Game restraints?

[Cyc]

Here's a different twist. Game restraints. Shall we give back captured cities? Disallow pop-rushing? Steal or ransom all tech advances? Outlaw game restraints?

The possibilities are endless. Shall we test the water, or no?

 

[mickyd47]

Cant remember where I read it but there was someone who played a Civ3 game Friendly.They wouldn't use ivory or use a tile with whales they also would only attack barbarians if they attacked first. We could also make restraints as we go along, there could be a poor backwards civ that we help with money and techs(or we could take the land off them)

 

[civplayah]

Here's a different twist. Game restraints. Shall we give back captured cities? Disallow pop-rushing? Steal or ransom all tech advances? Outlaw game restraints?

The possibilities are endless. Shall we test the water, or no?

Cant remember where I read it but there was someone who played a Civ3 game Friendly.They wouldn't use ivory or use a tile with whales they also would only attack barbarians if they attacked first. We could also make restraints as we go along, there could be a poor backwards civ that we help with money and techs(or we could take the land off them)

I agree with mickyd47

 

[CommandoBob]

I've had this in mind for some time. Not sure if it fits better here or as an SG. Seems like a good time to find out. If it fits, fine. If it doesn't fit, that is fine, too.



Maya, Mia!

This is just an updating and semi-redo of MeteorPunch's Succession Game MP6 - a Madman and his Ladies. That game never finished but I really liked the concept of it.

The only land units we can have
Settler
Worker
Archer
Berserk
Leader
Army

The Ladies
Egypt
Russia
France
England
Spain
Byzantines

Relationships - this will be updated when the game progresses.
The first we meet becomes our first "crush" (yes, even if it's Catherine). We are too shy to trade with her...ever.
The second becomes our "girlfriend." We trade every tech as one for one deals as long as a trade is available until every civ is met.
The third becomes our "lover." Must be the first civ attacked and conquered. Doesn't make any sense? Neither does love.
Fourth is Wife. Mutual partner, must attempt to ally in wars. Last to get the Axe.
Fifth is the "Ex." Must declare war with no trading on the first turn met.
Lastly "mid-life crisis fling." Give every tech,luxury, and resource for 20 turns.

Going Mad
After a "relationship" ends, must do the following. Number corresponds to relation.
1. Crush. Revolt to Anarchy.
2. Girlfriend. Stop research for 10 turns...need gold for a new girlfriend.
3. Lover. Disbands the capital.
5. Ex. Give the "wife" all your gold. If amount is less than 200, must give 20 gpt.
6. Fling. Raise luxury slider to 50% for 10 turns...it's a party!

Variants
Going for conquest victory.
We are somewhat defiant. No giving into demands, but always give into demands by "crush" and "wife." (unless at war)
A turnlog is not necessary, but report any important events.
Pictures and storytelling encouraged...if you want.

Notes
The Fourth Lady we meet will be the last to die and the Third Lady will be the first to die. The others we will have to decide.

Also, if when we meet the Fifth Lady we are not at war with the Third Lady, we should declare war the Third before we declare on the Fifth.

The capital is disbanded when the Third Lady dies, so we won't build any wonders in it.

In his game MeteorPunch allowed only Archers and Berserks as buildable land based units, in addition to Workers, Settlers, Leaders and Armies. The Mayan UU comes much earlier than the Berserk, which is a replacment for the Longbow (Invention).

To somewhat duplicate that limitation, we won't be able to build any land units past Musket/Rifleman, Cavalry and Cannons. Rifles do not require a resource, so if/when we learn Nationalism they become the default defender build. Cannons can upgrade to artillery, but no artillery can be built. Cavalry are a dead end unit.

Water units and air units have no restricion.

Default Mayan city names are not allowed. Instead, city names must come from the movie Mamma, Mia!. Actors, characters, songs, locations are acceptable, as are 'key' people listed in the credits. If it is in the credits, it can be a city name.

 

[Cyc]

I like. I like. The "Going Mad" part gives it an extra twist. Cavalry and Cannons are kind of stretching it, but I don't mind. We'll need them.

Push it and see how it is accepted. Could be a kick in the pants. Might even bring back Ravensfire. That's a good thing.

 

[GenMarshall]

The attack barbarians if they attack first and the no pop rushing appeals to me. Dont want to restrict ourselves too much.

 

[donsig]

CommandoBob's suggestion sure has role playing potential. My guess is it's pretty rulesy for some folks. Would also be interesting on a continents or islands map.

Could we substitute Babylon and still try for a culture victory?

 

[DaveShack]

CommandoBob's suggestion seems too risky to me without some serious modifications. Disband the capitol?

I saw another SG concept called little buddy. The first civ we meet becomes our little buddy, and we have to support that civ in every way possible other than gifting cities. The additional victory condition is that we try to make this civ come in 2nd.

 

[Cyc]

Hey, I like "Little Buddy" also. But I like the "Momma Mia" with a Bablon substitution better. Going for a Culture Victory and dealing with relationships at the same time would be a good test for our government. Even if we had to relocate/disband the Capital. Love - desperate times call for desperate measures.

I'd even agree to Continents with "Momma Mia".

 

[CommandoBob]

The only reason it is Maya, Mia! instead of another civ is only because of the alliteration with Mamma, Mia!. It sounded snappy.

With Babylon, the name change could be to Babby, Mia! or Hammy, Mia!. The syllables still fit, even though the alliteration is gone (which isn't that big an issue).

 

[Furiey]

I remember starting to read about that succession game, I would love to try it either as a succession game or here.

 

[donsig]

CommandoBob's suggestion seems too risky to me without some serious modifications. Disband the capitol?

Isn't not all that risky if you know from the start you're going to do it. The trouble I see with the suggestion is that it is scripted. It sounds great for a succession game (and perhaps we could go that) but we may want something more flexible for the democracy game. Little brother sounds more flexible. Rather than making the little brother the first one we meet we could pick our opponents and before we start the civ game we could vote on which one will be our little brother or sister. We could also pick a mortal enemy for another twist. We wouldn't know when we'd stumble on our mortal enemy nor when we'd be reunited with our long lost little brother/sister.

This kind of thing could be looked upon as the basis of our story line. The little brother/sister civ is family while the mortal enemy civ has been hated by our people since the dawn of time for some ancient transgression. We could develop a whole mythology here. The game restraints would be always war with mortal enemy and always help little brother/sister. We could develop relations with the others based on what they do. The enemy of our enemy is our friend. Mess with my little brother and you're toast. Etc. Seems flexible, especially with victory conditions though it does eliminate conquest, doesn't it?

 

[mickyd47]

I like the idea of the little brother/sister thing and the mortal enemy idea. I think the little brother/sister and enemy should be decided in game. So once we've met most of the Civs we could decide and maybe change at the start of each age.

 

[Cyc]

Wow. I really like the L B/S and ME game too. We have definitely got some cometition here. And some really hard decisions to make. Let's flesh these out a bit more to see if we can find advantages or flaws in each. Man, good job, donsig.

 

[Furiey]

The little Brother/Sister and Mortal Enemy idea would probably work better as a DG, the principles are very simple. I love the ladies idea, but trying to keep track of it in a DG situation would be more complex, it's probably better as a Succession Game. Thinking on whether we would need to have it encoded in our laws, after the DG7 where the 5BC thing was built in I would prefer not to do so now. It makes it just following the law rather than the whole culture of the nation. Could we have a "Vision of Our Nation" type thread where we have all cultural decisions our nation makes - at the start we could maybe just have something like: We are a Civ of culture and aim to dominate the other nations through culture alone (assuming that's how we want to win). We will help our beloved little brother nation of ... in any way we can, while defending us both from our mortal enemies the ... We can come up with names to call these Civs before we know who they are - we just discover what they call themselves when the decision is made on who is little brother and who is the MO. That way we can get the stories going before we know who is who.

 

[civplayah]

Maya Mia sounds fun. How exactly does a relationship end?

 

[civplayah]

CommandoBob's suggestion seems too risky to me without some serious modifications. Disband the capitol?

I saw another SG concept called little buddy. The first civ we meet becomes our little buddy, and we have to support that civ in every way possible other than gifting cities. The additional victory condition is that we try to make this civ come in 2nd.

What is SG?

 

[donsig]

SG is a Succession Game where a group of players take turns playing the save. Usually each player plays ten turns then passes the save to the next player.

 

[Cyc]

Maya Mia sounds fun. How exactly does a relationship end?

Looks like the first doesn't end until that tribe is vanquished.
The second can end once all the tribes have been met.
The third must die also, but they must be the first to be eliminated.
The fourth must die, but they are the last to go.
The fifth must die.
The sixth looks like it ony lasts 20 turns.

That's the way it looks to me

 

[Zearo]

You could also do something like set borders on a pangea map. Once all the land has been taken you can't conquer any more land by conquest- only by culture and propoganda . Conquest could be used to capture a city then weaken there cultural generating buildings then you have to give them back. We could turn the domination victory limit down to make it more even.

We could also play with a set amount of military units, or only a limited amount of gold to fund them with. So many different choices we could play with.