#1 Re: LT44 » Post here suggestions about the new game » Yesterday 10:01:11

Not sure if I can play so my opinion doenst really count here but in my opinion tech trading is less important here. Team games are usually world wars with multiple fronts forcing everyone on the team to help out each other. Hence the balance of the game is less compromised by weak players.

#2 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » The base ruleset for the WW1 scenario? » 14.03.2018 17:07:07

If you open the registrations, count me in! Since its only the Spanish Cvil War places are limited.

#4 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » The base ruleset for the WW1 scenario? » 14.03.2018 13:54:04

Hadnt seen your post! Since LT39 ended Im all on board. Sure! We can put a break at T20 or 30.

#5 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 13.03.2018 10:02:15

Like the idea with required city structures to build certain units. It would make it more realistic, since you can dump technology on an underdevoloped state but he will have big difficulties implementing it if the necessary infrastructure (humans, transport etc.) is missing. As far as I heard, capturing tech could lead to easy exploitation through "hub cities".

#6 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 13.03.2018 08:27:28

There are patents and fees. But techleackage represents that. The more widespread a tech is, the cheaper it is. That is btw what we did, we tried to leave at least an enemy unit/city alive therefore keeping the prices for tech up. If you want cheap tech kill weak enemies.

#7 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 12.03.2018 14:26:46

Also, the famous tech "trading" ist not a trading, it is mutiplicating. You create a good simply for making a transaction. If you were to loose another tech for trading another it would make sense, otherwise an intermediary simply trades with enough trading partners and without doing something that requieres physical hardship of your beloved workers you multiple techs. What is the value behind it? It is a bogus economy that gives the biggest market crier the benefit.

#8 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 12.03.2018 14:20:48

Actually I was saying that you and Kocurek put up a fight and were left alone.

Maho didnt idle completely until I crushed his last forces. Not many idling cities I took there. You had as much access to idlers as I did...

If you enable trading you enable free rider behaviour. Who researches doesnt put his money in armies. So why research at all if you can just "trade" it and conquer with all the money you put in your military?

In LT39 you stopped researching because you could simply buy the enemy. Not my fault if you rely on a unreliable strategy... Same for the 16 chariot attack. You gambled and lost.

Anyhow, I still think you performed  better than most and understood the overall strategic constellation, wich was the root of the problem and not the tech!

#9 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 12.03.2018 13:35:39

Im not angry if this is what you mean? :-) I apologize if I do.  By no means I want to change the decision to play with tech trading this time. But it is a dangerous narrative if we let wrong conclusions jeopardize the game in the future.

#10 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 12.03.2018 11:59:56

Im posting this because Im getting tired that people who made severe errors in LT39 blame the missing tech trading for their own faults.

1. Tech is not the only way to win.
2. If you cant win alone, gang up with others
3. If your neighbour is threatened by an enemy force and you will be the next one, it is deeply recommended to help him while he still can put up a fight, otherwise its too late and you are the next.
4. Secure free land before the enemy gets it, not taking it, makes the enemy take it and ultimately make him stronger
5. If you cant win conventionally, find the backdoor and kill the enemy where he is weak! Wich in fact is always recommended...
6. Use the soil! Build on hills. They can be mined and give good protection.
7. Build early on workers, they improve your land, help in war by providing roads and get promoted from the beginning and can do probably twice the work if you build them early.
8. Units can be decisive factors: tiremes give multiple options, veterans give your attack the decisive edge

Im not denying that a starting position or an idling player can influence massively the game but all those points I just mentioned were all or in part ignored by the loosing faction. One player had even his workers on autosettler...
In the whole game nobody even closely tried to attack me or change the overall course of the winning faction. Only a few tried to do something meanwhile our other opponents where closing their eyes and ears and hoping that the storm would spare them. Is that the behaviour this game wants to reward?

Besides, would I have been able to trade techs I would by now have howitzers, tanks and so on and the victory would be more swiftly. And believe me, I would have prevented the loosing faction from getting the new acquired techs.  The reason I have one of the leading positions is, that I took risks, risks that only 2 of the loosing players were willing to take and who werent supported by their peers and thus failed. 

Short: Play better by learning and applying new strategies and dont blame others for your mistakes. Im sure everybody is willing to help in giving advices. I myself have learned a lot from my team mates!

