Does everyone remember this?
ruffhi said:
I'm thinking of starting a concurrent succession game. What does that mean? In the Chaos game that we are playing (see sig at bottom), I'm the prankster and I marked 3 players as 'up', basically joking around with the roster. Well, they took that literally and all three played the next ten rounds and then left it to me to decide which was the official round. That got me thinking ...
In golf, there is a team game (2 v 2) where everyone tees off and the team plays the next shot from the location of the best ball. For example, Player 1, Team 1 hits a drive 300 meters. Player 2, Team 2 hits a drive 350 meters. For the next shot, both Players 1 and 2 would hit from the location of Player 2s ball. They would then take the best of those shots and play their 3rd shot from that location.
So, a concurrent succession game would involve a team of 5 or 6 all playing each round (including write up) and then deciding which was the best save. Then that save would form the basis of the second round - again, everyone plays the round but from the selected save.
This sort of game would be slower but it would enable everyone to compare their round with each others. There are a few issues that would need to be discussed before we start ...
how do we decide which is the 'best' save - we would need a scoring method
early exploration would need directional constraints so that we don't benefit from revealed map info
timing - I was thinking 4 days to play and write up, 1 day to post, 2 days to decide which save is 'best' (maybe play / write Sat-Tue, post Wed, discuss Thur, vote Fri)
other issues?
So - is there any interest out there for a concurrent succession game?
Parameters ...
Prince or Monarch (depending on feedback), standard size / speed, map - either Islands or Archipelago, all else random
I've been thinking (for awhile actually), about a variant on this well-inspired theme. The difference is that when the second team is ready to play, they don't have to all play the same save. The person can individually choose which of the first team's player's save they would like to continue.
We will be playing a multi-thread concurrent succession (MTCSG) (name suggested by Frankcor)!
Instead of discussing which you think is the best game and deciding which one to play as a team, you discuss it, but ulimately choose which one you want to play individually and as part of your write-up, you can discuss the strengths of the previous play and why you decided to build on that one.
So then multiple streams could form, and various strategies that could take more then one player-round to complete could come to fruition before being abandoned/built-on. I think it would encourage people to take long-shot gambles and we would get some very creative play.
Here's an example of how play would proceed.
Assume players A, B, C, and D are part of the first team and players M, N, O, and P are part of the second team.
Players A, B, C, and D would play the first save, then players M, N, O, and P would be free to choose which of those player's games they would like to play. The following turn, players A, B, C, and D could choose any amongst the 2nd turn M, N, O, and P saves to play.
After the first round,
Player M may have liked the way player B decided upon an early war and wanted to capitilize on that by fighting an extended war.
Player N may have liked how player C built a particular wonder and decided to build infrastruce complementary to that wonder.
Player O may have liked how player B went to war but decided that the war has gone on long enough and wants to consolidate the position gained by player B.
Player P may decide that he/she likes the way player D got two religions and wants to try and get a third.
Now, after the second round, the first round of players are free to choose which of the second round of saves they want to use.
Player A may want to continue the war begun by players B and M and now wants to continue that war even further.
Player B may want to continue the cosolidation begun by player O and now wants to return to more war.
Player C may like the nice plan that he/she and player N are doing in relation to their wonder and wants to keep specializing their civ that way.
Player D may want to try and consolidate the 3rd religion gained by player P and now try and spread some missionaries.
Eventually, up to 4 different parallel worlds/stories could exist at once, but during any round, an old parallel story could collapse and a new one arise/branch from another of the existing ones.
I would like to play this on Emperor (or Monarch) depending on player interest. I think the alternative series that would begin to parallel will pretty much prevent us from being eliminated.
If Ruffhi wants to start it, i would be honoured if he would include it in the Ruff series (it is his baby after all), otherwise, i will start it myself. (EDIT: I will be starting the game myself- heck: its started- so jump on in- the water's fine)
EDIT:
So, we should try to get 8 players. A-team (i pity 'da fool!) and B-team will be determined once we fill the roster.
ROSTER:
1. Immaculate
2. Frankcor
3. remconius
4. open
5. open
6. open
7. open
8. open
Any ideas for a potential leader? I would like to try Hatsheput, but i am just throwing an idea out there. It might be a lot of fun to play a spiritual civ to allow different players to try different strategies that involve civic changes without penalizing them unfairly.
Game starts
here