Some thoughts about buildings.

[Ketzerfreund]

Greetings,

there are some things I've wondered about the buildings.

1.) On some bulding times issues:

I'll take the equestrians for an example, using the building's names found in export_descr_buildings.txt.

Are the knights_stables, barons_stables etc. not just mere extensions to the basic stables? Then why do they take longer to build?

One thing I'm experimenting on right now is a different paradigm to the way the building times are handled.
The longest building times in my modified version of TLR are those for the basic recruitment buildings (and some others too, the ports, merchant wharfs for example).

I use 8 turns for the stables and bowyer and 4 turns for the next level of those buildings, plus one turn for every next level.
That makes:

stables - 8 turns.
knights_stables - 4 turns.
barons_stables - 5 turns.
earls_stables - 6 turns.
etc.

Same for the bowyers, barracks, ports etc.

For the churches (beginning at 2 turns), castles and city expansions it's still vice versa, of course.
I have equalised the building times for all levels of the taverns (all levels need 4 turns), markets (all need 6 turns) and some others.

All in all I have shortened the building times (the smallest church/chapel just needing 2 turns), while spreading the overall scale out a lot. The cathedral still needs a loooong time to be completed. Farm improvements also still take their time, they are for the whole province, after all.
Building times are far less relevant for the cities' growth than the population growths in my opinion. It might be a good idea to increase the population needed for reaching the next level of a settlement - thus the experience levels of the governors are far more important, since I'd refuse to lower squalor.
Lowering the base population growths might also be an option to not make book printing avaliable in the 12th century already.

You won't be able to build in all your settlements and recruit units all the time with even the 5000 crowns I've given the king's purses of every faction.
Those 5000 crowns are also relevant for something else I'll mention later in this post.

I have made the lowest governing experience level beginning at only -1 squalor, however. That does fit better into this whole picture when a lot of squalor is to be expected when the settlements reach the level of cities & above.

2.) On the rebel's capabilities to construct certain buildings:

I've noticed in export_descr_buildings.txt only very few buildings can be built by rebels.
What happens if I allow markets, ports etc. to be built by rebels?
At least it doesn't produce errors - the game runs.
One thing I just wonder about: Will the rebels build the eastern versions of buildings in North European settlements etc.?
Will they build islamic temples in catholic regions?
Or will the buildings according to the culture sphere the settlement belongs to be built? I'm not far enough in the game I'm testing this with to find out, yet.
Maybe someone of you has some insight on this already.
I would like to make the rebels able to construct more buildings to make them more believable as "minor kingdoms".
Plus, it might make the rebels more able to earn their own money.

3.) On trade buildings:

As I've mentioned in another thread, markets and merchant's wharfs give you a fixed income.
That's bollocks (a word I've learnt from Blackadder ).
I want provinces to be of differing values regarding trade.
Thus I have put the trade fleets back for the wharfs and I've put the trade base income boni for markets, ports and merchant's wharfs back in and taken out those fixed income levels.
However, that might reslut in a major hit to the economies - that's also why I have increased the king's purse of all factions to 5000 crowns.
I'll still have to see how good that will work...
I'm still alive as the HRE, so, it doesn't hurt that much.
If the hit to everyone's income will be too high, I'll rather resort to increase the trade base income boni of markets, ports/wharfs and roads than putting the fixed incomes back in.
I want to see those trade route lines with all their little ships travelling on them again...


Opinions, anyone?

-Der Ketzerfreund.

[Rex Inanimatus]

Nice thinking though :

issue one: I believe it is Torn's idea to progress slowly and only get better units after some time.

second issue: Torn is planning for independent kingdoms instead of rebels and yes I hope this will involve reinforcemets for their amries.

third issue: the human player is so much better in exploiting the trade values than the AI, That's why I feel Torn has moved towards an agricultural economy to decrease the value between costal and non costal areas.

Of coarse These are my personal believes . I have no hard prove of it. Though played many mods I usually see a pattern how the main modder want see it's mod revolving

[Ketzerfreund]

1.) Hmmm... wait a second.

<browses export_descr_buildings.txt once again>

Ah, here we are:

stables requires factions { northern_european, middle_eastern, eastern_european, greek, southern_european, slave, } and building_present_min_level castle_barracks mustering_hall or building_present_min_level barracks town_guard

See the prerequisites for the stables?

knights_stables requires factions { northern_european, middle_eastern, eastern_european, greek, southern_european, slave, } and building_present_min_level castle_barracks garrison_quarters or building_present_min_level barracks city_watch

And see how the knights_stables need also the next level of the barracks?
Shouldn't that suffice?
The barracks themselves don't have any prerequisites including other buildings; perhaps I should include one settlement level for every two barracks levels as one...
I'll look out for how my changes result in the availability of the better unit types during the course of the game. Thanks for pointing that out.

2.) The list of factions is full - therefore technically for the game rebels will always stay rebels. The possibilities of changes I'm looking for concern trade buildings and unit recruitment buildings; if possible even religious buildings (as I mentioned, I wouldn't like to see catholic churches built by rebels in the middle of islamic lands).
I don't know anything about how to influence the unit recruitment of the rebels; the availabilities of buildings is just one aspect among many, I suppose.
The availability of stables, barracks and the like might influence the variety of rebel units, however.

3.) Hmmm... do you think the ai will build markets and ports more often with the fixed income boni than with trade fleets/trade base income boni?
The ai will have to construct these buildings first before making any money, anyway.
Perhaps even the character traits of a faction ("balanced", "religious" etc.) influence inhowfar the ai distinguishes between coastal and inland provinces.
Maybe we could try giving all factions the "trader" trait...
[Edit:]Or maybe the "sailor" trait... See this list...
If the ai is too stupid to realise that working towards an income it can live off is a good thing, whichever character it has, then let's push it towards doing so.
Thanks again for pointing that out; the ai's distinction between coastal and inland provinces is something I haven't thought of.

To me making all provinces worth the same just doesn't feel right...
I'll fathom all options available that might allow making some provinces more valuable than others.


If my changes should collide with what Torn has in mind, I can still post them as user's contributions optional for the players. But first I have to make sure they work at all, of course.
All in all, different people exploring different concepts at the same time can't be a bad thing for the sake of winning insight.
That's for what we talk about these things on this forum, after all.

-Der Ketzerfreund.