Store Page
Total War: ATTILA
All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos Workshop News Guides Reviews

Total War: ATTILA

Store Page
Total War: ATTILA >  Workshop > Sheph's Workshop
Not enough ratings
Authoritative Guide to Building Conversion costs thread
Description Discussions1 Comments6 Change Notes
   
Award
Favorite
Favorited
Unfavorite
Tags: mod, Campaign
File Size
Posted
Updated
136.872 KB
Jun 23, 2018 @ 4:13pm
Jul 28, 2018 @ 7:35pm
2 Change Notes ( view )
Created by
Sheph
Offline
See all 14 collections created by Sheph and other people (some may be hidden)
818 Unique Visitors
81 Current Subscribers
19 Current Favorites

Subscribe to download
Authoritative Guide to Building Conversion costs thread

In 1 collection by Sheph
Little Shepherd Innovations
36 items
Description
Conversion costs should be much cheaper in the game due the the limited space to build and the fact that one is essentially making a minor modification to a structure or set of structures to serve a different function.

Unfortunately, several mods have their values backwards.
The examples in this mods have been researched and tested.
You can add this as a submod, but the real point is to be a reference for modders.

Follow the example of Data and experienced modders please instead of discouraging players!

The values herein are approximate and I would appreciate feedback on their actual effects.
For example, I have yet to see a mod use the building_min_conversion_cost in cv. I found that it doesn't do anything noticeable until it is well above 300. I set it at 555 and it appears to give me a 50% discount on conversions.

Does -50% att_effect_building_conversion_cost_mod reduce the price of conversion 50% or less as I expect?
Does +100% att_backend_main_building_conversion_cost_mod not cause any change as I expect or is it better than 0%?
Help those improving Attila


LS collection: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1420203491
Popular Discussions View All (1)
0
Jun 30, 2018 @ 8:54am
Findings
Sheph
6 Comments
< >
Sheph  [author] Jul 28, 2018 @ 7:42pm 
It turns out we are acting on two kinds of "conversion" cost:
1) Intercultural conversion which occurs when you change over a building from one culture to another
2) Intracultural conversion as in att_effect_building_conversion_cost_mod
I think both are overpriced in Vanilla and encourage the use of these variables.
At the very least reduce 1. As it is it is cheaper to sack or burn down a level than to convert a building.
The building_min_conversion_cost in cvariables is actually not a factor in a complex formula. If you reduce the conversion costs of buildings in the range of -65 or so, you will hit this variable which serves as a floor. In my tests, all tier 1 and 2 buildings, regardless of culture, cost this much to change to another version once all conversion costs had dropped low enough.
Greq7 Jun 30, 2018 @ 9:03am 
Steam\steamapps\workshop\content you find your new mods in there
Sheph  [author] Jun 30, 2018 @ 8:50am 
See discussion for news. Does anyone have a better mod-manager loader? I can't seem to get my mod manager to locate this mod in my data directory. I can't upload the new version for you.
Sheph  [author] Jun 24, 2018 @ 1:27pm 
Are you saying you see know difference between -2 backend and -150?
I am not an authority on the backend effect as I haven't used it yet in my mods. I know that Vanilla and other major modders give backend POSITIVE values to decrease conversion cost. for that effect. construction_cost_mod uses negative values.
I am looking for feedback from testing. I will give it a try as well later this week. I
Greq7 Jun 24, 2018 @ 8:03am 
Actually I am confused a bit to be honest. I just checked in my mod I only used handicaps and it works. It reduces the cost significantly. example: -2 True att_backend_main_building_conversion_cost_mod faction_to_region_own_unseen -150
. I gave -150 because my buildings are more expensive btw. So what am I missing here if the handicaps are applied and conversion is cheap already?
Greq7 Jun 23, 2018 @ 6:10pm 
It seems like you found a way to do this properly. Very soon I will probably have to tweak some in my overhaul :) thank you