Longturn Forum

The LT34 changes as they are now. I'm still going to add some changes and fine tune some settings, but you should get the idea. Also feel free to comment.


World wonders

A.Smith's Trading co. will cost 700 instead of 300
Darwin's voyage will cost 1500 instead of 300
Great library will cost 400 instead of 600
Isaac Newton's college will cost 600 instead of 800
Manhattan Project will cost 1500 instead of 6000

Small wonders

Copernicus costing 100 instead of 300
Mausoleum of Mausolos costing 180 instead of 300 and obsoleted by combustion instead of explosives
Statue of Zeus costing 150 instead of 250
Pyramids costing 100 instead of 200
Colossus will cost 80 instead of 200
Hanging gardens will cost 90 instead of 300
J.S. Bach's Cathedral will cost 300 instead of 600
Marco Polo will cost 800 instead of 1000
Temple of Artemis will cost 90 instead of 200


City improvements

Coastal defense costing 40 instead of 60
Mfg. Plant costing 180 instead of 220
Port facilities will become available with electricity
SDI defense will cost 240 instead of 140
University will cost 100 instead of 120
City walls now have an upkeep of 1 and also prevent losing population if a land unit kills a defening unit
The city improvements now have a 10% probability of being destroyed if the city is conquered. This used to be 20%.

Units

Elephants will cost 25 to build instead of 30
Crusaders will cost 30 to build instead of 40
Cannons will have the same 100% bonus against cities as there is with artillery and howizers
Fighter will cost 50 instead of 60
Bomber will cost 90 instead of 100
Trireme will cost 30 instead of 40
Frigates will cost 50 instead of 60
Destroyers will cost 70 instead of 80
Battleship will have a defense of 18 and attack of 18
Submarines will have a defense of 4 instead of 5
Carriers will have a defense of 18 instead of 9
Cruise missiles will have a move rate of 9 instead of 18 and they will cost 40 instead of 50
Spies will have an upkeep of 1 (gold/shield) but no upkeep for diplomats
The base chance for diplos and spies to succeed is now 40% instead of 50%
Restrictinfra is enabled meaning that you can't use roads on enemy territory
Using the allied airports is allowed and the receiving end can receive an unlimited number of units
Kiillunhomed=10 meaning that unhomed units will lose 10% of hp every turn or at least one hp. Eventually unhomed units will die.

Space race

Space component will cost 1600 instead of 160
Space module will cost 3200 instead of 320
Space structural will cost 1000 instead of 100


Scientific

; 2 - Technology cost is reduced depending on the number of all players
; (human, AI and barbarians) which already know the tech.
Tech trading is disabled by setting the receiver to always lose the transferred tech
tech trading is disabled
Not sure if this is enough in order to prevent all player2player transfer of techs. Still investigating.


Misc
800 tilesperplayer and landmass 40
Generator=island and startposition=single -> still trying to figure out how to make sure that all the players can be reached with triremes
There will be no workerparalysistime since Freeciv 2.3 doesn't support that

If player wins the space race, will they win it for themselves or whom they "declare" as their teammates? By default, building the spaceship just ends the game (you still have to have highest score, or be on team with highest score to win). But since we are using these modified rules of "declaring victories", "survivors", and other out-of-game rulings, how will you determine winner should someone build the space ship? btw, if map is big enough, it's almost gauraunteed to be space ship victory.. Even with space modules 3200, it's relatively inexpensive...

happy new year everyone!

wieder wrote:The LT34 changes as they are now.

Compared to what?

Meaning, what is the basis of the ruleset/server settings to which these changes are being applied? Obviously not the freeciv 2.3 default ruleset since you are mentioning elephants & crusaders which exist only in civ2 ruleset of the standard version. Also, in another thread I have been told about triple movement, extra veteran levels, citymindist change, etc. and those are missing in your list. So the base is either some "LT standard" ruleset or that of a perviously launched game, maybe LT33? I did not find any root ruleset in the GitHub but did find the server settings and ruleset for LT33. So, if I study those and read your list will I then have the full picture of how the rules and game settings will be for LT34?

