------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

------------------
What if the Hokey-Pokey is really what its all about?

Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

Nice job.

The link: Easy win at deity is blind

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

------------------
Go Redskins!

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

The document by Drago Sinio has some flaws IMVHO. I will have to download and read the whole document to be more constructive, but the necessity of certain wonders for example is questionable. Also, when building the space ship it is better to use the caravans for wonderbuilding, then switch to space ship parts rather than disbanding them.

As I said, only took a short look at it so maybe I missed something in which case I apologise. I will have to come back to you with more constructive comments after reading it more carefully.

Logs of games played by Arii & DaveV: ../../Forum3/HTML/000803.html?11 ../../Forum3/HTML/000748.html?16

OCC Record is: ../../Forum3/HTML/000868.html?3#3

Scenarios mean you can land in the BC years! ../../Forum3/HTML/001686.html?32

Multiplayer co-operation game landing in 6AD ../../Forum2/HTML/001677-2.html?76#76 ../../Forum2/HTML/001696.html?date=06:29

Matthew's Quicktime to AC Strategy ../../Forum3/HTML/001269.html?31

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

------------------
Save the whales, collect the whole set!!

If Al Gore invented the Internet, then I invented the spell check- Dan Quayle

I don't think "A is for alphabet" is in the composed document? Must admit I haven't followed the discussion on the organisation of the Apolyton GL, maybe it shouldn't be in there as there is a link to the thread here?

My research is going lousy today, think I will dig up some more threads that can be of use.

DaveV's early argumentation for shields over trade:

../../Forum3/HTML/000758.html?13

Sieve Too on the battle odds (please let me know if there are more recent threads on this topic):

../../Forum3/HTML/000248.html?7

Smash's size 1 settler trick, especially useful at lower levels when you start with one settler only:

../../Forum3/HTML/000888.html?19

Caesar the Great's list of data:

../../Forum3/HTML/000329.html?28

Yet another list of data:

../../Forum3/HTML/000881.html?23

inca911's collected tips and tricks:

../../Forum3/HTML/000880.html?76

Smash's hut knowledge:

../../Forum3/HTML/001103.html?58

This is active strategy forum only, not the archive. As I said, maybe these are old news.

Also, the early general forum had some interesting topics (before the various forums' roles emerged). I will check that archive later, though, as I have to mentally prepare for doing battle against my favourite sleazer!

I think subsequent OCC experience might allow us now to explain some of the disparities that everyone commented on in the thread. But the basic progression derived by using the method CtG describes still seems to me to be very useful.

And, boy, am I glad I don't have to repeat his noble three hour stint!

I had been intending to put DaveV's shields -v- arrows analysis up for inclusion.

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader on 01-19-2001 11:13 AM As for that sleazer - get hold of those hanging things he likes and I warrant you'll see him suffer!

Heh, heh, heh...Yes, that is a good way to slow down expansion a little.

Actually, I forgot that in the current game no wonders are allowed and that we can build max 12 cities. Then we have to make the most of what we got.

I can't believe I've been playing Civ since the original came out, and didn't know about this site. This is a fantasy camp. I've been reading until my eyes blistered, mostly off this topic. Now I have lots of plans for playing the game in ways that never interested me before, or I didn't know about. In the spirit of contributing, I've expanded on something mentioned in one of the threads, and added analysis. Maybe it will be useful in the recommended Civ II FAQ. I hope this is based off of the original rules.txt file; make changes as necessary.

*** The Lone Engineer at Work***

This is a listing of all the times required for a single Engineer to complete a given task. Settlers would take approximately twice as long for the tasks they can compete. In each case, time is measured from the turn you give the Engineer orders to the next turn the Engineer can receive instructions. So, if you tell an Engineer to build a road on grassland, the road will be done instantly. But the Engineer cannot take further orders until next turn; it takes one turn of the Engineer's life to complete the task.

TURNS TASK

1* Build a road on grassland/plains/desert/tundra
2* Build a road on forest/hills/swamp/jungle/glacier
3* Build a road on a mountain

2* Build a railroad on grassland/plains/desert/tundra
4* Build a railroad on forest/hills/swamp/jungle/glacier
6* Build a railroad on a mountain

* Building roads or railroads on squares with a river always takes one extra turn.

3 Irrigate/farmland grassland/plains/desert
5 Irrigate/farmland tundra/hills

3 Clear a forest (plains)
8 Clear a swamp/jungle (grassland)

5 Reforest grassland
8 Reforest plains/swamp/jungle

3 Mine a desert
5 Mine hills/mountain
8 Mine a glacier

10 Transform grassland/plains/desert/tundra (to hills/grassland/plains/desert)
20 Transform forest/hills/swamp/jungle/glacier (to grassland/plains/plains/plains/tundra)
30 Transform mountain (to hills)

2 Clear pollution/build fortress/build airbase on any square

Now, what do we learn from this? Well, let's say you have a forest square and you want it to be grassland. The Transform command will get you there--in a mere 20 turns. On the other hand, you could clear the forest, then transform the plains. If you do, you'll save 7 turns. Or let's say you have a fruit (jungle) square and want to make it a wheat (plains) square. Again, the Transform command takes 20 turns. But if you reforest the jungle (silk), then clear the forest, you get the wheat square 9 turns faster.

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

------------------
If someone doesn't agree with you, you haven't explained yourself well enough-Luther Ely Smith

She turned me into a newt...well I got better- Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

Little suggestion. Why don't turn off your signature here? It takes up more space than your posts & it's cutiness wears off after we've read it twice.

We like your contributions here, save your cutiness for other places?

quote: Originally posted by Carolus Rex on 01-19-2001 12:23 PM Heh, heh, heh...Yes, that is a good way to slow down expansion a little. Actually, I forgot that in the current game no wonders are allowed and that we can build max 12 cities. Then we have to make the most of what we got. Carolus

Carolus this is so untrue! One should never stop expanding if the land is good around them after 12 cites. I realize that was probably the limit for this particular game though.

This comprehensive guide by Slow Thinker should answer most questions on the subject of espionage.
../../Forum1/HTML/001678.html?36#36

-------------

I realize this is a work in progress. If I'm putting the cart before the horse, let me know.

I agree with your comments. If you go back to my first post you will see how I first envisaged the GL. However, we are all guests on this site and the final decisions on matters like this rest with Dan and Mark.

SG[1] has suggested we may be able to utilise our first entry in the thread to form an index, which could be edited in and updated. When we have a little time we will make an attempt to achieve this task.

In the meantime, there are many very experienced players around who will be able to offer help about topics you don't find in the GL.

-------------

I would like to call back to starting idea of this thread. Although original idea of Scouse Gits wasn't accepted by administration of Apolyton, it is possible to do something else.

Knowledge of group A is created mostly by individuals and needn't to be processed using collaboration of many people. Jcarkey's "Compostion" holds main strategies well.

But organization of knowledge of group B is very neglected at Apolyton:
Identical problems are discussed in several different threads. People usually start a new thread since it is hard to find the appropriate past thread. Therefore it is very tedious if you try to extract a concrete information. It is really depressing: for example, if you watch how people starts debates about basics of the combat system again and again ...

Idea of "Compostion" may not be applied succesfully here. Knowledge of group B should be constantly updated and corrected.

a) to debate about the best way how to organize and sort it
b) to define groups (for example caravans, happiness, barbarians, combat system, demographics window, governments...)
and for each group
c) to collect threads that contain any information related to the group
d) to arrange all knowledge related to the group into one place

I regret that I have just entered the 'marking season' and will have little time for admin tasks until somewhat after Easter, but we have the will - the GL shall be built!

------------------
Scouse Git[1]

quote: Originally posted by Slow Thinker on 03-19-2001 08:17 PM It is really depressing: for example, if you watch how people starts debates about basics of the combat system again and again ...

I think new posters on the site welcome some dialogue with the existing members. I don't want the GL to cut out the social side of these forums. Exchanging views with posters new or old is part of Apolyton's success. Sure, a number of threads will keep repeating on a subject covered many times - so what? There is always something to learn for somebody.

I always look on the Civ2 threads as the daily news - the GL is more of the magazine for concentrated study. They complement each other.

I agree with you that organisation has to be brought into this thread. I think the idea of the Index is a good start.

------------

SG(2)

One problem with simply linking a thread is that many threads contain many frivolous messages that have little place in a library. A 30-post thread often contains 5 posts of useful info, another 5 redundant posts, 10 personal comments, and a smattering of divergent questions and responses. If the GL is concerned with what is contained in the 5 useful posts, we should weed out the filler.

ST's type b) should be, as ST suggests, more of a document summarizing everything known about the topic. The Diplo/Spy thread is good; I like the idea of one post being edited to reflect what is currently known.

As SGs have the first post in this thread we can edit in an alphabetical index.

This does not solve all the problems as there are many ways to categorise information; but it would be a start. It sounds quite simple but a good index has many cross references which makes the job more complex. For example your work on Diplomats and Spies would appear under "D" as well as "S". In addition, we would have to consider including cross references as follows:

Sabotage
Poisoning
Bribing
Revolts
Stealing
City Investigation
Embassies
Vet Spies ... and so on ...

------------
SG(2)

About index:
A "search" feature is built-in Apolyton (you may choose a forum to search in). If we would persuade admins to create a specific forum...

I had an idea of a special indexing, look at "A New Forum: Civ2 Research". Search for "keyword". The first sentence is "I think another problem is more urgent:".
In fact, we could put "[keywords]" directly into threads, not to names of threads, but serching would be slower.

About hierarchical outlines:
A hierarchical outline could be useful also for type B. First or first and second levels would point to threads of type "Info: diplomats and spies", next levels would point inside threads.

There could be two or more distinguished categories of links :
a)links to threads as "Info: diplomats and spies" (with higher value of information, with higher density of information)
b)link to threads with any information related to the topic.

But, if you will try to index threads with any information, a detailed index (Sabotage,Poisoning,Bribing,...) would be very very laborious: It would be easier to build threads of type "Info: ..." first and then index these threads.

I would suggest a brief index (just one term: "diplomats and spies")in the beginning. It will be laborious enough.

An brief index would be more appropriate for sources such as the "Diplomats and Spies" example we've talked about. I agree with ST that CivII offers an excellent begin point for this format; Particular game elements (ST's type A info), such as Spies, Hills, OCC, can easily be linked by a topic in the index. Subtopics need not be linked, but could simply provide the browser details about what is contained in the linked thread/post.

As far as the database being too large - there's just too much info for that to be any different. Organization is the key to simplifying large databases. In my real life I manage a database of some 300,000 always changing land records with 200 columns of data each. It's monstrous, but made simple by having been created with DESIGN. While tedious, putting this sort of thing together goes faster than you might expect.

The final GL could be fantastic if the index is planned with a particular format as an end goal. I would vote for placing emphasis on the type of thread that "Diplomats and Spies" is. One link, all the collective info. If the topic requires subtopic links, good. This could be viewed as a two stage development. The initial topic links get made first. Any very long posts or threads that need subtopic links could follow as needed, once the material is more or less solidified. Cross references might only be needed for linking themes for which the browser does not know the particular game element. Examples might be "maximizing shield production," with links to strategies; or "bribery," with links to government forms and spies. This could by nature only follow the initial organization - a spin on the keyword issue you discussed above.

Before this becomes an essay, I'll close and look for your responses!