyways,

I still think we shoud watch this development and ask, if we want such direct translation by hammer into science and culture.

Processes exist, and literally no one has a problem with them except you. They don't affect the median, so it's an irrelevant point.

G

 

[Stalker0]

I feel like the debates are just going in circles here until we see G's new method in the next version. Lets just test out what it looks like.

 

[Recursive]

In DifficultyMod.xml, which contains Vox Populi's difficulty handicaps, there are the following AI values for bonuses:

AITrainPercent = Production discount to units (ex. 70% = 30% hammer discount)

AIConstructPercent = Production discount to buildings

AICreatePercent = Production discount to national projects, e.g. Manhattan Project

AIWorldConstructPercent = discount to Wonders. This is actually a penalty of 10% on Settler and a 0% discount on all other difficulties - AIs can't build Wonders at accelerated speed.

AIWorldCreatePercent = discount to World Congress projects like World's Fair (they also don't get one, but it costs more for them on Settler).

AITrain/Construct/CreatePercent are also reduced every era by AIPerEraModifier.

AIs also get a very small Production bonus to the origin city when a human kills one of their units.


Unless VP changed something I'm not aware of, AIs do not get a direct production bonus to Processes like Arts and Research. They can build Production buildings faster on higher difficulties and that could give them a higher output, yes - but even then, the Arts process only gives 20% Production as Culture, and most AIs are too busy building units to slam into each other and buildings to make their opponents' slamming more difficult. They've got other things to do besides run processes, and when they do it's only for a few turns. At most.

And once you catch up to them through skilled play (you are skilled if you're playing high difficulty games, right?), you get the same buildings they do, and that very slight head start in Process output ceases to exist.

So as Gazebo said, not only would it require a ridiculously large number of cities to run Processes for an extended amount of time to make any impact at all on the median (a very slow-changing statistic) but even if it did, it would only be a slight change - i.e. easily controllable with the buildings you have available. A change probably wouldn't even be noticeable at all unless you've pushed your empire to the limits through overextension or overpopulation.

And only a small fraction of Production is converted into one type of yield - remember, you'd need 40%+ of cities to run Arts simultaneously to affect Boredom, and that still wouldn't change the other yields.

Finally, as I've just explained in detail, high difficulty AI do not get a Production bonus towards processes.

(as far as I'm aware; but even if they do,
which is unlikely, it still wouldn't make any difference to your happiness.)

So, you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. Processes are a non issue.

Now since it's clearly the difficulty handicap you have a problem with - just play on Chieftain, AIs get only very small advantages and it's as close to "fair" difficulty as you can get.

Many people like a challenge and they do play higher difficulties where AIs get bonuses to match a human player's skill level as closely as achievable. But it's entirely your choice to do that.

Of course, judging by this thread's history, you'll probably ignore this like you ignored Gazebo's in most cases very patient replies to your concerns.

But hopefully this summary is helpful to anyone else who might read it.

HW

 

[tu_79]

In DifficultyMod.xml, which contains Vox Populi's difficulty handicaps, there are the following AI values for bonuses:

AITrainPercent = Production discount to units (ex. 70% = 30% hammer discount)

AIConstructPercent = Production discount to buildings

AICreatePercent = Production discount to national projects, e.g. Manhattan Project

AIWorldConstructPercent = discount to Wonders. This is actually a penalty of 10% on Settler and a 0% discount on all other difficulties - AIs can't build Wonders at accelerated speed.

AIWorldCreatePercent = discount to World Congress projects like World's Fair (they also don't get one, but it costs more for them on Settler).

AITrain/Construct/CreatePercent are also reduced every era by AIPerEraModifier.

AIs also get a very small Production bonus to the origin city when a human kills one of their units.


Unless VP changed something I'm not aware of, AIs do not get a direct production bonus to Processes like Arts and Research. They can build Production buildings faster on higher difficulties and that could give them a higher output, yes - but even then, the Arts process only gives 20% Production as Culture, and most AIs are too busy building units to slam into each other and buildings to make their opponents' slamming more difficult. They've got other things to do besides run processes, and when they do it's only for a few turns. At most.

And once you catch up to them through skilled play (you are skilled if you're playing high difficulty games, right?), you get the same buildings they do, and that very slight head start in Process output ceases to exist.

So as Gazebo said, not only would it require a ridiculously large number of cities to run Processes for an extended amount of time to make any impact at all on the median (a very slow-changing statistic) but even if it did, it would only be a slight change - i.e. easily controllable with the buildings you have available. A change probably wouldn't even be noticeable at all unless you've pushed your empire to the limits through overextension or overpopulation.