#11 New Games » Longturn vs. Longturn-web » 07.03.2018 10:11:13

Replies: 8

Cgali had the idea of playing a (team) game between traditional longturn.org players and the new longturn-web gamers. "Normal" longturn.org rules, no numerical balance between teams i.e. web-players can be much more players.

#12 Re: New Games » Making the bigger empires harder to get/maintain? » 07.03.2018 10:05:54

Since I have a ton of towns in LT39... Its not like I really wanted them and they are not as easy to mantain since I need many happiness buildings. Besides, with that big number of cities you start missing things. I feel like a japanese electronic devise producer who has lost sight over what his key product is and quality suffers.
I agree, its quite easy to hide behind walls.

#13 Re: LT43 » How big alliances? » 06.03.2018 16:51:48

Im rather for a fixed number like 3 to discourage free-riders. But if its gonna be a web-community game I wont stay in the way...

#14 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 06.03.2018 11:50:45

About tech trading. I think its the most toxic thing that exists. SG1 was totally trashed by it, instead of fighting we mostly saw a competition of Old MacDonald who grows the biggest crop in the game. I can step aside this game but I deeply recommend disabling tech trading.

#15 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 05.03.2018 21:31:51

What abou the map? Can we have a mix of continents and big islands? Some people on the big continents, some on islands?

#16 Re: LT43 » Post here suggestions about what to change for LT43 » 05.03.2018 19:58:06

No 2x movement pls. The last two games I played were slowly enough. You get used to 3x movement pretty fast.

#17 Re: New Games » A more modern ship travelling on rivers » 26.02.2018 18:50:21

http://forum.freeciv.org/f/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=89695 in this post I proposed a landing craft. It was intended to obsolete the tireme. So I propose:

- moving only on rivers and ocean tiles but not on deep ocean
-can carry --> 4 units (twice as a tireme), maybe even 6?
-moves 12 if tireme has 9. If tireme has only 6 it could have 10? 
-Can carry heavy equipment opposed to tiremes

#18 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » The base ruleset for the WW1 scenario? » 14.02.2018 12:20:18

Looking again at the map maybe 2x should be enough.

#19 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » The base ruleset for the WW1 scenario? » 09.02.2018 16:08:32

In theory 10. Practically only 6 active players. Its not much commitment since a few turns would be enough to test the eventualities but I guess everybody wants some fun so maybe test for 7,10 or max 14 days.
I mean the regular timeout, of 23h but would be open to a 15h timeout. Maybe call it "Fastturn" :-)

The techs are already in place. Sceanrio can be downloaded here: http://forum.freeciv.org/f/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=809

#20 Re: ScenarioGame 2 » The base ruleset for the WW1 scenario? » 09.02.2018 14:32:27

What about testing the ruleset in the Spanish Civil War Scenario? Just as a small scale test game. Im more of a fan of 3x moves. Maybe we could add the wonder "Fortification" to emulate the importance of fort cities like Verdun or Przemysl. Just one special fortification per player with a special defense bonus. Besides that Im still advocating the tech suggestions made here:  http://forum.longturn.org/viewtopic.php?id=800
We could do a few test games since a rematch in scenarios is always a big problem and the problem of tech trading made SG1 weak and probably lowered the enthusiams for future scenarios.
That should give us a solid testing experience to go for SG2 WWI.

#21 LT39 » Clock synch » 05.02.2018 18:15:35

Replies: 0

Could someone synchronize the clocks? Thanks!

#22 Re: LT42 » Adding more "extreme" tiles » 03.02.2018 21:53:02

Understandable. But shoudnt be jungle unlike desert more easily be convertable? So maybe just less desert more jungle? Maybe some extreme small islands if that is technical even possible.

#23 LT42 » Adding more "extreme" tiles » 03.02.2018 17:04:27

Replies: 2

I know jungle and ice arent very popular but Im missing from an aestheticall point of view their appearance. Of course when global warming is coming jungle appears wich is somehow contradictory...

#24 LT42 » Federation » 03.02.2018 16:59:57

Replies: 0

What about making federation more interesting by adding regional capitals giving some sort of bonus but also making them vulnerable to secession if the regional capital is conquered but limited to the radius of the regional capital.

#25 Re: LT41 » LT41 to start February 7th. Teamless, islands and more traditional » 24.01.2018 14:05:05

Yeah, I had the chain in mind! But that only works for non-coastal river cities. Make the chain cheaper for river cities than the "port protection" for coastal cities.  Would the chain make an attack impossible or give bonus to the defender?

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB