Waaaaaaa...Back to the Cradle

[stankarp]

Found the revolt % chance. It is in risks.txt.

[hexagonian]

I think you mean diffDB.txt

[Ekmek]

does anyone have a list of what each improvement frame equals? I was under the impression that a lot were building graphics but as I play cradle my worker graphics are being used for placed ones is that right? (I'm using my new terrain graphics in a cradle game)

[stankarp]

Hi Hex,

Sorry, thats what I meant.

I was thinking about your idea of extra corruption for overunning the cap rather than empire breaking up. A compromise effect can be achieved by lowering the revolt level and, maybe, the riot under happiness level.

The net effect would be larger, but more unproductive empires with occassional riots but rare revolts. The same effect.

[hexagonian]

Well, I did monitor the AI during the course of my last game, and other than the Roman civ exceeding the Monarchy cap, the AI did not seem to be unduly hampered by the cap. In fact, the AI usually was keeping its happiness in the 76-78 range. It would occasionally have the stray city in riot.

Of course, I did not monitor it so much in the early game, but I wasn't too concerned by it because the AI was still miles ahead of me...

So the trick might be to try to nail down the cap numbers based on playtesting. The problem with that is that map settings are so varied that a separate cap might be needed for each general size setting.

Maybe a SLIC file could be created that either allows a AI civ to raze its smallest city if it exceeds its cap, or to stop building new cities if it is over it's cap. Any takers????

What I am trying to come up with is the incentive for a player to maintain a higher level of happiness rather than cutting it so close to (75). If the crime effect is too small, then the cap really does not stop him from expanding. In fact, the player will always be much better at circumventing the cap due to his ability to intelligently manage his entertainers and sliders.

Anyhow, I did some tweaking this past weekend and this is what I came up with...

I raised the crime settings for all of the governments to (2). This gives a baseline crime loss at (30%) at (75) happiness for everyone in the game. (I kept warmongor government types at (1.5) as a bonus for those governments - Dictatorship, Monarchy, Fascism)

I had to start out with a higher baseline because the click of happiness needed to be more drastic. And I had to do it for all the governments because of the fact that later in the game, I wanted crime reducer buildings to have more impact. Its not a priority if you have a crime rate of (5%) to reduce it down to (4%), but it is a little more important to go from (30%) to (24%)...

Still, I would of liked to have gone even higher, but a baseline of crime at (40-50%) would of been too much.

Each click of happiness moves the crime rate approximately (+2.5/-2.5%) So a (74) happiness will make the crime rate about (32.5%). Make happiness at (72) and you will lose (7.5%) to crime.

This is the one area I've been frustrated in - how to locate the means to adjust the crime rate AS YOU ADJUST YOUR HAPPINESS Its my holy grail for this adjustment.

I ended up dropping the riot rate from (40%) per click to (20%) per click. This means that you have a little more of a margin too.

The thing you have to remember is that in the current system, a city at (74) has a (40%) of becoming totally unproductive - at (73) that goes up to (80%). In my new setup, a (73) will net you a (40%) chance of going unproductive, but if it doesn't riot, it still produces at (-5%) from a (75).

And I believe that the riot may be recalculated on a turn-by-turn basis, though I'm not completely sure on this.

I believe that AI cities do not go into revolution because of the cap as much as they go into revolution because they vacate a slaveholding city. Nevertheless, I also reduced the revolution setting from (67) to (64).

[Peter Triggs]

Maybe a SLIC file could be created that either allows a AI civ to raze its smallest city if it exceeds its
cap, or to stop building new cities if it is over it's cap.

It's programmed so as not to do this. Here's how it decides when to build a settler:

sint32 max_cities =
     g_theGovernmentDB->Get(g_player[m_playerId]->GetGovernmentType())->GetTooManyCitiesThreshold();
sint32 num_cities = g_player[m_playerId]->GetNumCities();//how many cities it's got
sint32 needed_cities = (max_cities - num_cities);//so how many cities it wants to build

...

case BUILD_UNIT_LIST_SETTLER:
    Assert( strategy.GetSettlerUnitsCount() );
    strategy.GetSettlerUnitsCount(desired_count);
    //desired_count is the number in the SettlerUnitsCount field of the player's current strategy
    break;

...

case BUILD_UNIT_LIST_SETTLER:
    if (desired_count - m_currentUnitCount[best_unit_type] > 0)
    // here m_currentUnitCount[best_unit_type] is the number of settlers it's already got
    {
        m_buildUnitList[list_num].m_maximumCount = needed_cities;
    }
    else
    {
	m_buildUnitList[list_num].m_maximumCount = 0;
    }

Notice that desired_count effectively controls how fast the AI will expand by building new cities. If it's
set to 6, it means that it can have up to 6 settlers wandering around at the same time. It will always
build settlers (hence cities) up to the level of needed_cities and then stop when needed_cities =
max_cities.

I think that, probably, the AI is exceeding it's cap by capturing other cities. There's some SLIC in Call
to Conquest that will make an AI civ raze a city upon conquest if it's small or too far away from it's
borders. But this still won't necessarily stop it from exceeding it's TooManyCitiesThreshold.

[Martin Gühmann]

Or you just need to stop AI expansion:

Use this slic to asign the right startegy to the AI:

HandleEvent(ArmyClicked)'MG_Initialize2'pre{
	MGNumOfGovsInThisMod = 12; //In the default game.
	DisableTrigger('MG_FinishChangingOwner');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize2');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize3');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize4');
}

HandleEvent(CityClicked)'MG_Initialize3'pre{
	MGNumOfGovsInThisMod = 12; //In the default game.
	DisableTrigger('MG_FinishChangingOwner');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize2');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize3');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize4');
}

HandleEvent(MoveArmy)'MG_Initialize4'pre{
	MGNumOfGovsInThisMod = 12; //In the default game.
	DisableTrigger('MG_FinishChangingOwner');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize2');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize3');
	DisableTrigger('MG_Initialize4');
}

int_f MG_GetPlayerGovernment(int_t thePlayer){
	int_t i;
	int_t MGPlayer;
	MGPlayer = thePlayer;
	for(i = 0; i < MGNumOfGovsInThisMod; i = i+1){
		government[0] = i;
		if(PlayerWorkdayExp(MGPlayer) == GovernmentDB(government[0]).WorkdayExpectation
		&& PlayerWagesExp  (MGPlayer) == GovernmentDB(government[0]).WagesExpectation
		&& PlayerRationsExp(MGPlayer) == GovernmentDB(government[0]).RationsExpectation){
			return i;
		}
	}
	return -1;
}


HandleEvent(NextStrategicState)'MG_ChangeStrategies'pre{
	government[0] = MG_GetPlayerGovernment(player[0]);
	//If there are too many cities stop expansion
	if(GovernmentDB(government[0]).TooManyCitiesThreshold < player[0].cities){
		ConsiderStrategicState(player[0], 9999, StrategyDB(STRATEGY_TOO_MANY_CITIES));
		//Expansion should be stopped, so that the city cap is respected,
		//well if a city revolts there is no change but we shouldn't cause a
		//revolution.
		if(PlayerHasWonder(player[0],WonderDB(WONDER_EGALITARIAN_ACT))){
			ConsiderStrategicState(player[0], 9999, StrategyDB(STRATEGY_NO_REVOLUTON));
		}
	}
}

Now you just need to define the strategies STRATEGY_TOO_MANY_CITIES and STRATEGY_NO_REVOLUTON and another thing you have take care of is that the values of the combination for WorkdayExpectation, WagesExpectation and RationsExpectation are for each government unique. Well code that runs on a playtest version can of course be more simple.

-Martin

[Protra3211]

Have to try the crime rate change.

Seems you have found a way to stop the exploitment of using sliders to much. With the crime rate increase ,now you have to build more buildings if you want more production . gold or science.

Im thinking of using a in house rule before you can change to a new form of goverment. In the empire manager page (where the silders are) there is a Empire Happiness overall average. For example. You would have to maintain say a 80% happieness(or what ever you think is a good setting) for Democray if i wanted to go the next goverment. Just add all the numbers from each turn (some low some high) and divded to see how your average is.
I use this because it seems to easy to expand at the cost of the civilization your ruling. All production ,science and gold going to the maintaining of war. I dont think any modern form of goverment would allow that. and as you change goverments and expand it should only get harder. Building wonders and feats of wonder would help alot.

[Protra3211]

Just one last thing.

In the General/Help/Strategy section there is a thread titled Happiness. You should read this. Most conclude there is no strategy needed or point to keeping you civ happy.
What if there were elections in Ctp2? Dont think that could be moded in .

[EPW]

Originally posted by Protra3211
What if there were elections in Ctp2?

