Now what after the Great China 4 for TM scenario..?

[thietavu]

Okay, it took me years. Weird. But I was never completely satisfied with what I did with that giant map. It is ready now - not perfect, but as ready as I judged it can be now. Most of you will possibly hate that map, since it is nothing like the original RRT3. It is far more like Civilization on rails. Not a game. It's a simulation of a huge railway system in Far East.

What now? My "Northern Europe" map for TM was poor. Embarrassing. So were the early versions of "China".

I've been thinking about some other insane monster scenarios lately. Northern Europe probably should be improved - a LOT! If I take it to the standards of Great China 4, it will be a very major task, taking easily a year if not more.

Some BIG maps I've been thinking of include the Trans-Siberian Railway (already a little bit of that in Great China 4), Africa and maybe Australia.

What kind of HUGE RRT3 simulation challenges would you like to see..?

[cheminot]

There was an old idea of running a railroad from the USA up north to Alaska, over the Sebring Strait, into China and on to the Balkans and finally ending in Europe. Tempts you?

(scenarion?)

[thietavu]

There was an old idea of running a railroad from the USA up north to Alaska, over the Sebring Strait, into China and on to the Balkans and finally ending in Europe. Tempts you?

(scenarion?)

Certainly! If only the RRT3 engine allowed something like that (sigh)... :)

[Gumboots]

Why wouldn't it allow it?

[Wolverine@MSU]

Why wouldn't it allow it?

No reason why it shouldn't. Although a map that large wouldn't have much detail (resolution) there's no reason it couldn't be done. It could be called the Transamericalaskaberiansinobalkanesian railroad.

[cheminot]

wolf: forgot to add EUROPEE

[thietavu]

Oh, it's all in detail! :) I wish even Great China 4 for TM was a lot larger, more detailed... It might make sense to divide the Trans-Siberian wonder to two pieces, though...

[Wolverine@MSU]

I wonder whether it would be possible to assign a "key" with successful completion of the first half, say New York to the Bering Strait, and then have an event in the second half that would require an "input" of that key to continue with the second half of the scenario. I can envision a couple of ways to do this:

1) Upon completion of the first half, a dialog would appear providing a "serial number" that the player would write down. As a "choice" event, set to trigger at the start of the second scenario, the player would choose the proper "serial number" from among 4 choices. A successful choice would allow the scenario to continue. The downside is that a player could just restart the scenario and choose a different number until they met with success, although this could be made more difficult by having a series of choice events, with choice 4 being "Show me more numbers", taking the player to another set of 3 numbers, and another "Show me more numbers". This could be continued as many times as the designer thought would be needed to achieve the purpose. A bit clunky, but it would get the job done.

2) Another possibility would be to supply cell coordinates (randomly assigned?) for a player to be required to lay a piece of track in the second half. This would require pre-setting up the Company, and giving it just enough money, or limited track, to build one (or a few) piece(s) of track, and then have an event at start-up to require the player to lay the piece of track in the approriate cell, which would be assigned a territory for checking purposes. Success would then add cash to the company and give additional track as needed.

The ability to "link" scenarios is an interesting one, and I'ld be interested in hearing other player's strategies on how to do this.

[cheminot]

I was thinking of a sequence of scenarios, like "the Age of Steam" series. The key thing is interesting, but what would the purpose be for a key?

[thietavu]

There are clearly two kinds of RRT3 maps. Some are game-like challenges with clear business and time etc. goals. Some (quite few) are more like world simulations with very different goals and strategies. I wouldn't, for example, build any maps for "normal" RRT3 gaming. I'm interested in simulations and RRT3's ability to form large and long lasting scenarios with countless ways to win. If I made the "Trans Siberian Railway" in 2 parts, I wouldn't put any artificial mechanism there to force people to finish one before the other. People could choose whether to start from the east or from the west, and even play both maps simultaneously, if they like.

It's a bit like the difference between games "Skyrim" and "Bioshock: Infinity". Both are great games, but I prefer open, free environments (like Skyrim) where I can spend hundreds of hours just picking flowers, if I so wish. :) Many people are less patient and want results, action and tasks quicker - that's a completely different way of playing.

[Gumboots]

You do realise that it's possible to pick flowers without requiring a computer game to do so?

[thietavu]

You do realise that it's possible to pick flowers without requiring a computer game to do so?

I think I do... But I still love big, deep, long simulations - not short-time action in games. :)

[AdmiralHalsey]

Why not make a US one?

[thietavu]

Why not make a US one?

That's an interesting challenge, indeed. The China one took me maybe 5 years to get it "right" (if you think I got it more or less right). Any next map I do for TM or RRT3 1.06 will take a lot of time, too. Maybe too much. ;) Anyway, there are several scenarios I'd love to play the way Great China 4 plays. USA is definitely among them.