Phaedo's 1st basic skills training game: patience required

Phaedo

Emperor
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
1,183
Location
Tokyo, Japan
EDIT: The game is closed unless someone drops out

This post has been changed to roster and updates.

Current Roster:

mr_2_u (just played)
D'art (skipping?)
Bucephalus (skipping)
Phaedo(up)
Sal(on deck)
Aabra (warming up)
 
Phaedo,
I'd be very interested in a training day game, but I've never done a succession game, so I don't know whether your proposed conditions are workable. I have some questions about the one you propose, though. I list myself as a regent level player because I haven't played anything above that. But I'm thumping the AI pretty hard in my current game as China on continents, regent-level. So I'd like to move up.

What difficulty level do you propose? What about skill level of players? (You won't hurt my feelings if you're looking for emperor or above players.)

What about variations or victory conditions?
 
Sorry, I realized after I got up that I didn't mention anything about level or other details:blush:

I guess i was thinking at least emperor. If you are thumping the AI at regent, I think you would probably win at monarch too so an emperor game shouldn'd intimidate you. You are more than welcome.

Details:
Level: Emperor
Version: version 1.22
Maximum Players: five

Map: Standard, 60% H2O with any configuration other than pangea.
I am open to any victory condition other than Wonder and think we can decide that when some people join up.
As for the civ, I’m not partial. Random is fine of if there is some civ that most people want to play that is fine too.
Barbs: Restless

Once we decide on the victory condition(s) we are aiming for, we stick to it.
 
Well, maybe I'm brave and maybe I'm foolhardy, but I'll give it a shot. (I guess I'd rather take a whoopin' at emperor than wax the AI at warlord.) I should probably also mention that my regent-level playing has basically meant . . . well, a whole lot of warmongering.

A couple of quick questions & comments:

Once a decision has been reached through consensus, majority or inaction, All players take the game until the tasks discussed have been completed and we post saves.

Once the first tasks are complete, we discuss the pros and cons of the various positions and decide which save we will play from. After that, we play 5 turns and each player is on his or her own.

IIUC, every five turns, we all post saves and compare them? Then choose a "save point" from which everyone begins the next set?

I'd also prefer C3C 1.22. I'm not a huge fan of having our civ chosen randomly, but if we can get other players, I'll make do with whatever everyone decides. As for landmasses, I'd prefer continents, but that can be decided later. The rest of the settings sound fine to me.

I've got CivAssistII. Any other mods or graphics I'll need?
 
Well, I was thinking that for the first turn (or so) we could all see how we do. There are possible differences with the way we could micro manage cities or differences in movement. If we are all basically making the same moves, we ought to see what the differences between choices and be able to compare relative benefits of the differences. It is the only way I can think of highlighting those small variations.

If we do it for all turns it would probably take too long so I was thinking to just do it for the first couple of sets.

So we have two. A couple more and we have a game. I'd rather not randomly pick a civ. I don't care who we play but I think we should pick one that either makes our chosen victory condition more or less difficult depending on the team's confidence. I'm down with continents unless anyone who joins has really strong feelings against it. I would just rather not play pangea if possible.
 
I could join if you don't get enough people otherwise. I have never played in an succession game before but I've been following this part of the forum for over a year now.

I might be a little overqualified though as I can beat monarch with almost any start but I very rarely play anything higher than that as it feels like I have to put too much thought into it to enjoy it fully. So if you get enough people without me I can just lurk but if not, I'd be happy to join.

I have no civ preference as I usually just go for random nowadays, whatever you choose is fine with me. Preferably one with a medieval unique unit though as a despotic golden age is never that much fun :) I agree that pangaea would not be ideal as it takes away one aspect of the game - boats. Then again, archipelago has a little too much emphasis on that in my opinion so continents would be great.
 
Well, this is great. We have four which should be enough given that it will be slow in the beginning. It would be nice to have at least one more but I'm willing to start if you guys are comfortable with that. I don't think we should be too concerned with playing quickly so there may be value to fewer players. It does seem that players drop out for various reasons through the game but we could always take on more if we want. What do you all think?

Big thanks to D'artagnan, I have been following your game closely and have learned lots:D .

I agreee that we shouldn't start with an AA UU and it seems we have consensus on the type of world. So we should decide on the civ. Any suggestions? I have a bit of a partiality to the Koreans for purely non-game reasons . They seem to fit the bill and add the extra challenge of not allowing dinghies from the first turn even if we are by the coast; thus limiting our early trade opportunities and potentially putting us under some early pressure. I really don't care who we play although I agree a post AA GA is better.

What about victory condition? Anyone have a preference? I think we should leave most, if not all, options on but choose one goal and stick with it.

As I said this is my first SA game so I do have a technical question: if anyone can help. I usually use Snoopy's terrain. If I use that to roll the starts will affect anyone's ability to load the save properly?
 
I've only played a couple of games with the Koreans but my take on their UU (the Hwacha or whatever it was :p) is that it's a bit lame. Lethal bombardment sounds nice in theory but in practice you would need at least four (if all hit) to kill just one veteran enemy troop. And since usually at least one third of the shots miss you would need a whole lot of them to kill troops fortified in cities. Feels like a lot of work for very little profit.

As for a victory condition.. I'd rather not go for the 100k culture victory but everything else is fine with me. Domination or conquest would be my preferred choice. We should leave them all on though.

As I said this is my first SA game so I do have a technical question: if anyone can help. I usually use Snoopy's terrain. If I use that to roll the starts will affect anyone's ability to load the save properly?

It won't have any effect whatsoever. If you look at some other SGs it seems that everybody uses different terrain modifications these days :)
 
Welcome aboard, one and all!

I've also been lurking in all of the active TDGs here, including D'Artagnan's other training game.

As for Snoopy's graphics modpack, I haven't used it, but I've been thinking about downloading it, anyway. So if I need to download it to play this SG, that's fine with me.

Last night I decided that I'd better at least give emporer a try, in the interest of not totally humiliating myself. I actually wound up starting several games. I began as the Chinese, because I've played them more than anyone else. The first few games were disasters. (My cities rioted almost as fast as I could found them. I began to wonder if my settlers had found a luxury not listed in the civilopedia -- tequila).

Then I decided to jump headfirst into the unknown:
Emperor -- never played it before last night
Restless barbs -- never had them as restless
Rome -- never played them before
Otherwise, continents, 70% water, everyone else random.

I am pleased to report that by 1225 BC, I'd founded 7 cities, made contact with three civs, traded with them (though not as well as I'd have liked), located horses and iron, pulled off the republic slingshot, and was known as the "Magnificent Romans." And all with (iirc) only one or two instances of civil disorder! All in all, I was very pleased.

Civ choice I think will be, in part, governed by our victory conditions. There are some traits that will be useful almost no matter what, though.

Industrious -- Come on, who doesn't like faster workers?

Commercial -- Kind of like industrious. How could you not like more money and lower corruption?

Agricultural -- More food = faster growth. 'Nuff said?

Militaristic -- So that we can get in touch with our inner warmongers.

As to UU, I vote for an offensive unit that can trigger our golden age in the MA. Too early and we don't get much out of it. Too late and the game will have already been won.

Edited: to add Militaristic. Also, I'd like to do some warmongering, so conquest is good as a victory condition. Space shuttle, though, gives us the opportunity to work through all of the ages of the game.
 
Ok, my vote is for domination if we are going to be warmongers but Rome will give us an AA Ga. What about Russia, Germany or the Ottomans? Vikings or the Mongols could be choices too. In the Spirit of democracy (which I doubt our subjects wil l ever see:devil: ) let's vote.
Phaedo: Ottomans
Aabraxan: ?
Salarakas: ?
D'Artagnan59: Rome (?)

Once we decide on the civ I'll roll the starts
 
Russia: exp and sci, cossacks. Scientific is great, expansionist less so. Cossacks are pretty nice as the extra possible attack (or even two!) can be used for leaderfishing. Pretty good time for a golden age too.

Germany: sci and mil, panzers. Sci is great, mil is also very nice if we go for domination. Panzers, however, come in much too late.

Ottomans: sci and ind, sipahi. Used to be my favourite civ in the game as both traits are excellent and the sipari is one of the best unique units in the game. Golden age in the medieval era too.

Vikings: mil and sea, berserks. You said we didn't want to get early contacts from boats so getting three-move curraghs right from the start is probably not a good idea. An interesting civ but it seems it's not the best choice for this game.

Mongols: exp and mil, keshiks. Again, expansionist is not very strong and militaristic, although nice, is not the best trait in the game. Keshiks can be great on a map with lots of mountains and hills but in a normal game not that strong. The golden age would be perfectly timed though.


Out of these I'd go for Ottomans (if we want the best civ) or Russia (if we want a more interesting civ).
 
Aabraxan said:
My cities rioted almost as fast as I could found them.

Aabraxan said:
And all with (iirc) only one or two instances of civil disorder!

City disorders can be easily avoided if you use some helper program like Mapstat or CivAssist II. They will automatically tell you if some city is unhappy so you don't have to manually check them all each turn. Personally I recommend Mapstat as it's very lightweight and does what it's supposed to do. Both are great though so give them a try :)


I also recommend getting THIS for easily spotting happy and unhappy faces in the domestic advisor (F1) screen. To install it:
1. Make a backup of popHeads.pcx which is in your "Civilization III\Conquests\Art\SmallHeads" directory. Rename it to popHeads.pcx.orig or something.
2. Copy popHeads.pcx from the c3c directory of the package to "Civilization III\Conquests\Art\SmallHeads".

If you want to restore the original one just delete the new popHeads.pcx and rename popHeads.pcx.orig back to popHeads.pcx


Edit: and if you didn't know it's the number of unhappy citizens compared to happy citizens that determines if a city riots or not. More unhappy than happy and the city will riot. E.g. 3 happy, 3 content and 4 unhappy and it will riot. 3 happy, 4 content and 3 unhappy and it will stay content.
 
I'm down with either Russia or Ottomans. What do Dart and Abra think?
 
Back
Top Bottom