EDIT: I also noticed an executable freeciv-serv file in the LT33 GitHub. So there are some changes to the server code as well? I coud not find the source code for the modified server though. Could that be made available too? Or list the changes made in there compared to the official release?

Compared to LT33. Sorry about that. I should have been more clear.

This is the first time I'm an admin for LT games and I still have lots to learn That's also one of the reasons why I'm asking for some feedback. I was participating with changing some of the settings for LT33 but this time I'm doing more and will probably forget to mention something. Once I've done some editing I'll upload the stuff to github. This is another thing I'm figuring out. I'm not exactly familiar with all this github stuff

I don't know about the server code but akfaew probably has some idea about that.

LT uses a heavily modified ruleset and the documentation has not been a priority since there has been barely resources for making the changes. I think we had some discussion about listing the changes but it's not that easy if we would like to have a nice list of changes for everyone. QWe have lots of players only familiar with Civ1, Civ 2 or perhaps Civ3. Some have been playing Civ4 and some possibly even Civ5. Naturally we have lots of Freeciv players but since some of those are coming from Greatturn it's even more complicated. However I was planning to make a veru short list (something like 10 basic differences) for new players. That list would have the citymindist, moves and something about how you can die and win.

When the civ2civ3 ruleset was first used in LT31 we had a very comprehensive list of basic changes but 905% of the players never read that because it was too long. This is why listing the changes to the previous game is one way to go. Not a very good if you are a new player but simply one solution. The cahnges to the unit costs can be noticed when playing the game but some changes are not that easy to pick up early enough. In LT33 some players missed building Leonardo's because we didn't have that for LT32 and the change was hidden in the list of changes I'm going sidetracks now but that's how it was in the past.

"If player wins the space race, will they win it for themselves or whom they "declare" as their teammates?"

Mmm2, we need to decide about this before the game starts. I would like to make it automatic for the game to end when the ship arrives. The out-of-the-game rulings only affect how the ranking points are calculated and how many winners there can be. Basically it's like this. If you don't care how the others think about you or your victory, forget the out-of-the-game rules. You can form an alliance of 20 players, ally with everyone end then end the game. The server will say how you won but in this case I and probably lots of old players will think that it was a tie. You can of course think that you won. No problem with that. You won't just be listed as a winner here.

If the space race victory seems to be too cheap, we can make that more expensive. However if we decide that the space race winner will be the only winner, he or she should be able to defend the capital against everyone else until the ship arrives to the target. The ship will be destroyed if the capital is lost.

Another setting I'm not 100% sure of is the unlimited number of units moved to the target airport. This setting is there for speeding the game up without a global rails network. Since this will be an islands game you would either need lots of ships or that. With ships the problem is that if you need allied ships you should really be online at the same time if there is a chain of several islands you need to move the units through.

And yeah.

Happy 2015 everyone

wieder wrote:Scientific

; 2 - Technology cost is reduced depending on the number of all players
; (human, AI and barbarians) which already know the tech.
Tech trading is disabled by setting the receiver to always lose the transferred tech
tech trading is disabled
Not sure if this is enough in order to prevent all player2player transfer of techs. Still investigating.

Conquering? Stealing?

"Conquering? Stealing?"

Yeah. It shouldn't be possible to steal or trade techs. Not even by conquering cities. All the techs you get must be invented by you. This will help smaller alliances to compete against the big ones. At least they don't need to worry about falling too much back on techs if they are not able to trade. I also like the idea that the enemy can't simply steal all the techs someone researched. It has been too easy even while people were not that interested to steal stuff on LT33.

Also the techs getting cheaper as anyone invents them will help the less experienced players. Not completely prevent them from falling back but alt least helping them to get some reasonable techs.

techlost_rcv = 100 means no tech trading at all, no in trading, no in diplomacy and no in stealing, every player who gets it from this ways just loose it after that.

I am going to like this ruleset, if it stay like it is:) SIM CITY game!!!!

does this setting prevent getting techs through conquering enemy or ally?

Yeah, I have techlost_rcv = 100 because it sounds interesting and it's what lots of players wanted to see once LT33 was about to end.

