Discussion in 'Civ2 - Scenario League' started by JPetroski, Apr 13, 2020.
Do the penalties only apply if you sign? Can you withdraw once you've signed?
They only apply if you sign. I considered a pop up box that would let you withdraw after signing, but think that might be easily gamed. One thing I may explore is perhaps making this an event that happens every, say, 30 turns (10 years) so you'd have to commit to it for a decent period, but wouldn't necessarily be stuck with it the entire game.
I've been doing a lot of playtesting this week and bug fixing. I think I have most ironed out, but with over 23,000 lines of code just in the primary events file, to say nothing of the modules, it's always possible more will be found.
I can, however, report that I'm feeling pretty good about the balancing and how the SP game plays and feels. I'm playing a game as the Non-Aligned now, and just managed to convince Egypt to join, which was a huge boost. Further, I can say that it is delightful playing with the Soviet equipment once they decide to sell it to you. There's something very satisfying about purchasing your first few MiG-15s and taking them up against western Spitfires.
Playing as the Non-Aligned also gives me a good indicator of how the AI is doing. It's a little hard to see in the minimap, but China was able to unify, though it took them a bit longer (it's possible to unify by the end of 1949 if you're playing as them, but the AI took until about 1954 in my game, which I think is acceptable).
I just want to make sure that I have most of the bugs ironed out before I open this up to the community to playtest, but I suspect that will happen very soon and I hope some of you will give it a spin.
Count me in!
For those of you following this thread please note that I've started a playtest thread and this scenario is now available for download. I'd appreciate it if you'd give it a shot!
Weapon Sales module updated so that Pro-West can only buy from the lowest bidder in a category in the menu.
I also updated the weapon sale function to create a message for the seller. You will have to add
to after production, and you might want to add
as a keypress event.
Let me know if you want/need more functionality to facilitate AI weapon purchases.
I updated the diplomacy modules so that Pro West and Pro East can't give away money through diplomacy. Otherwise, the money could simply be gifted to the 'master' civ, rather than buying weapons. In any case, since they represent a bunch of countries, it doesn't seem right for them to be able to pool resources to bribe other powers or anything. If you want these tribes to give away money, you can change the table noMoneyGift (or, just not update the modules).
You might want to update the General Library, since your map is round. Use gen.declareMapRound() in your events at some point.
The costs of transferring units in diplomacySettings, cityCanReceiveUnitsFn, calculates distance, ignoring the world shape (so it is expensive to cross the 'dateline'. You might want to switch to gen.distance for the calculation. I think I wrote that calculation only as a simple example in my tests.
So here's a long list of things to do. I will use this post to keep track of what I change and what needs to be changed. Items in red until they're finished. Calling @techumseh , @typhoon353 and @tootall_2012
All "post #" is in the playtest thread.
-Text for formation of FRG
-Text for formation of various Communist satellites
-SSKs allowed on main map only.
-I think I can give subs the sub flag by deleting ICBM and MRBM that start turn outside of a land tile, meaning that if you loaded up a sub with these, they will "unload" next turn. I suppose this means someone could extend the range of these missiles by the MP of a sub leaving port, if they fired that turn... But... I suppose I can deal with that to avoid AI bombardment with subs.
-I will take away the "missile" trait from the hydrogen bomb munition and SLBM because I think making these air units will get the AI to use them more. I'm still not sure if the AI will use any 99 attack unit if one hasn't been used against them though.
-I have no idea why align nations wasn't working for @techumseh but I'll try and sort it out.
-Move Hanoi to 84,94
-Increase rail movement (note though Tech that there is an option for building RR/highways - did you research this before swapping the rules out?)
-Close off some undersea waterways
-Make freight faster
-Add move unit event for Ganges Delta (did anyone find other areas the AI stacks?)
-Diplomatic briefing hotkey
-Diplomatic way to end wars (maybe a key press event that costs money to initiate talks, other side has probability of accepting or not. Might make probability dependent on who has more cities?)
-Make the "neutrals" China's proxy so they can cause trouble too
-Consider an APC for China and India if two slots exist, or at least a generic one both can use.
-Look at post #54 and change various city names over time.
-AI fighter fix. Likely good ol' fashioned events dump.
-Fix "abandoning units" though I might leave it for ships as there's presently no way to sell ships and they should be transferable.
-Add a help tab.
-Double check the techs the U.S. can give away (post #66) or at least what use they'd be to the minor civ.
-Western Infantry has no sound because Euroinf.wav is missing.
-Change text for aqueduct to reflect size 5 not 8.
-Raise western production costs
-Pro-West should be monarchy. Pro-East has it tough enough already so I might let them stay fundamentalist.
-Bump up cash that Soviets get for Pro-East cities since they start with so few.
-Consider reducing Soviet unit costs another row or two (will allow for more units and less expensive sales).
-Fix civil rights issue (post #93)
-59,29 and 37,47 need swamp removed (check Tootall's posts as there are a few more you didn't catch while compiling but thought of just now).
-Reduce tech rate to 200.
On the fence:
-Not sure if I'll make Pro-West and Europe Allied until America and Europe are not. If I do this, all AI rebellion for Pro-West needs a war check.
-Exploring ways to make Europe stronger in the SP game. Likely needs the same unit help as others. This might do it.
-Do you three think there's any true point to keeping the Special Forces and Cargo plane in the game, or is it simply "gimmicky?" I'm glad I explored it, because I want to use it in another scenario, and I think it is "fun" to have a special unit that grants a leader bonus, but it may be of such small use that the slot would be better utilized elsewhere. Bear in mind the cargo plane can airlift special forces, airborne forces, and trade.
If anyone out there has any other thoughts, now's the time to present them, as I'm going to start working on this list with a major goal of correcting the massive east-west disparity found in the playtest thread to -- hopefully -- allow a MP match if anyone is interested to start in time for the holidays/lazy winter season.
Unfortunately, I didn't get the chance to research the associated techs so I never got to build the units in question and therefore to use them during the game.
I still a little confused by the following post from you. There is no "Diplomatic Maneuvering" advance in the game. Where you referring to the functionality behind the '2' or '5' keys or is there another feature that I failed to discover?
I also assume your changes will include removing the gifting of units unless through international ports? And perhaps increasing the transport cost to international ports for arms sales?
Finally, I didn't see any reference, in your list above, to the Civil Rights Act wonder problem I enumerated in the following Cold War Playtest post #93.
Here's an idea for how to deal with Pro West, since the current version seems a bit deficient (you might modify this slightly, this is just a general idea):
Pro West can only attack the communists. Pro West 'rebels' can be funded in other territories, but these can only fight the communist rebels.
The Americans have the option to shift territory into the Pro West camp by means of "Foreign Aid". And, by "foreign aid" I mean bribes to the people in power to adopt policies that the U.S. likes, in particular an anti-communist stance. Generally speaking, the poorer the country, the cheaper it should be to align them. The 'facts on the ground' (such as communist rebels, or the political stance of neighbours) might influence the price, also. Of course, the Soviets could also use aid to try to align countries as pro east. If the U.S. stops the "aid", the country drifts back to a 'default' position, probably neutral or non-aligned, but Canada/Australia etc. would stay in the pro west camp.
Europe can also grant independence as pro-west, if they can't hold the territory themselves. Perhaps because there are pro west groups fighting pro east already, and they will be stronger with an actual city.
This would mean that Pro West doesn't attack Europe directly, but once a country becomes independent, it is fair game for the U.S. to influence.
Good list, John! A few things:
a) I restarted a game and the "align" tech worked fine.
b) No, but excellent transportation networks already existed in industrialized countries before "interstate" highways. Why would I wait to build freeways through thousands of kilometers of forest and swamp when I have the Trans-Siberian railway already?
c) The US fleet stays in the gulf between China and Korea. Maybe that's not too unrealistic though.
d) Egypt remains under European control through to the sixties (as far as I've got). While occupied by the Brits during WW2, it was never really a British colony. It was among the first countries to chart an independent course. I suggest an event to make it non-aligned, or even start as a neutral country.
e) I find that Africa remains under European control as well. The independence movements in those countries were increasingly powerful, and much of the pressure for decolonization came from the US. Consider strengthening the events for African independence, at least for single player games.
f) The scenario covers the period of two Europes: the decline of the European colonial empires (British, French, Dutch, Belgian and Portuguese) and the rise of a unified European Union. The loss of colonial empires gave a strong impetus to European unification. Perhaps there could be more distinction between the two phases? You're probably to far along at this point to consider any big changes, but it occurred to me, so I thought I'd mention it.
g) I know you love the idea of capital ships sailing up navigable waterways John, but it just ain't realistic. I have Soviet subs doing regular surface patrols between New Orleans and St. Louis and between Chicago and Toronto. Honestly, NONE of these rivers are navigable by large ships, with the exception of the St. Laurence by means of locks, starting at Montreal. And even those can't handle a battleship or a carrier. (exception - the Amazon might be navigable for some ships as far as Manaus.)
I love the scenario, btw. It's the most innovative since 'Red Front'. I look forward to the final product. Well done!
I'm not opposed to upping the movement as you suggested. I guess my question is, does it become ridiculous once the interstates go in?
If the Non-Aligned research their alignment tech and choose to Align Egypt, it changes hands. I did struggle a bit with if I should have it start as European or not. Perhaps being Neutral would be a better idea, as then the European player also won't feel as bad about simply having the cities (along with their ample units) swap hands at a keystroke?
I structured the events in such a way that changing the strength of AI rebellions is pretty easy. Since neither you nor @tootall_2012 reported a massive AI success with the rebellions, perhaps it makes sense to increase the help they get in these?
Well, there are a few things in there for the Europeans. Moving along the ECC pathway grants different WoW that are useful and also, eventually, once the European Union "forms" (via technology), Europe gets I believe 30 gold per European city (in Europe that is). So there's benefit there. I'm not sure what else might be good for them - 30 gold per city is a pretty strong benefit, I'd say. If I were playing Europe, I'd certainly go for it.
I'm not sure if ToTPP allows one to choose which units can navigate rivers or not. If it does, I'd solve this by having a "river" square at some point, where the navigation ends. The issue is whereas these rivers aren't navigable by supercarriers, they do take significant freight along them. I am not wed to having them navigable though since it bothers you so much
I appreciate it though I'd say Napoleon and OTR are probably more innovative - I'm just glad to be able to put a lot of the tricks from both into use with this one!
I can't really say. I'm not sure what the incremental strategic movement effect of interstates or autobahns would be. Europe and North America would already have a fairly extensive highway network, and they and the Soviets would have an excellent rail system.
It doesn't bother me at all.
With ToPP there is an additional flag in UNITS_ADVANCED that allows selected naval units to move on river tiles. It is not utilized by the AI however. You're correct about freight, carried by barges designed for rivers. I submit that the extra trade arrow for river tiles already takes this into account. I can't see any other strategic military benefit in the modern era.
Have you ever been to CT? No army, freight or civilian is moving anywhere near as quick on Route 71 (the main thoroughfare of its day) as they can on I-84. The interstate highway system was largely Eisenhower's doing, so I like having it in the game. However, I wouldn't have an issue putting in the trans-Siberian railroad as a "highway" in at the start (and perhaps some of the Autobahn as well). Then the Soviets can move along that, but may still wish to research the highway tech so they can build offshoots here and there. I'm just contemplating if this is better than expanding the roads in the first place.
Separate names with a comma.