Would you participate in a "Succession "Game?

Since many of us are chomping at the bit for a new tourney game, I thought maybe a succession game would be great for the second half of each month. What do you think? It'd be cool.

Advantages:

(1) Weaker players can gain experience from playing with stronger players.

(2) Busy persons can play.

(3) Playing Civ3!

Questions:

(1) Would we email to the next person or load it in a thread?

(2) How many persons per game? We can play more than one, eh?

(3) Should we designate a goal (victory condition) for each game? You know, like say in one we've got to win by s/r so those playing who have difficulty (w/ this victory condition) can pick up pointers.

(4) A time limit per turn? 2 days?

Maybe us "poor" little ole' Mac users can get another special thread for "Succession Games!"

Here is a sample game for those who want to see if its something they like.

Civ: Babylonians
Difficulty: Regent
Victory Conditions (all are activated): Cultural, UN, or Space Race.
Barbarians: Sedentary
Map: Standard (large continents)
Age: 4 billion
Climate: Temperate

The game is saved at 1300 BC. I've met Catherine, Shaka, & Bismarck. Now, while I'm in despotism I buy techs. In other words, I spend gold & gpt. At then moment, I've got some deals on the table. I'm beelining for monarchy, researching polytheism at the moment. Catherine recently extorted 10 gold from me. Four cities built. In each, temples were the first order of business. Babylon is building the Oracle (about 25 turns away from completion).

If you don't like my preferences, change them. If you want to go as far as posting your saved game, I'd love to check it out. Just let us know what to expect when we open it. Don't want to see a horde of cossacks heading our way w/ out some warning!

Starting place is KILLER!

I think at least I can try. But there are a couple of points to discuss.

Originally posted by dojoboy

Advantages:
(1) Weaker players can gain experience from playing with stronger players.
(2) Busy persons can play.
(3) Playing Civ3!

Click to expand...

But I doubt about those points.
(1) If people really want this, I think we need relatively detailed records. When one see two saved game at beginning and end of some other's turn, he might not get any ideas what the other did. Then he could not get anything from experienced player.
(2) If we need detailed report, busy person may not have enough time to do.
(3) No doubt.

Originally posted by dojoboy

Questions:
(1) Would we email to the next person or load it in a thread?
(2) How many persons per game? We can play more than one, eh?
(3) Should we designate a goal (victory condition) for each game? You know, like say in one we've got to win by s/r so those playing who have difficulty (w/ this victory condition) can pick up pointers.
(4) A time limit per turn? 2 days?

Maybe us "poor" little ole' Mac users can get another special thread for "Succession Games!"

Click to expand...

Here is my opinion,
(1) I think upload is better, because everybody (waiting his turn, beginners or happen to look at the thread) can see what is going on.
(2) Three or four could be a limit. Otherwise, we may be bored for waiting.
(3) Depend on situation.
(4) It is a very difficult point. First 50 turns we have less to do, but each move is very important to headstart and establish our strategy for whole game. After 1000AD or 1500AD, we have a lot of units to order, so we need more time to finish 50 turns.

What do you think?

voted no

i don't like to continue a game that's older than 2 days, so this doesn't appeal to me.
i agree with pigumon's points, there's not a lot to add.

except perhaps point 3:

right now i'm a little fed up with civ3.
or more precise. with the ai.
i just need human opponents.
i was allready like this 2 months ago when the gotm started, but the gotm refrehed my interest again...

@ Pigumon

*Detailed note-taking would be needed, I think at least in the manner of some of our GOTM discussions.
*Probably 4 persons could enjoy a succession game without a great deal of time between turns. I think you'd have to put yourself in the right mindset, and you can have your own personal game going at the same time.
*Players would have to come up with a play schedule for the game. Player A could take it up to 1500 BC. When I set up the demo, playing to 1300 BC seemed like a good length for a turn. Ideas?

For me, a succession game at emperor or deity would be helpful. Seeing how certain challenges/stages are met would be very educational.

@ Shogoth

I understand about frustration over the AI. In a current game, I'm actually playing that demo through, Persia surprise attacked me, sending 40+ units into my lands. Even without much artillery, I know the AI is going to dance those units around and then leave.

Hopefully, we'll get PTW, and you can become frustrated w/ my inane decisions.

I would be interested....

Look at the RBD and RBE succession games for the kind of notes, etc, needed for all players to know what's going on...

yeah, basically all of my (sucessfull) games went like this:

1. conquer/build about 20/25 cities with a fp until early middle ages
2. develop your civ (builder mode, no wars, no threads).
3. overwhelm the other civs in modern times even if you are some techs behind.

actually, i allmost never experience a huge attack as you describe. or let's put it this way: either i'm attacked early on (premiddleages/early middeleages) by the ai and i'm (most often) lost or i survive and beat the **** out of the ai winning quite easily in industrial times (on deity).
I only had one game when i started to play deity where i tried a builder approach and only managed to get about 12 cities. anyway, i won this game by un....

ptw would be much more funny, even when playing against weaker opponents, since there will be "random" choices of the player, which might lead the "weaker" player to victory.

let's be honest: who of you is defending all coastal cities against marines invasion?
Or which human player would leave a city which will get attacked by landet troops in the next turn virtually undefendet? If i would ever see the ai landing some troops near one of my cities i would put allmost all of my units into this city (railroads...), in order to prevent the ai of getting a bridge into my teritorry.
inane decisions can lead you to victory, as long you're not playing against a stupid ai.

i would really love to play against human players!
I want ptw

Dojoboy, are you going to start a succession game?

Originally posted by Txurce
Dojoboy, are you going to start a succession game?

Click to expand...

Yea, I am. Right now I want to complete the emperor game, its become pretty messy, nukes and stuff. I destroyed Romes s/s, razed Rome, etc... The French aren't real focused on the s/s right now (no components under construction). Rome and I each have one built.

I've been absent on the boards because my nephew was in a terrible car accident Friday night. Thanks be to God he survived a collision on his side of the car, right on his door. Fortunately, he's young and strong. A snapped femur appears to be his most serious injury. It was a frighting weekend. Any prayers of healing is much appreciated. He's a great kid (HS senior).

I was going to use the recent GOTM for a succession game, but I'll start a new one on emperor since so much is already known about the Azteca game. I'll try to get 3 more players (4 total). I'll start it tomorrow (10/15/02).

Dojoboy, my best wishes to your nephew.

Now, why'd you nuke Rome so soon?

Check Emperor Assistance thread, Txurce.