1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

The Cold War 1947 - 1991

Discussion in 'Civ2 - Scenario League' started by JPetroski, Apr 13, 2020.

  1. techumseh

    techumseh Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,691
    Location:
    in the frozen north
    Is it possible to simulate the competition between the powers within each region? Could each superpower 'bid' for influence in a region, so that the one committing the most resources in a given turn bumps up it's influence one level? Depending on each power's level of influence, more options within that region would be available. I think there may be more choices than a large scale guerrilla uprising. Maybe this isn't what you're thinking or perhaps too complex, but it's a thought I had.
     
  2. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    What kind of options were you thinking about?

    To me the simulation is the fact that the three major powers are going to be fighting over the areas, and the proxy system/rebellion funding allows this to happen without the game immediately devolving into "Russia invades Europe." Russia can be at "peace" with Europe the entire length of time and still actively "fight" via the Pro-Eastern civ that Russia controls/influences. The more cities you have, the more powerful you are, as you can build units in those cities as opposed to relying on shipments from the Soviets, for example. Also, capturing ports might be more important, because perhaps the Soviets can only send heavy tanks/aircraft from port to port (but could fund local infantry pretty much anywhere). So, you might have a situation where a rebellion starts deep in the jungles of Brazil, but the big question is if a major port can be captured by it.

    I'm trying to keep it simple because this will be a SP scenario that just so happens to (hopefully) be something you all would want to play MP, so while complex options are possible, they need to be ones that can be handled well enough by the AI. If you have thoughts about how to do that, I'm open to suggestions--but it has to be something the AI can handle. I will be making a SP events file vs. MP events file (so the AI gets units spawned to fight rebels since the AI can't handle sending some on its own), but I'm hoping to keep differences to a minimum.
     
  3. typhoon353

    typhoon353 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    62
    Nice! Did you ever get around to giving the same treatment for some of the British WW2 carriers? I think you did an Illustrious which served as the basis for the later Indomitable, Implacable and Audacious-classes.
     
  4. Fairline

    Fairline Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2002
    Messages:
    1,242
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Yes I did - a generic Centaur / Audacious angled flight deck and Hermes' 2nd (3rd?) conversion as a ski-jump Sea Harrier / helicopter carrier circa 1982. I think I may have already posted them.
     
  5. techumseh

    techumseh Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,691
    Location:
    in the frozen north
    It sounds like you're pretty far along in your design. I was just blue-skying some ideas, so no worries.
     
  6. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    @Prof. Garfield you mentioned that you had a quick way to take the object names from a rules file and set up the lua file. I am pretty much done with the rules now. Can you please help me out with that when you have some free time? Thanks.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Prof. Garfield

    Prof. Garfield Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,900
    Location:
    Ontario
    Here, I think I've got everything. There is a chance that there may be an error with some names (I didn't test), so you may have to change something. You may also want to make more convenient names for some things, also.
     

    Attached Files:

    JPetroski likes this.
  8. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    Awesome, thank you!
     
  9. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    I'm guessing this is not the way to use the object as this is not working (it's not throwing an error code, just not having the desired effect):

    civ.scen.onLoad(function (buffer)
    civ.enableTechGroup(object.tUSSR , 5, 2)


    end)

    where object.tUSSR is listed simply as 'tribe' in the example in the functions reference.

    (Basically, I'm trying to get my leaders 2 to work after it hasn't set correctly - I need the Soviets to be able to research group 5 techs).
     
  10. Prof. Garfield

    Prof. Garfield Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,900
    Location:
    Ontario
    Does it work if you replace object.tUSSR with civ.getTribe(ussrTribeID)? If not, then the problem isn't with the object table.

    Do your events have the line object = require("object")?

    Did you define object.tUSSR in the object file?

    Try a simple event like civ.ui.text(object.tUSSR.name)

    Try

    civ.enableTechGroup(object.tUSSR , 5, 0)
     
  11. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    It's probably that I dimly put a 2 instead of a 0... I'll check it out in a bit. Thanks for the second set of eyes.
     
  12. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    civ.enableTechGroup(object.tUSSR , 5, 0) worked, but only once I brought it to its own line. I think part of the problem was that I had it in the middle of the civ.scen.onLoad(function (buffer) function.
     
  13. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    Here is the updated units... I've removed the North African Revolutionary/Nationalist because it seemed silly to waste the space on two units that would only show up in a handful of cities. Instead, North African cities will spawn middle east troops. I replaced them with a Frigate and Aegis Cruiser. There's too much water in this scenario not to have a number of naval options and I wasn't pleased with the line up.

