King of the World #7: ????

[Neal]

As the noble Inca hurtle towards Alpha Centauri, leaving behind a world ravaged by war, we must turn our attentions to new challenges. It's time to decide on King of the World #7!

Initial caveats: I will be jumping to Emperor difficulty. This will be a warrior's game (I can only build so much before I just want to raze something). Sorry, BakingTheArt, but we will remain on the 18 map (though see below), at least one more time. I want to be comfortable at the new difficulty level, first.

Now, for the somewhat crazy ideas. I'm considering making a couple of minor Worldbuilder moves to throw a monkey wrench into things. First, I'm thinking of moving Spain's settler 1E. At the very least, this will give Isabella room for a second city in Iberia. This will also give her coastal access, which could, in theory, allow her to be more than just a European speedbump. Now, admittedly, she had said hello with a Caravel in the Inca game after taking Paris, but that's an exceptional circumstance.

Secondly, I'm thinking about bringing down a pair of mountains: the one in Central America blocking Montezuma, and opening a corridor for the Inca toward the south, near the copper. This is more an academic interest, just to see how things change. I think all three American Civs benefit from this move. The Inca can obviously build more than three cities, and get access to the sweet, sweet South American mainland. The Aztecs can also go there, establishing a proper border with the Inca. And the Americans might get to survive or even thrive with the Aztecs able to expand peacefully.

So, please, I'd love to hear your ideas on the changes and the new leader. Initial discussion seemed to favor the Arabs, but I'll leave it up to a proper poll.

 

[oyzar]

Bring forth the mongol hordes!

 

[Feyaria]

The two worldbuilder-things are a good idea. It will be interesting, if Spain and Inka can play a more important role in the world with this change.

And about America surviving, look at this screenshot.

 

[Rotty]

Move up to Emperor, but play Persia with a maximally efficient rush (Persia over Rome because you've been squeamish about opening warrior rushes in Europe ).

 

[PaulusIII]

Bring on the Khan!

 

[Kev]

Perhaps you don't want to do anything kooky as you move the level up, but I would love to see some different civs either included or as replacements for some. Perhaps even playing a different one in their basic geographic spot? It would certainly be interesting how a Ragnar would fare on the map.

With replacements, it would be interesting to see how Sitting Bull might fare instead of Roosevelt - or perhaps working the Mayans into the American mix somewhere. Maybe put the Portuguese in the mix instead of Spain - wonder if they would use their unique unit fully. And maybe find a spot for everyone's good friend Shaka. Not sure if it would make a difference, but perhaps the "other" leaders for civs like Russia, Egypt, China, Mongolia, Germany, France, Greece, Persia, India, etc might lead to some new and different things.

 

[Civman123]

I say you should make those changes. They make the game at least give the illusion of fairness for poor Izzy, Roosevelt, and HC.

 

[AndrewN]

I voted Lizy, but then I am biased, everybody should always play England The English start gives you 2 good cities; London where the settler starts and Birmingham just south of the Iron in the Midlands and a slightly dodgy city at the very north of Scotland (John o' Groats maybe?). The rest you need to take

 

[r_rolo1]

I'm for Saladin But a game with the Khan should be interesting too ( falling over other civs with keshiks should be a nice show to see )

 

[Ultimocrat]

I vote for Alexander, but would also enjoy seeing Saladin -- I think the early Middle East has not been explored very much in these games so far, and either leader would probably expand in that direction.

As for the WorldBuilder changes, I think the move for Spain is excellent, and the removal of mountains in the Americas is also good, though I worry slightly that Barbs will just wipe the Incas off the map (maybe not at emperor, though).

 

[Pacifist46]

Yes! Khan is in the lead - and Saladin is second - either of those would be good.

 

[Quotey]

Why are you reluctant about changing to 34Civs? You got a better PC

 

[Gagonite]

Because he doesn't want to mix up the game too much

I agree with your idea of removing those 2 mountains and moving Isabella's starting location 1E.

I was kinda hoping for England this round.. ah well. The Khan'll or Saladin are good choices too.

 

[Joshua368]

Why are you reluctant about changing to 34Civs? You got a better PC

He wants to move up to Emperor difficulty first. Seems fair.

I voted for Saladin, you need some middle east action. Persia, Greece, Egypt, Arabia, any of those.

 

[tycoonist]

can i suggest giving each civ an archer at the start - to prevent rushing europe with warriors etc.

 

[Capellan]

I voted for Genghis, but Saladin would also be fun.

I like the Worldbuilder ideas.

I'd also like to see some changes to the civs - having Rome, Spain, Greece, France and Germany in the game is just crazy. I say drop two of them: then add in the Vikings and maybe Shaka. The Mayans might be cool, too - that'd seal the Aztecs off to the south once more, but also give the Inca some additional competition over South America.

 

[kkwisper]

I would think if you were to do a match as Roosevelt before you get rid of the mountains that would make a tough match because of Monty at your borders.

 

[naveedx983]

I voted Asoka, but I've always had the itch to play a full Earth18 game through with him and could never do it

 

[GreatNinja]

Khan's position is a little demanding for a jump to emperor so Saladin's my pick, Khan second.

 

[Stewie0416]

I voted Saladin, it would be a interesting game with LOTS AND LOTS of BLOOD!
A lot of chances for war since your stuck in the middle of the world.