As you may know, the Emperor Masters' Challenge series have come to an end. I think we've done all that we could on that difficulty level, barring some rather outlandish variants.

Now, I'm interested in starting an Immortal Challenge. I had thought I might move on from these challenge games after EMC4, but I have recently found renewed interest in Civ4 and this is a good time for myself to move up a difficulty level. I've learned much from the previous challenges, and I'm sure some people have too. Moving up a difficulty might provide some new insights to the game. Are you guys/girls interested?

My idea for the first of such a challenge would be playing a warmongering game as Aztecs. True, they have been featured in the first ALC, but Warlords brings a fresh new take on them with the UB and changes to the UU. I intend to exploit these as much as possible. What do you think of this idea?

yeah lets do it !!!!! if you are going to do a heavy war game, keep doing your AWESOME dimplomacy to make sure wen you are peace time you arent suprised.game if you really want to go to war alot you should make it a Pangea

lol You still havn't tried out an Angkor Wat Strategy yet... Maybe next time lol

I've enjoyed ALC and EMC threads, and would certainly like to see IMC now that EMC has come to the end. Can't really provide much for the discussion, as I'm now back to Prince (with BetterAI) - Immortal is far beyond my abilities for now.

But how can you say that all that can be done has now been done? Certainly there are interesting variants available still - or are they in the outlandish category?

I vote against it. why?
I don't want a 100% vote :lol:

I vote against it. why?
I don't want a 100% vote :lol:


Treachery!

I'd definitely like to see an Immortal Challenge. The last EMC proved that you could handle emperor even without repeated warring. If you're going to go for relentless aggression, I think a shift up a level would be worthwhile, given the efficacy of that particular approach.

woot! do it aelf, can't wait :D

If you want to go up to immortal that's fine and I'm sure you'd have a large and lively audience. My concern is that you might find yourself discouraged by increased war-mongering which was an aspect of the game you didn't seem to enjoy much in your last EMC game.

^^^^that's a good point. we want to keep aelf happy :D

yes cant wait.

you could try a new rule. what about: only alowed eight citys, this whod allow you to build the forbiden tempel. and if you could manage to build versilles you will be awarded to grab three more citys. with a total of 11 citys.

Is this posible on imortal, anyone? if not make this a bad sugestion :D

yes cant wait.

you could try a new rule. what about: only alowed eight citys, this whod allow you to build the forbiden tempel. and if you could manage to build versilles you will be awarded to grab three more citys. with a total of 11 citys.

Is this posible on imortal, anyone? if not make this a bad sugestion :D


Sounds great. But 8 cities won´t do...


Wha about this:

limit is 15 cities (is enough to obtain tech lead for a space race victory) and city razing isn´t allowed?

Well, since Aelf doesn`t like going crazy military I would imagine domination is out. So, yeah, it would make sense to work with around 15 cities. I wouldn`t impose any restrictions since immortal is very difficult and to start off playing as efficiently as possible would be key.

The EMC's were great, and an IMC would be just as good. Do it!

Well, I did say that this game will be a warmongering one, so we'll be unleashing the bloodhounds. And, hey, we've done domination once. We can do it again. But it won't be on Pangea, though.

I think an immortal challenge is a good idea because there have not been many on the boards. While I think a lot of people will follow it, I'm not certain how well the experience transcends to people who play on lower difficulties. I think the bulk of the people who have been posting with frequency here in the strat & tips forum are probably prince and monarch players. Some dabble with emperor (yourself, future hermit) and there are few who are playing on immortal/deity. From prince and up, it seems different strategies for success exist on each level. What works on immortal may not work on monarch.

Example: there has been a recent thread laying out the ground work for a compass beeline so it can be traded for the 4 C's. I don't think this works well on monarch (where I play), because by the time I've got compass, the 4 C's aren't readily available for trade. On emperor (and up), a beeline for an odd tech works better because the AI is teching faster. Because of this, improved diplomacy and oddball teching work to your benefit due to the trading available. The game progresses much quicker because you have to figure out how to keep up with the AI. Attempting those strats on lower difficulties can leave one waiting for the AI to 'catch up' with the strategy you're trying to work.

However, if you're looking to try IMCs, then EMCs are in your rearview mirror and a monarch challenge would be a waste of your time. An IMC gives those of us not yet playing on those difficulties a chance to see the game played differently, which is good future training. Perhaps I'm just pointing out the obvious in that each level of difficulty is, in and of itself, a different game.

All that said, I'd like to see you try an IMC with Augustus Caesar. I'm using him right now in a fractal monarch game and I dig the creative/organzied trait combo. Cheap libraries, courthouses, and lighthouses are really nice for quick builder phases and the praetorian speaks for itself. Their UB is also nice. I'm curious to see how clutch cheaper buildings will yield more use of the UU on a higher diffiuclty. On monarch, it's disgusting, lots of CR praets slashing their way across the map.

Go for it!

I really want to see an IMC! The EMCs have helped me a great deal. In fact i am right now wrapping up an Emperor Domination win with Augustus. I hope to be moving to Immortal in the next couple months.

Definitely would like to see you go up to immortal. So far I have had a few attempts with only one victory so it will be a good learning experience for me.

For those who only play at prince/monarch, I think there are still things you can learn from watching an immortal game. True, the 4Cs compass beeline strategy mentioned by johnny may not work at lower levels (relies on AI getting to Alphabet fast). But you can still learn how to win a quick liberalism race (say AD500), take nationalism as free tech, research gunpowder and have an army of 18 drafted muskets in 6 turns (AD800) to go and kick butt. Its lots of fun and a strategy that works at those levels.

The ALCs are still for those who find Immortal too intimidating to participate. But seriously, Monarch players can still contribute to discussions on an immortal game. At worst, you suggest something suboptimal and when someone suggests something better, you learn something.

As a Monarch level player I totally agree. I don't mind someone proving my suggestions wrong, and I've seen lots of people of all levels giving good suggestions so far in both the EMCs and the ALCs. And of course we're also here for the story-telling. :D That won't change when you go to Immortal, right? So keep it going, aelf.

Thanks, guys. My approach to this game would be slightly different. Instead of the ambitious and grandiose projects that you've been seeing in the EMCs, I would stick to the basics in the Immortal Challege, things that would pretty much apply in Monarch or even Prince games. How much can whipping and warmongering differ, anyway? ;)

I would probably begin this weekend.

If we're still considering the Poll, I agree with both options in that; there are (respectfully) way too many of these types of threads already (I believe a sub-forum should be made for such threads) but I am always prepared to read through games played at the 'higher' levels for tips and tricks.

Sure, vote any way you like. The reason why I had a poll and that option is because I understand the situation and how people might feel. If by the weekend the majority of the votes have become "no", I'll call off the game.

It is looking as though you might have your answer already! ;)

I voted 'Yes', but more for the reason that the EMC series is becoming an institution (that I have enjoyed reading - thanks for your efforts :)), and as above - I'm keen to see 'higher level' games played out ... more so than adding to the 'flurry' of 'one person succession games' that are appearing of late. These are clearly popular, but I question if they wouldn't be better off in another forum such as a sub-forum of this forum.

Well, I'm certainly not doing this to add yet another thread of its kind to this forum :p

A sub-forum for such threads is probably a good idea. But what would it be called?

Meh. Boring. No offence.

I'm still waiting for someone to start heavy SE game on Immortal, that would be far more interesting, would recquire you to change strategy you use in every game, would spark far more interest.. and I have no time to do it myself. Cottage spamming game after game gets , how should i put this.. boring.

Why would you put these threads in a sub-forum? Wouldn't it mean that less people stumble across them and get hooked on the forum?

Perhaps the strategy and tips forums needs an OGG (online group games) or PY2CI (put your two cents in) sub category.

Perhaps the strategy and tips forums needs an OGG (online group games) or PY2CI (put your two cents in) sub category.

:) i think the forums encompass the PY2CI category as a whole..

i totally disagree with acidsatyr's post, but after following some of his games, the guy sets the bar pretty high. oh well, maybe he'll chime in with some good advice from time to time.

i would really enjoy a "consistent variation" of games taken seriously at the immortal level. the utility of these threads for the masses is huge and greatly appreciated. attention to detail and diplomacy pointers in these threads are a great help.

on the other hand, if a lot of top immortal and deity players wanted to get together and play variations on strategies and post about it, i would sign up for that read as well..

I enjoyed reeding your games, not only because of the detailed game descriptions, but also because of the interesting read.

I think it would be definitely worth to start a try at immortal, and I would follow it through.

If you go peaceful, go for it, if you go warmonger, go for it, if you play CE, SE or FE go for it, as you wish (for the first try best would be to use the strateg you feel strongest with;)

I would definatelly have time to chime in suggestions, I was just voicing my opinion, nothing more. I think for a change of pace it would be interesting to start something different, where everyone could learn something new instead of doing same thing again. So someone could start FE game on immortal, and, it doesn't have to be same person playing all the time, ppl could switch. Hell, it doesn't even have to be FE, but something different. How about philosophical civ and trying to get as many GP as possible (ok it is FE then).
lol
wether a game will be revolving around wars or peaceful building depends from game really.
you get the point

Yes, you should do an IMC--actually, several of them. I agree that for the first one you should keep things straightforward. I always do when I start a new difficulty level. Then as you gain confidence you can add variations, as several have suggested.

I myself would like to see either a SE or FE as I rarely use those and would like to learn more about how to implement them; I also understand that they're de rigeur at the higher levels. Seeing them discussed in theory is one thing, but seeing them illustrated in an actual game is very instructive.

I've never really run a pure SE. There will invariably be cottages somewhere in my empire. But, then again, I'm not a really a CE player either. More than once people have commented in the EMCs that there are not enough cottages :p

I don't mind running an SE for this game. But Monty isn't Philosophical, so if there are no high-commerce resource tiles nearby, we might just be forced to lay down cottages.

When on Vanilla I had immortal pretty mach sorted out, on Warlords 2.08 I tryed a few games resontly and got isolated starts a few times on fractial script with New Cathy.

I had to remember how to build cottagess :)

Pure SE seems to did not let me to get togood enoght shape at the point of coming out of isolation.

The curently best start I seems to come with is to aim to cottaged capital with burocracy and academy why running everywhere else build gold or mechant specialists with castle system.
Ofcouse first I aim to produce 2 GS, for academy and Philosofy.

That seems to let me run near 100% research when all commerce practically come from capital and go try capital Academy and all other research building I can stick to. ONly this way I managed to be first to liberalism and come out of isolation with some trade matherial, but still behind.

Did not work out this scenario on Warlords 2.08 immortal yet complittly.

whilst i have not posted before i have used them to understand the game much better - in fact if it was not for the advice given by people here i would never have got into the game as much as i have.

I have to agree with acidsatyr - it would be great to see you start off with a game focusing on FE. your detailed descriptions of your games are excellent and i think would really help players with understanding how to move up to the immortal level (even if you ended up losing - actually i think people learn more from losing than from winning).

I switched to warlord only 2 days ago...

On emperor everything worked out quite easy (going liberalism first etc) with FE, but since I tried then directly deity (with very limited success:blush: ), I tend to share Multineers opinion:

Without cottages I wasn´t able to get to lib first (the AI´s seem to get it around 450 AD). Wasn´t even able to get a decent economy running... What I did in my last try was to build one or two cottages for each city I built, and to switch to whipping only after 1 AD (was on a continent with 2 civs, napoleon and brennus, only 2 trades done, math and iron working, both for alphabeth). I also used the academy + burocray approach in capital, but additionally whipping the Great Lib (had no mable, but when not whipping until GL chances seem to be quite high to get it) and building the National Epic to speed up GS produciton some more, combined with pacifism.

this worked out quite good, and I was able to grab lib in 425 AD...


