New Succession Game: Training Day

I imagine these games will be very useful even to those not playing, and if the ideal is realized, someday there may be a link to the respective threads stating "Before you play a SG, read through these games first"--that's my hope anyway.

Heh, when I first came to this forum I read the games of the best players incessantly (and still do...) I still tell people to read RBD7: Cuban Isolationists although alot of its trading system has been superceded by patches. Now that was a game! If you want to learn about micromanagement... well, just go to the third or fourth page of this forum, find that game, and start reading. :)

LOTR2 is shaping up to be another such epic game, though for different reasons of course. If you want to learn about combat, look no further than that game.
 
Hey CrTh, I'd suggest to almost make teams of 4. I know I can't play normally on Tuesdays and sometimes I can't on Thursdays nights... and I can only play weeknights or weekends as I'm a working man. It makes it hard to pass this around so quickly when you might have people gone.

But I am the rook and this is your game, I'll go with the flow. :)
 
Originally posted by Pagan
Hey CrTh, I'd suggest to almost make teams of 4. I know I can't play normally on Tuesdays and sometimes I can't on Thursdays nights... and I can only play weeknights or weekends as I'm a working man. It makes it hard to pass this around so quickly when you might have people gone.

But I am the rook and this is your game, I'll go with the flow. :)

There's going to be plenty of time to take your turn. I know it'll be excruciating to some, but I imagine there will be at least 4 days, if not a full week of "allowance". I'd rather you take your time, not force it.

Slave, I think you need more Civ experience before you join the Training Day games...I think one should be able to beat Warlord occasionally at the bare minimum.
 
This sounds like my best chance yet to learn the art of the SG. Please sign me up if that last spot is still available. I'm a Civ II vet and am winning fairly regularly at Monarch. Emperor and Deity are still having me for lunch though!
 
Ok, Mystery13, you're the final slot for Team 3.

Now all we need are some Vets...


BTW, as for Vet allotment, I'm going to try to match up Vets with people they haven't played with before (for example, if Lee graces us with his presence, I won't have him as part of my team) if possible.
 
Can we use an official world map?

I haven't played on that yet. That kittenofchaos map seems pretty cool as it has the real start position of civs
 
Originally posted by Ihmotep
Can we use an official world map?

I haven't played on that yet. That kittenofchaos map seems pretty cool as it has the real start position of civs

I don't want to use any mods/custom maps, etc. "Natural" starting locations are also out, because then you have some expectation (hey, I know the British have to be on that island over there). Let's master the random maps first; IDIC as the Vulcans say.
 
Ok, what the heck, sign me up. BUT, I have to stipulate, for my game it must be on a small or tiny map, as I don't have time for anything larger. This will likely mean we go for a conquest/domination victory, unless we want to restrtict victory conditions or get variantish.

I am normally a builder, and can give reasonably good advice on those lines. I won't claim to be an expert micromanager (too fiddly for me) but I know the general principles if anyone wants advice there as well. I don't claim to have any special knowledge about how to prosecute a war, nor about diplomacy, so if you want advice there, best try another game. This of course assumes you want to bother organizing teams on the basis of which people want to work on what aspect of their game.
 
no custom maps? ok I'll still play

I would do a standard map w/ continents and 70% water coverage, roaming barbs. Climate = warm/tropical
 
OK -

Add 1 vet to the list.

My group better get use me
1 - Barracks / vet troops
2 - MicroManage city building wonders
3 - Not researching steam power / factories in the IA - they key point for the human player.
 
Originally posted by Zed-F
Ok, what the heck, sign me up. BUT, I have to stipulate, for my game it must be on a small or tiny map, as I don't have time for anything larger. This will likely mean we go for a conquest/domination victory, unless we want to restrtict victory conditions or get variantish.

I am normally a builder, and can give reasonably good advice on those lines. I won't claim to be an expert micromanager (too fiddly for me) but I know the general principles if anyone wants advice there as well. I don't claim to have any special knowledge about how to prosecute a war, nor about diplomacy, so if you want advice there, best try another game. This of course assumes you want to bother organizing teams on the basis of which people want to work on what aspect of their game.

Zed, I was planning Standard maps, but with one fewer opponent. There is going to be flexibility on playing time; I won't be piping up every day saying "What's the status here?" The only issue you may have is partaking in the discussions on a regular basis.

There are basically two strengths that these games are trying to develop: Flexibility and Teamwork. Anything else is gravy. If it makes you a better warmonger, great, but that's not the point of this exercise. What I'm trying to do is to take a group of SG lurkers and make them full-fledged players. Yes, there will be a lot of tips, tricks, and strategies disseminated, but my ultimate goal here is for all of these rookies, after finishing their game, to be able to jump into any open SG and not fear a verbal tongue-lashing for incompetence, inexperience, or downright WEEDish behavior. I don't expect all of us to be master SGers when this is done...but I expect us to be able to hold our own.

If you want to be one of those guiding and forging the SGers of the next generation, then great. If you feel it'll take more time than you are willing to invest, I understand. But I'm hoping you'll give us a chance...you may find you enjoy the experience a whole lot.
 
Originally posted by LKendter
OK -

Add 1 vet to the list.

My group better get use me
1 - Barracks / vet troops
2 - MicroManage city building wonders
3 - Not researching steam power / factories in the IA - they key point for the human player.

Great! I'm glad you were able to join Lee, I appreciate it :)

If Zed-F decides to play, we'll be set, and I'll get cracking on the individual games.
 
I wasn't really expecting to learn to be a better warmonger, so that's not a big deal. :) Just wanted to let you know where I'm coming from in case that was relevant. And, I don't expect discussion to be an issue.

Are you really set on Standard maps, though? Do all games have to have the same map size? There's no competition involved here, so I don't see why we couldn't have different sized maps in different games... that's my only sticking point. I have found that once we get into the mid-Industrial age, even on a Standard map, things bog down too much for me, especially if there's war (as is usually the case.) The number of enemy civs is not the issue, it's the sheer proliferation of cities/units to manage that's the problem.

EDIT: If you still want a Standard map for my game, I could still play, but in that case I would probably drop out of actually playing the game once we hit the Industrial era, or shortly thereafer, and just provide comments between the newbies' turns. If that's ok with you, or if you're ok with a smaller map size for my game, then we can go forward on that basis. Otherwise, I'm open to suggestions...
 
I wasn't referring to you specifically with my warmonger comment, Zed, I meant any of the Rookies :)

The reason I prefer standard is because all the defaults are set to Standard (research time, corruption, etc). And the bogged-down industrial age is pretty necessary, because that's what happens in most of the SGs anyway.

If you don't want to invest the time, I understand, but I'd like to keep all the games with roughly the same starting criteria (i.e. Random except for world size and # of opponents). Remember, the goal isn't to win, it's to learn. If you're still in despite my argumentative nature, let me know, and we can get these games cooking tonight.

EDIT: Just caught your edit. If you want to stop playing turns in the late game, that should be ok...just as long as you don't abandon the herd. :)
 
I hesitantly offer myself up as a vet SG player. I say hesitantly because I have seen at least one player who seems more experienced in single player games than I (I am now playing Monarch in my single games). But I have been reading this group since the Civ3 SG's started, have followed many, many of the SG games and have played in a number of LK Open games and am now in 2 "closed" games.

I had thought about starting this type of game because I like to teach and I have found the SG games a great way to learn about the game. What I really like is that we all have strengths in the game and can all learn from each other. I have learned alot from following as well as playing SG games.

One thing that I would suggest to all who participate in these games is to explain your big decisions. If you have to spend some time thinking about a decision, explain the thought process that you went through. Even the options that you threw out may help another person learn. And at the beginning of the game detail your build orders in all your cities. In the early game build orders can be critical and it is helpful for others to know what choices you made. Throughout your game you should at least detail techs researched and started, cities lost and conquered, deals made with other civs, great wonders started by other civs, great wonders started and finished by "our" civ, etc. (What else did I miss here?)

I also am going to suggest that the games be played on standard size maps. Larger maps can be difficult to pick up after some amount of time especially when there have been dramatic changes in the course of the game. For those new to SG's a standard map will offer plenty of challenge.

I like the idea of playing random civs. I have learned alot by playing civs other than what I have played in my single games. The different attributes impact how you play and playing those other than what you are familiar with is a good learning experience.

ChrTh, I would also suggest that with only one vet SG player per game that you try to allocate the players based on their single player experience. Having all of the Regent/Monarch single players in one game will waste some good learning for all.

Another thing you might consider is mixing the vet in to the mix on a different schedule. For instance:
Vet
Player1
Player2
Player3
Player1
Vet
Player2
Player3
Player1
Player2
Vet
Etc...
Or some other way of not always having the vet SG player and the vet single players always following the same people. I am afraid that if the vet players (both SG and single) always follow the same less experienced players than some of the players won't get as much from the game as they could. I realize that this could cause scheduling headaches but if we decide on some system we can work through it so that all will benefit as much as possible from the experience. As a vet player I would try to pick up the game and take a look after each player and make suggestions, if necessary, but real life does leave all of us with time constraints that won't allow this all the time.

One last suggestion to all the players in these games - SG's are meant to be fun. You can learn alot and meet some great people. Other players may make decisions that you don't like or agree with but don't be too harsh with them. Use the resulting position as a learning experience and challenge - why did they do what they did and what can you do to get a win from the current position.
 
Originally posted by Readylander
One last suggestion to all the players in these games - SG's are meant to be fun. You can learn alot and meet some great people. Other players may make decisions that you don't like or agree with but don't be too harsh with them. Use the resulting position as a learning experience and challenge - why did they do what they did and what can you do to get a win from the current position.

Well said! :goodjob: I always like to think of these games like a succession of governments/rulers in the growth of a civ. Each has different strengths and views (not necessarily ones you agree with).

I also agree a good write up adds immeasurably to the game and if you can embellish a story to it, it makes great reading and makes the whole thing more unique and interesting. :egypt:
 
I'm a n00b when it comes to SG, although I have read a few, and I understand how they work. Got plenty experience with Civ3 though..

I would like to play as well..
 
I'm in, then, with the understanding that I'll probably stop playing turns and just comment at some point later in the game.
 
Back
Top Bottom