Mediterranean Adventure

[vadalaz]

Once again I'm looking for players to join me for a succession game, this time on the Mediterranean Region map from Extended Europe.

The map has a preset list of playable civs: Arabia, Assyria, Babylon, Byzantium, Carthage, Egypt, Greece, Morocco, Ottomans, Persia, Portugal, Rome, Songhai, Spain, Venice.

The map is resource-rich and all civs get strong starting locations with the only exception being Songhai who get a low production start.

I'd like to play as one of the civs with a central and coastal start. So these are the options:

Carthage


Rome


Venice


Greece


Byzantium


Please let me know if you're interested and specify which civ you'd prefer to play here.

Current roster:
beetle
Nizef
raider980
vadalaz

 

[beetle]

I would love to play! The previous game was very entertaining!

Handicapping ourselves by playing Venice or Byzantium could be be interesting. But did you have a preferred VC from the start?

 

[Nizef]

Hi,
As promised, I will join the fun. My vote goes to Rome for two reasons: 1. I usually do poorly with them and 2. They have the best start, looking at the resources. But obviously I will join regardless of what we decide on.

 

[vadalaz]

But did you have a preferred VC from the start?

Not sure about VC, but I think getting some Exploration policies here would be interesting. There should be lots of good coastal spots for cities (or coastal cities to conquer).

As for civs, I think I slightly prefer Carthage, Rome and Venice over Greece and Byzantium.

 

[beetle]

I agree with @Nizef that Rome looks like the best pick!

1. As noted, of the five, that’s the strongest start.
2. Coastal river start is a nice buff to the UA.
3. Nearest neighbor is the most annoying AI civ to have in a game.
4. Good UU for early conquest.

Regardless of the VC, taking out Venice early will be a good start!

 

[Nizef]

Carthage would be my secondary pick.

 

[raider980]

I'll play too. My old video card seems to be doing ok on low graphics settings. I even tested a large map to T280 after the map had been revealed. This map says 92x42, that's even smaller than Standard isn't it? But that can't be right with 15 Civs?

Rome or Carthage sound good. Byzantium would be interesting; a nice canal city with some land that would be free for the taking around the Black Sea.

At first @beetle I thought you were talking about Greece as the most annoying. But I guess you mean Venice. For me its between those two and Austria; I don't like anyone that interferes with CS too much. I think Rome would be more fun maybe - I'm thinking along the lines of beetle, Venice must go before they start gobbling up CS; of course that'll be a massive diplo hit.

 

[Nizef]

Venice should be an integral part of the glorious Roman empire, shouldn´t it? Could we take the city with CBs and Legions?

 

[beetle]

Edit to add reply to @raider980

Venice should be an integral part of the glorious Roman empire, shouldn´t it?

Most certainly!

Could we take the city with CBs and Legions?

Yes, for sure. But I vote that we try and make Ballistas work. It is much less optimal, but is more thematic.

At first @beetle I thought you were talking about Greece as the most annoying. But I guess you mean Venice.

Greece is annoying to be sure, but more in a competitive way. So I don’t resent them as much being on the map.

Venice breaks the game in ways that make the game less fun. Different, but not really in a way that adds interest. Their UA strictly subtracts game elements.

In theory, Austria should be worse, but in actual play the UA feels much less disruptive to me. Maybe because they have to ally for 30 turns first? CS disappearing off the map ends up seeming so much less random.

Venice must go before they start gobbling up CS; of course that'll be a massive diplo hit.

Not if we kill them while we are still in the Classical Era!

 

[vadalaz]

I'll leave sign-ups open for the weekend and start the game on Monday.

This map says 92x42, that's even smaller than Standard isn't it?

For a lot of maps that's true, but Huge Inland Sea is 84x52, and it has a layout similar to what we're playing here. From the minimap it looks like everyone should have space for a few expos.

While there's a bit of downtime I think that we should discuss the rules for the game.

I propose the following:

- No CS worker steals and no one-sided Open Borders or Embassy deals - same as we did in the Earth game
- No gpt from AIs. Getting lump sums is fine, trading luxuries and strategics is fine. This makes DoFs more valuable and prevents leeching endless gold from AIs
- No white peace unless offered by the AI
- "No B's": no GS bulbs, no GMu bombs, no bribes. I believe there used to be a DCL series player that handicapped themselves with that rule

These make the game more difficult, but that's not my goal here. I'm just looking to try something different. I'd be down to lower the difficulty level to Immortal to compensate for the handicaps above.

What do you guys think?

 

[Nizef]

I am up for these extra rules. It is definitely good to try out something different. It would also be kind of nice, not knowing whether we can win or not, so I would still like us to play on Deity. I hope this is acceptable to all of you.

I was already thinking about a more warlike game anyway, since at least @beetle and I have our eyes on Venice. There should be reasonable expands along the coast (to the N in the Genoa bay area and to the S in the Napoli area) and it would be really nice to get a city on Sicily as well. And maybe we could colonize Corsica and/or Sardinia as well. What do you think about going down the Liberty tree here?

 

[vadalaz]

A warlike Liberty game on Deity is right up my alley.

 

[beetle]

I like the extra rules, but please clarify what you mean by “no white peace unless offered by AI.” Is that where the AI offers peace, but only for one or more of your cities — and the player deletes the cities from the trade and accepts peace?

Might a better constraint be: No negotiating on peace deals? (i.e., the player has to accept, or reject, the default AI offer)

I had not heard of the “No B’s” rule, but I like that one too!

 

[raider980]

So the extra rules mean that we can't use the peace deal abuse trick like last game? That's good, I was going to suggest we don't use that. After we did that last game we'd basically won at that point. The rest of the game played like Immortal, or even Emperor.

No GS bulbs and no bribes though, whew, that's really handicapping ourselves. But I'm fine with it, I don't ever get to see a lot of Academies and Shaka is not in the game. Plus we have the Alps to protect us although it sounds like we're going to be the aggressor in this game.

 

[vadalaz]

I like the extra rules, but please clarify what you mean by “no white peace unless offered by AI.” Is that where the AI offers peace, but only for one or more of your cities — and the player deletes the cities from the trade and accepts peace?

Yeah, that's what the rule is supposed to prevent.

Might a better constraint be: No negotiating on peace deals? (i.e., the player has to accept, or reject, the default AI offer)

That works for me, and it has an interesting consequence. If we adhere to the rule of not getting any gpt from AIs, and an AI is offering us gpt for peace, this locks us in the war until the AI is willing to give up a city.

No GS bulbs and no bribes though, whew, that's really handicapping ourselves. But I'm fine with it, I don't ever get to see a lot of Academies and Shaka is not in the game. Plus we have the Alps to protect us although it sounds like we're going to be the aggressor in this game.

Yeah, we'll have to be careful. I expect Dido to attack us with a billion Quinqueremes at some point. Alex is pretty close too.

 

[Nizef]

If we get 1-2 cities in southern Italy, I hope that will prevent Alex from looking in our direction. Dido will attack us whatever we do, though. But military strength is something we will have to work on very early. This might prevent some potential invasions.

On a different note: Do we want our own religion?

 

[beetle]

Does the “No Bees” rule apply to GEs as well?

That works for me, and it has an interesting consequence. If we adhere to the rule of not getting any gpt from AIs, and an AI is offering us gpt for peace, this locks us in the war until the AI is willing to give up a city.

This overlap had not occurred to me!

On a different note: Do we want our own religion?

Yes, of course. Shrine second in the build queue. Wine is decent pantheon.

 

[Nizef]

Let me put it differently: I almost always play with a religion of my own, but we might have to accept not getting one on this map. We barely managed one in SG1 with Ethiopia and this will be harder.

 

[vadalaz]

I think the map is considered Standard sized for calculating total # of religions and per-city penalties, so with 14 AIs the chances to get a religion are very low.

Does the “No Bees” rule apply to GEs as well?

Good question. I don't think it should, but it's tempting to plant some manufactories, get New Deal and turn Rome into an absolute beast of a city.

 

[raider980]

I have no opinion on religion, half the time on deity I don't bother building a shrine, haha.

I'm still unclear on "white peace". I thought it meant simply peace with nothing traded. But are you all saying that if the AI offers us something, or demands something, we can't alter the deal to make it "white peace"? We must reject it and stay at war?

What turns will a CB/Ballista/Legion attack come on Venice? I'm thinking about turn order and I don't want to have to start that.