Updated Plans for DoC 1.18

[Leoreth]

1. Adjust AI start conditions and settler behaviour
2. Adjust number of available slots
3. Rebase the map branch on the develop branch
4. Balance tech speed
5. Implement / adjust, playtest, and balance UHVs for new and existing civilizations + restore 600 AD and 1700 AD scenarios
6. Merge the map branch into the develop branch - balancing and bug fixes continue from here based on community feedback
7. Civics rebalancing
8. Baseline city name mechanics
9. Indian city art
10. Immersion: great people names, city names, dynamic civ names
11. Documentation

With the recent release of the civics redesign, we have now completed step 7. The next goal is to make sure we can start working on city names, and maybe address some of the most visible discrepancies.

However, before I do anything in that direction, I will address the long list of issues that have been reported for 1.18. You might have noticed that I did not do much on that end beyond acknowledging the reports and asking for clarifications - the simple reason is that I did not want to get distracted from the civics changes and constantly jump back and forth. It's also much easier to address issues in larger sets instead of a slow trickle. So expect some improvements on that before I get back to adding new content.

 

[BaneFire]

10: Dynamic Civ Names
Will you open a thread ahead of time for contributions there?

 

[Leoreth]

No, but please go ahead if you want to.

 

[Leoreth]

1. Adjust AI start conditions and settler behaviour
2. Adjust number of available slots
3. Rebase the map branch on the develop branch
4. Balance tech speed
5. Implement / adjust, playtest, and balance UHVs for new and existing civilizations + restore 600 AD and 1700 AD scenarios
6. Merge the map branch into the develop branch - balancing and bug fixes continue from here based on community feedback
7. Civics rebalancing
8. Baseline city name mechanics
9. Immersion: great people names, city names, dynamic civ names
10. Indian city art
11. Documentation

Long time no revisiting this list. I want to make sure everyone is aware of the current state and what is left to do.

 

[AOS9001]

I can't believe it, 1.18 is approaching completion...

Will the 200 BC and 1500 AD scenarios be a 1.19 goal?

 

[Leoreth]

They won't be part of 1.18 at least.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

"Immersion" immediately brought scripted events to my mind . Can you say whether or not this is something you'd intend to even get into at this stage?

 

[Leoreth]

What kind of scripted events?

 

[SultanRedSnake]

Your pardon. It had been more precise to say "expand existing events". I'm talking about the big ones like New World, Trading Companies, etc. Although now that I think about it we could surely brainstorm some more minor random events that would perhaps be regionalized (Reformation being an existing example). Or even civ-specific, in particular as a means to "help" the AI or encourage certain behaviors. Example: Slave Trade. Upon meeting an African civ, the player could be given the option to offer a "gift" that would improve attitude. Actually I'd love to see events like these generally to break-up some insurmountable diplomatic dead locks. Regardless you may consider all of the above DoC Dreams for the time being.

For now, would you deign to share your idea of what "Immersion" would involve? Would "Flavor" be another way to say what you'd mean?

 

[Leoreth]

Immersion:

• Historical behaviour
• Great people names
• City names
• Dynamic names

"Immersion" is everything that makes a game feel like real history - note how this intersects with balance in that both involve historical behaviour of civilizations.

I use aesthetics to refer to art assets for units, buildings, leaders, city sets etc. Documentation is mostly in reference to full strategy texts and other civilopedia entries being available. I will get to "additional content" later.

That's my brief explanation of it from the opening post. It refers to a lot of the dynamic / civ specific stuff typical for RFC, but I see historical behaviour of civilizations as part of that as well, which you might not consider covered by "flavour".

You can certainly see scripted events as part of historical behaviour. But I am generally not a fan of scripted events overall. There are two reasons for that. Conceptually I prefer if the game produces historically immersive outcomes from general game mechanics, rather than specific scripting targeted at specific outcomes. I would consider the need for scripting a crutch to address a flaw in the overall design of the baseline mechanics. The second reason is that every scripted event in existence is something that I need to implement and maintain, that can break or have edge cases I did not consider etc. So the more of them there are the more overhead there is to deal with that subtracts from adding other features to the mod. Considering that scripted events are usually very targeted, that means that a lot of effort goes into things that may not be felt for most of the game.

Of course scripting still exists in the mod as it is. On the one hand that is because there is no clear division between general game mechanics and scripting. The AI is "scripted" to do things certain ways in the general AI logic. You could consider settler and war maps scripting because they direct the AI in certain directions but in my view they are preferable because they are generalized, apply to all civilizations, allow room for deviation, and integrate with the base game logic directly. On the other hand I will resort to scripting if a) the outcome is pivotal in shaping the subsequent game and b) there is no possible way to make it happen any other way.

An example of this are e.g. the Roman conquerors. A historical Roman empire is important both for the play experience during its existence and also for the impact it leaves for subsequent civilizations. Not only does history feel "wrong" if it doesn't happen, it also creates unintended playing experiences for everyone around it.

I think you are raising a correct issue with the slave trade and overall diplo AI, but I would rather make changes to these mechanics to address the causes of those issues rather than trying to paper them over using scripting. I know that pushes the solution further into the future but eventually it is the better solution in my view.

 

[SultanRedSnake]

from the opening post

Ugh I'm becoming what I loathe. I made you repeat something else not long ago. Sowwyyyyyyy.

Conceptually I prefer if the game produces historically immersive outcomes from general game mechanics, rather than specific scripting targeted at specific outcomes.

I thought this was the case. TBTH I was LK hoping you'd rebuff my own proposal.

a) the outcome is pivotal in shaping the subsequent game and b) there is no possible way to make it happen any other way.

I'd just like to cope and say I meant to write these qualifiers into my post.

something that I need to implement and maintain, that can break or have edge cases I did not consider etc. So the more of them there are the more overhead there is to deal with that subtracts from adding other features to the mod.

Yes. This is the answer right here. Case is now closed!

I know that pushes the solution further into the future

Mein Bruder, we're now TEN YEARS into this Odyssey; time kinda isn't a thing I can see passing anymore. And from the looks of where the series is headed, this is likely to remain the best Civ experience for at least another decade.

Vielen Dank für alles

 

[Pawlak]

Conceptually I prefer if the game produces historically immersive outcomes from general game mechanics, rather than specific scripting targeted at specific outcomes. I would consider the need for scripting a crutch to address a flaw in the overall design of the baseline mechanics.

This for me is what gives DoC insane replayability potential. Mods with more scripted events typically have world that is pretty much the same each game disregarding player activity.

Not having played myself yet I am curious how close to the goal 'historical immersion' feels right now. Personally I hope as much as possible will be achieved without many new scripted events, that's just my taste though. There is fine line where game world state feels like something that could have happened and I guess that's the kind of gameplay we all enjoy in RFC mods.

 

[Leoreth]

Where things are largely depends on everyone's feedback. I rely on people's observations to know if something is going wrong.

Of course this kind of thing is an ongoing process that is never going to be complete. I think all things considered we are in a good place. I have to make the decision that 1.18 is ready for release at some point but that doesn't mean the chance to address things that are off is gone. We can continue that in subsequent versions.