SGOTM 18 Pregame Discussion Thread - Austin Powers

[BornInCantaloup]

It seems we'll be more Plastic than Ducks for this SGOTM

You sure? I've heard that love will never be a product of plasticity...
(Plastic People, Absolutely Free, Frank Zappa & The Mothers of Invention, 1967)

Love is all, we know. Gets one's mojo working.


Edit, @post below: yes, we may all be mother-forsaken ducklings.
Oooooh:

Spoiler :

One... at... a... time...

 

[shakabrade]

They are snow ducks so they are cool with that. They have weakness to fire though which makes them tasty.

Regarding Plasticity, it seems mother Duck has abandoned us taking the part of the name with herself.

 

[AlanH]

I've added "Immortal Difficulty" to the game description in the signup thread.

 

[BLubmuz]

Require Complete Kills is only problematic for the Conquest Victory Condition. Since Conquest is not included in Objective 4, Require Complete Kills is not problematic for this scenario. We're not required to kill off Dr. Evil, Goldmember, or anyone else.

I don't see Require Complete Kills as gimmicky. It is a full-fledged game design option with consequences, although inability to kill AI Great Spies and spies is not a consequence of significance in this scenario.

I see no reason for a vote to inhibit the creativity of the game creators.

While we're not requested to kill anyone in this scenario, not killing completely an AI will result in unhappiness problems in the conquered cities. This is random, due to the number of spies such AI created and due to luck in caught them.
Simplyh i don't like that a team can have an AI killed in the "old way" and another one struggles to see what it can't see.

Then, it's an escamotage to let us choose the settling spot, not a real choice. I suggested other ways to do so.

The fact that the option was already discussed and discarded in the past should have some weight, too. The game designers should have considered this.

 

[BLubmuz]

My question is this:
If you capture all of a civ's cities but it has an unkilable spy/great spy left, DO THOSE CAPTURED CITIES SUFFER from "we yearn to join our motherland"? Can the AP or UN vote to "return city X to its rightful owner"?

There are some game mechanics which are affected by whether a civ is "alive" or not, but I'm not sure which. If two teams capture the same civ, but in one team's save there is a spy left and in the other the civ is dead... how are those games different? Is it a big difference or a negligable one? Most notably, (given the UN VC requirement) do civs with no cities get to vote in AP/UN elections (even if it is zero votes for you, it could be a big problem for me)?

Unless negligable, I'm inclined to remove the "require complete kills" setting, and make changes so you don't all lose conquest defeat in turn 0.

Yes, you suffer the WYTJOM.
The two games you described differs if there are or not spies alive. But remember that spies are not the only problem. In Vanilla/Warlords a unit left by an otherwise dead AI in the territory of an AI who won't sign OB keeps that AI alive until you declare to the host AI and can chase the unit. Also this is an unpleasant random factor, let alone with BtS spies.
Yes, the AI is alive for diplo votes. Obviously it won't count much, but its friends do.
I know well this because in some mod (LoR mostly but also some other one) a Civ can be "resurrected" if a previously owned city goes into rebellion.

 

[BLubmuz]

Yep, that's exactly what I said as well. BLubmuz just keeps misunderstanding my posts.
I think I actually prefer this start to a Dr.Evil auto-win. Who knows, that scout might actually be able to defend the city...

I understand perfectly what you said, but my worries are not for a delay on conquest. I just described how this option works.

BTW, i'm not even sure you can win by conquest if an AI is "alive".

 

[kcd_swede]

Yes, you suffer the WYTJOM.
The two games you described differs if there are or not spies alive. But remember that spies are not the only problem. In Vanilla/Warlords a unit left by an otherwise dead AI in the territory of an AI who won't sign OB keeps that AI alive until you declare to the host AI and can chase the unit. Also this is an unpleasant random factor, let alone with BtS spies.
Yes, the AI is alive for diplo votes. Obviously it won't count much, but its friends do.
I know well this because in some mod (LoR mostly but also some other one) a Civ can be "resurrected" if a previously owned city goes into rebellion.

WYTJOM is enough reason to avoid this setting, imo. The race for laurels of all colors tends to be decided by a handful of turns or less, and I do not want this random factor to be decisive. Therefore, I will remove this game option of complete kills. I am looking into ways to do so with minimal impact on what you have alreay seen and been told, and therefore your suggestions on how to do so are appreciated. Expect some change like that.

As to the previous post that wondered whether the screenshots depict the actual save... well no, obviuosly the team saves can't be made until the teams have been established. But the save you get to play will at least look like the screenshots, at least it will in the parts you can see now.

 

[LowtherCastle]

My question is this:
If you capture all of a civ's cities but it has an unkilable spy/great spy left, DO THOSE CAPTURED CITIES SUFFER from "we yearn to join our motherland"? Can the AP or UN vote to "return city X to its rightful owner"?

There are some game mechanics which are affected by whether a civ is "alive" or not, but I'm not sure which. If two teams capture the same civ, but in one team's save there is a spy left and in the other the civ is dead... how are those games different? Is it a big difference or a negligable one? Most notably, (given the UN VC requirement) do civs with no cities get to vote in AP/UN elections (even if it is zero votes for you, it could be a big problem for me)?

Unless negligable, I'm inclined to remove the "require complete kills" setting, and make changes so you don't all lose conquest defeat in turn 0.

I promise you several new challenges you have never encountered in any xOTM.

Also, in sgotm18 we will introduce some new stuff...

One aspect that made Gyathaar a great scenario designer, imo, was introducing us to game features we were less familiar with.

If some team beats the crap out of an AI, shouldn't there be consequences? Plus, one can take measures against the Motherland unhappiness, so you don't need to buy into the victim paranoia about one team having bad luck compared to another. Frankly, having thought deeply about this scenario already, but being careful not to disappoint Ronnie1, I can envision that vagabond AI spy turning those maintenance coins into Gold Laurels....

As for teams losing the game on Turn 1, test it yourself. I don't think mapmakers have ever been disqualified for reloading...

xpost w/kcd

 

[kcd_swede]

One aspect that made Gyathaar a great scenario designer, imo, was introducing us to game features we were less familiar with.

If some team beats the crap out of an AI, shouldn't there be consequences? Plus, one can take measures against the Motherland unhappiness, so you don't need to buy into the victim paranoia about one team having bad luck compared to another. Frankly, having thought deeply about this scenario already, but being careful not to disappoint Ronnie1, I can envision that vagabond AI spy turning those maintenance coins into Gold Laurels....

As for teams losing the game on Turn 1, test it yourself. I don't think mapmakers have ever been disqualified for reloading...

xpost w/kcd

I have tested and if the "require complete kills" setting is not there, you lose by conquest defeat if you do not settle before Fat Bastard takes the Swinger's Pad. I'm testing how many turns to give you before that happens and a bunch of other stuff. Don't worry... I'm practically infallable (or is it infallible?).

 

[LowtherCastle]

oops...wrong thread...sorry for the spam...

 

[UnforcedError]

I understand perfectly what you said, but my worries are not for a delay on conquest. I just described how this option works.

BTW, i'm not even sure you can win by conquest if an AI is "alive".

You can. That's what I was saying. Even if there are several AI units on the map the game will end if you hit end turn and there are no more AI cities left at the start of the next turn. If the AI still has settlers and creates a new city or takes one the game will continue.

I have tested and if the "require complete kills" setting is not there, you lose by conquest defeat if you do not settle before Fat Bastard takes the Swinger's Pad. I'm testing how many turns to give you before that happens and a bunch of other stuff. Don't worry... I'm practically infallable (or is it infallible?).

Normally the game does not check for any victory conditions in the first 15 turns, apparently this is an exeption then.

 

[LowtherCastle]

Therefore, I will remove this game option of complete kills.

Spoiler :

BUMMER!!!

I am looking into ways to do so with minimal impact on what you have alreay seen and been told, and therefore your suggestions on how to do so are appreciated. Expect some change like that.

If we have just lost our city, then we've already defogged those tiles anyway. As far as I can tell, you just have to decide what to do with our scout. What else do we already know other than the color of Fat Bastard's leotards?

 

[kcd_swede]

As far as I can tell, you just have to decide what to do with our scout. What else do we already know other than the color of Fat Bastard's leotards?

There are plenty of things to decide. That's why I'm the mapmaker, and you are.... not.

Fat Bastard's leotards are actually kilts, and as such you should be informed they are the standard red/black scotch pattern, although in size XXXL.

 

[LowtherCastle]

There are plenty of things to decide. That's why I'm the mapmaker, and you are.... not.

Right. I'm hoping you add two novelties for each one you remove. And this time, mum's the word.

 

[Doshin]

Murky Waters continued sans Murky, right? I'm assuming, perhaps wrongly, that (s)he inspired their team name.

 

[BLubmuz]

It's strange how people continues to argue about proven things, with any possible reason, even the most imaginatives.

So, why not use "no espionage"? it has been proved broken, thus banned from the HoF, but it's there.
Or random events, or huts?

Because this is a tight competition and any random effect option must be removed, period. You can use those options in your solo games.

IMO the interesting aspect of this competition, aside the fact that play in team is nice, is that the (poor) mapmaker usually offers us (or tries to) new ways of thinking, by setting the map in a certain way or imposing particular rules.

 

[UnforcedError]

Fat Bastard's leotards are actually kilts, and as such you should be informed they are the standard red/black scotch pattern, although in size XXXL.

Careful with the hints We want to learn about all this during the game

 

[Deckhand]

... Don't worry... I'm practically infallable (or is it infallible?).

ineffable?

 

[WastinTime]

I think the XotM games are the perfect place to explore the dark corners of the CivIV. More random stuff makes for more challenges that teams must adapt to. The entire game is based on random effects! Combat is random!

Random events are fun. BUFFY removes most of the large-impact ones. There's actually a lot of strategy to set up the pre-reqs to try to trigger the event you want.

btw, 'no espionage' would be fun! it's something we can't do in HoF games. Why not explore it here?

And I don't buy the argument that random events don't belong in a 'competition'. In fact, I don't buy that SGotM is really even very competitive! That's right, many teams aren't seriously competing with each other. Each team is just trying to learn more each time and apply more of their knowledge to the (crazy) scenario. It's the 'crazy' that makes SG's attractive. Don't kill the 'crazy'.

So my point is: Consider leaving 'require complete kills' and explore more exciting new options in the future. Either way you chose, it will be a great game!

 

[BLubmuz]

I think the XotM games are the perfect place to explore the dark corners of the CivIV. More random stuff makes for more challenges that teams must adapt to. The entire game is based on random effects! Combat is random!

Tu quoque, Bruti