Some concerns . . .

[maglock]

Firstly, I have to say this is an excellent mod. Very well done thematically. All the civs are great.

But . . .

I have this problem. I can't seem to wrap my head around the strategies needed to win. I am a long time player of FFH where I play at Monarch - Immortal depending on how much of a challenge I want.

I have played several games of Dune Wars on ** Noble ** and I am still having trouble.

- All of the hard counters make it very difficult to take cities.
- Most of the siege requires Nitrates? and if you don't have this resource you are never going to take cities.
- Spice monopoly victory is extremely difficult to achieve. Basically this is a domination victory. Even spamming spies to kill enemy spice harvestors won't get you the win unless you own half the map or more.
- I have lost to the AI several times now via transformation victory. Mostly the AI doesn't even have to do anything. Just get a decent amount of land to begin with and then win 250 turns later. I think the percent needs to be raised to 5% at least.
- Those spammed Mahdi units from the Fremen and Bene Gesserit are extremely annoying to counter.

All in all, unless you go for an early rush and wipe out your next door neighbour, you will have a great difficulty dislodging an entrenched enemy due to all the hard counters that they pile in their cities.

So either you win by transformation yourself or else early rush.

Tell me I'm wrong and that I just suck at the mod Then please give me some good hints to win other than by transformation.

 

[maglock]

Responding to my own post :

In my current game I am going for a spice monopoly victory. I have 100 spice from land and Project Amal + Spice Purifiers. My nearest rival has 20. It is past turn 200.

So my problem is this. Every time I get near to having the monopoly, getting 1 more resource seems to bump up the maximum by 2 or 3. So you need a ridiculously overwhelming majority compared to everyone else. If someone gets even 1 more resource, up it bumps.

I think my current required is now 117.

I can't sabotage enemy improvements (seems only Ordos can do that). So I am forced to continually declare war on neighbours to get a few more spice.

So my suggestions for this victory mode are as follows:
- Either lower the number required to 60%
- Or make it so that if you have > 4 or 5 times the nearest rivals spice you win

Otherwise this really just becomes a domination victory. Maybe that is what you want. If so, I will accept it. But has anyone who has played the game won via spice monopoly without also being near a domination win?

 

[ChrisAdams3997]

Hey maglock,

For the first post, let's just say the same strategies from FfH definitely won't work, it's a very different game . I normally play at Emperor and give the AI a run for it's money every time. A few things to remember about war, don't always obsess about siege weapons, if you can get stronger melee units before the enemy has good enough city defenders to counter them, maybe strike where the enemy doesn't expect it first, you can take cities without the siege weapons. Use the mobility of transports to your advantage. Of course siege weapons are nice if you can get them too, just don't fret if you can't, they typically play a smaller role here than in BTS or most mods .

As for the Spice Victory, that was something implemented before I began working on the mod and I never took a hard look into how to fix it, as I agree, it's not well balanced. I was always looking into other things though and just never took a hard look into it (or tried winning one for that matter).

 

[Jester Fool]

All of the hard counters make it very difficult to take cities.

Use melee units (CR3 works fine).

Most of the siege requires Nitrates? and if you don't have this resource you are never going to take cities.

Don't waste hammers on siege - again use melee units.

Spice monopoly victory is extremely difficult to achieve.

I don't think this victory condition ever got fully tested/balanced to where it was a viable (meaning you could actually win) victory type.

I have lost to the AI several times now via transformation victory. Mostly the AI doesn't even have to do anything. Just get a decent amount of land to begin with and then win 250 turns later. I think the percent needs to be raised to 5% at least.

The percent is fine. The problem is that you let them win 250 turns later. Kill the terraformer(s) and problem solved although it would be better to just win beforehand.

Those spammed Mahdi units from the Fremen and Bene Gesserit are extremely annoying to counter.

Thopter units eat them alive (unless you are backwards in tech - on Noble you shouldn't be).

give me some good hints to win other than by transformation.

Although on Emperor, Dune University 1 might be useful to read and I didn't win by terraforming (that would be DU 3 ). http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=428015

 

[Bahahotep44]

I wonder if a limited war of destruction targeted to the spice gatherers of the opposition would result in a victory if it were done in Blitzkrieg-mode.

 

[Ahriman]

Hi maglock, welcome to Dune Wars, glad you're having fun.

I have played several games of Dune Wars on ** Noble ** and I am still having trouble.

Certainly the game has a number of new mechanics that can take a while to get used to.
I'd also say that, relative to FFH, there are fewer mechanics that the human can exploit to a much greater degree to than the AI can (like ring of fire and other damage or stun area effect abilities in FFH), and that the AI is a bit weaker here than in FFH.

All of the hard counters make it very difficult to take cities.

As Jester says, melee units with City Raider promotions still work fine. Some siege can be useful, but melee are the most important - you'll take losses, but they'll do the job. Melee units ignore city defense from wall and force shield type buildings, though cultural defenses still come through.
If you can't take a city, you can still get a significant advantage by pillaging lots of your enemy's stuff. Pillaging their water sources will starve their cities and destroy their economy, making them easy pickings later when you have teched up.

Spice monopoly victory is extremely difficult to achieve. Basically this is a domination victory. Even spamming spies to kill enemy spice harvestors won't get you the win unless you own half the map or more.

Consider declaring war and pillaging enemy harvesters with military units - much quicker than using spies. The AI is very poor at defending their spice harvesters, so it is easy to pillage them quickly.
Building spice purifiers (I think they're called?) in each of your city can also help, as can building the Project Amal wonder.
I agree that it is hard to achieve, but we wouldn't want it to be too easy either. We're certainly open to tweaking the numbers around, the values we have haven't been tested rigorously.

I have lost to the AI several times now via transformation victory. Mostly the AI doesn't even have to do anything. Just get a decent amount of land to begin with and then win 250 turns later.

Terraforming takes a long time, and still requires a lot of land. If the AI is terraforming a lot, go attack them, take some of their cities! If we raised the threshold to 5%, it might be too hard to achieve.

Those spammed Mahdi units from the Fremen and Bene Gesserit are extremely annoying to counter

As Jester says, thopters and then other aircraft (hornets) are a good counter, as are shock-promoted units. They're cheap and spammable, but fairly low strength; they have a period where they are very powerful, but they're then outclassed in the midgame (they're useless against heavy troopers and the like).

Then please give me some good hints to win other than by transformation.

A religious victory is very possible, either with Imperial, or with Quizarate. Friendly diplomatic game with lots of missionary spamming.

Some general advice:
City placement is very important. Be very careful in picking city sites; water is the most important thing by far (get windtraps wherever possible). Don't spam cities everywhere, only where they're good. Optimal city placement distance is much higher than in vanilla (much more empty unsettled space).
Make sure to get Law of Arrakis not too late, Tribunals are very important for allowing you to expand without wrecking your economy.
Prioritize building harvesters on spice, free cash is good.
Don't bother trying to get every tech; have specific goals that fit your strategy, and feel free to trade for others.

Best of luck!

And of course, feel free to post again with more questions or comments.

 

[maglock]

Thanks for all of the good advice everyone

I did some mathematical analysis of the spice monopoly victory and would like to share:

Trying for a peaceful monopoly:

You        50     60     70     80     90     [COLOR="Red"]92[/COLOR]
Harkonnen  10     10     10     10     10     10
Corrino    10     10     10     10     10     10
Ecaz       10     10     10     10     10     10
Ordus      10     10     10     10     10     10
Ix         10     10     10     10     10     10
------------------------------------------------
Total     100    110    120    130    140    142
Goal       65     72     78     85     91     [COLOR="Red"]92[/COLOR]

As you can see this wont work. The enemy is sure to get more spice as time goes by. So you think you can win by getting just 15 more, but it really takes until 92 to win because when you add to the total number, the goal number goes up as well.

Now look at the warmongers version:

You        50     60     [COLOR="Red"]65[/COLOR]
Harkonnen  10      0      0
Corrino    10     10      5
Ecaz       10     10     10
Ordus      10     10     10
Ix         10     10     10
---------------------------
Total     100    100    100
Goal       65     65     [COLOR="Red"]65[/COLOR]

Here we see that if you crush the Harkonnen machine on Arrakis, and make the Emperor bow at your feet, you much more easily win the Spice Monopoly.

So basically my flaw was in thinking that you can peacefully win a Spice Monopoly. It can be done, but it is extremely hard. Much better to think of this victory condition as a warmongers (or hybrid) victory.

Some flavourful (and relevant) quotes to finish:

"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing"
"We will kill until no Harkonnen breathes Arrakeen air"
"He who controls the spice controls the universe"

 

[luke2345]

he who controls the universe controls the spice.

 

[Ahriman]

I don't think you should be able to get a spice victory in a totally peaceful game, but you are probably right that it is a bit too hard at present.

 

[ChrisAdams3997]

Maybe a better way to handle it would be to require a certain percent compared to everyone else's spice, so that the target doesn't keep moving up as you gain more spice.

So in other words, if you need more than 100% of the spice of all competitors, and everyone else's adds up to 80, then you'd need 81. There's already a minimum at the beginning of the game which would stay in place. It's what keeps someone from winning by being the first to put up a spice harvester . I'd think this is based on a percentage of the total spice on the map, but haven't looked at the code.

I also think some consideration for the number of player's you're up against would be a good move. If you have 6 other civs, amassing more than all six (> 100%) seems like a good challenge perhaps, but in a one-on-one game, not so much. Some algorithm based on the number of players that adjusts the target percentage. So maybe one-on-one, you'd need something like 200-300% (hard to say without testing it), around 100% with six other civs (e.i. a 'normal' size map), down to around 80% with eight other civs ('large' map).

 

[Ahriman]

Maybe a better way to handle it would be to require a certain percent compared to everyone else's spice, so that the target doesn't keep moving up as you gain more spice.

This seems very sensible. From a mathematical perspective, they can be made to be equivalent; if I have to have 80% of total spice, then this is the same as having to have 400% of everyone else's spice.
But from a UI perspective, this might be much easier for the human to understand and feel less like a moving target.

I also think some consideration for the number of player's you're up against would be a good move. If you have 6 other civs, amassing more than all six (> 100%) seems like a good challenge perhaps, but in a one-on-one game, not so much. Some algorithm based on the number of players that adjusts the target percentage. So maybe one-on-one, you'd need something like 200-300% (hard to say without testing it), around 100% with six other civs (e.i. a 'normal' size map), down to around 80% with eight other civs ('large' map).

I dunno. If you have fewer other players, then victory will always be easier for any victory condition. I think we should balance around ~7-9 total players.
I think 100% of what other players have is probably too easy to get, that would be only 50% of planetwide spice production. I think that 100% of everyone else's spice should be an absolute minimum, no matter how many other players there are, and maybe more restrictive from there with fewer players. I don't think we should worry so much about balancing for 2-4 player games.

[Also, obviously the restriction would depend on starting players, it wouldn't go down as players were killed.]

But I'm not sure that a variant by number of players would be needed; what if we set it at 150% of total spice production for everyone else? This would be equivalent to 60% of global spice production. This still might be pretty easy, since the AI isn't that good at building harvesters or defending them.

[And of course, keep the minimum, as current.]

 

[maglock]

Some more maths:

Currently the values are 65% you 35% everyone else. So simple division 65/35 =~ 186% over everyone else.

Some data from my current game:
Small Arrakis everything at default.

Me            101
A              27
B              18
C              14
D              24
-----------------
Total         184
Goal          119  (65% total)
True Goal     154  (186% everyone else)

True Goal indicates the amount needed by just increasing your own production peacefully.

Its late game and all land is settled. So the spice values for the AI wont change much.

I went into World Builder and added up all the spice and I got ~450 total on the map. So how about the Spice Monopoly = 25% total spice on the planet. This would make my goal 112 which is comparable to above. Obviously could make it 30% if this is too easy.

To counter the case where 2 civs may have similar amounts, ie 112 and 110, you just make it also require at least double or triple your nearest rival. This means that you would tend to go to war with the rival civs who have the most spice, as opposed to just taking a few spice off of some weak civs. Very flavoursome. ie Battle of the spice producers.

The benefit of this are:
- scales to map size automatically, because more spice spawns on larger maps
- goal does not increase by getting more yourself peacefully
- war between rival high spice producers is likely


TL;DR

Spice Monopoly Victory Condition:
- Change minimum goal amount to be ~25% global spice squares
- At least double (or triple) nearest rivals spice production

------
Edit: On further reflection this would totally deny an early game monopoly victory.

But then maybe this would be a good thing. It would force it to be a more mid-to-late game victory if you can't win via conquest/domination/Holy war. Similar to how Tower of Mastery / Altar of Lunotar are more late-game victory conditions in FFH.

 

[Jester Fool]

@ Maglock : I would be inclined to lean towards your definition of "spice victory". I have never pursued that victory condition but then again, currently, spice victory is pretty much impossible (compared to all other victory conditions). Maybe Chris can chime in. It would be nice to have spice victory as a viable way to win.

 

[ChrisAdams3997]

I'd done the same math yesterday Maglock (I rounded to 185% myself, same thing). As your real game data shows, and as Ahriman pointed out, in the end either of this or the original way equals the same thing in the end, the difference being it doesn't give a 'false' lower goal when your spice production is low. For that reason alone I support that approach over the current one.

As for using the total spice on the map, I have a sinking feeling that makes it too dependent on the distribution of 'land' on the map that gives access to spice. In other words I think the amount of spice that will be 'inaccessible' might be too variable based on map size, settings, and dumb luck for this to be a good indicator. I could be wrong, just a suspicion.

I also really like the added stipulation that it has to be some amount over the nearest rival, for the reasons that you stated. In numerical terms this means the goal is the larger of x% of all rival's spice OR y% of the largest rival's spice.

'x' right now is equivalent to 185% of course. My general feeling from your in-game example is moving it down around 140-150% might be good (116-124 spice). My question, do you feel like you should have already won that game, does it feel like you should be almost there, or still a bit to go to really feel 'dominant' enough to justify a win? Deciding at what point the game should be won is of course a very subjective call, so let me know how it feels to you.

As for 'y', nobody is close enough to qualify for that to be the larger goal in your example, but I've seen games where there would be a significant rival for the spice trade. So, thinking out loud here, I'm initially thinking 'y' should be around 250%, plus or minus a bit. 200% certainly I think would be too low. I'm not as certain 300% would be too high, it's a possibility.

 

[maglock]

You are absolutely right about much of the spice being unobtainable, so that rules out my above suggestion.

I finally finished my current game, achieving the monopoly with the following stats:

Me 141
A   30
B   10
C   36
D   Dead

I feel I should have won the game some time ago. No one came close to my GNP or spice production. I was raking in ~ 1200 GPT and ~1500 BPT and I had over 14000 Gold saved up.

It was basically mop up for more than 30 turns.

I reckon we should just give it a go at 60% (ie 150% of all rivals production) and see how that pans out. If that makes it too easy then bump it back up to 185%.

As for the y% I think 250% would be about right. I was in one game where I had ~100 and the nearest was 54. In this case 200% would be easy pickings. I would just have to take one city probably (or even just pillage I few of his spice). But at 250% I would probably need to annex 3 cities off of a powerful rival near end game.

This would make the victory:
- Control > 60% of spice production (calculated as 150% total rival production),
- and > 250% nearest rival production
- with the minimum to prevent winning on turn 1

With a little more testing I think we'll be set

 

[ChrisAdams3997]

Sounds doable to me , I'll work on it some time next week.

 

[Ahriman]

So how about the Spice Monopoly = 25% total spice on the planet.

I think we need a mechanic that is based on spice being harvested, not spice tiles on the planet. If it is the latter, then spice purifiers don't count, project amal doesn't count, and pillaging enemy harvesters doesn't count. All of these would make the victory much less interesting, and much more like a generic domination victory.

We debated this issue earlier and came to the conclusion that it was more fun to make it depend on rival spice, so you are really fighting other players to get the monopoly, rather than just achieving it on your own. We want it to be an "active" victory type, where there things you can/need to do to achieve it.

We want to deny an early game monopoly victory, but this is done by having a minimum number of spice that must be acquired in addition to the proportion.

the difference being it doesn't give a 'false' lower goal when your spice production is low. For that reason alone I support that approach over the current one.

Precisely.

I also really like the added stipulation that it has to be some amount over the nearest rival, for the reasons that you stated.

I'm not sure I see a need for this, if we have to have 150% of all other faction spice then we already have a bonus over other. I wouldn't want to see anything where we could win with less than 50% of current spice production.

I don't like the idea of it *just* depending on the largest rival. That could get messed up.

The mechanism I would prefer would be:
Spice monopoly victory when you control at minimum X spice resources, and control at least Y% of spice resources controlled by all other factions.
X could be ~25 (maybe varied by map size) while Y should probably be ~150%.

I don't see much need for an additional 250% of largest rival, in practice I bet it would rarely bind.

 

[fahrenderfisch]

#spice victory:
I might be missing something... but in the real world you cannot get a monopoly by just increasing your own production either. You always need to "take care" of your competitors in some way...
Actually at first I thought the definition of monopoly isn't really implemented well here... Now I think it is hard enough to achieve even the demanded 65%

but pillaging other harvesters is quite easy with some maurauders... really helpful
so i think this balance is alright.

#terraforming
winning any peacful game indeed seems to be quite hard, because you always need to take care of those damn terraformers...(why not just send a plague of sandtrouts to take all the water?)
I don't say that you should raise the %. But maybe come up with a different way (espionage missions to destroy the buildings??? or will pilaging the water resources help?) than declaring war and capturing/destroying the cities...

#mahdi
spaming mahdi units is great!!!
espacially when u are a fremen and reach this tech soon enogh. within hundred turns I rose up from second last to top... I thought I had already lost. Those mahdi fanatics saved my ass!!! Later the units were too weak and useless, yes, but then i was already first place...

#siege units
never had problems building them... but I hate to transport them. So I don't bother much... city raiders do the job!!! But I could imaging espionage missions which temprarly weaken the city defense...? despite: as far as I know due to force shields the artillery never played a big role in dune universe... man to man fight was the way to go.

P.S. only played three games of Dunewars, all on noble, all hard and chalanging but all a "win".

 

[Ahriman]

I might be missing something... but in the real world you cannot get a monopoly by just increasing your own production either. You always need to "take care" of your competitors in some way...
Actually at first I thought the definition of monopoly isn't really implemented well here... Now I think it is hard enough to achieve even the demanded 65%

Monopoly power (or "market power") doesn't require that you are literally a monopolist - ie the sole seller. In any industry, a single player that controls half or 2/3 of production will have a huge ability to affect market prices.
And yes, in the real world you can establish market power without touching rivals directly if you have some kind of cost advantage that allows you to out-produce your rivals.

But the intention in-game is that some pillaging is required to make the victory condition realistically feasible (or massive map domination).
And total monopoly (ie controlling all spice) isn't required because that would be pretty boring.

winning any peacful game indeed seems to be quite hard, because you always need to take care of those damn terraformers...

Sounds like it is working as intended.
I've never had the AI win via terraforming though.
The whole point of terraforming is that it is passive, but takes a very long time. If the AI is getting a terraforming victory then yeah, you haven't been pressuring them enough.

Also, if you want to sabotage the enemy, then play Ordos. Ordos saboteurs can blow up enemy buildings.

spaming mahdi units is great!!!
espacially when u are a fremen and reach this tech soon enogh. within hundred turns I rose up from second last to top... I thought I had already lost. Those mahdi fanatics saved my ass!!! Later the units were too weak and useless, yes

Sounds like they are working as intended. Note that they are zero maintenance, so they're never completely useless, and that eventually, they can upgrade.

never had problems building them... but I hate to transport them. So I don't bother much... city raiders do the job!!!

Sounds like you're playing Fremen. Fremen can get by with melee alone; everyone else will need to use transports. Working as intended.

But I could imaging espionage missions which temprarly weaken the city defense...?

Play as Harkonnen; the Harkonnen Traitor unit has such a mission.
Each faction has its own unique espionage missions.

despite: as far as I know due to force shields the artillery never played a big role in dune universe

In the Dune universe all units were basically melee. That would be a really boring game. So we had to make some compromises. As you will have no doubt noted, Force Shields already provide a huge protective barrier to anything that isn't melee.

P.S. only played three games of Dunewars, all on noble, all hard and chalanging

Great! Glad you're enjoying the mod.