lunfa_reo
Warlord
This Friday I could play an Internet game in the evening. I'm at GMT -3 and have the same user name in GameSpy.
Internet Game - CFC game
- Thread starter Luthor_Saxburg
- Start date
gfurst
Warlord
Buenas
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
So anyone up for a game starting sometime within the next few hours or so?
lunfa_reo
Warlord
Returning home now, I'll be online in around 1 hour.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Kk, anyone else?
I just hope I don't fall asleep in the meantime.
I just hope I don't fall asleep in the meantime.
lunfa_reo
Warlord
Online at GameSpy now...
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Okay I'll be there in five minutes or so.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Alright, both I and lunfa_reo are on Gamespy now and preparing to launch a game. It's called CFCGame and the password is 1234. Whoever wants to join is free to do so.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Never mind that, since it's only me and lunfa_reo we decided to play a 2on2 teamed with some randoms instead.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
I hereby proudly proclaim that lunfa_reo has as of this moment won a conquest victory on his very first pub game! Granted, it helped that his neighbor left the game at some point while my own plunged me into a war that lasted from 2.000 BC to 1920 AD when lunfa swooped in after I peacevassaled to him sometime in the Middle Ages.
lunfa_reo
Warlord
Thanks, that was a very nice game! Indeed my neighbor leaving early helped me a lot, and also the fact Knoedel was dragged into an eternal war with the remaining guy.
I had a lot of fun and Knoedel is a great teammate!
PS: oh, also the fifth guy declared and suicided his settler and warrior against me around 3600 BC. That really helped too...
I had a lot of fun and Knoedel is a great teammate!
PS: oh, also the fifth guy declared and suicided his settler and warrior against me around 3600 BC. That really helped too...
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
PS: oh, also the fifth guy declared and suicided his settler and warrior against me around 3600 BC. That really helped too...
Oh I totally forgot that we were five players in the beginning! Well it was hours ago, I can´t remember everything, but that sure was funny.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Alrighty then, do we have more players available tonight, i.e. in 2-3 hours?
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
Nobody? Really?
Anyway I just finished downloading Equestria Girls, which means I will be watching it now which in turns means I will not be available for the next one and a half hour. When I come back I hope to more activity here.
Anyway I just finished downloading Equestria Girls, which means I will be watching it now which in turns means I will not be available for the next one and a half hour. When I come back I hope to more activity here.
Hello there LoR fellas, I've been reading some posts on LoR forums and then I ended up here. It's nice to see other people playing MP LoR, I thought only me and my two friends who live nearby still did that.
If possible I would like to see how is it to play with you guys. It seems you are not used to LoR MPs and prefer an enjoyable to a competitive game. I'm used to play under heavy pressure (Deity, Huge, Marathon, Start Minor, Ruthless AI, real world gen), but I think it's ok to spend a good time playing.
But as of the Revolution mechanic, how is it that you play with it and without AIs? Is it possible? Or did I understand something wrong?
BTW I have here at least two other players on the same timezone, GMT-3. My availability is going to get limited by the next week, but at least it'll become organized. Now I have a lot of spare time, but anything may happen at any time.
If possible I would like to see how is it to play with you guys. It seems you are not used to LoR MPs and prefer an enjoyable to a competitive game. I'm used to play under heavy pressure (Deity, Huge, Marathon, Start Minor, Ruthless AI, real world gen), but I think it's ok to spend a good time playing.
But as of the Revolution mechanic, how is it that you play with it and without AIs? Is it possible? Or did I understand something wrong?
BTW I have here at least two other players on the same timezone, GMT-3. My availability is going to get limited by the next week, but at least it'll become organized. Now I have a lot of spare time, but anything may happen at any time.
Imperator Knoedel
Currently obsessed with The Owl House
I doubt any of us play on your level, so if we played competitively you would most likely wipe the floor with us. 
I´m not really sure what you are trying to say about us playing with revolutions but without AIs.
Okay then, would it be possible to organize a game this weekend?
I´m not really sure what you are trying to say about us playing with revolutions but without AIs.
Okay then, would it be possible to organize a game this weekend?
lunfa_reo
Warlord
Count me in for LoR MP. I play at Prince but can adjust to some other level (preferrably if most players in the game are human). I'd only ask we play with Revolutions OFF.
Friday or Saturday evenings (GMT-3) are fine for me.
Friday or Saturday evenings (GMT-3) are fine for me.
Depending on the time you prefer to play I may say which day is better.
By Revolutions without AIs I was talking about the revolution mechanic where a new nation may be formed by revolutionaries in someone's city(ies). This mechanic can't create new human players (but if they are willing to play on noble, this could be a nice idea as you can enter on the game and take this new AI slot), so an AI will spawn. If you play with no AIs what do you do with this mechanic? You simply turn it off? Or you let AIs spawn if you are facing rebellion?
I'm not proposing a competitive game, exactly because I've been playing like this for years and you haven't, so it would be unfair. A nice game just to see how it goes. If you get interested in learning LoR then one day maybe we can play competitive. Me and my friends are eager to play a big LoR game with more diplomacy then our 2 or 3 player games. 2 player competitive game on LoR under our options most of the time never sees a war between the players, because:
1- It's too early and the war will surely make both players lose to a more powerful AI;
or
2- It's too late, and the war will never end with a winning side, but both would be stagnated and revolutions would surely balance the international scenario again.
My last great game saw the Capitalist Power (me as Hannibal of Carthage) with more then 100 cities and the Communist Power (my friend as Gilgamesh of Sumeria) also with more then 100 cities simply end due to my offer of defeat, because we reached the point where we had to attack each other and nobody else was free. We spent most of the game (1600 - 2030 in marathon) locked on a world war against the aztec archipelago, which had all religions and most random events. This eternal war possibilited us to expand indefinetly, but when the war was over and we both had nukes against each other the end was clear: We wouldn't be able to conquer each other, and at the same time both our empires would crumble because of the instability that was increasing because we had no more cities to conquer.
So I gave up, instead of losing more time on this 200 hours game, that we played for more then a year. So here is a pic for you to see when we finally handled the Aztec military (for most of the time the relation between our armies and his army was 0.1, which means that his military capacity was so superior that we couldn't be sure because there is no smaller relation then 0.1):
By Revolutions without AIs I was talking about the revolution mechanic where a new nation may be formed by revolutionaries in someone's city(ies). This mechanic can't create new human players (but if they are willing to play on noble, this could be a nice idea as you can enter on the game and take this new AI slot), so an AI will spawn. If you play with no AIs what do you do with this mechanic? You simply turn it off? Or you let AIs spawn if you are facing rebellion?
I'm not proposing a competitive game, exactly because I've been playing like this for years and you haven't, so it would be unfair. A nice game just to see how it goes. If you get interested in learning LoR then one day maybe we can play competitive. Me and my friends are eager to play a big LoR game with more diplomacy then our 2 or 3 player games. 2 player competitive game on LoR under our options most of the time never sees a war between the players, because:
1- It's too early and the war will surely make both players lose to a more powerful AI;
or
2- It's too late, and the war will never end with a winning side, but both would be stagnated and revolutions would surely balance the international scenario again.
My last great game saw the Capitalist Power (me as Hannibal of Carthage) with more then 100 cities and the Communist Power (my friend as Gilgamesh of Sumeria) also with more then 100 cities simply end due to my offer of defeat, because we reached the point where we had to attack each other and nobody else was free. We spent most of the game (1600 - 2030 in marathon) locked on a world war against the aztec archipelago, which had all religions and most random events. This eternal war possibilited us to expand indefinetly, but when the war was over and we both had nukes against each other the end was clear: We wouldn't be able to conquer each other, and at the same time both our empires would crumble because of the instability that was increasing because we had no more cities to conquer.
So I gave up, instead of losing more time on this 200 hours game, that we played for more then a year. So here is a pic for you to see when we finally handled the Aztec military (for most of the time the relation between our armies and his army was 0.1, which means that his military capacity was so superior that we couldn't be sure because there is no smaller relation then 0.1):
Spoiler :
Attachments
lunfa_reo
Warlord
That surely looks like a very interesting game. Good thing you and your friend stayed motivated to play it over a period of one year, and it being an Internet game and not a PBEM for example.
I understand what you mean about Revolutions. Anyway I said before I'd ask for Revolutions to be turned OFF for our possible game regardless of what you mentioned, but I can still relate my reasons to what you said:
- If civs spawning from revolutions would be AI, then there's the difficulty level issue, that could be solved by having every civ playing on Noble. But the thing is, I enjoy multiplayer because of the interaction with other human players. For me, the fewer AIs a MP game has, the better (the ideal being 0 AIs).
- Allowing other human players to take control of the civs spawned from revolutions would lead to players entering and quitting the game often. Which means time lost waiting for connections, civs switching control from AI to human and back, etc. What I like about Internet games originated from a forum chat like this one is it allows for a stable and particular game with a previous consensus on most of its parameters. Players entering and exiting a game continuously OTOH happens in ad-hoc Internet games mostly, and frankly to have that happen in the game, I'd rather go and look for an open game in the lobby and join, instead of focusing on creating a nice pre-arranged setup, which is what we are discussing here.
The former issues can be resolved by turning Revolutions OFF for our game. This would actually be even better for me since I don't like Revolutions in LoR. The LoR games I played with the feature ON ended up frustrating me because whenever I tried to stop, recover and REX a little between wars, revolutions wouldn't let me. It was either keep on conquering enemy cities (even when in non R games you would stop if yo judged it convenient for whatever reason) or fighting uprising continuously. The last one is particularly painful because most of your cities are in permanent disorder and therefore don't produce anything. So you don't grow, don't tech, don't anything, you just fight rebels and it doesn't matter if you defeat them, because they will be there again to fight in a few turns.
OTOH I had no problems with Revolutions in an old version of C2C I used to play. Maybe it was because that version or the game speed I played was not balanced, but the several ways C2C introduced to combat instability made it much easier to avoid uprisings. Which created the ironic situation of Revolutions being irrelevant in that game.
In LoR, I find Revolutions frustrating, while I love most of its other features.
So, to sum it up, please let's switch Revolutions OFF
I understand what you mean about Revolutions. Anyway I said before I'd ask for Revolutions to be turned OFF for our possible game regardless of what you mentioned, but I can still relate my reasons to what you said:
- If civs spawning from revolutions would be AI, then there's the difficulty level issue, that could be solved by having every civ playing on Noble. But the thing is, I enjoy multiplayer because of the interaction with other human players. For me, the fewer AIs a MP game has, the better (the ideal being 0 AIs).
- Allowing other human players to take control of the civs spawned from revolutions would lead to players entering and quitting the game often. Which means time lost waiting for connections, civs switching control from AI to human and back, etc. What I like about Internet games originated from a forum chat like this one is it allows for a stable and particular game with a previous consensus on most of its parameters. Players entering and exiting a game continuously OTOH happens in ad-hoc Internet games mostly, and frankly to have that happen in the game, I'd rather go and look for an open game in the lobby and join, instead of focusing on creating a nice pre-arranged setup, which is what we are discussing here.
The former issues can be resolved by turning Revolutions OFF for our game. This would actually be even better for me since I don't like Revolutions in LoR. The LoR games I played with the feature ON ended up frustrating me because whenever I tried to stop, recover and REX a little between wars, revolutions wouldn't let me. It was either keep on conquering enemy cities (even when in non R games you would stop if yo judged it convenient for whatever reason) or fighting uprising continuously. The last one is particularly painful because most of your cities are in permanent disorder and therefore don't produce anything. So you don't grow, don't tech, don't anything, you just fight rebels and it doesn't matter if you defeat them, because they will be there again to fight in a few turns.
OTOH I had no problems with Revolutions in an old version of C2C I used to play. Maybe it was because that version or the game speed I played was not balanced, but the several ways C2C introduced to combat instability made it much easier to avoid uprisings. Which created the ironic situation of Revolutions being irrelevant in that game.
In LoR, I find Revolutions frustrating, while I love most of its other features.
So, to sum it up, please let's switch Revolutions OFF
Actually I wasn't supporting the idea of revolutions, just questioning its presence with the idea of a game with no AIs.
You explained a lot about MP games over there. I'm not used to them, the only MPs I play are with these 2 friends over LAN. The idea of other ppl joining was just a thought, and you showed me how hard to handle it would be.
I can agree with your idea, it's not my intention to ask any game option to be on or off, my only unavoidable demand is that we play LoR, nothing more. I've been playing LoR for years, so I have no idea how the vanilla game is anymore. The few things I remember just bring me painful memories (trirremes evolving to frigates and then evolving to destroyers, no Trafalgar Square, no range bombard, no inquisitions, no IDW - where every won battle gives culture to the tiles around it). So if you want to play another mod or the vanilla game I wouldn't be interested in playing.
About your frustration with revolutions I would like to say something: I have already felt the same, it's really frustrating when you are consumed by Revolutions. But as time went on I discovered lots of things to manage revolutions, so here go some tips:
- Your Government Civic is the strongest factor in managing revolutions. If you are despotism in the beggining of the game, I would say to stick to your cheesy ring and don't exceed 4 cities. The cheesy ring is the ring where distance maintenance cost is less then 1 (in vanilla civ this was 0, that's why it's cheesy ring. LoR introduces fractions, so it's not 0 anymore). Here is the cheesy ring: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/city_upkeep.php. If you make cities close to the capital they rebel less. Another tip for this era of despotism is: 2 units are awesome compared to 1. At least that's my impression, cities with 2 troops resist a lot better then with a single troop.
- After you manage to become Hereditary Rule, things like commerce/gold, culture and garrison matter more then distance. If you become the supreme Hereditary Ruler, you will boost happiness with troops, making your cities bigger (which is worse for stability) but with a big garrison (which is better for stability), while your city will become productive and then can make culture and commerce/gold (enhancing even more the stability). If you manage to become the strongest army you may keep getting bigger because conquering cities is the fastest stability booster after a good bribe. If you manage to be rich, you may bribe the rebels, that's always a good idea (if it's in the first stages of Warning it's even better because it's cheaper and it's effects last longer). Planning a big conquest period that ends after getting constitution is the best plan.
- After this you have to consider your plans: If the idea is to get Huge (Domination), Universal Suffrage is your best friend for stability. If your idea isn't get huge, you may choose whichever government civic is better for you, because small nations have no issues of rebellion if they manage themselves nicely (not being attacked constantly or trying to handle a 3-shrines city running theocracy).
After you incorporate these lessons you'll never have revolution problems again. On this game I showed I have never had a single revolution inside my Empire, neither did my friend.
But you may still see revolutions as a boring mechanic which only makes your game harder and worse. But who said you can't make someone else rebel to you? With uber generals (how stronger a troops is, more culture it gives to a tile in which it wins a battle) or espionage missions or just a lot of culture in your borders you can make foreign cities rebel to you.
When a single city is rebelling to you you get a temporary discount in unit maintenance cost (which decreases constantly as the turns pass), some rebel troops outside the city (you may get your Unique Units, but not the ones of the guy who is rebelling, but you may get troops he can make and you can't, like his rifles while you don't have rifling) and if you're lucky a spy inside the city already at a 50% stationary discount (all units without XP, but rarely you may get a special unit with a "use enemy roads" or woodsman III - without woods I and II - ups, the AI loves to get these).
That's already awesome, but if you make 2 or more cities rebel to you, depending on your size/power (i'm not sure what actually) you will get GGens to use how you desire and even settlers (that's something that only happened when the guy rebelling was bigger then me) plus everything else said above, and of course even more troops.
So revolutions can be quite interesting in the game. I'm playing my second Egyptian LoR MP with a friend, and I did the same thing on both games: Started small, built one of my first cities right beside my capital, let the closest minor take the city and wait for it to rebel. After rebelling I could forget about making troops and focus on wonders, while the revolution provided me a decreased unit maintenance cost and tons of units arriving periodically right outside my conquered city. The biggest problem is: Be careful of someone else passing nearby and razing the cities rebelling to you (and this happens a lot!)
You explained a lot about MP games over there. I'm not used to them, the only MPs I play are with these 2 friends over LAN. The idea of other ppl joining was just a thought, and you showed me how hard to handle it would be.
I can agree with your idea, it's not my intention to ask any game option to be on or off, my only unavoidable demand is that we play LoR, nothing more. I've been playing LoR for years, so I have no idea how the vanilla game is anymore. The few things I remember just bring me painful memories (trirremes evolving to frigates and then evolving to destroyers, no Trafalgar Square, no range bombard, no inquisitions, no IDW - where every won battle gives culture to the tiles around it). So if you want to play another mod or the vanilla game I wouldn't be interested in playing.
About your frustration with revolutions I would like to say something: I have already felt the same, it's really frustrating when you are consumed by Revolutions. But as time went on I discovered lots of things to manage revolutions, so here go some tips:
- Your Government Civic is the strongest factor in managing revolutions. If you are despotism in the beggining of the game, I would say to stick to your cheesy ring and don't exceed 4 cities. The cheesy ring is the ring where distance maintenance cost is less then 1 (in vanilla civ this was 0, that's why it's cheesy ring. LoR introduces fractions, so it's not 0 anymore). Here is the cheesy ring: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/city_upkeep.php. If you make cities close to the capital they rebel less. Another tip for this era of despotism is: 2 units are awesome compared to 1. At least that's my impression, cities with 2 troops resist a lot better then with a single troop.
- After you manage to become Hereditary Rule, things like commerce/gold, culture and garrison matter more then distance. If you become the supreme Hereditary Ruler, you will boost happiness with troops, making your cities bigger (which is worse for stability) but with a big garrison (which is better for stability), while your city will become productive and then can make culture and commerce/gold (enhancing even more the stability). If you manage to become the strongest army you may keep getting bigger because conquering cities is the fastest stability booster after a good bribe. If you manage to be rich, you may bribe the rebels, that's always a good idea (if it's in the first stages of Warning it's even better because it's cheaper and it's effects last longer). Planning a big conquest period that ends after getting constitution is the best plan.
- After this you have to consider your plans: If the idea is to get Huge (Domination), Universal Suffrage is your best friend for stability. If your idea isn't get huge, you may choose whichever government civic is better for you, because small nations have no issues of rebellion if they manage themselves nicely (not being attacked constantly or trying to handle a 3-shrines city running theocracy).
After you incorporate these lessons you'll never have revolution problems again. On this game I showed I have never had a single revolution inside my Empire, neither did my friend.
But you may still see revolutions as a boring mechanic which only makes your game harder and worse. But who said you can't make someone else rebel to you? With uber generals (how stronger a troops is, more culture it gives to a tile in which it wins a battle) or espionage missions or just a lot of culture in your borders you can make foreign cities rebel to you.
When a single city is rebelling to you you get a temporary discount in unit maintenance cost (which decreases constantly as the turns pass), some rebel troops outside the city (you may get your Unique Units, but not the ones of the guy who is rebelling, but you may get troops he can make and you can't, like his rifles while you don't have rifling) and if you're lucky a spy inside the city already at a 50% stationary discount (all units without XP, but rarely you may get a special unit with a "use enemy roads" or woodsman III - without woods I and II - ups, the AI loves to get these).
That's already awesome, but if you make 2 or more cities rebel to you, depending on your size/power (i'm not sure what actually) you will get GGens to use how you desire and even settlers (that's something that only happened when the guy rebelling was bigger then me) plus everything else said above, and of course even more troops.
So revolutions can be quite interesting in the game. I'm playing my second Egyptian LoR MP with a friend, and I did the same thing on both games: Started small, built one of my first cities right beside my capital, let the closest minor take the city and wait for it to rebel. After rebelling I could forget about making troops and focus on wonders, while the revolution provided me a decreased unit maintenance cost and tons of units arriving periodically right outside my conquered city. The biggest problem is: Be careful of someone else passing nearby and razing the cities rebelling to you (and this happens a lot!)
