Discussion in 'Civ1 - General Discussions' started by Lord.L., Jul 17, 2018.
Is it possible? Has anybody done this (I mean on Emperor)?
Yup. A lot of people have done it. In fact, it's been the only way I play Civ for the last few years. It makes it so much easier to bang a game out in a couple of hours. Search the forum for either 'one city challenge' or OCC. Lots of threads and posts dealing with it around.
Hasn't found anything about it((( Can you post the link here please?
I bet you haven't found anything because you didn't really try to search for it. I can't spend my time looking through the forums for you. There are advanced search options, which let you search only the civ 1 forum. Type in "one city challenge" with the quotes and dig around. There is no 'link'. There are dozens, maybe hundreds of posts. Some of them are in threads that specifically deal with OCC, some are in other threads. So, just read the forum. It's not only pointless to ask questions that have been discussed at great length, on most forums it is against the rules.
102 hits in this forum. Here's one for you.
Yeah, but that game wasn't exactly textbook OCC. In it I held and starved down enemy cities, and took their settlers as slaves, etc. Now, I play with the specific intent of only ever owning one city and razing enemy towns. Only the occasional culture flip can screw that up.
The fun thing about Civ1 OCC is that you get to invent the rules you'll play by. After seeing a modestly successful OCC thread someone tried to start an "official" thread in here with all sorts of conditions (you had to play as the Americans, for example). It died.
I've only been sucessfull on OCC on chieftain and warlord. but to be honest. the consept doesnt appeal to me much.
im thinking about opening up a "maximum score" challenge, only rules would be "no binary hacks, no reloads"
Pretty sure it's been done too. Some of the guys here are beyond crazy about scores.
Anyway, back to the OP: Lord.L., read up on the forums as we suggested, or play some OCC on emperor, and then formulate better questions. 'Is it possible?' and 'has anybody done this?' have already been answered.
Why not make it pure, with no fast-Settler and no sentry-unsentry, no shift-56? Philosophically, it's an on/off choice: allow some subset of cheats or no cheats. But aha, not everyone agrees on what is a "cheat" and what is not. For example, roads on water. Some think that's a cheat, a design flaw, but i think it cannot have escaped notice during the game's production, and Microprose decided to leave it in. To really exploit it, one must have invested tens of turns building boats, then building Settlers to set afloat, then making the bridges. The feature might not be a bug, just something they left in because it didn't look like a game-changer. And it's not. The benefit of building roads on water in Civ1 feels pretty balanced, compared to the production and development costs to do it.
Yet, some people think that roads on water is a cheat. That's fine, no objection to this rule or that, went years myself before realizing that Settlers could bridge water, so i can abide. A reload is a bump advantage in moves and development, but what if you're presented with a game arrangement which takes more than 6 hours to play but you've got to go to sleep in 4 hours to make it to your cousin's wedding on time? After wearing off the hangover for a day, you re-start the Civ game 2 days later. Is that a "reload"?
If you'd like to set up a hiscore derby, you need to say beforehand: what is a 'cheat'... and what is the yardstick for "maximum score". Raw civscore, or the civ's % rating, or the number of rival civs on your trophy wall at the end?
i forgot the shift 56 which is clearly a cheat (arguably a testing/QA method) which would be part of the rules.
problem really is the fact many of these cannot be easily traced, and some i feel like they are ok to be allowed because effectively the AI cheats as well.
theres a fair amount of widely known tricks that are grey area in this game. my idea was to allow all of them with a very restricted amount of rules just to see what can be achieved.
for instance. the known RR over water + transport sentry trick is effectively a way to make railroad over the whole accessibly body of water in a single turn. in order to make it fair for everyone id even consider just giving the map away with all water converted into RR... downside to it would be the fact that even tho its achievable in a single turn as soon as RR is avaiable. there is a set amount of turns that is required in order to get the tech.
the reload rule is just because i know from the game mechanics. a reload approach can give you a 1 turn win. which will screw up the whole challenge to everyone else.
theres just soo much to take into considereation when setting the rules that.. well honestly i gave up the idea of organizing it miself.
i just wanted to get an idea of "how much better than me are the pros" but setting the same rules alone would probably rule out some players, and there would still be some exploits not mentioned that i dont know so i cant rule out, which would screw up the comparative view of the scores.
Yep, that's what i found, reading through this forum a few years ago. There's no way to compare games when every player has a different idea of what's 'legal' and what's not, let alone diffy levels and city restrictions. There is no "standard" game, and that's nice. This allows many people to be #1, each at the style of Civ1 playing which they favor. As said in another thread, this is Civ1's charm: a hundred ways to play it, including hack-n-slash. After finishing a long-form game, often play a couple quick vicious games just to cleanse the palate.
Separate names with a comma.