#1 Re: LT40 » The winning conditions for LT40 (proposed) » Today 10:24:54

wieder wrote:

If the game is not ended before T250 it may end with a tie.

What does this mean? Equal score for everybody? Since the game is score-based, why not simply "declare it over with current score being used to decide rank"?

#2 Re: other » Longturn Discord channel » Today 10:16:25

Well, if you have no other reason for it, no reason to get there because of this. I created it only to get people who are already there and not on any of the forums. The basic idea is to simply transfer information from here to there.

#3 other » Longturn Discord channel » Yesterday 23:40:15

Corbeau
Replies: 2

If anyone here is using Discord, feel free to drop by.

https://discord.gg/B95Fz5c

#4 Re: LT40 » LT40 test game has been started » Yesterday 19:58:18

Penalty when changing tech only 10%? Was this by choice?

Also, just checking, there is no specific "tech steal" probability? "Transfer success" only deals with treaty tech transfers, correct?

#5 Re: LT40 » LT40 test game has been started » Yesterday 19:37:18

...and I understood Spy was going to be available way, way sooner...

#6 Re: LT40 » LT40 test game has been started » Yesterday 19:17:04

Just making sure you remember to use the nations we signed up under LT40 when starting the real game wink

And I see you stuck to the 1 city size per new unhappy citizen. This will end baaaadlyyyy.... tongue

#7 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » Suggestions for the next Ruleset. » Yesterday 15:58:33

wieder wrote:

Yeah... Maybe for SG2 pikemen will replace warriors?

Also, should the defense be less powerful in SG2?

Wait, pikemen and warriors in WWI scenario?

As for defence... No?

#8 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » Suggestions for the next Ruleset. » 19.11.2017 21:17:45

I would just like to remind everybody that I was proposing the tech tree to start late and finish early. Roughly, start with Gunpowder, end with electricity and stretch the whole game through the techs in between. If that happened, we wouldn't have had the main problem with this game wink

Please add this to my file and consult it during the next discussion smile

#9 Re: LT38 » LT38 has reached the end, Team Blue wins! » 18.11.2017 15:55:58

I was actually planning to kidnap this review, add a bit to it and put it on the Facebook page.

If only there was somewhere else to put it... Like the Longturn front page or something...

#10 New Games » Hexes? » 16.11.2017 12:19:47

Corbeau
Replies: 1

Somebody asked me this and I realised I've never seen this topic discussed on this forum.

So, what about hexes? I personally actually prefer them and they do tend to make a game more realistic. So how come none of the LT games were played on hexes? (Or were they?) What are other people's thoughts on this?

#11 Re: other » Longturn propaganda - front page » 15.11.2017 22:52:48

wieder wrote:

And starting two games at the same time was also needed because they have different setups and the other one is not really that much for the world domination folks.

Well, still, I much prefer the LT40 settings, but I would probably play LT39 if it wasn't at the same time. Since it is, things could get... schizophrenic.

I'd say that starting two games now was necessary because nothing was started two months earlier smile

#12 Re: other » Longturn propaganda - front page » 15.11.2017 21:34:48

One more thing. I have been taught - and eventually realised it is very true - that people respect and reward reliability, regularity and consistency, and also, sometimes, predictability. So, if we were to publish a "Longturn calender" with set dates when games are to start, we may be able to count on more players.

Now the question is, how many games per year. Looking at the archive, it seems that almost no games lasted more than 5 months, most were over in four or less. I would say it is possible to play three games as long as they are in very different stages. (The first month is basically watching the grass grow.) So, I would be bold to presume that starting one game roughly every two months would not be too much.

Basically, what we have now, two games starting on the same day, is the worst combination there is because the concentration is divided, the games will probably become more complex and more time consuming at the same time, and the paces may be similar enough that occasionally you get confused and are not sure which game you are actually playing. But that's probably a sort of backfire for not starting a game in a single year, so it may be a little glitch that won't happen again.

As for the dates, I'd propose 1st of every even month (February, April etc.) Publish this on the main page and let it stay there for every passer-by to see at a first glance, let it stick to his memory.

I think this is the way to go.

Of course, once this is published, delays are always possible and forgivable, as long as they do not go too far. If someone has been waiting for two months, five days more won't mean much.

Opinions?

(BTW, any additional thoughts on the main page getting more dynamic? Who is the admin anyway?)

#13 Re: LT40 » Everyone can get an embassy with everyone for a low cost » 15.11.2017 16:48:34

It's still 60 shields too much if you have an ally who will give you all this info for free.

I suggest give it some small real bonus, maybe +5 trade in the city where it is built.

#14 Re: other » Longturn propaganda - front page » 14.11.2017 18:53:57

Dude, internet is full of Civ images. Or I can make one in three minutes. Like I made this. Not the issue here.

#15 Re: other » Longturn propaganda - front page » 14.11.2017 18:30:21

If you want to draw people, new linkable and shareable content needs to be added constantly. Nobody who drops by here and sees a nice image will say "Oh, what a pretty picture, I think I'll stay." Instead, the response you want to produce is "Oh, something is happening here, let's check it out."

#16 other » Longturn propaganda - front page » 14.11.2017 17:29:13

Corbeau
Replies: 8

Ok, so none of us is good at propaganda (for the record, I'm not good either; i vaguely know what to do, but actually suck at doing it).

However, a good start would be turning the main page at Longturn.org into a, well, front page of the whole thing. Ruight now it is gaping completely empty, and I mean literally *empty*. I'd like to ask powers-that-be to set up some kind of blog-like service (nothing too complicated) so that news/texts/announecements can be published there. Then that stuff can be shared elsewhere. There is some content that can be created and, ironically, there is nowhere for it to be placed at.

For example, the recent cgalik's LT38 review seems just like the right thing to be put there.

#17 Re: LT39 » City growth too fast? » 14.11.2017 15:25:58

Sketlux wrote:

Could we still introduce 1+1 for LT39? What coastal cities lack in production they have to in food.

Offshore platform makes them the main production hub.

And please, even +1 +1 is too much. Seriously, like I said, give them some other kind of bonus. Say, Harbour with the discovery of refrigeration gives +3 (+5 with supermarket) food on the center city tile.

Make things grow more gradual. I understand it+s GREAT to have "more, more, more", but you really need to find some balance.

Hell, if every sea tile gives +2 food, may as well start global warming deliberately!

#18 Re: LT38 » red team surrenders ? » 14.11.2017 11:42:45

Wow! I'm actually 3rd in "Killed Units"! It does make sense, there was a lot of pressure in the first half of the game and I was massacreing Hannoverian everything that kept rushing into my territory, but I didn't realise it was so much.

#19 Re: LT39 » City growth too fast? » 14.11.2017 11:39:10

I think the harbour gave too much food. The cities on the coast became absurdly big which doesn't make sense. The point of harbour is to help with the fact that sea is so poor when it gets to food, not create an abundance.

So, definitely not +2 food on all tiles. Maybe, if you really want to, add 3 food to the central tile.

And this:

Lord_P wrote:

Another good thing about the improved harbour is that it is the only way to save your starving cities when global warming gets bad..

We should be adjust our actions to prevent global warming, not tweak the rules so that we benefit from it.

#20 Re: LT40 » City work radius sqr(9) + sqr(9) = two increase improvements » 13.11.2017 22:47:57

What exactly happened? Did you get a different radius than the one you expected, or got nothing at all, or the game crashed, or...?

#21 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » Ruleset changes for WW1 scenario? » 12.11.2017 20:54:59

It is always impolite to give a lot of  ideas that someone else would have to work to implement, but you asked, so...

I think that for WWI - or any such time-restricted scenario - you have to rewrite the tech tree from scratch. So, you need to get several types of armour, each slightly better than the previous, various types of infantry, maybe different types of submarines... But, to be honest, there wasn't much tech progress during the WWI.

The Nuke effect can act as gas bombs.

Also, this may be a good opportunity to make two tweaks that may result in a drastically different gameplay.

1. Kill Stack off
2. Artillery has a "Bombarder" flag. However, don't give it too much power so that you need piles of them to have a devastating effect.

These two things combined could have the effect you are looking for: shitloads of units stacked against each other on the front in a small space with a very static situation, slow advances and constant and senseless pounding of the enemy. Yes, that would then take much of the players' time, doing the same thing over and over again, but if the soldiers in the trenches suffer so much, why would you have it any better? tongue besides, that's what a WWI scenario should be all about wink

#22 Re: LT40 » Artillery (cannons, catapults...) to really be artillery? » 12.11.2017 14:21:21

wieder wrote:

It might really change the game, but one way to do this and test how it would work could be adding new units and keeping the old ones. Something like xxx howitzer, able to bombard but the cost would be double to the normal one. I would be really careful with this stuff because those act like bombers and with bombers you can clear any city really fast.

Yes, but then you give them less firepower and make them more expensive, both in production and maintenance.

I have a feeling the time is ripe for a fully experimental game wink

#23 Re: LT39 » Leonardo upgrades 2 units / turn but loses v levels » 12.11.2017 13:58:35

It was annoying, but realistic and it makes sense.

#24 Re: LT39 » Less defense? » 11.11.2017 22:53:41

cgalik wrote:

Yeah I mean I have the best units in the game and a lowly fanatic or partisan is a tough cookie. smile

I could see a stalemate develop if two teams develop at same rate.

Which is a perfectly reasonable and realistic thing to happen. So if that happens, you don't go for a military victory, but for the other one.

See? That's what I was talking about. You guys see this as extended chess or Warcraft. While in a game of Civilization, having a non-military ending should be perfectly valid and happened many times through history.

#25 Re: LT40 » Quick list of LT40 ruleset changes » 08.11.2017 18:03:22

I replied on Freeciv.org to create traffic and make people aware of stuff wink

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB