Windmills, Sawmills and Ironmills [IMPLEMENTED]

[raystuttgart]

Hi guys,

first before anybody gets scared, the Buildings (Windmill and Watermill) inside the City have not been touched.
This implementation just adds new stuff considering Improvements (also "Mills") or slightly improves.
(It is a implementation of DLL capabilities configurable in XML which I implemented a few examples with.)

And now to the new feature:

Windmill, Sawmill and Ironmill
(City Effects from Improvements - Part 2, + more balancing options in XML)


-----

But with new 3D Improvement graphics (by @hrochland) I created new Improvements:
(All of that stuff is animated. )

• Windmill
• Ironmill

All 2D stuff I did myself.
(Buttons and Builds.)

------

Also, this existing Improvement has been heavily modified:
(It is not an "Upgrade" anymore, but an Improvement of its own and works totally different.)

• Sawmill

Credits for the graphics: @Schmiddie
(His stuff is of course also awesome but the graphic was already in use not new. )

-----

Basic GameConcept:

You can now decided if you want to build "Production Improvements" or "Support Improvements"

Production: They produce the actual Yields, and can grow, cheaper
Support: They add Bonus modifiers (% modifiers on whole City), can not grow, expensive

But be carful:
Support Improvements are not helpful in early game.
But in late game, when your city production is high they can become extremely powerful.

Generally you need to have a mixture of both.
One kind alone will be a bad idea. (Too many "Support" will not work without "Production".)

-----

Also "Support" Improvements have limitations on how / where they are allowed to be built.
(Except that they genrally produce less raw Yields themselsves than pure "Production" Improvements.)

They need to have a distance between each other.
(Only checking for the same kind.)

By the way:
Distance restrictions also count for "Monasteries" and "Forts" now.

------

 

[ConjurerDragon]

The text
"Can not be built to another another improvement of the same type..:"
Should that be
"Can´t be built next to another improvement of the same type..."?

 

[raystuttgart]

Thanks, I was coding this in a rush.
(Had to finish it in one evening - currently my time for modding is really limited.)

@Kendon will most likely check and improve my texts anyways.
(His English is of course much better than mine since he is a native speaker.)

 

[Kendon]

The text
"Can not be built to another another improvement of the same type..:"
Should that be
"Can´t be built next to another improvement of the same type..."?

Good phrasing. Your suggestion sounds more natural. I've made the commit.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Thanks, I was coding this in a rush.
(Had to finish it in one evening - currently my time for modding is really limited.)

@Kendon will most likely check and improve my texts anyways.
(His English is of course much better than mine since he is a native speaker.)

In that case we should strive to change all texts of events to american english after the first century in the game - just in case that he covertly tries to anchor the supremacy of the Queen´s English deep within the files to undermine the efforts of the colonies to create a new national identity...

 

[Kendon]

In that case we should strive to change all texts of events to american english after the first century in the game - just in case that he covertly tries to anchor the supremacy of the Queen´s English deep within the files to undermine the efforts of the colonies to create a new national identity...

There's really isn't any American English until Mark Twain writes "Huckleberry Finn" in 1884. American books before that generally sound like an English author talking about the United States.

Where I live we've been used to calling ourselves the colonies until quite recently which is partly why I feel an empathy for this game. We chop wood and carry water, sell raw materials to larger economies and send remittances back to the old country. I notice how often "We the People" portrays my modern world accurately. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

It's not entirely the Queen's English. We try to be mid-Atlantic. We also get some spelling from a large community that was here before the French Revolution though I don't hear any clamour to bring back Louis XVI. We have a few Indigenous words and I expect we'll add more in the near future. English changes constantly. That's a big reason why the grammar makes so little sense.

 

[Moandor]

Very interesting system you playing with here, spices up terrain improvements quite abit i have to say, but does this system just work for the city working the tile or are there plans for adjacency bonuses?

I would also opt in for one change or addition

Sawmills on forests - Increase Hammer Production
Charcoal burner on forest - Increase Tool Production?

This way you dedicate forest resources between tool production and hammer production
What then about the Ironmill you might say?

Rename it Mineral mill and have it increase ore yield instead? as its placed on flatlands ore production would kinda compete with Food production as the Windmill occupies Hills?

Just a few thoughts, but i look forward to what else you tinker up

 

[raystuttgart]

Very interesting system you playing with here, ...

Thanks.

... there plans for adjacency bonuses?

For a short time considered to make this use adjacency bonusses instead.

But:
1. It is difficult to visualize in UI
2. It is difficult to explain to new players.
3. It is difficult to implement it performantly
4. It is very difficult to teach it to AI.

However:
I have a technical concept for adjacency bonusses as well.
(It was just too big and risky to implement it now.

Summary:
I may use adjacency bonusses for another concept.
(I still need more time to refine it.)

Charcoal burner on forest

In my concept for more Yields I want to introduce Coal as well.
(Which will have a whole game concept attached.)

And I have ideas to integrate a "Furnace Building" in the City to consume coal and give a Bonus to Tools, Blades, Weapons and Cannons production.
Potentially a "Char Burner as Improvement" (on Forrests) might also be used to generate Coal.

In other words:
I need to figure out first more details of my "Coals Concept".
Before I did that, I do not want to touch / add anything related to Coal.

Summary:
Please give me some time to implement "Coal" itself first.
(After that I know more what may fit to it and in which ways.)

------

but i look forward to what else you tinker up

I have so many ideas (and often already existing concepts or even prototypes) but so little time to implement it properly ...

 

[Martin Peralta]

And I have ideas to integrate a "Furnace Building" in the City to consume coal and give a Bonus to Tools, Blades, Weapons and Cannons production.
Potentially a "Char Burner as Improvement" (on Forrests) might also be used to generate Coal.

My first thought was "Banished meets Colonization " ... Maybe its time to reverse-engineer Banished and make it more colonization like?

Guys, you are awesome - I am impressed by your dedication to WTP and by the time and effort that you give to this..Thank you very much!

I have zero programing knowledge, but reading your posts (which i do every day), makes me want to learn it.

 

[modmod]

Is the lumberjack camp improves into sawmill or am I confused?

 

[raystuttgart]

Is the lumberjack camp improves into sawmill or am I confused?

Not anymore.
I had explained it here:

Also, this existing Improvement has been heavily modified:
(It is not an "Upgrade" anymore, but an Improvement of its own and works totally different.)

 

[raystuttgart]

@Moandor
I had briefly talked to you about "Coal Furnace".

Just wanted to show you the graphics I have.
(I think they are from "Coal Miner's Mod.")

But again, we first need to have "Coal" itself in the mod.
Once that Yield / Bonus is there, we know more what we can do with it.

There is currently no effort to invest here though.
(Let us go step by step - and just invest effort when we really plan do do something.)

Level 1:
(This here fits the theme of our mod just perfect. )

Level 2:
(This here may be a bit too modern for our mod. )

 

[Martin Peralta]

Looks amazing! Great work! And i agree... level 2 looks pretty advanced.. 1800's at least.. IMHO, LVL 1 should be the LVL 2 one.. and instead of LVL1, it should be some basic coal pit..

 

[Moandor]

Both assets look amazing that's for sure. The level 2 is as you say abit too modern but its not the only problem with the asset, its ideally a steam mill (concentrated boilers at one end of the structure and mechanical power is transferred on belts through the building) so not quite representative.

Charcoal kilns is actually quite underwhelming as its usually just a pile of logs covered with dirt and "burning", these structures where simple and easy to build and usually situated very close to the source of the wood used in the burning as transporting stuff way back when wasn't so easy so products would be produced or refined on site.
In a comparison a large foundry operation here in Norway in 1730s (comparable to same time in the well established colonies) would require 1500 kilns worth of charcoal divided between 300 kilns in the area.
Also the just before we thing everything back then was small scale, the mines of Potosi (origin of the Spanish treasure fleet, pieces of eight ect) had some 15 000 small bloomeries dotted along the mountainside to extract silver from the mines.

In the link here I've included some 1870s charcoal kilns and it would actually represent the apex of complexity to such a simple industry as with the industrialization and using fossil coal to produce coke and coal gas ect



Should be noted that Charcoal and Fossil coal is two very different products to a blacksmith or a foundry worker, infact what trees the charcoal is made of is also of quite significance depending on what you will use it on.

Do pardon my rant here but this is a subject close to my heart, and i would love to see this portrayed as accurate as possible so if you need a second brain to bounce ideas off just to yell out

All in all tho i doubt the average player would dive too deep into it, I've always loved the way Civ games teach you so having the game actually teach the player stuff about these things through assets and colopedia entries so having it as authentic as possible is just a win win situation in my opinion.

 

[Nightinggale]

While I like the concept I wonder how this will affect games with one plot radius. With 24 available plots, using one for this concept is less of an issue than if the colony only has 8 plots available. It's not a concept killing issue, but still something to consider.

For the time being I think we should ignore the radius balance issue and then deal with it later if it turns out to be a real issue. Worst case scenario is that it's game breaking for 1 plot radius games, in which case we can add "2 plot radius only" in improvement xml.

Alternatively we can add a CivEffect, which is given to all when using 1 plot radius. This can then be used to disable contents or alter values if needed. It's not like we lack options.

 

[raystuttgart]

While I like the concept I wonder how this will affect games with one plot radius.

Most likely like this:

• From Mid-Game on: In 2-Plot-City-Radius you will find "Support Improvements" in almost every City (common, since most Cities self supply)
  
• From Mid-Game on: In 1-Plot-City-Radius you will find "Support Improvements" in maybe only 1 out of 5 Cities (quite rare, only in specialized Cities)

Already now 1-Plot-City-Radius forces players to much more specialize their cities. (2-Plot-City-Radius are often self supplying.)
With "Support Improvements" that idea is only strengthend. (Since high specialization is rewarded by this feature.)

-----------

Summary:

I see no problem there since it is just about how often will you build them.
("Health", "Happiness", "Culture" ... are much more impacted by "City Radius" decision.)

It allows people to simply have a differerent play style.
("Many small specialized Cities" vs. "Fewer and bigger self supplying Cities")

2-Plot-City-Radius and 1-Plot-City-Radius are already different play styles.
And sure, features like these will make differences even more obvious.
(Just like "Culture", "Happiness", "Health", ... also have a totally different impact on the 2 game-styles.)

-----------

Let us not declare "differerent play styles" as a problem.
Let us continue to see it as a chance.

 

[bordar]

Hi. Can you add a similar improvements to storage capacity of a city - warehouse outside a city that improve a max storage
Thanks you!

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Hi. Can you add a similar improvements to storage capacity of a city - warehouse outside a city that improve a max storage
Thanks you!

If so, then the goods stored in that warehouse would need to be "accesible" by foreign invaders or raiding natives. Storing outside the citywalls is not as safe as within.

 

[raystuttgart]

Storing outside the citywalls is not as safe as within.

I am also not really a fan of having "storage outside the city fortifications" considering immersion.
Also I explicitly wanted to keep storage a bit scarce so it is a bit more challenging to manage it.

 

[Nightinggale]

Storing outside the citywalls is not as safe as within.

That's what I was thinking as well. Also being me I instantly started wondering about how to get it working and I have come up with some edge cases, which aren't trivial to get bug free. I think this proposal is pretty much dead by now.

I will however say I like the thinking in terms of challenging the status quo and propose new concepts. That's how new good concepts are born. Just be aware that it might be rejected as that happens once in a while to all of us. Yes modders included.