And only a small fraction of Production is converted into one type of yield - remember, you'd need 40%+ of cities to run Arts simultaneously to affect Boredom, and that still wouldn't change the other yields.

Finally, as I've just explained in detail, high difficulty AI do not get a Production bonus towards processes.

(as far as I'm aware; but even if they do,
which is unlikely, it still wouldn't make any difference to your happiness.)

So, you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. Processes are a non issue.

Now since it's clearly the difficulty handicap you have a problem with - just play on Chieftain, AIs get only very small advantages and it's as close to "fair" difficulty as you can get.

Many people like a challenge and they do play higher difficulties where AIs get bonuses to match a human player's skill level as closely as achievable. But it's entirely your choice to do that.

Of course, judging by this thread's history, you'll probably ignore this like you ignored Gazebo's in most cases very patient replies to your concerns.

But hopefully this summary is helpful to anyone else who might read it.

HW

You could say that processes are not the problem, but a symptom. If it were the case that AI is only working processes, that's a symptom of all buildings been built and no need for extra units. Or a bug.
I wonder if this situation could happen to civs that research too slowly but produce very fast. I heard recently something alike from a guy who was using enlightenment era modmod.

If it happens only for a few turns, as G claims, then it's a non issue.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

I have a Ph.D in Germanic history and culture, so you'll have to do better than an appeal to language. The best translation of 'stoeren' is not 'influence in a negative way,' it's 'disrupt', 'violate', or 'interfere.' Very strong language. In fact, 'influence in a negative way' doesn't even show up on leo.de's translation page. Come on, man.

"stören" has 2 main definitions (by Duden), in the first, you interrupt someone in his work or rest, or annoy someone with your presence.
The second one is about influencing values or procedure in a not wanted way. "sustainably impair"
Yes, disrupt may be a correct translation, but its more commonly used for a procedure which gets completly stopped. But I dont think any german would use violate in this case, which has more the definition of breaking rules or hurting someone. Interfere is also wrong, cause its defined as an active, intentional way to influence something, like US intervining in other countries diplomacy.

In DifficultyMod.xml, which contains Vox Populi's difficulty handicaps, there are the following AI values for bonuses:

Is it correct they also can grow faster? I remember some people said, AI cities need less food to grow.

And once you catch up to them through skilled play (you are skilled if you're playing high difficulty games, right?), you get the same buildings they do, and that very slight head start in Process output ceases to exist.

You mean declare war and punch as much as possible into their face? Do you think its possible to catch up in higher difficulties (emperor+) if you never go to war with them?
What is with AIs, which never go to war? Their running all the time the bonus for losing more units in wars, which never happens. Wouldnt it make more sense to give the production bonus mainly for units and only slightly for buildings?

high difficulty AI do not get a Production bonus towards processes.

Never said that, but do you want to deny, in most cases the AI is much more frequently able to use processes than the human? (higher difficulty)

I dont think you can balance all the different sources (production handicap, yields by events, yields at founding cities, grow of those handicaps), if you spread them over such diversity.
I like to see easy, direct solutions for the main issues. Do they lose more units than the human? Give them an advantage in producing units.
Do they have a bad focus in constructing buildings (doesnt look like anymore), give them a slightly advantage in constructing buildings.
Are they unable to do great synergies by religion or policies? (For me, there are not that many real synergies possible, a lot of people see synergies, if they simply stack as much possible yields in one or few buildings and build them first, but if you can construct every building fast enough, stacking doesnt give that much advantage). Give them some discount on policies and techs.
They are weak against early rushs by human? Give them military starting units, but no extra scout or worker. The extra worker can create an extreme difference in advantage of AI vs human or AI vs AI. Normally I start with shrine, monument, worker. Before I can start to create my first farm or mine, the AI can already create 4 farms, which can lead to 8 difference in food, if they start at a river. Meanwhile the AI with a forest or jungle start and no river has to pay the maintenance of the worker, but cant use it. I would place the starting worker only for deity games, for the challenge, but I think it has maybe a too much influence in starting conditions. (My opinion)

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

 

[Moi Magnus]

Is it correct they also can grow faster? I remember some people said, AI cities need less food to grow.

No, it is wrong. However, food is part of the instant yield they receive (not completely sure about that), so they do get some bonuses on that. TBH, the main the growth advantage for the AI is the bonus to worker rate (for so quicker farms), and the free worker.

