Pharaoh

[50_dollar_bag]

Oh and I forgot to say that Rob Akavira was born in Heliopolis a sparked off a Glorious golden Age for the Egyptians

Now that this game is all but wrapped up, do you have any other good ideas for an SG?

 

[mice]

Well I'm hoping people will say what they thought worked and what didnt work.
Be hard. i can take it.

I like SGs a lot, but I was trying to find a way that's a bit different.

The governor idea appeals, but it needs refinement. I welcome any ideas.

The idea is that eveyone on the roster is involved and can affect things, but not necessarily 'your turn, my turn, next turn' like that.

It's tricky because whoever has the save gets comfronted with global decisions all the time. I tried to work it so that even though I had the save, i wasnt in charge of the whole empire.

The idea is that no one person gets to run everything, because in history there would be people with personal agendas running against the common good, and I wanted to emulate that.

Giving city orders worked, but with domination it became a big task for whoever had the save, and most configuration was understood to be towards military. Early on it was interesting though. Placing of the cities was good too.

One general taking on a war for as long as it took worked well I thought.

It was 'make it up as we go', but I would be keen to formalize the mechanics of it a bit more

Any ideas ????

 

[50_dollar_bag]

I agree it needs a bit more refinement, it did sort of fall into a normal SG towards the end.

As a small empire it's easy to keep track but as it's grows it becomes harder to keep all requests in order. Plus towards the end no orders we're really given especially for the turn I just took.

Perhaps a stricter rule could be placed i.e. if no orders are given the city gets put on auto-governor, or builds wealth and workers surrounding the city go to sleep.

 

[pawelo]

to Hakizamanabag II

What a major example of steamrolling.

Even our king can now take his portable jaccuzzi to the front (with a slave of course) and command our troops for the last battle without too much risk (yeah, still the slave thing - must be something sub-conscious )

As for the concept, I really enjoyed this one a lot.
You're right meaning that it became more or less a standard SG towards the end, anyway, as long as everyone was trying to stay in the egyptian mood it worked a unique way.

I thinks your limitation on early governors and rewarding generals with cities worked pretty well. Also, as any governor had a chance to go to war (even Metahu will have HIS war - if we still can call it a war ), we can't speak of some sort of annoyment.

In hindsight, I think we haven't exploited much the fact that we could work against the empire.
Still it's difficult to formalize this kind of rules - it depends pretty much on the players.

What could be a nice thing in such kind of game is that the game sponsor and leader designs in secret one player to be a potential traitor (through PM). Of course it has to remain secret toward the rest of the roster. Such a player could give some poor advice, or place his city in sub-optimal way, or play extremely well to a critical point of the game, when he would, for exemple, give away all his cities to the worst enemy

This could work no?

I'll be more than happy to join you on your next adventure of this kind mice. How about a Politburo-style game with Stalin ( though the idea has already been brilliantly done recently in the RP Challenge )? Or a Roman game with senators debating the destiny of Rome (techs, civics, taxes, capital), and families ruling provinces?

 

[mice]

What could be a nice thing in such kind of game is that the game sponsor and leader designs in secret one player to be a potential traitor (through PM). Of course it has to remain secret toward the rest of the roster. Such a player could give some poor advice, or place his city in sub-optimal way, or play extremely well to a critical point of the game, when he would, for exemple, give away all his cities to the worst enemy

This could work no?

I think this is a great idea.

Perhaps a stricter rule could be placed i.e. if no orders are given the city gets put on auto-governor, or builds wealth and workers surrounding the city go to sleep.

Mmm I think it needs clearer rules. One problem is that there is no motivation to make a good city except that that's what we like to do, and everyone was in the spirit of the game. It would be nice to have some reward for cities that produce well, like being given the next city. But it's hard to gauge what is most beneficial for the empire, because the situation changes so fast.

 

[r_rolo1]

I don't like the traitor idea... but maybe a " I wan't to be sultan instead of the sultan" player could be fun

 

[pawelo]

I don't like the traitor idea... but maybe a " I wan't to be sultan instead of the sultan" player could be fun

What appeals me in the traitor idea is to spice up the game a little by a sudden struck of bad events.

Imagine in our current game - everything seems just great, cruising toward an easy cav domination victory, and I get the game for 10 turns instead of Haki II. Being a traitor, my goal is to cause damage to the empire. Therefore, I give Cyrus Military Tradition and Rifling, and settle for peace - leaving him 10 turns to upgrade his army.

Of course, I am executed afterwards ( or escape to my new retreat in Persepolis suburbs ), but the rest of the roster has to face a much greater enemy than the immortal-longbows based Cyrus army New challange, game spiced up etc.

This cannot be unlimited of course, we could agree on a scope of such a harmful event. We cannot give away more than X cities, techs etc.
Also, the traitor has to hand out the game to the roster just after the traitorise - the team has to be given a chance to react.

The traitor player should be carefully selected by the game sponsor as a proven SG player, who wouldn't just sack hours of group effort in a few minutes.

 

[Arlborn]

So, your king has the great honour of striking Cyrus in his capital and making him a slave? Well, played, well played!

< hope I don't screw up >


Anyhow, I tend to agree with most of what Pawelo said! And I think we must have more rewards for cities doing well, and armies doing well too. In truth, we had this idea from the beggining, we even renamed units, but it got lost somehow in the middle, no?


I shall play tomorrow! Wait for the eternal glory!

 

[50_dollar_bag]

The traitor concept has merit, I had in my mind when we started this game to do some city build that went against the good of the empire like building wealth when at war, assigning citizen specialists instead of scientists/merchants to kind of resemble how sometimes people of no skill are put into positions of power like family and friends.

Perhaps there could be a set of events that each governor gets to choose from at the beginning of a turnset and that's how they run their city for that turn. Kind of how the Irrational Isabella open SG was run a while back.

 

[mice]

Perhaps there could be a set of events that each governor gets to choose from at the beginning of a turnset and that's how they run their city for that turn. Kind of how the Irrational Isabella open SG was run a while back.

Irrational Isabella was great. I like the imposed mad build idea.


I was also thinking about a game where we dont pursue a victory condition, but we have some kind of battle between governor's cities for most culture, most commerce. AI set low, noble perhaps.


Culture contest game;
Possibly try to achieve legendary status before any one else (capital not included)
possibly each roster player has a regional capital and then 2 subsidary cities and that's all. How to allocate wonders? possibly coin toss or dice. Slider by concensus, or whoseever turn it is.


War for land game;
Possilby each player gets 20 turns to take whatever cities they can. Winner is the player with most commerce/hammers after a set number of rounds . Army = capital's builds, and one's own units only. Other city's units defend their cities + BFC only.

Bad seed game ; traitorous player as said by Pawelo, random bad builds. Bad seed would work best with domination victory

I think the war for land game could work well.

 

[50_dollar_bag]

War for land sounds good.
The other ones rely a bit too much on where the city is settled I think, but I could be wrong.

On different tip I was thinking about a game where everyone has 3 traits 3 UU's and 3 UB's. What do you think?

 

[pawelo]

Irrational Isabella was great. I like the imposed mad build idea.


I was also thinking about a game where we dont pursue a victory condition, but we have some kind of battle between governor's cities for most culture, most commerce. AI set low, noble perhaps.


Culture contest game;
Possibly try to achieve legendary status before any one else (capital not included)
possibly each roster player has a regional capital and then 2 subsidary cities and that's all. How to allocate wonders? possibly coin toss or dice. Slider by concensus, or whoseever turn it is.


War for land game;
Possilby each player gets 20 turns to take whatever cities they can. Winner is the player with most commerce/hammers after a set number of rounds . Army = capital's builds, and one's own units only. Other city's units defend their cities + BFC only.

Bad seed game ; traitorous player as said by Pawelo, random bad builds. Bad seed would work best with domination victory

I think the war for land game could work well.

You are right, and it would be the easiest to manage.

I love the challange of culture contest.
I think it should be a prince game, with a leader like Genghis - where no particular traits/UB favor culture. And without the slider

 

[Arlborn]

No I am not gone.

That is me from a neighboor's mac just to explain to you guys.

I am so lucky last weeks that my internet(plus MY TV plus MY TELPHONE) is inactive at the moment. Looks like an accident in a building site down the street messed up the cables, and they say it should be fixed by Monday. Which is when I am away.

Sorry!

Good game everybody.




Summary of history:


King Metahu got assasinated and the new King is the direct successor of the once Great Pharaoh Mice, which got kille by Metahu's family.

All in family, really. Nosw he got the honor of getting back to the ancient glory and name of his family! GO EMPEROR MICE!



PS: Im in for the cultural game next SG! Haha!!!!

 

[mice]

The rule of Eygpt returned to the descendants of Pharaoh Ramicess in the end, and victory came easily.







City with the most hammers/turn, Heliopolis, Metahu , with 70 raw hammers.


City with the most commerce/turn , Bombay, Metahu !! , with 65 raw comm - just beating out Wen Amon.


City with the most culture , Thebes, Ramicceses, with 45 at 0% culture. Those Pyramids.


The Russian cities of Pawelo contributed to the military effort in the late game. The Sloahotep cites of Paris and Valley of Kings contributed commerce and great people, as did Orleans and Lagash of Cabledawg, with Memphis Heliopolis and Thebes building the bulk of the army that was brilliantly commanded by our generals.

And.. Wen amon opens the champagne !!

~~~~~~~~~

Good game.

Alborn you had some tough luck but our RP battle was a lot of fun for me. Everyone was great.

I hope it sparked some ideas for how we can play the game differently, although I think this format needs some big tweaking.

 

[mice]

I'm squashed for time now so won't be jumping into a new game for a bit. But if anyone has further ideas, post them here and we can keep the discussion going if there is interest.

 

[pawelo]

Great finish for a great game Mice!

Thanks for this one, everyone was great. I look forward to play alongside in the next game of yours I am certain you will mix us a nice one in the near future.

 

[r_rolo1]

I've one really crazy idea in my head for a while for a SG ( completely unrelated with this..... ) Will make it when I'm not with 4 SGs and 2 open games in my backs

About this game: It was a interesting idea ( too bad I couldn't make the final war ), but the format needs some refining. Maybe some secret mission for every governor ( build x % of army , get y culture in city , governor's troops conquer n cities or gather x XP, .... ) or the cultural chalenge ( that one would make me the trash player of the SG most surely ).....

 

[mice]

About this game: It was a interesting idea ( too bad I couldn't make the final war ), but the format needs some refining. Maybe some secret mission for every governor ( build x % of army , get y culture in city , governor's troops conquer n cities or gather x XP, .... ) or the cultural chalenge ( that one would make me the trash player of the SG most surely ).....

I like it. i'll jump in on that when you get the time to start it up.

The general problem remains, how to govern individual cities.

I've got a format based on "war for land" that I think will work.

I'm going to post it and see what people think. Of course I know most of us are snowed under.

The culture one is full of holes as is I think. Too dependant on city placement, but could be developed.

 

[Arlborn]

I am back! Sorry for the strange things around here!

All I can say is that I enjoyed my first completed SG!

 

[mice]

I am back! Sorry for the strange things around here!

All I can say is that I enjoyed my first completed SG!

Yea, it was fun. Catch you in the next one when ever that is ...