Playing a GOTM the way Civ should be played.

[grahamiam]

Exploit; Any tactic that the computer does not understand and cannot do well

this is extremely too limited. the AI cannot think like a human and, therefore, cannot be assumed to be able to use things like logic and reason that comes naturally for a human.

for instance, it has been shown that each unit has a sequence number and the ai will follow that sequence even if it defy's logic.

example, assume the following units are in sequencial order and are next to your city: cav, warrior, cav, cav, worker, arty, arty, rifleman. the ai will attack/move the units exactly in that order, while a human would bombard 1st, then attack to capture with the cav(hopefully), then hold position/quell resistance with the rifle and warrior. is this an exploit since the computer does not understand?

what about moving a troop transport (galley, caravel, etc) without an escort? i've seen the ai troop transports "freeze" 2 tiles off my coast because i've destroyed thier escorts. it's funny to watch because it won't move until another escort unit comes over to it, so it's just a sitting duck. should we do this too?

a couple of things that should be remembered with your critique of using common known good tactics:
1. current technology does not allow a computer to think. it does not even come close.
2. well made games are designed to be won by the human. if they were unwinable, no one would play them

 

[AlanH]

Here, here, Moonsinger [edit: and grahamian - crossposted]. But I would go much further. If you are really determined to play as badly as the AI plays then you must build a minimum of offensive troops, don't ever invade an overseas territory with more than one warrior at a time, on a galley, and ensure that you never ever use artillery for anything other than defensive purposes.

Civ3 is just a piece of very addictive entertainment concocted by a gang of programmers to make money for a software publisher. There is no moral dimension to it, and no reason to treat the electrons that run around your CPU and memory as anything more real than that, or as flesh-and-blood victims who should somehow be given an even break.

 

[a space oddity]

...when was the last time somebody won GOTM w/anything but conquest or domination victory? Like, GOTM 3 or something?

GOTM27: Histographic (SirPleb)
GOTM21: Spaceship (alexman)
GOTM18: 20k Cultural (! who else than Moonsinger... )
etc.

But you are right, most of them are either Domination or Conquest.


edit: Added quote for clarity.

 

[Lord Jimbob]

Here, here, Moonsinger [edit: and grahamian - crossposted]. But I would go much further. If you are really determined to play as badly as the AI plays then you must build a minimum of offensive troops, don't ever invade an overseas territory with more than one warrior at a time, on a galley, and ensure that you never ever use artillery for anything other than defensive purposes.

That's be a nice challenge- conquest using only troops w/defense greater than offense!

 

[Dianthus]

I would be willing to bet the top two in GOTM31 will be Spaceship/Cultural 100K. I'm not willing to bet which order though .

 

[AlanH]

But you are right, most of them are either Domination or Conquest.

I don't think that's inevitable. The winning formulae for military victories have been more highly evolved by the top players. I think if the same effort were applied, you would see more top scores for other conditions. Fact: clever players are probably busy people, and so they will find the fastest way to achieve a high score. That results in fast conquests and dominations. 20K or histographic or spaceship wins will always take longer to achieve and so are less popular for busy players.

You can get a prize for a high scoring 20K victory and there's less competition. Become the king or queen of the gotm 20K victory. And then refine your approach until you can win a gold medal for it!

 

[Lord Jimbob]

I would be willing to bet the top two in GOTM31 will be Spaceship/Cultural 100K. I'm not willing to bet which order though .

Well that would be inspiring and a breath of fresh air!

You can get a prize for a high scoring 20K victory and there's less competition. Become the king or queen of the gotm 20K victory. And then refine your approach until you can win a gold medal for it!

-sigh- I can only dream... now where do I apply for transfer into the 'non-busy people' category?

 

[AlanH]

I would be willing to bet the top two in GOTM31 will be Spaceship/Cultural 100K. I'm not willing to bet which order though .

How much..?

 

[samildanach]

20K or histographic or spaceship wins will always take longer to achieve and so are less popular for busy players.

Having only went for histographic once I'm probably not the best person to comment, but, it strikes me as being the hardest victory condition as well as the most time consuming. That might be why people shun it. Players like me get a quick civ fix by going for dom. or conquest while hard core civvers like to torture the poor AI for as long as possible.

 

[Grazzit]

sorry, but i felt the need to post to this thread imho, your restrictions seem pretty well thought out but not very attractive. for instance, why limit city size? i've seen the ai with size 26 cities so i don't see the point. well, i don't want to go point by point, but make a suggestion.

.

Sorry, i think i suck at english/writting.
What my list ment was.. Things i don't do.. Limit my city size.

Most of my cities get to 20-30 (i usually have a lot of costal cities)

 

[AlanH]

Players like me get a quick civ fix by going for dom. or conquest while hard core civvers like to torture the poor AI for as long as possible.

Please don't shatter my illusions like that Sam? I definitely had you down as a hard core torturer

 

[samildanach]

Please don't shatter my illusions like that Sam? I definitely had you down as a hard core torturer

Hey! Just because I'm very slow at conquest/domination it doesn't mean I'm going for a histographic. Cheeky Monkey!
Or maybe you were just refering to the "recreational equipment" I have in my dungeon...I.. mean ..er...garage.

 

[AlanH]

All answers apply

 

[Offa]

Most of these suggested restrictions sound a bit silly to me. Why force yourself to play badly. Ultimately it seems like the aim would be to make the human play like the AI.

Regarding the predominance of military wins in GOTM. I think it has become clear that the jason score favours military wins. However, do people really believe that it is easier to win militarily in 620 ad than squeeze out a spaceship or diplo win nearly a millenium later?

 

[Dianthus]

How much..?

If I'm wrong I'll play GOTM32 without upgrading a single unit, if I'm right than you do. How does that sound?

 

[Lord Jimbob]

If I'm wrong I'll play GOTM32 without upgrading a single unit, if I'm right than you do. How does that sound?

whoa... heady stakes!

 

[jeffelammar]

Grazzit -
I personally agree with many of your points. I consider a lot of the effective tactics either as exploits or as "not fun" (Notice I didn't say they were cheap, just not fun)

The fact is that I enjoy having a civ of metropoli in the OCP strategy. I like this, but in the context of GOTM it is not really a viable stategy if you want to place highly.

I think RCP and the "disconnect resource" ploys are clearly outside the spirit of the game and should be disallowed in GOTM. On the other hand, I think it should be perfectly legitamate to do a mass upgrade. Obviously many people may disagree with me on this, and that is their right.

One of the main reasons (other than time) that I stopped playing GOTM was that I felt that I was being forced into using specific strategies. The first 3 times I upgraded 120 horsemen to cavalry was fun, but not so much when I do it every game. Similarly, RCP once revealed gave such a competitive advantage that you could not really get away without doing it if you wanted to place in a reasonable position.

All that said, I think Grazzit's suggestion of a game by different rules is a great one. It would all be honor system (But GOTM already is, so what does that matter?). It might be nice to have one game of the month with the following rules.
1. Min 4 moves between cities. (it takes 4 keystrokes to get there)
2. No disconnection of resources to build obsolete units for upgrage.
3. No RCP - By this I would say no more than 4 cities in the first rank position (I chose this because OCP puts 4 at rank 1)

This would be fun for me, just to see how it changes the play style. There is no doubt in my mind that I would still finish in the bottom of the pack, but I think the pack would be different.

 

[Dianthus]

whoa... heady stakes!

[secret whisper mode]
Not really. I'm thinking of doing it anyway just for a laugh. Don't tell AlanH though!
[/secret whisper mode]

 

[Lord Jimbob]

[secret whisper mode]
Not really. I'm thinking of doing it anyway just for a laugh. Don't tell AlanH though!
[/secret whisper mode]

wow! this vB upgrade kicks butt!

 

[Justus II]

Grazzit -
I personally agree with many of your points. I consider a lot of the effective tactics either as exploits or as "not fun" (Notice I didn't say they were cheap, just not fun)

.....

This would be fun for me, just to see how it changes the play style. There is no doubt in my mind that I would still finish in the bottom of the pack, but I think the pack would be different.

I just wanted to comment on a couple of points here. First, I agree with the general theme of comments, that some of the things that make the most 'sense' in terms of improving GOTM score do not seem to be in the vision of what Civ is 'supposed' to be, but that is so subjective, that I don't try to argue the point. Some of the moves that really threw me were palace jumps, whether free or with a leader, and the no/min research, buy all techs strategy for higher difficulty levels. In my mind, if I were the King/Emperor/Consul of a nation, I would never advocate doing such a policy, but having seen them in action, and then learned how to do them, it's hard for me to see how you could play in a competitive game without using them. There are many others (my favorite pet peeve is the whole concept of pre-builds, but there again I'd never play without it unless it was a variant!). Anyway, the game is what it is, and in any competition, you agree to rules, and then do the best you can within those rules. If you don't like those rules, look for alternate competitions, or take the satisfaction (but not the score) of playing by your own rules!

Which leads me to your last point. Having played GOTMs and now in SGs with some very good players, I don't think you would see that much difference in who ended up at the top of the pack. While there might be some players who would choose not to play rather than abide by new restrictions, I think most of the better players are as good as they are because they study the game, the situation, AND the rules, and then develop strategies to get the most out of the situation. If there are new rules, most would very quickly develop optimal games that fit within those rules. And then others would learn from them, and improve as well. To me, that's part of the challenge of the game, especially in SGs but also here, is to watch and learn from the really good players, to see what they see in a situation and the thought process they use to overcome it.