Appeasement and Agression Released!

[AGRICOLA]

Congratulations on another very interesting, well-designed scenario.

Germany (Deity) is doing just fine, churning out 2 tech advances per turn. Once it gets Panzergrenadiers in April '37, everybody better watch out!

You may want to change the Pz VI Panther to Pz V Panther to match the icon.

[Case]

On the topic of the too-fast tech progress, it seems that I may have forgotten to adjust the tech paradigm down from the accelerated levels I used during my last minute testing. When I was fiddling around with the scenario last night, the British were developing two techs per turn!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
You may want to change the Pz VI Panther to Pz V Panther to match the icon.

I thought that the Tiger was the Pz V. Didn't it appear before the Panther?

Originally posted by Boco
Psst! Just about any American outside of New Jersey will give less than a less than glowing appraisal of NJ and its denizens. However, they're all wrong, we're a polite, quiet, generous bunch.

I've caught a train through New Jersey: all I remember is swamps, industrial wasteland and sprawling suburbia The suburbia looked rather pleasant, ableit in a cold way (it was late December).

...Not that I can really criticise where anybody else lives: most Australians think that Canberra is one of the most boring places in the world, and resent us for taxing and governing them. The ungrateful fools

[Boco]

I think you have the Pzkw V (Panther) and VI (Tiger) bass ackwards.

If no one else volunteers before then, I'll proof your text files on Sunday. There are a few minor errors. I promise I won't Americanize it.

As you can imagine, you see the finest real estate from trains and superhighways.

[AGRICOLA]

@Case

Your comments seem to explain why at the start Germany needs only ~360 flasks for a tech advance. The results have been puzzling me a bit because freights are generating flasks at a very high rate compared to what is needed for tech advances while the $$ returns have been quite a bit lower than I would have expected, considering the commodity, the number of trade arrows in the home city, the probable number in the destination city and the route taken by freights. Compared to Raging Dragon, I'm getting chickenfeed $$.

What should the tech paradigm be set to? I wouldn't mind re-setting it even if it means backtracking a few turns. Does it have any effect on the low $$ returns?

Howcum Panzergrenadiers and Freights show 4 movement in the units window but seem to be able to move only 12 squares along roads when a 1 Mv unit can move 4? It's seriously cramping my style.

[Boco]

Both PzG and Freights have mf=3 in Rules.txt. Road bonus=4. That's consistent with the mf you see.

Howcum Panzergrenadiers and Freights show 4 movement in the units window

Pedia or Defense Advisor?

[AGRICOLA]

@Boco

Military Units window in Pedia.

[Catfish]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Military Units window in Pedia.

I figured as much. Defence Advisor displays raw MF values. The Pedia, on the other hand, uses this formula:

Road Multiplier/3 x MF

Therefore, when the Road Multiplier is 4 and the MF is 1, the Pedia displays 1 (1.33 rounded down). When the MF is 3, the Pedia displays 4.

[AGRICOLA]

Thanks for clearing up source of discrepancy.

[Case]

Originally posted by Boco
I think you have the Pzkw V (Panther) and VI (Tiger) bass ackwards.

Um, yeah it sure looks like it. As I have an adversion to Nazi army weaponry, I'm a bit hazy on that kind of thing.

If no one else volunteers before then, I'll proof your text files on Sunday. There are a few minor errors. I promise I won't Americanize it.

Wow thanks!

I'm sure that you won't Americanise it

As you can imagine, you see the finest real estate from trains and superhighways.

Good point

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Your comments seem to explain why at the start Germany needs only ~360 flasks for a tech advance. The results have been puzzling me a bit because freights are generating flasks at a very high rate compared to what is needed for tech advances while the $$ returns have been quite a bit lower than I would have expected, considering the commodity, the number of trade arrows in the home city, the probable number in the destination city and the route taken by freights. Compared to Raging Dragon, I'm getting chickenfeed $$.

Yeah, that's the long and short of it I suspect.

The main reasons the trade cash returns are low is that there are no RRs and the trade unit is a caravan and not a freight. As the 1930s and 1940s were a time of protectionism and autarky the low cash returns don't bother me.

What should the tech paradigm be set to?

From memory, it's currently at techs cost 6/10 of their default cost when they should cost 8/10. All the main civs should develop a tech every two or three turns. As the tech tree is pretty long and unit production costs are relatively high this rate isn't quite as useful as it looks.

Catfish, thanks for sorting that out - I'll add it to the readme. To be honest, as I always used the rules file and not the civlopedia to check that stuff I hadn't even noticed the problem

[Boco]

Civilopedia mf's are a mess for EA, too. I missed the reason why as well. Think I'll go back and edit the label something like "Check mf via [F2]".

[AGRICOLA]

@Case
Thanks. Resetting tech paradigm to 8/10 and starting afresh.

