Cold War Colorado for v1.06

[Cash on Wheels]

The player is flush with cash to start the game. Which means you can corner the market before the AI get a chance to lay their rails.

More from curiosity, but what do you mean by "corner the market"? Match the AI chairmen's investment in his own company?

In Z Email you "start" with $14M. I used that money to comnect all major cities on the map. Thus leaving the AI with no good starting places. I was then able to buy +50% shares in all of the AI by year 3 and my PNW was over $10M = game over. Now its time to finish Ocan's Dry Lake scenario instead.

The same can done with this map.

[RulerofRails]

I didn't mean that Zambu Email was a challenge against the AI, they are still a "decoration" to the map even if you give them some advantage (leave them space). Just that it was a 1.05 scenario I remembered where the AI started companies in the normal way (track isn't pre-built for the AI chairmen) where they didn't go bankrupt even if they weren't very smart with their starting location. Also, if you leave them unmolested, short-selling isn't the greatest idea.

In wsherrick's Age of Steam series the second installment (Green Diamond for 1.05 but with pre-built track and some industries for them) and the fifth (Phoenix Rising for 1.06) will probably give better competition versus the AI. With price islands back causing less intense breakouts, the Phoenix Rising map is probably a bit easier to beat them in terms of revenue, but merging all their companies is most probably still a good challenge.

Anyway, I'm happy to test play this map (Cold War Colorado) again with any changes you decide on for the AI in place. After all, allowing multiple companies to be started ruins any PNW challenge for the players that like the robber baron stuff (Zambu Email allows it also). Probably it's $200M PNW goal can be met within a couple of years, but this style of play doesn't interest me, I prefer to run a very efficient railway and see where that takes me.

PS.
If you want to see my attempt at controlling the AI in TM take a peek at what I did when making Warrington Wire a stand-alone scenario. (Price islands not in use during testing, haven't tried to add them to TM yet). I developed a scale similar to the economic scale that tested for their last year's revenue and would implement certain advantages/disadvantages in the current year dependent on that. This was applied to each company specifically. Purposely avoided temporary (gamewide) events. My intention was to keep them smallish but healthy.

ETA:
Another way to help the AI would be to have a small hidden territory with an event to seed a farm or two there when he starts a company (needs to fire correctly to give the human no chance to jump and buy it). An event would confiscate this for his company giving him an actual revenue base (probably better than over-use of cash-injections). IMO, this may be a better alternative than pre-built track when going for strongish AI. There could be some randomization to determine which industry type is seeded which should help re-playability further.

[Cash on Wheels]

Anyway, I'm happy to test play this map (Cold War Colorado) again with any changes you decide on for the AI in place. After all, allowing multiple companies to be started ruins any PNW challenge for the players that like the robber baron stuff.....

Don't burn yourself out, wait for the next Beta. Changes will made, but I'm up in the air about multiple co.

..................................................................................................................................

I'm terrible playing with AI. I guess i get territorial or something.

Overextended myself in one game.....

Someone turned off the safety!

This is how to control the steel flow.

In order to control the massive amounts of Cola pouring out of Somerset(~27-44 coal loads a year) I suggest anyone to run three dedicated coal trains to Grand junction. All of coal will pile up there instead. Then runs coal trains out of Grand junction to wherever.

Aspen(8) Durango(8) Craig (14) should be easy to manage.

[RulerofRails]

So the circle is so that you get more revenue from the AI running on your tracks

I used Grand Junction as a hub as well. During the middle of my last play, I seriously considered using Big Boys to Haul the black stuff up to the top of the Tennessee Pass and dropping it there. But I was already setup with many F3s, so couldn't be bothered to reconfigure everything. I would have incurred some losses on engine replacement/retirements as well. In my next play I will plan for it. Although with manageable fuel costs, I might even have them run it further towards Denver.When I use the version of those big steamers I posted with manageable fuel costs I will definitely setup for this.

My start last time involved buying up the cheap resources that were slow in establishing demand in the pre-game period. Maybe you don't mind if players use this route. If you wanted to prevent it, perhaps boost industry prices during the first year. (Also thinking after my last comment that dirt cheap industry prices for the AI at specific times when you also gave a cash injection could help them to get over their default second year slump.) The risk would be that this might indirectly encourage players to play the stock market and not start a company for awhile.

