Realms Beyond Emperor: The DSG's

[JMB]

Charis,

I think the updated "rule set" sounds pretty good. I think that while we have max 20 turns to declare, we should, whenever possible, try to minimize the amount of time we are at peace with everyone.

It might also be nice to try to include a rule that would make it so that we can't always declare war on our terms (ie, so we might not have time to move all our troops into position along another border.) This, however, will probably be too difficult a rule to write and implement... So instead, maybe we should just have the players roleplay this idea (ie, keep it in mind while playing their turns)

JMB

 

[Reagan]

I like the OW (ditching the "P") concept, with a 20-turn maximum peace period, which should allow us some time to take a breath and regroup between wars. Would we declare war immediately upon making our first contact or could we wait 20 turns if we chose to do so?

I also like the rule that our next opponent must be a neighbor and/or one that can "give" us something (i.e., we won't attack an AI with just one city remaining, unless it has a valuable resource/luxury/wonder). If in the later game there is a non-neighbor opponent we can legitimately reach via transport and who presents us with a reason to fight, we shouldn't have to be locked on the neighbor-only side of this rule.

Those two rules should give us all the guidance we need. It was not my intent to join an always war game, so I'd prefer that we structure this game to give us some peace time play between wars.

 

[anarres]

Hi everyone, I am an RB noobie, but am interested in the game being discussed.

I am currently playing my first SG game (LK39), and enjoying it lots.

I will check this thread for updates, and I will read back a bit too to get some more background.

Edit: After reading a few posts back I realise there are several games being discussed. I am interested in the POW game (I think).

@Gothmog:
I hadn't forgotten your email, but simply hadn't got round to doing anything about it as I've been busy playing PBEM games. Looks like this is very similar to what we were discussing

 

[Gothmog]

anarres, I posted a brief description of what we spoke about in this thread on the 16th.

Yes the POW game is quite similar to what we discussed, I am currently involved in LK38 and K7 and am unwilling to commit to another until atleast one of those ends. If the timing is right I would go with any of the ones Charis discussed - even always war. But timing is key, and it might be fun to start a new series devoted to winning as fast as possible by whatever means. If I do that there is a spot reserved for you. We shall see.

 

[anarres]

I just went back and read some more about the proposed games here. It is a shame the AW game is full as that really looks fun.

Charis - I tried to find a link to one of the early deity tounament games that had ancient wars, but I was fairly new to cfc then and my write-ups lacked detailed timelines. In the last season the only deity game I played wasn't suited to early war.

Gothmog, we will have our game. Definately sign me up if you start the new series

I have been thinking about a 'low-tech' deity game. Very low tech rate (maybe 10%) would mean only 40-turn techs were possible, and what could be bought through trade or peace negotiations. I think it would lead to more defensive wars, and more unusual tactics.

 

[Sullla]

Just wanted to "bump" this topic back up and remind any readers that there is still an open slot for the RBE6 Naked Civ builder's game. Right now T-Hawk, reagan, and I are set to go and awaiting only the signup of a fourth player to begin. I hope someone is interested, because I'd like to start this thing soon!

 

[JMB]

Hey Sullla,

I am interested, but am also worried about overcommitting myself... Since we won't be warmongering too much in this game, I should be able to handle it.

JMB

 

[Sullla]

Alright JMB, I will put you last in the rotation and we may look for a fifth player to decrease the load on all of us playing; I know that reagan is in a number of succession games as well.

With four players signed up, I'll create a new thread for our game...

 

[Gothmog]

Well guys and gals, I tried a couple of always war starts over the weekend. Cheezuzzz Criminy Crickets, I got waxed and shined. I tried out the Aztecs and Mongols and was at war with 3+ civs in the first 30 turns. Wasn't pretty, even when I could hold my own in the wars I fell way way behind in expansion and techs. I don't know how you are going to win a Diety AW game, it will take a good start with not to many neighbors and maybe a lucky hut or two. I think Urugharakh was right on when he said: "I will only participate as Greeks or maybe Carthago". You may want to call it the AW series, because I think it will take some bold strokes along with risking alot on a kind RNG.

I also tried out a OW strat and that did work better, but it was still tough. Basically the first two wars turned into a bit of "pointy stick research", I also got a few slaves. I only took one city and that was a retake! The Diety AI just starts with too many extra units. In this game the AI's traded around Bronze Working and then Iron Working just to make life difficult. It was certainly winable though. I was on a continent with only two other civs in this one and me in the middle, so no alies. By my third and fourth wars I was making significant headway on each oscillation.

To sum up I would say: AW -> Hoplites! You will not be able to do an early offensive unit rush (i.e. archer or UU), or at least I was not able to make it work in 4 starts. Jags (or any 1 attack units) are not much fun against fortified spears.

 

[Gothmog]

OK, after digesting my weekend attempts I've come up with a possible game I'll call "Ancient War". The idea is that you get to do some expansion before going into the Always War part. The biggest problem I had in my AW attempts was that I was at war with multiple AI opponents before I had time to build more than 1 or 2 extra cities. Admittedly I was a bit unlucky and was playing on a standard or possibly small map, but still I think it is a general problem of declaring war on whoever you meet. So for some predetermined time (or predetermined goal - # of cities or possibly tech) you get to do an expansion phase. Then when the time comes, war and lots of it. I am still undecided about playing this as a true always war variant or something along the lines of must be at war with at least two other civs. My initial idea is to play as the Iroquoi and try to run rampant with the MW, then possibly Knights, and try to win by conquest or domination as quickly as possible. I am thinking Pangea, so no navy will be needed, and a standard or large map, to give some room between civs. The expansion phase would go on until the first MW is built (or some yet to be determined date is reached). I think the expansionist trait will be great as it will allow us to know where our enemies are and to try for some free settler/cities during our expansion phase. I haven't tried this out yet, but I may do a test run this weekend. Any interest, thoughts, input?

 

[meldor]

Try it on a very damp map with lots of jungle. The jungle helps to keep you from geting hit to hard.
Cat, cannon, arty are big in AW for defense until the end. You don't have to kill every units, make them waste time moving back out, healing and then moving back in. The AI tends to build only a certain number of units and if you kill them the just replace them.
If you don't have jungles, then push thoswe borders out asap.
Funnel the units were you want them by keeping one city weaker and letting them concentrate there.

 

[Sirp]

I had another possible idea for a "lesser Always War" game:

Your Civilization is xenophobic, hating all cultures that are not similiar to its own. As soon as you meet any Civilization that is not in the same cultural group as you, you must declare war with them, and be in war with them until one of you is destroyed.

There might be restrictions on having to make friends with Civilizations in the same cultural group as you....but probably not: you'd just treat them the same as any other civilization.

This would probably be best played with culturally linked starts enabled, perhaps on a Pangea - that way you'd make fairly early contact, but your opponents wouldn't be all surrounding neighbours.

-Sirp.

 

[Arizona_Steve]

Is it me or has Gothmog started an oscillating war deity game that is pretty similar to the one talked about in this thread?

Not sure whether to jump into that game, or hang on here for Charis' game to start, having stated my commitment to play in that one...

 

[Gothmog]

Hey Arizona_Steve, yes my game is pretty similar to the OW game but also has some differences (I call it Ancient War). If you have been following this thread you will notice I posted about it here starting about a month ago. I wanted to play in the warmongering asian game, but missed out on that one. I also was interested in the defiant nationalists. I posted about my interest back in December. Through no fault of Charis (he did invite me to play in the nationalists game) I didn't get in either. The timing was just off, I ended up joining other games (both of which were great) and not wanting to overcomit myself. I also didn't preregister for the OW game because I didn't know when it would start. So, I am ready now. It shouldn't take too long for the AI to stomp us flat so join the fun if you're so inclined!

