Rod1- Something Enjoyable

[CommandoBob]

Change the .biq
To get to the number of civs, we have to modify the .biq.

Is there a place to modify resource distribution?

Otherwise
Lacking Iron, while a risk with Rome (Legionary) or Celts (Gallic Swordsman), is one worth taking. We're not playing at a Difficulty where the AI gets extra starting units, so a good REX should give us Iron locations. If not, we fight for it.

 

[DWetzel]

Vmxa Suggested Rome, the problem is, we will have to find Iron and the Iron Chances to be far away, we are toast. I might be overcautious but we cant have a game ruined because we dont have Iron.

If you want, I'd be happy to vet a few maps to make sure that iron is at least somewhat accessible.

 

[Greebley]

There was an AW Regent game on Small map with 30 civs. I looked but couldn't find it. In any case the game wasn't difficult because each civ was a single city. The larger the map the higher the difficulty.

To get lots of civs on a map I think you make a scenario biq. It is possible to do this without making the map. I haven't done it myself, but I thought you simply did 'rule changes' only to do this. You load by going to civ content.

I do know to crowd civs on you not only have to change the number of civs, but you also have to change the distance apart they are, otherwise you get the "cannot place civ" type message and the creation aborts.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Playing around with the variables makes me think 31 civs on a world meant for 16 is not that crowded. 31 on an world meant for 8 civs is crowded, but not at an OCC level. I am playing around in the editor, hopefully it won't affect my regular games. I'll see what I can cook up.

Edit: I think I'm close. A large world (normally 12 civs) with 31 civs seems like the goldilocks setup. I think to get 31, you have to get rid of the barbarians. Anyway, here is a picture of my test game.

Spoiler :

I still haven't figured out how to get a random map that I won't see beforehand using this method. Here is my 4000 BC save for that map so you can try it.

 

[Rodent]

I have done quite a few tests myself, and think that Large map will be the best.

Leave the map generation to me.

However, If the team wants Rome, I will pass the .biq to Dwetzel so he can get us a bit of Iron

 

[Peebo]

You got lucky Overseer, two iron sources in your territory.

 

[CommandoBob]

In the .biq is a setting for Resources, but I don't know what it means. I forget the name of the label (I looked at it last night) but the default value is 160 and that value can be changed. Not sure which way gives more resources, but more resources for Iron will mean that everyone, not just us, has easier access to Iron.

 

[TheOverseer714]

There were extra resources everywhere on that map, maybe the number of civs automatically affects resource amounts. I know from anecdotal sources that having fewer than normal civs causes a resource shortage, so having more than normal might cause a glut of them. I do know those 8 Ivory tiles in my test game did not represent a monopoly, as some other civ built the SoZ.

 

[vmxa]

Kibitzer:

Pretty much any AW game gets rough, if you lack Iron in the first half dozen towns. You will struggle to deal with units using attack 2 troops and even getting a leader is not as strong, if it can only be filled with horses or spears or archers.

Sword type units are very important in AW as they have the 3 attack and their defense is at least as good as a spear. Some of the UU units provide superior traits with either better defense or movement. Movement is very handy in that it allow some retreat and stops those darn horses from retreating.

One of the key things is kill ratio and horses retreating reduces that. You often get burnt as you have to kill the retreating unit and expose your unit. Legion armies are extra strong as they tend to be attack prove the whole game as long as they are green.

Anyway many nations are going to work just fine as long as you get a decent start location. The biggest killer of AW games is too many early contacts. Cbob mentioned the fact that Regent does not get any starting bonus, so that helps a lot.

We got over run a few times on AWDG with 4 or more early contacts. One of the hardest games I played in was one of Greebly's AWM. We had several turn sets that we were near to having them break into our soft area.

The last one I played in was much easier at AWDG as we had a very good start location.

 

[darski]

In the .biq is a setting for Resources, but I don't know what it means. I forget the name of the label (I looked at it last night) but the default value is 160 and that value can be changed. Not sure which way gives more resources, but more resources for Iron will mean that everyone, not just us, has easier access to Iron.

to get more iron, you set that number higher. I did that in my .biq because I would get only one resource for an entire small map. First time I set it to 260 but I have since changed it to 200. It seems to be about right and I am still not guaranteed any iron without some effort.



I also think that you would be better served to be Greek and to have that incredible defense unit. Everyone has the same offensive units and the human use of barracks makes the difference there. it is the ability to take a severe pounding in the first rounds that will keep you going... IMVHO

 

[TheOverseer714]

Rome has that same 3 defense with a unit that can also attack. In AW, if you are just defending, you are losing, and Greece is defensive oriented. If not Rome then I'd say the usual suspects are next: Celts, Persia, Iroquois, Sumeria. Other possibilities usually have bad traits or other weaknesses.

 

[CommandoBob]

My first Civ 3 game was as Rome. I think they are everybody's first favorite. For an AW game, they are an obvious choice and I would rather play as another civ.

Celts are fine; I haven't played them before.

If we knew what we were doing I would suggest Russia, with their Cossack upgrade to Cavalry. It comes into the game late, just in time to roll over everybody.

 

[darski]

My first Civ 3 game was as Rome. I think they are everybody's first favorite. For an AW game, they are an obvious choice and I would rather play as another civ.

This is what I love about Civ3. It can be all things to all people.

Rome was the only Civ that I never chose to play in Vanilla. It was only when I set a Random choice that I had to play them.



I have to admit that I am really looking forward to watching Rod02 play out. It should be majorly interesting and I am sure this team can do it.

 

[TheOverseer714]

The Celt UU has the stats of an Ancient Cavalry, minus the extra hitpoint, so should be an excellent choice for this game. Agricultural means fast growth and Religious means cheap culture and short Anarchy, which could make for a rare strategy, the 2 revolution game; Monarchy until the IA, then Communism to be able to use a large empire to finish the game. I guess the next step is level; Regent or Monarch?

Edit: Post number 3000!

 

[Bucephalus]

The Celt UU has the stats of an Ancient Cavalry, minus the extra hitpoint, so should be an excellent choice for this game.

lurker's comment:

At 40 shields, though, it can be difficult to get many out in the early game, when your land is still largely undeveloped.

 

[TheOverseer714]

They are a bit pricey for that extra move, but eliminate the need for horsemen. My Rome test game showed the need for a unit that can kill and retreat, my Legions kept getting killed because they would be damaged in killing an enemy, and then the next enemy would kill them because they were damaged and exposed. Iroquois are also a good choice, and at a higher level are a no-brainer. Best 2 move unit until Chivalry, tied with excellent traits. However, they are overplayed as a result.

 

[CommandoBob]

I'm fine for this at Monarch, but I'm not sure how comfortable Rodent is at Monarch. Happiness at the higher level is a bit tougher, but the AI doesn't get any bonus units.

This game (Rod01) was harder due to the lack of luxuries; at Monarch it would have been tough indeed.

I think that Rodent is ready to play and learn at Monarch, but I don't know if he thinks he is ready.

 

[vmxa]

TheOverseer714 when you ran a test was it a large map with 24 nations? Did you start in a corner with water on two or three sides? I asked as I ran a test to see how a large 24 map would look and even in a corner by 100 turns I had met 6 civs.

This was a pangaea with 60 or 70% water. I would expect you to not have to expose units in the first 100 turns, but soon after you will either like to have a few horse types or an army to avoid exposures.

Note I did not do any wandering around, just out enough to plan for the next town. IOW, I would have ran into those units, if they were there regardless. No boats out either.

No need to met more for research at Regent or Monarch and for sure no need to increase the incoming units with new friends.

 

[TheOverseer714]

It was with 31 tribes, and was on the inner curve of a circular pangaea. The contacts came from all directions. Starting in a corner would have helped cut down the contacts some. It got crazy fast, and I ended up giving up after some horrible RnG. Losing a healthy Legion army to a regular spear totally ticked me off. In AW, the contacts come to you fast and furious and it eventually wears you down.

 

[vmxa]

Kibitzer:

I was wondering, even at 24 you get busier than a a handed paper hanger with a doze of the craps. It should be a fun game, with plenty of stress for the first 200 turns. I had sedentary barbs to try for some huts. I missed timed the first warrior and the border popped a hut and the warrior, so I got barbs.

No barb camps will show up, with that many civs running around. They are sending in so many settler combos that even with 2 armies, I cannot stamp them out, before one gets plopped.

I would not want to start out with land on all four sides, that will be more stress than fun. I think I would roll 4 starts and look for one that was in a corner. I would rather have a lesser start than be surrounded.