Additional candidate files for the IGC mod

[Savant]

I would like to propose we expand the files to be edited as part of the base IGC mod to include some of the "cost" files. Specifically, I would like us to consider making changes to data in the building cost, land, and naval files.

These files are also general files and do not have the negative unintended consequences of editing monarchs. It would be an extension of the tax_stab file changes to include more "targeted" changes to national acquisitions of military assets. This of course could subsequently be extended to include other infrastructure building costs at a later date.

I think the immediate need is to edit these data in response to what is the most pervasive problem we observe in the game and that is Spain's dominance until end-game and Britain's continued struggle in late 1700's to be anything more than a collection of local pubs serving ales to the French, Spanish, Scots, and whoever else has a hankering for a pint.

There are three files that are the object of changes:

1. BuildingCosts.csv
   This file is the master file listing the specific nations and the corresponding "cost classes" for each. For example, if you open it you will see the following:
   
   ;Infantry;Cavalry;Artillery;Warship;Galley;Transports
   FRA;B;B;C;B;A;A
   SPA;A;A;A;A;A;A
   TUR;D;C;B;A;C;A
   ENG;A;A;B;C;-;B
   RUS;D;C;B;A;B;A
   POR;B;A;B;B;-;A
   VEN;A;A;B;B;C;B
   HOL;B;A;B;C;-;B
   HAB;B;B;C;A;-;A
   PRU;B;B;C;A;-;A
   SWE;B;A;C;B;B;A
   ADE;C;C;A;A;C;A
   ALD;C;C;A;A;C;A
   ARA;C;C;A;A;-;A
   AST;C;C;A;A;-;A
   
   Here, France has cost "B" for infantry and cavalry and cost "C" for artillery. The example generalizes to naval unit and other nations as well. Cost class "A" is highest and "D" is lowest.
   
2. landcosts.csv
   This file references specific lan unit classes to costs. As you can see, at Technology level "0" infantry classified as unit cost class "A" costs that nation 3 ducats per unit. The example generalizes across all units and technologies.
   
   Land unit cost;Infantry;;;Cavalry;;;Artillery;;
   Techcnology;A;B;C;A;B;C;A;B;C
   0;3;2;1;10;8;4;0;0;0
   1;3;2;1;10;8;4;40;30;20
   2;4;3;2;10;8;4;50;35;25
   3;6;5;4;18;15;7;50;35;30
   4;8;6;5;20;17;10;50;35;30
   5;8;6;5;20;17;14;55;37;32
   6;8;6;5;20;17;14;60;40;35
   7;10;8;7;20;17;14;60;40;35
   8;12;10;8;20;17;14;65;42;37
   9;15;13;10;25;20;18;70;43;39
   10;15;13;10;25;20;18;75;45;40
   
3. navalcosts.csv
   This file serves the same purpose as "landcost.csv" and the logic generalizes to it exactly as above.[/list=1]
   
   What I propose is that we develop a rational for assigning these costs. Cost "classes" as well as specific "ducat costs" could be edited to produce a Spain that may flouruish as she acquires colonies but as she develops higher technology (which is obviously correlated with game time) she has a harder time assembling overwhelming force. Similar changes could be made to other nations if the team so wishes. For starters, I propose we reserve cost class "A" for the Spanish when they achieve technology levels above 5 in the game. The cost classes of other nations could be reduced in a corresponding fashion and/or the specific costs for technology x cost class could be altered.
   
   Response?

 

[Savant]

hehehe..

You can see I already changed my costs for Spain to be "A" across the board. Your current file has a cost class of "B" for Spain for at least one of those unit types.

 

[State Machine]

For starters, I propose we reserve cost class "A" for the Spanish when they achieve technology levels above 5 in the game. The cost classes of other nations could be reduced in a corresponding fashion and/or the specific costs for technology x cost class could be altered.

Since the file is global, how does one influence changes over time?

 

[State Machine]

Also, I question, the consequences of the extreme economic tweaking of Real EU or the IGC 2.0 economic options.

My questioning is only because Laurent Favre and First Surprise have reported extensive test results of this type of tweaking, and not reported anomolies that distort relative tech advancement, whereas on the forum, I've seen one report of this. Is there a pattern, or an isolated event?

 

[Vandelay]

I usually tinker with the building cost file as well - some of the things I've tried:

In some of the IGC versions Russia was on steroids so I lowered their Land tech and raised their infantry cost one step. Historic rationale - while Russia fielded huge infantry forces, few were regulars until Peter the Great.

Raised the cost of Ottoman infantry one level, lowered cost of their cavalry one level. Ratianale - Janissaries maxed out at 20000 effectives, the rest were irregulars of lower military value. The turkish Sipahi cavalry was numerous and effective.

I also remove the ability for all Non-European countries to build Ships of the Line - AFAIK only Algiers and Ottomans wre able to build and maintain sailing-ship navies. Persia tried and failed, Chinas maritime hegemony was long gone.

The weaker nature of Indian Ocean sailing vessels is best simulated IMHO by galleys - thus I give Persia, China, Japan, Crimea, Georgia etc. the ability to build galleys.

/Vandelay

 

[Savant]

Good Q's State Machine

and I'm glad you are here. By combining tech levels 0-10 and the class costs (A-D) one can produce an interaction of sorts. That is, the expeense growth rate for units for class A units (and nations so designated) could increase at a geometric rate over time whereas the expense rate of say "C" units could increase at an additive rate over time. On a graph, the growth for unit A nations would be on a more quickly accelerating slope that actually is nonlinear and those for C units would be a steady climb on a more linear slope through time.

For example:

Say we have class A units cost 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 over 5 tech levels and class C units cost 3, 5, 8, 12, 20. The rate of accelerating cost per unit basis for class A designated nations is an increasing multiple of those for class C designated nations (by x 1.6-4.0). Over time, class A nations have to spend significantly more $ to maintain the same number of units.

Vandelay. Thanks for those suggestions! If nothing else I am going to do the same with those fleet capabilities. I was playing Ethiopia and building all these warships and thinking to myself.. this is not possible! Are there any other oddities that should be edited along those lines?

 

[Doomdark]

I understand your reasoning Savant, and it could surely be done... Have you tried it? What about the "D" level in BuildingCosts--it doesn't seem to exist in landcosts.

 

[unmerged(3310)]

How do you stop a country from building a certain type of ship?

 

[BiB]

Put a "-" instead of a letter in buildingcosts.csv, I woudl think.

 

[unmerged(1689)]

Originally posted by Vandelay
I usually tinker with the building cost file as well - some of the things I've tried:

I also remove the ability for all Non-European countries to build Ships of the Line - AFAIK only Algiers and Ottomans wre able to build and maintain sailing-ship navies. Persia tried and failed, Chinas maritime hegemony was long gone.

The weaker nature of Indian Ocean sailing vessels is best simulated IMHO by galleys - thus I give Persia, China, Japan, Crimea, Georgia etc. the ability to build galleys.

/Vandelay

Hey, I like that idea! Persia never could build a navy, and they easily can in EU. Portugal conquered Ormuz from them in 1515 and held it until 1622, when the British fleet agreed to help the Persians. This would be great for the IGC. I hate seeing the Georgians with conquests in Scandanavia... The only problem I can see is if a player wants to actually be that country. Should be a way around that.....

 

[Vandelay]

The only problem I can see is if a player wants to actually be that country. Should be a way around that.....

Wordpad...

In one fantasy campaign I played as the Jewish Republic of Salonika I initially made all military units extremeley expensive to reflect that at the time Jews would have no martial tradition and few mercenaries would serve a Jewish state.
After 100 years (c. 2 - 3 generations) I normalized the costs - by then a martial tradition should have been established.

So, if you play Ethiopia and by some weird turn of events conquer a European province you could have some rationale for enabling the warships in the BuildingCosts.csv.

Another change over time would be to allow cavalry in e.g Iroquis/ Inca/ Aztec armies, say 50 - 100 years post-european contact?

/Vandelay

 

[unmerged(2376)]

I have a question about the landcosts.csv file. The 'technology'
column ranges from 0 to 10. Since the actual tecnology levels go
much higher than 10 what happens when your technology level is
higher than the last row?

 

[Savant]

Great info and I am no expert, so all this is helpful

Doomie - No I haven't run any tests with new settings yet. This just occurred to me last night as I was watching the Spanish again conducting seiges on 4 different provinces owned by four different countries with huge stacks and it was 1780. By 1780, the Spanish should be spent in that they could barely hold their own much less aggressively expand as thgey were doing. And this happens virtually game after game unless someone plays France and aims at the Spanish deliberately.

I am going to change settings to make some runs however today and tonight. I think for starters I want to adopt Vandelay's suggestions as they are very keen and then edit the buildcost.csv file by itself before making additional changes to the landcost and navalcost files. BTW, I tend to "tweak" and not make wholesale massive changes at once, so my settings will likely be conservative and then get greater as I get a better feel for what happens. I also aim to make the costs "historical" so that for instance, Portugal still has to pay a premium for land forces as that country simply didn't have the population to support huge armies without significant infrastructure expense. I suppose the key is to keep in mind that the changes should be related to factors other than just controlling the Spanish.

Yes, the naval cost stops at level "C" I think. So there is less that could be done there but of course the actual ducat costs associated with the class levels can also be changed to produce a good spread.

Hunter - Yes, Bib is right. Just put a dash where that unit type would be designated as a cost class.

Belisarius - Me too. I get chagrined when I see the Nubians offloading troops in the Baltic.

Vandelay - I am not that fastidious to make changes to the saved game files. I would aim for more "start scenario" changes to prevent some anomolies, like the ones you suggested with fleets. The same logic can be applied to land units too. It is doubtful the Ethiopians ever had or could have had, cavalry. Cannons? Well, maybe, but I would put those costs at cost class "A" for them. Maybe they would have been able to purchase them at a steep cost from others - but at a steep cost for sure.

Cicero - I don't really know. I assume that the landcosts stay at level 10 technology for the cost class. Good point.

I need to look at EU_Province's web site again to check out his tables for land/naval tech to see what level 10 represents in the way of time. Thanks for bringing that to our attention.

