V30 Plans

[strategyonly]

I'll have iPad access to the boards, but no modding/playing access)

How do you like the iPad, is it worth the time and money alone or even the effort to buy one?

 

[Sgtslick]

ii) Playing a game to sedentary lifestyle on marathon basically takes a day;

A whole day? More like 3 hours I reckon if you just auto-hunt, auto-explore don't wait at end of turns and use build lists you fly through the game. Would using ai-autoplay be faster I wonder?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I know you can set <iMinLatitude> and <iMaxLatitude> for buildings but I don't think they have longitude code. But even if we did I am not sure if we should. Half the fun is having civs in locations of the globe they normally would not be. And if its based on the native cultures then you would be basically limiting them to a part of the hemisphere which means longitude more than latitude.

I also think it would mess up scenario maps a lot. We already have a problem with animals and scenario maps. Imagine how much worse it would be for civs.

Since some would feel that way and there would be issues with maps potentially, this would make a case for such a modification being an option. But its one I'd prefer to play.

Rather than choosing a civilization and enforcing it be in any particular place on earth, the first city built checks the spawn codes to figure out what type of region its in and auto builds the first (native) culture from that. Then everything else goes as we have it.

This way you never know what you'll get til you get in game. With this, developing leaders, and the rest of the way we've done cultures, you really are starting with nothing but names. That's one of the goals in the concept.

 

[Koshling]

A whole day? More like 3 hours I reckon if you just auto-hunt, auto-explore don't wait at end of turns and use build lists you fly through the game. Would using ai-autoplay be faster I wonder?

On Marathon it takes me a whole day in terms of 'that amount of a day I can devote to C2C' (game speed snail). AI autoplay wouldn't help me judge how it compared to me, which I'm using as yardstick to see where the AI lags against a human (also applies to hunting efficacy). I could change game speed, but it needs testing at a variety of speeds and this is where I am comfortable, so it's where I am starting.

 

[JosEPh_II]

@Koshling,
I just got beat out to Tengrii for the 1st time in months on Prince Difficulty level. I did linger with a few extra techs along the way but was beat out by almost 1000 yrs on Epic.

JosEPh

 

[ls612]

I just did an autoplay and the first AI was reaching Sedentary Lifestyle on Marathon after 313 turns. By means of comparison I set up Marathon to expect the Prehistoric Era to be 300 turns, so for an AI with no bonus (this was on Noble) this is pretty good IMO.

 

[Koshling]

I still got there first today, but there was a major reason for that, which I believe I have now fixed (will know after tomorrow's game). Basically there was a threshold level that was squired for the ai to consider a building worth constructing with a unit, and one effect of all the ai weights was effectively to increase more or less everything in value by 50 or so points. Now that that is gone, the threshold was tuned too high, and as a easily the ai was not building any myths. Once that is addressed I think the ai will be well ahead of me at sedentary (but I still need to verify that)

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I still got there first today, but there was a major reason for that, which I believe I have now fixed (will know after tomorrow's game). Basically there was a threshold level that was squired for the ai to consider a building worth constructing with a unit, and one effect of all the ai weights was effectively to increase more or less everything in value by 50 or so points. Now that that is gone, the threshold was tuned too high, and as a easily the ai was not building any myths. Once that is addressed I think the ai will be well ahead of me at sedentary (but I still need to verify that)

Are you saying I need to put weights on the Myth buildings? I am considering splitting many of the Myth buildings into two buildings one to give the science boost and expire the other to give the boost to building speed of other buildings. They would act as one building so that when you build the Myth you get the other two instead.

 

[Koshling]

Are you saying I need to put weights on the Myth buildings? I am considering splitting many of the Myth buildings into two buildings one to give the science boost and expire the other to give the boost to building speed of other buildings. They would act as one building so that when you build the Myth you get the other two instead.

Absolutely not. I don't want anyone putting weights on anything for now, until I finish ai tuning. It won't be necessary for things like myths.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Since some would feel that way and there would be issues with maps potentially, this would make a case for such a modification being an option. But its one I'd prefer to play.

Rather than choosing a civilization and enforcing it be in any particular place on earth, the first city built checks the spawn codes to figure out what type of region its in and auto builds the first (native) culture from that. Then everything else goes as we have it.

This way you never know what you'll get til you get in game. With this, developing leaders, and the rest of the way we've done cultures, you really are starting with nothing but names. That's one of the goals in the concept.

Sounds like your indirectly forcing the "Culturally Linked Start" then. What if you want one of each regional type to start in the old world? Or worse where you start is Antarctica or something where there are no Native Human cultures.

 

[Raven Destroyer]

Or worse where you start is Antarctica or something where there are no Native Human cultures.

indeed nothing there beside Penguin Overlordship

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sounds like your indirectly forcing the "Culturally Linked Start" then. What if you want one of each regional type to start in the old world? Or worse where you start is Antarctica or something where there are no Native Human cultures.

Keep in mind we're talking about an option. And though I'm saying we use a mechanism similar to the animal spawn region, I'm sure if it needs its own definition that could be done. Just extrude S America, Africa, Australia, Oceana all the way south in its defined regions.

