D+3 Classic SG: The Future Roman Superpower

Ok, I'm sorry. There's no excuse for my taking this long to complete my turns. For my atonement, I will offer up to the next player a generous situation and a challenge.

1762 (0) -- Opening situation -- we're at war with the other three civs as a Fundy country. 91 Roman cities versus 7 Aztec, 16 Persian, and 4 Indian cities, each civ with at least one city hidden from sight. 73 M pop. some units to move and a few tweeks conducted. Take Tula & elimiate the consequences.

1764 (1) -- Discover Recycling and opt for Space Flight (only choice) move stuff -- pop a hut for Augustadorum, and note that two alliances crop up among our enemies.

1766 (2) -- Discover Space Flight & use food trucks/buy the wonder accordingly.

1768 (3) -- Make the move on a few Aztec cities, taking Xoch and Malnalco, while razing Tamuin in the process. Very few parts appear. Note the locations of the remaining targets & begin to set up appropriate boat chanins. Take Sidon and establish a beachhead in Persia.

1770 (4) -- Quietly move more units, and decide to scope out one of the last two Aztec ones. Pop a hut for barbs and buy one. Also have two boats (and spies) in the vicinity of a barb outbreak between Ganges and Hamadan. Barbs break out near Tingis and Oea. Good thing the Old & Slow curse arrived late in the game.

1772 (5) -- Discover Environmentalism and opt for Plastics (only choice) A domestic delivery of uranium nets 1.3K after waiting a couple of turns to beef up the target city. Meanwhile a foreign delivery of spice nets 1.4K. Take Texcoco, and the size 7 city only produces one Partisan, who is quickly dispatched. Drop off three boats of units (one entire transport of engineers) to Persia and take Susa, with the capital moving to Tarsus. Finish cleaning up the last of the pollution.

So the situation is this -- a Pet Aztec city with some nearby units -- should fall next turn. Four Indian cities, three in one location and another easily reachable (I airlifted a tank, and there's two engineers roadbuilding their way to Ganges. Punjab has yet to build -- the next player can opt for a tank or something else. I have a single boat chain toteh other three cities, and the units in Kolhapur have yet to move, so a landing can be made this turn.

I decided to deliver a few trucks for the early portion of 1772, and I think we're ok in that department (14K in funds and it looks like a full stream of beakers) but there a few more trucks for the next player that can go places. There's a triple boat chain available nest turn from Assunto Goon to Sidon, but only one boat's worth of units sleeping in the city -- next player will have to build/airdrop to fill the remaining gaps.

I think that the next player can take out the Aztecs and Indians with a sneeze. My challenge: can he also take out the Persions (currently on four different islands) within the next five turns?

 

Nice job even if it took a lot of time. At a quick glance it looks as if the Persians should be easy to finish off in 5 turns using a combination of ground troops (already on their main island), nukes, stealth fighters and paratroopers. We have plenty of cash so anything needed can be rush bought.

Duke plays next.

On to the next game! (assuming there's interest)

 

We don't have stealth and, as a personal choice, I don't use Nukes...

So, we'll see what I can do.

 

Sorry, I couldn't use five turns to get them all killed... I only used three.

Final score is 3307.

Here is the final just before taking the last AI city. I did manage to build all the engineers into cities just for fun. Plus, here is the main Persian continent just before taking the last city to rid us of all the annoying partisans. I did get to stealth on the last turn, but never got to build any of them.

We had so much money and so many units I set and rush built everything close by and ignored 80-90% of the cities.

I'll have to decline the next game, too much stuff going on right now to be able to commit to it regularly.

 

Wow! That was quick (i.e. few turns). I forgot that we didn't have stealth - I wouldn't have expected this to be possible in only three turns without these high-tech weapons.

Well, I'm interested in a new game (and even in starting a new one myself if no one else does). However, interest in these Civ 2 succession games seems to be gradually declining which is natural given the declining number of Civ 2 players. So I'm a bit worried this may have been the very last succession game here. If I'm wrong I'm interested in a new game, a far more challenging game than this one was. The geography was intended to make it more difficult but I was terribly wrong there, it was an easy one. So in a possible new game I'd want weird geography, no exchange of maps and possibly deity+4 instead of deity+3. Possibly some more new ideas as well.

I wonder if there is sufficient interest but I'm not particularly optimistic.

 

My availability for another game should go up around the end of the year/start of next year. I'll certainly chip in if you want to run another one, particularly if it starts around then. I could probably even start earlier than that since the first turns don't usually take too long. But I'd have a harder time managing the more involved mid-late turns until then.

 

So far I never played a succession game....and after following you're game in this thread I'm interested in joining a new game. So far never played a deity+ game so that's also interesting for me.

@The Viking...with no exchange of maps you mean that it's not allowed to change maps with AI-civs (with diplomats or Marco Polo)?

 

I have never played succession game either, and would very much be interested in playing. I think it would probably help my game quite a bit so that I could get better at GoTM's.

 

I to have never played this type of succession game, I've been following this thread and found it very interesting.

I'd be interested in playing as well.

 

Great! Looks like there might be sufficient interest here for a new game to be started, thanks to a few new players. A few more players are needed, however, so I'm going to wait a bit to see if more players are interested. At the moment we seem to be 5 but I'd prefer 6-8 players.

Notes:

* By no exchange of maps I mean we'd not be allowed to exchange maps with the AI civs via MP or diplomats. This makes the game far more challenging, we would not get complete knowledge of the world until Apollo. Black clicking would be discouraged as well.

* The Classic version of Civ2 is required. It's not possible to play Deity+ in the more recent versions.

* Most of the players should have experince playing at deity level. Deity+ experience is not required.

 

I have the classic version so no problems for me. I hope we can start soon with the game.

 

I love reading these succession game threads. They are very beneficial to me because they remind me how very much detail- and goal-oriented play can improve your game. I can win handily on deity, but tend to be kind of "lazy". I kind of do "enough" to win, but don't push the envelope, which has hurt my game. I think this is related to the reason succession games are played so well. When every player is "fresh", they can focus all their energy on "perfect" (I use that term loosely) play. I honestly think that all those little details and keeping track of moving goals during the game is the difference between good play and great play. A great player, for instance, is constantly trying to extend trade, get huge bonuses from trade, and invest those returns intelligently in reworking his empire. In contrast, I know that I tend to do "ok" on trade. I'm not a master of unblocking, I never calculate wildcards, and I often don't match supply with demand (I do when it's convenient, but I don't typically bother to do it as much as I know I should - it definitely is a rush when I deliver a demanded oil or silk and see that 2/3 beaker limit tripped). As Solo has noted, many of the advances in Early landing times came from trade advances. I'm plannning on applying the lessons I've learned from reading this thread to the next GOTM. I know I won't get the high score, but hopefully I'll have a decent showing and have fun doing it.

 

I'll be keen for another succession game. I haven't been playing much lately due to work pressure but the style of rounds of turns would suit my timetable well.

 

Although I've never played in a succession game, and I've never played above deity, I'd be game for the next succession game if the other players will have me.

 

Just want to say thank you guys for the way you post your reports, been reading through a lot of them for this and many of your other D+2/3 games and have learnt a heck of a lot!

Just played through my first full D+3 game (by full, I mean I survived til 1927 when the Persians got to Alpha Centauri) and almost had my ship built as well.

Keep up the great work

 

I think it would be cool to see these guys crank it up to D+4.
Or is D+4 too wacky?

 

I have no idea how hard D+4 is. But after playing D+3 I think it is possible but without any restrictions. I like to give it a try but then more players should join in.....

 

I'll play a deity plus 4 game.

 

I'll go with the flow, though I have no clue what D4 would entail. Has anyone ever posted any strategies for the early going?? One thing I request though, please let's keep the Barbs at Raging. Wraith just has too much potential to unbalance the play...imho.

Monk

Just noticed: Congrats to Magic_gorter who is the new Civ2 Mod!!

 

I doubt that the early strategy for deity plus 4 would be radically different from that of deity plus 3. All citizens would still be black hats, the only real change would be increased tech costs and a harder time beating the computer to wonders.

If you want to keep the barbs at raging hordes, that is fine with me, though in previous deity plus three succession games the players did manage to deal adequately with the barbarians. I think barbarian wrath adds an interesting aspect/challenge to the game, including some early conflict.