Accounts e-mail HP


Post a reply

This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek: :halo:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review

Expand view Topic review: Impressions

Re: Impressions

Post by XYZ » Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:00 pm

Yes, next time I will definetely do more testing. It's so much more work to fix things after the game has started... :P I was just inpatient to get this scenario going :D

Re: Impressions

Post by Davide » Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:23 pm

The problem Beckett is that we don't have enough people on board to provide a divine service to our citizens. As long as Greatturn won't be an "Enterprise Inc." with employees payed to do the hard job - and obviously it will never become - we won't be able to provide the perfect services we all would like to have. I also wish someone could heed your call for better scenarios. But we don't have anybody in charge for that task, as long as nobody nominates himself. By the way, thank you Ferdi for working on this African map!

Re: Impressions

Post by BeckettTheIncompeten » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:30 pm

My impression of this scenario is that is could be a bit better setup.

My main complaint is that cities started at size 1. This is bad because, as stated above, many units had to be abandoned because the small cities could not support them. Fortunately, I realized this early and was able to disband some units in a formal matter. This factor of small cities also slows the game down in terms of conquest, since there is really no point of destroying a city of size 1 this early in the game.

But after all, XYZ very generously made this scenario on the fly (in 3 days, I am told) because of time constraints.
Maybe in the future scenarios could be tested first for the 'simple' bugs and improvements? Then again, the more people testing scenarios the more people who have an 'unfair' advantage by knowing the map...

Re: Impressions

Post by Major Nimrod » Fri Mar 14, 2014 2:55 pm

Speaking from the point of view of a scenario designer, it's quite easy to mistakenly deploy cities without a palace. Essentially, what happens is that the first city deployed for any given nation will, naturally, have a palace. But decisions down the line may cause one to remove that city in favor of a better position (perhaps more accurate, or better strategic placement). Anyhow, once the city is removed then the palace is gone... and it's not automatically replaced (unlike in the game, where there is a setting that's normally toggle on to replace palaces if they are captured).

Ultimately, I think Corbeau is right: the absence of a palace (and of a capital) is pretty catastrophic. Morbid curiosity leads me to want to see just how bad it gets with other governments (which one would be the worst?). ;)

Re: Impressions

Post by Corbeau » Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:01 pm


However, does anyone else thinks that the consequences of not having a palace are a bit too drastic?

Re: Impressions

Post by Major Nimrod » Thu Mar 13, 2014 8:26 pm

Cool. Thx.

Anyone else not have a Palace? That might be good for them, too (especially if they don't realize it, but are befuddled as to why things are so weird right now).

Finally, Morph made a new poll on GT10-Hex to remove the "Waste" setting. This might be a setting worth taking out of this one as well (see my screenshot above for the amount of "waste" on a brand-new city).

Re: Impressions

Post by XYZ » Thu Mar 13, 2014 7:09 pm

Ok, together with Davide I built a palace for Nimrod and Corbeau. We also added el_perdedor as leader of the Welsh.

Re: Impressions

Post by XYZ » Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:38 pm

You could kindly ask Davide if he is willing to build you both a palace? Maybe some cash recompensation?

Re: Impressions

Post by Corbeau » Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:14 pm

No palace. And by the looks of it, there won't be any :D

Re: Impressions

Post by Major Nimrod » Thu Mar 13, 2014 2:54 pm

Corbeau wrote:Huh, I just switched to Communism and the result is a disaster: all my cities are wasting *all* produced food which, as a result, means I'll lose all of them in 3-4 turns. For example, one is producing 11 food and all is going to waste. Is this how it's supposed to be? All my cities are within 9 tile from each other.

Yes, that looks exactly like what I've got going on as well with my nation. This cannot be by design. I've played many a game of civ2civ3 ruleset offline, and never had this type of behaviour under communism!

Question to you, Corbeau: do you have a palace in any of your cities? This might explain it.

By the way, here's a screenshot of a brand new city I built this turn.

New city.jpg

Doesn't make sense, does it? Negative growth, brand new city? wtf ?