What leader would you like to play in future GOTMs?

[rddc05]

Don't know if this is appropriate, but the GOTM creators can feel free to ignore the thread.

I would like to play a GOTM as Alexander because I think it would be a step up in challenge to the typical strategies:

1) You start with neither Mining nor the Wheel, so you are at least two techs away from BW or Pottery;
2) The UU is early, but it doesn't much take advantage of the Aggressive trait as it is primarily a defensive unit
3) I find that taking effective advantage of the Philosophical trait is a real challenge, particularly in combination with Aggressive

If early copper is not present, we're talking a REAL challenge.

Anyone else care to share their preferences?

 

[Redbad]

I suppose sooner or later every leader will appear in the gotm.

I never played Alex, but is he as you state a bigger challenge then most other leaders, then I don't know if the next gotm is a good idea. The next gotm will most likely be at emporer level, which on its own is challenge enough for many of us.

In my GOTM experience the higher the level the more favourable the conditions and versa vica. So maybe Alex for the next noble or prince?

 

[ohioastronomy]

I'd mostly like to see a GoTM that is set up to make something other than domination the most effective winning strategy. I do think that is one reason why we should have some normal speed rather than epic speed games tossed into the mix...

 

[BudFox]

I would like Roosevelt. Lots of land, tropical with a nice mix of other builders, warmongers and religious leaders.

Or alternatively - what is the worst leader / traits for a particular map /set of other leaders - I would like that, no natural 'given' course of action.

BudFox

 

[solenoozerec]

We are going through exploration phase of gotm. We played, continents, lakes and in-land sea. There are several other types of maps and we are likely to play one of them. What will be the next one? The difficulty level is increasing and the next game likely will be on emperor. It is harder to program AI behavior on water rich maps, thus they are safer for humans on higher levels. Hence, I expect that the next game might be on archipelago (unless gotm staff is keeping it for higher difficulty levels). If the next gotm will be on archipelago, I would like next leader to be financial. Other trait is not as important. However, starting tech is important and needed tech is obviously fishing. Such a combination gives George Washington and Victoria. We played for England (although it was Elisabeth), thus it leaves only George W.

 

[akots]

Alexander is fun to play on higher difficulty levels. I've played an Immortal level game on small map recently and was particularly happy to see about a dozen Persian immortals committed suicide by attacking over about 10 turns a single phalanx I parked on a forest hill near Persepolis. The heroic hoplite got to level 7 iirc.

 

[ainwood]

We are going through exploration phase of gotm. We played, continents, lakes and in-land sea. There are several other types of maps and we are likely to play one of them. What will be the next one? The difficulty level is increasing and the next game likely will be on emperor. It is harder to program AI behavior on water rich maps, thus they are safer for humans on higher levels. Hence, I expect that the next game might be on archipelago (unless gotm staff is keeping it for higher difficulty levels).

I am still considering the difficulty level for the next GOTM. Whilst we want to cater for all, my own feeling is that Civ4 monarch is approximately equal to Civ3 emperor (or at best, only slightly easier). As such, don't expect the difficulty to continue ramping on up to deity - especially as people are still learning the game.

 

[Memphus]

I would enjoy playing with any leader which has the spiritual characteristic.
(we havn't yet)

1. Caesar
Expantionist
Organized

2.Elizabeth
Philosophical
Financial

3.Tokugawa
Aggresive
Organized

The reason being I am sure the top players will come out with some great strategies if they are able to swap civics without anarchy.

So that gives us:
Saladin
Montezuma
Hatshepsut
Mahatma Gandhi
Asoka
Mansa Musa
Isabella

Of which I would predict:
Asoka is out since we just played organized
Hatshepsut would be tough since game may go up to emporer difficulty this month(spiritual and creative )

If indeed we have an archipelago then:
Isabella (fishing)

But if they are saving that map type for later then finacial would be a nice trait and that goes to
Mansa Musa

So next game I would like to see Mansa Musa be the leader

 

[Garmoon]

I am not sure I want the difficulty to go up to Emperor just yet.

It will be fun to stay at Monarch but the leader has traits/UU that aren't very good for map settings.

Perhaps Hatshepsut or Monty for Archipelago

 

[fbouthil]

..., my own feeling is that Civ4 monarch is approximately equal to Civ3 emperor (or at best, only slightly easier).

I would have to completely disagree with that statement. It took me about 1 year to get used to emperor level in civ3 and I never really got the hang of it (needed a very good start). In civ4, it only took me 3 test games to get a winning strategy at monarch level.

Still, there is a much larger number of players for civ4 GOTM than I ever saw for civ3, they seem to be less confortable at high level and we are still learning the game, so I completely understand if we don't go up in level next month.

 

[solenoozerec]

It took me about 1 year to get used to emperor level in civ3 and I never really got the hang of it (needed a very good start). In civ4, it only took me 3 test games to get a winning strategy at monarch level.

The same, it took me a while to win on emperor in civ3 but I won on monarch in civ4 from the first attempt and I doubt that I will loose next game if it will be on emperor (though who knows).

Yet it does not mean anything. The proper comparison would be if I were not playing civ3 prior to civ4. Otherwise this is not comparable.

 

[ainwood]

Yet it does not mean anything. The proper comparison would be if I were not playing civ3 prior to civ4. Otherwise this is not comparable.

Thats exactly what I was meaning - and its especially applicable with the high number of new players.

 

[Matthevv]

It does seem that many players are not that familiar yet with Monarch, so maybe another game or two on this level would be a good idea. We have the extra difficulty category for those who want something more difficult.

It seems that many players like to be peaceful builders, so maybe a map/leader combination that would favour that approach such as islands/Saladin?

It would also be nice to have a map/leader that forces players to play differently to a conventional approach. Maybe highland map with raging barbarians would be interesting (maybe with a Civ that has a good early UU so that it isn't too interesting)

 

[Monthar]

As one of those that couldn't even survive this gotm and not submitting due to restarts and checking the spoilers to try and figure out what I did wrong. I certainly won't play one on a higher difficulty any time soon.

 

[JerichoHill]

GOTM staff,

I like the challenge of Monarch. I choose not to submit my game because in the end, my problem which wiped my game a few turns in had already revealed to me a neighbor, and resources, that would have altered any strategy I would have had. I play it out though, and lost in a close space race.

I'm learning ALOT about C4, and definitely don't want the difficulty to go up. I'd be so busy trying to catch up that I'd miss learning the nuances

 

[Seraphinus]

It will be nice if this time the leader will be more suited for builders and not for warmongers, so I will be glad with Mansa Musa or Hatshepsut. I hope we will be able to practice during the weekend.

 

[ronricorum]

I'd like to see a leader with one of the traits not yet covered in the first 3 4otMs, say Industrious or Spiritual. Or Creative, I guess, which at least saves you from having to build lots of Obelisks or Theaters.

I'm also secretly hoping it will be a leader I've not yet played. Tokugawa was (is, I'm still slogging through 4otM 3) fun in that respect.

I think the GotM organizers do a great job of rotating through the various options and keeping things fresh and interesting.

 

[ewokimpi]

Originally posted by ainwood
Thats exactly what I was meaning - and its especially applicable with the high number of new players.

As a weak player of both civ3 and civ4, I appreciate the gradual increases in difficulty we've had so far in GOTM4.

I only started playing the Civ series in February 2005, had only made it up to Regent level before Civ4 came out.

The gradual increase in difficulty and the advantages given the human player have allowed me to post victories in all three GOTM4's so far, albeit with mediocre scores. So in addition to the general fascination I experience with Civ, the victories are also positive feedback that help motivate me to continue with GOTM4 and keep on learning.

I'd suggest a Monarch game on Highlands -- you ain't seen barbs until you've seen Highlands Barb!

 

[Thrallia]

hm, I've been into civ since civilization 1, but I never even knew there were fan sites like this one out there until december 2005, and although I got civ3 when it came out, I never passed warlord level...I guess I just didn't really wanna press myself farther than that, as I could win on that level, but didn't win the one or two games I played past that. Since finding this site and Apollyton, I've challenged myself much more in civ4, and have now progressed past Noble(I assume, since I have 100% victory rate in one game on prince ) and still have an outside shot at a win in the current GOTM. I think I will fail rather spectacularly if the difficulty goes up any more, but at least I'm learning what I've done wrong so far in this GOTM.

as for what leader I'd want...I have a weakness for creative leaders, it is just nice to be able to get some initial culture started in a city quickly.

 

[Markus5]

I'd suggest moving back one level if the map is peculiar in some way, or if the civ is being played against its attributes. Otherwise, another one at this level with a civ that is played within its attributes.