Prince Clique Bullpen

[CivIVMonger]

Prince Clique​

This is a list of all of the past PC games and all that will come. It is also a discussion thread for ideas and suggestions for upcoming games and improvements. I will update this every time we come into another game. Feel free to comment and tell me your thoughts and opinions about this series.

HISTORY​

This series started back in June. The purpose of this series was to take Noble level players, and take them to the Prince level. It also was for taking Prince level players and taking them up to Monarch. You can play any difficulty that your heart desires though. The idea was for the experienced and inexperienced to be asking questions and helping each other along. Due to technical limitations, I was not able to properly produce the series. The first 5 installments have had problems. Dissatisfaction and disappointment caused this series to stop for a long time. It returned in November with the sixth installment, Peter. This installment has many of the improvements that were requested. More improvements are still added as PCVII Wang Kong is installed. Finally the quality is perfected with the installment of PCVIII Qin Shi Huang. WB Save fully edited and photobucket screenshots! I will agree that it is sad that it took me 8 games just to figure out how to post one correctly, but hey, it says "History" and I have got to post it. Then, Nappy and Charley were posted with good quality and better edited saves.


The Games

There are eleven games in the series, with one added around every Week/Thursday. They are listed below:

1.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324283: Exp/Imp is best for REXing. (PCIJoao II)
2.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324470: Phi/Cre is great for culture, research and the SE. (PCII Pericles.)
3.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=324870: Fin/Org is arguably the best economic trait combo in the game. (PCIII Darius)
4.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326309: Exp/Org is really balanced with UU and UB. (Mehmed II)
5.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=331926: Agg/Char is a great Warmonger combo. Easy promotion s and cheap barracks. (PCIV Boudica)
6.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=343963: Phi/Exp is a good combo. And could be abused well for an SE. (PCVI Peter)
7.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=345578 Fin/Pro is relatively balanced for a good all around useage. (PCVII Wang Kong)
8.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=346448 Ind/Pro is good for a fairly balanced cultural play. (PCVIII Qin Shi Huang)
9.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=347343 Spi/Pro is not well liked, but reaps some convenience benefits (PCIX Saladin)
10.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=363023 Org/Char is really nice for great economic advantages and early happiness. (PCX Napoleon)
11.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=363684 Pro is not well liked but Imp is good for a REX/GG's (PCXI Charlemagne)
12. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=9186393#post9186393 Cre/Fin is really nice for early specialists and a strong all 'round economy. (PCXII Willem van Oranje)

 

[Shafi]

you should have links to each of the past games.

 

[CivIVMonger]

you should have links to each of the past games.

I realized this even before you said anything.

 

[CivIVMonger]

What do you think the next leader should be? I am a little late on posting this next game... So, a quick responce would be nice, or I could just pick it myself.

I was thinking a financial leader would be nice.

Any thoughts on the map?

 

[lymond]

How bout a religious focused leader (spiritual) and religion focused game?

Also, note that in your list of games above, you should be able to rename the link to say the Leader/#. It would be easier to read.

 

[CornPlanter]

What about any leader and playdamap focused game? If the purpose is moving players up the ladder, there's nothing more beneficial than teaching to read the map and play the map. In my humble opinion.

 

[Nares]

What about any leader and playdamap focused game? If the purpose is moving players up the ladder, there's nothing more beneficial than teaching to read the map and play the map. In my humble opinion.

"Reading the map" is extremely open ended, and in general, details of the map sway tactics more than strategy.

Play one of the better strategies for your difficulty level (ie Liberalism->Nat->drafted rifle or cannon or cavalry spam), or play one of the better strategies for the leader (typically a variant). Try to apply this to the map as best as possible by accommodating the strategy with map-specific tactics (ie early sailing if there are numerous rivers/heavy coast).

If a map is really radical, and won't support your main strategy or a strategy specific to your leader, be ready to adopt a new strategy built on the tactics you're being forced to employ.

But it's very important to have an overall strategy in mind, even before the game starts, and this can only be derived from either strategies proven to be effective on the difficulty level you're playing or a strategy related to the leader. "Playing the map" usually results in some half-baked decisions, as some map feature throws you off and you lose focus.

That said, the latter option of playing a leader-specific strategy is really only an option if you're comfortable with strategies proven to be effective on the difficulty level you're playing. In general, you still loosely conform to the proven strategies, with leader-specific approaches taking small detours for flavor. If you're not comfortable with determining what's vital and what can be delayed, you're likely to fall into the same trap that "playing the map" leads you to; namely, you lose focus, make poor decisions and fall behind.

 

[Shafi]

Hannibal, Ragnar, Willem or Wang Kong

 

[CornPlanter]

But it's very important to have an overall strategy in mind, even before the game starts,

Please tell me, what do you base your strategy on, before the game starts? The only information you know is map settings and your leader/civ stuff which is of course not enough.

No, I really mean it. Why not teaching playing the map? Yes, its gonna be very open ended game, whats wrong with that? Each round you can describe situation, describe your strategy plans and how are they derived from situation, and probably describe alternatives and why they are inferior in this current situation.

"Playing the map" usually results in some half-baked decisions, as some map feature throws you off and you lose focus.

I dont really get what you mean by this, sorry. Playing the map usually results in making decisions based on information you have, rather than imagination or wishful thinking or roleplaying kind of stuff. Imagination, wishful thinking and roleplaying is nice too at difficulty level you are comfortable at, just no good when you are trying to climb the ladder.

Now I dont deny you must have some general goal from the very start, I just suggest a game where emphasis is on reading/playing the map, not on some specific goal.

 

[Nares]

I dont really get what you mean by this, sorry. Playing the map usually results in making decisions based on information you have, rather than imagination or wishful thinking or roleplaying kind of stuff. Imagination, wishful thinking and roleplaying is nice too at difficulty level you are comfortable at, just no good when you are trying to climb the ladder.

There's no imagination in looking to settle at least six cities, or exploring for good sites, or researching techs in a timely manner to reveal and connect resources for use or export.

There's no roleplaying in pursuing a sound economic path I could have as easily outlined the majority of prior to ever seeing the map.

And there's no wishful thinking in planning my first war around rifles/cannons/cavalry because I know that's a reliable window of opportunity.

The map might influence where I settle, but I still want a strong production site, and some generally strong food sites. It might eliminate a shot at GLH, but I still want to research currency. And the game may start with my closest neighbor only ten tiles away, but I'm still going to look for a war (my second) around rifles/cannons/cavalry.

As for your emphasis on reading the map, it can have some whacky outcomes. There's more roleplaying in that than in following a general strategy you adjust based on the map. For example, I wouldn't look to build the pyramids, even if I had stone, unless I knew I was going to use it (presumably for rep driven SE/SSE). If I was "reading the map," I'd probably waste upwards of 350 hammers on something I made minimal use of.

 

[CornPlanter]

And there's no wishful thinking in planning my first war around rifles/cannons/cavalry because I know that's a reliable window of opportunity.

There certainly is. Many times you will find yourself at war way before cannons. Just because Alexander decided so. Other times you might need no war at riffles/cannons/cavalry - or no war at all. But this is not what I am talking about anyway.

There's no roleplaying in pursuing a sound economic path I could have as easily outlined the majority of prior to ever seeing the map.

Except that after you see the map, you might want to throw your plan out of the window and come up with a new one. Sensible, this time.

There's no imagination in looking to settle at least six cities, or exploring for good sites, or researching techs in a timely manner to reveal and connect resources for use or export

Here you just listed the most basic sensible things everybody tries to do in every single game. It's not a sort of "strategy" one comes up with in this kind of learning games. As opposed to what I was refering to in my first post: "How bout a religious focused leader (spiritual) and religion focused game?". But if you are indeed suggesting focus the game on finding at least 6 cities and exploring for good sites, well, I support this suggestion

If I was "reading the map," I'd probably waste upwards of 350 hammers on something I made minimal use of.

Either you just plain contradict yourself (because doing something of so little value is certainly not "playing the map") or your definition of reading/playing the map is quite different from the rest of us. Playing the map is doing the most beneficial things in the current situation, as opposed to pursuing religion path just because you decided so way before the game started. Or building pyramids just because you've got stone and not using them. Sorry, your definition of playing the map is just silly, nobody does that. And I really doubt that you consider wasted hammers "playing the map", probably you just came up with this silly example only for the sake argument... of sorts.

 

[lymond]

I'd second Wang Kong. Never played him. I think he's Financial/Protective which is an interesting combo. Plus, I'd like to see that siege weapon in action. When playing against him, usually he starts out strong but winds up being someones vassal. Interesting to see what he can do in human hands.

 

[Nares]

There certainly is. Many times you will find yourself at war way before cannons.

Can't see why you would. With some diplomatic skill, and an appreciation for the power graph, it's easy to avoid almost any war, even with the most obstinant of neighbors.

Except that after you see the map, you might want to throw your plan out of the window and come up with a new one. Sensible, this time.

Sure, but you're probably only throwing some minor elements of it out, such as the cost-intensive pyramids.

I highly doubt you'll throw out the sound economic strategy I refer to, because you'll still need it to support your economy whether the map "supports" it or not.

It's not a sort of "strategy" one comes up with in this kind of learning games. As opposed to what I was refering to in my first post: "How bout a religious focused leader (spiritual) and religion focused game?".

You can go into great detail outlining a religion focused game without picking a map script or even a leader.

Clearly, the strategy is not map dependent.

Playing the map is doing the most beneficial things in the current situation, as opposed to pursuing religion path just because you decided so way before the game started.

