Emperor Cookbook I: Ghandi

[Soirana]

Archipelago. With no water abusive leader. I mean no to dikes and cottons.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Hi,

@Soirana: not sure about archipelago because AIs are genarally weak on these maps...

why not fractal (with someone checking the number of landmasss for us) or a custom continents (which seems to produce more interesting maps than standard continent)? This way we can have both a coastal start and competent AIs.
But I like the idea of a sea start with no cheesy leaders (portuguese, Willy, Darius,Roosevelt...), hopefully some people will NOT build the GL

@ChroniumL: thanks for this game

Cheers,

Raskolnikov

 

[RJM]

Perhaps fewer turns per round.

RJM

 

[carl corey]

I'm currently playing an Archipelago map: some AIs can't get to me before Optics/Astronomy, others can but would have to sail a lot to attack. That means I can easily outtech them while building only a minimum of troops. It's not even a close race. Not sure if this is very usual on Archipelago maps or not...

I'd rather try a Big & Small or Custom Continents map though. Pangaea-like Fractal is indeed an easier map, even easier than the standard Continents map. Well, unless you're the half isolated one.

 

[Soirana]

Maybe medium and small? Although i never played it.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

IMO one of B&S, M&S, or Custom Cont... Someone experienced could make the map and mess with settings (coast shape, number of landmass...)

 

[KingMorgan]

Custom Conts would be good, with a IND leader. Although i'll go with the majority.

I'm involved in lots of B+S/M+S type games at the mo. Isolation is covered by the LHC.

 

[ChromiumL]

So, we definitely want a coastal start. I play almost all of my personal games on big and small or custom continents maps and really love those settings. I agree that we shouldn't go for isolated start... Hmm, I thought I had a custom map generator that dealt with this, but I suppose I don't. But, if we select 3ish continents on custom continents with a standard or large map, we shouldn't be isolated. Of course, we could also just try to find someone who would be willing to make the map up for us again!

Leader is a bit more challenging decision--I am looking at the industrious leaders and so many of them have late game uu and ub.

DeGaulle (Ind/Cha) could be fun, good UU and UB that are late, but not too late...

Roosevelt (Ind/Org) would be nice, especially since he starts with fishing, but that might be a bit cheesy knowing that we are going for a coastal start. Also late game UU and UB

Augustus Caesar (Ind/Imp) might be fun--but praetorians make things a big too easy for all you war-mongers out there .

Same goes for Huayana (Ind/Fin) and his Quechuas...

We just did spiritual leader, so Ramesses II (Ind/Spi) should probably not be considered...

Bismark (Ind/Exp) but both uu and ub are late game (we probably won't get to them).

Stalin (Ind/Agg) might also be interesting, but I don't think you war-mongers need any more advantage (aggressive trait)!

Does anyone else have any traits they would like to see (or not see)? I also vote for industrious -- the other trait I just would rather not see aggressive or Financial

I agree that some of the turnsets are a little long, particularly the second set (1500BC to 400AD). Is anyone here very familiar with the number of turns in each turnset so that we can compare? *EDIT* An epic game has 750 turns--and the Monarcharist Cookbook Bullpen has the original breakdown with number of turns in each set (which has apparently been changed over time)

1. 4000 BC - 1000 BC (120 Turns)
2. 1000 BC - 700 AD (100 Turns)
3. 700 AD - 1300 AD (60 Turns)
4. 1300 AD - 1600 AD (60 Turns)
5. 1600 AD - 1740 AD (40 Turns)
6. 1740 AD - 1820 AD (40 Turns)
7. 1800 AD - 2050 AD (330 Turns)

Here are the current turnsets, and changes I could possibly see:

Round 1: 4000 BC - 1500 BC -- I think this round should stay the same
Round 2: 1500 BC - 400 AD -- maybe 1500 BC to 200ish AD?
Round 3: 400 AD - 1100 AD -- 200ish AD to 900ish AD?
Round 4: 1100 AD - 1500 AD -- 900ish AD to 1300ish AD?
Round 5: 1500 AD - 1700 AD -- 1300ish AD to 1500ish AD?
Round 6: 1700 AD - 1820 AD -- 1600ish AD to 1720ish AD?
Round 7: 1820 AD - 2050 AD -- etc...

I want to get the next game started by Wednesday so that we can do a one week turnaround for each round (Wed-Sun play, Mon-Tues vote). Does anyone have any issue with this? If we change the length of some of the turnsets, it should make playing the round in 5 days a bit easier.

@RRRaskolnikov-- Thanks! I really enjoy running this sort of thing, so unless someone else wants to take the lead on the next game, I am happy to keep it up.

 

[KingMorgan]

Industrious leaders are always good.
I'd vote for DeGaulle or Bismark, aiming for a space race victory. 3 continents are good for space, and we will need a continent to ourselves towards the end.

 

[carl corey]

I don't think I've ever played DeGaulle. He gets a vote from me. He's the one most benefiting from Stonehenge (cheap and gives +1 per city), and it's been a very long time since I last built that wonder.

I agree that Stalin with cheap forges + barracks might be a bit overkill. (heheh) And Huayna, well, he's been overused as is. As are Praetorians.

Roosevelt was a sad (for me) affair in the first Immortal Cookbook, so I'd rather not have him in another cookbook just yet.

Bismark is another solid choice, but as it had been said his UU & UB come very late in the game. Might actually be good to see him in either a Space Race or late Domination win. Half a vote.


About the rounds, I have no idea, as I play Normal in my offline games. As for restricting victory types, I can see a cookbook that would require something other than Domination/Conquest. Or just Cultural and Diplomatic could also be interesting. Not necessarily starting with the next game.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

What about Louis (Ind+Cre, Agri+wheel)?
Otherwise Bismarck or De Gaulle (hum, I always make loosy games with him...don't know why)

 

[carl corey]

Ah, didn't check to see if there are other Industrious leaders. Add him to the mix. My full vote still goes to De Gaulle; as I've said, I've never played with him. (Come to think of it, I haven't played with Stalin either...)

There's also Qin (Ind+Protective). No love for protective, eh? Actually, Qin for me is a pretty straightforward guy: bulb Machinery with Pyramids+Forge GE, with MC from Oracle or simply researched. Protective Cho-ko-nus and end of story. I don't remember if I've ever done it on Emperor though...

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

CKs in the BC...
Well, while nice and fun and all, I don't think this is regular play and a good way to master a level (same as open a level with praets on a small pangea ).
Same with Roosy and the GL IMO (yeah , I am not making friends here )... Gandhi next to Shaka was more educationnal!

Cheers,

Raskolnikov

 

[carl corey]

Well, we could put Qin next to Mongolia and Carthage.

 

[Roxlimn]

I think Expansive is a better way to get the hang of any particular level. Passive bonuses, and it complements nearly any other trait or strategy. It certainly encourages you to play the map. Sury's already taken by the Prince CTL. How about Izzy?

 

[carl corey]

Izzy's not bad, but we've already had a Spiritual leader. It's time we learned how to change civics responsibly.

 

[Soirana]

Personally i would like Louis. Nice haircut at least

 

[carl corey]

If we've voting hair styles I think I'll go with Cathy.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Personally i would like Louis. Nice haircut at least

Louis is Sury's brother beware!
and is also my favorite ind leader... (What tastes i have )

 

[Roxlimn]

How about Peter, then? I don't see a lot of games with him, and he's got the Philo trait to make it a little easier. Works well with Expansive providing good vertical growth.