While We Wait: Part 5

Nukes? Missiles? Tomahawks? Tanks? What about tanks? They could just run them down. HA!

Tanks get eaten by the giant super crocs. Nuclear radiation will just turn them into godzilla. We won't be able to beat the Seshweay once they start using war crocodiles.

Hey, did anyone else know that the bird is the word?
 
I'm also killing my brain cells one by one by listening to the actual song for a few hours straight.
It's one of the songs on my current playlist. So I hear it every 75 songs or so...it's good music to play CS:S to. :)
 
Who saves instant messenging conversations

Blame GMail Chat. Also, it's nice for the occasional blackmail.

Just wondering, is there any non-US news media that is not in favour of Obama?

Georgia possibly?

Incorrect use of awesome.

Correct use of awesome?

Hey, did anyone else know that the bird is the word?

Sorry, but that qualifies under "old hat".

Also, you post too much while I'm away.
 
I was speculating today on how to limit runaway economic growth in NESes. The conclusion I came to was that we aren't modeling the economy properly, and that there isn't a point of diminishing returns in our models, while there should be. To take that out of economist lingo: at some point, mods should stop rewarding spending on the economy with more spending and actually decrease the amount you can spend.

Instead, players can spend on stuff like massive statues of themselves, silly hats, or even the welfare of their people...

Thoughts?
 
Already mixed into my model :p
 
@North King, I can only say that the thought occured to me: things like the current financial crisis etc don't seem to happen in NESing. Admittedly most NESes don't take place in the modern era, but anyway I agree the model of limitless growth seems unrealistic.

I guess you could prevent spending on the economy altogether, and make it so that you have to take out of the economy as much as you need via taxes etc, with the possibility of decreasing your long-term income and causing unhappiness etc (I remember at least one NES did this already, though I can't remember which). And ontop of that, add random fluctuations in the economy, or allow players to set the amount of regulation they want to prevent such things but have slower growth overall...

-----

[obsessivewierdness]

Civ4 Dilemma: as we all know the Socialist Republic of Native America is a great threat to world peace, a barbarian state with pretences to great power status, a state that is hiring evil Khmer airship mercenaries to incite fear and terror in all free nations. And so our second great colonial war (Operation Greater Justice) is being carried out to bring them into the enlightened co-prosperity sphere of Korea, and put us back above the evil Khmer Empire as the world’s leading power.

Civ4ScreenShot0322.jpg


ogj.jpg


We capture two cities (B and A, offscreen) and prepare to attack another (E) with the bulk of our great expedition force of justice (F). But the natives have fooled us, while launching failed invasions of our nearby island colonies (macemen vs machine gun lolness) there were in fact gathering their main stack of doom on their mainland (C), with some seven cuirassier units, one war elephant, and a few catapults, pikemen and longbowmen.

City B has only three fortified riflemen to defend it (and two captured workers). Rifle unit at hill D has repelled some initial cuirassier attacks. Our main fleet with the galleons (G) can get adjacent to city B, but can’t enter the harbour in one turn. So it would take two turns to move any of our main forces at F back to B.

So I see four options:
1, Move fleet to outside B, and evacuate our three defenders to the safety of the ships. The natives will reclaim their city, and our brave soldiers at D will be abandoned to fate.

2, Move the three riflemen from the city to hill D. They probably have the same def advantage as in the city, and the enemy might not be so keen to attack, once they get their city back. Survivors might be able to join up with our main force (F) in following turns.

3, Move the riflemen from D into the city, and hope for a miracle. Half of the main force will press the attack at E, while the rest will sail to reinforce B if it can survive the turn.

4, Ask for peace, maybe after sneakily attacking and capturing city E first. Then resume a more careful campaign in ten turns time. But that is ‘gamey’, and we really want our colonial wars to be finished before the 20th century starts.

So, what would you do???

[/obsessivewierdness]
 
If you can, burn B to the ground and move the soldiers onto D. That's what a Total War adherent would do. :p
 
If you can, burn B to the ground and move the soldiers onto D. That's what a Total War adherent would do. :p
You can't burn cities to the ground in Total War games man. ;)

I would try to hold the city but then again, that's me, refusing to leave a man behind.
 
North King said:
If you can, burn B to the ground and move the soldiers onto D. That's what a Total War adherent would do.

I disabled city raising in this game :( Got annoyed in another game when 1 enemy horse archer was able to wipe out my size 10+ city and all its improvements in one turn :mad:
 
I think it has more to do with a lack of knowledge than anything. People wouldn’t know how to simulate or even start a fiscal crisis, or other economic event, all of the events of some magnitude I’ve seen have been relatively arbitrary.