 

[Txurce]

The extra worker can create an extreme difference in advantage of AI vs human or AI vs AI. Normally I start with shrine, monument, worker. Before I can start to create my first farm or mine, the AI can already create 4 farms, which can lead to 8 difference in food, if they start at a river. Meanwhile the AI with a forest or jungle start and no river has to pay the maintenance of the worker, but cant use it. I would place the starting worker only for deity games, for the challenge, but I think it has maybe a too much influence in starting conditions. (My opinion)

TBH, the main the growth advantage for the AI is the bonus to worker rate (for so quicker farms), and the free worker.

If we accept that scaled or era-based bonuses make for a better game experience than equivalent starting bonuses, then it makes sense to shoot for an ideal where more gradual production bumps eliminate the need for the AI's free worker. And if the AI's worker-rate bonus isn't era-based, that would help, too.

 

[Gazebo]

"stören" has 2 main definitions (by Duden), in the first, you interrupt someone in his work or rest, or annoy someone with your presence.
The second one is about influencing values or procedure in a not wanted way. "sustainably impair"
Yes, disrupt may be a correct translation, but its more commonly used for a procedure which gets completly stopped. But I dont think any german would use violate in this case, which has more the definition of breaking rules or hurting someone. Interfere is also wrong, cause its defined as an active, intentional way to influence something, like US intervining in other countries diplomacy.


Is it correct they also can grow faster? I remember some people said, AI cities need less food to grow.



You mean declare war and punch as much as possible into their face? Do you think its possible to catch up in higher difficulties (emperor+) if you never go to war with them?
What is with AIs, which never go to war? Their running all the time the bonus for losing more units in wars, which never happens. Wouldnt it make more sense to give the production bonus mainly for units and only slightly for buildings?


Never said that, but do you want to deny, in most cases the AI is much more frequently able to use processes than the human? (higher difficulty)

I dont think you can balance all the different sources (production handicap, yields by events, yields at founding cities, grow of those handicaps), if you spread them over such diversity.
I like to see easy, direct solutions for the main issues. Do they lose more units than the human? Give them an advantage in producing units.
Do they have a bad focus in constructing buildings (doesnt look like anymore), give them a slightly advantage in constructing buildings.
Are they unable to do great synergies by religion or policies? (For me, there are not that many real synergies possible, a lot of people see synergies, if they simply stack as much possible yields in one or few buildings and build them first, but if you can construct every building fast enough, stacking doesnt give that much advantage). Give them some discount on policies and techs.
They are weak against early rushs by human? Give them military starting units, but no extra scout or worker. The extra worker can create an extreme difference in advantage of AI vs human or AI vs AI. Normally I start with shrine, monument, worker. Before I can start to create my first farm or mine, the AI can already create 4 farms, which can lead to 8 difference in food, if they start at a river. Meanwhile the AI with a forest or jungle start and no river has to pay the maintenance of the worker, but cant use it. I would place the starting worker only for deity games, for the challenge, but I think it has maybe a too much influence in starting conditions. (My opinion)

Reference #103 to AI handicaps. If you have a problem with the bonuses the AI receives at higher handicaps...don't play with a handicap.

/thread

G

 

[BiteInTheMark]

Reference #103 to AI handicaps. If you have a problem with the bonuses the AI receives at higher handicaps...don't play with a handicap.

/thread

G

As already mentioned, not with the handicap itself, but the side effects that the handicap provides and was not originally intended.

 

[Gazebo]

As already mentioned, not with the handicap itself, but the side effects that the handicap provides and was not originally intended.

'Not originally intended?' Says who? You? All is as it should be.

G

 

[ashendashin]

Reference #103 to AI handicaps. If you have a problem with the bonuses the AI receives at higher handicaps...don't play with a handicap.

/thread

G

Hey, the worker point Txurce expanded on ain't that bad. That one always annoyed me most when starting new games, as any pantheon that requires both tech and worker investment puts you at the highest disadvantage against the AI in religion and generally limits viable starts. The worker investment will put you too far behind in cases where the land is only decent when improved.

 

[Gamewizard]

I play on a high difficulty and my game is too hard! What on Earth is this craziness!?!?!

 

[ashendashin]

I play on a high difficulty and my game is too hard! What on Earth is this craziness!?!?!

If you're including the worker point, I only wanted to point out that this limits what starts are viable more than other handicaps.
As Txurce pointed out, stacking difficulty over time is fine.

 

[BiteInTheMark]

'Not originally intended?' Says who? You? All is as it should be.

