[BNW] ANY TAKERS FOR A NEW CHALLENGE SERIES?

[consentient]

Calling any members of the old player base that still drop by here, if there are any...

I've started playing Civ 5 again, and although the main challenge has been relearning how to do things well, I still crave the enjoyment of sharing my playthroughs with others and finding out how they did it differently.

If anyone is keen, we can start out on Immortal and then slowly ramp things up.

Let me know

 

[aafritz17]

HI, C! Back home, or still far far away?

Sure, I'm interested. Immortal is my 50/50 level. What do you have in mind?

 

[consentient]

Oh I don't really have a home as such, but thanks for asking.

Let's try something fun with Spain for starters...that gives so many different options. All Policy Trees and all VCs are fun as heck with a strong Spain start. And it will give 50/50 players like you a bit of practice at getting the mid/lategame right, and not losing momentum etc.

Gimme a day or two to roll some maps and I will start something in a new thread. Perhaps that will pull some of the old players out of the woodwork...perhaps not.

As long as one other person is playing the map besides me, my fun is doubled

 

[aafritz17]

Rock on, I'll be looking for 'em.

I recently started playing some of the HOF gauntlets, and there are some good players posting in that forum. I'm sure they'll see this thread. You'll probably hear from some of them, too.

 

[mbbcam]

I've never played Spain. I'd have no idea what to do -- but I might be prepared to give you a laugh by making a complete Horlicks of a game. Not giving firm promises -- I do have some pride left ... Not much, but some. Mid-game ... I never get beyond it.

 

[consentient]

The trick with Spain is to find the Wonders and therefore break the game. Finding a Wonder first gives you 500 gold, which means you can buy a super early Settler. Plus the yields can be really amazing from the right wonders...it gives you a really strong start with the right map

 

[beetle]

I will play whatever you post, but speaking of Spain, here is a super fun map. GBR and a faith mountain near your Salt start.

 

[claudiupb]

A new challenge series would be great. I think I would manage to participate maybe once per month.

 

[noto2]

Well, I haven't played the base game in years. Would you be down for doing this with Acken's minimal balance mod?

 

[consentient]

I'll consider doing one with AckenMod, but the last time I played a bunch of games with it, it was not enjoyable for a couple of reasons: firstly, the difficulty throughout the game is not even. Emperor is really easy in the early game but by the midgame is a severe challenge. It's not a minimal mod in the sense that the learning curve to do well in games that use the mod is simple. In fact, I've never managed to complete a game on Demigod. Secondly, there always seemed to be something 'broken' about the AI diplomacy and I'd get denounced for no reason. I think he may have tinkered with it too much. But I'm open to the idea, with more guidance from the community.

 

[noto2]

It does raise the difficulty of the game a lot, and considering that the AI bonuses actually get nerfed in the mod, that shows you just how much he improved the AI.

It's true that while it started out absolutely minimal, he did get it to version 8, I believe, and there are some significant differences. I think if you really analyze these differences, though, you will see they do improve the game. For example, ranged units are slightly nerfed and melee units buffed in the mod, which is an improvement over the base game where ranged units were always better. The Piety and Honour trees are slightly buffed, and they needed it, while the rationalism tree is slightly nerfed (mainly that it cannot be used until the industrial age). It may seem like a lot of changes but if you read the change log you can get a good sense of what was changed rather quickly.

As for diplomacy: probably the reason you are getting denounced is because the AI is preparing to attack you because you have a low power score. In AM, the AI is a bully and will attack you if you are weak. Personally, I like this, because I find it too gamey when I can sit and spam wonders and shoot toward a space or culture win while I have no military to defend myself and my neighbours just sit there and watch it happen.

But that might just be my taste. I know there are a thousand different mods out there that do a thousand different things and we couldn't all agree on our own personal preferences (I have heavily modded the game myself), but I think of Acken's Mod as more of a balance patch.

 

[consentient]

Haha, I'm very familiar with the changes he made, and I was one of the testers for a while. I agree that in theory many of the changes he made were interesting, but as I said, last time it played out, it was not a fun experience. Even with a good start, the wars become a real slog.

And the denouncing thing was not as you say. I am a warmonger, and whereas in the base game you can maintain DOF and 7 green indicators with people you've 'played' just right, in AckenMod the diplomacy seems somewhat disordered or random. It's clearly broken, in my view. I can't believe that the denouncements I've been getting are what Acken intended.

Like I said, I won't rule it out, but I'd have to see an LP of a Demigod game with the latest version, where someone playing in much the same way that I play (War in every era) is able to win without too much slog. So far that is only a theoretical concept.

"In AM, the AI is a bully and will attack you if you are weak. Personally, I like this, because I find it too gamey when I can sit and spam wonders and shoot toward a space or culture win while I have no military to defend myself and my neighbours just sit there and watch it happen."

I definitely think that it's gamey as you say, but neither do I think it works to have an AI that behaves erratically when you do NOT have a low power score. If I bribe A to DoW B, and have 5 other green indicators with B, and I denounce and DoW A, I don't want B to denounce me for it. Also, I remember one time when B asked me to go to war with him against A, I said 'In 10 turns', went a turn or two early, and got denounced by B for it. Stupid.

TLDR: I'm no turtle, quite the opposite, and AckenMod has tended to make my game less enjoyable.

 

[consentient]

In fact, why don't you roll a map and submit it so that I can see if it's suitable for this challenge series?

Please, nothing higher than Demigod, and with a civ that is decent for Domination, but not Babylon, Prussia, Persia or Shoshone. Would you like to do that?

I tested some maps myself today and in each the diplomacy was completely off, and AI behaviour highly erratic. Sejong makes DOF then backstabs within 2 turns, then DOWs along with Morocco who only just met me. Both had scores equal or less than mine. I had a big enough army to repel theirs and capture each of their capitals. Meanwhile, another AI has settlers that were frozen without movement and not making cities.

AckenMod is a nice idea in principle but needs refinement before I'll consider it playable.

 

[bonniepbilly]

How about using Vox Populi?

 

[Grendeldef]

Crap, I'm doing these in backwards order but still, an appropriate place to sign in and offer my support to the general idea again. Time permitting it's always nice to play shared maps.

 

[beetle]

One idea that I have been contemplating for a while, and that I think would we interesting, would be a series of eight games, all with the same civs. The eight would be picked because they are civs that the AI plays well. Is this something two or three people would be interested in?

My own preference would be to keep as much the same as possible from game-to-game, to eliminate as much RNG as might be done, and to really nail which civs the AI drives best. But (1) my expectation would be that most folks strongly prefer new maps each game (even if they are generated by a familiar script); and (2) I know one can start a game with a specific map, but I am not sure about keeping the civ starting positions static, and that would pretty important for this sort of experiment. Very much tempering this idea is my assumption that starting dirt is more a determining factor for AI success than which civs are easier for the AI to play.

 

[beetle]

One idea that I have been contemplating for a while, and that I think would we interesting, would be a series of eight games, all with the same civs. The eight would be picked because they are civs that the AI plays well. Is this something two or three people would be interested in?

Despite there being apparently zero interest in this, I plan to give this eight-game series a try. I think the donut script (ocean in the center, grassland for the base tile, and younger world age (for mountains)) will result in enough consistency so that starting dirt might not be an overwhelming factor, which is something that happens pretty regularly with Pangea. Also this way I would be generating a new map each time.

Please help me pick out the eight best civs for the AI to play.

In for sure: Alexander, Casimir, Sejong, and Shaka.

Other AIs that I am partial to for this experiment: Elizabeth, Haile, Pachacuti, Pocatello, Washington, and Wu.

Double checking against @consentient’s tier list, I see that with my first choices, I missed Darius, Harun, Nebuchadnezzar, and Pacal. But, remember I am looking for civs that the AI plays well. (For example, with Babylon, the AI does not rush writing and does not plant the GS.)

Thanks very much

 

[consentient]

Besides the 4 you named first, I'd go with anything that has benefits from wide play, as the AI will of course spam the hell out of cities.

The leaders that I think should round off your list are those that a) can be a threat early on, and ones that are a pain to deal with later on as well.

There are civs that I usually groaned when they were the last 1 or 2 civs I had to take a Domination sweep into their lands, because I know they'll have dozens of cities and lots of units: -

Monty, Dido, Attila, Suleiman/Caesar

If you can win Dom on Deity with ALexander, Casimir, Sejong, SHaka and 3 of those 4 as your opponents, on a regular basis, you know that you have gotten there.

 

[Blatc]

Interesting to consider what civs the AI plays best, as this should probably be completely different than the civs commonly used in the fastest SV games (with rare exception of using a stronger warmonger like the Huns to disrupt the game; it's more common to use moderate, controllable warmongery types). The name that sticks out to me is Sejong, who I've regularly included in my SV attempts, and would have a low expansion bias. Is it common for Korea to really take off mid-game in a 250-350 turn game?

Unless domination is the specific focus, I'd suggest making a point of having 'well rounded', strong AI in terms of their advantages and more common victory condition. As such, Korea likely does warrant inclusion in the 'Starting 4', and I would put in a vote for Pachacuti (will benefit from your chosen world age), Haile, Caesar, and Attila.

 

[raider980]

I'd play this if it's different maps each time. Sounds fun.

I'm no expert on how well the AI plays a civ but I have noticed that there are some civs that seem to be able to win the game often. And others that I've never seen win. In addition to the 4 you mentioned, Pacal is one that I has beat me a number of times. Catherine and Pachacuti also seem to consistently do well.