So, mmm2, yes, the settings should prevent you from getting techs with conquering allied or enemy cities.

It seems that the top researchers have been slightly slowed down by a similar setting in LW2. This is why it might be a good idea to make the techs to cost 80% of what they cost in LT33. Good players would normally get all the techs by T150-T180 but with that setting they would get them by T120-T144. This will allow plenty of really interesting strategies. I don't know what will be the best idea but LT34 will be definitely something different compared to LT33.

Because of the pyramids costing only 100 instead of 200 it's very probable that going that route will be much more interesting compared to taking monarchy as soon as possible. Of course monarchy will also have some advantages but at least you are no longer forced to take that route.

It's slightly surprising how people have not really commented the changes that much. In the late game the naval war was made more interesting by cutting the range of the missiles and also increasing the defense capability of the carriers and the battleships. What do you say? Should the battleship be even more powerful?

wieder wrote:Compared to LT33. Sorry about that. I should have been more clear.

No worries. =)

wieder wrote:This is the first time I'm an admin for LT games and I still have lots to learn

And this is the first time im going to take part in a LT game. That's why I'm asking so many questions.

wieder wrote:I think we had some discussion about listing the changes but it's not that easy if we would like to have a nice list of changes for everyone.

So very true. If such a list would ever be edited I would vote for it to be based on one of the freeciv 'official' rulesets. Because the games are played on freeciv. But then some people would have to compare their favourite ruleset with the LT base ruleset & changes list. OK, forget I ever mentioned this. :p

So, I downloaded the LT33 ruleset & server settings from GitHub, made a copy for LT34 and applied the changes you listed above. I'm going to experiment on that to get some idea of how the game behaves. BTW, is there a sepatrate list of server settings that I missed? Because in this thread people are talking about techlost_recv=100 which is not mentioned in the starting post.

I did some game starting tests and got this a couple of runs:

Freeciv chat wrote:The server appears to have gotten into an infinite loop in the allocation of starting positions.
Maybe the number of players is too high for this map.
Please report this message at http://gna.org/projects/freeciv/
in create_start_positions() [../../../../../server/generator/startpos.c::403]: assertion 'player_count() == map_startpos_count()' failed.
Please report this message at http://gna.org/projects/freeciv/

The game did strart, though. No idea if the starting positions were as intended. What if this happens when starting LT34?

I also noticed some issues in the server settings file (in case you are using a copy of LT33 too):

Freeciv chat wrote:HanduMan: 'set cmdlevel info'
/set: Option 'cmdlevel' not recognized.

cmdlevel is not an option, it's a command. So 'set' should be removed from the beginning.

Freeciv chat wrote:HanduMan: 'set ec_max_size=5000'
/set: Value out of range: 5000 (min: 10; max: 1000).

This sets the value to 1000 so it's OK. Just doesn't look nice. :p

Freeciv chat wrote:HanduMan: 'set scorelog=1'
/set: No match for "1".

Enabled/disabled. This sets it disabled.

Also, about the map generator settings, I would like to comment on
set specials=200
which I think is way too many. While writing this, I'm looking at a newly started game. I can see 15 specials around my starting position without even moving any of my starting units. I think this makes the specials somewhat less special. In our private games we have been using values as low as 25. I would like to suggest this to be set at 50. Even that produced five initially visible specials when I tried.

Furthermore, the topology is plain square "WRAPX|WRAPY". I like hexes more but also undesrstand that it would be too much to ask for. But how about adding "|ISO" there at least? It would not affect the gameplay at all, just the way we see things. The map would still be all squares but the viewing angle would be slightly different. I like the eye-candy of the more modern tilesets like the Amplio's. The only tileset (in the standard game) that supports plain square is Trident. Which is horrid to watch and pure pain to play with. I know I could use Amplio on non-iso topology but I don't like the idea of topology and tileset not matching to each other. Or do you maybe have an adequate plain square tileset of your own that us estethics could use instead of Trident?

handuman: you will be a great player if you get practice on your localhost!.. I and most players don't actually practice with ruleset before these games, so you might be veteran player even with your first game.. As for tileset, I prefer trident. I don't mind if you set |ISO. That will just make my mini-map skewed. My N is ISO's NE, so it is a bit disorienting, but someone must have the odd mini-map.. Right now I still think the majority of players are using the trident. My favorite was the tinydent tileset (a smaller version of trident). Tinydent is great, because you can see huge map in 1920X1080 monitor like I have. I think tileset is just a matter of what you are used to. I wouldn't mind to try the amplio, it might be interesting too for future game!

wieder: it will be submarine having 12 attack (18 V) versus battleship 18 attack (27 V), that is probably strong enough but if you felt it neccesary you could boost the strength to 19 or 20!!.
As for missile attacks, no worries - you just have to put aegis cruiser on stack (it gives quadruple defense against missiles and air units)...
about missiles, how about to make short-range missle and long range missile that costs slightly more? In the same way, you could also make other units with the same sprite that cost slightly more fore more moves or other attributes...
cruisers are still way overpriced... they cost more than submarines, you could still fix this, but as nobody will build any cruisers it's likely to be forgotten unit anyway...
other suggestions...
what about:
magellans expedition?
suntzu war acedemy?
Shakespear Theater (original)?

Please understand that I am only voicing my personal opinions and preferences. Not really requesting anything to be changed to my liking. I'll go with anything the game admin decides. =)

The non-iso square topology is OK too. I can always tweak the trident tileset to suit better for my old eyes. Or even create a new one. Speaking of which, it would be nice if all the new (not existing in freeciv standard rulesets) units and buildings were defined with their own graphic property plus an alternaive one. For example, there is this "Mausoleum of Mausolos" for which the graphic properties are It would be better (in general, not just for me ) to set it like so it would be possible for someone to create a specific icon for the Mausoleum on their personal tileset.

mmm2: With the standard delivery of freeciv there comes also a tileset "isotrident" which is just trident with a different viewing angle.

Another question: Is it really intentional that caravans consume one movepoint while traveling to an adjacent tile by road on their home territory? If it is, why?

I seem to be commenting mostly on things I find in LT33 ruleset instead of the LT34 changes listed in the starting topic. If I am out of place please redirect me. :rolleyes:

HanduMan wrote:Please understand that I am only voicing my personal opinions and preferences. Not really requesting anything to be changed to my liking. I'll go with anything the game admin decides. =)

another warserver player? take it in mind that you will need to focus on diplomacy and spending lots of time on this game, you are calling yourself as a newbie but saying words that majority will not understand.
Are you able to put new tileset to a standard client, because more then 50% player will not do it by hand if we will change it.
We are always play here on vanilla client and only server and settings can be changed.
Some players here are playing on iso and some on trident and both sides are not understand how they play in this angle, it is like drinking coffee with milk/sugar or without it, or even drinking coffee at all.

edrim wrote: another warserver player? take it in mind that you will need to focus on diplomacy and spending lots of time on this game, you are calling yourself as a newbie but saying words that majority will not understand.
Are you able to put new tileset to a standard client, because more then 50% player will not do it by hand if we will change it.

Oh no, never played on warserver. I am new here in Longturn community but have some experience on multiplayer freeciv a few years past. We used to play kind of LT style with 12 to 24 hours timeouts. We also had a quite modified rulesets for which I contributed a bit. I also created an iso-hex tileset since there wasn't one at the time. Or worked on it. It never got perfect enough to be published. :p

I am not suggesting a new tileset to be forced for all clients here. My suggestion about the graphic_alt thingy does not change anything on anyone's client who are using whatever tileset they prefer. It is only defining that if someone uses some tileset which includes a sprite called "b.mausolos" then the client will use that sprite for the Mausoleum. If the tileset does not contain a definition for "b.mausolos" then "b.oracle" is used. Just how it is currently. The LT ruleset already contains such definitions, for example in units.ruleset for the migrants unit: This is how all new objects should be added in any custom ruleset.

LT33 was working so I'm not sure why it's like that.

"cmdlevel is not an option, it's a command. So 'set' should be removed from the beginning."

Interesting. I have no idea why it's there but yet interesting

I was thinking about asking akfaew about the scorelog but forgot to do that. There was some talk about that. No idea why it was off really

What it comes to the specials, there are so many of those because the game is tuned for speed. It should end in about 120-150 turns or at least that should be possible. In the past longer games have resulted with too many idlers or too much to do for a long period of time. LT32 was a very long game and it lasted about 227 (???) turns. In the end it took more than an hour a day even if you made fast moves. At least for those who had lots of cities and units and still wanted to do at least some micromanaging in the biggest cities.

As Edrim said, the game is supposed to work on a vanilla client. I'm not quire sure what do you mean with the tilesets? I'm playing with the amplio tileset and lots of players are playing with trident. I would guess that 40% are playing with amplio and the rest with trident.

I'm also new to all of this github stuff and just managed to install it for the first time. After doing that my computer crashed and now I'll do it again on my laptop and I should be able to release my actual changes for LT34 in few days.

The caravans. This was (not sure if I remember correctly) a bug when it was introduced but it resulted with some interesting options for planning the strategies so it was left there on purpose. Lots of wonders are actually quite cheap but getting the caravans there is not that easy. I was thinking about incresing the moves to 4 but gave up on the idea. 3 worked quite well on LT33.

There is also a bug with siege units having no native terrain. I suppose we want to fix that even while it was interesting.

Also does someone know how to prevent pre-forts from changing tile ownership?

I'll check mmm2's propositions soon.

The LT33 is quite different compared to standard ruleset and there may be bugs we don't know of And some that are intentional

The current settings are under the LT34 folder

https://github.com/longturn/games/

I'll try adding the last edits tomorrow or in the day after that if I encounter some issues tomorrow. Then we could start a test game with few minute turns and see what will happen

I had some ideas about making the air units more important compared to the howizers but I ended up making only those few adjustments. So if anyone has ideas about how to do it... The problem is that air units easily become too powerful.

OK, I understand the speed tuning aspect with the specials. But doesn't the caravans not benefiting of roads contradict to that? Just my thoughts.

You can forget most of my tileset talk. Tilesets are each and everyone's personal choises. For people like me (abit pedantic about certain issues) the only tileset usable with the topology used in LT games is trident. And it hurts my eyes. I might want to create myself a more adequate tileset if it gets too painful with the trident. For that, it would be really nice to have those graphic_alt's defined for all new objects (buildings, units, bases,...) properly in the ruleset files. As I said, it would not change anything for anyone with their currently chosen tilesets. And that really is how new objects should be defined in general.
For example:

http://freeciv.wikia.com/wiki/Editing_Rulesets#Base_types wrote: graphic - Graphics tag for base. Client will search correct graphics from tileset based on this tag.
graphic_alt - Fallback graphics tag in case tileset has no graphics for main tag.

As for

wieder wrote:Also does someone know how to prevent pre-forts from changing tile ownership?

you might want to try this:

http://freeciv.wikia.com/wiki/Editing_Rulesets#Base_types wrote:border_sq - Base will claim land ownership up to this radius, -1 to disable

I checked out the LT34 files from GitHub. A few observations:

wieder wrote: City walls now have an upkeep of 1 and also prevent losing population if a land unit kills a defening unit

This is missing from the City Walls help text. Also, the effect defined in effects.ruleset file for this applies to all attacking units, not just land units.

wieder wrote: Cruise missiles will have a move rate of 9 instead of 18 and they will cost 40 instead of 50

The move rate is still 18.

wieder wrote: Space structural will cost 1000 instead of 100

This was actually 80 for LT33. Still is for LT34. Because you have changed the sabotage success percentage from 100 to 1000 :p

Everything else seems to be as listed in opening post.

Wow! Thanks for checking all that! It's easy to miss something and make mistakes with this stuff. At least for me

I'll add that to the help text and check the moves and costs of those other two.

I can also add alt graphics but someone should tell me what to add and where. I suppose there are lots of alt graphics missing or was there just few of those?

I'm also planning to add a 2nd palace (as an administration center) but not sure if I should do that as a small wonder or as a really expensive city improvement. The problem is that conquering far away lands is almost impossible because of the corruption, unless you have communism and mausolos. This is not happening with small games where the map size is not that huge but with 50+ player LT games it's a real issue. Now I only wonder it it would be too much to allow many of those (maybe it isn't!) but I can't say that I wouldn't be tempted into doing so. Maybe it should cost something like 800 as a small wonder and 1600 as a building. As a building it should be more expensive because it's cheaper nad faster to buy those things.

wieder wrote:planning to add a 2nd palace

how about to call this taj mahal?

also, i really like to build hanging gardens, maybe we could make that more affordable?

thanks,
m

Here I go again... :p

LT34 buildings.ruleset wrote:Counts as having a Cathedral in each of your cities on the same continent.

Actually, the effect is not limited to the continent (island) where Michelangelo's Chapel locates. It affects all the player's cities on every continent.

About the alt graphics. There are already some that are correctly defined, like in buildings.ruleset for the Academy: Also, in units.ruleset there is an almost OK definition for the Migrants unit: "Almost" because it really should be "u.migrant" instead of "u.refugee" but we do not want to change that because it would mess it up for those who are using the Amplio(2) tileset. =)

I would like to suggest the following changes to be made in buildings.ruleset: And in governments.ruleset: In terrain.ruleset: Actually, to be perfect, all the "sound" and "alt_sound" properties in units.ruleset and buildings.ruleset should be altered accordingly but leaving the alt_sound as "b_generic". :p

wieder wrote:planning to add a 2nd palace

I cannot see how the 2nd palace would work as a small wonder. Not sure but I think the freeciv server only allows one capital city per nation. And the distance for corruption calculation is measured from there to other cities. You can make an effect reducing the distance based corruption but it would affect either just the city where the building exists or all your cities. If the "Continent" range could be used with buildings then we could make it affect the cities on same island.

EDIT: Missed Federation in governments. It was hiding behind Fundamentalism.

Hello to everybody! I haven't being playing since LT12 so I apologize if my questions will sound silly or annoying; I will be very grateful if somebody will be so kind to help me.

If I understand correcly what written in this thread, there does not exist a list of LT 34 rules, but one should take the standard ruleset, then apply the summary of all changes made till LT 31 (which I haven't been able to find on this forum), then changes from LT 31 to 32, from 32 to 33, and finally to 34. It's really complicated, isn't it? I things the rules should be clear to all players before the game starts.
Then my questions are:

1. Can somebody please post here a list of links to the pages in which LT31 rules are listed extensively and to all the successive modification?

2. Can somebody please write here a short summary the essential ruleset, such e.g. as citymindist, rapturedelay, and the outcome of caravans, i.e. the rules that toally change the game strategy?

3. Is it possible to download a version of Freeciv in which the LT34 rules are implemented? Or a patch for transforming the standard freeciv ruleset into the LT34 ruleset? I haven't be able to find this online, so I would need a link or a precise set of instructions.


Thank you so much for your understanding and help. I look forward to start playing with you!

The default tileset amplio won't work in this game?

I seem to have confused some people with my questions and comments. Please accept my apologies, it was never my intention.

vidlius: All tilesets will work, amplio, amplio2, isotrident, trident, hex2t, isophex, whatever. But only trident is fully compatible with the topology settings used on LT games. By that I'm referring to how the map and everyhting on it is being drawn on your screen. This issue has nothing to do with the gameplay. Everything in the game works with all tilesets.

Luca: If you need the full list of all rules for LT34 (not just changes compared to 'standard'), you should download the full ruleset from the GitHub (wieder linked it here some posts before this), start a game with it and read all help subjects. Also apply a "/show all" command on client chat to produce a list of all server settings. (That will be "a version of Freeciv in which the LT34 rules are implemented" for you.)

Hi Luca, this ruleset (civ2civ3) is very different to default one.

http://forum.freeciv.org/f/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=86
You can download the file civ2civ3_04-2014 and take a look to the readme file where you will find bardo's explanation of his own ruleset.
The lt34 ruleset is based on that one, but there are some changes, so once you get a general idea about the core changes, you can try to find other minor changes made for lt34.