Hi, are you going to play Victoria again?

Probably not, at least not for a long time, even though her traits changed. I'm not even halfway through the list yet!

Regarding Hammarabi, I think he is one of the stronger AIs. A rock steady defensive UU that can support stacks in early warfare. A useful UB. What I thinkl are one of the best warring trait combos.

So I say Hammarabi should be on Immortal!!! You jumped into this difficulty, I say stay in it for a strong war-monger.

in regards to hammurabi's UU: it serves the same point as all defensive UU: none. ignore it completely.

The problem with Hammy's UU isn't so much that it's defensive--there are uses for those, or so the Protective fans tell me--it's that its bonus is versus a military unit which the AI disdains in favour of mounted ones. I'm just starting to get into multiplayer games, and I'm thinking Bowmen are probably very strong there, since human players love melee units so much. Ironically, though, against the AI, I don't think they're as useful.

The problem with Hammy's UU isn't so much that it's defensive--there are uses for those, or so the Protective fans tell me--it's that its bonus is versus a military unit which the AI disdains in favour of mounted ones. I'm just starting to get into multiplayer games, and I'm thinking Bowmen are probably very strong there, since human players love melee units so much. Ironically, though, against the AI, I don't think they're as useful.Bowmen definitely have their uses if you spawn next to Shaka (or a horseless Monty). Both of them (and Boudicca) can quite happily send a slew of melee your way early on.

It's a bit more situational, but if you're lacking metal and have horses/cats, combat bowmen would make great stack protectors.

I'm thinking Bowmen are probably very strong there, since human players love melee units so much.

Everyone else is thinking "oh gawd i'm gonna rush Sisiutil with War Chariots":sad:

Everyone else is thinking "oh gawd i'm gonna rush Sisiutil with War Chariots":sad:

:lol:.....

Yup, considering that only Egypt has war chariots ;)

Everyone else is thinking "oh gawd i'm gonna rush Sisiutil with War Chariots":sad:

Well, yeah, unless that happens... :( :lol:

The big question is "which difficulty level" (and really, we can leave that to the pre-game thread, but oh well). We played Immortal with Lincoln because we wanted the game to be decided later rather than sooner. What's the situation this time around? If we want to showcase Hammurabi's advantages, what kind of game are we looking for?

Hammy has:
Aggressive - good for early-to-mid warfare.
Organised - best with large empires. I see synergy.
Bowmen - IMO, still only useful as city (or hill) defenders. I'd prefer Axemen for a stack.
Garden - gives cities more health... useful as long you have plenty of :) resources on hand.
Techs - The Wheel, Agriculture.

I know you want to hear my 2 cents on this. My 'ideal' game with Hammurabi would see rolling warfare starting in the Ancient age (perhaps even with an Archer rush if resources are lacking), and continuing through to the Gunpowder age; leveraging Aggressive to make gains, Bowmen to hold them, and Organised to keep the economy going. Assuming Domination hadn't been won, then around the Industrial Age I'd turn to peace and use the Gardens to take the edge off the health problems I always seem to have at that point.

The main part of that plan is early and constant warfare. I suspect that, even with Organised, Sisutil would be unable to keep up economically with that strategy if he played Immortal. Immortal would also probably rule out an Archer rush, whatever the situation. So, I'd rather this game was played on Emperor.

Recommendations: Emperor, (2) Hemispheres, Largish map. That way you'll have plenty of guys to fight early on, but you won't run out of opponents either... and the difficulty means you get to be a little more creative than you would on Immortal, e.g. making use of any religions you capture, playing with the Apostolic palace, or beelining/bulbing certain military techs in unusual ways.

A good suggestion soundly reasoned, oldsaxon. I'll consider it.

You could go back down to Emperor and play with raging barbs on. I suggest this only because it seems like the only way to make serious use of Bowmen. If you don't really care about emphasizing the UU, play normal settings on Immortal. You might still be able to make use of Bowmen if you don't have early access to copper.

To add to OldSaxon's comments, I'd recommend Marathon speed if your main intention is to attempt to show off Hammurabi's early game chops.

In further agreement with OldSaxon, I really really dislike difficulties higher than Emperor, and not just because hard settings kick my furry ass. No, I hate them because they tend to shoehorn the player into various tricks and gambits to try to offset the rather ridiculous production, maintenance, and unit upgrade advantages. The single-minded focus required at higher difficulties is somewhat in conflict with the stated aim of the ALC series, which is to showcase the civ, teach the finer points of the game, and hopefully win.

Put it another way -- what was uniquely Lincolnish about the last ALC? Arguably the only Lincolnish aspect of the game was the use of Philosophical for specialists and the use of Malls to boost happiness to allow bigger cities to try to get the UN win. I'm not criticizing you, just pointing out that you have to play your "A" game to win on Immortal, so leveraging America's late game benefits was an afterthought.

I again urge you to lower the difficulty a notch and insert some factor (RP rule, opposing civs, whatever) OTHER than difficulty to make the game more challenging.

On Hamsammich:
UU: Like the protective trait, it's there when you need it but not worth changing your game to accommodate.
UB: Very strong. Health is the one aspect of the game you can't compensate for with the slider.
Starting techs: Beaker-wise Agg and the Wheel are the most expensive starting techs there are. Heavily forested and you can go mining->BW. Light forests means you can get pottery first for an early CE.
Traits: Agg isn't one of my favorite traits, but it easy to play since it doesn't require any leveraging. It's just there for a little boost when you might want it. Perhaps with an Agg leader Sis can finally be tempted into waging a war or two. Boring peaceful/builder that he is.
Org is a great trait that just gets stronger as the game goes on. On Immortal difficulty, the game will probably go deep into the later eras when civics/inflation really begin mointing. Hopefully we can have a map that promotes a large and sprawling empire. Large size might be rough on slower computers but is low sea level an option? Focusing on Corporations might be an option.
Vidtory conditions: Ummm, One hasn't made them a priority in the ALCS yet, why start now. But I want a bloodbath. If only because we get more frequent updates when there is a tasty war to be fought.

I fail at everything above prince, so bear with me.

Hammy's strength is really, really, early wars (As in, beeline to archery before the AI can get it, and rush their capital). Other than that, his UU's only strength is being able to evade pretty much any attack on his land. Agg/Org has some good synergy, so anything but a huge empire wouldn't be taking advantage of his traits. I agree with trying to war constantly until industrial age. Maybe... I dunno, military-aided diplomatic? Nothing's really obvious here. I would like to see another conquest, though.

EDIT: Disregard my first part. I didn't realize that the AI started with Archery.

I fail at everything above prince, so bear with me.

Hammy's strength is really, really, early wars (As in, beeline to archery before the AI can get it, and rush their capital). Other than that, his UU's only strength is being able to evade pretty much any attack on his land. Agg/Org has some good synergy, so anything but a huge empire wouldn't be taking advantage of his traits. I agree with trying to war constantly until industrial age. Maybe... I dunno, military-aided diplomatic? Nothing's really obvious here. I would like to see another conquest, though.

You won't beat the AIs to archery on anything above Monarch, because they start with it on those levels.

Oh. Damn. Nevermind.

Traits: Agg isn't one of my favorite traits, but it easy to play since it doesn't require any leveraging. It's just there for a little boost when you might want it. Perhaps with an Agg leader Sis can finally be tempted into waging a war or two. Boring peaceful/builder that he is.
:lol:
Put it another way -- what was uniquely Lincolnish about the last ALC? Arguably the only Lincolnish aspect of the game was the use of Philosophical for specialists and the use of Malls to boost happiness to allow bigger cities to try to get the UN win. I'm not criticizing you, just pointing out that you have to play your "A" game to win on Immortal, so leveraging America's late game benefits was an afterthought.

I would agree that the late game UU/UB were something of an afterthought, but I would argue that I got considerable use out of Charismatic as well: monuments for extra happiness early on, and did you see all the highly-promoted units I had?

