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
Now is it just me, or does that fundamentalist government look supremely overpowered? No unit costs, minimal corruption, no war weariness, and you can still pop your science rate up to 70%
Where's the counter-balance a la Civ2's 50% research hit?
"If you doubt that an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters would eventually produce the combined works of Shakespeare, consider: it only took 30 billion monkeys and no typewriters." - Unknown
Isn't Polytheism a bit TOO early for something that is clearly much better than Monarchy? Polytheism is actually a prerequisite for Monarchy! At least string it out past Theology like Civ 2 did!
Yeah, Theology would make more sense.
Life is a journey, not a destination. It is the destination that leads one to journey.
Originally posted by optimus2861
Now is it just me, or does that fundamentalist government look supremely overpowered? No unit costs, minimal corruption, no war weariness, and you can still pop your science rate up to 70%
Where's the counter-balance a la Civ2's 50% research hit?
your right about fundamentalism being over powered. it is too powerfull even though the workers only work at 50%, and you cant rush build. in my testing games that im playing now, other civs use fundamentalism more than any other government. i think the like the no unit support..
Fundamentalism now (in next version) will be available through Monotheism, not polytheism, and the rate cap will be 60.. (unless anyone has better ideas)
in the next version im gonna add thing i accidentally forgot.. like giving the privateer new stats (oops, i only reduced his price)
Originally posted by optimus2861
If the Battleship was 18/12 & is now 16/10
and the Ironclad was 4/4 & is now 4/6.
More Ironclads will win Battleships than before.
Before: If the Ironclad attacked: 4/16 = 25% Ironclad win.
Now: If the Ironclad attacks: 4/14 = 28.5% Ironclad win.
((About 10% more often here))
Before: If the Battleship attacked: 4/22 = 18% Ironclad win.
Now: If the Battleship attacks: 6/22 = 27.3% Ironclad win.
((About 50% more often here))
ok..
battlesships defence will be raised to 11.. iron clads d will be dropped to 5, also im gonna raise destroyers defence to 8..
If the Battleship was 18/12 & is now 16/10
and the Ironclad was 4/4 & is now 4/6.
More Ironclads will win Battleships than before.
Before: If the Ironclad attacked: 4/16 = 25% Ironclad win.
Now: If the Ironclad attacks: 4/14 = 28.5% Ironclad win.
((About 10% more often here))
Before: If the Battleship attacked: 4/22 = 18% Ironclad win.
Now: If the Battleship attacks: 6/22 = 27.3% Ironclad win.
((About 50% more often here))
Wrong.
Combat works by each unit having an attack chance each round. A 4 unit attacking a 16 unit has a 20% chance of hitting, but only a 4% chance of hitting a battleship and not being hit in return.
Besides, the biggest change in rate is not the ironclad attacking the battleship, it's the battleship attacking the ironclad.
The battleship used to have a 98% chance to win if attacking, assuming each was veteran. Now it's down to 90% with his new models. The battleship used to have a 93% chance to win if defending, now it's down to 89%. So, the biggest change comes from the battleship attacking angle, down 8 point from 98 to 90, rather than the defending battleship, down 4 points from 93 to 89.
Remember, in order to "win" you have to hit while not being hit - and that's especially hard against a high point machine like a battleship. And in order to kill, you have to "win" a number of rounds. This compounds the percentages and makes an ironclad victory remote...
battlesships defence will be raised to 11.. iron clads d will be dropped to 5, also im gonna raise destroyers defence to 8..
this should straighten that up a little..
Ancient -
Don't change anything until you get real numbers on how combat is affected by changing the values. Your changes don't really affect much, except making the ironclad a better defender than attacker, which frankly in naval units doesn't make alot of sense except for carriers, transports, and submarines (better attackers than defenders)...
Combat works by each unit having an attack chance each round. A 4 unit attacking a 16 unit has a 20% chance of hitting, but only a 4% chance of hitting a battleship and not being hit in return.
Besides, the biggest change in rate is not the ironclad attacking the battleship, it's the battleship attacking the ironclad.
The battleship used to have a 98% chance to win if attacking, assuming each was veteran. Now it's down to 90% with his new models. The battleship used to have a 93% chance to win if defending, now it's down to 89%. So, the biggest change comes from the battleship attacking angle, down 8 point from 98 to 90, rather than the defending battleship, down 4 points from 93 to 89.
Remember, in order to "win" you have to hit while not being hit - and that's especially hard against a high point machine like a battleship. And in order to kill, you have to "win" a number of rounds. This compounds the percentages and makes an ironclad victory remote...
Venger
since you seem to be good a this can you tell me what the odd would be with
Iron Clad having
A.D
4.5
and battleship with
16.11
Don't change anything until you get real numbers on how combat is affected by changing the values. Your changes don't really affect much, except making the ironclad a better defender than attacker, which frankly in naval units doesn't make alot of sense except for carriers, transports, and submarines (better attackers than defenders)...
Venger
but the ironclad shown as the icon, was a better defender than attacker. it only seem right to do things real.
this patch is a working project cause i havent play tested it enough for it to be perfect. (ive only played two full games with it)
4/16 was simply a mistype - a 4/20 would be correct as you noted. However, As you can see the other #s were correct. A 4 unit attacking an 18 is a 4 to a 22 & thus 18% - correct.
By "Ironclad win" I meant the Ironclad successfully damaging the Battleship for 1 hitpoint, not successfully sinking the Battleship. Thus the 50% increase of making a successful hit for the Ironclad when the battleship attacks is correct.
Besides, the biggest change in rate is not the ironclad attacking the battleship, it's the battleship attacking the ironclad.
Im glad you guys now how to do this stuff.I hope civ III will have all the new scenarios Civ II had.I look forward to a WWII or Starwars one .I have been playing for years and thanks to you out thier it never get old
I say I think, because I don't have the game yet. I'm shopping around for a computer that will meet the recommended specs (500 MHz, DirX compat., etc.) Time to put the old 266 clone out to pasture. (Don't laugh, it ran Civ2 MGE, and it's all I could afford on my pathetic excuse for a salary.) Someone offered their 500 to me after Christmas, so I'm crossing my fingers.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
hoping it will eat him last.
Winston Churchill
Thanks a lot for what looks like a great contribution to the Civ community. Before I install version 1.35, may I ask a few really basic questions?
Does your mod alter the graphics in the cityview whereby the gold cost of units/buildings are displayed?
Can you explain what is meant by the letters B.R.F/(T) in the specs next to the units?
Can you explain what is meant by the entry "propaganda a:20 des:10 m:5 c:-15 r:5 d:0 fa:5 fu:-5". I don't understand this at all.
What is meant by "resistance Fu:-15 fa:-10"?
What is a rate cap?
I also have an unrelated point. Every game I've played, the Germans have been amazingly aggressive. Do you think there is any merit in *either* switching Germany's preferred govt to Fascism *or* toning down their aggression? It seems to me that a Democratic but massively aggressive civilization is a bit unrealistic.
Finally, I'm really looking forward to your projected version 1.8; especially the addition of Constitutional Monarchy (I am a constitutional monarchist ) and 'reverse culture', whatever that is.
Thanks a zillion for this highly valuable, but free, contribution to the civ community!! $ $ $
Im glad you guys now how to do this stuff.I hope civ III will have all the new scenarios Civ II had.I look forward to a WWII or Starwars one .I have been playing for years and thanks to you out thier it never get old
I'm shopping around for a computer that will meet the recommended specs (500 MHz, DirX compat., etc.) Time to put the old 266 clone out to pasture. (Don't laugh, it ran Civ2 MGE, and it's all I could afford on my pathetic excuse for a salary.) Someone offered their 500 to me after Christmas, so I'm crossing my fingers. 
$
Tweet
Comment