ALC Game 16: Persia/Cyrus

[ParadigmShifter]

I agree that Sisiutil should play the map and ignore the nay-sayers, nothing was added it was just checked and presumably it was the first map rolled anyway. I don't think some of them appreciate the amount of effort required for this sort of thing either.

 

[GinandTonic]

There are some pretty ungrateful buttheads around here. Sisiutil should do whatever he thinks is most fun.

Couldn't agree more. Hopefully that will be playing on and thumbing his nose at the ingrates.

 

[imadork]

De-lurking to say I don't think there's any need to regenerate.

And to thank Sisiutil for starting this up, and the rest of you for commenting. I really enjoy this series!

 

[Jet]

Of all the leaders Cyrus does seem like the most one-trick pony.

If you got Horses I'm not sure Cyrus would be too awful in an isolated start:
- dominating barbs
- cheap military police (probably with a better power graph rating than Chariots)
on top of
- easy level 4 unit from barbs
- 1 to 2 points of resourceless happy, and 2 points of resourceless health from Apothecaries
- fast expansion; when else are you going to build that many Settlers?
and for that matter
- more Great Generals when the more advanced AIs invade your sorry isolated ass

I think Horses are fairly common on isolated starts. You won't always get them, but it's not like anyone is going to beat you to them.

 

[Sisiutil]

I agree that Sisiutil should play the map and ignore the nay-sayers, nothing was added it was just checked and presumably it was the first map rolled anyway. I don't think some of them appreciate the amount of effort required for this sort of thing either.

For the record, I sent Welnic 3 starts and asked him to choose one in which (a) I wasn't isolated and that (b) "horses are within reasonable reach" (my exact words). He e-mailed me back and said to use the 3rd map, nothing more. I'm not sure what he interpreted "reasonable reach" to mean, and I actually don't want to know. They might be in the capital's fat cross, they might not. If it's the latter, the mere fact that I'm not isolated could mean I have competition for them. The plan was always to research AH first and then grab horses with the 2nd city unless they show up in the capital's tiles.

Was that cheating? Maybe. I don't know. I play these ALC matches with the intention of highlighting every one of the leader's characteristics, including the UU. Frankly, the last game for me was a big disappointment because I don't think Mehmed got a fair shake, not from the map nor the way I played it. So I'm trying to avoid that this time.

To my mind, having the map checked was a way to avoid a restart, possibly several of them, because I wasn't about to play through an ALC Cyrus game if I was isolated and/or unable to get horses in time to make use of Immortals. I've regenerated the map in off-line games as Greece when I don't have a coastal start with seafood, I've abandoned off-line games as Rome when there was no iron available and as Egypt when no horses were anywhere nearby. I gather from posts on the board that many of you do the same. It's a game and I play it for fun, and to me, not exploiting the UU is just no fun. Having the map checked is just a variation on that theme. I don't want to waste time in a publicly-hosted game with one or two false starts.

In the spirit of that, I've convinced myself of what most of you have been trying to convince me: I'll continue with the chosen start. Sorry for all the drama. If you do have a problem with that, I respectfully suggest that you sit out this ALC. This is a game, not an ethics class.

I've decided to do a little exploring before settling down, which could be a Civ-based reflection of a mid-life crisis showing evidence of my longing for the heady days of my youth, but let's not go down that road. Kniteowl's reminder that I did a little exploring in the Kublai game and won my highest score ever have been ringing in my ears. Not necessarily cause and effect, but since I'm not trying to found a religion, why not look around a little? I'd like to think I can handle the additional challenge of rebounding from a couple of "lost" turns.

 

[Steppin' Razor]

Not cheating. This is not the 'challenge S series'; ... I want to see early UU in action and I'm glad this was pre-checked.

Posting to agree. There are plenty of existing games that explore playing the impacted period without the benefit of a UU. I think there's some value to working through an isolated start occasionally, but the last ALC focused on that type of game.

 

[pax]

The idea of the All Leaders Challenge is that I'm going to play a game with each of the Civ IV leaders. With the help of all the posters who participate, I will attempt to make the most of the leader's unique characteristics: traits, starting techs, unit, and building.

What part of "I will attempt to make the most of the leader's unique characteristics" do people not understand? I think it's perfectly reasonable to check for isolation. While isolated games can be fun, I don't think they give Sisiutil the opportunity to show off the traits, unit and buildings of a civ the same way an integrated start does.

As for the UU resource, I think it's fair to check for the UU resource in the case where the UU replaces up to a classical era tech. For something like the Egyptians or the Persians, maybe even the Zulus, I'd want the resource to show up within a second city's fat cross, at a minimum. For the Carthaginians, Gaels, Mongolians or the Romans, I'd want it within a third city's reach, or capturable by an early axe/chariot rush. Here's the thing, though: IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I WANT. It's not Pax's ALC. It's SISIUTIL'S ALC. The man could start it on turn 100 with his civ possessing half the world, I'd still pay attention. Think about it: part of the purpose of the ALC is instructive. I'd rather be taught about the 75% likely case (betting that 3 out of 4 Persian starts have horses nearby) than the 25% likely case.

If you think it's "cheating" if you think it's not "hardcore" enough, that's fine. It's your opinion. I encourage you to go run your own version of the ALC somewhere else on the board, where you can play by your own arbitrary ruleset. I like Sisiutil's rules just fine.

And now, having previewed, I see that Sisiutil will, in fact, play this start. Bravo, sir. Ignore the boo birds and play on.

 

[ac196nataku]

Horses don't have to be in Persepolis' fat cross.

However, they should at least be a city or two away, so I vote for somebody to confirm it for Sisiutil (should he ask for it).

How do you highlight a leader's UU if it never appears?

It will just be any old leader if we don't have a UU.

 

[biggamer132]

Regenerating because you have a poor starting position? It's fine that you want him to "show off" the various aspects of the leaders, but at the same time, he's here to show how to play every leader to it's fullest potential, regardless of starting position. If you're going to show off the leaders' traits, you might as well save time and build the maps in order to guarantee an optimal start. There's no difference between building the map and re-rolling until you get one that "works". Besides, I'd rather see him win without ever using the UU, since that is a for more educational game than, say, the Mongol game where he popped all of those techs.

Oh yeah, no re-roll =P.

I'll just restate what others have said; without the UU, no civ is the same.

 

[JoeBlade]

I'm quite surprised of the negative reactions concerning the start. The ALCs have always been about maximising a leader's traits, UU and UB. Cyrus is one of those leaders that are unable to shine in a solitary start or without horses.

What if Sisiutil had gone along with a random start and had started on a lone continent or without horses? Would he have lost the game irrespectively? Not by a long shot. Would such a game have been interesting? Not by a long shot either.

Cyrus is one of those leaders that justify rerolling for a specific setting even in a solo game. Why? Because cIV is still a game. Even though solitary starts or a horseless one would be winnable with Cyrus, it wouldn't be as much fun, if at all (esp. for someone who's played many games like Sisiutil) Fun is what games are all about.

So just sit back and enjoy the show

 

[Hackapell]

Also agree that you should just go foward.
There was actually a question posed in the pre-game thread that aksed what we do if we don't have horses. The answer is very simple; find metal, THEN go out and conquer those horses! Even if there is no uber-early immortal rush, with a diverse stack, you can use axeman to take out the spearmen, use suicide cats to weaken the defense and defenders, then charge with the Immortals!
My point is, even the greatest strategies have some weakness and even if you compensate, you may notbe able to use the plan effectively. Be flexible. Show courage. And don't give in!(unless tanks are attacking your musketmen. then you should throw in the towel.)

 

[curtadams]

I figure that if Sisutl started a Cyrus game and found either a) he was isolated or b) there just weren't any horses, he'd probably regenerate anyway. There was a lot of discussion of that with Kublai (where the start looked poor for other reasons), and while many opposed regeneration it wasn't really on ethical grounds. So I think having maps pre-checked is just a way to save us a week of discussion and planning on a map we're going to throw away anyway.

That said, I'm inclined to say that if isolated starts are unacceptable, you shouldn't use fractal maps. Maybe somebody could tweak the fractal code so that nobody ever got an isolated start (and sometimes there would be open continents, which could be interesting). But otherwise, especially since these are demonstration games, the "standard" continents map would be preferable in spite of being rather predictable.

 

[scooter]

I'll add myself to the list of people who are more interested in seeing Sisiutil get use out of the UU, UB, and trait combo than anything else.

 

[Whitefire]

In the spirit of that, I've convinced myself of what most of you have been trying to convince me: I'll continue with the chosen start. Sorry for all the drama. If you do have a problem with that, I respectfully suggest that you sit out this ALC. This is a game, not an ethics class.

It was a change in rules that I was not ready for. I still stand by my suggestion for someone to construct the initial save for you from now on. If the goal is to show off the unique traits of each leader and not now how to succeed regardless of the hand dealt for the leader, then having a game constructed in the WB would be much more effective. It could even have some challenging twists. For example, have you and 2 civs on one continent, separated from the other four. Then have the other 4 on islands, but within galley distance of each other. But thats for another thread, eh?

 

[Elkad]

Another lurker

Play it.

 

[Janus0]

Sisiutil:

 

[KMadCandy]

I've decided to do a little exploring before settling down, which could be a Civ-based reflection of a mid-life crisis showing evidence of my longing for the heady days of my youth, but let's not go down that road.

oh those giggles scared my dogs!

i am so going to throw a fit if all the drama causes you to not have fun playing your games here for us. if we drive you crazy with disagreements over "ethics" or calling you names, if you have no fun, that sort of thing, you'll stop doing the threads, and we all lose.

get a grip people. we love the threads and we refer to what "we" should do with our settlers and such, but it is after all his game and he chooses to share it with us. it is a game, it's supposed to be fun, that's goal #1. last game wasn't much fun i think. i also don't think that last game means he wants this one to be a "demo" or a walk in the park, but i think he does want it to be fun and not frustrating as all get out. don't even start giving him reasons to pack it in and retire. it's a lot of work in the first place, even when people do show appreciation for it. he's talking mid-life crisis here; don't encourage him to go have a fling with some flashy young new game and abandon us !!!!

i usually stop reading threads on any forum if they irritate me. i just don't like to get all worked up over this stuff. i kept reading this one, cuz i love the ALCs and S is one of my heros. i don't get ticked often but when i do, you don't want to see it. well okay, you wouldn't actually see it since i often read these forums in my pajamas and i ain't about to post pictures. but whatever. S, go out and bash some heads and have fun.

 

[Bhruic]

Was that cheating? Maybe. I don't know. I play these ALC matches with the intention of highlighting every one of the leader's characteristics, including the UU. Frankly, the last game for me was a big disappointment because I don't think Mehmed got a fair shake, not from the map nor the way I played it. So I'm trying to avoid that this time.

That's totally cool, and I can understand your perspective on it.

In the spirit of that, I've convinced myself of what most of you have been trying to convince me: I'll continue with the chosen start. Sorry for all the drama. If you do have a problem with that, I respectfully suggest that you sit out this ALC. This is a game, not an ethics class.

This, however, I don't really get. I've seen a few people post that, and it's pretty damn baffling. Other than the one trollish "cheater" post, I don't think anyone has said "play my way or else". No one has threatened to stop reading if you didn't play the way we wanted (a foolish threat to make in any case). I'm not sure why people have been acting as if we had? If someone makes a suggestion about what move to make, people will debate it without abusing the poster. But if we make a suggestion about how you start the game, suddenly we are the bad guy?

That seems pretty unfair.

Maybe my original post came off with a different tone than I was going for. I don't know, but all I was suggesting was that you reconsider the idea of ensuring you've got easily available Horses. You've done that, and stuck with that - fair enough, it's your game. It's not like I'm going to stop reading, or stop enjoying this great series. I certainly never intended to offend you or upset you in any fashion.

Bh

 

[EEE_BOY]

oh, it's 5 pages, and we haven't move the scout....the expansion pack will come out on the 2nd of July... i suggest sisiutil should 'employ' some experienced people doing the ALC simultaneously...to speed up it.

 

[dave866]

De-lurking. If Sis is aiming to explore a leader's UU, then he needs "reasonable" access to the prereqs for that UU. QED.

The question of "ethics" that continues to arise strikes me as off the mark. The decision to check the map for horses, isolation, the world's largest ball of string, or anything else, is a debatable one (obviously), but not an ethical one in any way I can see. Doubly so since Mr S. made it perfectly clear that was what he intended to do, thus avoiding any pseudo-unethical subterfuge, skullduggery, or other such disingenuity.

On the other hand, the decision to expend considerable effort to document, illustrate, and narrate his games (and do so very well) for the benefit and enjoyment of this community is, no two ways about it, commendable.

Here's to you, Mr Sisi, the godfather of ALC and hardest working man in Civ business - get down with your bad self, and enjoy what promises to be one of the more entertaining rounds.