Test Game: Civic Centric "damocletia"

Provolution

Sage of Quatronia
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
10,102
Location
London
TEST GAME: CIVIC CENTRIC "DAMOCLETIA"

CIVIC CENTRIC "DAMOCLETIA"


Here we go, I decided to make a test run with the recent Civic-centric proposal, and did a few discoveries underways. Since each civilization is through its traits, its special unit and its special building geared to favor and discriminate certain civics, I felt it necessary to randomize everything but the planet size. Time Progress is Epic, to allow for more interesting battles.

Forests are beneficial to some traits, and thus civilization and civics, for example, where a conscious choice of a civilization would penalize or reward a certain playing style. To avoid this, and to preserve the integrity of the civic-centric system, the planet became fully randomized from Shuffle Planet, and random on all options but planet size, which was large.

Since the expansion is "Beyond the Sword" I picked the Leader Name "Damocles", after the Sword of Damocles, which could swing either way in terms of fate. The people were named Damocletians and the adjective is Damocletian. The dice was tossed, and what came up...

Aztecs, with Montezuma as leader, both Aggressive and Spiritual, both interesting traits, as well as the Jaguar as special unit and Sacrificial Altar as special building. What does this mean for the game?

ANALYSIS

Aggressive and Spiritual Traits

The combination Aggressive/Spiritual means for the civic-centric system that the transition of power will go smooth with no turn of anarchy for a civic change. This means that we may need to go further with opening for a marginal civic change following mid-term elections in additional to the major one during the main primary election.

Double production of barracks, drydocks and temples mean that we can set up a smaller, but professional army to save costs, and possibly invest more elsewhere, or to fight aggressively if needed with more experienced units.
The added experience to melee and gunpowder units makes for a stronger infantry force, which will be the backbone of the Aztec Army.

Furthermore, the Jaguar Unit will make attacks from forests into open areas or cities the preferred approach, as Woodsman bonus makes the Jaguar an ancient guerrilla unit, most likely to be used in terms 1 and 2, and 3 at the latest, so we can foresee a less democratic early era if we are neighboring several civilizations (ideal civic of Montezuma is Police State...).

The Sacrificial Altar reduces the anger caused by slavery by 50 % as well as court house functions, which makes locations with lot of food centers of activity. We can with this strong Aztec Infantry and an abundance of food create an early empire.

START SITUATION



This is the situation as the game starts, and we need to elect the National Leader, the High Priest and the General, that is all we need for now. The Barbarism Civic will make these same three men the very Supreme Court as well. Aztecs 4000 BC is indeed an ugly sight, and Amnesty International, and Sacrificial Altar for that matter, is yet to be invented...

This brings us to our starting technologies:

We got Mysticism and Hunting for starters, and we see a cow next by. We move onto the coast on a hill to keep all options open, and make the capital Damocles City the port capital. Now we can have our first election.



The National Leader election is straightforward for term 1. There are no competing civics to speak of, and no stone or marble to help out wonders. The terrain is quite barren, so there is little forest to help build wonders as well. There are three player rivaling for running the early days of the Aztecs.

1. Player One, "MrGranite", is a demogame conservative, and likes to stick to real history. He advocates an early game of developing technology from Polytheism and Animal Husbandry first for religious reasons and for the proximity of cattle. For the end of the term, he wants to research Monotheism to deprive competitors for Judaism and get Organized Religion, and get Meditation and Priesthood in order to qualify for Monarchy, as well as taking on Mining, Masonry and Bronze Working in order to qualify for the beneficial slavery civic, and thus allow Term Two to advance Civics to become Hereditary Rule, Organized Religion and Slavery, a quite tough Policy Combo.

2. Player Two "MsFrantic", is a demogame conservative, but likes to make troops and kill at first instinct, and she advocates for taking on Archery and Animal Husbandry. Her long term plan also includes Slavery, so she would go for Mining, Masonry and Bronze working right after Archery and Animal Husbandry, as well as quallfying for Organized Religion through Polytheism and Monotheism, as well as taking fishing, wheel, agriculture, pottery and writing in order to build up a basic infrastructure for exploiting slavery more for troop builds.

3. Player Three "MrSweet", is a demogame radical, but more of a peaceful hippie that would like an early religious victory through Apostolic Palace.
He would research Buddhism and Animal Husbandry. "MrSweet" is not too much into civics, he likes to talk about rights for voting and so on, but more concerned about getting some basics up. Like the others he goes for Slavery, Mining, Masonry and Bronze working, as well as creatively targeting fishing, wheel, agriculture and sailing, as well as targeting pottery, just in order to mass produce buildings using the slavery with food surpluses.

The High Priest Election is also straightforward, but there is actually two competitors for this one.

1. "MrFanatic" just wants to show participation and eagerness, he fishes compliments, but eagerly awaits the State Religion and to push for religious buildings sooner than later.


2. "MrPope" just wants an Apostolic Palace win, and worriedly watches the national leader election to see if he can work with the "right Candidate", and develop relations long term.


The General is also less than contested than it should be, but two runs for it.

1. "MrJaguar" has made it his mission to push for iron working sooner than later, a resource industrialist always eager for war, he would like the National Leader to push for Bronze Working, Iron Working and alphabet, currency, code of laws in order to get Sacrifical Altar and really make the Aztecs great, an imperialist and autocrat, he goes all Aztec.

2. "MsPussycat" has made it her mission to push for a civic and defensive force that will protect the Aztecs in an enlightened manner. She would become general simply in order to reduce warmongering, and only set-up a small defensive force just enough to make it quicker to more humane times.

All of these three elections are determining a lot in the game, the direction of the general technology development, the number of available civics for next primary election and finally the focus of the new military. All important decisions.

Due to the Spiritual trait, the demogamers agree to that the mid-term opens for a singular civic change if the National Leader and the People wants it (simple discussion and poll to be acted on in two weeks).

Next elections, mid-term, will be for Historian and Senator, which will take place in two weeks time. The National Leader may appoint himself to become "Ambassador" and "Treasurer" until further notice.

So who do we let win of these three fictive elections in this experimential run of civic centric?

National Leader

1. MrGranite
2. MsFrantic
3. MrSweet

High Priest

1. MrFanatic
2. MrPope

General

1. MrJaguar
2. MsPussycat

I would take into account the first five voters that give test-votes to all three fictive candidates.
 
Before beginning the experiment, I have a question. The platforms seem too detailed to me. That much in-game info right at the start might bother roleplay enthusiasts because we haven't even made a single move yet and already we need to know all about game mechanics. I'm not saying that it's a definite bad thing, just asking if you think we'd really have people declaring that much in advance.

Further, let me try to analyze the platforms to a catchphrase to see if I've got your meaning.

MrGranite: methodical approach
MsFrantic: warmonger, dagger style
MrSweet: peaceful spiritualist

Not much to say about the High Priest candidates. It's too early to tell if religions will catch on in the roleplay side, though by stating interest in an AP win this early, MrPope's platform will help the people choose their roleplay goals.

MrJaguar - true Aztec warrior
MsPussycat - sheep in wolf's clothing
 
You understood their basic platforms 100 %, very good :)

However, one of the High Priest Candidates, is a sectorial builder, only craving more religious buildings.

Roleplay enthusiasts may like to look for more meat on the bones for the narratives, and I am not amplifying that here. The first steps are bound to be tentative and technical, until the very first election (3 positions) is off the ground. The fictive candidates is to show that some got roleplay potential, some not, but the game goes on regardless.

What will happen now, is that we fastforward two weeks (2 turnchats) with the leadership of the three elected ones, and see what they polled and did not poll (I make this up, to show the mechanic) until the mid-term elections.

The mid-term election will handle the Senator and the Historian, as well as appointments of Ambassador and Treasurer, as well as the first Governor and Mayor. These will be up for election again next mid-term. In the meantime, two weeks before that election, another Civic Primary is up, and the three positions above would be up for election, with 3 brand new candidates.
 
I really am inspired by your work here, Provo. Bravo with what you have available to work with, but I do not own CIV4 and probably won't buy it. I really think bringing religion full force into the CIV world was a mistake, just like slavery. True, slavery is nothing more than an economic tool for those in power, but there is so much more attached to it. And, of course, this too bothers me as much as the religious aspect.

As far as your nominees, I don't really care for any of them. Period. For your National Leader I might vote for MrGranite, although in viewing the description, there is no trust level there for me. I would not even vote for your Relious Leader, abstaining on this bizzare principal. For General, I might vote for MsPussyCat. But again, I'm not even sure I could stick with this game. Sorry.
 
Heck, I may even do a Civ3 C demogame just to get you in, but then as a government-centric game.
 
Top Bottom