RBCiv Conquests SG Discussion Thread

Only disadvantages are:

1) Starts surrounded by civs who are culturally disinclined to like them. ( Germany, Burgundy, Magyar, Abbasids.) Rus and Turks close by as well.

2) Long way to research if they want Knights instead of Cataphracts.

Other than that, they have a good start on any wonder they might want, given the size 7 Byzans. They also have access to more than one lux. Powerful indeed.

Grimjack
( 5.3.2 instead of 4.3.2 )
 
I would like to be in a challenging one (deity/Sid).

No strong preferences on the Civ but some are more appealling:
- byzance
- the boatless russian viking
- the far away english
- the keeper of Jerusalem Abassids

If T-Hawk captains a byzance Sid, i'ld be happy to be in :-)


If my computer manages this scenarios fast enough, and depending on how many people are playing, I could play in another slightly less challenging one.


Jabah

Ps If someone had already played this scenario, are the AIs not too useless with the relics : ie. not trying to send them to Jerusalem with a proper escort (or do they need first to hold Jerusalem before sending them) ??
 
Since I played this Conquest extensively (and even focused on it during the beta-testing), I feel qualified to make some analysis:

1) Machine performance:
Not a big issue. I ran a 700MHz P3 until recently, and loading/IBT time is absolutely acceptable (clearly less than 10 minutes). There's not much trade, guess that's the reason.

2) Civs and difficulty levels:
The big problem here is (regardless of level) not surviving, but winning before one of the strong AI Civs (Byzantium, Abbassids, Turks; rarely Germany and Franks) hits the 30000VPs. Naturally, since by far most of those VPs are won by unit kill, the higher the level, the faster this will happen simply because of the # of units they can throw at each other. As a rule of thumb, on Regent no AI should win in time, on Monarch within the last 20 turns, Demigod around turn 160-170. So obviously, picking the level a certain Civ should be played is more depending on its chance to win in time, or to eliminate the leading AI Civ(s) before they'll win, than the start itself. Cordova, for example, starts with lots of Luxuries, nice lands, all resources nearby, a weak neighbor (Castille), but without a Relic and far away from the crucial Civs, it's pretty much impossible to succeed above Emperor.

There also is a lot of luck involved when playing one of the Catholic Civs: If the Fatimids or Byzantium razes Jerusalem, you can win this on Deity. If not, Emperor is pretty though already - the Abbassid will secure Jerusalem like Fort Knox; it's their capital, site of a King and the only VP location on the map...by the time a Catholic Civ usually can reach the Holy Lands with Knight forces, there are easily 15+ Defenders in Monarch already. In the LK series game with Franks on Demigod, there were something like 25 Swiss Mercennaries...

Possible levels, at least IMHO:
  • Sid:
    England (if you don't mind a "minor" exploit"), noone otherwise
  • Deity:
    Danes, Norway.
    Turks: They have an ugly start, but the Sipahi is the über-unit here, and they are close enough to the real competitors. And they have the IMO best traits for the high levels, MIL/COM. Possibly:
    Sweden, though it can turn out in a complete :wallbash: , if your fellow Vikings (attacking them would be suicidal) block the way out of the Baltic Sea for the first 50 turns. Did happen to me :rolleyes:
    Franks, Germans: Jerusalem problem.
  • Demigod:
    Abbassids, Sweden, Germany, Franks. Most likely England (one of the very few Civs I didn't play so far).
  • Pretty tough or frustrating even on Demigod:
    Cordova - too far away.
    Burgundy, Kievan Rus, Byzantium: the corruption will kill you. City placement was obviously done with the old corruption model, and the FP comes rather late. Especially Byzantium is frustrating on the higher levels, while being a cakewalk on Regent/ Monarch (that's the reason why AI Byzantium does so well). The closest cities in productive terrain will have about 50% corruption with a Courthouse(!) on Demigod...
    Burgundy also has no primary source of neither Iron or Horses; while it can settle Iron, there are simply no Horses that won't be claimed by someone else before. And you're sandwiched between Franks and Germans. Definitely a challenge, but could be doable.
    Fatimids: Don't worry about other Civs for 100 turns, you will be busy fighting of hordes of 3/2/3 Barabrian Keshiks...see Burgundy.

3) Tactics/ exploits:
  • Researching the other trees is clearly intentionally, min research time is only 40 turns. I see no reason why this shouldn't be allowed. Note those Techs can also be stolen.
  • Relics: The AI won't aim directly for your Relics, that's a myth. Unless the AI Civ owning a relic has access to Jerusalem, it won't manage to return it - it will try, nevertheless. At some point, it will march a rather frightening stack of units containing the relic-carrier towards the Holy Lands, but by no means enough to take Jerusalem. However, don't lose your relic to the Abbassids during the siege of Jerusalem :D
    However, if a Civ is running short of units, the Relic can travel anywhere, even as Settler escort. Also, it seems quite random if the AI picks up the Relic at all. Just wanted to point that out here already, to avoid clogging up every thread later.
  • Exploit: Yes, there is. Initial Diplo, as always; but since you start with almost no gold, the costs for establishing an Embassy take care of that. More important: Who says he have to capture different cities for VPs? You can capture the same city over and over again....works great with London :D . Pump it up to 12pop, gift it to Bulgars (no defenders during your turn!), capture it (no combat - no pop lost), gift it to the Magyars, capture it...you get the point? Giving away a city in order to retake it once later is a viable strategy for the Vikings (they can capture anything, but hold it against the English Army?), but not repeatedly.

I've made 2 mods with Castile and Celts as playable Civs, both are already running as SGs (and since the complete BA staff participates, I think they're worth it ;) ).
If someone is interested, feel free to include them; I also have a Magyar mod.

In any case, I will participate, preferably with one of the more difficult Civs (Burgundy, or Deity Danes/Norway).
 
More important: Who says he have to capture different cities for VPs? You can capture the same city over and over again..
:eek:
Is that the "minor exploit" you were referring to in order to achieve Sid success ?
:crazyeye:
 
I'm definitely interested, pretty flexible on Civ preference, although the Kiev Rus sounds intriguing, and/or another intense game as the Byzantines (Diety?). Another note, from lurking on several Middle Ages SGs, the AI is quite facinated with settling Siberia/Russia, and it quickly becomes a checkerboard of everyone's 9-tile, unconnected cities. I wish there was a way to make "steppes" as an unsettleable terrain, but as is, I think that is a way for the Rus or Turks to rack up VPs and/or a stream of free workers ;) as a player. However the AI is quite content to get surrounded by settlements.

EDIT: Fixed typos, now that I am back to a 'normal' keyboard.
 
Wow Doc, great post, thank you! :goodjob:

And yes, sheesh, that is quite an exploit indeed. That's precisely the type of one that as a developer you 'let go' and don't ruin your heatlth or the scenario programming against it, and is at the same time definitely on the no-no list for this SG :P
I particularly appreciate the suggestions on civ-vs-difficulty, although to be honest, the comment "Cordova, for example... it's pretty much impossible to succeed above Emperor." leaves me itching to try Cordova on Demigod or Deity :hammer:
(BTW Doc, that's neat you have mods for the other civs! - and also that some BA's are playing. Just to give normal civs a shot here I'll keep them off the initial list, but: i) I'll be watching your SG's closely now, and ii) if there's interest we could follow up the main series with non-playable-civ variants like RBC12I and 12J.)

It would be great to see the civ variety manifest itself with different win conditions - domination, conquest, and VP. From Doc's comments, it looks like a VP win by AI except for lower levels, so a Regent/Monarch game targetting Conquest sounds like a fun one (Turks come to mind as one option for the Conquest-oriented, or a Catholic nation for Domination)

At least a dozen folks interested in about 16 slots so far, excellent! Keep 'em coming! (And with only 200 turns in the game, we should target 4 players per game - so they each get 5+ player turns.)

Charis
 
Originally posted by Ridgelake
Well Gobi Bear, now that most of the games are over or close to over, what are your impressions? I know that I enjoyed my turns with the Huns game. I am interested to see what your think of how things have turned out.

I played in the Vandal game and had a great time being the one who took down Western Rome. It was interesting to note the scoring effect on Sid difficulty (i.e. you get tons of points for unit kills when a civ is eliminated because of all the bonus units at that level). We never noticed that in beta testing since the new difficulty levels were added pretty late in the game. We also didn't have that many testers who were daring enough to try Fall of Rome on Sid.

I am playing in the William Wallace SG that Doc started. I'll keep an eye on these Middle Ages games as well. It might be that I have time to fit one more SG into my schedule. It's great to see all the activity with these Conquests.
 
Currently playing in Doc's Reconquista variant.

Throw me in on any team. I've had a lot of success :hammer: as the Germans or the English, and would be willing to be part of either of those teams; I'd also be interested in playing a bloody Viking, a Muslim, or a Byz. I'm not ready for Sid, or maybe even Deity.
 
I've never seen the AI anywhere close to Domination; if you want to go after that, I'd suggest the Turks as well (though this removes one of the Deity candidates).

Conquest is a different issue: There is clearly only one Civ with any chance to succeed here, the Kievan Rus. They are COM, which will help, but the more important is their completely unique unit selection: They can build a mounted unit (Cataphract) and Berserks and Longships.
Since there are a number of single-tile islands, only a Viking Civ can take them, but the other three have only the late-game Inquisitor (and, to tell the truth, I never managed to research that far with one of the Vikings) as as fast land unit. True, you can aim directly at the 3 Kings, but those islands will be needed as operational bases. Non-Viking Civs would have to travel in Curraghs for ages anyway.

And Cordova....challenging? Let me point out again that the possible frustration comes from the AI Civs racking up 500+VPs each turn, and you're too far away to have any influence here. If Byzantium slaughters the Bulgars and trades Longbows (and Heck!, a lot of Longbows die every turn) with Turks/ Abbassids, it may jump from 20k to 30k within less than 10 turns - and even if you manage to overrun all of Europe, you won't make that much.

If you want a challenge and fun, try the Turks/ Fatimids on Deity. Even the Vikings will be darn though already, especially if you fail to capture 2 Relics within the first 20 turns.

Edited for clarification.
 
Bede would like to try as a Viking Demi-God, or Emperor.
 
I'll join a game, preferably on Emperor or Demi-God difficulty.
 
Since you are taking sign-ups, put me down for a non-Christian civ, probably not above Demi-God.
 
Back
Top Bottom