Guardian Angel Challenge Mod

DioAurion

Warlord
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
213
Location
So-Cal
This is something still only imagined as I haven't spent more than a week studying python but...

This summer I plan to create a challenge option for fall from heaven inspired by the high to low challenge option in base FFH.

The Challenge would go as follows:
1. Choose your civilization. Play 150 turns (eventually I'll have to figure out how to adjust this number for various game speeds, for now just assume epic speed).
2. After 150 turns, player will be randomly assigned to lead a new civilization. This will last for 100 turns.
3. After 100 (maybe 150? I'll need to test it to see how long it takes to give you a stake in each civ's success without stretching the game out too long) turns, this process will repeat until the player has gone through 4 to 5 different civilizations.
4. At the end of the final 100 turn cycle (turn 550 or 650), the player will resume control of their original civilization and can then seek any victory condition.

The challenge:
If at any time the player's original civilization or their current host civilization is destroyed, the player losses the game.

Why this challenge?
I thought I would make a challenge that was more novice player friendly when compared to some of the other challenges while still being a unique gaming experience. It would also allow players to experience what various civilizations have to offer in a single gaming session, making it an excellent learning experience. Last it makes you think in a new strategic way, particularly with options like aggressive AI, in which you may be forced to keep your original civilization alive despite your original civilization trying to kill you.
 
Looks like you should beef up your starting civ, then build only units for the civs you take control of, and disband all of the units when you're about to lose control.
If you know in advance you're going to lose control, it's not a good idea to let you switch sides. The high to low challenge was made to give you control of various civs that were more or less allied in one of the last scenarios. In it, you definitely don't want any of the civs to die, whereas with your proposed play, it's worth killing the civs you just controlled.
 
Ah good arguments, I considered the same when planning this. This is why I was considering the ideas of how long you should be in control of each civ.

First point I should note is that I came up with this idea as a way to practice the python I'm learning in an applicable way to make a gaming experience I was interested in trying.

Second point is, would total stagnation really be the ideal playstyle in this situation? Is destroying each random civilization through this means really that beneficial to you at all times? I envisioned playing this on a large map with multiple civilizations on aggressive AI. In this situation, ruining each civilization you are placed in control of by doing nothing for 150 turns may in fact defeat that civilization while empowering other civilizations in the immediate vicinity. Thus when you finally return to your original civilization you may face one massive superpower rather than multiple scattered and weaker civilizations.

The aggressive AI would also force you into multiple situations of war with varying pre-determined diplomatic situations that would force you to adapt on the fly. In some situations you may be able to help destroy the enemies of your original civilization while in others it may just be a struggle to prolong the demise of a civ long enough to reach the next civ switch.

Last of all, as more work is done on modding and improving the AI, this scenario would only become more fun when cheap tactics can no longer overcome 4 to 1 power odds.
 
Top Bottom