So, I present to you a game writeup that's really seven game writeups. Hotseat game, fairly standard settings (fractal, normal speed, noble level, random civs), 7 players, the catch is that they were all controlled by me. A little self indulgent I know, but bear with me.
Why did I do it? Well, I get a bit of a multiplayer experience without having to commit myself to a game, find other people to play, organise the time to play it, nor deal with other players doing things like dropping midway. I also get to study the game from every angle, and see what makes the difference between players of equal skill.
Why am I telling you about it? Because it was interesting and different.
So firstly, an overall impression. Would I recommend it? Would I do it again? Yes and yes. I found it quite enjoyable, and thought it worked better than I was originally expecting. It helped that the game turned out to be quite tight and exciting, inlcuding quite different strategies for different players.
Pros:
* A multiplayer experience but played at my own pace, in my own spare time, with reliable players of equal skill.
* See the game from all angles, and know what went wrong when you lose.
* Psychologically, I tended to get excited about the winning side in all conflicts rather than depressed about the losing side, so as pathetic as this probably sounds I felt like I was winning the whole time. That might just be me and my generally positive attitude though.
* Do new things and expand your strategies. In this game, I founded every religeon, and built every wonder myself (ok so not quite - I never bothered with Chicken Pizza). I self-researched down every branch of the tech tree. There are certain wonders I just never build in single player, and my tech tree direction is normally fairly narrowly focused on small variations on my normal preferred tech path. In this there was plenty of scope to try different things because I didn't need to account for which techs the AI likes to research and always gets to first.
Challenges:
* Diplo is difficult to do correctly. I just kept it relatively simple. The players just behaved rationally for the most part (not very realistic I know!). There were key events that lead to most of the conflicts. I had a rough idea in mind for what each of them was thinking, their plans for winning the game etc.
* Along the same lines, espionage is difficult as well - not the in-game type but the more general concept of figuring out what other players were up to. I always knew what I was up to, but had to pretend I didn't depending on who's turn it was.
* It takes a long time. You're playing 7 games, so it should take 7 times as long. It's still faster than a large pitboss game though as you don't have to wait for anyone.
* The turns are interleaved, and you need to keep track what you're supposed to be doing in each of the civs.
Cons:
* I was only testing my own strategies on myself. As people who study AI may know, it's rare for self play to be sufficient to lead to optimal strategies.
What would I do differently next time?
* Load the Buffy mod before starting, so I can use it, because I didn't and I missed it.
* Build more military defense. I already knew that was a weakness of mine. It came out particularly in this game a couple of times when fairly half-baked military buildups were enough to crush unexpecting, pitifully defended civs.
* Play better in general and take more care. There's some pretty horrible mistakes described below, and I make no excuses for them.
* Play on Emporer, or something higher than Noble anyway. Being used to immortal, the barbarians were just pathetic.
Now to the writeup of the game itself. I'll give a broad overview, then a writeup for each Civ (in separate posts), going from last place to first.
The geography:
Two starting continents, one with two civs the other with five. Asoka and Churchill on one continent, with Churchill having the superior starting location of being in the middle of the continent, balanced by Asoka's incredible capital. The other continent was roughly a tall pacman shape with Bismark, Tokugawa, Justinian and Zara Yaqob around the outside (in clockwise order, with the gap between Zara and Bismark) and Mansa Musa stuck in the jungle in the middle of it all. There were two smallish uninhabited islands, one connected to the main continent near Bismark, and the other in the middle of the otherwise vast empty ocean.
Overall result:
Well, there was a lot that happened. Three civs were eliminated, while three of the remaining civs were in very serious contention for the win. The victory could easily have been religeous or domination, but ended up cultural of all things. The winner was Asoka of India, the civ with seemingly the worst starting location (although an excellent capital). There is something of a split in the timeline however and down the other path it looked like being a domination win for Tokugawa. Controversy indeed.
Demographics Screens at the end:
Top 5 Cities:
Overall placements were:
1. Asoka. Culture victory in the 'official' reality line.
2. Tokugawa. Highest in score, most likely to win otherwise, and almost certainly the winner of the 'alternative' reality line.
3. Justinian. Second highest score, the other remaining free civ at the end and always in with a shot.
4. Churchill. Alive to the end, but (voluntarily) vassaled to Asoka.
5. Mansa Musa. Eliminated 1120 AD
6. Zara Yaqob. Eliminated 300 AD
7. Bismark. Eliminated 300 AD
I've also attached the final save, in case anyone wants to look at anything.
Why did I do it? Well, I get a bit of a multiplayer experience without having to commit myself to a game, find other people to play, organise the time to play it, nor deal with other players doing things like dropping midway. I also get to study the game from every angle, and see what makes the difference between players of equal skill.
Why am I telling you about it? Because it was interesting and different.
So firstly, an overall impression. Would I recommend it? Would I do it again? Yes and yes. I found it quite enjoyable, and thought it worked better than I was originally expecting. It helped that the game turned out to be quite tight and exciting, inlcuding quite different strategies for different players.
Pros:
* A multiplayer experience but played at my own pace, in my own spare time, with reliable players of equal skill.
* See the game from all angles, and know what went wrong when you lose.
* Psychologically, I tended to get excited about the winning side in all conflicts rather than depressed about the losing side, so as pathetic as this probably sounds I felt like I was winning the whole time. That might just be me and my generally positive attitude though.
* Do new things and expand your strategies. In this game, I founded every religeon, and built every wonder myself (ok so not quite - I never bothered with Chicken Pizza). I self-researched down every branch of the tech tree. There are certain wonders I just never build in single player, and my tech tree direction is normally fairly narrowly focused on small variations on my normal preferred tech path. In this there was plenty of scope to try different things because I didn't need to account for which techs the AI likes to research and always gets to first.
Challenges:
* Diplo is difficult to do correctly. I just kept it relatively simple. The players just behaved rationally for the most part (not very realistic I know!). There were key events that lead to most of the conflicts. I had a rough idea in mind for what each of them was thinking, their plans for winning the game etc.
* Along the same lines, espionage is difficult as well - not the in-game type but the more general concept of figuring out what other players were up to. I always knew what I was up to, but had to pretend I didn't depending on who's turn it was.
* It takes a long time. You're playing 7 games, so it should take 7 times as long. It's still faster than a large pitboss game though as you don't have to wait for anyone.
* The turns are interleaved, and you need to keep track what you're supposed to be doing in each of the civs.
Cons:
* I was only testing my own strategies on myself. As people who study AI may know, it's rare for self play to be sufficient to lead to optimal strategies.
What would I do differently next time?
* Load the Buffy mod before starting, so I can use it, because I didn't and I missed it.
* Build more military defense. I already knew that was a weakness of mine. It came out particularly in this game a couple of times when fairly half-baked military buildups were enough to crush unexpecting, pitifully defended civs.
* Play better in general and take more care. There's some pretty horrible mistakes described below, and I make no excuses for them.
* Play on Emporer, or something higher than Noble anyway. Being used to immortal, the barbarians were just pathetic.
Now to the writeup of the game itself. I'll give a broad overview, then a writeup for each Civ (in separate posts), going from last place to first.
The geography:
Spoiler :
Two starting continents, one with two civs the other with five. Asoka and Churchill on one continent, with Churchill having the superior starting location of being in the middle of the continent, balanced by Asoka's incredible capital. The other continent was roughly a tall pacman shape with Bismark, Tokugawa, Justinian and Zara Yaqob around the outside (in clockwise order, with the gap between Zara and Bismark) and Mansa Musa stuck in the jungle in the middle of it all. There were two smallish uninhabited islands, one connected to the main continent near Bismark, and the other in the middle of the otherwise vast empty ocean.
Overall result:
Well, there was a lot that happened. Three civs were eliminated, while three of the remaining civs were in very serious contention for the win. The victory could easily have been religeous or domination, but ended up cultural of all things. The winner was Asoka of India, the civ with seemingly the worst starting location (although an excellent capital). There is something of a split in the timeline however and down the other path it looked like being a domination win for Tokugawa. Controversy indeed.
Demographics Screens at the end:
Spoiler :
Top 5 Cities:
Spoiler :
Overall placements were:
1. Asoka. Culture victory in the 'official' reality line.
2. Tokugawa. Highest in score, most likely to win otherwise, and almost certainly the winner of the 'alternative' reality line.
3. Justinian. Second highest score, the other remaining free civ at the end and always in with a shot.
4. Churchill. Alive to the end, but (voluntarily) vassaled to Asoka.
5. Mansa Musa. Eliminated 1120 AD
6. Zara Yaqob. Eliminated 300 AD
7. Bismark. Eliminated 300 AD
I've also attached the final save, in case anyone wants to look at anything.