civ1 GOTM?

[Irish Caesar]

a.) did u already play the GOTM/GOTQ?

b.) will u play the GOTM/GOTQ in the future?

c.) which difficulty lvl do u prefer? please make a list from which u prefer most to less!

d.) do u like games that last till a specific year? if yes which one would u prefer?

e.) which goals for the game would u prefer (spaceship, complete conquest, population, whole tech tree, ...)? make a list ...

f.) do u cheat when just playing for yourself ( which ones)?

g.) would u rather say competition with or without cheating?

h.) which name would u suggest for the thread (i propose that question, because i just found the gotm by accident)

a. Yes, and submitted it.
b. Perhaps...
c. King, followed by prince, emperor, warlord, and chieftain
d. I suppose cutting them off at a specific year is a legitimate victory condition as long as the GOTM moderator specifies it, why not?
e. A different one each game? Mix 'em up!
f. Hell no!
g. Obviously without.
h. GOTM #, the way the other versions do it. This would be GOTM 1.

 

[GoldBerg]

a.) did u already play the GOTM/GOTQ?
NO.

b.) will u play the GOTM/GOTQ in the future?
YES

c.) which difficulty lvl do u prefer? please make a list from which u prefer most to less!
KiNG, nothing else.

d.) do u like games that last till a specific year? if yes which one would u prefer?
doesn't matter to me.

e.) which goals for the game would u prefer (spaceship, complete conquest, population, whole tech tree, ...)? make a list ...
chart list
1. population by ??? date
2. whole tech tree
3. spaceship

f.) do u cheat when just playing for yourself ( which ones)?
YES
1. SETTLER cheat
2. SAVEGAME cheat
3. OPEN MAP cheat (474.01, 'shift-56')

g.) would u rather say competition with or without cheating?
depends on a realistic definition or chance to show that other contestant DiD cheat or not.
at least i propose to follow the rules.

h.) which name would u suggest for the thread (i propose that question, because i just found the gotm by accident)

Game Of The Quarter|2006|01 - Discussion
Game Of The Quarter|2006|01 - Results
Game Of The Quarter|2006|02 - Ideas | Game Announcements
... and so on

OR

GOTQ|CivDOS|2006|01 - Discussion
GOTQ|CivDOS|2006|01 - Results
GOTQ|CivDOS|2006|02 - Ideas | Game Announcements
... and so on

 

[akaneda]

ok we have the first aspect of the result i can say its definitly: the further difficulty is chosen by the GOTQ-players to be (drums) ----> KING

 

[Alex Johnson]

King is hard for me now, but I think playing GOTQ will improve my skills. And if I lose so what? It's only one game every so often. I can play Prince by myself and King on GOTQ.

 

[Irish Caesar]

It shouldn't be a set difficulty level; part of the fun is mixing it up every month (quarter?). Don't rule out prince, emperor, even warlord, just because a lot of us tend to like king level.

However, it would seem that King gives us a pretty good starting point to go from.

 

[GoldBerg]

It shouldn't be a set difficulty level; part of the fun is mixing it up every month (quarter?). Don't rule out prince, emperor, even warlord, just because a lot of us tend to like king level.
... ...

as we discuss, the SAME scenario is total different at PRiNCE or King.
with just (perhaps) ~5 people playing constantly
it wouldn't be a contest we had to discuss rules for
if we forget about the SAME LEVEL.
and (additional) the look at each others savegames
wouldn't be something
comparative/ 'to learn'
('how did others do it?')

 

[Irish Caesar]

Oh, I'm saying that every month, the level, victory conditions, civilization, and opposition are chosen anew.

So all of us will be playing the same level at the same time, that level just might not be the same from month to month.

 

[Dack]

The following is a excerpt from the READ.ME of version 5

23. Cities must have a population base of five or more to support
taxman or scientist specialists.

24. Under a Despotic government, citizen unhappiness will increase with the
number of cities you control. This may lead to 'very unhappy' citizens,
(recognizable by their red shirts) who must first be coverted to
normal unhappy citizens before then can become contented. This effect
occurs to a lesser degree under other government types.

25. A maximum of 3 units per city may be used to impose martial law.
(i.e. Convert unhappy citizens to content citizens.)

28. The maintainence cost of Barracks has been changed to 1/2/3 coins at
the Prince and King difficulty levels, and 2/3/4 coins at the Emperor level.

I would think the use of version 1 is a cheat given that
1) Taxman or scientist specialists are allow earlier (23)
2) lower unhappiness level (24)
3) martial law use to suppress unhappiness is easier (25)
4) maintenance cost of Barracks has increased (28)

It is just a much easier game. Its been years since I've played a full game in version 1 but doesn't the lost civilization bug ruin the end of the game if conquest is your aim. I can remember searching aimlessly looking for a civilization that did not exist.

"If you destroy a civilization BEFORE it builds its first city, you will not be able to conquer the world. It seems that you need to destroy the civilizations capital for the computer to register its death. This bug occurs even if it is a computer controlled civilization that kills the settler."



As an aside to this thread. This thread has 187 posts in 2 months! Only two threads in this category with more posts.
Only the Civ1 DOS Succession Game! at 232 got more posts in a shorter amount of time and Civ 1 Quiz at 224 took two years to get the same amount of posts. Very interesting!

.​

 

[Irish Caesar]

Has anyone ever seen one of these red-shirted unhappy people?

I have version 4 and have never seen them.

 

[Dack]

Has anyone ever seen one of these red-shirted unhappy people?

Every now and then in version 5. Should be around from version 3.

I have version 4 and have never seen them.

Upgrade to version 5

 

[Irish Caesar]

Thanks.

Will we require v5 from now on?

 

[Tenochtitlan]

As an aside to this thread. This thread has 187 posts in 2 months! Only two threads in this category with more posts.
Only the Civ1 DOS Succession Game! at 232 got more posts in a shorter amount of time and Civ 1 Quiz at 224 took two years to get the same amount of posts. Very interesting!

.​

Cheers to that
I recommend you make more use of visual rhetoric

 

[GoldBerg]

we now have a civDOS sub.

 

[Pikachu]

Wow, a whole subforum just for us


When is the deadline for the first GOTQ/M? And when is the next one going to be released?

Maybe we should decide who should organize the next one soon?

 

[Pikachu]

A new GOTM is released! It looks like a great game

But didn’t we decide that we should play games of the quarter of the year? Why did it suddenly become game of the month again? Are we witnessing a coup here?

Nah, who cares? It looks like Dack is our new leader. Long live Emperor Dack!

 

[Dack]

I am not anyone's leader. I just wanted to get it started. This seemed like a good idea for a scenario. I await yours!

 

[Pikachu]

I am not anyone's leader.

Oh no! So my hopes that a benevolent dictator had emerged was just a pipe dream? What a disappointment!

I just wanted to get it started.

I know, and I thank you for doing this for us. Your scenario looks promising.

But according to our old leader, Goldberg, we were supposed to post scenarios here first and vote for which one should be the next GOTQ. I like your way of doing it better though, but it would be nice if we all some day could come to an agreement on how we do things.

I am quite confused about how the official GOTM decision process works. Do we have any way to distinguish between suggestions and final decisions?

This seemed like a good idea for a scenario. I await yours!

I am not a scenario maker. Does every GOTM have to be a scenario? If I get the chance to organize a GOTM, I would prefer to just start a random game instead. Making scenarios looks like so much work, and I am more interested in playing than working. But maybe that’s just me. I hope you guys keep those great scenarios coming!


And finally a topic from Goldberg’s thread:

and yes - sorry - i didn't expect that people will be that bored with the settler blues before 1750 AD so no 'population game' ever again from my side.

Don’t give up a good goal because of one mistake! We now know that 1750 AD is too late in a prince game, but something like 1 AD or 1000 AD would probably have been great for most of us. If we discuss the goal year in advance we will probably be able to agree on a good one the next time we go for a maximum ‘something’ in a specific year.

 

[Dack]

Post 189
Has anyone ever seen one of these red-shirted unhappy people?

Version 474.05. I was planning to take this city with a bribe. Just before I did my people fell into anarchy. This is what I found after the bribe.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Hmm. I've heard Tech often rates as an unhappy campus...but I haven't seen that particular individual around the city...

I'll let you know if I see any, I guess. After all, I recently found that I've been playing 474.04 this whole time.