SIMPLE and EASY Ideas for the Patches

[padillah]

Originally posted by Adagio
...if I see the above I can tell how many civs there are (at least if there's less than 7)
I want it to show:

1) Henry the Greatest
2) Catherine the Mediocre
3) Montezuma the Not So Good

Ah, good point.

The last time I activated the "show enemy moves" I had to wait a long time between the turns because I was shown every move within visibility... and I wasn't even at war with anyone

Hmm, is that a bug or is there some other method it uses to determine who's an enemy and who's friendly. Open Borders? That'd be annoying. Peace Treaties? Understandable but you can't establish them until after discovering {some-tech-I-can't-remember-off-the-top-of-my-head} so that wouldn't help for the first few turns at least. And I don't like Peace Treaties, I can't break them whenever I want... Hey, yeah.
[220] Be able to break a Peace Treaty at any time. (Fine, give me -12 relations with them, I'm more than likely wiping them from the face of the map anyway)

Tom P.

[TheHateMale]

You shouldn't have seen all the moves if you weren't at war and only had 'Show enemy moves' on. Is it possible you had 'Show friendly moves' activated as well?

---

Being able to break a peace treaty at any time kind of removes the point of them. As it is, you only need to wait 10 turns (I think) to redeclare.

The only reason I can think of that you'd want to redeclare war that quickly is if you're caught unaware and have your units on the wrong side of your country/you don't have enough of a military and need the AI to leave you alone long enough to build up for war. This is exploiting the AI though, and would be better achieved by just reloading a save from 5-10 turns earlier and setting your units/production up to whatever's necessary.

[padillah]

Originally posted by TheHateMale
You shouldn't have seen all the moves if you weren't at war and only had 'Show enemy moves' on. Is it possible you had 'Show friendly moves' activated as well?

---

Being able to break a peace treaty at any time kind of removes the point of them. As it is, you only need to wait 10 turns (I think) to redeclare.

The only reason I can think of that you'd want to redeclare war that quickly is if you're caught unaware and have your units on the wrong side of your country/you don't have enough of a military and need the AI to leave you alone long enough to build up for war. This is exploiting the AI though, and would be better achieved by just reloading a save from 5-10 turns earlier and setting your units/production up to whatever's necessary.

Argh, we're both thinking of Cease Fires, not Peace Treaties.

Peace Treaties can be canceled at any time and have no time limit.

Cease Fire agreements are established right after a war and last for 10 turns, as you said. My only regret is entering a CF under the impression I might loose and then finding out, a turn or two later, that I was wiping the floor with them and should continue to do so before they rebuild (the AI gets new units almost every turn it seems).

Tom P.

[TheHateMale]

Ah right. Well, cease fires *are* purely for re-arming.
Use the rest of the 10 turns to build lots of defenders and siege weapons, if you still have enough troops to beat them pretty hard.

The AI will conscript heavily when it's losing though - if Nationalism's available, you don't have much choice aside from reloading, or conscripting yourself and using sheer weight of numbers. If they're weakened, it should also be easier to get an AI to join the war with you. They do like their easy pickin's.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by TheHateMale
You shouldn't have seen all the moves if you weren't at war and only had 'Show enemy moves' on. Is it possible you had 'Show friendly moves' activated as well?

Maybe my memory fails, I only tried it in the very beginning, so it is possible that I had 'show friendly movies' activated as well...
I'll try again

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Adagio
I want it to show:

1) Henry the Greatest
2) Catherine the Mediocre
3) Montezuma the Not So Good

Wouldn't you have to change the way the ranking adjectives are applied? Otherwise those could give you an idea how many civs there are.

[DrSpike]

Not if the ratings applied to the known civs.

[Lord Avalon]

Well, that's my point: the ratings for civs you've met would potentially be different from ratings of all civs. So you'd have to run the rating algorithm for just all known civs, as opposed to running it for all civs and then taking out the ones you haven't run into.

[DrSpike]

In that case I agree. Your adjective should be mediocre or whatever if you are the third best out of all the 3 known civs and 3rd best out of all 7 civs.

But it doesn't really matter much.

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Lord Avalon
Well, that's my point: the ratings for civs you've met would potentially be different from ratings of all civs. So you'd have to run the rating algorithm for just all known civs, as opposed to running it for all civs and then taking out the ones you haven't run into.

How would it be different with all civs compared to just the civs you've met?

If we say we have 5 civs, 3 of them met, the other 2 are unknown. How it is now when showing the 'most advanced' it writes this:

1. Adagio the awsome!!!
2. Unknown civ
3. Montezuma the not so awsome
4. Unknown civ
5. Washington the not so good

Then it would always be me who is number one, while Montezume will always be below me, but still higher than Washington, making him number 2, while Washington will be the one at the bottom, making him number 3... it's not like Washington gets more techs when we're only 3, compared to when we're 5

[ugignadl]

I don't think it's that big of a deal to know the number of civs anyway. That's usually pre-match information. The relative standings is also useful, but not terribly so. Perhaps we should trim this thread to the really good suggestions.

[Adagio]

Would you like to play the game, where you see the whole map before the game starts? It's just about the same as with the number of Civs... it spoils the suprise in the game...

[ugignadl]

No, it isn't. As I said, most of the time the number of civs is known before the match. Unlike the exact layout of the map. What a ridiculous analogy.

[Adagio]

Ehmmm... try to read all my posts about this subject before you start talking about it. You obviously missed something

[Adagio]

Originally posted by ugignadl
No, it isn't. As I said, most of the time the number of civs is known before the match. Unlike the exact layout of the map. What a ridiculous analogy.

To make it easier for you:

I have mentioned before that it should be possible to have a random number of enemy civs, therefore you wont know how many enemies you have
And because of this, it's the same as with the layout of the map
Knowing how many civs you're up against would spoil the suprise of discovering in the same was as if you knew the layout of the map