#1 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 19.08.2017 16:48:57

No need for. You will recognize the map but since I changed so much of the map (moved rivers, altered pathways, added/deleted nations and changed a lot of tiles that it is unnecessary and would take away a fun thing to do: Explore! It can be useful to look at an older map for rough orientation but I think you will pretty fast know where you are even without looking at the map.
As for me, I wont take a look at the map, I will only have the memory of a map of an editors perspective wich is a lot different. Players will anyhow be randomly assigned. But most importantly I'm not a good player... :-)

#2 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 19.08.2017 13:49:31

I dont think much more people will join. Almost all were veteran players and most joined in the first days. Also, scenarios are very sensitive to idlers and newcomers are often idlers so I prefer quality over cuantity. We could start soon if you ask me! Anyhow we have to test how well this runs.

Yeah, I will position players once confirmations are through.

#3 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 17.08.2017 16:28:42

Perfect! I figured out how we can handle less players and evenly distribute land. I will work on it tomorrow and then send it to wieder.

#4 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 17.08.2017 13:52:52

The tech levels need to be set to allow the advanced start. Somehow it doesn't feel right to start with ancient techs.

I disagree. I've played the scenario. It was fun to play it low tech and then sowly advance. High tech games are much faster. The map is relatively small, we would accelerate it disproportionately.
We are talking about the borders of 1872 because Freeciv offers mostly 18/19. century german states. But they were fighting internally for centuries so it doesnt feel to me strange to start the fight low tech.

Another question is tech trading and tech leakage. How to set those?

I like very much LT38, no trading but some leakage to give everyone a chance. We could use those settings.

And the buildings... I'm not that familiar with that time period in Germany. I know the story of the unification and stuff but I have no idea about what kind of infra different states had around the time.
The city sizes are another issue. They should be something like 10-12 maybe. So that not too much time is needed to grow the cities. Not sure how big the cities were at the time...

The Africa and Europe scenarios are much bigger and justify more infrastructure like rail. In German States Scenario the three cities you get are already connected by road plus one north south and an east west medieval long road connect all ends of the scenario. Also, the big rivers are all navegable by all kind of ships since they are made of lake tiles. It is enough.

As for the buildings. The cities are not edited since it is a huge work. I did it for the Europe Scenario in hours and hours of work and only for more easy available census data of 1900. Not doing it again. Specially since everybody will complain that the game is too unbalanced. City size 1 is not a bug, its a feature. Again, the smallenes of the scenario would give disproportionate strenght to impires with big cities. And if I would take the data from the 1900 Europe scenario the would be pure fiction aplied to 1871. There was huge population growth between 1871 and 1900! I reject using fantasy data. 

I thought about it maybe best to edit the  German States 1871 scenario. Some "artistic freedom" needs to be taken, probably, meaning that some nations should be merged or edited out depending on how many players we get. While testing different scenarios would be preferable, it looks like that starting with one scenario, playing it and then playing it again for the second time with edits and fixes would really help balancing and understanding this scenario stuff.

I can cut and glue it but since longturn has less nations than regular freeciv it is again difficult... I got a newer edited version of the German States version were I made improvements to the landscape.
I dont wanna take the completely surprise of exploring. We could start with the default version and in the end we would take the edited landscape version that nobody know besides me.

I made some work on the Africa scenario. It doesnt have the nations problem and there is still lots of exploring. Might be an alternative as well. It has edited 1900 tech but you still have to grow your empire and when the empires are flourishing it will be one huge war. If we wanna have fireworks from the beginning it has to be Europe 1900...

#5 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 12.08.2017 14:55:06

The probem with nations with units only is conquering the cities. One way to deal with this would be giving those nations only ancient techs. That way the conquered cites would not be able to produce new units or at least units that are modern enough. Does this sound too weird?
Maybe we could test the scenario game with a very small and short game setup? Maybe editing some map for a limited number of players and playing a 10-20 turn game with 23h turns? Anyone interedted to play such a short game? It would be a non ranking game and we could plan the setup together.

Wieder, could we test the Spanish Civil War Scenario? 8 people have signed up so far for SG1 and almost all are playing LT38 so all of them are a reliable bunch. I think its ok if nations without cities can conquer cities and produce own units. We could use the ruleset of LT38 and play 10-20 to test the concept of scenario games and at a later date try a bigger one. I could send you the newest file, inform everybody  and then we could start pretty soon. 
What do you think?

#7 Re: LT39 » Any changes you would like to see for a more traditional game? » 04.08.2017 12:28:22

And other thoughts I posted on the freeciv forum:

"I've always wondered if strategic bombing could be introduced since it is much more that what bombers did in WW2. Destroying homes, factories and infrastructure of cities and not to forget kill humans. I could imagine a city loosing a city structure and/or population per bombing raid but not necessarily units. Odds would depend on if there is a defender e.g. rifleman (also depending on how many) or an anti-aircraft gun structure/unit. Also introducing a tactical bomber for unit combat would close the gap between fighter (more gainst other planes) and bombers (for city destruction)."

http://forum.freeciv.org/f/viewtopic.ph … 4748#p4748


"In the german states scenario I used lake tiles to form rivers producing by that natural bariers between states since big rivers like the Rhine can be a real obstacle and a bridge that size to cross them is not something natural. I therefore thought of a bridge unit that could transport itself to a lake-river tile owned by the player and placed as a bridge. The details (unit or city structure; being close to a city or not) are of course debatable but I like the idea."


#8 Re: LT39 » Any changes you would like to see for a more traditional game? » 04.08.2017 12:25:01

You said it! Doesnt need to land each turn. Its better to speak of airship though, since they started already from the 1850s and technically Zeppelins are younger coming up with planes. Actually Zeppelins were quite robust in the early stages of WWI withstanding mutiple shots from enemy planes. They could even defend themself with multiple machine guns. Game changer was the introduction of inflammable bullets and they were always vulnerable to artillery. We could also talk of limited transport capability but since Im not aware of any bigger troop deployments by Zeps I would cut back on that, although in the 30s civilian people made transatlantic flights with zeppelins in bigger numbers...

To summarize it:

-Doesnt need to land eacht turn
-Available earlier than flight
-unreachable from ground with exceptions of artillery/howitzers
-lots of moves (guess there is wind in freeciv...)
-weak bombard capability
-weak against planes
-maybe random chance to get lost when flying over the deep ocean? (They quite often got lost due to weather...)
-transport capability  max for diplomats and spies? Make it only available with combustion? 

Seems all realistic to me.

Now the most important question: can you simply introduce a new unit with new grafics?

Because I have many more unit ideas like crossbowman as advancement of the archer. Tanks could be split in WWI and WWII tanks. But I woudnt necessarily make them mandatory to research. Just as a tactical advance for bulbs.

#10 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 27.07.2017 15:30:37

I noticed. Much of the nations in 2.3 are missing in 2.7  :-/

#11 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 22.07.2017 09:35:40

Wieder you think you could open the registrations? In my opinion there is enough interest here and once enough people registered we can do the adjustments.

#12 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 27.06.2017 11:04:39

I guess in the end its better if we just take the German States Scenario and try to play it with as much players as possible. I guess the best way to proceed is to open the sign up process and then see how many will join. I can erase a few players who anyhow are too close together and make other changes if requiered when I roughly know how many are playing. The  other scenarios require just too many house rules.
I would suggest to either limit alliances to 3 players or scrap alliances completely and only allow one winner since the map is rather small. Easy and conflict avoiding rules.

#13 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 22.06.2017 16:40:15

"Limited capabilities"

Depicting the Iberian peninsula I added Gibralta (Britain) and France north to the border plus countries that fought/helped in the Spanish Civil War and therefore are represented with units but without cities. Maybe to role-playish for the first game?

Im open for amputation of other scenarios. Caribbean Colonization is too unscenario-like in my opinion.

#14 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 22.06.2017 15:24:48

6-10 players is more something for the Spanish Civil War. But it could work mainly as a proof of concept and for people looking for a role play game since some forces only have limited capabilities on this map.

#15 Re: ScenarioGame 1 » A new concept to Longturn games, scenario game » 21.06.2017 13:27:05

Actually I had given up playing a scenario but since the actual possibility seems to be there... :-)

Here again the the collection I have to offer:


Ive been updating most of the scenarios without updating the page. Varying the topography, players and many more things so the scenarios would be familiar but not totally predictable and there would be no necessity to reveal the map.

#16 Re: LT38 » Reply here to join Team Red » 02.06.2017 14:22:31

I knew I was doing a mistake! I will renounce. But I just liked the lion. Lets see what I can find instead...

#18 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 05.04.2017 21:00:45

This thread is over a year old. I guess we should just take the Spanish Civil War scenario. 2 players is the minimum. 4-6 is optimal and more can be accomodated. Once the game is being played I could imagine that more people get interested in future scenarios. 

The scenario can be downloaded here: http://forum.freeciv.org/f/download/file.php?id=528

#19 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 03.04.2017 23:17:40

"Your nation is not RIP yet"

Funny, a couple of workers dont count as a nation! ;-) 

I spread the word in LT37 and the feeciv forum.

#20 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 01.04.2017 19:16:10

I had expected more enthusiasm... Are there not at least 3 more people willing to play s small scale scenario?

#22 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 24.03.2017 21:27:18

Im ready if you wanna proceed... :-)

#23 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 19.02.2017 23:24:26

You have a free hand with the ruleset! What you think is best! I'm anyways getting to know through a hard try and error process the current LT37 so I will hopeflly have learned something. The 2x move needs to come since its a rather small scenario.

I like the exploring element and since we don't know the exact player number amputation will anyhow come and change the map. I'm sure I can find a few hours to change the topography strong enough so that the incentive to explore the map is there. You will only have a medieval sense of where you are...

I think other scenarios are better suited to play with modern units and big cities. I want to have more primitive battles or medieval ones at least in the beginning.
Sure 1870 suggests otherwise but it was more for practical nation reasons.

A team game is a good thing (thinking of random 3 player teams) although a backstabbing-no-official diplomacy game where only one can be king is something worth considering.
Playing with a king unit is anyway worth considering...
But since I'm so indifferent in these points I even prefer a poll.

For fairness purpouses I would suggest anyways a random nation allocation since it's a fairer game than other scenarios I made.

Its one of my less role gamish scenarios ever. They tend to be fragile. GT Colonial Africa was hugely fun but was hard to manage since you had to intervene some times because people didn't know the rules or ignored them arbitrarily. (like giving tech to natives, forming forbidden alliances). So this one should be easy to handle.

#24 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 15.02.2017 16:08:41

Or lets keep it easy and just take the German States 1871 scenario as test game. I could alter the the appearance of the map superficially before the game starts to add the exploring and surprise element. I could also adapt the number of players by this.

This should be the newest version: http://forum.freeciv.org/f/download/file.php?id=501

In the unlikely event that we need more nations I have a newer version with more players.

#25 Re: New Games » German States 1871 » 14.02.2017 13:38:09

Sure, new ruleset it is. What size, tech level and how many players? Inbalanced, balanced,  team, role game? 2x moves would in most cases be better. Experienced showed scenario to be faster.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB