Ruff05 - Team SG

[ruff_hi]

I've been playing a few team games with where I am teamed with AI controlled CIVs against other AIs lately. I am also playing a multi-player team game with some RB people. Last week end, I played a hot seat multi-player game. All of this combined as sparked the following ...

A team SG game involving 5 civilizations in 1 team in a pitched 'always war' battle against 5 teamed Emperor or Immortal AIs. We will control all of our Civs (no leaving it up to the stupid AI) but we will be playing against another team of 5 AI controlled Civs. I'm looking for expressions of interest to play in this SG but not on a first come, first serve basis - those that I have played with before will get an advantage.

Our Civs: Random but happy to discuss
Their Civs: Random but happy to discuss
Difficulty: Emperor or Immortal
Geography: Fractal (but not if it generates two continents)
Victory Conditions: All enabled
Variant Rule: NIL

Roster:
Ruff_Hi
Ozbenno
Conroe
Jeejeep
Hamtastic

 

[Ozbenno]

Sounds interesting. I'm in if you'll have me.

Only point I'd make is that, with controlling 5 civs, once the action heats up the turns are going to take a while. Maybe reduce turnsets to 5 once the eternal war starts.

 

[Conroe]

I'm interested. I must admit, I am having trouble visualizing the game mechanics. We are going to play 5 civs, in hotseat fashion, for 10 turns? Isn't that the equivalent of like 50 turns per set? I agree with Ozbenno, we may need to reduce the number of turns or even the number of civs.

 

[jeejeep]

I am interested, but will it be easier than normal emperor or immortal? If not, I might be able to do emperor, but definitely not Immortal. I also don't have much AW experience.

 

[ruff_hi]

I was thinking 10 for the first set and then 5 there after. Teching will be very fast so the game will not be too long.

 

[Cosmichail]

Lurking.....

I will be watching this SG with fascination and keen interest. I like the concept and have often wondered about having a game with humans controlling civs rather than AI's. Even better having humans control 5 and go against 5 AI civs on that level. Again will be lurking...

 

[Tatran]

Maybe you guys should first read the 3 Team versus 3 Team,a SG
earlier this year.One of their cities got hit with +42 war weariness.

 

[Cosmichail]

Tatran,

That's a good point since they will be at war always. I personally would just like to see a game with only human players no AI just a thought...

Do you remember the name of the SG I would like to read it...

 

[Ozbenno]

I am interested, but will it be easier than normal emperor or immortal? If not, I might be able to do emperor, but definitely not Immortal. I also don't have much AW experience.

I would imagine it would be easier than normal emperer or immortal, but not having tried anything like this don't know for sure. You essentially could split up the tech research 5 ways! Have one civ going straight for alphabet from the get go!

Assuming it is easier, if the level is emperor, how about the 5 AIs are all aggressive?

 

[berserks01]

I too have been thinking about this type of gameplay, but I'm not emperor nor immortal player. Just a humble prince player here, who will definitely be lurking if this gets going

 

[ruff_hi]

I would imagine it would be easier than normal emperer or immortal, but not having tried anything like this don't know for sure. You essentially could split up the tech research 5 ways! Have one civ going straight for alphabet from the get go!

It is actually better if you all research the same tech. In that way, instead of getting 5 techs at the end of turn 10 (say) - you get 1 tech every 2nd turn. At the end of turn 10, you are in the same position, but you have been able to use Tech #1 for 8 turns, #2 for 6 turns, etc.

 

[Conroe]

IIRC, research costs go up in a team game. I'm thinking it is something like a 50% increase, but it could be based upon the number of teams. Honestly, I don't know the formula, but I'm pretty sure they are more expensive than a normal non-team game.

 

[jeejeep]

Still, it won't go up anything near 500%.

 

[Tatran]

@Cosmichail

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=165390

 

[ruff_hi]

We have 4 players. We could do with 1 (or 2) more - any suggestions regarding possibles? Also, any discussion on the structure of the game? Is 5 civs to control too much? Should we go with 4? How would people feel about taking on the Diety AI? I love a challenge!

 

[Conroe]

I'm ok with the structure of the game that you have laid out. (ie 5v5 with 5 turns per set). Deity, though, I'm not too sure about. I'm not comfortable that I could effectively manage 5 civs at that level.

 

[Ozbenno]

I'm probably going to run a test game this weekend, as I've never played with teams before. Will play to 0AD at least. I'm going to try emporer, so I'll let y'all know how easy/hard it was on this level and also how long the turnd were taking. Deity might be pushing it a bit.

 

[jeejeep]

I think four would be fine, but what do I know? I'll start a test game today.

 

[jeejeep]

I started a test game, didn't get very far but I have one major observation.

Compared to commerce, production is very slow. I played on epic, but research was like normal speed. We might want to give everyone a slight production boost to make up.

Otherwise, it was very fun, even playing with the stupid AIs. Is this going to get started?

 

[hamtastic]

Signing in for action, if you'll have me.

Bad Idea: Who wants to do something absolutely ridiculous like have all warmonger civs on our side and all financial on the other side? It would be a tad crazy...

Bad Idea 2: We could be Gandhi and just build a crapload of fast workers to upgrade everyone else's land (ok, I don't know if it lets you do that in a team game, but it would be funny)