SGFN-05: A work in progress

TheOverseer714

Overseer
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
5,077
Location
Ohio
I am starting this thread to begin brainstorming about my next Succession Game for newbies. Right now, my idea I've been tossing around, is to play as India. India is always the "peacenik" tribe in most games, until they backstab you at the worst possible moment. For this game, I want India to be an out and out war-monger, to be an in the face, kick your backside kind of civilization. The intended Victory condition will be either Domination or Conquest, though all VCs will be enabled. (Have to give the AI a chance to beat us) I would probably choose a variant, maybe a NOW set up. A Non-Oscillating War, which means we fight each enemy to extinction before selecting our next enemy. If that seems too difficult, we can always just do our wars as we see fit, fight an enemy until we achieve the goal for that war. I figure either Continents or a Pangaea. So is anyone interested?

Possible Roster, this is just a list of interested players:

ThinkTank-confirmed
Rodent-confirmed
TheOverseer714-confirmed
Anaxagoras-confirmed
Doug Lefelhocz-strongly interested
Northen Wolf-strongly interested
akk47-interested
Optional-confirmed
Jorgo Mono-confirmed
 
Here is a picture of the 4 starts I rolled. The saves may not be in order, but the names describe major features in the start location, so it shouldn't be hard to figure out.
SGFN-05Saves.jpg


The team has chosen start A. The save: http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=179846&stc=1&d=1213208359

World stats are:
Standard
Pangaea
70% Water
Warm
Wet
4 byo
Roaming barbarians
Normal Aggression
 
Rules for this variant: Blatant Rip-off from GMA-02, thanks to GmaHarriet. There was no way I could make these any more concise, and they are all great guidelines for any game of Civ3.

We will play as the Indians in a variant on the Non-Oscillating War. The basic framework is taken from Arathorn’s War Academy article, though I have edited out the parts that will not apply to this game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arathorn: “Comprehensive Guide to Variants”
Non-Oscillating War (NOW): . . . . [edited]. . . .As each is eliminated, the next must be declared on before the end of the turn. Other wars are allowed, and alliances are encouraged. Sandbagging or not finishing off a defeated foe simply to not go to war with the next one on the list is illegal.. . . . [edited]

We will change this variant as follows:
The growth of our empire dictates the beginning of our War to end all wars. When we get 5 cities built, we must immediately declare war on our first opponent. This will be determined by order of contact, i.e., the first civ we meet will be that opponent.

Once a civ is targeted for elimination, we may not have peace with them. They must be eliminated. At all times after the beginning of the first war, we must have at least one civ targeted for elimination. Other wars with “non-targeted” civs are allowed. Once one Target Civ is eliminated, the next civ we contacted after the first civ becomes the new Target Civ and war must be declared by the end of the turn. Rinse and repeat until we win.

Timelines: 48 to grab, 144 after that to play. (7 days total) I expect it will move more quickly than that, but that guarantees weekend days in everyone’s turnsets.

Turnsets: The first player’s turnset will be 20 turns and 10 for each player’s set thereafter. If turns become longer in the later game we may go to smaller sets.

Other rules of SGFN05:

Rule #1 of SGFN05: We're all friends here. We will learn as much from our mistakes as from our successes. Criticism of your turnset or questioning your decisions is not a personal attack. Don't use it as one, don't take it as one. This is also a Democracy, any major decisions like non targeted war declarations by us, Rights of Passage, Mutual Protection Pacts and what techs we pursue should be voted on by the team. This is not to say that you have no say so, on the contrary. What powers you do have are mostly the same as solo games, just nothing that will turn us onto a damaging path that the rest of the team would not agree to. Use your common sense.

Rule #2: Detailed logs. We can't spot mistakes unless we can see what's been done. Granted, we can't all be CommandoBob, but the whole team needs to be able to make sense of your turnset. (NOTE: CB, you've become famous for your logs. )

Rule #3: There are no stupid questions. If you're in the middle of your turnset and either: (a) realize that you're in over your head; or (b) have hit a crossroads that needs a group decision, stop and ask. Discussion is greatly encouraged.

Rule #4: When in doubt on cheats, exploits or bugs, consult. If you can find someone online to ask, great. In the absence of that, I like to use GOTM rules as a guide. They are always accessible, even if no other team members are online. If they need modification or if we decide not to use one of those rules, I'll put it in the informational post once a decision has been reached. GOTM rules can be found here: http://gotm.civfanatics.net/games/rules.php

Rule #5: Have fun. I hope everyone enjoys this one and learns lots.

And Bede’s rules - I don't expect any conflict between Bede's rules and the GOTM, but if there is one, please follow Bede's rules:

Rule #6: No false peace treaties. Pointy stick research is a long and honorable tradition but breaking a peace treaty secured with technology and installment payments before the treaty has run its course will not be allowed. Any treaty secured by gold per turn or resources on our side must be honored for the full twenty turns.

Rule #7: "The trading reputation is golden" say LKendter, and so it is. That means no deliberate act on the player's part that will cause the premature end of any deal involving gold per turn or resources from our side. Losing the "Trade Rep" has consequences that will affect the entire course of the game, and not for the better. Being unable, ever again, to buy tech for gold per turn or resources, or supplying resources for a lump sum payment, changes the dynamics of the game so much that what had been a game of building, diplomacy and warfare, becomes a game of war or rumors of war, unending. I can play that sort of game, at Deity, and win, but I don't like to; it takes way too many options off the table.

Unfortunately the game does not recognize the difference between random events and player actions when considering the impact of a broken trade route. So volcanic eruptions can destroy a road and break a deal, barbarian galleys appearing on a coastline can break a trade route, war not involving the two principals in a deal can break a trade route, and the demise of one of the parties to a deal can break a trade route. So when considering a resources or gold per turn deal for cold cash, World Maps, or technology, look around carefully and make sure those risks are minimal

Rule #8: RoP rape is not a permitted tactic, nor will the use of RoP's or scouts to deny a resource to an opponent by parking a unit on it before it can be roaded.

Rule #9: No worker automation, ever, and limit the use of go-to orders to situations that are detailed in the notes to the save. It is really annoying to press enter on the first turn of a set and have little figures scampering all over the landscape. It is even more annoying to chase them down and turn them off.
 
lurker's comment: I am interested in watching at least. I would love to see a NOW played out.

Tried that once and it went nowhere slowly :lol:
 
Lurker:

Do you mean new to C3C, new to SG's or new AW? I wondered as it seems to me that you would play differently for each as new player. A new to C3C, read any civ3, needs to learn fundamentals, without so much pressure.

New to SG or AW could be treated the same, I guess, depending on the game and level. The reason I posted, was it occurred to me how many times I see SG's for newbies, but they mostly just jump right in the fire.

You can learn from that, but I kind of remembered some of the trainers in the past going over much detail for true new players. I guess it depends on whom the players are that join.
 
In the past, my first 4 go arounds at this, our target group was people new to SG's, not new to the game. My teams have always been a mix of high level players who just haven't done SG's, and mid-level players who want to improve their games by playing an SG. Some have found out SG's weren't their cup of tea, and others have learned to relish the SG format. It isn't strictly a Training Day game, more like a "learn by doing" exercise. We've always drawn excellent lurkers, who are the REAL trainers, though just participating in team discussions has taught me alot about the game. I think most of our former and current players are no longer newbies, but become senior team members and quality lurkers. I'm always open to participation(playing) from anyone that isn't a grizzled veteran of the SG world. Veterans make the best lurkers;)
 
Well, I'm the kind of player that thinks about putting his name up this time! I've never been involved in any Succession Game, it could be fun for a change.
Vmxa, when I look at some names that have previously joined these games for newbies, I don't see any newbies to the game as such among them. Not that I know them, but I recognise the names, they've been on the forums for a while, and therefore not newbies to the game.
I think it should be open for everybody though. I don't think there's that much for real newbies (or is there? I'm not so familiar with this part of the forums). Anyway, what I'm saying is, I don't mind if the difficulty level gets adjusted to the experience of the players that join.

I'm not very experienced as a warmonger myself. I play peaceful builder style in my own games. I would probably appreciate hints from my team mates about how to play aggressive. I just feel like joining a succession game, regardless of the variant, as long as it's not too far off from a normal game.
 
For training purposes, the usual idea is to go a level or 2 higher than your comfort level. Generally, we play at Monarch or Emperor level, as those are the levels where the Ais and the human players are somewhat even, at least with regards to production and such. We are open to pretty much anyone, but to play an SG requires more than beginner level knowledge about the game. If you just got the game yesterday, odds are you won't benefit from an SG. If you've played for some time, want to move up a level, brush up after playing Civ4, learn some more advanced game mechanics, this is ideal. For example, 18 months ago, I was a weak Regent-level player. After being involved in this series and others, I am a strong Monarch and an average Emperor-level player. I would say if everyone who joins can handle Regent, this one will be fine at Emperor. Your mistake level over 10 turns will not get out of hand, and the next player can adjust things to correct them. There will be some micro-managing involved, but nothing to the extent that a DG or higher level game demands.
 
Hey Overseer. Good to see the SGFN is going on its 5th edition. :D

Just a thought, if you want an lesser-played tribe and want an alternative to the "Rambo Ghandi" oxymoron, how about Portugal, Emperor, Pangea, Conquest?

If you play Portugal for pangea conquest, it'll play like a tough Emperor / low DG game. Maybe play with no barbs, no huts so that you'll basically be playing a tribe with no traits. ;) The 3-move curraghs are somewhat valuable for scouting even on a Pangea, the scouts help you somewhat with early terrain knowledge and contacts, but beyond that, virtually no traits. Could be a nice challenge. :cool:
 
Excellent! Welcome aboard Jorgo, I think you'll make a fine addition to the team, as will Optional. To Othniel, Portugal is the easiest civ to neutralize their traits, but I have been playing them in Kraz 1 for a looong time, so I'm kind of sick of them;) If our team wants to do that instead of India, I'm game for that idea. All ideas are welcome.
 
I have no civ preference. But Portugal a lesser played civ? You play them, Othniel, I play them, Overseer is familiar with them... Portugal seems to have quite a cult following these days.
I've never played India. Which would make them more interesting for me. I would like to keep Barbarians and goody huts in.
 
I just read an interesting title in an index of stories and tales.
"The War of the Crazy Women"

It might make an interesting game to use only the female led Civs. (how many are there these days?)
 
Byzantines, Russia, Spain, Egypt, and France have female leaders, so you'd end up on a tiny or small world to do that. Female AW. Interesing.
 
Oops, I don't know how I forgot the skinny redhead and her milk baths? Brrrr, that's a scary mental picture.
 
Non-oscillating war with India. Always peace with the Zulu or Mongols. Sounds just about right. India seems handicapped much less to me. If I can get enough people to join in for my always peace succession game/get someone to roll a start for us, I'd find it interesting to play this succession game at about the same time also.
 
England? I think there might be others...

EDIT: Oh, and what version of Civ will this be?

Conquests version 1.22 is what all in this series have been played in. Hopefully we don't end up playing in Spanish again, that was a trip.:crazyeye:
I can see a roster forming here. I will play the first 20, then a moderately experienced player, then ThinkTank, another moderately experienced player, then a more experienced one, that way each newer player has an experienced player before and after their set to help keep things focused. This system has worked well in the past. As always, if you aren't sure, ask, someone can always get an answer before you continue.
 
I'm not an experienced player and am playing in training SG myth01, there I already managed to wreck several things. Now, may I try to wreck unimportant things(like breaking honor, getting towns sacked by barbarians here[5x])?

Comfort level is regent, freely win that with less or low micromanagement. Weak on monarch, wherein I usually get bad maps, (no iron and Dutch/Greece nearest neighbors).

I do not like concept of Continents map, as AI sucks in naval warfare (counting in RNG god favor of galley with 1 hp defeating 5 vGalleys, for AI.), that gives unfair advantage to human player, who does better in naval invasions.

I also do not get concept of Domination victory, victory that can be archived with only little use of force... You should always have few settlers inside your invasion force, do replace razed towns or empty holes in AI areas, domination just takes away fun of killing everyone and Ai won't get big enough, expt. maybe on single continent + islands.

I'm slow poster(edit posts and typos after posting), slow player(take my time playing), not so smart(despite of thing above my avatar). But I've reached area where I try to complete monarch, and that is good improvement for me as recently I was one of those 'help me improving' thread maker.
 
I forgot that I added in Empress Wu so I was thinking she was in the mix...

One of these days, I might just start and Amazon AW SG.
 
Back
Top Bottom