Changes in rules.txt

[SlowThinker]

Added This thread is placed in Civ2-MP only because I can't place it in more forums simultaneously. So consider a SP view too.
Why I started this thread? I would like a better rules.txt. For both SP and MP. I know there are many better rules.txt in scenarios but they are too different from the original and they are too numerous. So my wish is to get some new standard rules.txt.

IMHO there are many imperfections in Civ2. I see both rah rules and Aussie rules incorporate no changes of rules.txt. Did you ever try to arrange such changes?

---

Some examples:

There shoudn't be definite strategies in the game. An example is the path to monarchy in the beginning. I think there should be more possible strategies and they should be balanced so that a different starting position need a different starting strategy.
So the tree of reasonable strategies is constricted with the standard rules. And the entertaing principle of games - the decision - is lost.

Barracks: I think they have no prereq so that novice players have one improvement among starting production possibilities. But Barracks are a powerful improvement and the tree of reasonable strategies would be much wider if Barracks were placed on some unwanted tech: Bridge Building for example. This way the game would be more balanced, the value of BB would be much higher.

Marketplace: this is an improvement that could be available from the beginning (no prereq) and nothing would change. You always need caravans long before marketplaces, so marketplaces are always discovered already when you want to build them, you needn't care where they are in the tech tree.

Granaries: they are never used, their cost is too high and should be lowered. Again that would bring much more starting strategies.

Corruption dependent on distance from Palace: I think this is bad. Games where civs expand in concentric circles are not very interesting. Imagine a map with dispersed civs - this is more interesting from strategic point of view. (BTW, games with 2 or 3 starting Settlers on different positions could be interesting)
Solution is introduced in some scenarios: cost of a Courthouse is 10-20 shields, mantenance 0. (But then it shoud be forbidden to use Couthouses for rushbuys of units).

New cities vs. larger cities
(Next I will suppose you also don't like to manage 50 cities and that you would prefer games where a growth of existing cities would be favoured over building of new cities in comparison with standard Civ2 settings)

Deity: I have a feeling that players prefer to play deity because it is 'harder'. But it is not harder if you play without AI: anybody can build some happiness improvement before a city can grow. Only effect is that growth of cities is more expensive.
(Another problem is that only player with HG can easily celebrate.)
Added Also the fact that you need units for martial law don't let you decide if to let a city undefended or to defend. The game is simpler.
And corruption is too high - this force you to build boring empires centered around the capital. From this point of view it is always better to play chieftain and to adjust happiness by changes in rules.txt.

Happiness due to number of cities (see 'Happiness quirk' thread in the GL for details): take republic with deity: there is no penalty for first 8 cities, there is +1 happiness penalty in each city after 16 cities. But then things turns back due to the black hat bug: there is 0 penalty after 24 cities, +1 bonus after 32 cities and so on.
Anyway there is not very much of differences due to number of cities. But I suppose we want to prefer a smaller number of cities. So this is the 'prince' happiness with a changed unhappiness due to number of cities:
no penalty (4 initial content citizens in each city) with 4 cities
+1 penalty (3 initial content citizens) with 8 cities
+2 penalty (2 initial content citizens) with 12 cities
+3 penalty (1 initial content citizens) with 16 cities
+4 penalty (0 initial content citizens) with 20 cities
This way the amount of reasonable strategies is wider: expansion needn't to be maxed.

[rah]

RAH rules does change one item in rules.txt
Oracle doesn't expire untill industrialization.

[SlowThinker]

That's good.

[atawa]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
There shoudn't be definite strategies in the game. An example is the path to monarchy in the beginning. I think there should be more possible strategies and they should be balanced so that a different starting position need a different starting strategy.

Depending on starting position I'll either take mapmaking or horse usualy as my extra tech.
(Unless something comes out of a hut first)

Barracks: I think they have no prereq so that novice players have one improvement among starting production possibilities. But Barracks are a powerful improvement and the tree of reasonable strategies would be much wider if Barracks were placed on some unwanted tech: Bridge Building for example. This way the game would be more balanced, the value of BB would be much higher.

I dont agree, this is something everyone can build, leave it untill BB and Suntsu becomes way too important.

Deity: I have a feeling that players prefer to play deity because it is 'harder'. But it is not harder if you play without AI: anybody can build some happiness improvement before a city can grow. Only effect is that growth of cities is more expensive.
(Another problem is that only player with HG can easily celebrate.)

I agree on this one, happy wonders become too important when playing MP on deity.

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by atawa
Depending on starting position I'll either take mapmaking or horse usualy as my extra tech.

So there are 2 possibilities how to go through the tech tree in 40 turns. This is not a heavy variability . You got accustomed to that, but imagine a similar variability is all the game.

I dont agree, this is something everyone can build, leave it untill BB and Suntsu becomes way too important.

This is a good point, but SunTzu may be moved too. Or barracks can be put under a more easily accessible tech than BB.

[rah]

Barracks should be available at the beginning. It's a risk to build one instead of a settler early. It's one of those early decisions. Later in the game, those 40 shields aren't as important.

[Ming]

I can't remember the last time I built a barrack early in the game... Until you have a decent bunch of core cities... it's just to expensive to build one. You give to much up for the little you can gain early.

[rah]

Exactly. There is no need to delay the ability to build barracks. It is also quite rare for me to build one early. Maybe once in all the years I've played.

[SlowThinker]

What do you mean by 'early'.
I think Barracks must be built when you expect your units will fight, so usually you don't need them in 3800 BC.

Originally posted by rah
There is no need to delay the ability to build barracks.

I wanted to say that the game (or rules.txt) is more interesting if you are not able to built barracks in time when you want to build them and therefore you have to discover the appropriate tech.
This is the principle of techs: you can go for different techs, each tech has its merits and you have to decide which tech is the most important.
The game is more interesting if you have to decide among 5 very useful techs than if you know you must go for Monarchy and only for Monarchy.

[rah]

I don't know of anyone, except the AI, that will build a barracks before Monarchy, (or republic for those that race to that), so I don't see what you're proposing having any impact at all. Maybe if you're suggesting associating it with a more useless tech like Chivalry, then their might be a choice. I think we'll leave it the way it is.

[Ming]

I can't remember the last time I built a barrack before 2000 BC... and only seldomly before 1000 BC.

[SlowThinker]

It is also quite rare for me to build one early. Maybe once in all the years I've played.

I can't remember the last time I built a barrack before 2000 BC... and only seldomly before 1000 BC.

I had always a suspicion that you MP players are weak but i can't conceive it is so bad.

[Ming]

You don't really need them before then...

I will take a settler or 4/5's of a caravan anytime over a barracks in the early part of the game.

[rah]

Originally posted by SlowThinker
I had always a suspicion that you MP players are weak but i can't conceive it is so bad.

You should join us some time and find out just how weak we are.

[SlowThinker]

Originally posted by Ming
You don't really need them before then...

I can agree you needn't them as long as you have no contact. But then you need them as soon as possible IMHO...They double every shield spent on combat units.

Originally posted by rah
You should join us some time and find out just how weak we are.

I have contacted atawa already, but I am afraid I will be too slow.

[rah]

On our tiny little rocks, you have a tendency to meet people very early. Even though you're usually still in the land grab era conflicts can occur. But that early settler is 90% of the time, more important than the barracks.

[War4ever]

hehe....bumping into units with mp left can get you some early vets!!!!

[rah]

That never seems to happen to me. I'm usually the one that people are getting vets against.

[DrSpike]

That's only because War thanks you for the vet all the time whether he got one or not.

[rah]

Yes, that's a common spoof for us.

[War4ever]

EVEN WHEN YOUR CITY IS BEING POUNDED BY ENEMY CATAPULTS, ITS COMMON TO SAY THANKS FOR THE VET AFTER ANY ATTACK YOU SURVIVE/WIN

WE KNOW ALOT OF IT IS HOGWASH, BUT EARLY IN THE GAME, THAT APPARENT VET ARCHER/CHARIOT CAN CREATE A SENSE OF INSECURITY IN YOUR OPPOSITION WHICH CAN BE ENOUGH TO CLAIM TWO MORE CITIES

[rah]

Caps stuck again I see.

Yes the illusion of power is sometimes just as good as actually having it. I guarentee you that I am much more careful trying to settle an area where I have already lost a unit to a chariot or archer.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by rah
Caps stuck again I see.

I don't actually see how you can write a post and not notice you were writing in caps for the whole post. Unless you are one of those people that types with 1 finger and stares at the keyboard the whole time that is.

[War4ever]

nope, i can type around 55wpm...not great but not bad ..... i do peck at the number pad though and i use it everyday...

when i see the caps locked sometimes i edit, sometimes i am just lazy......just ignore the caps unless only one or two words are being emphasized....

or there are times i start out in caps , lose them but dont edit the first few words...

if you give me time i am sure i could sum up some other examples for you.......

[Hydey]

I thought you just liked shouting at us

[SlowThinker]

You defile my important thread by such a spam!

[Hydey]

hey wait a minute, I wasn't the one doing all the shouting.

[War4ever]

hydey the key is to spam loudly like Sean does...... i just alter my vocabulary

[Hydey]

Would it help if I put in lots of **** words and called everyone names and noobs?

[SlowThinker]

Hydey, I mean all this degenerated MP company. Next time I will post back to Civ2-Strategy.