Accounts e-mail HP

Under new mangement

New releases, projects, multiplayer games, etc.

Re: Under new mangement

Postby Corbeau » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:35 am

Well, 2000 CE was just a number. It may as well last half as much, it's a matter of preference. Me, personally, don't have a problem with long games. The whole point of Civilization is that you play it long...

However, another option would be not to set a fixed number of turns but, for example, to end the game when three players (or more, or less) research all technologies. Or when all wonders are built. Or, seriously, when a spaceship is built and reaches its destination, however, the winner doesn't necessarily have to be the person who built it, let's say it gives you some points, but not a victory on its own. Or when the world population reaches a certain value. Or when ONE player (or more) reaches certain population. Or when one player acquires a certain amount of territory (again, this doesn't have to be a victory in itself, when that happens, score is calculated by any method that is agreed on). Many options, really. Maybe even a combination: each of these events may represent a trigger and, to end the game, you need three (or more, or less) triggers happening.

But seriously, is there any way to find out what is your in-game score derived from while you are playing?
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: Under new mangement

Postby wieder » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:38 pm

Yeah, Y2000 was obviously an example, but what should the exact end turn be some such a game as LT33 currently is? It's also hard to see how the game could not end on a conquest victory once all the techs were researched. With nukes and the most advanced weapons everything accelerates even more. In LT33 an entire nation was already destroyed in 3 turns and that's before rails and some seriously powerful weapons. Once there are rails and the nations have some powerful weapons, this all can happen even faster if the players are not prepared for it. I don't know if it was like that on GT but nations quickly collapsing on LT is not that rare.

Is it really a problem that the games end only on a conquest, domination or space race victories? Or on the turn limit as it did on LT31. I didn't like the game ending on a turn limit because it felt artificial, but that has happened. However if that kind of ending is enabled, the amount of turns should be based on something more than just a half random number.

"But seriously, is there any way to find out what is your in-game score derived from while you are playing?"

What do you mean with this? How is it calculated or something else?

Now I actually start missing the point. What is the actual problem with the LT games?
wieder
 

Re: Under new mangement

Postby vidlius » Sun Oct 26, 2014 1:29 pm

Wieder:

There isn't a problem with LT. The problem is that the game settings/rules really only cater to one style of gameplay; militaristic.

No space race (no peaceful victory condition)
No turn end (no peaceful victory condition)

Small wonders. I'm sure this is for game balance,given that LT is very competitive, but I like big wonders, the race for them, etc.

No trade routes. (They are op and need to be changed) Removing trade routes removes an entire aspect of peaceful play.

Anyway, as I'm saying there is nothing wrong with LT in and of itself, its just that players who aren't hellbent on conquest aren't gonna stick around as there isn't much LT can offer them in gameplay.
User avatar
vidlius
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:46 am

Re: Under new mangement

Postby wieder » Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:18 pm

Yeah, it's true that the militaristic approach is the one that's the best one when you play on LT.

It's also not a secret that it will continue to be that way in the future because LT is a very competitive community. However if you have some ideas about how to make the other victory conditions easier, I would love to hear them out. The current game LT33 has lots of changes making both militaristic and peaceful gameplay more interesting. The trade improvements give +50% instead on +25% you get from the normal civ2civ3 ruleset. There are some new small wonders compensating the trade routes and making it easier to play with a peaceful approach for your nation.

However the biggest problem with this Sim Citying gameplay is that in the past games no one has been able to survive against an enemy who is very advanced and focuses 100% on military unit production. In the first Ladder Wars game, on the b board, the game ended at T87 once one played had researched gunpowder and then shifted all production to musketeers. The peaceful approach is not working that well if there is not sufficient defense for those nations. I'm also not sure how to fix that while still letting the people to have great wars.

Two things that have been discussed for LT are enabling space race with an extremely expensive space ship and enabling the trade routes without the one time bonus. However both of those have some unresolved issues and it was not decided yet how to bring those back.

Can anyone suggest what the end turn should actually be or how it should be decided without writing any new code? It's probably not going to happen but it's even less likely to happen if there is no real proposition for the end turn.

There is currently only one really powerful big wonder on LT and that's the Darwin's. What kind of big wonders would you like to see and how expensive they should be? I would make the Darwin's to cost much more than the 300 it's now. Maybe something like 1000 shields. This is however my view on this and not something that will probably happen :SS
wieder
 

Re: Under new mangement

Postby Corbeau » Sun Oct 26, 2014 6:25 pm

Hm, didn't I just propose about a dozen ways a game can end?
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: Under new mangement

Postby wieder » Sun Oct 26, 2014 6:54 pm

Yeah, you did and didn't but some of those endings would require coding and coding is mostly out of the question because no one usually does that. This is why most of the fixes are limited to tweaking the ruleset. What it comes to ending the game at some predestined turn, you should probably propose the actual turn instead of saying that it should be some turn.
wieder
 

Re: Under new mangement

Postby Corbeau » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:34 pm

Some of them don't. Historian Reports reveal some information, embassies reveal some and everybody can see which wonders have been built. It's all a matter of agreement and checking up on other players.
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: Under new mangement

Postby wieder » Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:42 pm

What is the end turn you are proposing?
wieder
 

Re: Under new mangement

Postby Corbeau » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:11 pm

Excuse me?
User avatar
Corbeau
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:23 am

Re: Under new mangement

Postby wieder » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:14 pm

You said that one victory condition could be a pre-defined end turn. At what turn you propose the game should end if the end turn was used for deciding the winners?
wieder
 

PreviousNext

Return to Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron