Updated Manual?

[Squirrelloid]

So, for example, remembering what constr level and path levels all the forgings require is something that is inconvenient to look up. Its also relatively stable across CBM versions (a few change, but those are generally noted on the first post releasing the new version). Since research strategy and forging strategy are important elements of playing the game, going from normal to CBM could really screw you up and you wouldn't even know until you completed the necessary research (or what you thought was the necessary research!). Further, you wouldn't necessarily think to check beforehand for many items.

The most obvious change is gem gens, probably the single most important change for game balance CBM has made, and one where if you plan your strategy around them based on SP experience, and didn't think to check if they were moved in CBM, your entire plan would fall apart. But there are numerous others where knowing something was easier or harder to get would radically change your planning and possibly even pretender design.

At least Cleveland has provided a forging guide that includes Vanilla and CBM, so its at least plausible to check forging. But heaven help you if the *function* of an item changed, as I can't think of a single good way to check that quickly.

If the game had an excellent in-game manual (Civilopedia style) and the developers had made the mechanics more transparent (don't get me started on how much existing spell descriptions annoy me), then I'd say that switching back and forth is sufficiently easy to not be an issue. But many things are hard to reference, and oftentimes its not clear from a description what the heck something actually does. So the only way to know what 50% (or more) of the spell list and a large variety of items do is to try them out - meaning changing the rules set you're using with any frequency is rather obnoxious.

Now, given that the vanilla game is horribly balanced (gem gens for starters, but there are also issues with scales, unit pricing, pretender chassis costs, spell research, gem, and path requirements, etc...), and CBM fixes many of these issues, and is also played vastly more often in MP situations, it would seem to be the best available 'standard' to learn and play under.

(Further, sure there are new versions of CBM, but the base game at least used to get patched regularly, and made sometimes major changes to things like dominion powers for Rlyeh/Ermor, so certainly new versions is not an issue only with CBM. One should argue that CBM's continuing to get updated is an advantage).

When i get a new car, it comes with a manual that actually explains what everything does and tells me the technical specs. If I really care, there are experts who can explain what all the technical specs mean, how exactly the specific engine/fuel injector/whatever works. This makes it a lot easier to switch cars, because it has adequate documentation for *everything*. Also, if the car manual is actively wrong, it gets recalled and I get a new one. The game manual is actively wrong on every remotely technical explanation of mechanics.

[Sombre]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

At least Cleveland has provided a forging guide that includes Vanilla and CBM, so its at least plausible to check forging. But heaven help you if the *function* of an item changed, as I can't think of a single good way to check that quickly.

What do you mean by the function of an item? We can only mod the weapon and armour granted by an item. You don't need heaven's help to find out about that, you look in the dm or the accompanying txt file.

(don't get me started on how much existing spell descriptions annoy me)

There was a mod which changed spell descriptions into technical descriptions. It might be out of date now but you can probably find it by searching.

So the only way to know what 50% (or more) of the spell list and a large variety of items do is to try them out - meaning changing the rules set you're using with any frequency is rather obnoxious.

CBM mostly changes variables which are transparent in spells, units etc. I'd say at least 95% of the changes are things like damage, range, gemcost, visible stats and abilities etc. Things you can see by clicking for more info, not things that need testing or hunting through the .dm file or accompanying txt.

That's true to a point.
However there's some things in it that are not straightforward (#effect 10021, #spec 4194304
, #pathlevel 1 1 ?) if you don't actually mod.
And now try to find out what has changed about all air summons.
I'm not "griping" (whatever that means), I'm saying it would be nice.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/griping

If you don't know what it means, how can you say you aren't doing it?

You may have noticed that in addition to the dm, there is a parallel .txt file which lists the changes made in plain english rather than modspeak. Not that 'modspeak' is hard to understand, since it only has a handful of terms that aren't obvious and for those you have modding documentation, which is near enough 100%

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Sombre

You may have noticed that in addition to the dm, there is a parallel .txt file which lists the changes made in plain english rather than modspeak. Not that 'modspeak' is hard to understand, since it only has a handful of terms that aren't obvious and for those you have modding documentation, which is near enough 100%

modspeak actually sounds a lot like this: Intermission in the Third Dimension
coincidentally: most conversations on IRC sound a lot like this too.

[Gandalf Parker]

In Game Manual:
It would be nice to have. Better if the devs programmed it to call an external file which could be added to by the dom community.

But how would adding the overhead to the game be different than making your own clickable link to Edi's Database or to Lch's wiki? I have the same reaction when people want builtin options for screen capture or backups or all of the other things that can be done with 3rd party options. It doesnt need to be in the game, limiting our choices and adding massive overhead just for people who want it in the menu so they can find it easier

Spell Descriptions:
There is a program that will update spell descripts. And the source code is available. Its fairly easy to update it. You can also use it to change the tips that appear and other text. BUT it modifies the executable of the game itself. Thats one reason Ive been leary of linking to it on my dom3 site. It just seemed like a direction I didnt feel right in supporting.

Mod Documentation:
I think this tends to get back into the territory that the manual did. Developers should not do the documentation. By the time they get it to work, they are too deep to think and question and answer like a newbie who is looking at it for the first time. Developers of games feel their game is "intuitive".

And developers of mods feel that mods are self-explanatory. Anyone who has extensively worked with mod commands (or map commands, or command line switches) tends to look at those and feel its clear as a bell. No further explanation is needed than the code itself. In every case (as the manual itself exemplifies) documentation is best done by a 3rd party looking at it from scratch and keeping good notes on what did and didnt need explanation. I dont knock anyones efforts to document their own. I just feel it can usually be done better if done by new eyes.

[Illuminated One]

Originally Posted by Squirrelloid

Now, given that the vanilla game is horribly balanced ...

I'll grant you that the balancing is better in CBM (although I can only fully agree on the gods and pricing part + (many) spell changes - the luck scale I took in the non CBM has certainly paid off).

When i get a new car, ...

You missed my point. When you start driving a new car you don't read the documentation, you just drive. Every car drives differently, but the basic "mechanics" of driving are the same.
It's the same for the game - your strategies (and exploits) remain completely the same (prot vs damage - att vs def - awe versus morale - rout and take retreat route and defending against it - buff vs damage spells - etc) only the tools change (this spell has double aoe, berserker costs gems).
In most cases you shouldn't even have problems using something that works well in vanilla in CBM, only that you have more counters and alternatives.
...

One should argue that CBM's continuing to get updated is an advantage

...
It is certainly an advantage but it's another point why it is not good to learn the game by learning CBM 1.6. by heart, instead you learn the mechanics and adjust to it in the game you are (as you do in any case).
Which makes "play only CBM in order to learn it by heart" a moot point.

And lastly you have not provided a single reason why you want to have a fixed standard in any case. Of course you are free to play only CBM games. But that doesn't mean that "every game *should* use it".