What about the LBE scenario I posted? Would you be interested in that?Zitat von Civilionaut
Due to how important trade is in these scenarios, Britain would be comically weak without it.
Also, did you download the LBE scenario I posted? It is an older version than what you guys are using in the other LBE PBEM, but I think it's better.
What about the LBE scenario I posted? Would you be interested in that?
yes
Yet another LBE-scenario?
Cobra, du bist im Star Trek BAQ und you could take the Americans in La Belle 3.1 (or another one could do that)
Yes, but a much earlier version. Also, it's a pretty good scenario.Yet another LBE-scenario?
Cobra, du bist im Star Trek BAQ und you could take the Americans in La Belle 3.1 (or another one could do that
I love trade in scenarios but Civs with masses of cities have a huge advantage over smaller Civs as their they can get more traders produced quickly and will not run out of traders as soon as the smaller nations. This is what really unbalances the game. If you were to cut trade out of the game it would become pretty dull. For me that is the big issue to deal with.
I don't think it can be dealt with. By necessity, a period-based scenario with a focus on trade will have bigger and smaller civs. The onus lies on the individual players to make the best of their position through shrewd tactics, strategy and diplomacy.
Japan might have a hard time becoming a global power in these scenarios, for example, but they can rule Asia. By the time the British Empire has put together enough forces to challenge that position, Japan can gather allies to dissuade Britain from attacking her, or, in the worst case, fortify her positions and trade routes enough to basically hold the status quo more or less forever.
Also, I think that the version of LBE I posted is the fairest scenario set in this era and focused on trade because there is a low hard cap for trade revenue.
I did some testing to see if it checks out by establishing a trade route between Sydney and New York for a demanded good.
Basically, all trade is capped at ~800 gold per trade unit. It costs ~200 gold to rushbuy a trade unit, so the profit is more or less capped at ~600 gold for trade units.
By comparison, it costs roughly the same to rushbuy a trade unit in newer LBE versions and Imperialism, but the profit is much, much higher. That way, a British trade unit from some podunk colony would cost ~200 to rushbuy, but bring about ~2700 gold in revenue, resulting in ~2500 gold of pure profit.
Therefore, in this version of LBE, development of core cities (of which the other powers have roughly as many as Britain) is much more important than just cranking out trade units.
This is why I proposed this version of LBE. I think it is as fair as it will possibly get, though I wouldn't want to dissuade anyone from trying to make a better scenario.
That's very interesting about the trade investment/revenues and something I have not looked into in great enough detail.
If Britain is too strong perhaps there are ways they could be artificially weakened, such as having a house rule that the British can not conquer any cities or take offensive action against anyone until a certain date?
No, that's no solution.
Maybe for the british player should be only the weaker trade unit ("caravan") buildable
Anyway, only 1 more player needed for the French.
Actually, this weaker trade unit thing gave me an idea.
How about having 2 kinds of trade units: Colonial goods (caravan) and Industrial goods (freight).
By house rule, only cities with factories would be allowed to build industrial goods, whereas any backwater colony would be allowed to build colonial goods. Coupled with an appropriate price for factories, this would require a sizable investment for any city except those which start with factories to produce "good" trade units.
It would more or less put all civilizations on an equal footing at the start (since usually all of them have the same number of core cities with factories), and individual players could try and develop their empire from there.
I think that in a scenario with a high trade cap, this would be the only "fair" way to ensure that nations with tons of cities (Britain, Russia, maybe the US) don't overpower everyone from the get-go.
Also, come on guys. Just one more player needed for France, then we can start this thing. Give the LBE version I posted a whirl because, as I said, without someone making a new scenario, it seems like the fairest "colonial age" scenario out there.
By the way, in La Belle Epoque IV there are already the two sorts of traders
Come on, only one french Player and we can start the Game
I will play as the French if you'll let me
No problem.
Russia may start then.
Berechtigungen
Zitieren