The Next Big Thing(tm): Experience Changes

[Arctic Circle]

Interesting, I am mostly optimistic. I can't say much until I try it out.

Just please try to keep the XML as back-wards compatible as possible.

 

[Vehem]

Just please try to keep the XML as back-wards compatible as possible.

All new tags should be optional as usual - you will only need to include them if you want to use them (we hate having to update all the old XML as much as you do ).

 

[Sarisin]

I love these ideas too!

Especially removing the cap on killing barb units. I'm wondering if FF will have the current targeting AI for barbs that .43 FFH has.

Has there been any thought on how this will affect civs with the Barbarian or Charismatic traits?

Also, consideration might be given towards making promotions (especially the higher ones) cost more XP than now.

Again, some very good ideas, Vehem!

 

[Brokenbone]

Sounds interesting, look forward to seeing it in play!

One thing that I also like is the idea of, well, some sort of "lesser" hero. I like unique names, histories, odd little strengths/weaknesses, not sure in what form the "lesser" will take, but I'd wondered more than once whether instead of a hero promo that gave up to 100 free XP, if some watered down one might top out at 50. Or 30 or 80 or whatever!

Still would take a lot of creativity to give every civ another mini-hero! Lucian though might qualify. Some other current heroes might even become mini-heroes, like Loki (who gains no XP anyhow and whose worth is low after the early game), maybe poor Rantine as well (a pseudo axeman running around in the midgame is just sad!)

Anyhow, how it all rolls out, I'll be interested to see!

 

[Arctic Circle]

All new tags should be optional as usual - you will only need to include them if you want to use them (we hate having to update all the old XML as much as you do ).

I am much grateful..

 

[Kael]

An option to consider (if you haven't already). You could accomplish the same effect without resorting to decimals by multiplying the xp required per level by 100, and the things that currently gift xp by 100.

Either way accomplishes the same goal so it all depends on which is a cleaner presentation. The advantage of decimal is it allows people to stay with the level progressions they are used to (so they know that 2 xp gives them a new level). While the non-decimal system is more standard for RPG's (who use it for exactly the reason you describe, so they can be more granular with xp awards).

 

[zup]

Yeah. The numbers needed to advance levels in Baldur's Gate 2 got pretty impressive (300 000), until you see the amount of experience some kills and quests give (I solo that game).

 

[Vehem]

An option to consider (if you haven't already). You could accomplish the same effect without resorting to decimals by multiplying the xp required per level by 100, and the things that currently gift xp by 100.

Either way accomplishes the same goal so it all depends on which is a cleaner presentation. The advantage of decimal is it allows people to stay with the level progressions they are used to (so they know that 2 xp gives them a new level). While the non-decimal system is more standard for RPG's (who use it for exactly the reason you describe, so they can be more granular with xp awards).

We'd thought about it briefly and have been back and forth a little about which way to go. I don't think we'd considered the fact that RPGs do tend to use those sorts of numbers however, which may actually make it more accessible to players (initially decided that decimals were clearer than big numbers).

Yeah. The numbers needed to advance levels in Baldur's Gate 2 got pretty impressive (300 000), until you see the amount of experience some kills and quests give (I solo that game).

So did I once Dwarven Fighter with Simulacrum (so technically there are two of him). Soloing (duoing?) Demogorgon took a while though...

 

[Breez]

I have been thinking more and more about all of this.

Decimal Experience
Units will now be able to gain fractions of an XP (upto 2 decimal places).

Decimal vs larger numbers

To me its a wash 6 of 1, half dozen of the other. However... whole numbers will save you a charator by having no decimal point to display.

Passive Training
No longer will the warmongers get all the glory - builder civs may construct buildings that allow their units to gain experience slowly over time. Some buildings will increase the rate experience is gained, others will raise the maximum experience that can be reached.

Using the current formula and the basic "10 XP Cap" building with no speed increase, you'll be looking at around 30 turns to gain 5 experience, and 110 turns to gain 10 experience (levels 3 and 4 respectively).

So to over simplify here...

• Archery Range
  +.1 exp per turn for all Archery Units currently in that town. Max 10 XP
  
• Bowyer
  +.1 exp per Turn for all Archery Units currently in that town. Max 25 XP

So a New Archer Is created on turn 1 in a city with both buildings listed above and starts with +2 XP from a Civic and 2 XP from a Wonder

Turn 1 - 4 xp (Creation)
Turn 2 - 4.2 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
Turn 3 - 4.4 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
Turn 4 - 4.6 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
... ... ...
Turn 28 - 9.4 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
Turn 29 - 9.6 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
Turn 30 - 9.8 xp (.1 from Archery Range + .1 from Bowyer)
Turn 31 - 10.0 xp (.1 from Bowyer)
Turn 32 - 10.1 xp (.1 from Bowyer)
Turn 33 - 10.2 xp (.1 from Bowyer)
Turn 34 - 10.3 xp (.1 from Bowyer)​

(other than specific numbers) how far off am I from what you are thinking?


Edit: Forgot to ask...

Will Hero Auto XP still Cap? Will different Heros Cap thier Auto gain at different Levels?

 

[xienwolf]

There is a more complicated (barely) formula used for gaining XP. It is not a flat rate, but rather a decay function. So at the higher levels not only do you need more XP for each level, but you also gain free XP slower.

Also, buildings set the cap for a city, having a really high cap doesn't mean you grow any faster at the lower levels. But other buildings will be capable of improving growth rate, though once you hit the cap growth rate doesn't mean anything.

 

[BeefontheBone]

As a compromise for workers/adepts etc, could always grant, say, 0.25+x per turn, where x is random between 0 and .75 (or something like that) - so the expected value over a given number of turns would be the same as it is now, but the variance would be smaller.

 

[Vehem]

There is a more complicated (barely) formula used for gaining XP. It is not a flat rate, but rather a decay function. So at the higher levels not only do you need more XP for each level, but you also gain free XP slower.

Also, buildings set the cap for a city, having a really high cap doesn't mean you grow any faster at the lower levels. But other buildings will be capable of improving growth rate, though once you hit the cap growth rate doesn't mean anything.

Aye - stacking the "Cap" buildings will only increase the Cap. Stacking the "Rate" buildings will increase the rate of XP gain. Some buildings will have both attributes.

We had been discussing having the total cap influence gain rate, but decided that it would be easier to keep the two attributes separate. In the above example, the Archery Range would provide experience per turn, the amount slowly decreasing as experience is gained. The Bowyer would increase the maximum experience that can be gained, and would also increase the rate of all passive experience gain for UNITCOMBAT_ARCHER by 20% (so it does actually make the Archery Range a little quicker).

Command Posts will also provide a decent rate increase for all of the "military" unit combats (Mounted, Melee, Archer and Recon) which means that organized leaders benefit there, and defensive leaders may get a small (~10%) global increase to the rate. Even with the Global rate increase however, you will still need a suitable building to provide an "XP Cap". Lots of numbers still to be crunched here though to get the balance right.

 

[Gilg]

Hows about a amurite national wonder with High cap and gain rate for adepts? Perhaps build into their worldspell? Or giving Valledia a UB command post (A Cave of Ancestors replacement!?)? And Dain the NW.

 

[Breez]

Very neat Ideas.

Can't wait.

I am sure you have all heard it many times, but never too much. Thank you for your work on something I (we all) find so entertaining.

 

[Brokenbone]

Passive XP maybe differs at all gamespeeds, I wonder?

 

[Falc]

(ignore this, didn't see the second page)

 

[Elm]

This would make waning easier for the Sidar, right? More reason to build Adepts.

 

[Brokenbone]

Maybe Governor's Manor giving free XP to vampires to reflect the regular, turn by turn parties they invite lucky citizens to! Heh. Lots of flavorful possibilities!

 

[Vehem]

Passive XP maybe differs at all gamespeeds, I wonder?

Aye - and so will Hero XP (which currently doesn't because Quick speed needs around 1.67 and Marathon needs around 0.33 etc). Xienwolf generally writes "per-turn" mechanics with gamespeed in mind.

This would make waning easier for the Sidar, right? More reason to build Adepts.

Depends on which change you mean. It makes predicting the number of turns required to wane a unit passively (which is still a slow way of doing it - I much prefer using Divided Souls to XP farm and then wane) easier. But it also means that you have other options to Adepts that can gain experience that way, if you've built the relevant structures. Adepts will be getting slightly fewer/more expensive training structures than the "military" types, as they already benefit from passive gain wherever they are in the world.

 

[zup]

What of Calabim archers, cavalry and recon? The effort to make them level 6 usually kept me on the melee line. Could this cause balance issues involving more 500 xp longbowmen? Rooting those out of cities will not be easy.