Proposal: Summer Epic Challenge - Page 3

vmxa1 · June 25, 2003, 03:16

Well we have 24 civs, how many do you want to lock down? If you go with 16 set and 8 open, then you can add two more to the list. One should be Mil + Ind, oh did I mean Mao?
Yeah, it is hard to know how useful Expansion will turn out to be, I just am not a big fan of it even in the best setting it could be used on.
I have not play America since the first game of CivIII.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 03:18

I'm thinking in terms of the following settings:

Width: 250
Height: 250
# Civs: 24
Distance Between Civs: 36
OCN: 60
Tech Rate: 800

This contrasts with normal huge map settings of:

Width: 160
Height: 160
# Civs: 16
Distance: 24
OCN: 32
Tech Rate: 400

On a Huge map, there are 800 tiles per city in the OCN. On this map, there would be 1042 tiles per city in the OCN (with fewer civs per tile, so the OCN would be even smaller compared with available space to expand into). The tech rate will actually be higher compared with the OCN than on a Huge map, and not a lot lower compared with the number of tiles. That's going to make for painfully slow research in the early going, but should keep research from getting too easy even for big, powerful empires. And since the AI isn't smart enough to figure out when researching anything faster than 40 turns is hopeless, I'm thinking of upping the maximum research time to 60 or even 80 turns. That would avoid penalizing AIs so much for actually doing research and keep a 40-turn pace on the first few techs from being a complete no-brainer for human players.

Any thoughts on these proposed settings (especially from those who have played on oversized maps before)?

MrWhereItsAt · June 25, 2003, 03:24

60-80 turns max research time! This is sounding like it's almost about to get out of hand. Otherwise I like everything so far.

I will certainly be killing civs wherever I can just to simplify International relations! Think about it - 23 civs allying and fighting to try to remember the details of... has anyone managed this before?

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 03:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Mountain Sage

Don't forget the French (I might not even play them, for once

), but France had a big navy before a certain Nelson came along.

France also has the same traits as Carthage, which makes me skeptical of how much value including both of them would add compared with having an additional locked-in opponent.

alexman · June 25, 2003, 03:43

How about changing the cost of each individual tech so that the early game isn't so slow, while the late game isn't a breeze?

For example, you could have a tech rate of 400, but with the cost of each technology raised to the power of 1.1. Pottery would still cost 2 research points, Monarchy would cost 33 instead of 24, Nationalism would cost 194 instead of 120, Computers would cost 453 instead of 260, et cetera...

Just an idea.

Harovan · June 25, 2003, 03:50

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay
On a Huge map, there are 800 tiles per city in the OCN. On this map, there would be 1042 tiles per city in the OCN (with fewer civs per tile, so the OCN would be even smaller compared with available space to expand into). The tech rate will actually be higher compared with the OCN than on a Huge map, and not a lot lower compared with the number of tiles. That's going to make for painfully slow research in the early going, but should keep research from getting too easy even for big, powerful empires. And since the AI isn't smart enough to figure out when researching anything faster than 40 turns is hopeless, I'm thinking of upping the maximum research time to 60 or even 80 turns. That would avoid penalizing AIs so much for actually doing research and keep a 40-turn pace on the first few techs from being a complete no-brainer for human players.

Any thoughts on these proposed settings (especially from those who have played on oversized maps before)?

I have played with 24 civs on a 200x200 map (3 continents about the same size) with a tech rate of 750, a minimal research time of 6 and a maximal research time of 60. It was a great game, I played it right after PtW came out and remember it with pleasure. I played the Ottomans and won by space race in the 1900's. The only bad was, that I often had nothing else to build than wealth (I didn't intent to warmonger much in that game), because the tech pace was slower, but the building and unit prices remained the same.

Overall, this sounds like a fun game, especially for a hobby island hopper like me. Maybe I return to PtW SP for a while.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 03:51

Quote:

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
60-80 turns max research time! This is sounding like it's almost about to get out of hand. Otherwise I like everything so far.

Agreed that it's a bit out of hand, but from what I understand of AI behavior, the AIs are going to be pretty much maxing out research spending under Despotism no matter what. (They practically never run a GPT surplus under Despotism, and they don't know how to use the luxury slider under most circumstances, so their gold must go to science.) If human players can keep research at 10% and get their first three techs or so just as quickly as the AIs can at 90%-100%, that will give us a huge advantage in the early game. I know increasing the maximum research time will get a bit painful, but it seems like the only way to reward research instead of letting us pile up mountains of gold while the AIs waste theirs. (Even cost 2 techs would tend to take about 40 turns at max research with such a high tech rate. But if we don't run the tech rate sky high, the pace of technology seems likely to get too fast once the civs get up to speed.)

The ideal would be if the tech rate operated in such a way that most of the variation based on map size only kicks in after civs have been REXing for a while. That would keep the feel of the tech race more consistent across map sizes. But at least so far, Firaxis has settled for a simpler approach that tends to result in either painfully slow research early in the game or excessive ease of doing 4-turn research later on.

Nathan

alexman · June 25, 2003, 04:07

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay

The ideal would be if the tech rate operated in such a way that most of the variation based on map size only kicks in after civs have been REXing for a while. That would keep the feel of the tech race more consistent across map sizes. But at least so far, Firaxis has settled for a simpler approach that tends to result in either painfully slow research early in the game or excessive ease of doing 4-turn research later on.

But we have an advantage here. We don't need to make the tech pace work for all maps - just this one. Tech costs can be adjusted individually. See my suggestion above.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 04:08

Alexman, a simpler approach might be something along the lines of multiplying the costs of the expensive terminal ancient techs (Currency, Construction, Monarchy, and Republic) by 1.5 from their huge-map settings and doubling everything after that. I'm guessing that would put the cost increase somewhere around the time civs REX to a point where they can afford higher prices than they could on a similar huge map, or at least not so far off from it as to yield absurd results.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 04:08

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman

But we have an advantage here. We don't need to make the tech pace work for all maps - just this one. Tech costs can be adjusted individually. See my suggestion above.

Which I cross-posted with.

Dominae · June 25, 2003, 09:51

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay
Alexman, a simpler approach might be something along the lines of multiplying the costs of the expensive terminal ancient techs (Currency, Construction, Monarchy, and Republic) by 1.5 from their huge-map settings and doubling everything after that.

I like alexman's idea of a constant progression instead. Even if the end of the Ancient Age is approximately when one would stop REXing, I think it would feel too weird for tech costs to jump so drastically all of a sudden. Plus, it artificially forces the player into research-mode at that point in the game, discounting other strategies.

Insofar as civs, I think my original should be kept as is: even if some people think there are some civs "missing", everyone can nonethless find a civ that suits them.

Dominae

Jawa Jocky · June 25, 2003, 10:39

I'm starting to come around on this idea.

AUSS - Apolyton University Summer Session (or School)

see I'm already working on acronyms

I have only one suggestion. With massive oceans come massive travel delays. I think we should tweak the ships and/or add small wonders to help with ocean travel (make it quickier later in the game). While this does conflict with a core AU principle (minimal tweaking and preservation of the orginal game), I believe the map that is being proposed is so abnormal that it makes my suggestion worthy of consideration.

jshelr · June 25, 2003, 11:51

I'm not sure we need to worry too much about the AI being disadvantaged on tech in the early going given the max water map. If we can't use an early war to extort, it mightl be tough to keep up regardless of the AI uselessly setting research too high.

vmxa1 · June 25, 2003, 13:23

If one of the goals was to make contact harder to come by, then making ships travel faster/farther would defeat that aim.
I can see doing something for the very late ship travel, say battleships and transports.
I agree that Carth and France, pick one and only one, but we do not have Mil/Ind civ in the mix.
I have been playing Cleo and Hammy lately and and the promotions are so hard to come by, it is painful.
I guess the sci trait would start to loom large if the tech rate is bumped.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 13:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae

I like alexman's idea of a constant progression instead. Even if the end of the Ancient Age is approximately when one would stop REXing, I think it would feel too weird for tech costs to jump so drastically all of a sudden. Plus, it artificially forces the player into research-mode at that point in the game, discounting other strategies.

I think alexman's approach misses the target. Firaxis's approach to research ignores the fact that during the REXing phase, the only benefit players get from being on a bigger map is reduced corruption (and even that is irrelevant in the early stages while players just have a single, relatively small town). But alexman's approach keeps the relative cost of techs getting higher long after the amount of claimed, productive land flattens out.

What's really needed is an approach that keeps the costs in line with what they would be on a huge map until civs REX to a point where they can research faster than they could on a huge map, after which it ramps up fairly quickly to around double the cost (since once you settle half the land you're going to, settling the second half generally doesn't take too terribly long if you have room). If we want a more gradual scaling, we could go with something like:

1.25 for Literature, Philosophy, Code of Laws, Map Making, and Polytheism.

1.5 for Monarchy, Republic, Currency, and Construction.

1.7 for Monotheism, Feudalism, and Engineering

1.8 for Theology, Chivalry, and Invention

1.9 for Education and Gunpowder [Edit: and Printing Press]

2 for everything thereafter.

That would scale things a bit more gradually while still keeping relative costs the same as in the standard game once civs have essentially finished REXing and had some time to catch up on city improvements.

I also don't see how even my earlier, less gradual version would force players into a research mode more than conventional games do.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 13:44

By the way, a few months back, alexman snuck a change into the AU Mod that dramatically increases the cost of Map Making (16 instead of 12). As of AU 208, it's still there. I'm curious as to whether anyone has noticed changes in gameplay that seem positive enough and significant enough to justify keeping such a significant departure from the default rules.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 14:04

Quote:

Originally posted by jshelr
I'm not sure we need to worry too much about the AI being disadvantaged on tech in the early going given the max water map. If we can't use an early war to extort, it mightl be tough to keep up regardless of the AI uselessly setting research too high.

With the way Civ 3 is designed, if keeping up isn't tough in the early game, the game generally degenerates into a cakewalk by around the end of the medieval era. So I'd rather risk having the game end up on the tough side if we don't have neighbors reachable by land than risk having it be way too easy if we do. Consider how many warrior-to-swordsman upgrades 120 turns of science at 10% can buy.

Nathan

Dominae · June 25, 2003, 14:15

I've not played with the AU mod for quite some time now. I felt it was better to leave it alone for a while.
Whatever changes are included there will always be supporters and detractors. There is simply no use in arguing about what changes are good or not, because everyone appears to have a different agenda concerning the AU mod. If everyone could agree on the purpose/spirit of the AU mod, then it may then be worthwhile to open that project again.

Even with this simple game I'm beginning to see that there will be major disagreements on the settings. I suggest someone just say "this is the way it's going to be" and provide the scenario file. I assume the point of this game and this thread is to play Civ3 and not debate about its game mechanics.

Frankly, I'm a little hazy concerning the relationship between Huge maps, OCNs, REXing and research, so I'll just leave this all up to you guys.

Dominae

Theseus · June 25, 2003, 14:16

This sounds intense... I'm in, for as long as my computer can handle it.

Re research, I think the target should be achieving 4 turn discoveries around the end of the Industrial Era, but only if your empire can do so at 80-100% science.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 14:52

Dominae, in general, I agree that the AU Mod is in good enough shape that we can let it sit. But the change in cost for Map Making was done essentially unilaterally by one person in a spirit of "let's try it and see how it works," and I don't recall there ever being any real discussion since then of whether it produces any noticeable improvements in gameplay. Unless someone steps forward and says, "Yes, I think it's a significant improvement because...," I'd rather change the cost back to its normal value so there's one less change between the default and AU Mod versions to keep track of and take into consideration when switching back and forth.

Dominae · June 25, 2003, 15:00

Will this be an AU course?

Yahweh Sabaoth · June 25, 2003, 15:00

As a side note to the interesting but difficult-to-follow (for we idiots) discussion of tech costs, I just wanted to note that any changes that push this scenario in the direction of "real life" would be beautiful... that would be the best thing about this super-huge map, ne c'est pas?

Anyhow, carry on...

alexman · June 25, 2003, 15:03

Nathan, this "one person" performed a thorough analysis of AI behavior before suggesting that particular change, and he steps forward and says that it's a significant improvement because it encourages the AI to take a less predictable research path.

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 15:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
Will this be an AU course?

I think it's getting enough interest to justify following your earlier suggestion of making it a 400 level course. The one catch is that if we do both standard and AU Mod versions, it will probably be necessary to generate the initial map under the AU Mod, then restore the default rules, and then put the special world size and tech cost parameters back into the "standard rules" version. (After all, there's no such thing as truly standard rules for a 250x250 map.

) I'll leave it up to you whether you're willing to go to the trouble or whether you want us to settle for one version (probably based on the standard rules).

Jawa Jocky · June 25, 2003, 15:10

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
If one of the goals was to make contact harder to come by, then making ships travel faster/farther would defeat that aim.
I can see doing something for the very late ship travel, say battleships and transports.

I completely agree. I would peg any of the improvements to Flight (since airports make sea travel less relevant) or Nuclear Power (reactors). I don't really care since I wouldn't bother with late game war mongering, but 15 turns to cross the ocean will deter everyone but the really hardcore.

Dominae · June 25, 2003, 15:17

Not to be lazy, but I think it would be best if you all played stock (1.21) Play the World for this one.

Dominae

nbarclay · June 25, 2003, 15:19

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Nathan, this "one person" performed a thorough analysis of AI behavior before suggesting that particular change, and he steps forward and says that it's a significant improvement because it encourages the AI to take a less predictable research path.

How much of your conclusion is based on in-game experience, and how much on what you expected based on theoretical analysis? The games I've played since the change was introduced have tended to be unusual enough that I haven't picked up on a clear pattern one way or the other.

alexman · June 25, 2003, 15:30

The analysis was not theoretical. It was based on testing, and the results are summarized in a strat thread over at CivFanatics.

Anyway, do as you wish with the AU mod. I'm done with it.

vmxa1 · June 25, 2003, 16:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
This sounds intense... I'm in, for as long as my computer can handle it.

This is the one reason I am thinking of playing it all the way out. I want to see is this slow down I keep hearing about is true.
I have not played all that many huge maps, so I may not be in a position to judge, plus I always get the lastest hardware.
This would give me the answer once an for all.
24 civs on a monster map, if that does not bog things down, nothing will.

I was going to suggest AU3xx, but I was not sure what 302 was meant to be about.
I do think it is wise to use PTW 1.21 as the next addon will be at least at that level. May as well get use to it.

Nor Me · June 25, 2003, 17:31

On the tech costs, I've seen a definite improvement in the AI's choice in techs.

Normally the most significant part of the change is not the increase in cost in Mapmaking but the decrease in cost of Mathematics. The only way I've been able to exploit the change is by getting a 40-turn Currency in early.

The increased cost of Mapmaking would probably only be important if the minimum research time is increased significantly. I doubt the even the AIs will do much better than 40 turns on an expensive tech that they research early on the settings that have been discussed. Except possibly on Deity.