#1 Re: LT53 » The winning conditions and the ruleset for LT53 » 2020-08-30 07:57:54

I do not understand at all what you are writing. It's a bunch of prejudices, insinuations and inconsistencies.

I object the proposal that was made. Here and now.

#2 Re: LT53 » The winning conditions and the ruleset for LT53 » 2020-08-28 19:58:00

wieder wrote:

Just to make sure, fran, you object ending the official part of the game even if it continues to run unofficially?

At the moment I count you reply as objecting to end the game with the score ending.

I want the real game to continue with the players that want that. Whatever you declare official or unofficial, what scores you take, when you take them, what you do with them, is absolutely not my concern.

#3 Re: LT53 » The winning conditions and the ruleset for LT53 » 2020-08-28 10:09:31

Corbeau wrote:

"Officially ending the game" isn't equal to "shutting the server down".

I stick to what I've been told here https://forum.longturn.net/viewtopic.ph … 342#p10342

So far no player placed importance on that difference anyway.

#4 Re: LT53 » The winning conditions and the ruleset for LT53 » 2020-08-27 21:46:41

I dissent.

Practically I had waited with that until shortly before the deadline.
The reason I post it now is I want to spare those that want to leave
to play the next turns for the wrong reasons.

It is a matter of course for me that everybody that wants to leave does so
whenever he wishes and for everybody that wants to stay to stay as long as
he wants.

#5 LT53 » Delegation requests » 2020-08-26 21:13:40

fran
Replies: 1

From the rules:
"Since this is a team game, any team member may be delegated to another team member if someone is idler (not online) for full turn."

Dim hasn't been online for many full turns in this game. As of me writing this, the nation tab shows him idle for 3 turns. No idea if these are full turns or if the current turn is the 3rd. It doesn't matter. If nobody else steps forward, please delegate to me.

From the rules:
"If an idler is not replaced the team will have one week to move for the idler."

The admin might want to clarify if this sentence applies to game start only or if it
is to be taken literally in the sense of the above definition: idler = not online for full turn.

Please do not re-iterate the rules. I can read. It's a precise question.

#6 Re: LT53 » Some settings do not match original Warclient » 2020-08-24 14:09:31

Another major distinction to draw is what humans actually do on the one hand and how they reason about it on the other hand. I never could understand the reasons given here for quitting a LT  game. I agree with ste that airlift to allies and buying unimportant crap city did not change what had happened otherwise. I have railroad on my island which is the equivalent to longturn maglev and 2 (or 3) transports would bring units to kamblr's in 1 turn as does airlift to allies. So the things that are called responsible for the current state of game for sure are not. Changing them would change nothing. Having changed them before would have changed nothing.

Never mind, believe your story. I'm done with this discussion.

#7 Re: LT53 » Shoigu surrendered, nation open for permanent delegation » 2020-08-24 12:14:44

I built my nation for nearly 3 months and I would like to continue that, testing some stuff, maybe even reporting major issues. So in any case please let the game run for another couple of weeks.

#8 Re: LT53 » Some settings do not match original Warclient » 2020-08-24 12:05:36

louis94 wrote:
fran wrote:

Also the administration should clarify who is responsible for what.

The administration as a whole is responsible for everyone having fun. If this game wasn't fun, sorry about that, we're doing our best.

You will understand that from now on I will refer to the administration as "The Continuum".

#9 Re: LT53 » Some settings do not match original Warclient » 2020-08-24 12:04:05

There are different questions here that easily are mixed up.

a) Is there an inherent problem in the ruleset as such? Answer is no.
b) Is it possible to play it in an unadapted, compromise-free way you play warclient? Answer might be no. But the first reason for this is, the landmass setting is most likely not canoncial, and a longturn ffa game always will have non-competitive players, while a warclient game will not.
c) Should the player adapt to the ruleset at hand, or should the running game be adapted  to the player? Obviously the former, because the latter violates the rules and would make one particular player special.

The worst thing about this is, the warclient players call gameplay according to the ruleset as it is "cheating".
This together with their belief they can take the vast majority of players hostage to their one and only pure way of playing during the game, not even thinking about any way of adapting to what is at hand, is the point that should not be tolerated.

#10 Re: LT53 » Some settings do not match original Warclient » 2020-08-23 19:52:03

Ignatus wrote:

we don't have any worthy volunteer for Shogun nation.

Ask pneu?

#11 Re: LT53 » Some settings do not match original Warclient » 2020-08-23 19:34:47

>[*]Airlifting to allied cities is enabled. This makes the leading team much stronger.[/*]

Landmass = 17. This means two separate archipelagos are surrounded by vast amount of ocean. Doctors invaded the archipelago of Covids and conquered 1 island nearly completely and have a foothold in a 2nd island. Also several smaller islands were conquered by Doctors. 1 of our nations is down to 2 irrelevant cities on a small island. On the contrary, Covids didn't do anything to the archipelago of Doctors. In this context I do not understand the attribute "leading".
In the described map setting, airlifting to allied cities benefits the aggressor, because he can beam reinforcements over the vast distance where otherwise relay points for aircraft would need to be established or transports for land units would need to be used. We ourselves, fighting the invaders, have short distances both for airplane and land units and do not benefit said feature in the same way.
For the given reasons I reject the idea game balance would be disturbed by airlifting to allies, the opposite is the case. Even if we manage to take back our archipelago, this will take many turns, the other side has time to adapt to the situation. If the other side has nobody that did farming or is willing to do farming, that is not our problem. As far as I can see, vast majority of Covids are farmers. :-)

>[*]Bribing cities is possible. In the original Warclient rules, bribing a city costs 100k's of gold.[/*]

This is nice for the invaders, they can bribe our cities.


>These rules were present from the beginning, but this was noticed only recently.

Only 2 players in the whole game are warclient players. It cannot be expected from us others to know what warclient rules are, nor is this a warclient game. This is a longturn game where certain rules have been made to deal with problems, none of this rules say that anything that is not to the expectation of the warclient players is changed to their convenience. If I play a game, I notice the ruleset when I start and adapt my gameplay accordingly. Thus the assertion "was noticed only recently" is wrong.

>The whole ruleset balance is possibly affected (for instance, a rapture ruleset can easily generate tons of gold to >bribe cities).

Tons of gold can be used for many things. Can also buy stealth fighters.

>According to the rules:
>

The rules wrote:

>If there is a game breaking bug the ruleset can be fixed. If it's just an annoyance or like a really powerful but >cheap unit, a change is not made. Again, common sense. This is not done without something really serious >happening. The game help can be fixed while the game is running but it may not be updated to the actual game >since it requires a reload.
>

> I would like to hear opinions on whether or not these are game-breaking issues that must be fixed in this game.

There are no game-breaking issues that must be fixed, but there are wrong expectations from certain players about the game they must fix themselves or take the consequences. Changes to the ruleset can be applied for a follow-up. Though I would regret it and will not take part in that. Warclient is, if I am not totally mistaken, a shortturn (RTS) game played in a gated community in a highly specialized and optimized manner, while longturn is an open, free for all community where always players will take part that endanger the team by building undefended nations or playing in another, non-competitive way. The warclient players refuse to accept this difference, and I do not understand, why they want to play here at all. In my opinion the LT53 ruleset as is, with landmass=17, is excellently suited to meet the demands of FFA longturn. The airlift to allies feature helps a team to fight otherwise certain defeat if one of their non-competitive players is invaded, as in our case. But the rules are the same for everybody, and as I said, from an abstract viewpoint, it benefits the aggressor most.

I highly recommend to use this ruleset and setting in future games.

I complain about the forced deletion of the player asdrubaldone. It cannot be regarded as game breaking if  Doctors have to live with a single city they cannot disband. It violates the traditional longturn policy of treating all players as peers, with the sole exception if a player deliberately endangers the game outcome.

Also the administration should clarify who is responsible for what. The game page says, wieder is the administrator. The deletion of asdrubaldone was done by louis. As I have come to know wieder, it is hard for me to imagine  that he does approve this decision. Of course I am willing to revise the picture I have.

#12 Re: Augmented2 » return to x1 TC constant » 2020-04-04 10:24:15

Btw, why do you say "return to". I'm not aware of a decision to shorten turn duration. It just was a suggestion from wahazar.

#13 Re: Augmented2 » return to x1 TC constant » 2020-04-04 10:16:24

The game is starting very slowly and probably taking very long. It would make sense to shorten turns in the beginning and lengthen them in the end.

#14 Re: New games » Augmented2 modpack longturn game » 2020-02-15 13:12:42

What kind of map will you choose?

#15 Re: LT42 » How to fix game-breaker anarchy » 2019-01-11 16:30:28

From what I see tech upkeep hitting sooner would make it worse, because there are players, even if or because they go to war, that do not strive for better techs despite they didn't run into upkeep. And that clearly has something to do with archers being too powerful. But one should not rely on having mil units perfectly balanced.

#16 Re: LT42 » How to fix game-breaker anarchy » 2019-01-10 18:46:57

Of course having upkeep in anarchy is better than not having upkeep.
Maybe upkeep would fix the problem for shields, if they have
to be produced by the home city. For gold you simply take
a part of your cities and make coinage.

The problem is not solely upkeep but mainly the other 2 things
I mentioned.

#17 LT42 » How to fix game-breaker anarchy » 2019-01-10 18:24:06

fran
Replies: 21

Smallpoxing with anarchy can be a winning strategy in this ruleset because
a) happiness is independent from city number
b) production waste does not depend on distance from capital and
c) units cost no upkeep in anarchy, which I assume is hard coded.

The straightforward solution seems to impose a city number limit on anarchy only.
Once a certain numbers of cities is reached all cities should fall into disorder which
puts production to zero. Also it might be difficult to end that state because a city
has to be disbanded to respect the limit again.

The number of cities allowed could be computed like

tiles per player / max city area possible * multiplier

where multiplier is how many cities there may be on an area that a city with max radius covers.

Implementation of happiness stuff in freeciv is a little bit awkward.
The ugly solution, which the honorable Caedo probably would call "patching the wrong end"
would imply
a) setting the number of citizens you get content "for free" to a high number
b) setting appearing unhappy citizens to angry
c) specify the city number threshold
d) make a high number of angry citizens appear on first time the threshold is taken.
Frankly, I don't know if the latter is possible, if not, another approach has to be taken.
I'm just brainstorming.

If there would be NO anarchy period for switching govs, the number of free
content citizens could be set to the threshold and with every city built it's reduced
by one. The impact starts if the number of free content citizens you get is lower
than your actual city size, which in smallpoxing usually is 1-3. Otoh, that would
rule out building bigger cities in anarchy. Which is no problem imo, since gov
can be changed.

Since this restriction is for anarchy only and doesn't affect other govs,
it's not that critical to have it thoroughly tested.

#18 Re: LT42 » LT42: Ending, winning and other game settings » 2019-01-04 21:06:24

How do you know that's my only security copy?

#19 Re: LT42 » LT42: Ending, winning and other game settings » 2019-01-03 22:19:47

Corbeau wrote:

LT42 will be different from all previous LT games in one technical aspect: it will not end automatically upon victory of a player or an alliance. Instead, there is a number of endgame conditions. Once those conditions are met, game formally ends and score is calculated. After that, players who wish to do so may continue playing in a "sandbox/informal" game, to test out the new ruleset or, simply, to have fun. Game will be physically terminated at a later point that is to be decided between remaining players and admins.

Yeah, exactly. I wish to continue after game ended formally for fun reasons. Therefor I veto any physical termination of game "at a later point".

#20 Re: LT42 » LT42: Ending, winning and other game settings » 2019-01-03 22:18:02

Security copy.

Corbeau wrote:

LT42 will be different from all previous LT games in one technical aspect: it will not end automatically upon victory of a player or an alliance. Instead, there is a number of endgame conditions. Once those conditions are met, game formally ends and score is calculated. After that, players who wish to do so may continue playing in a "sandbox/informal" game, to test out the new ruleset or, simply, to have fun. Game will be physically terminated at a later point that is to be decided between remaining players and admins.

ENDGAME CONDITIONS

LT42 will end formally and score will be calculated when endgame conditions are met. Conditions are related to the Demographics reports and will need to be detected by the players themselves. Once any player publicly declares that a certain condition is met, the game ends on that particular turn and score is calculated. This needs to be declared publicly in the in-game chat. (Alternatively, a player is free to buy an ad in New York Times or a major daily newspaper in his country. The main point is that noticing that a condition is met and muttering it to himself will not be enough. It needs to be publicly declared.)

Modifications to the ruleset have been introduced in order to make endgame conditions detectable.
1. Marco Polo wonder (giving embassy with all players) will be available with Banking. The cost of the wonder is 100 shields.
2. After discovering Electricity, a player will automatically have embassy with everybody, without the need to build Marco Polo.

This will enable players to monitor technologies of all other player and also see which player is No. 1 in some demographic categories.

The official game will end when any of the conditions below are met. N will be the number of active (non-idle) players on Turn 10 of the game.

