On the sale of ships to a minor, what is considered a minor? Is it only AI nations? Also, if we no longer can make the ship type, how do we know the price (I am thinking of if we sell iron clads, but can't purchase them, how do we know the price?)
I would agree to the Belgium neutrality if it is AI controlled. If by a human, then that is a severe hinderance.
Belgium is indeed human controlled, so I believe it's up to him to decide. Now, the whole idea is not a hindrance, IMHO, but a protection: if Belgium has her neutrality guaranteed by 5 great powers, who in his right mind would go after her (except Willy in 1914!!)...but it's no big deal, for now it"s not in the game.
Warship prices: I believe you get the info somewhere on the counter, and in addition ships don't vanish from view that quickly...at worst we could just make a simple 'generally-accepted' price for each unit type, it takes 3 minutes (and I'll put that in the house rule doc).
Minors are indeed AI-controleld, as indicated in the header of the treaty proposals...Although the game engine qualifies Spain, Belgium, Holland, China and Turkey as 'minors', I believe we should not think about them as such since they are player-controlled in this WinC 1880 game
Warship prices: I believe you get the info somewhere on the counter, and in addition ships don't vanish from view that quickly...at worst we could just make a simple 'generally-accepted' price for each unit type, it takes 3 minutes (and I'll put that in the house rule doc).
Minors are indeed AI-controleld, as indicated in the header of the treaty proposals...Although the game engine qualifies Spain, Belgium, Holland, China and Turkey as 'minors', I believe we should not think about them as such since they are player-controlled in this WinC 1880 game
Suez Canal
May be some of you spotted that the graphics is absent (setup bug/omission). The canal is there, but the region visual correction is missing...it will appear by '[color="#B22222"]miracle[/color]' at start of turn 2.
PhilThib wrote:Agreed. Yes, I got your orders...as well as CHI, FRA and BEL
Missing: GBR, RUS, JAP, SPA, TUR, AUS, HOL, ITA
No news from those players yet. More worrying is no news at all from Japan, and no response from Lukas and Coolbean
Sorry, been studying for a test I have today, so I haven't been able to comment. I didn't know you wanted orders already, I can have them tonight when I get home. I will read the proposed rules when I get home, I couldn't download them on my phone.
Is there a list of the changes you've made to the standard 1880 scenario? And in regards to beefing up countries, which ones and by how? I'm only curious because I'm playing a Germany 1880 SP and I was wondering what I should expect to be different.
Also do you have a real quick idiot's guide to unpacking and installing the latest link you sent? (Me = idiot for which guide is intended so I don't mess up and can hit the ground running on this turn)
EDIT: Just read the rules real quick, they all sound good to me. We can handle any unforeseen problems as they come up and make a precedent going forward.
Ouch, I thought you all mastered the files structure in the game.... 
It will take probably longer for me to explain the how to than doing a specific installer....give me one day to think about it...
Explaining the changes in detail would also take hours, that's the reason why I sent to everyone all the files so that you can have a tour and look of everything...I can't make a guide of this, it would take a week of my time which is better used for other improvements. If you find anything shocking, just take note and report.
Below is a shortlist of improvements:
Eco
* All powers: added level#2 coal mines (between 2 and 5) to ensure proper coverage of coal needs from start. Also fixed coal where you could find a mine but no resource (a few cases). Some extra coal stock, and even coal sites were added (Canada, Italy, China) --> the idea is the nation does not run out of coal from T1
* To some degree, I also tried to balance a bit up the minerals supply (lacking) and other constructions materials (e.g. wood for TUR and CHI), either from extra sites or from extra starting stock. Same idea as above
* Added 5-20 extra industries, mining and agricaluture to China and Turkey which were overseen and made the countries barely playable from start
* Improved Canada population (was missing almost 3 million inhabitants)
Mil
* Change blatant starting errors of forces (mostly GBR and FRA), they are now in correct positions
* Added replacements from start to all playable nations (was in but never implemented before)
* Fixed some units type and tech errors, on map or in construction.
* Removed excessive additions to force pools, such as:
Col
* Fixed Congo start situation for Belgium (since the 1878 conference)
* Improved a bit CP to avoid structure disappearance on T1 (there may still be a few cases here and there)
* Added China Treaty Ports Concessions (Colonial Mode): a new decision, it allows building a concession (= trading post) in Chinese ports (not all). Concessions may bring extra trade and exotic resources every quarter (30% chance), but at some point (via events) will trigger rebellions over time (e.g. Boxer) if too invasive. Countries start with Concession (GBR first) and have a few decisions to play (extras will come by event over time)
* Reduced by 1/3 to 1/2 the total of colonial RGDs from start, to slow down the colonial game. All playable nation have some. Also, cost was upped by at least 25%
* Added Egyptian forts in Sudan (mostly for display reasons and also to fight a bit the soon to appear Mahdist rebellion) and gave Egypt a bit more CP there
Dip
* Added Embassies: key major countries have embassies in other major countries capital (not everywhere), FRA and GBR in the lead...Embassies may provide extra +1 diplomat every 6 months and some relations improvement with other main nations (50% chance)
* Recycled laws and reforms for the new playable nations (from other mods)
* Changed the relationship matrix to historical reality and agreements (.e.g. GER and AUS have an alliance since 1879)
Events and Various
* Increased a bit starting VPs (some nations had a defeat on T1 otherwise)
* Fixed the 1880 start events for a few nations, as they were errors creating duplicates with setup or errors, or reproduced their effects twice (e.g. gold mines doubled up). Still minor ones to do. NB: note that Holland will start T2 at war with Aceh (it's the 1873 event triggering)
Still a few other checks, but that's about all...
It will take probably longer for me to explain the how to than doing a specific installer....give me one day to think about it...
Explaining the changes in detail would also take hours, that's the reason why I sent to everyone all the files so that you can have a tour and look of everything...I can't make a guide of this, it would take a week of my time which is better used for other improvements. If you find anything shocking, just take note and report.
Below is a shortlist of improvements:
Eco
* All powers: added level#2 coal mines (between 2 and 5) to ensure proper coverage of coal needs from start. Also fixed coal where you could find a mine but no resource (a few cases). Some extra coal stock, and even coal sites were added (Canada, Italy, China) --> the idea is the nation does not run out of coal from T1
* To some degree, I also tried to balance a bit up the minerals supply (lacking) and other constructions materials (e.g. wood for TUR and CHI), either from extra sites or from extra starting stock. Same idea as above
* Added 5-20 extra industries, mining and agricaluture to China and Turkey which were overseen and made the countries barely playable from start
* Improved Canada population (was missing almost 3 million inhabitants)
Mil
* Change blatant starting errors of forces (mostly GBR and FRA), they are now in correct positions
* Added replacements from start to all playable nations (was in but never implemented before)
* Fixed some units type and tech errors, on map or in construction.
* Removed excessive additions to force pools, such as:
- Max 1 Gd corps per nation (USA and FRA have none)
- Removed all German minors corps from FP except 1 par natinality, BAV/SAX with 2 (otherwise Germany had 24 extra buildable corps!!)
- Reduced Mountain corps to 1 or 2 per nation (Italy had 6!)
- Removed old tech units still polluting the FP (Austria for instance had all its 1850-1870 minor nationalities in double quantity)
Col
* Fixed Congo start situation for Belgium (since the 1878 conference)
* Improved a bit CP to avoid structure disappearance on T1 (there may still be a few cases here and there)
* Added China Treaty Ports Concessions (Colonial Mode): a new decision, it allows building a concession (= trading post) in Chinese ports (not all). Concessions may bring extra trade and exotic resources every quarter (30% chance), but at some point (via events) will trigger rebellions over time (e.g. Boxer) if too invasive. Countries start with Concession (GBR first) and have a few decisions to play (extras will come by event over time)
* Reduced by 1/3 to 1/2 the total of colonial RGDs from start, to slow down the colonial game. All playable nation have some. Also, cost was upped by at least 25%
* Added Egyptian forts in Sudan (mostly for display reasons and also to fight a bit the soon to appear Mahdist rebellion) and gave Egypt a bit more CP there
Dip
* Added Embassies: key major countries have embassies in other major countries capital (not everywhere), FRA and GBR in the lead...Embassies may provide extra +1 diplomat every 6 months and some relations improvement with other main nations (50% chance)
* Recycled laws and reforms for the new playable nations (from other mods)
* Changed the relationship matrix to historical reality and agreements (.e.g. GER and AUS have an alliance since 1879)
Events and Various
* Increased a bit starting VPs (some nations had a defeat on T1 otherwise)
* Fixed the 1880 start events for a few nations, as they were errors creating duplicates with setup or errors, or reproduced their effects twice (e.g. gold mines doubled up). Still minor ones to do. NB: note that Holland will start T2 at war with Aceh (it's the 1873 event triggering)
Still a few other checks, but that's about all...
-
Matto
- Colonel
- Posts: 362
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:29 am
- Location: Prague, Czech Republic
- Contact: Website
If Japan will stay without player, I can take it ... it will be more fun than China
Napoleon days in Austerlitz 2011 - photo gallery
My Czech pages agout AGEOD: AGEOD games, RoP AAR - Prussian side
My AGEOD games: WoN, TYW, EAW, CW2, AJE, PoN, NCP, ROP Gold, RUS Gold and BOA2
My Czech pages agout AGEOD: AGEOD games, RoP AAR - Prussian side
My AGEOD games: WoN, TYW, EAW, CW2, AJE, PoN, NCP, ROP Gold, RUS Gold and BOA2
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
Sorry, I've been extremely busy the last three days and come down with a cold at the same time. So I'm hardly at my best right now.
Just haven't had any time/energy for online stuff. Everything looks excellent, so far as I can see. Will send my .ord in a little later today. Does anyone still need me to forward the latest files? PM me if so.
Just haven't had any time/energy for online stuff. Everything looks excellent, so far as I can see. Will send my .ord in a little later today. Does anyone still need me to forward the latest files? PM me if so.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
Agree with all of PhilThib's house rules, had only a concern about the following:
If a DoW is not followed by effective military operations and fighting within 4 turns of the war declaration, a penalty of 500 VP will be inflicted on each perpetrating nation. This is to prevent some of the weird effects seen in other PBEM where players make alliances with the intent of escaping their obligations. We want players to think ‘twice’ about their alliances
My concern would be that sometimes the distances involved will make it impossible to begin fighting within this time period. f.e. in the other game when France and Austria dow'ed Germany and my OE entered the war on the German side, but all of my armies were in southern Palestine. It took way, way longer than four turns to reach the war theatre. So perhaps we should allow for some similar situations, where the nation intends to fight, but simply can't do so that quickly.
Also wondered if there's any interest in the idea I had proposed to limit diplomatic options based on in game relationships? So you can't declare war on a nation with a high positive value, or an alliance with a nation with whom you have a high negative value. Thus even when players change, the nation policy can't change too quickly. Obviously the exact values where limits would come into play could be discussed. This will also force nations to pay attention to in game diplomacy, which will prevent some of the misunderstandings seen in CIE when one player values the in game dip ratings and another doesn't.
If a DoW is not followed by effective military operations and fighting within 4 turns of the war declaration, a penalty of 500 VP will be inflicted on each perpetrating nation. This is to prevent some of the weird effects seen in other PBEM where players make alliances with the intent of escaping their obligations. We want players to think ‘twice’ about their alliances
My concern would be that sometimes the distances involved will make it impossible to begin fighting within this time period. f.e. in the other game when France and Austria dow'ed Germany and my OE entered the war on the German side, but all of my armies were in southern Palestine. It took way, way longer than four turns to reach the war theatre. So perhaps we should allow for some similar situations, where the nation intends to fight, but simply can't do so that quickly.
Also wondered if there's any interest in the idea I had proposed to limit diplomatic options based on in game relationships? So you can't declare war on a nation with a high positive value, or an alliance with a nation with whom you have a high negative value. Thus even when players change, the nation policy can't change too quickly. Obviously the exact values where limits would come into play could be discussed. This will also force nations to pay attention to in game diplomacy, which will prevent some of the misunderstandings seen in CIE when one player values the in game dip ratings and another doesn't.
lukasberger wrote:Agree with all of PhilThib's house rules, had only a concern about the following
Good
lukasberger wrote:My concern would be that sometimes the distances involved will make it impossible to begin fighting within this time period. f.e. in the other game when France and Austria dow'ed Germany and my OE entered the war on the German side, but all of my armies were in southern Palestine. It took way, way longer than four turns to reach the war theatre. So perhaps we should allow for some similar situations, where the nation intends to fight, but simply can't do so that quickly.
Yes, I guess we can amend it a bit, like make it 6 turns (3 months). In most cases, nations also have naval units that can fight fast
lukasberger wrote:Also wondered if there's any interest in the idea I had proposed to limit diplomatic options based on in game relationships? So you can't declare war on a nation with a high positive value, or an alliance with a nation with whom you have a high negative value. Thus even when players change, the nation policy can't change too quickly. Obviously the exact values where limits would come into play could be discussed. This will also force nations to pay attention to in game diplomacy, which will prevent some of the misunderstandings seen in CIE when one player values the in game dip ratings and another doesn't.
Agreed for me, that would be sound and fair. Sole exception to the rule would be the CB's and other things generated by events (e.g. Remember the Maine event must be allowed to give opportunity for USA and SPA to go to war unexpectedly despite 'good' relations)
Of course, don't post the link publicly anywhere, ever !! 
Just for sur because I not see answer, this rule : No country shall send to the heart of Africa (all theatres except North African ones, Egypt, Sudan and South Africa) forces that are Division size or higher.
I am not really ok with that, because just for move, with big force in Africa you need big supply, and if opponent are good defence you need more troop.. And if you don't have a division in 1 area but 4 or 6 troop combinet is a division size but not in the same area, what do with that?
For me the solution is the event : malaria & tropical disease, really ok with random, but not with the lose VP and for all troop because is not only big troop have malaria, just more chance, is only a proposition, for you it's more good or not?
(sorry for my english I am in break in work)
I am not really ok with that, because just for move, with big force in Africa you need big supply, and if opponent are good defence you need more troop.. And if you don't have a division in 1 area but 4 or 6 troop combinet is a division size but not in the same area, what do with that?
For me the solution is the event : malaria & tropical disease, really ok with random, but not with the lose VP and for all troop because is not only big troop have malaria, just more chance, is only a proposition, for you it's more good or not?
(sorry for my english I am in break in work)
-
Ojodeaguila
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 136
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:03 pm
Lindi wrote:Just for sur because I not see answer, this rule : No country shall send to the heart of Africa (all theatres except North African ones, Egypt, Sudan and South Africa) forces that are Division size or higher.
I am not really ok with that, because just for move, with big force in Africa you need big supply, and if opponent are good defence you need more troop.. And if you don't have a division in 1 area but 4 or 6 troop combinet is a division size but not in the same area, what do with that?
For me the solution is the event : malaria & tropical disease, really ok with random, but not with the lose VP and for all troop because is not only big troop have malaria, just more chance, is only a proposition, for you it's more good or not?
(sorry for my english I am in break in work)
I agreed
-
Ech Heftag
- Sergeant
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:11 pm
- Location: Japan
PhilThib wrote:For sure...we need an answer from Ech Heftag, I have PMed him...
Yes, I've received your email. I'm still good for this game and Japan
I'm currently downloading the files and will then send you the .ord file for turn #1
lukasberger wrote:Re: Japan, ech heftag seems to disappear for a few days at times, gets busy or something. He's done that in CIE too, but always pops back up again. So I suspect he's just busy right now, I wouldn't assume he doesn't want to play.
Hmm yeah. I'm in the middle of a lot of stress (work, writing my master thesis, applying for jobs after university and the like) and don't always have the time to check the boards...
Edit: House rules and addenda by the patch sound good to me.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
-
Soulstrider
- Major
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:22 pm
- Location: Northern Lusitania
bjfagan wrote:I am not sure if I am missing something.... am I supposed to start a new 1880 game and choose Italy, or is there a saved game/scenario already created that I am supposed get my file from?
Start a new game in the new scenario, if you used the installer given to you it should appear one new 1880 scenario in the list. Then you just send the Italian ords files back to him.
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
PhilThib wrote:Good
Agreed for me, that would be sound and fair. Sole exception to the rule would be the CB's and other things generated by events (e.g. Remember the Maine event must be allowed to give opportunity for USA and SPA to go to war unexpectedly despite 'good' relations)
Of course, that makes sense. So the question is, what levels should we set for the dip rating to be at to allow alliances or dow's?
lukasberger wrote:Can we switch Matto back to Holland? We never really promised Holland to the guy who'd asked for it, just said that it might be available. Haven't heard from him again either, so...
Then China can stay ai, which seems the better plan, and will save Phil more work and allow us to get started sooner.
Lemoni contacted me for Holland, so I guess he is still OK...let's say that if he does not show up by the time we need to start the game officially, then Matto can choose Holland if he so desires...
Note that I fixed most Chinese issues, so China is playable...whether it's hard or not is another story
-
lukasberger
- AGEod Veteran
- Posts: 782
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm
PhilThib wrote:I would say roughly like that, subject to debate
> 0, Trade Agreement
> 10, Give Support
> 20, Defensive Alliance
> 50, Offensive Alliance
Comments ?
Probably a good idea to incorporate......
All that happened in the past was...if not over 25, the locals would take over any foreign structures belonging to the low relationship 'investor' Nation.
As Belgium, I will be learning about colonization....... Neutrality unless Belgium attacks sounds nice......but is this right.
It would tend to restrict wars to Africa.
I would like larger troops as OK for Africa, but with percentage risks for malaria..... the cohesion and supply risks must be tough their and perhaps light risk of attacks by natives and animals.
PhilThib wrote:I would like that all of you could run at least 2 turns of the game, and let me know if they see something weird or damaging for their game.
Spain has the North Pole as an objective.
EDIT: Spain has no positive SoI areas; everything is negative. Is it normal?
[ATTACH]21975[/ATTACH]
EDIT 2: Is it because of 'Extended claims'? Everyone seems to have -10 SoI everywhere where I checked.
- Attachments
-
lukasberger wrote:Can we switch Matto back to Holland? We never really promised Holland to the guy who'd asked for it, just said that it might be available. Haven't heard from him again either, so...
Then China can stay ai, which seems the better plan, and will save Phil more work and allow us to get started sooner.
One day u said I can have Holland then another player (Matto) not the starting Vezina wants Holland. And of course Everyday I check the thread while Lucas doesn t. I see you have a good company already playing PBEM
so I don t want to mess your game. I admire the devs of this game so much that I will accept whatever country is available. Just let me Know
Return to “PBEM and multiplayer matchups (all games)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests