Wonder Ideas for C2C

[Hydromancerx]

@Vokarya

Every time you post "Skeleton Wonder" I keep thinking your doing the crypt with the skeletons.

 

[Vokarya]

@Vokarya

Every time you post "Skeleton Wonder" I keep thinking your doing the crypt with the skeletons.

That's later. If I can figure out a good hook. I'm calling them "Skeleton Wonders" because I have a base with everything needed to get the Wonder in question to work with the game (in terms of base cost, requirements, no XML errors, etc.) but there's some key ability that needs to be fleshed out.

Oddly enough, Sedlec Ossuary and company are looking like they will NOT be skeleton wonders because they will have Python effects in the background that will be the primary effect. I think if I include a small XML effect, that will handle the AI issue of not being able to evaluate them; although giving them a non-zero <Asset> value seems to do the trick. I'll be thinking about those Wonders and some others suggested once I have all my current ideas committed to this thread and on the SVN.

 

[LumenAngel]

• Create a Culture (Ellis Island) building and redefine all buildings that use Culture to use either Culture (X) or Culture (Ellis Island) -- not very elegant
• Redefine all Culture (X) buildings [provided by Native Culture (X)] as resources instead of buildings

• Change Culture to be religion or corporation-like and spread more realisticly

^^

 

[Thunderbrd]

• Change Culture to be religion or corporation-like and spread more realisticly

^^

I've a pretty extensive plan to use the Property System for Culture spread values that so far is slated for full proposal to the site and ensuing development after the combat mod has been fleshed out and a number of other requests in between have been tackled.

Its far enough out though that whatever Vokarya does here doesn't require any discussion on those plans since I'll try to work whatever designs take place here into the fabric of that system too.

 

[Vokarya]

Here's a rarity: a new Prehistoric Wonder. Hill of Tara can be built once you have Chiefdom and Megalith Construction and have a Hill near your city.

View attachment 333300View attachment 333301

What's missing:

• +1 happiness in all cities with State Religion

Hill of Tara is supposed to have two levels of effect. At first, it serves as a ritual site commemorating your chiefship. So you get a free Chief's Hut in every city. Since you may not have been able to found a religion when this becomes available, I don't require a State Religion.

Once you get a State Religion, the priests of the religion take over the rituals, increasing your happiness from your state religion. This is the same mechanic that I want to use on Aachen Cathedral.

Then, as you shift to a more sophisticated form of government, you need a different way to assert your authority (the Chief's Huts go away). You can lose the Hill entirely by switching to a government from the people (Republic) or advancing technologically to the point where the rituals are no longer important to your people (Heraldry tech, matching when Chief's Hut goes technologically obsolete).

So that's what I have in mind, but I could take other suggestions.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Neat!

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Vokarya

Back in RoM/AND there was a National Wonder called the "World's Fair". It could not be built but was triggered once the year reached 1851 AD. It would spawn in random cities that were size 10 or larger. Every third turn it would change its location to a new city.

Here is a picture and mod files for it. Could you possibly bring back this cool Wonder?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I also liked the old olympics that moved about too... whatever happened to that?

BTW... love that idea on the mound. At some point soon I'll go through here and try to generate a list of all the tags you're looking for and see if I can't help you to get those in place.

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Thunderbrd

Yeah I liked the Olympics too. I think that was done through a special event or something. Note that there were 2 types of Olympics, the Ancient one (which we still have) and the Modern Olympics (which we don't have) that moved around in a similar way. Here is a picture of it.

 

[Thunderbrd]

The production penalties for both of them are waaaaaay too intense! Even if they DO move about.

I'd suggest a global -5% penalty (it only happens for so much time during the year and when it does it still doesn't make EVERYTHING come to a screaming halt.) It also impacts just about the whole nation. Perhaps another -20% penalty for the hosting city or something as well since a lot of efforts are going towards the games there. But the way the penalties are now I'd be way too reluctant to ever want to build and initiate the games.

 

[Nimek]

Why they (olympics) cant simply cost a lot of (like in reality is) instead of ???

 

[LumenAngel]

While you build all tour temporary stadium, house and all, you dont build anything ^^

 

[ls612]

@Thunderbrd

Yeah I liked the Olympics too. I think that was done through a special event or something. Note that there were 2 types of Olympics, the Ancient one (which we still have) and the Modern Olympics (which we don't have) that moved around in a similar way. Here is a picture of it.

Well, leaving aside the fact we didn't add the Olympics during the Olympics, I would like this to be added. At least then it will be there for Sochi.

@Vokarya

Back in RoM/AND there was a National Wonder called the "World's Fair". It could not be built but was triggered once the year reached 1851 AD. It would spawn in random cities that were size 10 or larger. Every third turn it would change its location to a new city.

Here is a picture and mod files for it. Could you possibly bring back this cool Wonder?

I don't think that the construction condition should be hardcoded by date, it should be by tech, IE the first person to reach Tech X (Industrialism?) gets this Wonder to start, and it can jump among all players that have researched Tech X. That would be IMO more balanced and a better implementation. Also, the time intervals it jumps on should be based on what gamespeed you're playing.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

It was the new Olympics that moved about not the ancient one.

 

[Vokarya]

One gift from the combat mod that has as of yet gone unmentioned.
use as:

<UnitCombatProductionCostModifiers>
          <UnitCombatProductionCost>UNITCOMBAT_MELEE</UnitCombatProductionCost>
          <iUnitCombatProductionCostModifier>5</iUnitCombatProductionCostModifier>
</UnitCombatProductionCostModifiers>

Please refer to the schema to find the proper placement order slot:

		<element type="TechCommerceChanges" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="TechYieldChanges" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="TechSpecialistChanges" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="TechCommerceModifiers" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="TechYieldModifiers" minOccurs="0"/>
		<!-- Technology Affected Buildings: END -->
		<element type="bDCMNukesOkay" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iDCMAirbombMission" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="PropertyManipulators" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="GlobalBuildingExtraCommerces" minOccurs="0"/>
		<!-- TB Combat Mods begin -->
		<element type="iAidRate" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iTradeCommunicability" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iFrontSupportPercentModifier" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iShortRangeSupportPercentModifier" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iMediumRangeSupportPercentModifier" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iLongRangeSupportPercentModifier" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="iFlankSupportPercentModifier" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="FreePromoTypes" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="DiseaseTypes" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="UnitCombatRetrainTypes" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="UnitCombatRepelModifiers" minOccurs="0"/>
		<element type="UnitCombatProductionCostModifiers" minOccurs="0"/>

OK, tried it out. It works, but I have a minor issue with the wording of the ability. The Civilopedia for this reads -50% discount to Missionaries Production Cost. The way it's worded for UnitDomain types (see Venetian Arsenal) is Builds <UnitType> +<amount>% Faster. Can we be consistent with this?

Also, I think you got your signs reversed somewhere. A number greater than zero should increase production, and a number less than zero should reduce it. I can see it going either way, but I think having the positive numbers be the bonus would be more intuitive for modders.

View attachment 333380View attachment 333381

 

[Vokarya]

I don't think that the construction condition should be hardcoded by date, it should be by tech, IE the first person to reach Tech X (Industrialism?) gets this Wonder to start, and it can jump among all players that have researched Tech X. That would be IMO more balanced and a better implementation. Also, the time intervals it jumps on should be based on what gamespeed you're playing.

I'll be looking at this when I get a chance. I definitely think Modern Games/World's Fair has to be keyed to a tech, but I'm not sure about making it auto-build. I think it might be better to have a player choose to build it, and then it starts jumping around once someone puts in the effort to build it.

 

[Thunderbrd]

OK, tried it out. It works, but I have a minor issue with the wording of the ability. The Civilopedia for this reads -50% discount to Missionaries Production Cost. The way it's worded for UnitDomain types (see Venetian Arsenal) is Builds <UnitType> +<amount>% Faster. Can we be consistent with this?

Also, I think you got your signs reversed somewhere. A number greater than zero should increase production, and a number less than zero should reduce it. I can see it going either way, but I think having the positive numbers be the bonus would be more intuitive for modders.

Hmm. At first I was going to hop all over this and take your advice/request and run with it right away. However, on some thought I noticed a few things.

First of all, the wording is different because the effect is technically different. A % discount to COST is not the same as constructing a % faster. The difference is that in the first example, you're decreasing the effective build cost itself. The second is a modifier to your production while your city is working that particular selection. The math is subtly different in that in the second case it may be interacting with other modifiers and the % modifiers total rather than increasing the overall sum total of all modifiers except this one by the % noted.

Therefore, in this case, the modifier I gave unit combats here is actually more... erm... powerful. Because its adjusting the ACTUAL build cost of the unit itself and is not subject to any potential blending in with other modifiers and actually represents something along the lines of adding the modifier at the end as in the above case.

To change the text to word differently might still be in order if we found the same effect regarding another tag and found the wording different there. But since there IS a difference, however minor, between the two effects, it really should NOT be changed so that the player can note that difference.

However, you've given me cause to want to read back through the actual programming to make sure its plugging in the way I think it is... lol. If its actually working the other way, as you've suggested, then yes, it should be changed to reflect.

 

[Hydromancerx]

@Vokarya

I just added an "Animal Race Track" as a new building. I was wondering if you could possibly make a related wonder that required them such as the "Kentucky Derby" or something like that.

 

[Hydromancerx]

It was the new Olympics that moved about not the ancient one.

That's what I said. The Modern Olympics moved from city to city.

 

[AIAndy]

Hmm. At first I was going to hop all over this and take your advice/request and run with it right away. However, on some thought I noticed a few things.

First of all, the wording is different because the effect is technically different. A % discount to COST is not the same as constructing a % faster. The difference is that in the first example, you're decreasing the effective build cost itself. The second is a modifier to your production while your city is working that particular selection. The math is subtly different in that in the second case it may be interacting with other modifiers and the % modifiers total rather than increasing the overall sum total of all modifiers except this one by the % noted.

Therefore, in this case, the modifier I gave unit combats here is actually more... erm... powerful. Because its adjusting the ACTUAL build cost of the unit itself and is not subject to any potential blending in with other modifiers and actually represents something along the lines of adding the modifier at the end as in the above case.

To change the text to word differently might still be in order if we found the same effect regarding another tag and found the wording different there. But since there IS a difference, however minor, between the two effects, it really should NOT be changed so that the player can note that difference.

However, you've given me cause to want to read back through the actual programming to make sure its plugging in the way I think it is... lol. If its actually working the other way, as you've suggested, then yes, it should be changed to reflect.

I suggest only using the increased production for X mechanic instead of decreased cost for X. The first gives diminishing returns, which is a good stacking mechanic, the second (if it stacks additively) has increasing returns which can even result in negative costs.