PROJECT: Playtest (the 4th Thread)

[percuno]

Oh puh-lease, why don't you just change the name to CTP2: Maquiladora Edition and get it over with.

[Ekmek]

Originally posted by NeoFax
It ask for a UC088.tga file and then doesn't even go into CTP2.

did you get the playtest files found in the first post of the thread? they should be in the default\graphic\cursor folders that and UC089.tga too

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by LemurMadness
hmmm you know, thinking about that, could something be done about it? like, reducting by half the damage flanking attacks do? stacking 12 tanks can tear down an empire... seems pretty hardcore and unbalanced...

You could reduce the defence or ranged attack of flanking units too.

Originally posted by percuno
Oh puh-lease, why don't you just change the name to CTP2: Maquiladora Edition and get it over with.

I havent changed anything without discussing it with other people.

You on the other hand seem opposed to anyone discussing any possible changes at all, even when some changes are obviously better for the game.

[percuno]

Removing a player's choices in a single-player game is better for the game? HA!

And do tell me, exactly, how removing all of the other options that were removed is preventing exploitation? What is exploitable about Desert and Swamp, oh great and wise one?

[Maquiladora]

We didnt remove desert and swamp, we removed the option of terraforming to desert and swamp. We also removed ugly tactics like terraforming mountains all over to mine for huge production. If you can terraform anything you need, then it removes the whole strategy of using well the land that you find, thus removing any variation the map generator gives the game.

So in fact we are adding choices, more interesting choices, of how to play the land you are given.

Now explain to us why Cavalry (and other unbalanced units) shouldnt be changed?

[percuno]

Let's see...shall I bother? Oh, might as well...

Originally posted by Maquiladora
We didnt remove desert and swamp, we removed the option of terraforming to desert and swamp.

I know that you are not stupid, that you are fully capable of comprehending that I was referring to terraforming to desert and swamp, so I am forced to believe that you are simply engaging in a cheesy debating tactic for avoiding the question of what is exploitable about those two terrain types, so you've accomplished nothing with that comment.

Originally posted by Maquiladora
We also removed ugly tactics like terraforming mountains all over to mine for huge production.

Perhaps you consider terraforming mountains all over to be an "ugly tactic", and perhaps many other people do too, but how many of the people who consider that used it at one time, and don't anymore, irregardless of the removal of terraforming to mountains? Each of such people made the choice to stop, and didn't need to be forced into it. I am confident that there are also people who still use it, one way or another, and their using it harms nobody. The fact is that what you and everyone else involved in the decision have done is not remove the ability to it, since it can be reversed with some work, but attempted to enforce your judgement of what every player should or should not be doing in their own personal, private games upon them. I personally don't use that tactic either, but that doesn't mean I have to control other people's use of it, I don't need to control other people and limit their choices to my style of play, because I don't care how anyone else plays the game. I just want a game that works, which is the *only* reason I use the AE instead of the last Activision version.

Originally posted by Maquiladora
If you can terraform anything you need, then it removes the whole strategy of using well the land that you find, thus removing any variation the map generator gives the game.

No, because you still have the choice of whether to do it or not, whereas if you had your way, there would be no way to do it at all, everyone would have to play your way, hence my suggestion of the name change.

Originally posted by Maquiladora
So in fact we are adding choices, more interesting choices, of how to play the land you are given.

Again no, you are removing choices, not adding any. Everyone always had the choice to play what land they started with, and in fact I have played many games in which I did absolutely no terraforming at all, not even clearing swamps, jungles or forests to make plains or grasslands. However, that was a choice I made, and that choice is mine to make in my games, not yours, and I shouldn't have to hack the game files to the end. There are plenty of better uses for hacking the game files than repairing the damage done by people who have the need to control what other people do and how they do it.

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Now explain to us why Cavalry (and other unbalanced units) shouldnt be changed?

Lest we forget, this discussion between you and I is about changes to the ability to terraform to certain terrain types, and drawing the discussion away from that topic is yet another cheesy debating tactic, most notably characterized by the implication that I would be against changes to this entirely different aspect of the game. However, since you choose to diverge in this direction in which I have made no foray as yet, I shall offer that I am all for any reasonable changes to cavalry units, as long as there was an easy way to restore the original attributes. Restoring the terrain details so far has been a big pain in the behind, with what little time I have available, and I still haven't gotten around to experimenting with the mess that is tileimp.txt.

Oh, and from a slightly earlier post I didn't have time to reply to properly:

[SIZE=1]You on the other hand seem opposed to anyone discussing any possible changes at all, even when some changes are obviously better for the game.

That unfounded accusation is yet another cheesy debating tactic, you seem to be fond of those for some reason. I have no objection whatsoever to discussing changes, nor to changes that really do add options to the player by opening up the ability to play a more balanced game. However, what you consider "obviously better" and what I do are patently different things, and regardless of what you or ten other people or ten thousand other people might agree upon as "obviously better" is never going to be de facto for every single other person, which is why I argue so vociferously on the side of choice over being forced into someone else's idea of what is right. To expand choice is to add options, to limit choice is to remove them, and what was done in the terraforming aspect of the game was limiting, not expanding, choice.

[NeoFax]

E, Thanks for the reply. I figured it out. Probably should change the README to reflect downloading the 10-23-2005 files first and applying them before applying the revisions.

Anyhow, I really enjoy the game as now it is playable compared to the 1.11 patched version. However, there are still some minor problems. I receive multiple out of bound array error messages which in turn cause the message box to be unreadable. When I started a war, I received a different error. I have also received one Slic error as well. Other than that a great game.

[Ekmek]

NeoFax

I think that happens if your userprofile.txt has debug set to yes. You can also change it to NO in options/advanced.

not sure why the slic debug calls up the errors.

[Protra3211]

Just wondering has anyone found a work around for the diplomacy bug?
Not rushing anyone just want to start a new game soon.
On vacation soon for two weeks and will have time to pull some all nighters getting into a long game with the playtest!

[Ekmek]

Protra
I'll be looking into it. we are tracking it here:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=153526

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by percuno
...

Like i said, start a terrain thread and argue it there. If anyone else wants to join the debate they will. Whatever the decision ill go with the flow.

BTW i didnt know it would be so hard to put the terraforming options back in for anyone, i didnt change any code in the .exe, all i did was edit terrain.txt, so if theres something in the .exe preventing it going back then i wasnt aware of it.

Lest we forget, this discussion between you and I is about changes to the ability to terraform to certain terrain types, and drawing the discussion away from that topic is yet another cheesy debating tactic, most notably characterized by the implication that I would be against changes to this entirely different aspect of the game. However, since you choose to diverge in this direction in which I have made no foray as yet, I shall offer that I am all for any reasonable changes to cavalry units, as long as there was an easy way to restore the original attributes. Restoring the terrain details so far has been a big pain in the behind, with what little time I have available, and I still haven't gotten around to experimenting with the mess that is tileimp.txt.

Wrong, read the thread. LemurMadness replied to a comment i made regarding changing Cavalry in which he basically agreed with me, Cavalry were unbalanced. Then you attacked me, and only me, for making the suggestion, even though LemurMadness agreed:

"Oh puh-lease, why don't you just change the name to CTP2: Maquiladora Edition and get it over with."

regardless of what you or ten other people or ten thousand other people might agree upon as "obviously better" is never going to be de facto for every single other person, which is why I argue so vociferously on the side of choice over being forced into someone else's idea of what is right. To expand choice is to add options, to limit choice is to remove them, and what was done in the terraforming aspect of the game was limiting, not expanding, choice.

No one is forcing you to install the AE, but if you disagree with something thats changed then start a thread to get peoples attention and argue to get it changed back, instead of moaning about choice all the time here.

[LemurMadness]

Well, why dont we submit it to a voting/democratic system? (Seems fair, as not everyone has the same perspective the other person does)

I dont agree with terraforming TO swamps or deserts, because people could be using them on a city border limit and choke another city when this one expands the city limits.

However, terraforming TO mountains, didnt CTP1 had that option? I think the point of terraforming is changing the landscape so it can be used in a more usefull way, of course the production output of a mountain is insane, but what if we add terraform TO hills, and then hills TO mountains? (I guess adding a huge public works cost and many turns to terraform it)

Going back to the flanking units, why dont we remove flanking units and change them to ranged / offense units? all flanking units has the advantage of high movement points, and that makes them better than any other units in the same era (there are some exceptions).

And what do you guys think about this thread?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=153785

[Ekmek]

Feel free to create a thread with a poll on the terraform issue. If it gets 10 votes consider it a quorum

As for flanking I've actually added a lot of combat modifiers that may reduce their effectiveness depending on the unit. My modifiers are similar to the pikeman's bonus against mounted but I added bonus against seige, mechanized, foot, wheeled, helicopter and i think a few others.

This way you can have infantry with a bonus against cavalry/mounted (depending on the age if you choose). In my civ3mod I have a tow infantry unit that has a bonus against helicopters, mechanized and wheeled units. And the bonus is high enough where a tank and tow infantry can go toe-to-toe but if you use regular infantry against the tow guy, the tow guy will lose.

[Ekmek]

Apolyton Edition Beta-Testers
civ4 had them so can we!

The AI diplomacy issues appears to be fixed.

Last night I tested it a bit and it seemed to work. However, before I could post an update I see that Fromafar posted his fixes. So in about 12 hours I'll post a rev596 build which hopefully doesn't have any problems.

Just in time for Protra's vacation

[Ekmek]

Revision 597 is up!

As usual post any problems here...