Fall from heaven SG - High to Low

[Ichabod]

After seeing that the RFC SG is getting a good amount of atention, I decided to make another SG featuring an extraordinary mod for Civilization IV, this time Fall from Heaven (FfH).

For those who don't know it, here's a link to the part of the forum dedicated to it: http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=190

And here's the link to download it:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=1

I'll be accepting people that haven't played this mod, if there's interest, so don't be ashamed to admit it .


Settings:

I haven't decided all the settings yet, just some of them:

1st. We will play with the "high to low" option on - This is a challenge offered by the mod in which you need to become the leader of the scoreboard three times. The first two times you do it, next turn you'll change control from your civilization to the one that is in the bottom of the scoreboard. Only after you do it the third time that you are allowed to win the game.

Yeah, It's very difficult, but also very fun. It's nice trying to crawl out of the big mess that the AIs do to their civilization and things can become very challenging.

2nd. We will use the Erebus Continents Map Script (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=308590). Erebus is the fantasy land in which the FfH lore develops. There's a map script called Erebus that comes with the Mod that is very flavorful and fun, but also very imbalanced (due to some civilizations flavour starts). Erebus Continents keeps the nice things about the Erebus map script and fixes some problems, so it's a very nice choice.

3rd. We will have more AI opponents than the standard number based on map size.

The rest of the settings are open to discussion and can be voted.


I guess a 6 man roster is a good number, so:

Roster:
1. Ichabod
2. Ozbenno
3. Jusos2108
4. Bill Bisco
5. Brian Shanahan
6. Fleme (last in the list due to thight schedule in the next month)


I'll leave this open for discussion on the settings and etc. before generating the map.

So, anybody up to the challenge?

 

[dot]

No sign up. Just a subscription post! This may prove to be interesting.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

Subscription for me too, with 4 SGs going (including SGOTM) and an R-Rolo special signed up for I'll be too busy despite having a big interest in FFH recently, due mainly to lurking the PBEMs at Realms Beyond.

Though a few months down the line if you need cover or replacement I'd be happy to help.

Edit: my two cents on settings, stay away from Epic speed, it's significantly longer than in BtS, normal should be well long enough.

 

[CiverDan]

Just lurking. One thought on settings. I suggest No Hyborem unless you want to be virtually assured being switched to Infernals the third time through.

 

[Ichabod]

Thanks for the support, guys. Hope that I'll find some people interested in playing.

Just lurking. One thought on settings. I suggest No Hyborem unless you want to be virtually assured being switched to Infernals the third time through.

Yeah, you are right. I'll leave this one open to discussion, but I tendo to agree with you. Another problem is hell terrain in the late game. Depending on the settings, things can get pretty ugly for not so great computers to handle.

 

[Civ'ed]

I'll be subscribing, but when the game starts, and I'm guessing it's FfH 2, you could start as Hippus. They start with one free horse (Hippus Palace bonus).

 

[Ozbenno]

I'm in, have hosted two of these games before (High to Low), its pretty hard, especially the last change.

Links to the two games:

OB07 (we won!)
OB08 (we gave up!!)

 

[mcwill123]

Good luck Ichabod. I hope you get enough people. I'm currently very involved in another FFH succession game (Orbis) and enjoying it very much. Just the one game keeps me pretty busy or I would consider joining this one.

 

[Ichabod]

Ozbenno,

Welcome aboard. I have to say that's very nice to see you joining this SG, since these games you posted made me try FfH for the first time, specially with the "high to low" option.

Epic games!


mcwill123,

thanks for the support . If we son't find enough people, prepare to get your PM box spammed .

 

[Jusos2108]

I was planning to lurk only, but since you're having problems to get the crew together I could join. Although I haven't played FfH that much, I have beaten all the scenarios though.

 

[Fleme]

Now this is something I find interesting although I prefer Fall Further over the "vanilla" FFH2. Still, an immensely interesting topic.

I've never played a SG nor do I know whether I'd be fit for it because of my tight schedule up till christmas or the obvious need for somewhat regular play but this really piques my interest.

It's also my opinion that FFH gets better as you play it on slower speeds, higher difficulties and larger maps so I suppose none of those criteria would make me suitable for the game (as I think the general census is usually something around normal/monarch/medium) but I'll definitely keep an eye out for this one.

I've never played High to Low either but that should definitely make for an interesting game.

 

[Ichabod]

Welcome aboard, Jusos. Thanks for the support.

Fleme, we haven't decided the settings yet. I was going to propose playing in emperor or higher difficulty and a large map, so that's not so different from your favorite settings.

I don't have a problem in palying a SG with a slower pace. Busy schedules are a common thing around here, so I think it's comprehensible that sometimes we're going to have to wait a bit.

Anyway, if you want to join, I'll be very happy. If that's not the case, don't forget to drop some comments once in a while.

 

[Fleme]

Well I could give my thumbs up in joining but as stated, I haven't tried my hand in SGs and I'm unsure whether I'm up to the kind of commentary I see a lot of people doing on this forum. That said, there's a first thing for everything and I guess I could give a go at it with the reservation that I might not be very active before christmas (killer schedule up to that point, really)

So, go ahead and consider this my submission. Looking forward to it.

 

[Bill Bisco]

I'm interested in giving this a try, however I want the Illians to be included in the list of Civs, and I want us to play as Auric as the first Civ.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

On second thoughts I'll be in. I've one SG pretty much died on me, one won, and one about to finish in a few sets (probable loss), so I acutally have time here.

 

[Fleme]

That makes six then doesn't it?

Should we start the settings discussion?

 

[Ichabod]

Sorry for the absence. I had an extremely busy weekend.

Yes, we should start the discussions now.

So, is there any objections about the settings I decided by myself?
These are High to low checked in, Erebus continents map script and more civs than usual played by the AI. This is the way I wanted this game to be played, but I don't have a problem changing it if the majority prefers.

Others settings to be decided are:

1. Map Size: If we play high to low, it's very likely that the game will take quite some time, so bare that in mind when choosing a map size. Late game FfH can be very exigent with the computer. I'd prefer to play standard or large.

2. Difficulty: FfH is way easier, IMO, than BTS. I wouldn't mind playing Deity, but it would be very hard with high to low. So, my vote goes to emperor difficulty.

3. Number of Civs: It depends on the map size, so i'll hold my vote about it.

4. Starting Civ: I don't mind playing random, but the game will be very difficult if we start with a Civ with slow development. The first high to low switch is critical, we should aim to do it as fast as possible.

Bill Bisco already voted for the Illians. I find them really nice. But I can't the team will decide to start with them.

5. Other special settings:

5.1.: Compact Enforced: This will prevent the Infernals and Basium from entering the game. I'd like this to be on, but it will make our second switch likely to be to the Infernals.

5.2.: No hell terrain: Hell terrain really screws my computer, so I don't like playing with it. But I wouldn't mind it being on, since patience is a virtue ;p.

5.3.: Permanent alliances: I like checking it when playing high to low, since it helps to save situations that are almost lost. It makes the game easier, most of the tomes.

5.4.: No Acheron: Acheron is a bad choice for this game because the AI can handle it. Some civs are likely to get destroyed by constantly suiciding troops trying to kill him. So I vote to check it.

5.5.: Living World: Events are always nice!

5.6.: <insert other settings that you'd like to be on>


So, let's hear some opinions.

 

[Fleme]

1. Map Size: If we play high to low, it's very likely that the game will take quite some time, so bare that in mind when choosing a map size. Late game FfH can be very exigent with the computer. I'd prefer to play standard or large.

Definitely Large. On a standard map it's way more difficult to come back from a weak position when there are less weaklings to prey upon. If I had my say it'd be huge but I'm going with what I assume to be the general concensus and vote large. And yea, those 200+ stacks eat away the best of computers.

2. Difficulty: FfH is way easier, IMO, than BTS. I wouldn't mind playing Deity, but it would be very hard with high to low. So, my vote goes to emperor difficulty.

I'll say Immortal but Emperor is fine.

3. Number of Civs: It depends on the map size, so i'll hold my vote about it.

Standard +2, Large +3, Huge +5

4. Starting Civ: I don't mind playing random, but the game will be very difficult if we start with a Civ with slow development. The first high to low switch is critical, we should aim to do it as fast as possible.

Bill Bisco already voted for the Illians. I find them really nice. But I can't the team will decide to start with them.

Playing a rusher first is an ok option tbh - it will inevitably get hard as it progresses. I'd be fine with Illians first since it would also set up a strong AI contender or alternatively the last switch to. Either way, an aggressive leader first is a plus.

5.1.: Compact Enforced: This will prevent the Infernals and Basium from entering the game. I'd like this to be on, but it will make our second switch likely to be to the Infernals.

I don't mind either way.

5.2.: No hell terrain: Hell terrain really screws my computer, so I don't like playing with it. But I wouldn't mind it being on, since patience is a virtue ;p.

To me it's a part of the game really. I mean, seeing Erebus become Hell is a central element of the game, is it not? I vote + on Hell terrain.

5.3.: Permanent alliances: I like checking it when playing high to low, since it helps to save situations that are almost lost. It makes the game easier, most of the tomes.

Well, this could bite us in the ass too since the AI is by no means above making these alliances and it takes away from it all. I personally vote against because I like the challenge - we have some limited power to affect our game through our decisions and those should be our tools - not relying on the AI to do our deeds for us.

5.4.: No Acheron: Acheron is a bad choice for this game because the AI can handle it. Some civs are likely to get destroyed by constantly suiciding troops trying to kill him. So I vote to check it.

No objections. Acheron doesn't really add to the game but I personally don't mind either way.

5.5.: Living World: Events are always nice!

Seconded.

5.6.: <insert other settings that you'd like to be on>

I don't know why but I kind of must have both Bannor and the Sheaim in game when I play FfH. Obviously I don't, but somehow I feel that they need to be there. Can't think of anything proper right now, I'll add more as the discussion starts up proper.

Edit: Thought of something right away! Speed! I'm a Marathon supporter and it would also give more room (time) to wiggle out of weak situations but as I'm pretty sure people will vote against it, I'm fine with Epic as well.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

1) Map size I'd go for Standard, with normal speed. Anytime I play Epic I get giant SoDs on all sides in the late game, the slog I could do without. Map style I think Erebus continents, plain Erebus can be just too difficult a start if we get the wrong civ.
2) I'm running in the FFH1 adventure over at Realms Beyond and that's monarch, I'm handling Prince easily in SP so Emperor is doable for me in a SG (I find for 20 turns and the concentration needed 2 level jumps from SP are pretty all right)
3) Whatever standard gives us, I think 7? We could go one extra if we want.
4) I always pick random civ so I don't mind who we go with, though Lanun may be overpowered if we start with them.
5) I like the settings, my computer can handle Hell Terrain (so far) but I've only ever gone to about 40% so higher may kill my computer too. And if others can't do it then I shouldn't force the issue.
6) I'm on patch "o" so I'd say we should go with that. If not I can work back if directed to the right place.

Quick ideas:
I usually play a bit more conservatively in FfH from the start going with 2 warrior builds before popping a worker, due to extra barbs. That may be a sensible idea.
Score is a funciton mainly of population land and techs, so I think an early REX is in order, to get us onto the 2nd civ quickly. We'll want time, especially on the last civ, IMO to be ready.
What is the preferred victory path? If we decided early to prioritise one over the others it might be a good idea, and I'd say something like the Altar or Tower victories will be out of bounds.

 

[Jusos2108]

1. The bigger the better, but I'll settle for large.

2. Difficulty level should be high, so that we actually have to work for the victory, so Immortal or Emperor.

3. If the map is large, then maybe 9/10.

4. Doesn't matter to me.

5. Hell terrain on and no permanent alliances, they can ruin the game. Acheron is okay, but if you guys don't want it, that's fine too. And yes events are nice.

EDIT: Oh and speed could be epic, but normal is fine too. Marathon might be too long.