Atomic Eagle II: The Price of Freedom Development

[AGRICOLA]

Harry, that's a very simple and truly brilliant solution.

Your approach appears to be simpler than those suggested by Boco and Techumseh because, if Omaha is captured, New York would lose its Omaha food route within one turn, even if Omaha's food bin was partially full. It would not affect US cities other than New York and there would be no effect on the happiness of the country as a whole.

I believe that the other approaches would require that Omaha's food bin is first emptied and starvation either reduces city size (or is about to reduce it) before the food trade link is broken.

Of course, you could adjust the size and food supply of donor cities so that they have zero surplus food and empty food bins. In that case, you would also have to ensure that capture by the Germans (and accompanying decrease in size) does not create a food surplus. Also, this could be circumvented by players who make quick improvements to one or more food supply squares of the donor cities.

[N35t0r]

The only problem with the 'helper cities' is that they tie up one city... How close are you to the city limit, harry?

[Harry Tuttle]

I think I have room.

In total I have 99 food units that need to be supplied. If each city can supply 3 units of food to wherever then I have to have 33 cities. Though, when I first made my 99 number I included some auxiliary cities that only need 1 or 2 units to net to zero. So, if I can trim the food units to 33 units needed to be supplied I will only have to build 10 cities.

This is no big deal really. I'd like to top out the city limit in the scenario anyways if I'm going to incude any settler-type units.

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Boco

Your solution looks good, but if I understand the problem, there may be a more straightforward answer. The manual states (and it's always right, right?) that famines in the donor city eliminate food routes. What would happen in a direct A to B food link if the donor city goes into famine (e.g ChangeTerrain in the city radius to decrease A's net food to <0, but not destroy it)? Seems too simple – did I overlook something?

Negatory. I thought so too, but then I tried it. Famine won't make the city drop the route, at least all the time.

[curtsibling]

Would changing the amount of food citizens eat each turn have an impact?

.......

[CapTVK]

I'm a bit late to to this debate, but wouldn't it be easier to put the large cities in permanent starvation? I mean that the large cities have plenty of high production (shield&trade) squares but not many with a very high food production. So without a constant stream of food caravans flowing in every few turns from other cities with a food surplus (small cities that run a large food surplus) the large cities would quickly see a drop in population size. You wouldn't even need to call it starvation ingame but more the effect of citizens fleeing from cities into the countryside due to food shortages.


It's a different concept but it seems to have the same sort of results.

[Boco]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
Negatory. I thought so too, but then I tried it. Famine won't make the city drop the route, at least all the time.

Shoulda known it wasn't so simple.

When you tried it, did you test for food route elimination when donor cities had a food storage of 0 at the time that they went into a net food deficit? Did you ever try to set up a famine using CreateUnit Settler events?

Btw, I'm not trying to shoot down an excellent idea, just exploring alternatives. There's sometimes more than one way to skin a cat, each with its peculiar advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I'd much prefer to learn from someone else's experiences rather than reinvent the wheel myself. Kinda lazy that way.

Btw2, how long do food caravan routes last in a game under 'normal' circumstances? For a set number of turns or until they are replaced by other trade routes?

[AGRICOLA]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
In total I have 99 food units that need to be supplied. If each city can supply 3 units of food to wherever then I have to have 33 cities. Though, when I first made my 99 number I included some auxiliary cities that only need 1 or 2 units to net to zero. So, if I can trim the food units to 33 units needed to be supplied I will only have to build 10 cities.

I'm afraid that your idea may require some modification. AFAIK, it is normally impossible for a city to have more than 1 outgoing food trade route. However, I don't know if it is possible to hex-edit a city so that it has more than 1 such route.

Originally posted by Boco
Btw2, how long do food caravan routes last in a game under 'normal' circumstances? For a set number of turns or until they are replaced by other trade routes?

They last as long as the donor city exists but can be replaced by a regular trade route if a freight arrives from another city.

[AGRICOLA]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
This is no big deal really. I'd like to top out the city limit in the scenario anyways if I'm going to incude any settler-type units.

I would urge you to include engineers in your scen.

The outline and details that I have read so far indicate that the US will have to stage a desperate withdrawal in the face of an overwhelming attack by German forces in Mexico. The few ways that outgunned and outnumbered defenders have of slowing down the enemy are to pillage roads and create obstacles such as minefields or swamps.

Engineers are not needed to pillage roads but are needed to restore pillaged sections if and when US forces begin offensive actions.

The rivers flowing into the Mississippi from the west provide limited natural defenses that slow enemy units by forcing them to crowd together at river crossings. IIRC, most if not all of these rivers had control dams and resevoirs that could be used to flood land downstream. This could be duplicated by having engineers who can quickly transform plains or grassland to swamps. Laying minefields is another possible engineering task.

I would not worry overly about players founding new cities. My experience with both versions of Red Front is that it is much more efficient to build up existing cities than to found new ones. Founding new cities and quickly turning them into production centres was an expensive 2-3 year project. This was true even for locations that had 3 resource squares, each one producing 18 shields.

Admittedly, founding new cities to act as fortresses can work very well if they are sited on good defensive terrain.

[Harry Tuttle]

Originally posted by Boco
When you tried it, did you test for food route elimination when donor cities had a food storage of 0 at the time that they went into a net food deficit?

Yes. What I did was start a new game and then immediately built two cities for testing. I created a caravan, editied it, and moved it into the donee city. The terrain was then changed for the donor city.

Did you ever try to set up a famine using CreateUnit Settler events?

Hmmmm, no, but that seems like it could have some merit. It would indeed create a loss in production, but once the city went into starvation wouldn't the settlers be disbanded?

Btw, I'm not trying to shoot down an excellent idea, just exploring alternatives. There's sometimes more than one way to skin a cat, each with its peculiar advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I'd much prefer to learn from someone else's experiences rather than reinvent the wheel myself. Kinda lazy that way.

No, no, ask away. I need you guys to find out any flaws in my idea as well as present some new opportunities.


@Agricola: Well I'm able to create multiple food routes to the same city using Civcity. So Omaha could have three routes to New York if I wanted to. Though it seems that a city can only donate up to three food routes to another city. Every food supply caravan after the third will only add to the "food box".

And yes, I will include engineers and caravans in the scenario as roads will have to be rebuilt and food routes re-established. I like the idea of transforming terrain to swamp. This could be a fun idea.

[Broken_Erika]

Need some Flakpanzers?

[Boco]

Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
Hmmmm, no, but that seems like it could have some merit. It would indeed create a loss in production, but once the city went into starvation wouldn't the settlers be disbanded?

Very likely, but would they knock out the food link reliably? Based on your tests, my guess is no.

[Sarsstock]

Say Harry, could you provide me with an e-mail address I could use to send you a first draft of the title.gif? It doesn't have to be your "official" address, but rather any old address I could use to get you the draft.

This way the title image can remain a surprise until the beta release.

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA



No, they are not. In developing Red Front 1.5, Colwyn wanted to set up Leningrad so that it had an adequate food only if it had food trade routes with 3 cities that the Germans were sure to capture. The idea was to starve Leningrad unless the player took drastic action.

I set it up but the idea did not work because the food routes stayed in place when the Germans captured the 3 cities and we had the crazy situation of German-held cities supplying Leningrad with food.

Agricola,

That post and Harry's use of the change terrain event made me think. Is it possible to change terrain of the city square??? It's the only square that will always be used by the city.

Because if you could, you could simply use changeterrain event to change the food production of a square a city is on. With an event it drops from 6 food down to 2 food, et voila...almost instant foodcrisis in a city.

You could also have a high food production square nearby but then it depends on an enemy unit occupying that square.

[our_man]

You could also have a high food production square nearby but then it depends on an enemy unit occupying that square.

It would have to be this way. CHANGETERRAIN on a city square destroys the city. It also isn't necessary for an enemy unit to occupy a high food production square within the radius to have a starvation effect outside. My solution would be to have a special resource/terrain e.g. grain silos outside major cities. In the event of the Axis capturing one of the breadbasket cities, a CHANGETERRAIN event could be used to remove the grain silo terrain and change it to a non-productive square. Voila, you have your famine.