G

I didnt knew the AI recieves production cost reduction for diplo units to influence CS by large groups of diplomats.... oh wait.... former you only could influence CS mainly with gold.....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reductions for buildings to lower my happiness cause I often run with less infrastructure... oh wait.... former your happiness was only influenced by your own behavior....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reduction to have time for running processes after they have build everything.... oh wait... this wasnt former possible.
(I refer here to the original version of Civilization, where there was already cost reduction for the AI)

 

[Txurce]

I didnt knew the AI recieves production cost reduction for diplo units to influence CS by large groups of diplomats.... oh wait.... former you only could influence CS mainly with gold.....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reductions for buildings to lower my happiness cause I often run with less infrastructure... oh wait.... former your happiness was only influenced by your own behavior....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reduction to have time for running processes after they have build everything.... oh wait... this wasnt former possible.
(I refer here to the original version of Civilization, where there was already cost reduction for the AI)

Gazebo, please don't respond to this.

 

[Gazebo]

I didnt knew the AI recieves production cost reduction for diplo units to influence CS by large groups of diplomats.... oh wait.... former you only could influence CS mainly with gold.....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reductions for buildings to lower my happiness cause I often run with less infrastructure... oh wait.... former your happiness was only influenced by your own behavior....
I didnt knew the AI receives production cost reduction to have time for running processes after they have build everything.... oh wait... this wasnt former possible.
(I refer here to the original version of Civilization, where there was already cost reduction for the AI)

Ignorance is bliss, but it's also not my problem.

Also #104.

Gazebo, please don't respond to this.

I can't help myself. It's like a shot of heroin in my arm.

G

 

[Recursive]

As already mentioned, not with the handicap itself, but the side effects that the handicap provides and was not originally intended.

Actually, to quote your own words...

Iam talking about that now for 2 or 3 months..... processes are distorting the need calculations. Which is a direct translation from AI handicaps to player happiness.

I still think we shoud watch this development and ask, if we want such direct translation by hammer into science and culture.

I rest my case.

The effects of the difficulty handicaps aren't secret and have been the case for some time now. As for them "not working as intended"...they work exactly as intended to produce a greater level of challenge, and from what I've seen those who are skilled enough to play Deity regularly are not constantly complaining about the game being too difficult, especially not because of AI processes - as I expected, you completely ignored the detailed explanation from myself and others why processes don't change the median. Anyway, this seems to me like this is a clear case of "practice and get skilled or play at a lower difficulty", or to put it simply, "get good" + ignorance about game mechanics despite them being explained in detail several times to you.

FYI, the bonuses on high difficulties were absolutely ridiculous in vanilla BNW, and even more so without any DLC. Deity included an extra Settler, five free technologies, discounts to techs and policies, a significant Happiness bonus...and it's worse in Civ VI. When your AI needs 3 Settlers at game start to stay competitive, you know you've failed.

VP has fixed this problem.

However, pretty much everyone can agree AI needs bonuses to stay competitive because the AI follows flowcharts; you have a real brain, which is smarter than any computer currently on Earth, and can synergize your military, economic, diplomatic, etc. strategies in ways that the AI cannot.

If you don't like the AI handicaps, you don't have to play with them - as I said, Chieftain is very close to fair, and Settler actually gives you an advantage and AIs penalties. I don't believe there's been so many complaints from anyone other than you about the difficulty handicaps.

Is it correct they also can grow faster? I remember some people said, AI cities need less food to grow.

Yes, the AI gets a discount to Growth on difficulties above Settler (on Chieftain, it's a 0% discount in the Ancient era and -2% per era, hardly significant). This discount increases with the difficulty level (at Deity, 30% discount in the Ancient era and -10% per era, which is significant, but you're playing Deity for a reason).

I dont think you can balance all the different sources (production handicap, yields by events, yields at founding cities, grow of those handicaps), if you spread them over such diversity.

It's not meant to be "balanced". It's meant to be challenging and give the AI an edge because you have a real brain.

If you have reasonable ideas for changing the difficulty handicaps (getting rid of them is not an option), and can get others in the community to agree with you, that's one thing. It is on the balance list.

But don't disguise your objections to the handicap system by pretending it's about happiness and processes, and ignoring the explanations people give to you. That's just acting in bad faith.

HW

P.S. I think I'll create a second thread on the difficulty handicaps to further clarify them as from what I see there's confusion about how they work, plus they're one of the items on the VP Gold balance list (after I figure out how BarbarianLand and SeaTargetRange function, as I never got that one answered nudge nudge )

 

[tu_79]

Anyway, Txurce has a point. The extra worker not only makes the game harder, as it should be, but also distorts the early choices for the human player.

I'm not going to make a case for it, as I don't expect to play in such hard levels, but maybe gameplay can be improved by removing the extra worker.