@ aelf:

so if you want to do a try with FE (backed up with cottages) I think there is lots of help and feedback around (including mine if you like), and there also seems to be quite a lot of peoples interested in this approach:goodjob:

I disagree with the notion that there are too many of these types of threads. I would love to see the whole forum devoted to them :p

There is no better way to learn the game imo than to follow these threads. Hands down.

If someone has a question about a strategy or if someone has a new strategy to share then fire up a game and let's play it out (e.g., the GG game that's going on right now).

Talking about things in the abstract is fine and all, but the best learning occurs in these threads.

The most I've ever learned about civ4 came from Aelf's trade-route economy game. I never understood trade routes or even paid much attention to them really. But now I really do and understand them a lot more thanks to that game.

Plus following games played by people such as Snaaty and Acidsatyr are great learning experiences as well.

Keep them coming! :D

What I sad apply only to isolated start. In not isolated start one does not need cottagess yearly on. Production is more impotant.

Sure, I didn't say no-cottages-at-all variant and certainly heavy oriented FE/SE can still have cottages here and there, i.e. low food city. Whether or not I will build cottages around capital city depends on starting location, i.e. if city has lots of food and has access to some early happiness I would probably not go for cottages at all there (and deff. not if I'm philosophical). I am more impressed with production boosting aspect of buearocracy rather than commence one. Also I've stopped building academies altogether and only build them in rare cases really. But seems lots of high-end players have different strategies which is always good so that’s why it would be more fun to do it, and everyone could learn something. I still firmly believe philosophical trait and the way it’s played is much stronger for research on immortal than financial civ with cottages is and that production is more vital than research, tho obviously one can’t go without other.

I like the idea of a sub-forum for one person public games. I don't think it would stop people running across them. Succession games is a sub-forum of the stories forum and that doesn't seem to stop people getting involved.

Certainly a significant feature of CFC is the wide range of posters (in terms of skill level) and that does means that inexperienced players and experienced players are going to have incompatible preferences. Like everything else on the forum you have a look, if you're not interested you don't read further.

Having said that a sub-forum would declutter the main strategy and tips forum.

I always thought that those public games could be safely in the stories and tales forum :mischief:

I'm not sure the ones posted here really belong in the stories and tales forum. When I read that forum there's always fairly wacky variants imo and sometimes even an emphasis on narrative > playing :p The threads in this forums generally look at specific strategies, especially the EMC/ALC threads, so I think they fit in nicely here. That being said, I wouldn't be opposed to a subforum. It would just mean that I spend more of my time there ;)

I'm one of the permanent readers of SGs.
I've read dozens of them.
I also read spoilers for GotMs.
Those threads are somehow nearer to 1 person SGs than to strategy. I like those threads a lot too, when they are well written, like Aelf and Sisiutil do.
Putting them in a sub-forum isn't going to change the fact that they are interesting to read IMHO.

Ok, you guys debate on whether there should be a subforum or not. I'll just work on the thread when it comes up. Good idea? :p

Ok, you guys debate on whether there should be a subforum or not. I'll just work on the thread when it comes up. Good idea? :p


Excellent idea. :)

Now for my side of the bargain....

:mad: A SUB_FORUM!?! Have you lot gone completely... etc. :gripe:

Ok, you guys debate on whether there should be a subforum or not. I'll just work on the thread when it comes up. Good idea? :p

I cast my lot with the Yea's. It may be boring for someone at acidsatyr's level to see a fairly straightforward Immortal-level game at this point, but I'm writing as one of the Joe Sixpacks who doesn't have time to play enough games to actually learn the higher difficulty level strategies (in other words, not just copying "So-and-so's Deity Win Strat"). I still find it very interesting to see how what I've managed to learn at lower levels falls apart because of the different dynamics at higher levels. And this isn't trying to run down acid's opinion, either. Just a different POV from him, that's all.

On a marginally more personal note, you and Sisiutil both do a very good job with these "Challenges" posts. It's not just a series of screen shots and short "I researched this and that to get these" sentences - you both do an excellent job explaining the thinking, both long and short term, behind your actions, and fleshing out the strategic plan and how it changes based on your in-game discoveries. For that reason alone, I think you should do this. Whether it's a straightforward game or a self-imposed variant, at least I know there will be some insight into the game and the strategy involved.

As for the whole forum/subforum issue, well, I'm with futurehermit: It really doesn't matter to me, I'll just spend more time reading where these threads wind up. :)

Stories and telling games deducated to storytelling, not learning

I think a subforum is a good idea, not because there are too many succession games , i've really enjoyed aelf's and Sisiutil's succession games here and also games by acidsatyr and Snaaty, uberfish and others. It's just easier to track and follow these games when they are ordered in a sub forum.

As for the Immortal challenge, go for it. Just as you I win most of my emperor games nowadays. Time to move on. I've never played immortal 2.08 myself and i think it won't be easy.

There is no "So-and-so's Deity Win Strat". There even no
"So-and-so's Immortal Win Strat". Yeach of higth level games is different and any particular start will not work in every game.

Opposite is true. Every start that work on low level could be used on deity in RIGTH CONDITIONS. Trick is to decide which stat is right and implement it correctly.

Sure, I didn't say no-cottages-at-all variant and certainly heavy oriented FE/SE can still have cottages here and there, i.e. low food city. Whether or not I will build cottages around capital city depends on starting location, i.e. if city has lots of food and has access to some early happiness I would probably not go for cottages at all there (and deff. not if I'm philosophical). I am more impressed with production boosting aspect of buearocracy rather than commence one. Also I've stopped building academies altogether and only build them in rare cases really. But seems lots of high-end players have different strategies which is always good so that’s why it would be more fun to do it, and everyone could learn something. I still firmly believe philosophical trait and the way it’s played is much stronger for research on immortal than financial civ with cottages is and that production is more vital than research, tho obviously one can’t go without other.

HI Acid

I've read a number of your games/SGs and see that do much prefer the SE/FE route. Have you played many games with a financial civ at high levels? How do you play then?

I agree that these threads are not the same as narrative threads. There may be a blurring of the lines at some points in some threads, but lumping everything together under "Stories and Tales" is not quite right.

I agree that these threads are not the same as narrative threads. There may be a blurring of the lines at some points in some threads, but lumping everything together under "Stories and Tales" is not quite right.
I'd agree with that. The purpose of these threads is to discuss strategy. If there's a story in there, it's just gravy; it's not the main point.

OK, so sub-forum of the strategy and tips forum seems to be the consensus.
If a mod reads up to this point, he can give it try...

HI Acid

I've read a number of your games/SGs and see that do much prefer the SE/FE route. Have you played many games with a financial civ at high levels? How do you play then?

yeah i played financial civs with cottage spamming, rarely does one start with SE and then goes to cottages :lol:
What I do in game would depend on game itself, but I would use some strategies that are almost necessary like lots of drafting and use of slavery, and these are just harder to utilize when you are concentrating on cottages rather than farms. In any case I would rarely build cottages early in game. I don’t know how to answer you question.

Actually, I don't usually build cottages early in the game either. As they say, food and production are more important early in the game, and getting that library up in your capital too ;)

I agree, except I'm of the mindset that if you start with the prereqs for pottery ag/wheel or fish/wheel and you have sufficient floodplains then go and cottage them first off. Floodplains still provide surplus food and the cottages will help your research out.

It (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=204202) has begun.

yeah i played financial civs with cottage spamming, rarely does one start with SE and then goes to cottages :lol:
What I do in game would depend on game itself, but I would use some strategies that are almost necessary like lots of drafting and use of slavery, and these are just harder to utilize when you are concentrating on cottages rather than farms. In any case I would rarely build cottages early in game. I don’t know how to answer you question.

Thanks Acid, that is what I am after, unless you want to start a cottage based game for us all to watch ;)