[RayofSunshine]

Well, I did not read all of the posts since my last attempt. However, although there are requirements with dates for some connections, and the requirement to get access to N.M., I didn't really find a terminal date to end the scenario. Could have missed it, which would not be the first.

[AT41B]

I noticed in the pics that you don't pause the game and do track leveling. I find in most cases when I take the time to do track leveling, I get the most out of the engine's pulling power.

[AT41B]

sorry, that would be life expectation and speed.

[Cash on Wheels]

Well, I did not read all of the posts since my last attempt. However, although there are requirements with dates for some connections, and the requirement to get access to N.M., I didn't really find a terminal date to end the scenario. Could have missed it, which would not be the first.

You can start in 1940 or 1937. But u need to b n grand junction by 1950.
There is no time limit to reach the new mexico reqiurement. Game ends 1989. If you focus on the haulage reqirements this game can be over fast. After I repo both tire warehouses I will increase the haulage reqirements.


Next beta I will give the player a PNW or troop/skier haulage reqirement to choose from.

I noticed in the pics that you don't pause the game and do track leveling. I find in most cases when I take the time to do track leveling, I get the most out of the engine's pulling power.

I do that with mainlines. But that branchline only had military extra trains running on it. No locals, no 'though' trains. If I had intentions to connect to texas I would do that.

Now when I play this game I do not get emotional. I may sigh if track laying is a pain or say 'crap' if an AI rejects my merge offer. But thats all. Now when that weapons train crashed a second time, (plus an electronics train went up on smoke earler in the game) mind u, tires were in a short supply across the map..it was outloud "no no no no, ", pound desk, "Where was my caboose?!!!" I guessing those crashes were a product of the trains sitting at a weapons factory for years.

[Gumboots]

I guessing those crashes were a product of the trains sitting at a weapons factory for years.

Probably. The rate of decrease in reliability is greatest in the first 3 years. After that, reliability will keep decreasing every year, but at a slower rate. So after 3 years your locos will be almost as unreliable as they are after 7 years. This is why I sometimes replace unreliable locomotives at the 3 year mark (Fireflies being an obvious example).

[RayofSunshine]

Maybe it was/is done on purpose, but I am having a little difficulty with the required hauls. The Industry List does carry the Munitions and weapons, as I have purchased them. However, I don't seem to be able to do the same with the Electronics and Machinery. Hence, being that they are not itemized totals on the yearly ledger, I don't know which items have reached their requirement. Thought it might be helpful for a tally for those amounts

[RayofSunshine]

Okay, I stand corrected. A player can purchase the Electronic and Machine Shop sites. However, being that I don't have a clue as to either of them have any haul, will the system actually make notice that each of them have met the requirement in the yearly ledger? More work for the programmer to indicate the total hauls of each item in the yearly ledge, other that a player to keep a "running" score in the Industry List each year, but I am just lazy.

[RulerofRails]

There is conflict with the use of variables. I reported this via PM also. I'm sure the next version will be corrected.

To finish playing your game without excessive mental strain, make a backup before switching to editor mode (Shift+E).

• In the Control Panel you will find a page called "Events".
• Look for the event named "Ledger1". Select it (normal click).
• Then click the button EDIT CONDITION to open the condition editor.
• Next click the small button with the little downwards arrow beside the words "Company Variable 1".
• Scroll up just a little until you see "Game Variable 1", select that, click ok.
• Repeat this for the following event: "Ledger2".

[Cash on Wheels]

Game variables work best with ledger events? Family out of way new beta on the way..

[RulerofRails]

"Conflict with the use of variables" means you are using the same variable for two different purposes. In this case Company Variable 1 is being used for the ledger and for the industrial event. Because both are events are active at the same time, this will cause unexplained behavior. If both events are isolated, it's possible to "re-use" events, but generally that should only be done if there's a shortage (arguably better to create a spare new small territory).

Game Variables vs. other types of variables:
Game Variables could be called the MASTER variables. They can be accessed by any event. Because there will only ever be one set of four (Game Variable 1, Game Variable 2, Game Variable 3, Game Variable 4), they will always be unique. There is no need to identify them in the Conditions page of the event.

To access all other variables, there is a need to identify them in the Conditions page. This can be a Test against... on screen player/player's company or it could be a Condition that Company/Player ID =#. For territories, use a "Force Test Against Territories" then you can pick the right one from the list in the Test against... section (there is an ID test for them as well, but this is an easier way to identify a specific one).

You can only access one set of Company Variables, Player Variables, and Territory Variables in the same event. Of course the same event can access the Game Variables so with the proper planning that gives you 16 values you could use which should be more than enough. If it's not,
There is a workaround: use multiple ledger events. However, each event will take at least one line even if it's very short. Suppose you want to quote Arkansas Territory Variable 3 and New Mexico Territory Variable 4. One event is needed to Test against... Arkansas and another to Test against... New Mexico.

Some variables can disappear mid-game. For example if a player is retired using an event his Player Variables disappear. Companies can come and go. AI companies don't always start up, and merging with another company will take it out of the game. There is also a problem if the player jumps to another company or starts a new one. If something was being counted in the variables for his old company (if using the Test against ... "on screen player's company only"). You might end up with a partial count in both places. Of course, if those things cannot happen in your scenario then these variables are safe to use.

When you write the text for the ledger when you quote a variable (press the "[" key), some of them have more display options than others (all can be displayed with the raw value). ALL Game Variables, ALL Company Variables and Territory Variables 3 & 4. have additional options like display as Money (can be simulated by putting a "$" in your text), True/False, Connected/Unconnected, and Complete/Incomplete. Basically 0 is False, any other value is True. Sometimes that's good, but most of the time it doesn't matter that much.

So, the question: Are they better? Game Variables are more versatile and easier to call up, but with a little care/effort the other varieties will work fine in most cases as well.

*Disclaimer: The editor is not my area of expertise, so don't take that as a complete picture. I have learned things from other maps, but it's very confusing when there is no guide as to what variables are used for what purpose (Oilcan kindly outlined this in some of his maps).

I encourage others to experiment a little. Make sure to check out the editor's Event Debugging page to see what the current status of the variables are. To test an event use the Frequency of "When track/station is placed' for controlled instant firing. Just remember that you must leave editor mode (Shift+E) before laying a piece of track then exiting track laying mode in order for the event to fire. I tend to put a dialog message like "jkljkl" or any other random thing just for me to confirm a fire. Then I switch back into the editor to setup for the next step.

I put some extras events in a TM map. I made sure each one was going to work first via this "simulation" test. No point in wasting game time to see "IF" something will work, just at the end to check for bugs (yep, it's pretty easy to forget to set a frequency/test switch or call the wrong # variable).

[Hawk]

Even after RoR's excellent explanation, you might be interested in OilCans's 'Guide to Writing RT3 Events', found on this page of the archives.
It's a 10 part pdf series on event writing.

[Cash on Wheels]

"Conflict with the use of variables" means you are using the same variable for two different purposes. In this case Company Variable 1 is being used for the ledger and for the industrial event. Because both are events are active at the same time, this will cause unexplained behavior. If both events are isolated, it's possible to "re-use" events, but generally that should only be done if there's a shortage (arguably better to create a spare new small territory).

Game Variables vs. other types of variables:
Game Variables could be called the MASTER variables. They can be accessed by any event. Because there will only ever be one set of four (Game Variable 1, Game Variable 2, Game Variable 3, Game Variable 4), they will always be unique. There is no need to identify them in the Conditions page of the event.

To access all other variables, there is a need to identify them in the Conditions page. This can be a Test against... on screen player/player's company or it could be a Condition that Company/Player ID =#. For territories, use a "Force Test Against Territories" then you can pick the right one from the list in the Test against... section (there is an ID test for them as well, but this is an easier way to identify a specific one).

You can only access one set of Company Variables, Player Variables, and Territory Variables in the same event. Of course the same event can access the Game Variables so with the proper planning that gives you 16 values you could use which should be more than enough. If it's not,
There is a workaround: use multiple ledger events. However, each event will take at least one line even if it's very short. Suppose you want to quote Arkansas Territory Variable 3 and New Mexico Territory Variable 4. One event is needed to Test against... Arkansas and another to Test against... New Mexico.

Some variables can disappear mid-game. For example if a player is retired using an event his Player Variables disappear. Companies can come and go. AI companies don't always start up, and merging with another company will take it out of the game. There is also a problem if the player jumps to another company or starts a new one. If something was being counted in the variables for his old company (if using the Test against ... "on screen player's company only"). You might end up with a partial count in both places. Of course, if those things cannot happen in your scenario then these variables are safe to use.

When you write the text for the ledger when you quote a variable (press the "[" key), some of them have more display options than others (all can be displayed with the raw value). ALL Game Variables, ALL Company Variables and Territory Variables 3 & 4. have additional options like display as Money (can be simulated by putting a "$" in your text), True/False, Connected/Unconnected, and Complete/Incomplete. Basically 0 is False, any other value is True. Sometimes that's good, but most of the time it doesn't matter that much.

So, the question: Are they better? Game Variables are more versatile and easier to call up, but with a little care/effort the other varieties will work fine in most cases as well.

*Disclaimer: The editor is not my area of expertise, so don't take that as a complete picture. I have learned things from other maps, but it's very confusing when there is no guide as to what variables are used for what purpose (Oilcan kindly outlined this in some of his maps).

I encourage others to experiment a little. Make sure to check out the editor's Event Debugging page to see what the current status of the variables are. To test an event use the Frequency of "When track/station is placed' for controlled instant firing. Just remember that you must leave editor mode (Shift+E) before laying a piece of track then exiting track laying mode in order for the event to fire. I tend to put a dialog message like "jkljkl" or any other random thing just for me to confirm a fire. Then I switch back into the editor to setup for the next step.

I put some extras events in a TM map. I made sure each one was going to work first via this "simulation" test. No point in wasting game time to see "IF" something will work, just at the end to check for bugs (yep, it's pretty easy to forget to set a frequency/test switch or call the wrong # variable).

Sorry to make you write all of that. But I notice I used those variables twice. So when it triggered one of the choices for industry reduction event in 1953 it went back to the first ledger.

[Cash on Wheels]

Done with the Christmas rush! Here's the third & final beta.

Please note the speed of your engines in the Colorado mtns. If your fully loaded trains are moving to0 slow, let me know.

BETA REMOVED 01/06/18

[Cash on Wheels]

"Conflict with the use of variables" means you are using the same variable for two different purposes. In this case Company Variable 1 is being used for the ledger and for the industrial event. Because both are events are active at the same time, this ......

Sorry to make you write all of that. But I notice I used those variables twice. So when it triggered one of the choices for industry reduction event in 1953 it went back to the first ledger.

spoke too...errr....typed too soon.

[Cash on Wheels]

Only just started playing the map. There was little high-value cargo ready to haul so I went for a cautious industry start. Many farms were discounted at game start. Also, I can buy them anywhere, even in territories that I don't have access to.

Main thing I wanted to report was that I selected two AI players. The first one started a company connecting Grand Junction to Somerset with two tunnels. His track value is $93.3M so of course his company has a mountain of debt and his share price collapsed to $1 within the month. I resisted the urge to do a max short on him which would have been worth a couple million in PNW. I suppose this was not intended?

I have yet to see this one.

[RulerofRails]

Tried the latest BETA, this time with all steam and the more economical Challenger and Big Boy files I posted. They are usable. The Troop goal is a challenge. I know some ways to do better next time (didn't connect south fast enough), also I was a bit rushed with this play, but I only had 833 at the end of the game. In comparison to the other goals, this is at least 3x as difficult. I don't think it's impossible, just needs a bit more effort than I put in this time. I would hazard to say that it doesn't seem very well balanced in difficulty with the other goals.

At the end of the game I lost completely, didn't even get a Silver, seems that's because Game Variable 2 = 3, while the Silver medal checks for Game Variable 2 = 2. A setting of "3" indicates completion of the Military cargo hauls to Roswell.

As I said, it was a rushed play, but I didn't see any other errors (didn't comb through the events). The AI behaved themselves. No crazy builds, Jay Gould did that crazy build I mentioned last time. Probably because he's not clever with track?