The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
this was posted by mostly harmless in the cfc isdg forum
Now that the mighty WPC has broken their NAP with us and entered the war, we have given up and there is not much more for us apart from hitting enter quickly.
On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZation
their version (compared to ours):
aztec:
they would give the same land for us, but less to cfc. most important they think the shrine city should go to them
cfc:
they demand 1-1 extra city more from us and aztec, speed racer and cutting would go to them
the biggest question is the shrine city. I kinda support cfc that they should get it otherwise they really get much less. I argue that we have to got more land and city because ours are not as developed as theirs. Aztec says they need the most because they lost the most units.. cfc says we agreed to divide the land equally before the war started (we didn't btw, we only said it will be fair, but it hadn't got defined)
I can't see the file.
But re CFC argument, they get much less. They spent time building a large cannon army while we and Aztec did the early and crucial warring. Or am I wrong on that.
On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZation
It certainly seems like we, and especially the Aztecs, did the heavy lifting. And if our goal was to split the two of them apart and join with the Aztecs against CFC, siding with them over splitting the spoils seems like the way to go.
Captain of Team Apolyton - ISDG 2012
When I was younger I thought curfews were silly, but now as the daughter of a young woman, I appreciate them. - Rah
our losses in the war so far:
7 rifles, 2 catapults, 1 cannon, 1 horsearcher, 1 chariot, 1 janissary
we killed:
14 rifles, 8 musketman, 9 maceman, 8 catapults, 2 axeman
aztec lost about 40 cuirassier, 7 rifle, they claim that they had killed 100+ egyptian units
cfc says the4y killed about 50 egyptian units and i don't know exactly but from what i could observe they too had more losses than us.
--
this shows two things:
RB's tactician did a really poor job as the attackers managed to have more than 2:1 win/loss ratio
we lost the least in the war. It's n ot because we wanted to avoid fighting.. it just happened this way. For example we moved our main army next to Tree huggers. Testssuggested that we will lose 10-11 units there if rb attacks us with their units, and it was the logical thing to do for them. But they did not, they waited in the city instead so we attacked by 3 cannons (2 survived) and then killed their 9-10 rifles without losses.
But re CFC argument, they get much less. They spent time building a large cannon army while we and Aztec did the early and crucial warring. Or am I wrong on that.
This is true but if we want to ally with CFC we shouldn't be seen as going against them publicly. Maybe behind the scenes help to make sure they get less (since they did do less work and entered the war late) but publicly we should be seen as helping their cause so we stay in their good graces. We just don't want them getting too powerful where they become a threat to us.
Of course, there is an alternative strategy if we really have gotten all we're going to get out of this war. That is we make peace thus excusing ourselves from the decision and let the others argue over what is left. That will keep them unhappy with each other (and maybe even come to blows over it) while we are at peace letting our war weariness wear off and rebuilding our civ. Just a thought.
we are continuing the arguments with cfc and aztecs.. our views are not getting closer to each other. it even seems possible that we jump on each other.. now that would be fun
ok, seems we reached a final agreement. we agreed on the division I proposed but we pay aztecs 500 gold and cfc pays 400 gold. I can tell you it was a very hard bargain.. went on and on for 6-7 hours, in the end we and cfc come closer to each other, concluded that aztec are sneaky and greedy, but we wanted to end the arguments already.
I think things are looking good for us. our position is strong, we face no danger it's time to put our research back on track. We need to watch hre as they have the biggest potential to be our rivals in techs. I think we first get sci-method and clloect money to decide that we go for biology or communism first. I would like to have biology, but i wouldn't like if any of our rivals would get the free great spy.
We offered nap till t220 to cfc they whish to make a longer nap, but I think they will accept it.
Uciv/HRE also proposed a nap with us till t260. realisticly we should not accept this, as they are likely one of our target to kill . What do you think?
cfc is too big and too far away, no 1 in military. it would be too hard to gain something from a war against them. If we ally with them we ensure that the both of us can win any war.. or likely. My plan would be to come out better from the smaller wars than cfc, become stronger, more advanced and try to win.
in ideal situation it would become a us+cfc VS maya, aztec, hre, it mwould be a nivce and balanced game, but i think the others will not recognize this. just like maya should had helped RB, but they did not.
nap with cfc to turn t220 is fine with me. I could not agree to a t260 nap with uciv/ HRE. Unless they were super analysts and predicted the outcome they did not support us and instead made loans to RB. However...
I believe your thinking, as you have hinted at above, is to team up with CFC against the others and then a final showdown.
It is possible that our best option is to align with the Aztecs if there are just 3 civs left.
Could you provide a bit more background to the 'in the end we and cfc come closer to each other, concluded that Aztec are sneaky and greedy' at post 1553 above.
Were all 3 of us Civplayers, us and CFC not looking for extra.?
I am glad of the position we are in (especially with RB out of it), but I am mindful of the other Demogame I was involved in with 2metra and sommers, where they were in the position to wipe out their partners at the end.
On the ISDG 2012 team at the heart of CiviLIZation
ok, so originally we agreed that all 3 of us would get equal worth of stuff. but then aztec thought that we should give them more because they lost so much. We agreed to give them soem compensation. when we finally started to talk about the spoils their claims were unrealistic (the inital cfc plan was also unrealistic.. but oh well).
So it was a really hard bargian and finally we agreed to pay to them and give them better land just to avoid jumping on each other and finally close the arguments. but even after that aztec tried to get more and more .
To reward this i have moved out most of our troops from the war zone. we are still helping the others finishing the war, but I told them we are not taking extra risks. (like moving in with damaged units). Cfc was quite upset on aztecs btw (aztec wated the shrine to themselves in the beginning, but even with the new deal they get the most).
but overall i think we got the best outcome from this war. we didn't slaved down too many units, we couzld get awawy with the cheaper draftings. we didn't have to spend money on upgrades except a few hundred treb->cannons. we lost only a few units, we are second in power, while our economy is still going strong. Now i only worry about if hre is also going for the great spy. I think they might get it sooner, but hopefully they choose something else. Soon our science rate will be the biggest again.
Tweet
Comment