Sir Bugsy said:
You could put a caveat in your rules that says "If you don't think the AI would use a tactic or strategy, then we won't use it."
That's not my intent. This isn't about the AI, nor about playing fair, nor about handicapping ourselves, though all of those will happen to some extent. Rather, this is about the true spirit of variantism, taking options off the table and playing within tighter boundaries.
Why is there a Sid level? Because folks found enough moves to solve Diety. If the goal is a game of X difficulty, there are two ways to achieve it. One is to stack up even more bonuses to the AI (create a Sid level) and the other is take some moves off the table for the player.
Suppose Civ4 were coming out tomorrow. Would you expect there to be a Sid level? Or would you want the design improved to where the AI plays better, the game balance is stronger, and many of the now-accepted moves in Civ3 have been rendered moot?
I hardly recognize the SG community any more. That's not a dis, just the reality. Players have pushed themselves to the max so many times, the game has been solved. SesnOfWthr imagines that this game will be bumped up to Sid. I understand why. That's the funnel through which most thinking flows now, has to flow now, because that is where the cutting edge has led.
But I think something valuable has also been lost. I remember executing the Ultimate Round of Trading in Epic Four. I picked up fifteen (!) techs on one turn. The AI reached the modern age in 640AD and I won a diplo victory in 750AD. And that was FUN. But it was fun only once. Even though trades of that size are no longer feasible, the concept remains. It is burnt into the landscape.
This game asks the question, "What if these tricks and moves weren't available"? Would the game be more fun, or would it merely be more boring?
What makes Civ fun to play? Is dotmapping fun? Is micromanaging every last shield out of your cities, so that none are wasted, fun? (Is it fun NOT doing that, and letting waste occur??) Is it more fun to research or to pore over the diplo screen in search of nfer trades? Is it fun only when the most effective moves are in play, or could it be more fun without some of them?
Is Civ3 merely the sum of the known tactics, or is there a fun game lurking in there that has been cornered, funnelled, bottled, canned and spammed by players having solved the game, found all the best moves and reduced most games to executing prime formulas with only minimal variations to account for the particulars of a map or variant?
The goal is what I stated: SLEEVELESS. Not sure we can achieve that, but we can try.
As for peace deals, the AI only offers peace when it's hurting or weary. A combination of time passing and pain inflicted on it will lead it to offer peace. When it does so, we will take it. Otherwise, we can propose peace when and if we like, and accept or reject or modify its terms.
This should not be considered a well-polished variant, but only an exploration. And it WILL be played on Demigod as I stated, not Sid. I put in my time pushing the cutting edge long ago and sated myself. Others have long since pushed past where I led, and I have no desire at the moment to catch up.
- Sirian
