SCENARIO: American Civil War - C3C only

Originally posted by Klyden
No, not suggesting we remove the bombard on divisons, but I think it will be better set at 0 (like the skirmishers). This provides a bit of extra defence for both the AI and the player and does not allow the player to use them as extra artillery in game.

There seems to be consensus on this from everyone. I will make the change for beta 3. All division sized units will have bombard range changed from 1 to zero. This will allow defensive bombard only.

Misfit
 
Originally posted by The Last Conformist
The "Non-Advancing Leader Creation Bug", as I've christened it, only rears it ugly head if the battle-created unit (Leader, normally) has a defense rating >0. I suggest we set it to zero, until and unless Firaxis should eventually fix the bug.



Leader units will have their defense rating cut from 1 to zero. This change will be in beta 3. Excellent suggestion The Last Conformist.

Misfit
 
Originally posted by Misfit_travel
Propaganda was supposed to give a happiness city improvement. Hmm, I look into that to fix it for beta 3.

We lowered the effectiveness of Churches and Cathedrals in order to add a third happiness city improvement. I was going to call it Prisoner of War camp, but there were some objections. I'll probably make it a Newspaper or something like that.

It was in the project plan to add, but I guess I missed it.

People objected to Prisoner of war camp? I kinda like it or something like it. Maybe just war prison or pow camp for short. Yes, POW camp sounds good.

I will try to update the tech dates some more this weekend but Im actually have less time on weekends so it may be slower. So far though I think you have done an excellent job on it and it seems to flow very well to me.
 
This one hurt---whole division killed---- (disease) at Paducah.

Of course, I like it because Im weird like that and I like tough games but Im losing about 1 unit a turn to the plague-disease effect and you will have to judge if thats too much, but it is doing a good job simulating the lack of sanitation-disease-deserters-.

My vote would be to keep it like it is because if we add a few auto-builds then it will be off-set anyway.
 
Im continuing tech tree time-line here due to the other thread so far back.


Week 18 1862---Economics (6 turns) 30 percent science-----568 gold per turn

Week 24 1862--Ironclads (6 turns) 20 % science----784 gold per turn

Week 30 1862--City Improvements 20 %science---789 gold per turn

Week 36 1862 Calvarly Organization 30 % science--- 588 gold per turn


OK I have Propaganda----medicine----improved cartography-----army organization (4) to go at 6 weeks each

Should hit the 2nd era(mid-1862-1863) at WEEK 2 1863.
So Im running about 6 months behind but thats with no tech stealing.....I will continue to update as soon as possible....dread
 
I don't know if plague might be the way to go or not as far as adding something to the game. Each side has a lot of PC's so there are going to be plenty of vultures around. For a defender in a certain area, it will get worse as they shuttle units around, trying to meet an attackers thrusts. (This is more prone to happen to the CSA as they use their interior lines of communication to meet Federal attacks than it is for the Federals in most cases).

The other thing is that knowing about the plague, I think people will adjust tactics and start putting as many units outside of cities as possible to help reduce casulaties. While this might be desirable to a point, the AI would not think of such a tactic while a human would, so the point being that casualties for an AI player would probably be worse over a period of time than for a human.

Another factor is while Dreadkought might like losing a division in Paducah (because he is wierd ;) ) and some players won't resort to using a auto save turn to avoid something like that, a lot more would just go grab the auto save turn to avoid the loss of the division. Early in the game, such quirks of fate can really hurt a sides chances when you consider how few "big units" there are and how long it takes to replace them, especially for the CSA where they depend a bit more on quality than quantity. If a lot of people feel that way, then having unit losses like that is something that has a strong impact on playabilty. Really too bad that you can't make it optional.
 
Based on feedback, here is my current list for beta3 inclusion:

1) Non advancing Leader creation bug fix
- set leader defense to zero
STATUS: done

2) Tweak unit costs
- modified Division costs downward
- modified Individual unit costs downward (slightly)
- increased support cost per unit from 1 to 2
- should decrease Union cash
- modified units supported free by CSA upward slightly
STATUS: done

3) Remove bombard range from divisions
- range to zero from one
STATUS: done

4) Add city improvments
- Newspaper in Propaganda tech
- Industrial Waste Management in Pollution Controls tech
- Manufacturing Plant in Advanced Production tech
- Hidden Offshore Account wonder in Capitalization tech
STATUS: in progress

5) Remove Steal tech from AI vs. human game
- ability removed from initial Spy missions
- ability added once Suspension of Habeas Corpus tech discovered
STATUS: done

6) Tweak plague settings (again)
- remove plague, substitute 2-3% chance of disease per terrain type.
STATUS: done

7) Check wonder splash screens for game crash
- check PediaIcons to make all references work
STATUS: in progress

8) Change Unit artwork for militia / garrisons
- research if additional artwork available which would be more suitable
STATUS: Done

9) Check Leader creation capabilities
- save game received from Klyden
- modify settings as needed
STATUS: in progress

10) Enabled drafting of Militia units in game start
STATUS: done

11) Enable domination victory condition

Let me know if I've missed any feedback.

Misfit
 
It was I that objected to "POW Camp" as the name of a happiness improvement. I just don't see locals getting happy for having a POW camp built in their town, and the name is quite opaque to the uninitiated (indeed, based on SMAC's "Punishment Dome" or whatever it was called, I would rather have expected it to increase shield output). I like "Newspaper" much better.
 
Some of you may recall the discussions on allowing Domination Victory we've had in the past. In PTW it wasn't practical, because you could not reach the prerequisitive 66% of total territory, since too much territory was unclaimed, and you can't found new cities.

Now in C3C, we can edit the percentages of landmass and population needed to achieve Domination. I think utilizing this is a good idea, because it removes the unrealisitc need of capturing every single little outpost on the map. I don't offhand have good suggestions for good percentages (my version of MapStat doesn't eat C3C files - I shall have to look and see if there's a new version available somewhere), but it should clearly be lowered for territory, and probably increased for population (the Union's got something lile 2/3 at start).
 
Domination victory rather than total conquest makes a lot of sense to me.

At game start the percentages breakdown like this:

Union % of World Size: 26
Union % of World Population: 68

CSA % of World Size: 24
CSA % of World Population: 31


I'd suggest that a good starting number for domination be:

% of World Size: 39
% of World Population: 80

Keep in mind that we have enable retaining the city culture when you capture a city, so you get the land area surrouding it.

Let me know what you think.

Misfit
 
Originally posted by The Last Conformist
It was I that objected to "POW Camp" as the name of a happiness improvement. I just don't see locals getting happy for having a POW camp built in their town, and the name is quite opaque to the uninitiated (indeed, based on SMAC's "Punishment Dome" or whatever it was called, I would rather have expected it to increase shield output). I like "Newspaper" much better.

Newspaper is fine with me. I agree that POW camp might not be dead obvious as to its predicted abilities. I'll make the change.

Misfit
 
OK, sent our PBEM back to Misfit; the war has begun! Naturally, not much has happened that I'm going to tell in a public forum.

On thing, tho. While I'm perfectly happy to try out the non-revealed map, it's mighty weird that the "known world" is discontinuous - you get dark stretches between your sparsely spaced cities in the West, as well as between the coast and ships out on the high seas. Now I'm no expert on the C3C Editor, but I think this could be rectified via the Fog of War editing.

Edit: Looking a bit in the Editor seems to indicate that FoW can only be edited for all civs simultaneously. This however seems quite weird, and even back in CivII you could have different starting fog for different civs, so I rather hope I'm missing something.
 
Originally posted by Misfit_travel
I'd suggest that a good starting number for domination be:

% of World Size: 39
% of World Population: 80

Keep in mind that we have enable retaining the city culture when you capture a city, so you get the land area surrouding it.

Let me know what you think.

I'm trying to visualize how much the Union is going to have to conquer to reach those 39% of world territory. Lemme see ... that amounts to more than half the South. Should be enough, I think.

Ideally, I'd like to have different thresholds (sp?) for the North and South, but that's going to have to wait for CivIV, most likely.
 
Originally posted by The Last Conformist
OK, sent our PBEM back to Misfit; the war has begun! Naturally, not much has happened that I'm going to tell in a public forum.

On thing, tho. While I'm perfectly happy to try out the non-revealed map, it's mighty weird that the "known world" is discontinuous - you get dark stretches between your sparsely spaced cities in the West, as well as between the coast and ships out on the high seas. Now I'm no expert on the C3C Editor, but I think this could be rectified via the Fog of War editing.

Edit: Looking a bit in the Editor seems to indicate that FoW can only be edited for all civs simultaneously. This however seems quite weird, and even back in CivII you could have different starting fog for different civs, so I rather hope I'm missing something.


Just research Improved Cartography and the world shall be revealed.

By then I'll be halfway to the Carolinas, so I don't know how much good it will do you. :hammer:

Misfit
 
Map value and pop should be pretty close. You might be able to test map value by going through and tripping over pop centers (don't know how hard that is) to get an approximation by historical standards. (A lot of the South was under Union control, but a lot of it was not). The other thing of concern is that if a lot of destruction of pop centers takes place (either on purpose or because there was 1 pop point left in some locations) that it will be harder for one side or the other to accumulate the required map space and pop percentage.

As you mentioned, too bad you can't make it different for both sides as I generally believe that the North did not have as much tolerance as the South did, but that is for Civ 4.
 
Hi everyone, All those changes sound good and I really like the domination idea. In fact I was thinking last night about how long it would take to capture every city as I play fairly slowly anyway.

Newspaper sounds good.

Did you see my estimate of tech running 6 months behind without stealing.

As to plague Klyden Brought up some really good points. All the birds do get distracting and the human player will camp troops outside of cities to avoid death. I even started doing this myself.

I still think we could set all terrain to a very low disease rate 2-3 percent and a little higher swamps to simulate overall population loss to disease-mal treatment. This would tend to help keep the smaller cities down a bit and wouldnt kill off units.

Iwill try to play some tonite but will be tied up(work) during the next couple of days
 
I agree that the plague idea is just not going to work. How about for beta 3 I will set all terrain types to disease with a 2-3% percentage chance. That will hurt population to a minor extent, but no more units will be lost.

BTW, in my v4.0 beta2 PBEM game with TLC, first turn Washington got hit with disease.......

Misfit
 
Originally posted by Misfit_travel
I agree that the plague idea is just not going to work. How about for beta 3 I will set all terrain types to disease with a 2-3% percentage chance. That will hurt population to a minor extent, but no more units will be lost.

BTW, in my v4.0 beta2 PBEM game with TLC, first turn Washington got hit with disease.......

Misfit

Yes, That sounds good to me. :goodjob:

On another note I wouldnt mind trying a PBEM game withsome sometime though I have yet to try one and might need a bit of help to start.
 
Originally posted by dreadknought


On another note I wouldnt mind trying a PBEM game withsome sometime though I have yet to try one and might need a bit of help to start.

Dreadnought:

I'll have a go at PBEM with you. My V3.9 game with
Misfit is very rapidly coming to an end. I'll download the
latest beta files later today. You can contact me at:
eric@eaelec.com
 
Sheez, I'm scaring the PBEM players away. First Whizkid, now Eric_A. Checkout the PBEM thread for ACW C3C for the action in those v3.91 games here

If you are going to play PBEM with a beta release, please post game updates in this thread. Please only post strategic / game play functionality type reports (ie not historical embellishments). As the beta is not fully playtested we are looking for game balance / bug issues. I don't want to get in trouble with the moderators of Civfanatics.

If you want help with the setup of a beta PBEM game, let me know.

Misfit
 
Top Bottom