#2 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 10.07.2018 12:54:42

The only problem is: does every city need to go through Tribe Hut - City Hall phase? It would be a bit ridiculous in the later stages of the game.

#3 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 10.07.2018 00:04:47

Maybe it isn't possible because, mechanically, Initial Conditions fall into the "scenario" category. Any experts here can confirm this?

#5 New Games » Team selection for future team games » 07.07.2018 06:59:43

Corbeau
Replies: 2

Since there are a lot of rpoblems with idlers, I propose that the rules for team games are slightly modified.

Firstly, there needs to be some discretion regarding choosing who gets to play. Obviously, the confirmation system isn't enough of a filter. So I propose that we agree on the "team captains" system, but with some added limitations to both the captains and the potential players.

1. In order to play a team game, you shouldn't be a complete newbie regarding LT. It is expected that you have played at least one LT game and that you have communicated with the people inside the game and made your presence known there enough. What is "enough" is to be decided by the team captains. Actually, this part can include other reliable and veteran players, not only the captains.

1a. The captains (and whoever's advice they listen to) may demand that the future players join Discord for better communication. Or not. Their choice.

2. The team captains review the list of confirmed participants and decide who gets to play based on the above criteria.

3. Only then do they start with selecting the teams, from the pool that they determined together. Players may voice their preferences and the final setup of the teams should be agreed on by a consensus or at least a compromise.

#6 Re: New Games » Why is smallpoxing bad? » 05.07.2018 12:53:47

Actually, that was my strategy most of the time. Also in Web games where Settlers cost 1 pop. I am never in the first five and those who are, I hear, do not use this mad expansion strategy.

#7 Re: other » Some other tech tree tweaks » 05.07.2018 12:52:05

wieder wrote:

Ar far as I remember there is a problem with setting all the root reqs and using too much those would take too much computer resources. I think that stuff is fixed on 2.6.

The person I heard it from (Monamipierrot, I think) also said that it was a test ruleset with many other things changed and maybe it was something else causing the delays. Cold have also been a slow server.

#8 Re: other » Some other tech tree tweaks » 05.07.2018 10:35:39

Well you still have to research Code of Laws.

#9 Re: other » Some other tech tree tweaks » 04.07.2018 19:06:28

Wahazar wrote:

Just read p.1 - there is obviously bug for Republic req. The only explanation is, that you can't trade Literacy and start Republic without Code of Laws, but such assertion can be now done using root_req flag.

Can you explain this? I'm not sure what you mean.

#10 Re: New Games » Why is smallpoxing bad? » 04.07.2018 17:27:39

as it is now, you are paying 30 shields AND 2 population.

But we are getting sidetracked. The main issue is whether 1 pop per settler is "too" cheap. I guess it depends on personal preference and what you want the game to be. 1-pop-price will create a different game from 2-pop-price and that's basically the main point. And the main question is which of these two games you want.

I still don't understand why 1-pop-price is bad.

#11 Re: other » Some other tech tree tweaks » 04.07.2018 17:21:46

I'm a great proponent of realism in Civ, but in this aspect, I think the most important thing with the tech tree is that it obeys rules of playability and game logic. The reason is that, if you go for realism, you have to employ a MILLION changes and you won't get proportionally closer to the ideal. Techs are just tokens used to create other stuff. Rearranging them wouldn't contribute much to a better game. Hell, for all I care, we could use numbers to identify them, nothing would change.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against any changes that may make the game more realistic. But you need to ask yourself how much is a given change actually improving the game and how much is it actually making it just technically different, but not necessarily better.

#12 Re: New Games » Why is smallpoxing bad? » 04.07.2018 13:54:51

You do not "automatically" get an extra tile with the new city. You get it with production you used to build the settler.

#13 Re: New Games » Why is smallpoxing bad? » 04.07.2018 10:17:18

I heard several times from different people that "smalpoxing is terrible and it is destroying the game". I don't really agree, just saying what someone else said.

Also, I thought preventing smallpoxing was the reason that Settlers use up 2 population when built. If this isn't it, then there is really no reason for this. The rationale that "a new city uses two tiles, so a Settler should cost two pop / two tiles" doesn't really apply here. That's called growth&expansion. That's the "name of the game". The "energy" consumed to get that extra tile is represented in shields used to build a Settler.

So, maybe rethink that thing with Settler costing 2 population? Unless there is another reason for it?

edit: And I think returning Settler cost to 1 population would very much help with the whole problem of the initial pace of the game being very slow.

#14 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 04.07.2018 10:11:00

Your proposals are very interesting, but they need to implement new graphics

How so? I only took your elements and rearranged them slightly.

Tribes, City Hall - all these need new graphics. Of course we can use some existing graphics as alternative one, but it is OK for testing, not regular game.

I think it is ok also for a regular game.

