RULES.TXT changes

[Campo]

Changes to RULES.TXT arose in another thread, and I'm hoping we can revisit that issue.

I did a search and found numerous threads with scattered references to rules changes, but only this one dedicated to it:
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...ight=rules.txt

I was surprised not to find anything in the Great Library index, unless I missed the obvious. If anyone knows of other links please let me know.

Otherwise I'd like to use this thread to discuss modifying RULES.TXT.

-- Is there a write-up somewhere that explains the process? Much of it is obvious, but there are some subtleties. (For example, I once tried to modify helicopters so they could carry a unit. I changed the flag that specifies that for ships, but it evidently doesn't apply to aircraft.)

-- What are some useful changes you've made? If possible I'd like to focus on changes that affect game play rather than cosmetic things like unit or wonder name changes.

[Campo]

I'll start with a couple. I haven't edited the rules much, but here are two that Ilike:

-- Changed destroyer so it can carry one unit. It seems reasonable to me that a big ship could carry and deploy a land unit. The destroyer isn't very strong, and this gives it more value. It's a good way to deliver a spy across the world, but not overly powerful since it's limited to one.

-- Changed fighters (regular and stealth) to behave like bombers so they can stay outside cities one turn. The point was to keep a fighter with a bomber for protection.

[LDiCesare]

Wasn't there anything in the Creation threads?
There are a few things/hints as how to change these things. Since I play ToT I know I found some in either Eyn's page or on Cradle Of Civ site. Or somewhere else... I can't remember I never edited the rules.txt myself anyway (or just once to see what it did) but play quite a lot of scenarios, so:
Clever/interesting changes I saw in scenarios/modpacks include:
- Adding lots of units, f.e. making pikemen 1a/3d, bombards with gunpowder being more poweful than catapults, and a new tech needed to have 3a/2d/2hp musketeers (or something like that), while feudalism gave longbowmen with 5a/2*d/2hp (something like that).
- Changes to early techs/units are much more impacting than other changes.
- Railroads coming late or never changes a game a lot.
- If you are playing a map where rivers are important (like Mesopotamia), then having bridge building a very late tech makes lots of difference in the way you play, as rivers become (sort of) slowing points.
- There is also making pottery a prerequisite for something useful early on (like map making, don't remember).
- Making Communism available earlier (as "Empire") makes it much more viable a government. Probably working on Republic the same way (or having Democracy later) could be interesting for those who never use it.

[Campo]

Wasn't there anything in the Creation threads?

There are occasional comments in a lot of threads, but I didn't see anything really devoted to it.

[St Leo]

http://sleague.apolyton.net/

Fun, fun, fun.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

This may not apply to you, Campo, but one thing I did when I was an Apolyton 'newbie' and still civving on King level, was modify the rules.txt as it related to unhappiness. I found that made things a bit easier when I switched to Deity... and then I just put the settings back gradually when I was comfortable with the production levels on Deity.

The main reason I didn't play Deity in the first place was because I had a phobia about the unhappiness. Bottom line, changing the rules made the game more fun for me, until I was ready to put the settings back to the defaults.

Beyond that... I've meddled with some of the unit settings, made Marines tougher, Howitzers weaker, added combat engineers, that sort of thing... just experimenting.

STYOM

[Campo]

St. Leo,
Thanks for the link, I've just started exploring there.
Hey, it looks like we're nearly neighbors.

STYOM - that's a good approach for newbies. I've been playing Diety for a while and can handle unhappiness fairly well. I wouldn't want to make it any easier.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Rule #1: Copy the original rules.txt to a safe place!

As for monkeying with settings, do NOT change punctuation in the file. All those commas and semicolons are needed! They demark the variables read by the game program.

For just changing the feel of the game, try modifying the caravan commodities and civ/leader names. The latter will also entail editing city.txt to match. Game.txt and labels.txt also contain endless text strings that pop up or appear in the windows.

Good luck!

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Campo
St. Leo,
Thanks for the link, I've just started exploring there.
Hey, it looks like we're nearly neighbors.

STYOM - that's a good approach for newbies. I've been playing Diety for a while and can handle unhappiness fairly well. I wouldn't want to make it any easier.

I figured you wouldn't need it easier. But why not make it harder (the Super Deity setting, Barbarian Wrath, etc)? I've played with changing the settings on Deity to give the AI production advantages (like Deity +2), but keeping the unhappiness factor on Deity. Makes the game a bit more challenging. I remember the Super Deity threads a while back indicated that the game was pretty much unplayable except as OCC on Super Deity and higher, due to unhappiness. So you drop the unhappiness factor back to Deity levels, and then try to keep up with AI production.

I have the settings somewhere if anyone's interested... I could even find the Super Deity thread, with a little work

STYOM.

[Straybow]

Hmmm, what haven't I toyed with? Not much. The global values at the top of the file have interesting effects. I think Fundy is absurd, so I change # free units to 0 (they can always build Fanatics if they want free units) and increase the science penalty. Commies' zero corruption is also a bit too much so assign the effective palace distance a nominal value. I use 8. I also change the Trireme loss divisor to 4 (making it a 25% chance instead of 50%)

Try adding 1 to the movement of each land unit, 2 to each sea and air unit. It's a little like MGE double movement, but not so extreme.

If you like long solo games they have slots for 3 extra advances, plus the unused advance Plumbing, and 3 extra units. Use them. I add Jet Engine, Adv Rocketry, and Special Forces and rearrange prerequisites:

Jet Engine (U1) req AFl, MP
Rocketry req Jet (U1), E2
Adv Rocketry (U2) req SFl, Rob
Special Forces (U3) req Exp, Tac
Mobile Warfare req Aut, U3
Plumbing (Plu) req Inv, Che
Ref req E1, Plu
Gen Engineering req Med, Sth

Alpine Troops assigned to Spec Forces
Aeroplane (extra unit) assigned to Fli (WWI type plane, weaker than Ftr)
Fighter assigned to AFl (Ftr & Bmbr WWII tech)
Tanker (extra unit) assigned to Rocketry (carry air unit flag set, range given as 4)
Stealth Ftr is assigned to Jet Engine (U1) (what's "stealthy" about it anyway?)
SAM Battery assigned to Rocketry
Nuke assigned to SFl
Aegis, Cruise Msl assigned to Adv Rocketry
SDI assigned to Stealth and doubled in cost (if nukes still allowed)

[Campo]

Thanks, I like some of those ideas.

One area I'd like to explore is ways to make the game faster without overly distorting it. My Civ time is so limited that I only play small world games, which is somewhat stilted. Perhaps a combination of increased unit movement and increased tile production (shields, food, trade, as appropriate) would keep the feel of the game but hasten play. Has anyone tried that? Any specific suggestions?

Thanks.

[Straybow]

I only once tried a game with shield values of forests, hills, mountains, and shield specials bumped up by one. That does speed play somewhat, and again not as drastically as MGE double production. I've contemplated a few subtle food changes, too, but never experimented.

Hmmm, I think I know what my next game is gonna be…

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by Campo
Thanks, I like some of those ideas.

One area I'd like to explore is ways to make the game faster without overly distorting it. My Civ time is so limited that I only play small world games, which is somewhat stilted. Perhaps a combination of increased unit movement and increased tile production (shields, food, trade, as appropriate) would keep the feel of the game but hasten play. Has anyone tried that? Any specific suggestions?

Thanks.

Increase road movement multiplier
Increase shields, food, or arrows on special terrain
Alter tech rate
Lower improvement or unit costs

You can probably imagine what the effects of various changes will have. Browse the rules.txt and experiment!

[Scouse Gits]

My personal favourite is to increase the value of a mined mountain -- it takes forever and a year to mine the rotten thing - it should be made worth while ...

SG[1]

[Straybow]

Yeah, that's a standard change. Even then I only mine specials unless there aren't any hills at all. I enable irrigation of mountains, too. Gotta be desperate, at triple the rate for one little sheaf, but the Inca did stuff like that.

[geofelt]

campo; try a minimum sized world. (25x40) Each dimension must be 20 or more, and total 1000. You will get very ugly terrain and room foy few good cities.

[Straybow]

Dang, I forgot another change that to me always seemed right. Unimproved hills should be worth more. I add 1 shield to hills and hill specials, and change mining hills to be worth 2 shields instead of three so the total remains the same.