Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by White Out, Mar 3, 2014.
In a game of 6+ Ai, do you ever play hotseat with yourself and try and beat... yourself?
I have played a few games of 8 civs against myself with no AIs. I made sure everything was random and tried to play with unique playstyles with each civ having a predetermined victory type lined up for it.
It is actually quite difficult, the thing that stopped me doing it was purely how long games would take on standard settings and the fact you know the whole map takes the great fun of exploration away.
Overall, a couple of games is fun, but after that might as well play the AI
I usually bounce back and forth between hotseat vs myself and a game vs AI. its usually AI city placement that pushes me over the edge into playing vs myself.
My friend loves to play huge 12-civ hotseat games on Settler difficulty - with himself controlling every civ. Because everyone is on Settler, everyone has huge bonuses.
I am thinking of trying this someday (with only 8 civs) but I want to make sure that I will be totally impartial with every civ.
How do you do domination then because you always know what the other guy is going to do?
many play chess vs. themselves to practice, and this idea is pretty analogous.
I never had any fun with chess vs. myself because I see what I am doing and stop myself from what I think I may be able to beat myself with. Always ends up a very long-winded, fruitless stalemate, so I'm not bothering to attempt it with civ.
The idea for me is that playing Civ against oneself is very roleplay, you can assume the role of an AI without having to stress over your next move.
Sadly.. no matter how much I try I can never really get into a good hotseat game.
No one practices chess vs themselves any more because of computer chess.
That friend of mine is a big roleplayer. He happily plays on Settler and doesn't have any problem with it at all. I find that high-level players are irritatingly condescending at times and the ridiculousness of being condescending over a video game amuses me, but even I play on Prince at least and play to win. Anyway, I think he is a world builder above all else; he plays mainly to act out a world history, to create a world in that game. I want to do the same, but with me playing each civ to win in a manner fitting their respective playstyles. So it would be in effect melding roleplaying and effective play. Unfortunately, I don't think I can be impartial enough to do this, especially in things like wars, which is why I haven't done it yet.
I would recommend playing on Cheiftain/Warlord when roleplaying as the effects of Happiness aren't as big as the player begins to get ridicolous amount of happiness on those levels.
I've done Risk, Catan, Foosball, and many other games by myself. This sounds like a pretty fun idea, maybe I'll try it sometime.
If you play it right, you can definitely roleplay well enough to control everyone impartially. If I can successfully create a 1 person Foosball league with 16 distinct teams in it, then Civ should be relatively easy. Just try to avoid favorites, and focus on the civ you're currently playing as above all else.
Is there a way to do the opposite--watch the AI play itself? Supposedly there was a mod to do this in Civ4
This sounds interesting to me, but I imagine some problems. I am not sure I could war against myself honestly. I would not want to compete with myself over wonders either. Maybe play one culture civ, one science civ, one diplo civ, and the balance war mongerish AI civs? Hmm, this might make my games feel like they are going much faster!
To give some more insight in to what I meant and how this is working:
I'm playing on continents plus with large map, 7 city states, no barbarians on prince.
I'm controlling the Mayans and Dutch, and playing against 7 AI's.
It`s been a lot of fun,but the 1st few turns on epic are tough cuz your blinking back and forth like crazy. I do find that it`s a little .... difficult to get really into like when you only control 1 civ. I`m not as invested in it as I would be if I was playing just 1 civ. If I screw up with Pacal i have william kind of thing.
1 thing I did notice was trying to make sure I keep my science focus with Pacal seperate from my culture focus with William. Thankfully each civ started out kinda far away so I can say I`m going to have a war with myself any time soon.
Fun but wouldn`t do it again probably.. but everyone should try it once
No. I have played hotseat as 2 civs, vs. AIs.
I didn't finish the game, but I think it's worth trying again.
I understood that I would win, and that I would also lose
I have a long-standing AD&D solo AD&D campaign that I both play and DM ... I have killed dozens of my own characters, hehe.
I think it would be fun to play a hotseat game as both the Mongols and Songhai against AI opponents. Evenly distribute your Horses through trades. Use the Keshiks as your ranged units and the Mandekalu Cavalry as melee and conquer the AIs cities with impunity.
Can you set up team alliances? 2v6 could be interesting, but 2v1v1v1v1v1v1 would be a cakewalk.
Worse, it seems like the MP AI doesn't do anything and is much more passive than the SP AI. I dont think this would work out like I would like it to.
This might be the problem TheKingOfBigOz reports having.
I don't play against AI, I literally play against myself... 10 players since 12 players loads slower between turns..
But it's the lack of features that does it.. Civ 5 is sadly still a click fest.
Are the 10 civs all random? How do you honestly war on yourself or compete for wonders? Is this pangaea? I understand that RP is part of the appeal, but so is a good CB rush -- and that depends on surprise!
It depends, I play on the most "realistic" map that is mysterious (Fractal in thsi case). I tend to use randomizer to pick the civs so I can actually name the leaders instead of having "PLayer 1 of the Shoshone".. I usually have this affinity to mirror the activites of the AI, so i settle more or less 3 tiles between two cities. It's less straightforward as it allows me to choose how each leader is played. For example Ramesses will research Wonders more than say Shaka, but Shaka will quickly start building an army, if there's a city 3 tiles close there might be a war.. it just relaxes me as I can anticipate and not get stressed over a sneak attack, but in theory, I can't lose, I do both, win and lose.
Separate names with a comma.