version 9 playtest feedback

I remember reading posts saying that moving down eras was impossible or at least non-trivial (perhaps because the necessary update methodes in the sdk do not work in reverse.)

Aside from the obvious things like unit / city art (i.e. on cities it might be cool to gradually replace the ruines with somewhat more habitable building as the game progresses) the ERA do also affect certain AI bonuses (AI getting more bonus as the game progresses)
 
Davidlallen while on the subject of eras you may want to note how adopting a religions effect the cities and surrounding improvements in FFH. They do this by linking your adopted religion with the era code. This could be useful in your mod in some way...
 
Maybe the scale shouldn't just be 100 years? What would a civilization that "starts over" and has different experiences develop? Without the usual government restructions and in a more desperate environment?
 
100 years is a bit arbitrary, so it probably soed not need to be "exactly 100". But i think at any rate the sclae should remain short... Going back to like 10 Years per turn would feel off in a "future age" game.
 
I haven't dug into how goody huts work very much. Maybe Small Arms is too powerful to pop, that is an easy change. I do not think the goody hut can directly give points towards a tech. Of course it can be done by rewriting the goody hut stuff in python instead of using the default engine, but that is more work. If I turn off bGoodyTech for Small Arms, does that help "enough"?
Click to expand...

FFH2 Fall Further has this mechanics, you can try to look there.
It's much more balanced.
 
Refar said:
100 years is a bit arbitrary, so it probably soed not need to be "exactly 100". But i think at any rate the sclae should remain short... Going back to like 10 Years per turn would feel off in a "future age" game.
Click to expand...

I was thinking to keep the same turn scale, but make the endgame open. Thus allowing more techs and more advanced tech growth...
 
Speaking of Small Arms, one thing bothers me about the game. When you defeat a gun unit, how come you don't pick up their guns? I mean would you say to yourself, well thats a mighty nice gun and it kills people from a distance, but I think I'll leave it lying on the ground and stick with my machete.

Shouldn't survivors wielding machetes who are lucky enough to defeat a gun unit pick up their weapons to use? Or other units collect guns to give to them?

Also, shouldn't you be able to upgrade survivors and crossbowmen to gun units once you can build them?
 
Another suggestion; add in the food from animals modcomp. It also allows you to get hammers from units as well. That way you could scavenge stuff from animals, barbs, and enemy units.

Possibly add in the ability to capture vehicles through combat. If you had a running Ute and you killed the crew and only damaged the Ute without destroying it, wouldn't you haul it back to be repaired?
 
jefmart1 said:
When you defeat a gun unit, how come you don't pick up their guns? [...] Possibly add in the ability to capture vehicles through combat.
Click to expand...

The issue with capturing guns is tracking ammo. In version 9, there is an ammo factory building which is required to construct a gun unit. If you capture guns but don't have small arms yourself, you would have no way to resupply them.

Limited ammo is a possibility, but one of the original design goals was to require some micromanagement for fuel trucks first, and then if people still had interest in micromanaging ammo, I could add that second. Maybe it is time to explore that. How inconvenient do you find it to micromanage fuel trucks? If you had to similarly micromanage ammo, would that make the game less fun?

There are a few cases where a unit could upgrade by capturing weapons. If you have an ammo factory, and your survivor defeats a guardian, an upgrade could be possible. Survivors upgrade to guardian. But if a cavalry defeats a machine gunner, where there is no upgrade path, it should not be possible to upgrade.

With some additional complexity, I could create a promotion which represents the machine guns, and the winning cavalry unit could carry the promotion around and transfer it. Then you might be able to upgrade a survivor unit in the same plot with this machine-gun-carrying cavalry. There are already examples of promos that can be carried and transferred that way; the promotion "drops" in the plot where the combat happened, so if you kill one unit in a stack of defenders, the remaining defenders get the drop.

I had proposed a mechanism for "wrecks" of vehicles in this post. It is on the list of things to do.

As usual, the hard part for either of these enhancements is getting the AI to use them effectively.
 
Actually, my feeling is, that MM-ing ammo might add a lot more to the gameplay than Fuel... For example because there would be units like Crssbows, that do not require ammo - so limited ammo on Firearms would actually allow these units to coexist.

I think the current solution for AI fuel truck use is acceptable as well (tho there is still space for improvement), so adding the ammo concept wouldnt cripple the AI too bad.

Another possibility would be not to split up fuel and ammo, but to use a single concept "Supplies" instead. (This probably would require to add supply counters to Trucks - so rearming a single Guardina does not use up a whole truck)...
 
davidlallen said:
The issue with capturing guns is tracking ammo. In version 9, there is an ammo factory building which is required to construct a gun unit. If you capture guns but don't have small arms yourself, you would have no way to resupply them.
Click to expand...