About Tribe(smen): you said "only Migrants". Well, that's the unit I was referring to, just give it some more properties. Or use Warriors icon. It may seem confusing at start, but you can check which unit that really is by clicking on it. Firstly, it's an early game so there won't be much confusion with so few units. Secondly, it will represent the fact that one band of wanderers didn't seem too different from another and you actually had to take a better look to determine what they are up to.

And we've used same icons for different city improvements a few times already. That is the least important thing of all, nobody is looking at the icon anyway.

Another idea: no palace at the start (some basic tech must be achieved to build it - Ceremonial Burial?), of course Tribalism corruption/waste should behave similar to Communism,  but on much higher level (50%?), and very low or 0 probability of civil war. Palace would decrease corruption locally and allow better city growth.
One important reason of lack of initial Palace: pain in the ... when placing first city which would be your capital, whereas dark void is around. Even explorers doesn't help with such decisions.

This seems like a good idea. But you shouldn't make it too expensive or it will slow the game down even more.

Another idea: make the Palace another prerequisite for Despotism. Or the only one, no tech needed?

#15 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 03.07.2018 14:23:26

Wahazar wrote:
Corbeau wrote:

... I fear it would only make the already slow first stage of the game even slower. With Workers in the 2nd column it will take a lot of time for the people to be able to actually start doing something and the game will be VERY static for more than a week, with everything moved further down the line.

Are you talking about Longturn game? In such case you are right, it is slow because tech advances are slow, so it take about 40..45 turns to get Farming, while for classic ruleset, only 12..15, I don't know why (are there changed settings for LT bulbs?).

Now I'm not sure what you are saying here. Did you download the LT ruleset and inserted your techtree? If there is a difference between LT and classic regarding same techs, it's probably due to science box size, meaning, general tech cost. it's one number and it's adjustable.

But my point is, LT start is usually slow. Takes 2-4 montsh for anything to start happening (unless someone gets really careless). So your 12-15 turns only adds to that, making the game static for the first 4-6 weeks.

Your proposals are very interesting, but they need to implement new graphics

How so? I only took your elements and rearranged them slightly.

BTW, defence bonus depending on city size or city radius depending on government are brilliant idea.

Thank you smile But it's not a new thing. In LT, defence bonus for a city size 1-8 is 50%, while for cities >8 it's 100%.

Also, I think LT40 had two city radii, the second one being active after building a certain improvement. In my ruleset (hopefully LT42, a bit delayed), there will be very dynamic city radius, starting from 1 and ending at maximum sqrt(36) in increments of 1.

PS. what does mean "smallpox" ?

A strategy where you build cities like mad, placing them close together for protection and quick production growth. The name comes from the way the map looks like.

#16 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 03.07.2018 14:21:52

Wahazar wrote:
Corbeau wrote:

... I fear it would only make the already slow first stage of the game even slower. With Workers in the 2nd column it will take a lot of time for the people to be able to actually start doing something and the game will be VERY static for more than a week, with everything moved further down the line.

Are you talking about Longturn game? In such case you are right, it is slow because tech advances are slow, so it take about 40..45 turns to get Farming, while for classic ruleset, only 12..15, I don't know why (are there changed settings for LT bulbs?).
Basically these neolithic "knowledges" need 3..4 bulbs, palpably not a rocket science wink
If talking about postponing settlers: primitive tribes were limited to their caves.

Your proposals are very interesting, but they need to implement new graphics, what is not convenient in case of freeciv.
My intention was to alter rulesets and rely on existing graphics (the only one new is stonehenge, but lack of this graphic is not critical).
Maybe we can apply these proposals for LT fork of neolithic ruleset discussed elsewhere.

BTW, defence bonus depending on city size or city radius depending on government are brilliant idea.

PS. what does mean "smallpox" ?

#17 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 03.07.2018 14:20:22

So, to continue here:

Wahazar wrote:

At the start, player can make only migrants (or coinage), no settlers or other units nor buildings. Migrants are aggressive units, stats similar to Warriors, but they cannot conquer enemy town nor fortify. They can be used as militia though. Or can be used to build up capital town, as typical migrant.

Shall we call them Tribesmen"? Or, even better, "Tribe"?

Because city walls are not easy accessible, I added Wooden Pre-Fortress (based on idea from LongTurn servers), which require only Forestry knowledge. Pre-Fortress prevents against kill-stack, but no defence bonus nor bribing protection - these are served by regular Fortress enabled by Construction, as usual. Pre-fortress is also groundwork for regular Fortress.

A few thoughts:
- call it "Stockade"
- why no defence bonus? let's have +25% (x1.25) for Stockade and +60% (x1.6) for Fortress, making it x2.0 total

I like this ruleset very much, but only for its realism and aesthetics. However, I fear it would only make the already slow first stage of the game even slower. With Workers in the 2nd column it will take a lot of time for the people to be able to actually start doing something and the game will be VERY static for more than a week, with everything moved further down the line.

Also, I don't think that postponing further expansion (Settlers) so much makes sense. Hell, all those early people were basically doing was procreating and expanding.

So I'd propose the following (using the suggestions I made above):
- Tribes(men) are multi-purpose units, basically Migrants, who can fight, scout, but also create new cities; it fits with the low civilizational development and basically no specialization; just group of people wandering around doing whatever they need to do at the moment; however, not irrigating or building roads
- make Tribes(men) cheap in shield, also use only 1 population; smallpoxing will be hindered by the fact that there will be no rapid city growth (unless you get lucky with wheat) and no tile improvement
- Tribes(men) are obsolete by Settlers and to get Forestry (Workers) you need agriculture
- city size 1 (and maybe 2) have defence bonus 0 (zero); If someone decides to spend more time in such state (quick and low-tech expansion) he gets ran over by someone who got Horsemen
- city radius during Tribalism is really small, further preventing large growth unless you get Despotism and switch city-producing units to Settlers
- maybe also tie defence bonus to government: zero at Tribalism, more with every other government; after all, tribes don't build cities, they build unfortified villages and camps; and a village may grow big, but it's still only a village
- maybe add a city improvement - "City Hall" - that signifies a growth from a village into a city; a city with "City Hall" can't build Tribes(men) anymore, but gets a better defence bonus; maybe make it impossible to grow the settlement to size 2 (or 3) without a City Hall

With all this, Tribalism really becomes an early stage in the development of the nation, but with distinct features and a specific role.

#18 New Games » Why is smallpoxing bad? » 03.07.2018 00:08:03

Corbeau
Replies: 9

When creating and discussing rulesets, this alwasy comes out as an obstacle. So, can some of you old LTers answer this: why is smallpoxing such a problem? It only exists up to a point, it makes sense, and after that point it dies off. However, at least two rules in LT are set to avoid it and it still comes out as a thing to be cautioned about.

#19 Re: LT41 » Winning Post » 02.07.2018 21:40:44

Not that I care or have a personal interest, but is this going to end or what? big_smile

#20 Re: LT44 » Vacations and Delegations » 02.07.2018 11:10:14

I'll be away from August 1st till August 18th.

#21 Re: other » Neolithic tech tree ruleset » 01.07.2018 19:32:19

This looks interesting and, as far as I'm concerned, we can add it to my ruleset for LT42. I mean, it's already drastically different from standard Civ in general so, what the hell smile

#22 Re: LT46 » Smaller empire sizes and city limits for LT46 » 01.07.2018 19:27:04

Democracy is the best government in the game because everybody has grown accustomed to its bonuses and nobody wants to make a step sideways and make an unpopular decision to nerf some of its aspects.

My ruleset has a reverse freedom of choice between taxt/sci maximum. In despotism you can set max 100% of sci/tax/max, while in democracy you can only set 50%. Gameplay and realism rationalisation: obvious.

Also, we should drop the Women Suffrage. Democracies are supposed to be less flexible in sending troops abroad and Women's Suffrage is a technical workaround that simply reduces this very important penalty to 50% which is huge. Also, building a fort abroad shouldn't claim a tile. That's another workaround and, effectively, a cheat.

#23 Re: LT44 » Tech sharing and leakage » 28.06.2018 23:05:30

Yeah. I for one wouldn't want someone else to rule my nation and make decisions. Only make moves that may be needed at that moment. Otherwise, there is no point in me playing.

Yes, someone could make an army of idlers, call in friends only for them to become idle, but that would soon be discovered and dealt with. Like Wieder said, common sense applies.

But this is an academic debate because current rules forbid this. We could do it in another subforum.

#24 Re: LT44 » Tech sharing and leakage » 28.06.2018 14:33:39

I have no problem with delegation manoeuvreing for this purpose. It is a way around what is basically a bu"soft bug". Furthermore, I actually have no problem with any kind of delegation in a team game. It's a team game, ok? There are people who like planning and doing the economy, there are people who are willing to sit at the screen the whole day. There are all types in both teams. So, join the strengths and cancel the weaknesses. Play a good game.

As for combining leakage and tech sharing, I am more and more convinced that it is a good thing. It forces people to coordinate and find convoluted ways of using the least bulbs for the best result. May the better coordinated team win!

#25 Re: LT44 » LT44 has started » 27.06.2018 17:51:27

fran wrote:
Corbeau wrote:
fran wrote:

Red Team? Wait, weren't that the Mao worshippers and mass murder adorers?

Those reports were grossly exaggerated.

First prove you don't have a Mao bible. See? You can't!

A witness account is evidence enough in the court of law. I do not have Mao Bible. There.

However, I do have Muammar Gaddafi's Green Book on my shelf. Also some booklet by Trotsky, explaining Kapital to beginners.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB