Discussion in 'Civ4 - Succession GOTM' started by Noble Zarkon, May 3, 2018.
Ah, you might be right - and it would explain something I noticed in testing ....
In my opinion, SGOTM games are more fun when the games are comparable to each other, and one area that helps to make different teams' games more comparable to each other is when the allowed Victory Conditions are limited.
Also, I've found that when there are multiple Victory Conditions available, usually the typically-strongest teams benefit the most, as they are generally best able to identify early on which Victory Condition to focus on, while other teams tend to "chase two rabbits and lose them both." While it can be fun for the typically-strongest teams to win, I also think that those teams have a much more enjoyable time when it is less of a blow-away-the-competition win due to a poor choice in a targeted Victory Condition (or even just a lack of focus on a single Victory Condition) by other teams.
So, my suggestion would be to pick a single Victory Condition for all of the teams to achieve.
How about setting the target Victory Condition for all teams for this game as being a Traditional Cultural Victory?
Given the following claim:
it seems to be as good of a time as any.
One other area that people claim to like about SGOTM is newness and innovation, and I can only recall one XOTM game that was set up as a One-City-Challenge where we started with multiple Settlers (actually, pre-founded Cities, to get around the prior in-game restriction of not being able to settle a second City with a Settler in a One-City-Challenge game), which was hosted by none other than babybluepants:
In that game, several players competed for a Cultural Victory (which is a noteable feat in itself, as it is often an over-looked Victory Condition in XOTM games), and an all-time record was set for the Fastest WOTM Cultural Victory in that game:
http://gotm.civfanatics.net/results/index.php?month=60034 (a whopping 37% of players achieved a Cultural Victory in that game)
In this way, all of the teams would have their goals in sight from the start: the Buildings needed for the 7 Cities and the Victory Condition that must be achieved.
How you go about achieving those goals will differ from team to team and will offer a fun post-game comparison of how different teams took different paths to get to the same end result.
Wow, that was a long time ago! Fun game.
Granted, it was inspired by the original 3CC game from DynamicSpirit:
BOTM 17: Spain - 3 City Challenge
It looks like there were 106 cultural victories there, myself included.
If you want to practice with the Celts you could try out the current Minor Gauntlet.
I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this, is working out the required victory condition part of the fun or something that should be defined in the game set up?
I will say that the SGOTM 26 map was not designed with a specific win in mind and I'm reluctant to change that now but for SGOTM 27 it's definitely an option.
For my own personal preference (not speaking for anyone but myself) I think it would be great for some games to have the win condition defined. We improve either way, but it is more motivating to try and improve the whole game thru when you are confident that you are on the right path. But it should vary from game to game, since it is also fun to try and discover a twerk that nobody else thought of. So for this one, I'd favor a set condition to differentiate from the last one.
I agree about variety and dhoom has a great point. However variety doesn't have to mean alternating. NZ already stated sg27 can/will be designed with a VC in mind.
This game forces us to go deep into the tech tree. Most victory conditions are viable. You could miss out on a planned wonder and need to build another one which puts a wrinkle in your victory plans. I'd prefer to leave it open this time.
Would like to hear from Fippy/WT/LC/Kait/Gumby?
Variety is good. It never crossed my mind whether it should be one VC or multiple. Or which way is better. Whatever is most appropriate for the scenario. The scenarios are always interesting and that's all that matters.
I could see banning religious victory once in a while.
I prefer when most victory conditions are an option,
makes discussing more fun (and can lead to 180 degree moves).
I would like seeing "normal" culture returning in some form, really bored of espionage culture (just being honest there).
Not a big fan of AP victories, too easy imo with all those tricks that peoples now know and have practised (like city gifts), but i like everything else being available.
x-post with WT, agree with you
Whatever makes sense for the scenario, IMO. There have been some great SGOTM’s where a specific VC was central to the scenario variant concept. The last one and this one are heavy on special conditions, rendering the choice of VC less important.
For the record, I’m also not a fan of religious or espionage culture victories.
Having a defined victory condition could be nice sometime, but I'd prefer not in this particular game. Working out how to best win the 7-city challenge is already quite interesting. A game with a predefined victory condition should ideally be designed with that in mind.
To me, the key victory condition for SGs is predefined: Fastest Finish. What makes post-analysis interesting is how different approaches achieve their various results. There was an SG (7 or 9, I think) in which two completely different VCs competed for the victory (my team lost that race ). That was the Deity game that Gyathaar designed. Most often, however, the top teams use the same VC so why stipulate it? I don't get it. I agree with others above that variety is a very important criterion for a good SG. Variety of openings, VCs, resources, and so on.
The other question I want to resolve is how the hell Fippy's teams keep getting a head start on us.
I agree with this and my concept for SG27 lends itself well to a predefined victory condition so I'm inclined to leave SG26 as it is.
It's quite refreshing to know even after 25 SGOTM teams still have more to learn about civ 4. Even after 10-11 years! That is what so great about this game. So many different ways to play the game. No one approach is ever right and never played out exactly the same. RNG always adds a few spanners too.
Matching Mylene's micro is a task I would not give to anyone. She works on another level and understands the game mechanics like food overflows/whipping so well. Probably one of the better players to come out of this SGOTM process. Fippy and Elite compliment eachother so well. Like all games each team need players that add something different. I am amazed I have not been ousted yet! Kossin was another player. He just understood the game and became a great player. He always took part in the Cookbooks years back when I tried running some of these.
In this scenario I think leave all options open. I think after 40-50 turns it should be pretty clear which option will be quickest.
A good portion of my reasoning delves into the area of strategic discussion. We're not supposed to have much strategic discussion in this thread, which is why I initially proposed the idea from another perspective. But, I'll try to lay out the concept by speaking as generally as possible about potential strategies while still describing my thought process.
Excluding an Espionage Cultural Victory, it's quite rare to see a Cultural Victory in SGOTM when it isn't stipulated. Yet, I think that SGOTM is where a lot of solid discussion and strategies arise, and it would be nice to see this Victory Condition better explored (as WastinTime and Fippy had suggested).
What I think makes a Cultural Victory partner particularly well with this game is that some of the traditional approaches to a Cultural Victory, such as spamming a ton of Wonders on lower-to-mid Difficulty Levels or such as taking over the world (like with most other Victory Conditions) then using all of those resources to power your way to victory don't apply here, due to the limit on Wonder selection and the limit on Cities that can be owned. Such differences from a typical Cultural Victory would enhance the discussions and widen areas of Civ 4 that would otherwise have been explored in this scenario, making for a more EPIC SGOTM.
Further, rather than a possible relative repeat of the strategy used/discussed in some recent SGOTMs or WastinTime's 15 Million Points thread (Knights, Mercantilism, and tech beelining), I'd like to see your team have additional factors to debate as tradeoffs, including:
i. Maybe spamming a ton of Great Scientists won't be as optimal (think: Culture Bombs, settling Great People)
ii. Maybe conquering the world won't be as optimal
iii. Maybe a beelined tech path won't be as optimal (think: Religions)
iv. Maybe having the 1000-years-Culture-doubling effect be relevant will make for even more interesting Wonder-selection tradeoffs, as well as the timing of when to invest resources into completing them (think: less Failure Gold)
v. Maybe the relevance of a Wonder's base Culture will also make for an interesting tradeoff discussion
vi. Maybe dealing with the Apostolic Palace won't be as straight-forward (since an AI could still defeat you with it, especially if you are tempted to obtain said Religion)
vii. Maybe the timing of when to complete research on Scientific Method will make for an interesting discussion
Basically, I think that an approach of everyone targeting a Cultural Victory will actually greatly enrichen the scenario, due in particular to some of the unique limitations that this scenario imposes tying in quite well with a Cultural Victory.
I also think that teams which follow the spirit of the scenario (focusing on key Buildings/Wonders) will have a much more reasonable chance of competing against a team that will likely otherwise Lightbulb their way to the end game and treat the completion of most of the Buildings/Wonders as an afterthought, probably winning by a wide margin, but while not truly even playing the same scenario as are those who spend most of their time focusing on completing the Buildings/Wonders.
Essentially, treat it as a challenge to have to do a lot more out-of-the-box thinking, a way to enhance the scenario, and a way to allow for a lot more alternative approaches to the typically-winning, straight tech-beeline approach to shine.
There is a new announcement thread here.
Separate names with a comma.