My next OCC scenario has a problem

Tom DeMille · June 23, 2000, 09:22

I've been testing my latest fortnight OCC creation, and have run into a problem.

You start in Fundamentalism, and the "forbid government switching" toggle has been set in the scenario special rules. This prevents you from having a revolution, so you need to struggle along in Fundamentalism the whole game, which I figured would be a new and interesting challenge (slow science, no WLT*Ds, but tonnes of cash).

Here's the problem. If you trade for a government tech from the AI, you are given the 1 time chance to switch governments.

This seems to be a "feature" of the game, one that I was not expecting and was horrified when I discovered it (when I got Republic from one of the AIs).

2 solutions present themselves:
i) I could give you all the government techs at the start of the game, so that you won't trade for them later and switch out of fundamentalism. The problem with this is that your research advance rate is bumped up to 49 turns right from the start.
ii) I could make it clear that switching governments is not allowed (rather like airfields on hills and food caravan cheats are not allowed).

I favour #2. Do you think that a note in the scenario description and at the start of the results thread about this would be enough? Or do you think no one would read it and accidentally switch governments when they were ment not to.

SCG · June 23, 2000, 10:02

not sure how much trouble you want to go to, but you could always edit the tech tree to remove the govt techs, and send along the modified rules.txt in a .zip file...

Scouse Gits · June 23, 2000, 10:39

I'd go with (2) Tom -- after all no-ones going to believe my 1143 landing anyway.

Seriously, we ain't playing for the crown jewels - if someone wants to cheat so let them...

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor

Tom DeMille · June 23, 2000, 11:24

It's not really of matter of someone cheating, SG1 (after all, the log would show something was amiss), it's more a matter of someone not reading the "do not change government" rule, and then being embarrassed about it later.

One reason for this thread was to bring the subject up, so the chance of someone missing the point of the scenario (getting to AC in Fundamentalism) would not be missed.

Xin Yu · June 23, 2000, 11:25

Or you can hex edit the save file and make all government techs your starting tech, so they won't count against you. Ask Hallard for how to do it.

Tom DeMille · June 23, 2000, 14:30

Well, I'm going to forward my scenario to Paul, and he can put it up as OCC12 next week. I'm going on vacation for a couple of weeks so good luck everyone. You will need it

I played the game almost to completion. I managed to get space flight in 1887, but the AI was hot on my heels and outresearched me to superconductor (and was outbuilding my spaceship. I quit when it became obvious that the AI was going to launch before me). Despite the lack of WLTPDs, my city was size 31 by the time space flight came along.

I found it a fun game, if a bit longer than usual. That was due to all the units that I bribed/built with the boatloads of extra cash available.

My mistake at the end was to gift techs right up to space flight. If I had stopped earlier, the AI would not have beat me in the spaceship race.

East Street Trader · June 23, 2000, 16:47

Damn! Damn! Damn!

I've been really looking forward to the next challenge. Now I start to read this thread and discover 1. It's a nightmare. 2. Tom failed it.

What friggin' chance is a newbie going to have?

Right, time for a little philosophy.

Something about winning not being important just the taking part. Or something.

Trouble is ... never believed a word of it.

Stupid game anyway (as I always said when my wife gave me yet another thrashing at bridge).
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited June 23, 2000).]</font>
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited June 23, 2000).]

Tom DeMille · June 24, 2000, 06:20

Take heart, that although you might not win, the game should be different and fun. You will end up with a lot of units to play around with (what else will there be to build in those long stretched between useful dicoveries). I learned some things about the uses of diplomats.

East Street Trader · June 24, 2000, 06:26

Been thinking about it. Might not be too bad after all.

Smash · June 24, 2000, 13:29

I wonder if an events.txt could be added to handle this problem.Maybe someone in creation forum would know what to do.

Course an events.txt takes some rather tedius conversion for MAC so I would probably have to sit this one out but I like the concept.Sounds tough.

Paul · June 24, 2000, 14:36

I think events.txt only works with the FW version and not with 2.42, so it wouldn't be an option for an OCC comparison game.

tonic · June 24, 2000, 17:42

I guess having the condition declared in the scenario .txt would help.

BTW, Tom, congratulations again for the great scenario work. The imagination and inventiveness of scenario-creators (which have distinguished each of the extant comparison games) help keep the challenge alive and fresh, and prevent it from developing into a routine application of the Paulicy (for the regulars, that is).
[This message has been edited by tonic (edited June 24, 2000).]

KhanMan · June 25, 2000, 04:21

To my knowledge, if you rename the techs Democracy, Republic, etc. to things like "blah", "BLAH", "magic", then these governments won't be availible, short of SoL.

(at least, this was the case at one point in the CiC scenario "Masters of Magic, Jr.)

Do this for all government techs except for fundie, and you should be safe.

-KhanMan the LLSS

PS. I think the same holds true for the railroad advance: I had a saved game where the civ had discovered the advance that replaced railroads, but the advance had a new name, so I couldn't build rails. Edited rules text to rename advance "railroad", and *wala!*, I could build 'em.

cavebear · June 25, 2000, 10:32

Tom, if you can't *possess* the other governments, how can you build the techs that depend on having them? That means skipping riflemen, spies, and everything up the feudalism line. Or is that intentional?

I'd go with only the basic announcement in the game description. Someone who plays a "Fundamentalism Only" game and then switches to Democracy would probably build 2 cities, too! LOL!
[This message has been edited by cavebear (edited June 25, 2000).]

Scouse Gits · June 26, 2000, 04:54

KM - you learn something every day! That was certainly news to me.
Good civin'

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor