The Monarchists' Cookbook Bullpen

[Diamondeye]

I like the idea of splitting the game into Monarch and Emperor lines. I have been inactive and will so for the next week as well, sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[nokem]

A plea from the gallery not to abandon us aspiring monarchs. This series is good material for shadow games. I've just finished MC1 (Bismark - time loss to Suleiman) and I plan to start the Pericles game this week. I'll read the threads after completion to avoid spoiler info.

One observation - the "best ball" format amplifies the effects of luck - eg. popping Aesthetics & Monarchy in MC1. I notice you turned off events and huts in the last game; that's going to help as much as eliminating best/worst saves.

nokem

 

[Sisiutil]

So you feel that the group is ready to move up a level, but the fans are pleading you to stay on monarch. What you may want to try to do is modify the custom game settings to make the game a little more challenging, or at least different. Some suggestions:

• Add more civs. More competition for resources and city sites in the early game can make the going tougher.
• If you're playing with one of the warmonger leaders (Aggressive, Charismatic, Rome), turn on Aggressive AI.
• Turn on "No Tech Brokering".
• Or turn off Tech Trading completely.
• Turn on raging barbs.
• etc.

I'll be the first to admit that these settings always make the game more challenging, because the AI's ability to adjust to them seems hit-and-miss. But they will add nuances to the game that you'll have to adjust to, making things more challenging without going up a level.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I generally agree Sis, but IMO not letting the AI broker techs or trade them will get it slaughtered. It is downright amazing how long classical and medieval troops last in this format. You can axe rush and axe rush and catapult axe rush and maybe throw in swords, and hey look! Longbows finally in 800 AD! On emperor!

IMO this decays games into a techpath that prioritizes monarchy/currency/CoL and then...war. Then some more war. Then some more war after that, because global tech rate will be TERRIBLE and land will be king even more than normal!

Well, maybe I'm in the minority there. I'll definitely play it, and I won't go attacko this time I promise.

 

[Sisiutil]

I've played a few games with the tech options, and my observations on them are similar to yours, but qualified.

No Tech Trading: Basically, some AI leaders tech better than others. The Financials have a HUGE advantage here. All others (with a few exceptions) tend to fall behind and stay behind. Thus you get a field of several extremely weak, backwards civs and a smaller number of competitors depending on who you drew at the start.

No Tech Brokering: Not as disadvantageous to the AI as no tech trading, and more of a challenge for the human player. You don't realize how much you rely on swapping techs around until you can't do it anymore.

Also, the AI will generally not, for love nor money, trade a tech to you which it has partially researched. This is one of my favourite ways to raise cash, especially once espionage allows me to see what everyone's researching so I can sell techs for their hoard when only 1-2 turns of research remain. With NTB, the AI will no longer do this.

This can be frustrating, but is also a weakness for the AI, as sometimes having the tech earlier outweighs being able to trade it. It would be nice if one of the Better AI gurus found a way to make the AI smarter about that, both when this setting is off or when it's on.

Nevertheless, I found NTB offered a mild challenge that doesn't result in quite the disparity in techs that no tech trading can. So, you may want to consider giving it a whirl.

 

[Winston Hughes]

• Add more civs. More competition for resources and city sites in the early game can make the going tougher.
• If you're playing with one of the warmonger leaders (Aggressive, Charismatic, Rome), turn on Aggressive AI.
• Turn on "No Tech Brokering".
• Or turn off Tech Trading completely.
• Turn on raging barbs.

As much as I love playing with non-standard settings, I fear those changes would make it easier for the players who are already cruising at Monarch, whilst making it more difficult for those who are still learning how to beat that level.

It wouldn't be a complete fix, but I still think that, as well as having a tough map chosen in advance, ranion's idea of discounting any saves that are clearly ahead of the pack is a good way to help preserve some kind of challenge. It should also ensure a decent debate over the best ball save, which is crucial to the format imo.

Beyond that, though, I'm afraid we'll just have to get used to seeing the game reach a 'play it out' position earlier than we'd like. If anyone wants to start a similar game at Emperor or higher, then I'd be up for joining in (dangerously-rickety PC allowing), but I agree with nokem that the MC should stay on Monarch.

Incidentally, Sisiutil, I believe you mentioned making a change to the map in WB - would I be right in thinking that you deleted some copper (there doesn't seem to be much of it about), and, if so, where was it?

 

[Sisiutil]

Incidentally, Sisiutil, I believe you mentioned making a change to the map in WB - would I be right in thinking that you deleted some copper (there doesn't seem to be much of it about), and, if so, where was it?

Errrrmmm... I don't remember. I may have to go have a look at the saved game file, something may jog my memory.

 

[r_rolo1]

Well, given the lack of interest in most of ppl in finishing MC 3 ( understandable, given that any of the 1500 AD saves is clearly in a very solid postion to win ( BTW Bleys, still waiting for the cheesy tao AP win ) ) I decided to toss out the discussion about next instalement ( since that I'm going to be if the sucessory line continues from to deputy ) of the MC ....

So:

-Format ( I'm leaning to a trash style game: every player that posts in the round has 3 votes for 1st ,2nd and 3rd best save and the save that picks the least votes is the oficial for the next round. as usual , parallel turnsets based in other saves are welcomed, but will not give voting power. This may offset a little the upward drifting that the games had been getting because of the contribution of people that normally play above Monarch ( Like most of the MC founders ) )

- Leader , map type..... the usual. I liked the tectonics map that S man bringed us in spite of somewhat challenging. But I was thinking something in the lines of the Planet generator ( see Noble's club X for a example of the maps that script can bring ). But this only my idea, since the reaction in NC X to the map was a little .......

I'm thinking in launching the game in the friday next to this one ( I have the LHC to launch in Saturday .... ), so we have some time to put fresh ideas in the table

 

[Bleys]

The last map was great, if Sis is willing, I would love to have him generate the next one.

I also like the trash-style, but perhaps we should consider a "toss out the best, and the worst, vote on the rest" if there are enough. Then players can do stuff like TMITs crazy rush or OTAKs bad-roll failed rush on Peter in the Pericles game, and those wont be voted in.

I definitely like the idea of the map script from NC X, I think thats just what we need to create challenging maps for us. As for leaders though, if you wanted to pick a few of the ones you would like to showcase, we could discuss them in the coming days. I like the idea of a PRO leader, myself, without a "first tier" 2nd trait. Sort of the opposite of an AGG leader with ORG, is what I am thinking.

And yes, I had forgotten about my Tao AP win plan, but I will try to get back to it. Sigh, so many games . . . kinda hooked on the Cathy NC game right now though, LOL.

 

[Winston Hughes]

the lack of interest in most of ppl in finishing MC 3

I'm still playing it. Warmongering is so very time consuming.

I'm about ten turns from victory, which I'm gonna play in just a minute, and then I'll be posting a report.

-Format ( I'm leaning to a trash style game: every player that posts in the round has 3 votes for 1st ,2nd and 3rd best save and the save that picks the least votes is the oficial for the next round.

Nice idea - it takes the best part of the best ball format (the analysis and discussion of the saves), whilst neutralising the inevitable difficulty problems.

One issue that occurs to me, though: what happens if several saves receive no votes at all? As the host, you could just choose one, of course. But if there's a lot of interest, then there's a danger you could end up choosing more often than not.

 

[vale]

On the low save votes, make the vote for the poorest position that isn't already lost. This would avoid the problem of having to select from several saves with 0 votes.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Mao Zedong on a NC X type map? That would be interesting, especially with the voting style. Of course, I was one of the people who actually liked NC X, since the AI doesn't really know how to adapt anyway it didn't feel hard (actually, the surrounding resources made it feel kind of easy, assuming you knew to get them).

 

[KingMorgan]

Count me in for the next game.

 

[Negator_UK]

Count me in for the next game too, even though I'm still playing the last one.

There is a chance that work will get in the way, in which case I'll be a lurker only for about a year.....

 

[Bleys]

On the low save votes, make the vote for the poorest position that isn't already lost. This would avoid the problem of having to select from several saves with 0 votes.

Perhaps just making a rule that 0-vote saves are not even eligible. In order to be considered, a save has to have at least 1 person who thinks its 3rd best, I think that will give us a more middle-road path through the rounds, as opposed to the top-end we have seen, or the very very "almost unwinnable" bottom of the spectrum.

 

[ChromiumL]

I like the way the new format sounds! I have to admit, always playing from the best save did feel a little like cheating. Even if I did play all the way through the last game (sorry all--I have a horrible time finishing domination games!) I wouldn't have the satisfaction of knowing that I won on Monarch...

Can't wait until the next game starts!

 

[Winston Hughes]

Perhaps just making a rule that 0-vote saves are not even eligible. In order to be considered, a save has to have at least 1 person who thinks its 3rd best, I think that will give us a more middle-road path through the rounds, as opposed to the top-end we have seen, or the very very "almost unwinnable" bottom of the spectrum.

Nice solution. A strict no-voting-for-your-own-save rule would be a wise precaution, though.

 

[Diamondeye]

I think this sounds nice and I am looking foward to playing a PRO leader, I seem to be one of the only ones who favor this trait.
Anyway, Rolo, send me a PM when the game is up and I will update the OP.
Also, I feel that we are playing with a new system every game. I don't know what to write in the OP about the series since they seem so ingenuine... For now I'll just let the old text stay but we might need to change it so that people doesn't have read through like fifteen pages to know how the game is run.

 

[Winston Hughes]

Any news on MC4?

 

[Diamondeye]

Rolo would start it soon I believe.