    Also, the Canberra is now the 2nd "strategic" bomber for Europe... I know it's technically a light bomber, but now Europe has 2 bombers (Canberra and Vulcan) to match the USA and USSR.

    upload_2020-5-16_7-59-52.png
     
    Tanelorn likes this.
  14. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    Don't do it, China!

    upload_2020-5-17_8-7-18.png

    upload_2020-5-17_8-8-17.png

    The Empire Strikes Back!

    upload_2020-5-17_8-7-47.png
     
  15. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    As seen above, I'm working on what events I can (read: the simple ones). I've decided to start with China since they are a fun little test bed for the scenario as a whole. I've completed their civil war events, Tibetan annexation event, Hong Kong annexation event (seen above), Invasion of Taiwan, and also a "what if" invasion of Indonesia.

    I plan on creating events that reward China for attempting to gain hegemony over Eastern Asia and the Pacific Islands, assuming India (and others) allow it. They start with 4 cities and a handful of units (though this will ramp up with their victories). I'm trying to make them a fun choice in a scenario that favors the Big 3 (USA, USSR, Europe). They might be an interesting Civ for a very good player who wants to challenge themselves.

    Europe's response to Hong Kong above will depend on their tech level. Anything from Meteors to Mirage 2000s might respond. I do want to tweak it a bit eventually to only fire if London is still European (it makes little sense that Britain would send a fleet to the opposite end of the globe if they were a government in exile), but I haven't added that part yet.
     
  16. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    @Buck2005 I figured I'd move this here.

    I think a lot of people (including myself) do tend to show off the units first and foremost, but I think I've put together a fairly interesting "world" here with some unique uses for different buildings (which is possible with lua) and some different takes on Wonders and what they should represent. I've also spent some time with the terrain, taking another cue from American Kingdoms (which, surprisingly, is one of the inspirations for this scenario -- I've just found it very fun to play). I have created a "developing" terrain which provides no benefit, but can be transformed into industrial terrain which gives a big boost. The question then becomes, will a civ like China or India, with massive populations, allow much of their citizens to starve for several turns to build up an industry? To me it is an interesting dilemma.

    You bring up a good point I hadn't considered. Perhaps I will make the marines (and for that matter, paratroopers) 1 movement units rather than 2 for the reasons you outlined. I believe it is possible, with lua, to prevent units from discharging directly onto land, and require they have a port, but I'm not certain I'd do that.

    Other lessons from the Imperialism game you reference are that France was able to gain an overwhelming advantage because her colonies were allowed to expand in size and number tremendously, and build whatever was necessary. Here, I'm aiming to achieve a situation where Africa and Latin America, for example, aren't worth much other than victory points.
     
  17. Prof. Garfield

    Prof. Garfield Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,900
    Location:
    Ontario
    I won because I traded effectively. I rushed my manufactured goods and ships to carry them, and reinvested the profits. More colonies did help in the sense that I had more commodities available, but I also had a lot of iron ore producing colonies that I made sure would build a mfg every turn. Eventually, colonies also mattered in the sense that they were a production slot for each turn.

    Be extremely careful how you treat trade units, since they have the potential to produce 1 tech per turn, and all the money you could want.
     
  18. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    Yes, you did trade effectively but I think being able to build anything anywhere is going to have a tremendous impact on any global scenario. As I recall, I think you had some Algerian and sub Saharan cities maxed with enormous populations by the end of it all, so I'd argue that you not only traded effectively, but developed effectively too.

    Imperialism would play very differently if the home regions had a different weight/meaning than the colonies. I'm hoping to use your modules to neuter Europe, or, frankly any civ that amassed a large overseas empire, as they will have the cities, but would need to bring in competent forces from elsewhere.

    As to the trade units, I'm going to test out how games might go if I removed or at least significantly reduced the bonus payouts. I'm still thinking this through and will need to see what tech rate could be achieved long term without them.
     
  19. Prof. Garfield

    Prof. Garfield Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,900
    Location:
    Ontario
    Being able to develop large cities is a consequence of establishing a trading system, with a touch of Democracy celebration thrown in. If you already have the income, you can found (or, in this case, capture) new cities, and rush the improvements and freight each turn necessary for quick growth to occur.

    I agree that neutering the "peripheral" cities would restrict this (provided the core cities don't have a supply of hides to send away as trade). Having cheap technologies restricts the income generated (2/3 of science cost per delivery), if you can live with a tech per turn. No bonus, but just ongoing route, would probably make sense, and probably still be in line with the value of other improvements that could be made.

    FYI, if you want to stop democracy celebration growth, that can be done via lua by clearing the "celebration" flag for each city each turn.
     
  20. JPetroski

    JPetroski Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,967
    -One of the Cosmic2 settings allows for removing the science/cash payout for trade routes, which I'm considering using. The historic problem with Cold War scenarios (First Strike and Iron Curtain) that my predecessors had to contend with is that the US has a massive trading advantage simply because they're often allowed to trade with Europe while the Soviets cannot (either by enforced house rule, or player diplomacy). I think simply having richer cities from the trade arrows this generates may be fair enough without the science boost.

    I'm still not sure where I'm landing on the turns. At most there will be 135 (4 months per turn) but I am giving serious consideration to 88 (6 months per turn). I think for at least the single player playtests I might as well go with 135 to see how far along everyone gets on the tech tree (I'm hoping to have a number of playtesters since this is SP), but we'll see. It will be interesting to see if it is possible to advance through the tech tree without the single-turn bonuses most are accustomed to in these MP games.

    I'm also considering some thoughts @Buck2005 expressed via PM regarding the late game Blitzkrieg. I would love to use attacks per turn to reduce this, but I believe it is broken where only the first 80(?) units follow the rule and everything after that just allows 1 attack per turn. I didn't plan for this when I was setting up my units so now I'd have to swap everything around. A lot of work, especially with all the units placed on the map, so I'm not sure I'd bother.

    I do want to pick your brain (and anyone else reading this) on "how you'd play it..." given this situation:

    Right now I'm thinking of basically counting the number of ities that the Big 3 have at the beginning of the scenario. I think the Soviets have 52. I was thinking of having a malus to their owning any more, which increases exponentially:

    Overflow 1: Cost of -500 gold per turn
    Overflow 2: -1000 gold per turn
    Overflow 3: -2000 per turn
    Overflow 4: -4000 per turn
    Overflow 5: -8000 per turn

    And so on...

    The idea basically being that one would want to move their cities anywhere in the world over to the proxy quickly to avoid this, but, for a certain strategic city or two, the Soviets (or US) might decide that it's worth the hit to keep one of the cities, or occupy the land directly.

    The problem is then what is to stop a player from conquering all of Europe and then handing it over to their proxy the same turn, so I was thinking of extending this malus further so that proxy civs can only have so many cities with the "core city" improvement before the mother civ gets this same malus. Perhaps what they start with plus 3-5. This would mean that people would be penalized for attacks on Europe, America, Canada, the Soviet Union, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, but you could still add 3-5 cities before the issue would happen (it might accelerate or start at 4000 for the 6th city), so you could have a war with a relatively minor exchange of cities in these regions.

    Basically, your proxy could own cities without the "core city" improvement for "free" and could only own a few more "core" cities than it started with. The main civ could not own any more cities of any type without a malus, but the malus is small enough for the first 1-2 cities that a rich nation might deal with it for strategic reasons.

    So, my question: If faced with the scenario that you were playing the Soviets and you could not add any cities without losing cash as above, and your proxy could not hold more than 3-5 core cities without losing cash, how would you think you'd approach the situation? Would this be enough to more or less convince you to focus efforts on proxy wars across the globe, at least until you had enough cash saved up (and were close enough to victory) that you felt you could sustain a final war in Europe? Or would you break the game in another way? :)

    We had a "frustrating Agricola" thread so I'm curious how to "frustrate Prof. Garfield" in this MP scenario and if my idea here would at least keep the players reasonably well behaved for the short term, or not.

    Overall, I'm trying to avoid a situation where the game immediately turns into "battle for Europe" and I'm also trying to avoid a situation where nothing much happens for 1.5 years before the game is over in 3 turns... Too many MP scenarios end that way.

    I'm leaning more towards either not allowing democracy, or giving it exclusively to the smaller civs to try and help them out. Right now I have them as monarchies:

    China, India: Monarchy but I'm entertaining Democracy renamed for balancing reasons;
    America, Europe: Republic
    Russia: Communism but with a tweaked palace distance for corruption
    Proxies: Fundamentalist so they barely get any science
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2020
    Tanelorn likes this.

Share This Page