#26 16.11.2012 18:23:02

Vendicar
Player
Posts: 21

Re: Changes

Yes, and if you have a river, that's even better.

A coal/River gives you 2/2/1
And Wine/River gives you 2/1/4

Mining them makes that 2/3/1 & 2/2/4.

So a Wine square would have to be the best place to put your first couple of cities?

The next best would be grassland/river 2/1/2.

Offline

#27 19.11.2012 17:02:08

Archont
Player
From: Kraków, Poland, age 35
Posts: 59

Re: Changes

Could anybody please clarify what does this line means:

Free Units        2\4

- there are two free units or four?


..(`)     In my spirit lies my faith
.(  )     Stronger than love and with me it will be
/(* *)  For always
./(_)()
Orchestra!

Offline

#28 20.11.2012 17:05:34

Modeemirotta
Player
Posts: 14

Re: Changes

Archont wrote:

Could anybody please clarify what does this line means:

Free Units        2\4

- there are two free units or four?

Depends on city size and goverment.

"By default 2 free units per city (upkeep and unhappiness), and 2 additional free units at cities with Pop >= 8."

Offline

#29 20.11.2012 20:24:56

Archont
Player
From: Kraków, Poland, age 35
Posts: 59

Re: Changes

Thank you.


..(`)     In my spirit lies my faith
.(  )     Stronger than love and with me it will be
/(* *)  For always
./(_)()
Orchestra!

Offline

#30 24.11.2012 03:52:35

Vendicar
Player
Posts: 21

Re: Changes

Vendicar wrote:

Yes, and if you have a river, that's even better.

A coal/River gives you 2/2/1
And Wine/River gives you 2/1/4

Mining them makes that 2/3/1 & 2/2/4.

So a Wine square would have to be the best place to put your first couple of cities?

The next best would be grassland/river 2/1/2.

   
Actually, I got that wrong - a city on coal/river/mine is giving 2/4/1

Offline

#31 24.11.2012 11:22:45

IllvilJa
Player
Posts: 51

Re: Changes

Noticed while browsing the unit help pages there are some changes to what units can do, and what they can't.  That's fine, but I found one couple of things unclear from the help pages alone, even if reading this thread clarified one of them for me.

Most notably: Helicopters are claimed to be able to carry what's called "infantry".  Exactly what is infantry in this context, all the units I 'assume' are infantry or is there a more formalized unit class that can be used to determine that a unit is transportable by helicopter?  If there is such a class (like the unit belonging to the "Land Unit" class) then I think the helicopter help text should refer to that specific classes instead of referring to it as "infantry".

My guess (I have not had time to download the rules files, I've only browsed this thread + read the ingame unit help files) is that any unit belonging to the "Land unit" class can be transported by helicopter.  Is that guess correct? Or is it just all the units that are capable of capturing empty cities that can be heli-transported (but perhaps "being able to capture empty city" == "Land unit" class :-) )

Suggestion, as rulesets are not set in stone (yet): Maybe let small land units be transported by helicopter as well?  Could be useful to sneak in spies into enemy territory...  Submarines should also be able to transport small land units in this way, in order to get spies onto enemy turf. OTOH, this would allow migrants to be transported by submarine + helicopter as well which could be, um, strange.


Another unclear thing that I finally think I managed to figure out: it is merchant units and migrants ONLY that can be captured, right?  And every unit with the ability to "capture some other units" has the ability to capture them, right?

(It could have been interesting to allow enemy sea and air units to be captured along with a city if enemy infantry manage to capture the city, making them belong to the side that took the city, like in good old Xconq anno 1988)

Offline

#32 25.11.2012 06:37:31

mrsynical
Player
Posts: 171

Re: Changes

I am guessing from my English interpretation of the word infantry refers to "human" units. e.g., Warrior, Phalanx, Archers, Swordsmen, Pikemen, Musketeers, Riflemen, Alpine Troops, Partisan, Fanatics, Marines, Paratroopers.

IllvilJa wrote:

Most notably: Helicopters are claimed to be able to carry what's called "infantry".  Exactly what is infantry in this context, all the units I 'assume' are infantry or is there a more formalized unit class that can be used to determine that a unit is transportable by helicopter?  If there is such a class (like the unit belonging to the "Land Unit" class) then I think the helicopter help text should refer to that specific classes instead of referring to it as "infantry".

My guess (I have not had time to download the rules files, I've only browsed this thread + read the ingame unit help files) is that any unit belonging to the "Land unit" class can be transported by helicopter.  Is that guess correct? Or is it just all the units that are capable of capturing empty cities that can be heli-transported (but perhaps "being able to capture empty city" == "Land unit" class :-) )

Last edited by mrsynical (25.11.2012 06:38:30)

Offline

#33 28.11.2012 04:10:39

det0r
Player
Posts: 166

Re: Changes

IllvilJa wrote:

Most notably: Helicopters are claimed to be able to carry what's called "infantry".  Exactly what is infantry in this context, all the units I 'assume' are infantry or is there a more formalized unit class that can be used to determine that a unit is transportable by helicopter?  If there is such a class (like the unit belonging to the "Land Unit" class) then I think the helicopter help text should refer to that specific classes instead of referring to it as "infantry".

I've never heard of this behaviour before so I'm guessing it has come in with adoption of the Civ2Civ3 ruleset. If so, I doubt anybody here will know for sure - we have only played one game on the Civ2Civ3 ruleset and it crashed before Flight/Rocketry because of a bug with spawning Barbarians.

If you think this is a particularly important rule then I suggest you open up a single player game and test the behaviour, or if it is not so important then maybe just wait until this game reaches an appropriate stage and you can test the behaviour then.

Offline

#34 28.11.2012 13:37:03

Xercise
Player
Posts: 95

Re: Changes

Thank you for all that have worked hard in creating the final ruleset!

I've installed the ruleset via the modpack, but it is not the latest one (with the tech trading losses etc). May I ask the person who has the 'final' ruleset to please update so we can install via modpack and try the new gamerules in non-LT games?

Thanks! Xercise

Offline

#35 28.11.2012 20:17:18

elrik
Player
Posts: 108

Re: Changes

Its just civ2civ3 ruleset from modpack installer + all units moves x3. If you want you can also download it from me. I`ve posted link few posts before

Offline

#36 29.11.2012 15:11:15

Xercise
Player
Posts: 95

Re: Changes

elrik wrote:

Its just civ2civ3 ruleset from modpack installer + all units moves x3. If you want you can also download it from me. I`ve posted link few posts before

Thanks for your reply, Elrik! But I just see the one from 27 June called Civ2-3 in the modpack list. The url it points to is http://www.cazfi.net/freeciv/modinst/2. … 2b.modpack.

Maybe I do not have the latest version of modpack or something... in any case I cannot see any ruleset called civ2civ3. Sorry, I feel like a noob, but please help me out.

Offline

#37 30.11.2012 07:03:52

elrik
Player
Posts: 108

Re: Changes

This ís the same mod:) I didn^t know exact name in freecev modpack installer. what we use here is civ2-3 with moves and probably vision tuned to 3x values

You can also check it here:
http://sdrv.ms/VXU1qy

it is on my skydrive account

Offline

#38 13.12.2012 23:37:34

chomwitt
Player
Posts: 38

Re: Changes

I noticed that building settlers with only 2 pop, the accumulated shields in a city got bigger than the cost of the settlers. Unfortunately i dont remember details just the basic fact. I was expecting that production will hold-freeze until pop=3 but it seems that extra shields were been accumulated in surplus. (anyway it was good for me but i wonder if it's normal or a bug).

Offline

#39 14.12.2012 02:31:06

det0r
Player
Posts: 166

Re: Changes

This is normal behaviour chomwitt. If you continue to build units you will retain those shields/transfer them to the next unit, but if you swap to a different 'production type' (e.g. building or wonder) then you will lose half of the accumulated shields.

Offline

#40 14.12.2012 12:48:48

Archont
Player
From: Kraków, Poland, age 35
Posts: 59

Re: Changes

May I request current list of Wonders of the World, both small and big? There is inconsistency between client's info and bardo's list present in this topic. Eg. the list mentions Marco Polo's Embassy and Michelangelo's Chapel; both of them are absent in Help and Research tree.


..(`)     In my spirit lies my faith
.(  )     Stronger than love and with me it will be
/(* *)  For always
./(_)()
Orchestra!

Offline

#41 14.12.2012 13:37:02

akfaew
Administrator
Posts: 619

Re: Changes

Archont, the help has the correct list and correct effects. Small wonders are listed as city improvements

Offline

#42 31.12.2012 10:48:57

chomwitt
Player
Posts: 38

Re: Changes

I noticed that there is no science output under anarchy. So the goverment table should add that info in the 'special' line?

Offline

#43 31.12.2012 11:39:44

ifaesfu
Player
From: Huelva - Spain
Posts: 93
Website

Re: Changes

chomwitt wrote:

I noticed that there is no science output under anarchy. So the goverment table should add that info in the 'special' line?

That info is in the first line of the governments table;    Tax/Lux/Cie Rate....Anarchy 0; Tribal 60;...

Offline

#44 08.01.2013 23:14:40

bardo
Player
Posts: 58

Re: Changes

I'm glad you are using this ruleset again for a long turn game.
Civ2civ3 ruleset is now in freeciv svn repository, and it will surely be included by default in freeciv 2.5, so it is no longer my own project, but part of the freeciv development.
It will be great if we can adjust it with the feedback from online players.

I'll try to answer questions about the rules here if you agree.

Offline

#45 09.01.2013 01:54:35

bardo
Player
Posts: 58

Re: Changes

elrik wrote:
monamipierrot wrote:

So caravan trade is ON????

Currently yes BUT as Kryon wrote it is a bug and trade min dist should be changed once more to 999

International trade routes were enabled in the ruleset to give this option to speed up the game in single player against AIs.
In long turn, I guess it will speed up a lot the game, but it could make alliances too powerfull compared to non-allied player. I'd suggest to dissable trade routes completely. The techs Trade and Corporation were already designed to give huge bonuses to corruption by distance.

monamipierrot wrote:

IMHO, changes on tile revenues are a mess, with no purpouse.

Some of the changes to terrain (mainly bad lands as tundra, swamp, jungle and deep oceans) were designed for Earth scenarios. But they should not affect much the online games at temperate maps.
The most important to me was to make it simpler to estimate the final output at the city tile. Imo, it was more confusing with deafult rules. With this ruleset, the final output in the city tile is always increased by one shield (or one food at hills/deserts) compared to the same tile without city.

E.g. Am I wrong or, despite of what the "TIP" says, the best settler farms are not <4 or <6 cities, but HUGE cities,* which may produce a settler each couple of turn?

Unless there is a bug, cities with pop greater than 6 will need more food to recover the population than cities under 6. The behavior of foodbox in this ruleset is almost equal to civ3, and the strategies to grow the cities should be very similar, with granary being very important.

This is a serious ANTI-SMALLPOX device.
citymindist is now completely useless, cause it's much better to have few huge cities than dozens of crappy ones.
I may be wrong but one would want not to let cities overlap in the future, so keep them >6 tiles between them.
Not only. One may want to re-think about conquering small empires with small cities, cause they are valueless.

Again, that behated citymindist, by forbidding something which nobody wants to exploit, ends in ruining it all, cause for some strategical reason I still could have wanted to build a city close to another althou suffering severe economical negative effects.

I agree with this ruleset Smallpox won't be useful in the long run, though I still think it could be useful in the begining. The default setting of the ruleset forces citymindist to 3 mainly to help the AI, I guess it won't hurt if you disable this limit for LT games. I'm still curious to see if skilled smallpox players can use it succesfully with this rules, and I hope so.

I have a doubt on what does it mean "10" in "foodbox new" = "40(10)" for a city 8+. Is "size of granary" the bonus food a granary give to us OR, opposite, the amount of food one still need to grow? In simple words, if I have a granary, will I find myself with 10/foods out of 40s or with 30/40 when reaching size 8 (or 9 or 10...)? In the latter case multiply for 100 my above statement about smallpox.

10 is the size of the granary, the amount of food that you will find in the foodbox when the city grows. It is the main change compared to civ3, where granary size is always half the size of the foodbox. It was not possible to implement the foodbox and granary exactly the same as civ3 due to hardcoded limitations, but I like to see granary being less important at large cities than it was in civ3.

I noticed that building settlers with only 2 pop, the accumulated shields in a city got bigger than the cost of the settlers. Unfortunately i dont remember details just the basic fact. I was expecting that production will hold-freeze until pop=3 but it seems that extra shields were been accumulated in surplus. (anyway it was good for me but i wonder if it's normal or a bug).

If I understood you, it is normal.
The cost of settlers was designed so most cities will be able to acumulate shields between one settler and the next one, and to have the chance to start improving the city or recruiting units soon in game, keeping at same time an optimal expansion rate. I find it very important in continental games, in order to be able to defend your initial cities/settlers, but I guess it is not so important at island maps.

Helicopters are claimed to be able to carry what's called "infantry"

If it was not changed for this LT31, helicopters can carry units typed as "Land" (mostly all infantry military units). I'm afraid it also includes cavalry, but cavalry should be obsolete by the time you build helicopters. It can not carry non-military land units like settlers or diplomats (typed as "small land"), nor wheeled units like artillery or tanks (typed as "big land").

Last edited by bardo (09.01.2013 03:01:22)

Offline

#46 09.01.2013 16:42:42

Kryon
Player
Posts: 326

Re: Changes

Bardo, you say "The techs Trade and Corporation were already designed to give huge bonuses to corruption by distance." but the help says these are one-time bonuses only. Is that right or do they reduce corruption permanently?

Offline

#47 09.01.2013 20:08:52

ifaesfu
Player
From: Huelva - Spain
Posts: 93
Website

Re: Changes

* Corruption by Distance is increased by 1 until The Corporation is researched by the player.
** Waste by Distance is increased by 1 until Trade is researched by the player.

I haven't read the help, but it seems it's permanent. They cancel the penalization.

Offline

#48 10.01.2013 10:55:53

bardo
Player
Posts: 58

Re: Changes

As ifaesfu says, it is a permanent reduction to the corruption/waste by distance. (se nota que entre andaluces nos entendemos wink )
With default rules, I think most governments become obsolete soon due to corruption by distance. The idea was to link this effect to trade/corporation, in order to keep similar amount of corruption/waste for all governments. The exception are Communism and Federation that do not cause corruption/waste by distance. I'm afraid in big maps like LT, every large empire will end using one of those 2 governments, but the rest of governments will surely be useful while the empire grow up, and they should be useful again if you are being conquered.

There is something important in this ruleset that may not fit well at big maps, and it is the waste of food by distance. The reason to introduce waste of food was to make it harder to create large empires at solo games, but it might be annoying at such big maps.
It is not affected by governments, so you could remove this rule without affecting the balance of the ruleset. Or you may divide the effect (the same than movement was multiplied). This is the related code:

; Base -1% food each 1 tile
[effect_food_waste_distance]
type    = "Output_Waste_By_Distance"
value   = 1
reqs    =
    { "type", "name", "range"
      "OutputType", "Food", "Local"
    }

; Total -1% food each 2 tiles
[effect_food_waste_distance_1]
type    = "Output_Waste_Pct"
value   = 50
reqs    =
    { "type", "name", "range"
      "OutputType", "Food", "Local"
    }

Last edited by bardo (10.01.2013 11:50:31)

Offline

#49 16.01.2013 14:38:52

chomwitt
Player
Posts: 38

Re: Changes

ifaesfu wrote:
chomwitt wrote:

I noticed that there is no science output under anarchy. So the goverment table should add that info in the 'special' line?

That info is in the first line of the governments table;    Tax/Lux/Cie Rate....Anarchy 0; Tribal 60;...


So , if i got it , in anarchy there is no trade production?
So why in a next line says: Special           +NoUpkeep -50% Lux ? -50% from what?

Offline

#50 16.01.2013 15:00:41

ifaesfu
Player
From: Huelva - Spain
Posts: 93
Website

Re: Changes

chomwitt wrote:
ifaesfu wrote:
chomwitt wrote:

I noticed that there is no science output under anarchy. So the goverment table should add that info in the 'special' line?

That info is in the first line of the governments table;    Tax/Lux/Cie Rate....Anarchy 0; Tribal 60;...


So , if i got it , in anarchy there is no trade production?
So why in a next line says: Special           +NoUpkeep -50% Lux ? -50% from what?

Not sure, but you can still have tax, science or luxury under anarchy if you set some citizens as taxmen, scientists or entertainers. Maybe it reduces the 50% out of what entertainers can produce.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB