Page 11 of 12

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:07 pm
by Corbeau
Wahazar wrote:
Corbeau wrote:Actually, the other way round. Upkeep depends on number of cities.

It is very bad idea, in my opinion. You can and up with deadlock: many cities, but none can grow above 16 due to high science upkeep.

What does science have to do with city growth?

Science upkeep should depend on population, not city count (logically, more people, higher cost of education). Unfortunately there is no such option.

I couldn't agree more.

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:48 pm
by Wahazar
Corbeau wrote:
Wahazar wrote:...none can grow above 16 due to high science upkeep.

What does science have to do with city growth?
Try guess what 16 size means :) Of course there are other, rather soft science factors limiting city growth (refrigeration, or some advances granting less unhappiness, etc).


But it is a project or already implemented? In your ruleset there is as follows, nothing about population:

Code: Select all

[research]
; Method of paying tech upkeep
; "None"   - no upkeep
; "Basic"  - upkeep is calculated as:
;     <Cost of technology> / tech_upkeep_divider - tech_upkeep_free
; "Cities" - upkeep is calculated like "Basic", but multiplied by number of cities
tech_upkeep_style = "Cities"

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:09 pm
by Corbeau
I said, "I couldn't agree more", not "it's implemented" ;)

As for city size 16, yes, Sanitation and Sewers, but Tech Upkeep is a number and you can set it to be anything you want. Of course it won't be set to cripple your growth.

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:41 pm
by Wahazar
Sorry, I was reading your post much too fast, and there was something like "I can't agree anymore" :)

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:57 pm
by cazfi
Corbeau wrote:I said, "I couldn't agree more", not "it's implemented" ;)

First time I even see that idea. It has not been requested (as in: wishlist ticket created): http://www.hostedredmine.com/projects/f ... issues/new

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:17 pm
by Corbeau
cazfi wrote:
Corbeau wrote:I said, "I couldn't agree more", not "it's implemented" ;)

First time I even see that idea. It has not been requested (as in: wishlist ticket created): http://www.hostedredmine.com/projects/f ... issues/new

Maybe it would be a good idea to put that information - along with procedure how to actually create said ticket - placed as a sticky in the Wishlist subforum, then?

Because if people who have to power to grant wishes only pay attention to such tickets, and not to the forum, then the Wishlist section is only a shouting chamber deceiving people that posting there actually means something.

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:30 am
by Wahazar
One thing bug me with these expanding city radius: state boundaries remain unchanged...

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:07 am
by Corbeau
They should expand with the city radius.

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:54 am
by Wahazar
There are Warriors with marine flag, and a huge gap until real Marines - this together with automagic unit upgrade, seems to be very annoying.

Re: Corbeau's ruleset (2.5) - v1.0 released

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 8:54 pm
by Corbeau
Fair point, but I don't agree with "very annoying" (although it is a personal preference). By the time Warriors become obsolete, they will become very irrelevant on all accounts.

Keep in mind that a unit doesn't have to be Marine in order to enter an empty city. And in the age of Musketeers, Warriors become pretty much useless for anything else.