Workers

[typopanther]

Interestingly enough, we've had some discussion on that lately where I proposed that its possible that the new world lagged as a very result of having this very deficiency. I'm thinking this is pretty well appropriate as a challenge for the new world civs.

That does actually make sense, but if we already have megafauna domestication as a possibility, shouldn't there be one which the new world civs can utilize? That way of someone is playing with the alt-timeline stuff off it can remain a challenge.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I thought TB was working on that.

I will if needbe but then again, I thought ls612 was currently trying to sort that out...

I'm in the middle of some trait tags at the moment but if he's stuck or wasn't working on them to begin with then I'll be more than happy to get right on this after the current tag set I'm working on is completed. I would think these would be a weekend or less of effort to setup.

 

[ls612]

I thought TB was working on that.

Yeah, that was why I'm making the new terrain work tags. Once I get those Improvement based specialization should be easy.

 

[strategyonly]

So are anyTIME? i can get a captive??

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

the chance of getting a captive depends on your civics and your opponents civics. If they are a barbarian you have a greater chance. And yes, currently there is always a chance.

 

[Thunderbrd]

the chance of getting a captive depends on your civics and your opponents civics.

Would you like me to include a civic tag that is totaled into the modifier being discussed in the other thread? This would require the base chance to be derived a little differently but could be more useful for fine tuning via xml rather than having to do so in the python you're working out.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Would you like me to include a civic tag that is totaled into the modifier being discussed in the other thread? This would require the base chance to be derived a little differently but could be more useful for fine tuning via xml rather than having to do so in the python you're working out.

It should be the way to go in the future but you need two figures (one due to you having the civic and one for the nation of the unit you have attacked) and I am still considering if military units may sometimes defect instead of being captured.

 

[Thunderbrd]

It should be the way to go in the future but you need two figures (one due to you having the civic and one for the nation of the unit you have attacked) and I am still considering if military units may sometimes defect instead of being captured.

I have a concept as to how the defection could be worked out down the road perhaps. But are you saying that perhaps units should have a 'resist capture' ability that is equally influenced by the threatened unit's leader's traits and civics (as well as some of its own ability perhaps which may play nicely into a moral mechanism?)

If that's what you're getting at, that sounds awesome to me! Thus you have an opposing value.

Out of curiosity, what is the current mathematical formula on this at this time?

 

[Hydromancerx]

It should be the way to go in the future but you need two figures (one due to you having the civic and one for the nation of the unit you have attacked) and I am still considering if military units may sometimes defect instead of being captured.

That reminds me of the Age of Empires Priest unit that could convert units. Perhaps we should have some sort of War Priest unit that can convert units to change sides.


Link to video.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Or a Great Commander ability to enhance the likelihood of the units in the stack to capture or resist capture

The War Priest could be a promotion line accessed by the unit having the same religious affiliation as the current State Religion (for now this would mean having a Religious Prereq plus the Promo associated with the current State Religion if there is one for that Religion...)

 

[Hydromancerx]

However its implemented I always missed that AOE feature in Civ.

 

[strategyonly]

A couple of TXT errors, i didnt see in the GameTxt area??

 

[Thunderbrd]

Aren't those the ones DH said he was having trouble with?

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

The second one is. The first is something else again.

 

[Hydromancerx]

Well it seems like all the Slave/Captured Units work tasks are missing text.

 

[ls612]

As I posted in the SVN thread we now have tags (for promotions only, I have no desire to set it up for units as well) that allow the work rate of workers to be changed by the terrain or feature they are on. So just a heads up I'll be making those promotions sometime soon.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Out of curiosity... how did you set up a tag for promos without setting up one for units? I always found it was easiest if there was a base xml tag established for the units first. (Now I'm curious to see how this was done )

 

[ls612]

Out of curiosity... how did you set up a tag for promos without setting up one for units? I always found it was easiest if there was a base xml tag established for the units first. (Now I'm curious to see how this was done )

Because I set it up without understanding fully how to do it for both. So the promo code is a copy-paste of the unit stuff, which should work fine (I did set it up in processpromotion same as everything else), but I really don't want to go back and add in unit functionality underneath what is there now.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Well... as I said, I'll take a look at how you've done it. Please don't be offended if I edit it some - just take it as a bit of training. It's very easy to setup - in fact easier to setup a base unit tag then adjust the unit ability by the promotion. In fact, its funny because you kinda have to at least establish a unit ability to modify it by the promotion in the first place so not making a unit tag so that its founding value can come from the base unit definition is like amputating a step that you have to make 75% of either way.

I'll show you what I mean in code once I get a chance to review your work. I'm updating now since I reached a juncture that would allow it to blend in with what I've done so far. So I should be able to address this today.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sorry for the double post but I felt it was somewhat warranted...

Ok, I've reviewed your programming on this ls612 and its really not badly done at all. You did a lot right. The programming appears rather solid to me. (You overlooked any AI and text display on them though... two very critical steps.)

However, given that we have the goal of giving differing unit types (differences in animal assistance so to speak) differing base abilities on these, allow me to tweak to show you how you'd set it up like that.

But I must admit, you did well at generating a mechanism that bypasses the need for a base unit defining tag at all. And I can understand why you may have felt intimidated by this second step - because you're working with an array and arrays are kinda freaky at first, particularly trying to blend their values in elsewhere.

I'm in the process of generating some unit tags myself today so it harmonizes well with what I'm doing. Once committed you'll be able to see the adjusted method.

EDIT: Hey... um... where's the tags in the Unitschema(s)? I looked in the main schema and couldn't find them nor in yours under your promotions module. Have you used the tags anywhere yet?