I'd be voted out in a second

[hexagonian]

Originally posted by Protra3211
Have to try the crime rate change.
Seems you have found a way to stop the exploitment of using sliders to much. With the crime rate increase, now you have to build more buildings if you want more production, gold or science.

Well in my current game, it has made a difference. The early game was more brutal in terms getting stuff built.
I missed out on a complete Spearman Militia > Hoplite Militia upgrade because crime ate away my gold.

Courthouses have became a must build. It has also changed my priorities in Wonders too. (I beelined to Code of Hammurabi instead of Pyramids)

I had also made some additional changes to the tile improvements. I made each of the earliest Tile Improvements gain only one type of benefit. So I have more of a either/or choice to make - in the past I was building Mines left and right. (for gold and production) I also had to create trade routes earlier to cover the loss of gold via crime and the lack of a Tile improvement that gave me two benefits.

Starting with the second tier, I made all of them 2 benefit, so there is still an either/or choice.
Farms - Food/Production
Mines - Production/Gold
Trade - Gold/Food
I'm not at that point in my game yet.

However, it seems that I am a little more competitive on the Power graph, though that may be a quirk in the game. (I may have to look at the Buildlists for the AI to make Courthouses more of a priority).

It does seem that there are fewer AI forces on the map, but I have been very vigilant in maintaining my borders, and I have a wide perimeter for my scouts, allowing ample time for me to gather my forces to meet them. And I have made an effort to not overreach onto land that I cannot defend - though I have a large buildup of enemy troops (including Legions) heading towards me on my northern front.

A couple of civs do have Legions and I am almost to Hypapists - which is about right, based on past games. I have delayed getting to Barracks because I want to make a beeeline through to Iron Working and I wanted to get gold supplies up for the upgrade sequence.

Originally posted by Protra3211
Im thinking of using a in house rule before you can change to a new form of goverment. In the empire manager page (where the silders are) there is a Empire Happiness overall average. For example. You would have to maintain say a 80% happieness(or what ever you think is a good setting) for Democray if i wanted to go the next goverment...

This is a nice rule!

[Winterheat]

I just finished a Cradle game and I have to admit that its a great improvement to the original game, making Cradle the best mod I played with (didn`t try Medmod yet). But there are 2 things I wanna ask:

1) For the guys I´m playing on MP it would be easier if all names and text is in german. So far I copied all the CRA* files from the english gamedata folder into the german gamedata folder and translated the CRA_gl_str file. As it works I think I´m on the right way. Do I just need to translate all these files or is there anything else I have to do?
Or maybe I`m lucky and somebody already made a german Cradle version?

2) Cradle runs fine at single player. Ifwe want to start a MP game the game wants to resync in the second round but the resync doesn`t go on, it just freezes at the beginning and I have to close the resync window, which also means game over. Any ideas on this?

[Maquiladora]

I was playing Cradle (1.30b normal game) this afternoon and noticed when you get a withdraw units agreement from an AI they get their units kicked automatically the turn after the agreement.

The problem is, when 2 or more units are stacked inside your borders, only one unit from their stack is kicked, is this intentional or a bug? Is it not possible to kick the whole stack?

Also is this same bug/design present in AoM?

Not sure if this is the right thread, but its the most up to date thread about Cradle and has pretty pictures in.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Winterheat
1) For the guys I´m playing on MP it would be easier if all names and text is in german. So far I copied all the CRA* files from the english gamedata folder into the german gamedata folder and translated the CRA_gl_str file. As it works I think I´m on the right way. Do I just need to translate all these files or is there anything else I have to do?

Just these files, obviously the Great Libary is a greater task. Maybe some sounds are missing: "Blood shall run!" for instance. But if you really need this I could give you these sounds from the German version of CTP1 assumed these sounds are from CTP1 and not selfmade.

Originally posted by Winterheat
Or maybe I`m lucky and somebody already made a german Cradle version?

As far as I know: No. And I should it know since I did the translation for CityMod1/2 and GoodMod (Actual for those it was the other way around at least partial) and ApolytonPack (but only because I had the most stuff ready).

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Also is this same bug/design present in AoM?

At least Stan was/is looking into it.

-Martin

[stankarp]

Re the withdraw thing in Cradle. AFAIK only one unit from an offending player is withdrawn once the agreement becomes active, which is 5 turns originally. I modified that to 3 turns for AOM.

I am testing a change to withdraw.slic suggested between Martin G and Fromafar, but of course, have to set up a withdraw agrement first to se if it works.

My hope is to have 3 ai units withdraw each turn.