Still, I hear what you're saying. If that game had been played on Emperor, it likely would have been a domination win with SEALs taking down the last targets and malls keeping the oppressive war weariness at bay. Even though the game would have been in the bag much earlier, it would have nevertheless given the UU/UB a chance to shine. So I'll consider what you're saying for the Hammurabi game.

You should be fine on Immortal with Hammy. Both the UB and UU come very early. You will probably find the UU more useful on immortal than emporer, simply because you are playing from behind for a large part of the early game. A cheap early defender that has a little edge over the generic unit can save the day. Against melee units, a CG1 Bowman is just .05 less than a CG3 archer. And in the openfield are better than generic archers. yes the Ai loves mounted units, but with a couple combat2 spears you should be fine.
I agree with slobberingbear about higher difficulties removing a lot of freedom of choice. Especially with regard to late game UU's and UB's. However i think the Lincoln game would have seen a lot more use of both if the world hadn't been so happily Buddist. For one thing, the Monty war wouldn't have lasted that long. An ai would have jumped in on one side or another. A second continent with multiple civs would also have changed the flavor a bit. But I am still in favor of staying at immortal. The same AI bonuses that take away a lot of choices, also force you to try and get as much out of whatever advantage your traits give you. In Hamsammichs case, it's gonna be a war or two or fifty. Time to man-up Big S. Think of it as a hockey game without the skating. Now give us a map and move the warrior one NE

Still, I hear what you're saying. If that game had been played on Emperor, it likely would have been a domination win with SEALs taking down the last targets and malls keeping the oppressive war weariness at bay. Even though the game would have been in the bag much earlier, it would have nevertheless given the UU/UB a chance to shine. So I'll consider what you're saying for the Hammurabi game.I respectfully disagree.

If the Lincoln game had been on Emperor, you'd have put Monty to the sword quicker and been able to war against everyone else quicker, having domination in the bag before Seals/malls turned up (as in the Saladin game). To get any use out of them, you'd have had to sit around peacefully developing Aztecistan for a thousand years or so in between wars.

The Buddhist bloc could actually have been leveraged to war with each in turn once you'd seized control of the AP, since the AI won't declare on you at friendly; the others would stay neutral while you gobbled your way through the rest.

I will put in a vote for an advanced start game. It is part of the game now and it would be cool to see you try it. Depending on how you use it, it could make an immortal game a tad easier.....by that I mean, if an immortal game is at difficulty 10 , then an advanced start immortal game would be at difficulty 9.8.

frankly, if the strategy doesn't work on immortal, i just don't want to hear it.

I will put in a vote for an advanced start game. It is part of the game now and it would be cool to see you try it. Depending on how you use it, it could make an immortal game a tad easier.....by that I mean, if an immortal game is at difficulty 10 , then an advanced start immortal game would be at difficulty 9.8.

advanced start is practically cheating

Hammurabi is one of the strongest (perhaps even the strongest!) leaders when it comes to early war. Extra power for axemen and the ability to quickly whip courthouses in the conquered territory, plus a strong, cheap defensive unit to keep out barbs and eventual counterattackers.

So, yes. Play Hammurabi on Immortal because he's got an excellent early rush.

The problem with Hammy's UU isn't so much that it's defensive--there are uses for those, or so the Protective fans tell me--it's that its bonus is versus a military unit which the AI disdains in favour of mounted ones. I'm just starting to get into multiplayer games, and I'm thinking Bowmen are probably very strong there, since human players love melee units so much. Ironically, though, against the AI, I don't think they're as useful.
You're absolutely right - Bowmen are hugely more useful in multiplayer games. Basically, you don't even think about an early rush of a human player who is using Hammurabi. You just avoid him and try your luck somewhere else until the ancient age has passed. ;)

I'll be interested to read how Hammurabi's ALC goes (if that's who you're doing next). :)

... it likely would have been a domination win with SEALs taking down the last targets and malls keeping the oppressive war weariness at bay.

Civ imitating life in America, circa 2008 ...

Well, yeah, unless that happens... :( :lol:
Better add Hatty manually to the next game... :)

Oddly enough, Hammurabi will use his traits, etc. no matter the difficulty level, so I have no concern there.

What one might consider is trying to generate a health-resource poor map so that the UB comes in a bit more handy.

Oddly enough, Hammurabi will use his traits, etc. no matter the difficulty level, so I have no concern there.

.

This is my thinking. The Bablylonian UU and UB will be used the same amount regardless of the game difficulty. The American UU/UB are sort of the exceptions because they come late.

Sis seams to be at an in-between difficulty level, emperor/Immortal. The question really is whether Hammarabi is considered a top level leader, average, or low-level. I consider him top level, average at worse. In the hands of Sis's capable military style/preference I think he's definitely top. If Sis were more of a builder/pacifist he would be average.

So I vote for Immortal.

Actually, the earlier Barbarians come, the more that UU will increase in importance, to my way of thinking. :)

Actually, the earlier Barbarians come, the more that UU will increase in importance, to my way of thinking. :)

True. Having the Bowman around makes it much easier to deal with barbarians without having to rush to strategic resources.

If hamurabi is next there is no reason to play anything other than immortal given that both his traits are great given sisiutils style of play..

I think that S man should not play this in emperor. I strongly feel that he would steamroll the AI with a Agg/Org civ in Emperor ( the traits of the vanilla toku ;) ) and that would not be neither entertaining or educational.

He proofed himself well in last ALC on Immortal. I think he can cope well this one in that level.

I think he will have a hard time ultilizing the UU personally but the traits are good and the UB is very nice...

I think he will have a hard time ultilizing the UU personally but the traits are good and the UB is very nice...

Trying to base a strategy around an archer UU @ immortal is just suicidal most of the time.

frankly, if the strategy doesn't work on immortal, i just don't want to hear it.

The close your eyes. The vast majority of this forum play below immortal

The close your eyes. The vasy majority of this forum play below immortal

last time i checked, you use ears for hearing ;)

the vast majority of members play below monarch. this game is about getting better IMO not finding different ways to abuse a UU or UB.

last time i checked, you use ears for hearing ;)

the vast majority of members play below monarch. this game is about getting better IMO not finding different ways to abuse a UU or UB.

Some people live near nuclear power plants and have developed extra senses

last time i checked, you use ears for hearing ;)

the vast majority of members play below monarch. this game is about getting better IMO not finding different ways to abuse a UU or UB.

Most people can't tell the difference. :)

The close your eyes. The vasy majority of this forum play below immortal

Your spelling is slipping.

Your spelling is slipping.

Ooooooooooooh, burn!

I think S should stay immortal. I'm trying to make that jump too but that's besides the point - he clearly won the last one on immortal, and Hammy is a sound leader with a lot going for him. Only a bum map or an ill-advised war could stop him :).

Translation for Mad: kloze yor iys, teh vast magoritee pla y belo imortle

As horribly difficult it would make things, will we ever see an ALC using Random Personalities setting on?

(If that's too much, how about Unrestricted Leaders?)

(If that's too much, how about Unrestricted Leaders?)

Someone said earlier about replaying Victoria- if/when we get to Pacal, perhaps it could be Victoria of the Mayans?

Well, i'll spare some work to Sisiutil and awnser for him, since he already stated this many times:

No unrestricted leaders. He wants to finish the ALCs before Civ X comes out ;)

Well, i'll spare some work to Sisiutil and awnser for him, since he already stated this many times:

No unrestricted leaders. He wants to finish the ALCs before Civ X comes out ;)
Thank you, exactly, yes. ;)

At least the ALC series for Colonization will be a wrap.

Hey Sisiutil and all the others!

First of all I would like to thank you, and all, for this great thread (and aelf (+co) for his). I'm rather new to CIVIV: BTS but your guides already got me a monarch win (cultural hence I'm not much of warmonger just yet..).

Besides the pleasantries I also have a suggestion.. Could you post more Military Advisor screenshots so that one can follow your production in more detail? It sure would be easier than to download every single saved-game file^^.

Anywho, keep up the good work!

\\kronisk

Hey Sisiutil and all the others!

First of all I would like to thank you, and all, for this great thread (and aelf (+co) for his). I'm rather new to CIVIV: BTS but your guides already got me a monarch win (cultural hence I'm not much of warmonger just yet..).

Besides the pleasantries I also have a suggestion.. Could you post more Military Advisor screenshots so that one can follow your unitproduction in more detail? It sure would be easier than to download every single saved-game file^^.

Anywho, keep up the good work!

\\kronisk

ALC 24 is now underway HERE (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=7064138).

I detest the Solver patch because it overwrites the official game files, which is awkward to reverse. I'd like to be able to play a true shadow of ALCs without installing it. But if it was a mod and the ALC save files were pointed at a mod folder, that would be fine.

I detest the Solver patch because it overwrites the official game files, which is awkward to reverse. I'd like to be able to play a true shadow of ALCs without installing it. But if it was a mod and the ALC save files were pointed at a mod folder, that would be fine.
Now ya tell me. Removing Solver would be difficult for me to reverse, then, and I'm not inclined to do that, sorry. I rather like the additional level of challenge the patch provides.

Are the saved game files not compatible?

Now ya tell me. Removing Solver would be difficult for me to reverse, then, and I'm not inclined to do that, sorry. I rather like the additional level of challenge the patch provides.

Are the saved game files not compatible?

Not from what I can tell :confused:

I loaded the save to see the map and civs and it worked.

save files are compatible - but a shadow game would be difficult since the game from the save onward would be governed by different rules than before the save.
However Solver's patch only requires one file to overwrite the core game files - CvCoreGameDLL.dll - all other fixes (python and xml) can go into custom assets - so just make a copy of CvCoreGameDLL.dll before installing Solver's patch and swapping is easy :)
Or use grumbler's installer which makes copies of the altered game files automagically :)

Will you be doing Rameses at some point, Sis? I'm working on him right now and have ample room (at Warlord level) to build peacefully and work on a space-race game (no immediate neighbours and stone/marble within spitting distance, plus a whole bunch of settlers from huts...), but it would be interesting to see how you handle him.

On a related note, here is the list of anticipated future ALC games, in order. However, this list doesn't include all those new leaders in the Beyond the Sword expansion pack--so when that comes out, it will mess this up. And of course I reserve the right to change the order on a whim. 'Cause I'm just crazy like that. :crazyeye:

How many of you think I'll get through every single leader before Civilization V comes out? Yeah, that's what I thought...

REVISED TO INCLUDE THE NEW LEADERS IN BEYOND THE SWORD:

Game 25: Celts/Boudicca
Game 26: Dutch/Willem van Oranje
Game 27: England/Churchill
Game 28: Ethiopia/Zara Yaqob
Game 29: France/De Gaulle
Game 30: Germany/Bismarck
Game 31: Greek/ Pericles
Game 32: HRE/ Charlemange
Game 33: Korea/Wang Kon
Game 34: Khmer/Suryavarman
Game 35: India/Mahatma Gandhi
Game 36: Mongolia/Genghis Khan
Game 37: Native American/ Sitting Bull
Game 38: Ottomans/ Suleiman
Game 39: Portugal/D. Joao II
Game 40: Rome/Augustus Caesar
Game 41: Russia/Stalin
Game 42: America/Roosevelt
Game 43: Byzantine/ Justinian I
Game 44: Celts/Brennus
Game 45: Egypt/Ramesses
Game 46: England/Elizabeth
Game 47: French/Napoleon
Game 48: Maya/Pacal II
Game 49: Persia/Darius
Game 50: Rome/Julius Caesar
Game 51: Russia/Catherine
Game 52: America/George Washington

Yikes! Wish me luck...
Reading the first page sometimes helps ;)

Looking at the list I am thinking Boudica may be an emperor level game and all the others Immortal until Charlemagne. While the tatooed lady may have the ultimate warring traits, nothing helps in economy plus the starting techs are week. Just some prethinking here.

What makes you think Sisiutil intends to ever go back to a difficulty level once he has left it behind?

By the way, I can't say I see that any combination of traits, techs and uniques can make or break a whole level all by themselves. The map (geography and AI composition) is far more likely to have such a great impact, if you ask me.

What makes you think Sisiutil intends to ever go back to a difficulty level once he has left it behind?

By the way, I can't say I see that any combination of traits, techs and uniques can make or break a whole level all by themselves. The map (geography and AI composition) is far more likely to have such a great impact, if you ask me.

I could be wrong but I thought Sis was considering moving back and forth between Emperor/Immortal depending on the leader.

If he wins this one, I bet he won't go back :p

If he wins this one, I bet he won't go back :p

You're probably right.

If he wins this one, I bet he won't go back :p
Agreed. It's only natural to be a bit cautious at first, but practice makes perfect, and after winning a game at a certain level you would normally know you can handle it (unless you won because you got incredibly lucky, and you know it).

Then let's not forget about the prestige... :p

Reading the first page sometimes helps ;)
I hadn't noticed that second post myself, actually. Interesting to see we're not even halfway through the leaders yet! Looks like a long (and exciting!) road ahead. :)

Sis, you must be thankful there's not another expansion pack planned, else you might never finish. ;)

Game 25: Celts/Boudicca -- Ah, my new favorite leader. The combination of traits has done wonders for changing my builder's mentality and focusing me on world domination.

Move the scout 1NE

Move the scout 1NE

No, no, no! Move the scout one east onto the other hill, as there is less forest around there. :lol: Then settle in place.

But seriously, be sure to be aggressive in the Boudica game. You could see in Hammy where everything went right after you attacked Saladin-- Boudica lends herself to being able to attack earlier, thus gaining the advantage earlier.

But seriously, be sure to be aggressive in the Boudica game. You could see in Hammy where everything went right after you attacked Saladin-- Boudica lends herself to being able to attack earlier, thus gaining the advantage earlier.

Let's just hope, for historical accuracy, that she ends up next to Rome. Kind of fair, too, with the UUs. Find the Iron!
Come on, Sis, you can take a few days off the game, but give us a starting position (with the scout move) so we can start parliamentary deliberations.

I'll try to start the pre-game thread tomorrow, the game thread on the weekend.

Boudica's traits are good; if utilized, that is. If our Civ is isolated or dozens of tiles away from the nearest opponent, they will have to wait, of course.

The Uniques, on the other hand, is best not focused on at all. Like defensive Archers, you can use Gallic Warriors to choke a Civ perhaps, but not much else. Basically, Copper/iron effectively shuts down GWs... which is to say "rather easy to shut down" when you consider how late it is when you can start building them (who beelines Iron Working just to get these guys?) And don't get me started on the Dun - it very well doesn't get any more defensive than a Wall, does it? (Sis has sworn off the Gold Wall trick)

(The Aztecs, whose Swordsmen are similarly hosed, can at least use their UU to double up as rather effective Medics, with that easy-to-get Woodsman III promo: a Medic in every stack! And their UB is quite unlike the Dun, that is to say very good and very versatile!)

So play your Boudica game without necessarily having your UU and UB foremost in mind. This is definitely one of those cases where the ALC series is best served by not getting distracted by your uniques... focus on Boudica's traits instead (no, not her visual ones) and use your regular units to great effect instead (Axemen, War Elephants, Catapults, you know the drill...)

(Let's hope Sisiutil doesn't get the build-swordsmen quest... :p )

Willem is certanly too early so maybe pericles, survayreman or ghandi for the flip to deity? Oh and i would be happy if you followed some advice on early game MM(read my message on msn). Also funny how much easier it was to get from emperor to immortal in btw compared to monarch to emperor in warlords. Long time since last cultural vic, maybe willem will be one? Doubt boudica's traits lead themselves to that VC.. Also about map. Why not try something different like highlands or global highlands(i am thinking snaky continents). Would certanly shake things up and would fit nicely with boudica.

I think it's a bit early to rule out Gallic Swordsmen. They are not always a great improvement over regular swordsmen but sometimes you get gold/silver or gems and have a great tech rate, swordsmen can be very useful then in attacking a neighbour civ. They are a huge improvement vs archers over axes after all.
Also, you might be stuck with no copper and have to look for iron. In any case I find Gallic Swordsmen to typically be much more useful than Jaguars but opinions may vary.

Guerrilla III gallic warriors( and later maces ) are perfect for attacking hills cities , and given the BtS AI preferences in that regard ...... ;)

About map..... why not global highlands? ;) It is a interesting script, in spite of being sometimes harsh.....

Shouldn't this discussion be in the pregame thread instead of here? I think we're wandering off topic ...

Shouldn't this discussion be in the pregame thread instead of here? I think we're wandering off topic ...

Just feels like the audience is getting pumped up before the rock stars enter the stage.

Shouldn't this discussion be in the pregame thread instead of here? I think we're wandering off topic ...
This is the pre pregame thread discussion... :lol:

Just feels like the audience is getting pumped up before the rock stars enter the stage.Heh. ::chanting:: Sisiutil! Sisiutil! Sisiutil!:rockon:

The global highlands IS an interesting idea. It makes the Dun a heck of a lot more interesting. I'd say it's more like making sure Vikings aren't on a Pangea map than it would be the overkill of making sure the Dutch are on a water map. The G1 promotion for all archery and gunpowder units would suddenly be an outstanding addition. I picture prioritizing Feudalism, and building a pile of GIII longbows for a very unique unit, that can move like lightning through the hills, attack with the ability to withdraw from combat, and be damn near impossible to kill once fortified in a city on a hill.

On the other hand, that's probably kind of a nutty thing to try at such a high difficulty level.

Getting units the march promotion at 13 xp is great as well, mix in a unit with woodsmen3 medic3 and the assault never pauzes

Request Immortal/Aggressive on this one, even if it means a loss. Let the AI know your elite troops are coming!

Yep i think that aggressive AI would be a good choice since with Boudicea there _will_ be much war, though i dunno how much it slowers AI's on such high level. Lots and lots of units and war weariness i presume..

The ALC game #25 pre-game discussion is now underway HERE (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=7235933).

Request Immortal/Aggressive on this one, even if it means a loss. Let the AI know your elite troops are coming!

Agressive AI makes the game easier as long as you survive the early going... Ofc it makes it less likely, hence generating a slightly larger number of "unplayable" starts(where you get decleared on in 2000 BC...).

The threads are still getting a variety of opinions about what kind of spoilers are OK to post.
link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=7271694#post7271694), link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7272658&postcount=314)
link (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7308691&postcount=355) and the two posts right after it

I see two ambiguous things about the "no spoilers" request currently in the first post. One, it opens the door to certain posts as long as the information is not "before I'm there myself." But for any shadow game, there are plenty of things that can happen in an alternate timeline that might or not be considered a hint that spoils the main game. In that light, "before I'm there myself" is ambiguous. Two, it doesn't specifically state "not even in SPOILER tags".

I suggest the first post simply request that no information at all about the map or shadow games be posted in the main thread or the bullpen until the main game is over. And for it to call out "not even in SPOILER tags".

I would just like to thank Sisutil, the seemingly mature and well renowed leader of the ALC-games for bringing me great enjoyment and teachings trough-out his games. I hope to see many more games in the future. :goodjob:

I like this series, although I hardly ever get to read more than the starting turns. Though this is already quite a profit, I'd very much appreciate, if you could link the beginning of the gambit/economy section (i.e., GE, pyramids or astronomy gambit.) This way you could directly jump to the point, without having to read through all the very drawn... I mean rich :lol: starting discussion.