Blind leading the blind *Sponsered by: Bad decisions and generally bad planning*

Yes, you've guessed it, i'm not too hot at this game, but we won't let a little thing like that get in the way. I'm looking for 4/5 brave players that will help me on my quest, achieving a victory on Emperor at our first attempt.

Before I go any further i'll get the important issues out of the way.

I must insist on any player that wishes to sign-up that they have NO experience whatsoever above monarch difficulty, no exceptions. Any player that seems too competent on Emperor will be put up for a vote to remove them from the team. If by majority we all agree any player has played at a higher level, thus flouting this requirement, the offender will be removed. Harsh, i know, but there are some chancers out there.

Anyway, back to how this game will hopefully proceed.

Our Civ:

Russia

AI:

Rome
Germany
China
Mongols
Zulu's
Korea
Scandinavia

Difficulty:

Emperor

Set-up

Continents 70% water, standard map, climate normal, temp normal and age 4 billion

Victory Rules:

Domination, Space, Conquest and cultural. Both cultural conversions and SGL are enabled.

As this is my first proper attempt on this level i'm open to how others think we should proceed. Do we just deal with events as and when they present themselves, or set an initial target and stick with it?

Whatever we decide I would prefer to trigger our GA with the use of our Cossacks. That means If we go with the Ruskies we can only attempt to go for one of these early wonders: GL, Lighthouse or Colossus (sp).

Be brave and join me on my quest. Hell, we'll more than likely crash n burn and embarrass ourselves in the process, but it'll be a steep and interesting learning curve all the same.

Signed up:

BlackJAC
Daghdha
Tatran
Shadow-Walker
Open slot

We will be using 1.22

*Important message for team members*

As this game is by all intents and purposes a training exercise for noobs, run by noobs, it has the potential to become somewhat heated. I would like to think we're all adult enough to be aware that it's only a game at the end of the day.

I would like to stress to ALL team members that we must all respect one anothers decisions and realise mistakes do/will happen, even more so considering some members haven't played at this level. There's nothing worse than people bickering and it achieves nothing by knocking the confidence of others.

Any team member for any reason found to be singling out any other member on a negative level will be removed immediately from the team. All members of this team are equal, thus allowing any member to remove another member that they deem to be abusive.

Constructive criticism is welcomed, abusive criticism isn't.


Any important decision i.e. wonder building, warmongering, MPP, ROP etc... will be a team decision as to lessen the burden on any one player.


Thanks to LKendter and Bede for encouraging my laziness by allowing me to print the following rules:

The following tactics are PROHIBITED:

RoP Abuse Tactics - Denying resources, blocking key tiles, RoP rape, or other ways to screw-up a civ via the RoP. A scout in AI territory has an explicit RoP and is subject to this rule.

Peace Treaty abuse - If you get concessions from the AI you must wait for the 20 turns to end before declaring another war.

Resource abuse - You can't disconnect / reconnect a resource every turn for the sake of building cheap units to upgrade with excess cash.

Ship chaining exploit - you can move a ship, unload troops to another ship in the same square not using any movement, move that ship, etc. This allows you to ship an indefinite distance, and that is why I consider it an exploit.

The negative cash flow exploit - you can run a huge deficit (-250 / turn) of negative cash with a token penalty of one lost worker / cheap building. If cash will go below zero, the research level must be dropped.

Palace Jump - You abandon the capital city to move the palace to a new location. If you want to move the palace, build a new palace.

Mass troop jumping - You can't give away a give a city to transport a large amount of troops to another landmass.

Worker automation of any kind is prohibited.

You may not declare war on a civ if you are currently shipping cash and / or goods to the civ.

Other info

24 hours to post a got it, 48-72 hours to play and post new save and log.

lurker's comment: Interesting. I will be watching. Can lurkers make suggestions?

lurker's comment: Watching too. I could make equally un-helpful hint. You want to know how not to conduct Diplomacy? Ask me...

lurker's comment: or me if you want to know how "not" to handle the ToE when you get the two new techs.

I was thinking about this earlier with regard to lurkers giving advice. I'd be happy for people to point out any glaring errors (and there will be many), but would prefer if we made our own decisions and lived by them.

I would like to stress to anyone that wishes to join that we must all respect one anothers decisions and realise mistakes do/will happen. There's nothing worse than people bickering and it achieves nothing by knocking the confidence of others. Any important decision i.e. wonder building, warmongering, MPP, ROP etc... will be a team decision as to lessen the burden on any one player.

anyone interested should take time to read this article: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_montoemp.shtml

lurker's comment: That's a great plan. Maybe you should limit the advice from lurkers to what's already happened rather than what should be done. Most important rule is have fun and build camraderie.

Aye, i'm sure it can only be a good thing if the more experienced players were to point out what they themselves would've done.

lurker's comment: idiot contingent checking in, not signing up (somehow, I'm over qualified, imagine that). Whomp and eldar will warn you about me. Thought I'd throw up or out some general advice before you ban it. Don't get too locked into plans that go more that 20 turns. Stay away from those early wonders unless you've got a dominating lead. Finally, no wars on the asian landmass.

I'd sign up except for 2 problems.

1) I am ready to start playing emporer RaR (which is harder than c3c) even though I've played maybe 40 or 50 turns on emporer RaR. So I think I would break the spirit of this game.

2) I don't have the time, which prevents me from signing up or starting my own SGs.


Otherwise, this sounds like a great idea! Maybe LK, Romeo, TMcC and Doc will make a stab at Doc level RaR. Just for the fun of it?

I will sign up if accepted. Have played some emp. games (4-5) with mixed results. Haven't played enough to really now my level of playing. Still makes stupid mistakes and are quite slow in expansion. Have an SG going (my first) on monarch but would love too play with others trying to improve while beeing supervised. I have a lot to learn.

Daghdha, welcome aboard.

To be fair, I don't mind if players have only started to attempt Emperor, like myself, I've had 1 or 2 test runs w/disappointing results. In other words, there won't be many Monarch players out there that haven't at least attempted 1 game on Emperor.

My main concern was I don't want this to be an easy challenge, also don't want any one person to be head and shoulders above the rest of the guys.

Learning to trade, MM, manage our finances and to hold our own militarily as to keep our state running smoothly is what this game should be about. I fail badly on all accounts as it's not an issue below Emperor

BlackJAC said:

Do we just deal with events as and when they present themselves, or set an initial target and stick with it?

Click to expand...

IMO it would be best to not set a fixed VC. We are in this to develop our basic skills (and have a ) and they apply to all VC's. If we learn basics well enough different VC's will probably be possible if not reachable.
Russians are fine with me. I have never played them but would be glad to.

edit: About advisors I found THIS . The way comments are made after turns is good methinks. Pre-action advice will likely lead to us just parroting without thinking. This way we could at least have a go at "thinking"

Yes, i think i agreed with whomp on how advice should be given. The way I look at it, we'll learn more from your own mistakes than what we would if we were to be helped along. Post-turn advice will necessary given the amout of MM that's gonna be involved in this game. Any bad habits i may have will be dawarfed when placed next to my MM skills. There will come a time in this game when to stand any chance of winning, I'll require some help on the MM front at some point. Whether that comes from within the team, or comes from lurkers remains to be seen.

lurker's comment: What you could also do is have good players play the same 10 turns each time and see the differences (they would use your save each time). Maybe leave them as an open succession where anyone one of them can pick up within 24 hours with a "I got it".

Open SG is fine with me if anyone cares to play the "good player" part

lurkers comment:
it seems we have a full company of idiot wannabes here.
will keep lurking
maybe we could play a delayed blast effect style game (40 or so turns behind?)
i think i will do that.
how about it? eldar, admiral and whomp?
not as a fulll sg, as we all are full, but as a side project

lurker's comment: I like using these delurk bracketty things.
Ummm...ok back on topic..SW if an idiot understands you correctly the idiots pick up on turn 40 then an idiot plays 10 and these guys play 10? Ultimately it's up to Blackjac.

lurker's comment: I'm perfectly qualified to give advice. And do spreadsheets. Just don't ask me for advice after about 3000BC, I tend to run out of steam....

All this chat is fine, but will be irrelevant if no one else decides to sign-up

Surely there's at least 2 others out there willing to give this a bash, no?

Out of interest, what's the usual waiting time before I can safely assume that a thread will die due to lack of participants?