Longturn Forum

Here is proposal of first longturn game based on augmented2 ruleset/modpack.

Game will be held on 2.6 server, with 2.6.* clients compatible.

Recruitment here: http://longturn.net/game/AU1/

Ruleset is here:
https://github.com/Wahazar/augmented2/tree/longturn

All alleged graphics files can be installed automatically using Modpack Installer utility,
using following modpack URL: Alternative method - by downloading ruleset and unpacking manually to the freeciv data directory, for example to ~/.freeciv/2.6/
Modpack is based on hex topology offer two tilesets, augmentedi (standard, amplio-like) and augmetedis (small, trident-like).
Without native modpack game is playable (using standard hexemplio tilesets) but ugly.

Winning conditions are:

http://forum.longturn.net/viewtopic.php?id=1306

Besides of in-game help, there is also wiki documentation about this ruleset:
https://freeciv.fandom.com/wiki/Augment ... et_modpack

Because this ruleset offer much longer timespan of game than standard ones, following settings are proposed to speed game pace a little:
timeout 20h, unitwaittime 2h (shorter turns and possibility to make 2 turns during one day - convenient for weekend idlers etc);
fixedlength 0 - possible to shorten turn if everybody agree, by pressing turn done;
average number of 3 huts/player - may be unfair but fun and faster initial game progress.

Another settings different than standard longturn: Barbarian nation held by barbarian AI.
Reason is that Cultural Victory may lead some nations to push all effort to achieve this goal, thus random Barbarian attack grant pressure
to develop some defense forces as well.

In case if some crucial bugs/exploits are revealed, game ruleset may be subject to change. Decision if ruleset is changed, after discussion, lies in hand of game admin.

I'm against 20h timeout because it will speed up the game by ~15% which isn't that much, but may cause more inconvenience with people's playing times.

What kind of map will you choose?

fran wrote:What kind of map will you choose?

"topology", "WRAPX|HEX|ISO"
"landmass", 40
temperature=50
and
alltemperate=disabled
because there are some features which make sparse terrain such tundra or jungle less handicapped.

I am wondering - other than being a pretty cool historical unit - what is the reason that the Samurai unit is so strong - the 15 hitpoints seems to make it more attractive than the the Grenadier (10 hitpoints, higher attack, lower defense) that replaces it?

Grenadier has FirePower 2, while melee units have FP 1.
There is units.xls chart in doc directory, where is calculated Effective Fire Power Factor (just triple multiplier of A or D strength*HP*FP) for easy reference,
so Samurai EFPA=75, Grenadier 120 (EDPD is the same, but these are assault units).

TLDR: Grenadier is better.

Besides this, one need to make optional tech branch to get Samurai.

Ok, thanks. I did not consider Firepower, just tried playing - and it didn't seem that Grenadiers had an easier time breaking through defenses (perhaps they would if I had brought enough firepower (Archers, Canons, etc.) to weaken the defenses first). My gut feeling was that the two units were more or less comparable. I was just reading up on it, so I could be wrong, but as I understand FirePower from this site:

https://freeciv.fandom.com/wiki/Combat.mp

Firepower is only applied in case the attacker gets to damage the defender (and that probability is calculated based on attack-value + veteran level + fortification factors). In other words, a Grenadier is less likely to get a blow in on a defender - but when he does, the blow will be twice as effective? So firepower seems to be a second degree factor - and direct multiplication is perhaps a bit of an exaggeration to compare the two? I.e. at each stage of the combat where a defender manages to survive, he will be more likely to give blows to a Grenadier than to a Samurai - and since the Grenadier has fewer hitpoints, each blow could more easily be a wiping blow? These question-marks are all genuine. I think that a lot of thought and effort have gone into this ruleset - and my gut-feeling/analysis could definitely be wrong.

Perhaps the two could co-exist until Stormtroopers - with a mix Samurais could be used as a first wave of direct attack to weaken strong defenders - and Grenadiers give final blows without taking too many hits from the weakened defender (or Grenadiers for when there is a lot of accompanying firepower, and Samurai for attacks without a lot extra firepower)?

If I understand combat.c code properly, firepower is used both for attacker and defender.
On wiki page: "In each round, only one unit succeeds in wounding the other. The damage a unit inflicts with each blow is called its firepower. "
Thus, if attacker fail its round to wound defender, he will get counter-blow from defender, using defender firepower.

Of course, A*HP*FP or D*HP*FR are not accurate estimators, this factor is just for rough check, if given units is much better or worse and if is worth of its price/upkeep or not.
Real results depend on A/D ratio, for example unit with high FP but low D can be easily killed by unit with low FP but high A - because defender FP could never be used against,
if almost all attacker blows are not parred.
Yes, single Samurai may get higher chance to survive charge of Lancers than Grenadiers (and it is even realistic), but it is not their duty - use Pikemen/Infantry to protect assault units.

Ok, thanks. I think you are correct - in what I wrote above, I got the attacking power of the two wrong, so in fact a Grenadier should be more likely to get a blow in than a Samurai. All in all I think you are correct that Grenadiers are stronger - but lowering the defenses with Cannons/Riflemen has an improved effect for Grenadiers - which also seems to be realistic. I.e. throughout history tactics using bombardments to assist direct troop attacks have played increasingly important roles.

Also don't forget that this ruleset has bombarder flag set for a collection of units starting with Archer. The rules for these units are a little different than the direct attack/defender types.

You are right, in case of bombardment action, firepower is set to 1 and it is hardcoded (at least for 2.6).
But I keep defining FP for bombarder units, because it is used for defense or for attack at non-native tile (for example cannon against ship).