More to the point, just because you have an ammo plant, you can't be sure that every Civ has decided to build the same type of ammo. I would think (don't quote me here, I'm speaking w/o full knowledge) it would be a long time before you could build ammo (other than shotguns) that would really work well with a lot of the modern weapons. So Civ's are going to back up a bit and use earlier guns. Now the question is would the go back as far as the late flintlocks used in the ACW or would they start with guns equivalent to the Lee Enfield or Mauser? Either way, different Civs might choose different calibers. One Civ might go the .303 route, another the .45 route.

So even if you grab the weapons and have ammo for you own weapons, you can't be sure they'd fit your opponents weapons.
 
Refar said:
Another possibility would be not to split up fuel and ammo, but to use a single concept "Supplies" instead. (This probably would require to add supply counters to Trucks - so rearming a single Guardian does not use up a whole truck)...
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a Scenario for Warlords or BTS set during the Crusades or something where you had a "Supply Wagon" that you needed while in enemy territory or bad things started to happen supply wise? I mean you can live off the land to some degree, but gas and ammo doesn't grow on trees so you have to carry it with you and that always slows things down for the attacker.

Of course, that being said, one could say if a supply unit was created, that units raiding cottages and the like would have a chance of creating such a unit. One of the main uses for Cavalry in the ACW was to go behind enemy lines and go on raids to capture food and provisions to keep an advance going. Not only a supply unit could be found, but perhaps something like the 'magic healing potion' of the Fall Further mod which represent a one-shot medical boost to help heal your troops. (This one-shot would represent medicine and other creature comforts that help your unit get back to scratch.)
 
The Supply Train from Chalemagne is just a medic unit - not really usefull for our purposes, tho we are using similar AI settings.
 
The supply train in the crusades scenario is the only way to heal units. They don't heal at all without it. EDIT: rats, I did not type fast enough, refar beat me to it.

I'm not so sure about combining fuel and ammo into the same supply unit; foot units would need ammo supplies but not fuel. I put "limited ammo" on the back burner so long ago, I never really thought about how to do it.

Good point that different civs may rebuild using incompatible ammo calibers, so using civ A's guns with civ B's ammo would not work. That does add complexity onto limited ammo. I hope it is still safe to assume that gasoline is gasoline, we don't need to worry that civ A's gasoline can't refuel civ B's trucks! That would spoil the whole idea of fighting over tankers, which is one of the original key concepts.
 
I wouldnt split up different ammo types - if limited ammo is going to be added. Sure there are meny different - sometimes exotic - calibers. But since we assume the mod set in somewhat limired area - like one continent or something - we can count on "prevalent ammo types" - sure sometimes you will find a gun you cant use. Nuts. But most of the time some standard issue calibers will be used.

Plus - refitting a gun to another caliber of ammo is quite simple. (As long as it is similar ammo of course - you cant refit your sidearm to fire Tank shells)
 
Refar said:
I wouldn't split up different ammo types - if limited ammo is going to be added.
Click to expand...

Of course this brings up something for an event or from a goody hut: "pre-Apocalyptic ammo" - finding some could either be used as a one-shot power-boost or gives the unit a promotion that increases their strength.

However, I think that Civ's would have to start making their own firearms and ammo pretty quickly. I would think that even the most frugal Survivalist would have used up most if not all of their modern ammo in the 20 years prior to Turn 1. I mean you look at "The Road Warrior" and almost no one had guns; all had more of the makeshift weapons, which is what you'd expect until any Civ could get ammo production up. From what I understand of firearms, it isn't the gun that is the production bottle-neck, it's the ammo. Plus, in combat, you use a lot of ammo. I can tell you from personal experience that you can blow through 7 magazines with 25-30 rounds pretty fast and not even being on semi-auto.

Plus, unless you are lining up and blazing away like they did up through the ACW, most shots fired are not shot with the intent to kill; they are shot to keep your opponents head down so your buddy can close and kill them. In Vietnam it was estimated you had 3,000 rounds fired for every casualty.

Obviously with the small unit size and the need to get much closer, this ratio would go down, but even if it were something like 1,000 to 1, this means you have to be able to produce a LOT of ammo.
 
I saw the ammo factory more as a reloading plant then really manufacturing ammo per se. There should be tons of used brass lying around after the world falls apart.

Part of my problem with the conceptualization of limited ammo is that in the US, there is probably enough ammo to kill everyone in the world a thousand times over.

That not withstanding, there are really only 3 main types of ammo used in the world, .223 (5.56mm), 7.62mm (Warsaw Pact), and 7.62mm (NATO) or .306 (also used in hunting rifles). The most common weapons in the world are AK-47s and M-16s or knockoffs, plus the dozens of rifles that are similar in style.

I personally own a Bushmaster (M-16 clone) and an SKS (predecessor of the AK-47) and have friends that own the same. At gun shows they sell ammo for both by the thousands, and sporting goods stores have boxes and boxes of it.
 
jefmart1 said:
Part of my problem with the conceptualization of limited ammo is that in the US, there is probably enough ammo to kill everyone in the world a thousand times over.
Click to expand...

Two problems with this. First, this mod is notionally set in Australia. Second, much of that ammo is going to be stored in military sites that will be destroyed in the War. Much of the civilian ammo will be destroyed in the War as major cities are nuked. Thirdly, and I think most importantly, there is 20 years from the War to Turn 1. 20 years is a long time for ammo to last when you have to fight to stay alive as well as probably using a lot of ammo for hunting to provide food.

jefmart1 said:
That not withstanding, there are really only 3 main types of ammo used in the world, .223 (5.56mm), 7.62mm (Warsaw Pact), and 7.62mm (NATO) or .306 (also used in hunting rifles). The most common weapons in the world are AK-47s and M-16s or knockoffs, plus the dozens of rifles that are similar in style.
Click to expand...

Actually I think you'd find that the 9mm round is also very prevalent. However, the amount of weapons you'd expect in the rural communities expected to survive would be more hunting rifles with a lot of .303 and .22 caliber.

jefmart1 said:
I personally own a Bushmaster (M-16 clone) and an SKS (predecessor of the AK-47) and have friends that own the same. At gun shows they sell ammo for both by the thousands, and sporting goods stores have boxes and boxes of it.
Click to expand...

While this is very true, remember that prior to the game there was War and then the Time of Disorder so there would be lots of uses for that ammo and people would be fighting for supplies. Plus having an AK-47 is fine, but can you make new ammo for it? Are you willing to bet your Civilization on whether you can make new ammo for it before my Civ decides to back up to ACW flintlocks with their solid shot or Minie Ball? Again, as I said before, many of the modern firearms are not that hard to make: metalworkers in Peshawar are hand-making copies of the .303 Lee Enfield and the AK-47, but they aren't making the bullets.
 
arkham4269 said:
Plus having an AK-47 is fine, but can you make new ammo for it? QUOTE]

If you police your brass and were able to manufacture gunpowder (sulfur, charcoal, and nitrates) you could reload your rounds. Most hunters, gun enthusiasts, etc; possess the necessary equipment and know how to do so. I agree that making "new" ammo would be difficult, but if you already have the gun, wouldn't you try making the ammo for that rather then making new guns?

Youre right about 9mm and even .45s (I have a Glock 21 as well) but since the game only has graphics for shotguns and assault rifles I only gave the assault rifle ammo as an example.
Click to expand...
 
jefmart1 said:
If you police your brass and were able to manufacture gunpowder...
Click to expand...
Something easier to do on the range but not in combat, unfortunately.

jefmart1 said:
I agree that making "new" ammo would be difficult, but if you already have the gun, wouldn't you try making the ammo for that rather then making new guns?
Click to expand...

It's all about sustainability. Turn 1 has your Civ starting out after 20 years after the Doom of Man(tm). So your people are going to be a mixed bag of survivors, most of which will have a wide variety of weapons. Plus, but turn 80, you'd have about 2.5 generations of growth so you might now have more people than old firearms to arm them with.

Plus think of it in terms of scale. If you have to produce machined brass cartridges, you will have to secure the brass, have the equipment to machine the brass as well as make the gunpowder for the rounds. Now you might be able to make gunpowder pretty quickly, but machining cartridges in large numbers might take some time, especially when there are a lot of other pressing needs. Plus you need a lot of quality control to mimic ammo needed for modern weapons.

So why go through the trouble when you can make your own Minié ball ammunition that use lead? First off, depending on your equipment, what ever size Minié ball you make, you adjust your rifle production to match the caliber you choose. Again, making a copy of a ACW US Army Springfield isn't that hard for anyone who knows how to make metal. Since this is 'old' technology, it is easier to find how to make it, especially with the popularity of blackpowder firearms as well as reenactors. (Do they have any of those in Australia?)

Another factor is simply time. As I said earlier, there are people in Peshawar in Pakistan that are making hand-made copies of the Lee-Enfield rifle so you could easily make a Springfield. These same machinist could also make the ammo for it unlike the AK-47's they also make by hand.

Not to mention, if you went back further to flintlocks, your men can make their own lead shot, even in enemy territory since it's just about melting some lead, pouring into the mold and cleaning up the next morning. So as long as your gunpowder supplies hold up, ammo isn't the problem. I wouldn't want to go on a attack into enemy territory with modern weapons that I couldn't reload unless back at home. That's setting yourself to get wiped out but a bunch of guys just using crossbows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
[QoL] Notification Settings
Replies
4
Views
608
axatin
A
D
Blinking
Replies
3
Views
278
dunbrokin
D
4
Is the DLL source code for the latest (October 2014, version 1.0.3.276) patch available?
Replies
11
Views
337
whoward69
whoward69
Nizef
  • Sticky
TSG 241 After Actions Thread
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
cocls
C
V
  • Sticky
TSG 242 After Actions Thread
Replies
19
Views
885
Bufnitza
B
Top Bottom