Nine times out of ten, the most beneficial thing to do in your current game is similar or identical to what you did in your last game.

 

[CivIVMonger]

Hey! I don't know if anybody is still subscribed to the bullpen, but... Any ideas for the next game?

I was really leaning on Willem van Orenje and running a Terra/High sea level game to make good use of the UB and the "New World" of course to make the merchantman more fun! Thoughts on the idea? Any other good ideas?

I'll be posting the game tomorrow if all goes well.

 

[lymond]

I always like Willie.

Never played De Gaulle, although we did do Nappy recently. Maybe soon though

 

[vranasm]

Dunno if it's good idea for prince difficulty, but i read a lot in the Emperor Cookbook and I like that thought about such kind cooperative play (people posting saves, voting for best and going on from there). But it's emperor there... I am lately playing mostly Prince with mixed results and want to better myself, so comparative play in such a way would be interesting for me.

 

[CivIVMonger]

I always like Willie.

Never played De Gaulle, although we did do Nappy recently. Maybe soon though

We did do France recently. I will keep that in mind for sure but I think we should wait before doing France again. Anybody else want De Gaulle?

Dunno if it's good idea for prince difficulty, but i read a lot in the Emperor Cookbook and I like that thought about such kind cooperative play (people posting saves, voting for best and going on from there). But it's emperor there... I am lately playing mostly Prince with mixed results and want to better myself, so comparative play in such a way would be interesting for me.

Yeah... I don't mind it but I honestly don't even read the cookbook myself! That is an interesting thought though.

 

[lymond]

One note on a Cookbook format is that I suggest it be a separate series. The reasoning is that more experienced players play NC, PC,etc. (at their currrent level) and post reports and join in discussion that can be educational for those less experienced. However, Cookbooks are geared toward folks trying to move up to that level or at that level. I would not play a Prince Cookbook as I'm at Emperor +, so it would not be fair.

I do think it's a good idea and would be great for folks trying to move up to Noble and Prince (since I don't think there is a huge gap between the two levels) and would fit in nicely at 2 levels below Emperor.

Personally, I think Deity University should be a cookbook format, especially since the current format seems about DOA.

 

[CivIVMonger]

One note on a Cookbook format is that I suggest it be a separate series. The reasoning is that more experienced players play NC, PC,etc. (at their currrent level) and post reports and join in discussion that can be educational for those less experienced. However, Cookbooks are geared toward folks trying to move up to that level or at that level. I would not play a Prince Cookbook as I'm at Emperor +, so it would not be fair.

I do think it's a good idea and would be great for folks trying to move up to Noble and Prince (since I don't think there is a huge gap between the two levels) and would fit in nicely at 2 levels below Emperor.

Personally, I think Deity University should be a cookbook format, especially since the current format seems about DOA.

Yes. However, the PC mainly gets Immortal or higher players rather than Nobles or Princes. Odly, my intuition doesn't want to change *from* Prince, but I think that a 'cookbook' format isn't really geared for this level. I do not 'own' the Prince Clique, but I do have a few questions.

Frequency: Am I posting too frequently. Honestly, it takes an hour out of my day every Thursday, but I thought that a weekly basis is normal. I have also seen IU and NC games coming on less frequently, is every other week better? I just want to make the game as enjoyable as possible.

Quality: Are my screenies and saves good n'uff?

Formatting: I am fine to resign my hostage or dissolve the current format if a cookbook style or anything else is in demand. Please give me your thoughts on this. I have had mixed requests on this so far.

 

[vranasm]

The thing is that in current situation NC and PC games are very free for difficulty and speed selection, so if I read some reports it's for me only "yeah nicely done!", "good job there!", but no "I should have been better along! he is already 6 cities at 1AD!!"...

and don't forget random along... battles that should be won but werent (bad luck with dice) etc. So even if we stuck with reporting rounds as suggested, usually if someone posts in this threads it's mostly 1-2 reports, one around 1AD, second after win and that is not sufficient for someone who can beat noble but struggles at prince (that's me... )

So that's why i found Cookbook interesting and there is only 1 running that to my bad went from Monarch to Emperor and that is a bit steep :-(, I think i could maybe worst player on Monarch but could be there, but on Emperor... well no one wants to be laughed out...

Maybe Prince difficulty is not the right place for Cookbooks (most players here will probably find it trivial difficulty), but i thought that after those sale actions there are new players and maybe we could "amass" some 3-4 players that would be interested and i think that could lead to something.

But maybe I am alone on this ;-).

@CiIVMonger: I think you are doing good/great with hostage of those threads, this should not lead to thinking that you are doing something wrong, just this format brings me less then i would hope to get. And that is my problem not yours.

Will probably just try jump to Monarch and try catch Emperor even if I won just 1/5 Prince games.