 

[State Machine]

and I'm glad you are here. By combining tech levels 0-10 and the class costs (A-D) one can produce an interaction of sorts. That is, the expeense growth rate for units for class A units (and nations so designated) could increase at a geometric rate over time whereas the expense rate of say "C" units could increase at an additive rate over time. On a graph, the growth for unit A nations would be on a more quickly accelerating slope that actually is nonlinear and those for C units would be a steady climb on a more linear slope through time.

For example:

Say we have class A units cost 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 over 5 tech levels and class C units cost 3, 5, 8, 12, 20. The rate of accelerating cost per unit basis for class A designated nations is an increasing multiple of those for class C designated nations (by x 1.6-4.0). Over time, class A nations have to spend significantly more $ to maintain the same number of units.

ahh... very good

In regards to "out of game" changes (i.e. save game editing). I'm working on creating a few tools. I have been thinking about "triggering" modifications to save games based on events. Now, of course, the player (or observer in hands off game) would have to stop the game at the applicable time, run the utility, etc. But, interesting thought for game behavior that is impossible to adjust in game start conditions.

 

[unmerged(2650)]

State Machine

such a tool would be very useful to simulate the spanish mines depletions

The gold income for the province is specified in provinces.csv. You must exit and reload the game to activate changes of this kind.

 

[unmerged(3310)]

Weakening Spain

I get a little queasy when we talk of programming in a Spanish Decline. There are probably reasons for the Spanish becoming weaker as it historically happened, but if the player avoids this then they shouldn't become a second rate power just because this happened in history.

As far as using the depleting of the goldmines as a justification, it is a shame that the Toledo province can't have its province income lowered at a certain point in the game, but we can't assume that the Spanish will achieve the goldmines in the New World. If they don't conquer the Incas and Aztecs and we still blast them with rizsing costs/lost income based on this "fact" then they will surely crash.

 

[Savant]

The Spanish smother all comers.

Playing to the end-game this invariably happens unless you as a player choose to pick on them deliberately. Is there ever an exception to this rule? Even on those occassions where theSpanish in my games struggled to take the Aztecs by 1650 or didn't even conquer the Inca, they still were by far the world hegemon. I don't mean just colonial hegemon either, I mean they were able to actively intrude across the breadth of Europe. I think this is shown quite well in HO games or when the player is a non-E minor that doesn't influence European events. Yet the British have NEVER even come close to being a shadow of their actual status historically by end-game. I think the game is deliberately programmed to emulate history - it's apparent in the division of provinces, colonial strength, etc.. the whole game is designed to roughly approximate historical trends.

I would agree wholeheartedly though Hunter that the deck should not be "stacked" so that any of the great powers has a predestined outcome. Yet I think that is currently the case with both Spain and England. If Spain had sometimes declined in my games or if England had sometimes emerged as one of the top 8 powers in my game, I wouldn't be motivated to seek a device to bring things more into line.

 

[Savant]

I need some help...

I have the EU_Province Land and Naval Tech tables and they go up to tech level 52 for Land and 42 for Naval.

For Land, level 10 corresponds to 1550 ad and for Naval level 10 is 1557. Does anyone know if we are to assume that the Landcost.csv file which ends @ tech level 10 is supposed to correspond to these tables?

If so, it would mean that unit costs don't increase beyond this tech level (#10) which apparently is reached in 1550 on average.

Now, this could be the case because most of the colonies that generate COTs would likely be discovered by then right? And so, maybe the unit costs are supposed to offset the increased COT presence and then level out for the rest of the game?

I'm still editing files to make changes and then do some runs. I had to reinstall EU as I had some crazy stuff happening like Serbia appearing as Ryazan. I am also using VLY's naval settings to prohibit nations from making specific units. Finally, I am going ahead and editing the Landcost and Navalcost files also to reflect the cost per unit trend I described in an earlier post in this thread.

I don't expect to produce great effects here as I would assume other files, like namely those involving settlers/colonization would also have effects and it would be good to make changes there as suggested.

 

[unmerged(3310)]

I agree that Spain is too strong, but then again I always play with Burgundy now. So Spain doesn't get the big boost from Flanders. I'd like to give Flanders and the Low Countries to Austria, but then Austria splits its forces and is still ineffective. Burgundy slows France and Spain down in one swell foop.

 

[Savant]

By default, I give the low countries to Austria

and you are right, it doesn't benefit them much as they go up against France and then get clobbered come the Nederlands. Spain does not seem affected by this. They still dominate while on cruise control.

Anyone have a clue about this tech level situation? I also noticed that the Landcost and Navalcost files might possibly be expanded to include the other tech levels. Does anyone know if that is possible? Can we actually have stagered increases across the whole era? I would be reluctant to make significant changes if they were limited to the pre-1550 tech levels alone. But if the changes can be spread across the 300 year era, then this would be a great way to tweak things.

I am doing a test run now with just cost-class changes in Buildingcost.csv. I expect to be real bold here and try to include additional tech levels to the Land/Naval cost files and see what happens. (Knocking on wood)