Culturally linked start would differ as you make the selection of your civilization first and it then places you in the region that civ would be (or as close as it can due to the map). For teams, this screws up their usual starting proximity and it probably also messes with the assumed value of the region in which the map chooses to spawn a player.

This would be the opposite... you get placed on the map according to normal unmodified rules, but where you end up would have some bearing on what you become - which is basically how the rest of the cultural structure works already and would benefit from this approach for that reason.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Just a note - the "Culturally Linked Start" option currently makes sure that your near neighbours are related to you culturally it does not try and start you near where your nation started. Although it does use information which defines where your nation started geographically in RL to determine the cultural link.

It may be that we want to redo this option in some way to fit with the C2C idea of culture and/or maybe use that geographic information to do initial placement on the map. Giving us a new option to replace the current one.

C2C Cultural starts - places nations within their cultural starting regions. This means that starting points would be chosen then a nation would be chosen that fits.

and maybe Start with C2C culture requirements which would make sure that all the needs are met so that you can build your chosen culture where you start on the map. This would not be selectable for nations that require multiple cultures. It would also be very difficult to program. If the player then decides to move the band of the plot they were put on to another "better" plot, then they would probably invalidate the whole thing.​

 

[strategyonly]

Just a note - the "Culturally Linked Start" option currently makes sure that your near neighbours are related to you culturally it does not try and start you near where your nation started. Although it does use information which defines where your nation started geographically in RL to determine the cultural link.

It may be that we want to redo this option in some way to fit with the C2C idea of culture and/or maybe use that geographic information to do initial placement on the map. Giving us a new option to replace the current one.

C2C Cultural starts - places nations within their cultural starting regions. This means that starting points would be chosen then a nation would be chosen that fits.

and maybe Start with C2C culture requirements which would make sure that all the needs are met so that you can build your chosen culture where you start on the map. This would not be selectable for nations that require multiple cultures. It would also be very difficult to program. If the player then decides to move the band of the plot they were put on to another "better" plot, then they would probably invalidate the whole thing.​

Now this to me, sounds like a very reasonable way to do it, anyone else??

 

[ls612]

Just a note - the "Culturally Linked Start" option currently makes sure that your near neighbours are related to you culturally it does not try and start you near where your nation started. Although it does use information which defines where your nation started geographically in RL to determine the cultural link.

It may be that we want to redo this option in some way to fit with the C2C idea of culture and/or maybe use that geographic information to do initial placement on the map. Giving us a new option to replace the current one.

C2C Cultural starts - places nations within their cultural starting regions. This means that starting points would be chosen then a nation would be chosen that fits.

and maybe Start with C2C culture requirements which would make sure that all the needs are met so that you can build your chosen culture where you start on the map. This would not be selectable for nations that require multiple cultures. It would also be very difficult to program. If the player then decides to move the band of the plot they were put on to another "better" plot, then they would probably invalidate the whole thing.​

I see no reason why the current Culturally linked Starts option does not work or why it needs to be changed. I think that what Hydro did to make Native Culture auto-build was good and needed, as Native Cultures were useless entries in the build lists after turn 1.

The one change I'd consider making there is to make civs native culture starting be based on their culture resource group explicitly (as opposed to it being implicitly linked like it is now).

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The current one is fine it just has no relation to C2C cultures at all!

The "Culturally Linked Start" has a list of (lat,long) of where nations started historically. Then it looks at what you chose and makes those near by you nations from the same region as in the list. So for example you chose Egypt and your start location is about where Wellington NZ is - it will change those nations that are near you and on the same continent to ones near Egypt in real history. Maybe placing Greece in Antarctica and Mali where Sydney Australia is. This means that the resources and animals you get are Oceanic and you would not be likely to get many of the C2C Cultures associated with Egypt.

 

[ls612]

The current one is fine it just has no relation to C2C cultures at all!

The "Culturally Linked Start" has a list of (lat,long) of where nations started historically. Then it looks at what you chose and makes those near by you nations from the same region as in the list. So for example you chose Egypt and your start location is about where Wellington NZ is - it will change those nations that are near you and on the same continent to ones near Egypt in real history. Maybe placing Greece in Antarctica and Mali where Sydney Australia is. This means that the resources and animals you get are Oceanic and you would not be likely to get many of the C2C Cultures associated with Egypt.

I know that I was suggesting changing it to use C2C cultures as opposed to the way it works now. So all Culture (Asian) nations would start near each other and they would be near Culture (Middle-Eastern) for instance.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

I see no reason why the current Culturally linked Starts option does not work or why it needs to be changed.

Sorry, the above sentence just confused me.

 

[ls612]

Sorry, the above sentence just confused me.

Ah, sorry, I was responding to Hydro's and Thunderbrd's ideas suggesting serious changes to the Culturally Linked starts, and a little to your suggestion to add more options.

 

[Hydromancerx]

and maybe Start with C2C culture requirements which would make sure that all the needs are met so that you can build your chosen culture where you start on the map. This would not be selectable for nations that require multiple cultures. It would also be very difficult to program. If the player then decides to move the band of the plot they were put on to another "better" plot, then they would probably invalidate the whole thing.[/INDENT]

Some civs don't have a culture.