And even diminishing returns is problematic, in a pre-industrial economy it kicks in fairly quickly on food production (Malthus), but does not necessarily slow growth and the effects might be negotiable. In an industrial economy, it kicks in but it’s fairly swiftly kicked back by any growth in tech or in an increase in labour productivity. In a pre-industrial economy paradoxically labour productivity and tech increases will lead to a lower standard of living since they lead to a growth in population in the long run.

My solution to the issue of runaway growth was to give growth a broad measure, so tie it into eight variables, only two of which are seen, with the remaining six black boxed. All of which can be changed by the player, quite often unintentionally I’m guessing :)

As to diminishing returns, the only solution I can think of would be to keep some notes, and use judgement to decide when something has been over done, or just to show the results of increasing complexity, unintentional consequences.

Likewise I tend to believe that we have a similar problem in government policy, we assume that policy is well implemented, and achieves the end result usually. I’m all for punishing badly thought policies, harshly, because lets face it players like to use the stick way to much and forget the carrot… the law of unintended consequences has some serious bite in reality and should have some serious bite in NESing.

We also have a similar problem in terms of institutions, an advanced economy with a banking system which can hold a great deal of government debt is usually much better placed to crush opposition than a nation without.

But even then it feeds back intellectual capital most people don’t have the knowledge to even approximate the likely result of a depression, or even pre-sage it.
 
I disabled city raising in this game :( Got annoyed in another game when 1 enemy horse archer was able to wipe out my size 10+ city and all its improvements in one turn :mad:

I would say abandon it anyway. The rifle column can probably repel the cuirassier attacks and maintain your hold on the other city. Or not, I don't actually play Civ 4. :p
 
Lord_Iggy said:
Ooh... what are your settings for that game Daft?

Well Civ4 wasn't something I could enjoy 'out the box', even with the Complete version. The 3.14 AI attacks any blob-shaped empires (calculates distance between your cities and your own capitol, instead of the AI's :lol: ) and other such stuff. So I got the 3.17 files without the full patch (too big to dl), got the 'Revolutions' mod/pack to add cool things like rebellions and splinter states (although it can get a bit crazy with AI overexpansion), better AI in wars, all civs at war with neighbours until both have discovered literacy (actual ancient wars happen), and 32 civs on a map. And then, I finally made my own map in the worldmaker thing, and placed civ's manually, with related civs placed near to each other. Even with the 'tectonics' map script, the maps were just not to my liking. So yeah now I'm enjoying it lots, but its taken three years and a lot of fiddling around :lol:
 
Since I occasionally discover neat things (among many horrors not meant to be seen by mortal men) among my trawls of DeviantArt for spiffy unit art, something for Homeworld fans.
 
You wouldn't happen to have the starting save Daft for that map lying around so I can pinch it ;)

As well as a comprehensive list of patches and tweaks.
 
I was speculating today on how to limit runaway economic growth in NESes. The conclusion I came to was that we aren't modeling the economy properly, and that there isn't a point of diminishing returns in our models, while there should be. To take that out of economist lingo: at some point, mods should stop rewarding spending on the economy with more spending and actually decrease the amount you can spend.

Instead, players can spend on stuff like massive statues of themselves, silly hats, or even the welfare of their people...

Thoughts?

I'd set a point of diminishing returns, and have it slide up over time based on population, tech level, natural resources, and all that stuff. Players that focus on growing their economy should have stronger economies, but they shouldn't be able to snowball, or else focusing entirely on the economy is the only sensible long-term strategy. In fact, unnaturally bloated economies should also have a significant chance to come crashing down if the player ceases to spend on them just to keep them intact.

In many NESes, I notice that you tend to start off with mediocre domestic stats, a small army with spotty training, and an economy weak enough that you can't upgrade all these things at once. After five turns, you've got top-notch stats, the most elite army possible, and a roaring economy which gives you more EP than you know how to spend. From a purely realististic perspective, it's not common that a nation which has supposedly been barely clinging to unity for the past five hundred years would suddenly enter a golden age where it reaches the pinnacle of civilization for its time over the course of 25 years - it makes no sense at all for every nation to do this at once at the arbitrarily chosen starting date of the NES. It's plainly not a good thing from a purely gameplay-oriented perspective, either.

For stats in general, not just the economy, moderators should implement a decay rate and force the player to choose where he wants to spend his EP to maintain his stats. Economy growth beyond a certain level, depending on the factors in the nation in question, should be expensive, slow, and difficult to maintain. Stats should probably inflate over time (and their maximums should be inflated accordingly), but this should be a slow process, over the course of thousands of years for ancient NESes, hundreds of years for pre-industrial ones, and at least tens of years for modern NESes.
 
Back
Top Bottom