 

[Charis]

I had the same thoughts as Arizona

The OW was going to start around the same time as DEFN but has gotten delayed for several reasons, primary of which was to 'stagger' the games so as to not have a bunch of heavy, bogged late game war SG's at the same time.

I don't see the difference between Gothmog's game and the POW. But our drift had shifted more to OW than POW. The game I was hoping Gothmog would go for is: Quickest possible conquest/domination. That was the question being kicked around. That goal would push one not only toward ancient war, but frequent war, without any handcuffs to force a player to war when waiting a half dozen turns would be much stronger. Going for a 'quickest domination' would probably run better as a RBCiv Epic than an SG, just because we could try out a lot of different overall approaches and see how they work out, rather than take one crack at it in an SG.

At this point there's one other large factor now looming on the horizon... (what does a cow say??) MoO! Moo3 could end up having nil impact on civ 3 (succession) gaming, could be a short blip that sees many of us disappear for a short bit, then return en masse if the game doesn't live up to expectations, or it might mean a virtual exodus. Or anything in between! I do know for myself that I do an *awful* job at playing two games deeply at once. I'm more of a 'serial' obsessionist, going whole hog in one thing at a time.

Also, the Menagerie game just finished and Sulla mentioned he has something good in store as a followup there. The SG's I'm in now are so chock full of war that I went for a 'no military' variant in Epic 21 (see the Stories and Tales thread for the result). So with those things in mind (and being behind on a project at work) I'm trying to figure out if I should not press any harder on the warmonger front right now.

I would say that if folks schedules are saying "go-go-go now" and Gothmog gets enough players, he should go for it. (If he gets few takers, he might note that many RB'ers are right now playing an Iroquois War Paint mini-epic right now, although it's not the same as what he suggested. Also timing might be bad in that many others are also involved in just *brutal* games right now)

If that doesn't go, or in a few more weeks there is a need to start something warmongerish, I'll start the OW. To clarify what is planned there (so Gothmog can differentiate, if need be), it's:
- Oscillating War (OW), but not Perpetual (POW)
- No more than 20 turns of peace allowed before you must declare war again (vs same or another civ). It will be war-and-peace in pretty rapid succession all game.
- We'll definitely be using a militaristic civ
- Early victory isn't a goal so much as finding out: does going to war early and often work as well on deity as it does on easier difficulties? Around Monarch you can plan and pull off a very successful game with: ultra-early attack, horseman or swordsman rush, knight-upgrade rush, cav blitz, and have a won game by then (if not, tank blitz for sure)
- The roster was shaping up to be a group of *non*-warmongers (but strong players) looking to hone their military skills in a SG setting where pure building was not an option.

Because of partial overload on my part, I won't feel bad if folks who showed interest in the OW sign on for the Ancient War game. I just hope that it takes on a flavor distinct from where I was going with the OW.

Charis

EDIT ---
Checking back at those showing interest, and looking at the GM1 thread, I can suggest the following...

If Gothmog is wanting a really tough challenge and likes the 'always at war with someone' rule, go ahead and start up GM1 as planned if you get enough players - you'll need diety lvl warmongers.

OTOH, if the OW rules described above are what you like (or not enough sign-on), the higher *number* of players we would have would keep it from overcommitting me. If so, I would like to keep it an RB-series game as part of my envisioned warmonger trio, and we could go with a deep roster of:
Arizona_steve, Charis, JMG, Reagen, Gothmog, and Annares.
(If there's someone else reading who's been itching for a chance to increase their military skills at deity lvl, we could squeeze one more in, and shorten turn length.)

If the latter (OW), the question left is the Civ. China was originally envisioned, but it's been pointed out that you're likely to be in two wars BEFORE Chivalry and an ancient UU would be quite nice. Avoiding other civs used in too-similiar games recently, this leaves us: China (archer rush then horses upgrading to Riders), Persia (Immortals), Iroquois (MW's) or Aztecs (Jag rush )
Probably a smaller map just to keep the game shorter too. Pangaea.

Either is fine with me...

PPS Sulla - post your idea so we can see what else is about to kick off

 

[Gothmog]

Hey all, I'm really not trying to step on anyones toes here. Thanks for taking me into consideration though, Charis. Given the # of games you are currently involved in (and I am lurking in ), I figured it would be awhile until you started another one. By that time I would have been tempted to join another, and so the process repeats. Thus GM1.

I agree my game is very similar to the POW game (I say as much above in response to anarres), and I did think you were drifting towards an OW game with periods of peace. The differences I see between GM1 and POW being: having an initial expansion phase where war is optional (on Diety I see this as necessary to get a quick win), and trying to win as quickly as possible. Actually, trying to win as quickly as possible through conquest or domination is still my intent. I was trying to think of how to work that in a SG where everyone has their own style. As you imply, without multiple parallel plays it is hard to know which path is 'quickest'. Thus, I felt we needed something to tip our hand and not let anyone just coast at any point. But that could easilly be removed from the rule list if you feel it's impinging on your OW game rules.

Actually, I would also play in the OW game if you start that one, even if I do end up getting enough players for GM1. I've been in two SG's simultaniously now and find myself only slightly overcomitted. Plus, as I say above, I think we may get "smacked down" quick in GM1. I think it would be an honor to be in the first Diety SG loss.

 

[Sullla]

PPS Sulla - post your idea so we can see what else is about to kick off

Alright, I was going to wait a few more days as a break between games, but there's no reason why I can't open this up for discussion. There's a lot of high-pressure, really tough games running here at the moment. That's great, and I'm really finding the dire straits in which the Naked Vikings have been placed to be entertaining, but sometimes it's fun to play a more laidback game just for kicks - with the appropriate variant wackiness of course. And with that in mind, I want to take you back into the past, to a succession game idea that was truly brilliant but never played out to the finish it deserved. Literally the strangest concept for a game that I've ever come across, and the game which is most likely of them all to result in defeat for the player's civ.

Of course I'm talking about the return of the RBD19 Big Brother Succession Game! For those who were not around for the original concept (March of last year), I will reproduce Sirian's rules here:

Originally posted by Sirian
This may be the wackiest game yet from the Variant folks at Realms Beyond. :crazyeyes

Our Objective in this game IS TO LOSE. That's right, we're going to win this (we hope) by "losing" the game!

BIG BROTHER! Game Concept.

We are Romulus, of the Romans. Our objective is to seek out the Lost Tribe of our brother Remus, then bend our entire civiliation to helping him win the game! Like any good Big Brother, we love our Little Brother to death and would do anything for him, including playing second fiddle to him in his hour of glory.


BIG BROTHER! Rules of Play.

1) All Victory Conditions enabled. However, anything OTHER THAN a Space Race victory by our "Little Brother" civ, will be a defeat.

2) First Civ we meet is Little Brother.

3) What Little Brother wants, Little Brother gets.

* Any demands he makes are granted.
* Any deals he offers of his own spontaneity are taken (no matter what!).
* Any tech we acquire that he doesn't have, we offer to him (by the end of our turn, doesn't have to be immediately), then accept the deal he offers us. If we don't like the deal, then just GIVE him the tech.
* Any resources he lacks, we must offer to supply to him. We will take whatever he offers in return. If that's not good enough, just GIVE it to him for 20 turns.
* Any resources we need, we look to Little Brother to supply for us, and pay whatever price he asks (if we can't afford, then we must wait). ONLY if Little Brother does not have any of that resource to offer, are we allowed to look elsewhere for a supply.
* Any and all deals we wish to offer, we must take what he offers in return. Map deals, etc.

4) Little Brother's Birthday! At the end of each player's turn, they must bestow a gift upon our Little Brother. Try not to spoil him! (No giving away cities, nor exorbitant amounts of cash, make it a reasonable gift).

5) Nobody Picks on Our Little Brother.

* Anybody who declares war on our Little Brother, we immediately declare war on them AND MAKE AN EFFORT to go help.
* We do not make peace with the offending civ until Little Brother first makes peace with them.
* If one of Little Brother's cities is captured, we must make an effort to liberate it, then give it back to him. ONE of the enemy's cities must also be razed in retaliation. We do not rest until this is done.
* If Little Brother loses a city, we will found a new one on the same spot and give it to him (unless he takes care of it himself before we can arrive). THREE of the enemy cities must be razed in retaliation! (And we do not rest until it's done).
* We do not sign MPP with Little Brother UNLESS HE ASKS. (We do not want to drag him into any of our wars).
* We sign any Alliance he proposes.

6) We do not pick on anybody who leaves our Little Brother alone, UNLESS they start a spaceship. Anybody who threatens to steal Little Brother's glory by launching sooner, they have to be "roughed up". Get the picture? (Roughed up, not exterminated. OK?) EXCEPTION: anybody who nukes our Little Brother has CHOSEN UNWISELY and shall be obliterated. Genocide. :skull:

7) Nobody pushes us around. We don't cave to threats, ever. (Unless it's Little Brother flexing his muscle, then we go along).

8) If Little Brother declares war on us, we defend ourselves, but never attack his cities. Whatever he wants for peace is OK, too, EXCEPT FOR cities. We don't give him cities. (Even beloved little brothers need some limits set now and then).

9) We want to maintain Gracious relations at all times, if possible, with our Little Brother. (Will take time to get to that point, but once there, we want to stay there).

10) We must build the Intelligence Agency at the first opportunity and plant a spy in every civ (including Little Brother -- hey, we've got to keep tabs on him!) This is so we can monitor the space race and "intervene" if necessary.

11) We must either build, or destroy, the UN. (Unless Little Brother builds it). We want to bury the vote, as our objective is a most glorious space ship launch by our little brother.

12) Obviously, we must prevent any other civ from winning, with all the options on the table!

This game is intended to be a fun, low-pressure way to explore a great idea that never finished the first time it ran. Playing this game "in character" at all times is HIGHLY encouraged! The ideal situation would be to have wonderfully desciptive turn reports, people making less than optimal decisions to fit the roleplaying situation, etc. The original game ran on Monarch, but seeing as how we are a bit more experienced at this game now (just a little ), I was thinking of running this one on Emperor.

I have no idea what civ we should play as; the original game ran as Rome but that certainly wouldn't be required in this one. I plan to select the AI opponents manually, putting all of our favorite friends in there: X-Man, Joanie, Bis, Hammurabi, Cleo, Crazy Cathy, and so on. Game concept will probably run PTW, but it could be run 1.29f Civ3 just as easily. Those who played in the original game would have first call on roster spots (that being Sirian, Cyrene, Jaffa, Charis, smegged, Jester, Carbon, and Zed) but if there is enough interest, more than one game could simply be run. Those people who look deeply enough into the past here will find that I wanted to play in the original RBD19 game and was not accepted. Well, I'm making sure I get a spot this time!

So that's my idea, not a new one but a game that really deserved to be finished the first time. We will NOT be using the 10-day turn limits that killed the original game - in retrospect, it appears that was a bad idea. Is anyone interested, or am I just crazy?

Oh, and here's the link to the original thread for those who want to check it out.
RBD19 Big Brother

 

[LKendter]

He beats me to the punch. I had a back burner idea to so something similiar. However, I am overbooked at the moment, about to start LK40 is enough for the moment - so not a I want in.

 

[Sirp]

hey Sullla, I'd be interested if you get enough players; sounds like it could be alot of fun!

-Sirp.

 

[Speaker]

With LK38 ending victoriously , I am interested as well.