- A spaceship is built and arrives at its destination.

- One player discovers Future Tech sqrt(N).

- Sqrt(N) players discover Future Tech 1.

- One or more players control 1/sqrt(N) of overall land area on the map.
For this, at the start of the game an overall landmass will be determined from the server settings. It may happen that the number is not completely accurate, but the error should be negligible and the number determined will be used.

If a player conquers enough land before others have built Marco Polo, he has no one to blame but himself. The game continues until at least a few other players can confirm this, either by building Marco Polo or establishing embassies manually, using Diplomats.

- (Just as a failsafe), current year is reached, whichever that is.

VICTORY CONDITIONS

There aren't any. When the game formally ends, in-game score determines who rocked, who rolled and who was rickrolled. Score is individual. There is no alliance victory. You are fighting for your place on the ranking table.

It is quite possible (although not extremely likely) that the player who triggered endgame conditions will not have the best score and thus will not be the "winner".

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

Naturally, a single player is not allowed to have more accounts in order to control more nations. All transgressors will be amputated from the game. Anesthetics will not be used. Screaming will be ignored.

Delegation is allowed up to a limit. Common sense will be used and all players must publicly announce delegations that may last more than a few days. Weekend is fine, don't spam with every detail. One week should be made public.

A player may control more nations through delegation for a very short time. You can have more short-term delegations (as long as they are not from the same nation, obviously), but only one long-term (more than a week). Again, common sense will be used. If there is a good reason why you should take more than one long-term delegation, ask and it will be discussed. "My friend has lost interest and I'd like to keep his nation alive" may be a good reason for the nation to be delegated, but not necessarily for it to be delegated to you.

In all other cases, common sense will be used. When in doubt, apply more common sense.

IDLER MANAGEMENT AND OTHER TECHNICALITIES

First turn will last 3 times the normal length of the turn (3 * 23 hours), to allow all players who signed in to receive the information that the game has stared, to join in, have a look around, make sure everything is functioning.

Nations belonging to players declared idle will be available for replacement. Player will be considered idle if:
- he didn't join during the first 3 * 23 hour turn
OR
- hasn't logged in for 7 days after playing for at least 1 turn

Replacement candidates, please contact Wieder on this forum or on one of the LongTurn Discord servers.

#21 Re: LT42 » The ruleset for LT42 » 2018-12-01 19:35:21

AFAIK Corbeau didn't post links to his ruleset compilation on forum. Could this be done, please?

#22 Re: LT42 » Bug(s) in the LT42 ruleset » 2018-11-27 16:08:02

A real bug into this ruleset is having workers capturable given their extraordinary cost.
And that's the only thing I would call "bug" so far.

#23 Re: LT42 » Bug(s) in the LT42 ruleset » 2018-11-27 16:05:03

Corbeau wrote:

HOWEVER, you SHOULD BE ABLE TO simply sell Manufaktur before starting to buld a regular Factory and things should be fine.

He, that was my secret. Why do you tell it publicly.

Corbeau wrote:

I was in favour of fixing the problem, but, for the record, Wieder was against it "because  there is a long tradition of not changing the ruleset once the game starts even if there are serious bugs in the ruleset". This will probably be the principle in the future, too.

You're talking nonsense now. Myself reported that bug in test game, and you said you would look into it. In fact, in the next test game looked to me solved, but the possibility of getting a second factory by selling the manufaktur sprang into my eye.

So it has NOTHING to do with wieder but a lot with the fact that reporting on discord in some cases is as durable as spitting into the closet.

#24 Re: LT42 » LT42: Ending, winning and other game settings » 2018-11-23 17:55:35

I estimate the top ranking player (not known to me!) currently will have 500.000 sqmiles or a little bit below.
Given exponential growth the condition could be met quite soon.
Not to forget the vast ranges of empty land on the map.
Confirmation shouldn't be a problem given the fact contact is enough to exchange embassies.

In my opinion this ruleset should had been started as island game.
With idler deletion as soon as first player gets ships.

#25 Re: LT42 » LT42: Ending, winning and other game settings » 2018-11-23 13:59:34

Corbeau wrote:

- One or more players control 1/sqrt(N) of overall land area on the map.
For this, at the start of the game an overall landmass will be determined from the server settings. It may happen that the number is not completely accurate, but the error should be negligible and the number determined will be used.

N is counted when? Or to ask different: Is the value already known?

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB