Challenges in China: Great China version 3

[thietavu]

It seems like I have created a monster! (just lost my "last" test game despite having played it countless times)

I'm talking about my new map/scenario Great China 3 - the 90% re-written sequel to China Ultimate 1 & 2. I changed the name because this is basically a new scenario with little in common with the "Ultimates". So, what's different then? Some changes:

- The map is more detailed and realistic than ever. Lots of new features like rivers, canals, lakes, natural resource fields, etc. added and others fixed.
- 200 cities - no more, no less.
- 100% new economics with a very unusual approach - but after hundreds of hours of test-playing, it seems to work.
- Much more challenging than my previous China maps. This can be a serious challenge unless one knows what (s)he's doing...
- Changes in scenario's goals and winning conditions.
- No more buying industries (you don't normally do that in China, anyway). Only building your own. This is a major difference to the "Ultimates".
- A 12 page PDF manual will be included, giving background information and hints.

Basically, you have time from 1876 to 2020 to connect Shanghai to 18 cities in- and outside of China. That's about the only thing in common with my previous, much easier China maps. Even many of those cities are now different - and there are many new locations on the map as well.

Unlike in those maps (if you knew how to make money in RRT3), here money will be a headache for you, because you can only make it with your railroads and self-built industries - and, of course, saving in costs as much as you can. Yes, there will be good revenues especially in good times. But there will also be huge costs and several bad times when wrong decisions can very easily kill your whole railroad. This is exactly what happened to me last night while doing well in my last test-run of this scenario. I forgot my own advice about cost management and avoiding too eager track expansion - and bang! When bad times struck, I was suddenly without money for any investments, with hundreds (over 550) of worn and inefficient engines, non-profitable tracks and everything you need for a disaster! I ruined my game in just about 10 years of being not alert to what was happening.

And I think this is what I myself like very much in this map. The game experience is very different every single time - to me it never gets boring. You just can't allow yourself to get into that "okay, let's fast-forward this until something happens" -mode. That mode will make you lose this scenario, because something happens all the time in countless places. And you need to be aware of it. ;) And then there's this managing of about 600 trains (for me, a typical number here) for over 140 years... You think it's easy, do you? I wish you good luck in trying that! ;)

This is most definitely *not* a "sandbox" like the previous China Ultimates 1 & 2 pretty much were. You must plan ahead - and very carefully, strategically. Otherwise you will be in trouble. Guaranteed. That's the reason I will include the 12 page manual. This is nothing like the other RRT3/TM maps - this is a real world simulation with need for understanding something about things like China and its geography. I very much doubt that many (if any) people will reach the Trainmaster (gold) title in just a few hours, without any sweat. Just when you think you're doing great, there's always something behind the corner to make you think twice. Wars. Depressions. Anything. And no two gaming sessions are the same.

I plan to post this map here very soon, this week. Just want to check some final details about the balance of the economy first. So, you can start wondering: would a UP Big Boy be usable for the steep mountain areas of Tibet or Sichuan? Can you run on steam until the 1990s like China has done in real life - or should you electrify or dieselize already early in the scenario? How to handle the very long desert tracks with few passengers and little freight? Yes, choosing the right locomotives for the right use in the right time will be critical for you in this scenario... And that's just the beginning. Can you connect the Great China and the areas around it?

[nedfumpkin]

Sounds intriguing. I do recall that we discussed some new locomotives, and I plan on getting to them, but are you looking for anything special for this? Let me know.

Also, would you be interested in making this a campaign map?

[thietavu]

Sounds intriguing. I do recall that we discussed some new locomotives, and I plan on getting to them, but are you looking for anything special for this? Let me know.

Also, would you be interested in making this a campaign map?

I have built this "China thing" for years now - and only now I feel that maybe (?) I have finally got it about right... If you and other people like it, like I do, I have nothing against making this a campaign map. This one will take a *long* time to complete and it requires knowledge about the engines and everything. So, it could be one of the last scenarios in TM. Kind of a sum-up of everything people have seen and learned. It is also so different from almost all RRT3 maps that people really need to use their brain to tackle this. And not in a "game"-way, but in trying to think like the head of railroads in China would have to do in real life. Lots of trains. Huge area. Lots of people and resources. Lots of time to use. Restricted economy with all kinds of surprises. Control.

Of course, for this one, it would be absolutely great to have some more genuine Chinese engines. The only one included now, "QJ" is not, I think, a very good model of the engine. Like many other original RRT3 engines, it is simply not very usable in this game (it also looks very small). Yet, China used it until year 2000 and even beyond in practically everything. In reality, the "Great China" would use at least "SL6" (Pacific) and "SY" (Mikado) classes until year 2000 or so. We could, of course, use the existing Pacifics and Mikados etc, but...

The Pacific modeled in RRT3 is, I think, very bad. Its operating costs, for example, are just horrible. Finland's VR's domestic-built HR1 class heavy Pacifics are still known as very reliable, very fuel-efficient engines - the complete opposite of the Pacifics in RRT3. I would like to see that class re-adjusted somehow. Now it's not really usable in, for example, Great China 3 scenario, since you can only run Pacifics for 5..10 years before their operational costs climb to heaven. :( And that's not reality. For example, in Finland. our HR1 class was very usable until about 1974 in some routes.

China's history and development is unique in many ways, also in railways. For example, they invested in steam when practically all the rest of the world were trying to get rid of it. The class "QJ" enters in 1957 when the player can see lots of so much better alternatives. It's even worse with class SY Mikados (1960 or so). I did not want to restrict players' choices in this scenario, so these steam designs have to compete with often superior electric, diesel or even steam designs from the world.

So... I would wish to see some steam classes like "Pacific" adjusted to be what they really were: better than in this game. It would be absolutely great to see some Chinese diesel/electric models in this game! I still have to find out what might work best here... But one key thing is: since we are missing almost all the Russian designs and most popular classes, having those in this game would help many scenarios - both my own "Scandinavia" and "Great China 3". I still remember seeing a long train in China, near Beijing and at the Great Wall, coming from Moscow through the mountains on the Trans-Siberian Railway. Our Chinese guide told us (in quite interesting English) that that railroad took people from Beijing to Helsinki in just 2 weeks. "2 weeks?!" I thought. Maybe in the Fifties. Not today! But anyway, I would like to see and use those diesel locomotives in the Great China 3 scenario, since I - and you - can see exactly the same mountains and places near Beijing I saw back then in 2002 in this map. :)

[nedfumpkin]

Okay, in that case, your map will be CA15 as a campaign. A lot of head work on the engines, so let me figure it out for the engines.

Making the models for engines will be kinda tough, but with creative skinning and imagination, could get some ideas going on. What would be helpful is the specs figured out....

top speed
acceleration
passenger appeal
reliability
cost
fuel type
fuel economy
annual maintenance
US availabillity
EU availabillity
WORLD availabillity


fuel economy
-------------
1.0 outstanding
2.0 very good
3.0 good
4.0 above average
5.0 average
6.0 below average
7.0 poor
8.0 very poor
9.0 extremely poor
10.0 atrocious

fuel type
------------
0 steam
1 diesel
2 electric


reliability
-------------
2 very poor
3 poor
4 below average
5 average
6 above average
7 good
8 very good
9 outstanding
10 near perfect


acceleration
-------------
1 extremely poor
2 very poor
3 poor
4 below average
5 average
6 above average
7 fast
8 very fast
10 virtually instant
11 instant


passenger appeal
----------------
0 ugly
1 acceptable
2 looks sharp
3 ultra cool

[thietavu]

Here's the map now as an attachment. A 12 page PDF manual is included.

EDIT: I removed the file because although the map seems to work, it now encourages people to play it in a way it wasn't intended to be played. If one concentrates on industry profits early in the game and doesn't expand the railroad network the way real China did, in order to connect distant places, it was far too easy to win this scenario. I shall therefore change the winning conditions and adjust the economic model one more time. Sorry for trouble - I just forget all the time that most RRT3 players play RRT3 very differently compared to me. ;)

[Wolverine@MSU]

I got Gold on Expert in 1900. I spent the first 10 years building Paper Mill/Flour Mill/Textile Mill combos all over the map in the midst of the agricultural communities (In my opinon, there are way too many of these). I also built several Steel Mills/Lumber Mills/Furniture Factories in key spots, and by the end of the 10 years I was bringing in nearly $40 MILLION per year in industry profits. Used that money to start building rails and running trains, which were also HUGELY profitable, so the money lept pouring in and the rails kept expanding. I had enough to tunnel through large expanses of the mountains (totally unrealistic) instead of trying to wind a path through the mountains. All track (except at the very end) was double-track, but the only city I had to double-station was Beijing; all the rest were single, Large stations. Used mostly Connie IIs until the S-40 came on line, and then used some of those too. Even in the worst economic times, I was making boatloads of money, so the challenge certainly wasn't to make enough money, but rather to connect the requires cities, which with the huge amonts of cash, was not at all difficult.

It is indeed a HUGE map, with lots of cities, and toward the end, with close to 300 trains running, I did notice the graphics slowing down a bit, especially when zoomed in on a train for a train ride. I did notice a lot of problems with the rivers not being placed logically, some going up and down the sides of mountains rather than in river valleys. The paint job is wonderful though.

This is an ideal map for the player who just wants to build and run railroads, but there isn't much of a challenge. I probably could have gotten Gold much sooner if I had started building rails right from the get-go as there is (over)abundant cargo to haul. I don't think the initial seeding of so many agricultural communities and other industries accurately reflects what was happening in China in the mid 1800s.

[thietavu]

I got Gold on Expert in 1900. I spent the first 10 years building Paper Mill/Flour Mill/Textile Mill combos all over the map in the midst of the agricultural communities (In my opinon, there are way too many of these). I also built several Steel Mills/Lumber Mills/Furniture Factories in key spots, and by the end of the 10 years I was bringing in nearly $40 MILLION per year in industry profits. Used that money to start building rails and running trains, which were also HUGELY profitable, so the money lept pouring in and the rails kept expanding. I had enough to tunnel through large expanses of the mountains (totally unrealistic) instead of trying to wind a path through the mountains. All track (except at the very end) was double-track, but the only city I had to double-station was Beijing; all the rest were single, Large stations. Used mostly Connie IIs until the S-40 came on line, and then used some of those too. Even in the worst economic times, I was making boatloads of money, so the challenge certainly wasn't to make enough money, but rather to connect the requires cities, which with the huge amonts of cash, was not at all difficult.

It is indeed a HUGE map, with lots of cities, and toward the end, with close to 300 trains running, I did notice the graphics slowing down a bit, especially when zoomed in on a train for a train ride. I did notice a lot of problems with the rivers not being placed logically, some going up and down the sides of mountains rather than in river valleys. The paint job is wonderful though.

This is an ideal map for the player who just wants to build and run railroads, but there isn't much of a challenge. I probably could have gotten Gold much sooner if I had started building rails right from the get-go as there is (over)abundant cargo to haul. I don't think the initial seeding of so many agricultural communities and other industries accurately reflects what was happening in China in the mid 1800s.

Yes, I can understand your frustration with this map. This is not for those who concentrate on business side of RRT3 or merely want to achieve "gold". This is, as you say, all about building railroads in challenging and sometimes beautiful places. It offers very little to players who know how to make money and aren't that much interested in developing the huge railroad network one needs in order to serve so many locations. For you it was very easy because you concentrated in the industry side of things. For someone who builds few or even no industries, the challenge is entirely different - especially if one plays (as was intended) very long, experiencing the nasty economic depressions, wars, etc. I even lost the game in the 1950s, running out of funds and unable to renew my aging uneconomical train roster. But then again, I had few industries and even those not very profitable then...

Maybe I'll still make some changes to this map because I think most people will play it the same way as they play the other RRT3 scenarios, concentrating on money and finishing the game as soon as possible. The idea here is to become the "Minister of Traffic" in China - not the "Minister of Industry". ;) So, I should somehow put the emphasis on developing railroads, not the industries. After all, a real Minister of Traffic wouldn't very likely build lots of factories etc. before building almost any track, would he? :)

Real China is full of farms and everything, and since people there use trains for about everything instead of cars, the large amount of farms and communities on the map is realistic in its own way. You may see it again from industry point of view. I see it more as a challenge, since all those people, raw materials and products need to be delivered somewhere. China needed to create a way to move things and people around a huge country. Therefore, it was and is much more important to connect all those places than to make as much money as possible. Since the Chinese don't yet have that many cars outside the richest large cities, trains are a must for the country. Even unprofitable trains. Once you build this huge network which connects almost all the cities in China, you will definitely need 2-3 stations in larger hubs. Simply because there will be an enormous amount of traffic (in my tests, easily more than 600 trains). And you will need to replace them when decades go by, electrify track, etc. etc. That's the main challenge in this map: building the huge network and keeping its trains running. :)

Thank you for your feedback! Since I myself play in a very different way, I didn't even think that someone would start, like you did, by making a huge fortune with industries. So, I guess I'll have to change the winning conditions so that people won't do the same (and spoil their own experience) but instead really concentrate in developing things all through the 20th century. ;)

P.s - the rivers are a royal problem...

[brunom]

if I can add my two cents on this one...

Although rural China is massively populated, indeed covered with farms, it makes a lot of sense to have a high spread of agro communities. However, thievatu, you have to agree that those communities will only scarcely produce cash crops in sufficient amount to justify railroad transportation.

My suggestion is to reduce the production of specific goods with a game event right from start. Smaller productions will then trickle to centers of demand, before they accumulate. I've used this in a number of scenarios, and it generally works smoothly. It is an easy change and simple code, it will reduce the profitability of industry based strategies and it makes the whole thing more realistic.

Rivers flowing upstream, really, are a sad sight. Your China map needs that improved, in my opinion, but then again, so do so many others.

B

[thietavu]

if I can add my two cents on this one...

Although rural China is massively populated, indeed covered with farms, it makes a lot of sense to have a high spread of agro communities. However, thievatu, you have to agree that those communities will only scarcely produce cash crops in sufficient amount to justify railroad transportation.

My suggestion is to reduce the production of specific goods with a game event right from start. Smaller productions will then trickle to centers of demand, before they accumulate. I've used this in a number of scenarios, and it generally works smoothly. It is an easy change and simple code, it will reduce the profitability of industry based strategies and it makes the whole thing more realistic.

Rivers flowing upstream, really, are a sad sight. Your China map needs that improved, in my opinion, but then again, so do so many others.

B

Thanks for good advice! :) Yes, that is something I intend to do next. The massive amounts of things transported in China were and are a reality, but their profitability is a different matter.

One thing about China is that it has never really been a market driven country like USA and most European countries are. Decision making there has always been a political or a military thing, one way or another. Railroads have been built until very recent days with little or no relation to profitability. Their purpose has been something different - often something strange to our "western" thinking. But this is also what thrills me in this "Great China" scenario. It should make us think like the Chinese think. For example, any western investor thinks like this: "Ok - a railroad from place X to place Y: will it make enough money?" In China it goes more like this: "Ok - we need this railroad from X to Y, no matter what it costs. Just do it!" :)

A good example is, I think, China's current, huge project of connecting cities with bullet trains. They don't *really* need most of them - but for China it's a matter of national pride and "okay, if we can do it, why not do it?" -attitude. I think, some of you might find this "Great China" scenario quite a lot more enjoyable when you stop thinking about "winning" or profits, but instead, try to think like the Chinese do - and, for example, start building those ****** bullet trains! With special tracks for them, of course! :) It often makes no sense businesswise, but it's fun - and it *is* realistic! That's what they do there.

Maybe the first "rule" about "Great China" scenario should be: "Stop thinking like a western guy! You're in a different reality now and your superiors expect you to connect the Great China - not act like you're an American businessman! This is China!" ;)

I'll see what I can do with those rivers. They are difficult and this scenario is huge. It has taken me years to make this even to this point. :)

[brunom]

Thievatu... you're failing in the most basic rule about "not thinking like a western guy" - the rule that tells you that people are more or less the same everywhere in the world and that you should stop looking at foreign as "alien".

There are numerous examples of railways in Europe which were built for national pride, swift transport of troops, access to key raw materials, etc, which were not "business driven". And we could discuss if the Chinese investment in trains in indeed very sensible when you have a third of the world population lives there and is reaching traveling-middle-class affluence in this contemporary prospect of a post-oil world.

Whether we discuss it or not (I have no wish to spoil the thread), I agree with you that a scenario like yours should be all about the railways side of it. So, have you considered enforcing this view? I mean, something like forbidding buying industries, including some industry profit tax, making industries much more expensive to buy, etc..?

B

[thietavu]

Thievatu... you're failing in the most basic rule about "not thinking like a western guy" - the rule that tells you that people are more or less the same everywhere in the world and that you should stop looking at foreign as "alien".

There are numerous examples of railways in Europe which were built for national pride, swift transport of troops, access to key raw materials, etc, which were not "business driven". And we could discuss if the Chinese investment in trains in indeed very sensible when you have a third of the world population lives there and is reaching traveling-middle-class affluence in this contemporary prospect of a post-oil world.

Whether we discuss it or not (I have no wish to spoil the thread), I agree with you that a scenario like yours should be all about the railways side of it. So, have you considered enforcing this view? I mean, something like forbidding buying industries, including some industry profit tax, making industries much more expensive to buy, etc..?

B

Thanks for comment!

I did consider those options, but didn't want to limit the scenario too much. Buying industries is already now forbidden, but clearly that's not enough. My biggest "mistake" was that I thought people would play it more or less the same way I do, which doesn't seem to be the case. So, let's see what can be done. It would be a pity if hundreds of hours developing this one lead to a disappointing map for most people.

Briefly about the "western/oriental thinking"... I have quite a number of friends, colleagues etc. in China, Vietnam, Japan, etc - and every single time I discuss with them I get surprised somehow. ;) People are the same everywhere, that is true, but for example the old Chinese culture affects many people's thinking in ways almost impossible to understand for a Finn like me. And vice versa, of course. :) On my trips to China I have made the basic mistake of trying not to see people and culture there as "aliens" at all. I learned the hard way that there are differences in thinking and values that could easily destroy a friendship or a business deal if not taken seriously. But yes, this is an interesting topic which doesn't belong to this thread...

[Wolverine@MSU]

If you want folks to concentrate on building rails, you could disable building industries, although unless you build key ones by event throughout the scenario, a lot of things won't happen. You could limit a players investment in industry (set a maximum for total value of industries, or industry profit, and tax the heck out of profits that exceed this level (very realistic in a communist country)). You could also have a minimum miles of track (see how much you've built in one of your long-term plays) and/or a minimum number of cities to connect (aside from the key ones already required for each medal level). There are lots of ways to "direct" the style of play, and if you want the player to be in it for the long haul, and to build a massive rail network, set the goals and limitations accordingly.

[thietavu]

If you want folks to concentrate on building rails, you could disable building industries, although unless you build key ones by event throughout the scenario, a lot of things won't happen. You could limit a players investment in industry (set a maximum for total value of industries, or industry profit, and tax the heck out of profits that exceed this level (very realistic in a communist country)). You could also have a minimum miles of track (see how much you've built in one of your long-term plays) and/or a minimum number of cities to connect (aside from the key ones already required for each medal level). There are lots of ways to "direct" the style of play, and if you want the player to be in it for the long haul, and to build a massive rail network, set the goals and limitations accordingly.

Thanks for excellent advice! Must check those options...