What leader would you like to play in future GOTMs?

[The-Hawk]

Might be fun to drop back to Prince, but play a map that is very forest poor. It would be interesting to see what tactics people come up with knowing none of their spoiler entries will include "chopped out a ....". Of course, as a devout chopper, I'd probably go nuts!

I'm certainly not opposed to next month being bumped up to Emperor, on the other hand, it seems like there is plenty of time for that. I think there are lots of interesting varieties to try, and as one of the earlier posts mentioned, it may start leaving too many people behind from a learning perspective.

Besides, if we get up to deity by May, where do we go from there?

 

[greentea]

As a person for whom GOTM is indeed a great learning experience, I totally agree that keeping the next one on Monarch or some challenging Prince is the best option. You can always make a game more difficult with a tougher map or a not so popular leader. I would personally love to see Cyrus or some other creative civilization.

 

[akots]

... Besides, if we get up to deity by May, where do we go from there?

They'll make an expansion with a Sid level.

Come on, the game is not that difficult in general. It seems considerably easier than Civ3 overall. Emperor level is a very fair level, may be similar to Emperor in C3C which may be very slightly more difficult than Emperor in vanilla Civ3. Those who win will post their spoilers and this would be a great opportunity for those unable to win to learn how it can be won. Otherwise, what is the point?

Also, strategy forum is fully packed with articles on how to win on Emeperor. Some of them are purely speculative whereas many others are very good and provide for very detailed and correct strategies.

 

[mboza]

I finished in the middle of the pack for the first 2 games, and GOTM3 was a close run thing indeed. So if you want to go up another level, I would appreciate relatively forgiving other settings, like a start on a plains hill with stone with lots of food nearby.

But equally interesting would be a prince game without many forests, and a general shortage of resources to make the domination game that bit harder.

Having said that, I am not so bothered about the leader, because I have not played enough different games to start with half of them.

 

[KingdomBrunel]

Isn't this all answered by setting up the Challenger, Contender and Adventurer levels to cater for everyone? What I like most is playing on the same map as everyone else, so I can compare my strategy to theirs. If I was playing this with bonus techs, or an extra settler, or even at a lower difficulty level, I wouldn't mind - what's important to me is that I can go and learn what people are doing to make up that disadvantage and get ahead on the same terrain as I was playing.

I accept that this may make comparisons more difficult in the league tables, but if you're at the stage where you're comparing your score with someone who played at a higher level, it's time to play at that level anyhow isn't it?

So I guess I'm saying that it shouldn't matter what level this month is set at, if it's set up well, everyone should still be able to have a go. I guess the difficult part is setting up what bonuses everyone should have, and with my experience I wouldn't like to comment on what they need to be.

Heck, I'll be trying even if it's on Deity.

 

[Markus5]

Well, its a short month, so we should get the preview real-soon-now. I'm hoping to get in a test game or two.

 

[Boppo]

Seems this has turned into a conversation of what level to play at not what leader to play as.

For the original question, I would like to see one of the non-warmongerer leaders. Ghandi or Hatty would be nice.

Of course any leader can be used to get domination or conquest wins, so it will take more than just a leader to change that focus.

 

[ohioastronomy]

I think Emperor is a good level to stick at. It introduces a lot of challenges, but doesn't yet have the silly starting AI units and tech speed.

Emperor is the first level where the AI is aggressive in placing cities; it's the first level where happiness and health limits are significant; and it is the first level where tech speed becomes a significant governor of early development (at epic speed). It is also the case that easy early tactics - stealing workers, axeman rushes - become much less viable.

The biggest issue for Emperor in GoTM is the tendency to get really crummy starting positions, but the GoTM staff can take care of that. (Emperor, alone on a continent, no luxury resources = painful...)

 

[RoddyVR]

(Emperor, alone on a continent, no luxury resources = painful...)

speaking with NO experience of this situation, i am still inclined to say "wouldnt it just mean many closely placed/overlapping cities?"

for leaders, i would love to play with one of the "heavily religeous" leaders like spains isabell, iirc she starts with fishing and misticism, and with those techs if we start on the shore with a fish or something near by, i'm fine playing at ANY difficulty (i'll lose at higher diffs, but it'll still be fun).

 

[Thrallia]

Isn't this all answered by setting up the Challenger, Contender and Adventurer levels to cater for everyone? What I like most is playing on the same map as everyone else, so I can compare my strategy to theirs. If I was playing this with bonus techs, or an extra settler, or even at a lower difficulty level, I wouldn't mind - what's important to me is that I can go and learn what people are doing to make up that disadvantage and get ahead on the same terrain as I was playing.

not really...the challenger, contender, adventurer levels don't really provide an all around bonus/disadvantage for people it just affects how their start is. And truthfully, for those of us who have difficulty at monarch or higher won't succeed simply because we got to start with an extra archer or worker or tech...we would need some radical bonus to allow us to even have a chance of competing or even winning on a higher level.

I lost, in a spaceship race, but it was only 2 or 3 very near misses that kept me from losing in the BCs or early ADs to conquest...and on a higher difficulty level I don't expect the AI to make those same near misses.

 

[ohioastronomy]

speaking with NO experience of this situation, i am still inclined to say "wouldnt it just mean many closely placed/overlapping cities?"

for leaders, i would love to play with one of the "heavily religeous" leaders like spains isabell, iirc she starts with fishing and misticism, and with those techs if we start on the shore with a fish or something near by, i'm fine playing at ANY difficulty (i'll lose at higher diffs, but it'll still be fun).

The maintenance costs will drag you down. For cities 6-10 maintenance costs rise from 8-12 for each additional city; you effectively need all cottages just to pay for the maintenance costs (not organized, no luxuries and a 3 happiness limit). Getting an early religion could relax this, but at emperor is not trivial.

About all you can do is to go for code of laws via Stonehenge+Great Prophet (avoid Masonry) or the Oracle (Writing-Mysticism-Priesthood) and then grit your teeth and beeline for astronomy...

 

[ainwood]

Well, its a short month, so we should get the preview real-soon-now. I'm hoping to get in a test game or two.

I'll post it in about 12 hours....

 

[jayeffaar]

I'll post it in about 12 hours....

Great! I'm really looking forward to it. I'll need the practice time to make up for last month's dismal performance. I suspect I'm not the only one...

 

[totororo]

only 50 minutes left.

 

[jayeffaar]

only 50 minutes left.

You might be taking Ainwood a bit too literaly. I'm hoping for something sometime this late afternoon or tonight (North-American eastern time), or maybe tomorrow if he's too busy.

 

[totororo]

you might be taking me a litlle bit too literaly. That was kind of a joke.

 

[jayeffaar]

you might be taking me a litlle bit too literaly. That was kind of a joke.

Around here, you never know...

 

[baboonfan]

They'll make an expansion with a Sid level.

Come on, the game is not that difficult in general. It seems considerably easier than Civ3 overall. Emperor level is a very fair level, may be similar to Emperor in C3C which may be very slightly more difficult than Emperor in vanilla Civ3. Those who win will post their spoilers and this would be a great opportunity for those unable to win to learn how it can be won. Otherwise, what is the point?

Also, strategy forum is fully packed with articles on how to win on Emeperor. Some of them are purely speculative whereas many others are very good and provide for very detailed and correct strategies.

That's exactly what takes all the fun out of playing the game. The point should be to come up with these tactics yourself, but I can see nobody does...

If there was no source for strategy articles/posts/discussion, most of us would struggle on prince.

Anyway, one more vote for Cyrus or either one of the Chinese leaders. And perhaps an Islands map. And bring the difficulty back to Prince.

 

[Matthevv]

That's exactly what takes all the fun out of playing the game. The point should be to come up with these tactics yourself

hear hear!

 

[Thrallia]

yes! I purposely avoid those strategy forums cause I'd rather play, find my mistakes, and learn them on my own than use a cookie cutter tpe of strategy