Just finished web search for Genevre. Didn't get any useful hits. Changing the spelling to Genève brought up much interesting interesting information about an old Swiss city.

[AGRICOLA]

Tried 8/10 for tech paradigm. Germany can still get 2 advances per turn. As the tech rate is crucial for the scenario and its lengthy tech tree, it might be best if you did a quick fixup and re-released the scenario. Otherwise any feedback on difficulty and playability will be severely flawed.

At the same time you might want to look at the lack of realism introduced by Labor Camps and their risk of nuclear meltdown in a 1936-1949 scenario. I had Munich blow up on the second turn before I could sell the rest of the damned things. As far as I know there was nothing nuclear that could have melted down in any German city, or anywhere else in the world, in October, 1936.

Similarly, I don't think that having pollution and global warming turned on is in keeping with the time period, unless the pollution is due to A-bombs. Even if A-bombs are used, significant global warming would not occur within the time frame of the scenario. IMO it should be turned off.

[Case]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Tried 8/10 for tech paradigm. Germany can still get 2 advances per turn.

That's fine. Are the other civs also producing techs at this rate?

As the tech rate is crucial for the scenario and its lengthy tech tree, it might be best if you did a quick fixup and re-released the scenario. Otherwise any feedback on difficulty and playability will be severely flawed.

Yeah/ However, I was putting that off until I got a few more comments though - in my experiance while everybody who originally downloads the inital scenari downloads the first update/upgrade, the second update/upgrade is a whole lot less popular.

And then when I tried to load civ last night to impliment the excelent sugestions which have so far been contributed, FW wouldn't work! (see: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=109936)

At the same time you might want to look at the lack of realism introduced by Labor Camps and their risk of nuclear meltdown in a 1936-1949 scenario. I had Munich blow up on the second turn before I could sell the rest of the damned things. As far as I know there was nothing nuclear that could have melted down in any German city, or anywhere else in the world, in October, 1936.

I've never actually had this happen to me - did you reduce the luxury rate? I want the Nazis and Soviets to have to keep their luxury rates high - historically these regimes only stayed in power at the cost of crippling their nation through bribes and inanely high levels of repression.

Similarly, I don't think that having pollution and global warming turned on is in keeping with the time period, unless the pollution is due to A-bombs.

The 1930s and 40s were one of the great eras of industrial pollution, and I want to include this. It was during this time frame that many European Industrial cities became unlivable (hence the rush to the suburbs after 1945) and the Soviets began systematically poisoning their nation.

During the war the weak environmental safeguards were reduced further/totally ignored and this had a very real human and economic cost - for instance, my Grandfather died of asbestos related cancer ten years ago because the Australian shipyards relaxed their safety and environmental standards during the war.

[Justinianum]

Originally posted by Case

I want the Nazis and Soviets to have to keep their luxury rates high - historically these regimes only stayed in power at the cost of crippling their nation through bribes and inanely high levels of repression.

The 1930s and 40s were one of the great eras of industrial pollution, and I want to include this. It was during this time frame that many European Industrial cities became unlivable (hence the rush to the suburbs after 1945) and the Soviets began systematically poisoning their nation.

About pollution, Thoddy used what IMHO is a very interesting concept: pollution as demonstrations and trade-unions protest and strikes.

[AGRICOLA]

Originally posted by Case

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Tried 8/10 for tech paradigm. Germany can still get 2 advances per turn.

That's fine. Are the other civs also producing techs at this rate?

I did a fast forward through the 4 month period from June to September 1937. In this interval Britain, France, Italy and the Soviet Union each produced 3 tech advances, a considerably higher rate than the one you mentioned in an earlier post. Germany's 2 techs per turn are the result of both trade and research.

I've never actually had this happen to me - did you reduce the luxury rate? I want the Nazis and Soviets to have to keep their luxury rates high - historically these regimes only stayed in power at the cost of crippling their nation through bribes and inanely high levels of repression.

I did not reduce the luxury rate but I may have been sloppy and allowed Munich to slide into disorder.

I apologize if I wasn't clear on this point but the only thing I do not think appropriate is the nuclear reference in the description of Labor Camps. There were no nuclear facilities at the time of the scenario. Changing the description to something like "Unpaid workers from Labor Camps increase industrial production by 50%. There is a risk that they may riot and destroy the camp." would make more sense to me. The mushroom cloud doesn't look all that different from the smoke of a torched camp.

Similarly, I don't think that having pollution and global warming turned on is in keeping with the time period, unless the pollution is due to A-bombs.

The 1930s and 40s were one of the great eras of industrial pollution, and I want to include this. It was during this time frame that many European Industrial cities became unlivable (hence the rush to the suburbs after 1945) and the Soviets began systematically poisoning their nation.

I appreciate your point on pollution, it makes sense. Is there a way to have pollution without global warming or a way to ensure that any actual warming takes place after the end of the scenario?