 |
|
Dominae
|
|
I stopped playing AU-205 because I wasn't having fun anymore, and when I came back a few days later my latest autosaves had been written over by another game...Too bad, I had some pretty interesting things happen to me that game, including a GL in 2950BC who rushed the Pyramids (my first time to do so). But, once I got my FP in place around 600AD, I was dominant but everyone hated me, so it was going to be war war war until the end. I promise to be more enthusiastic next time though!
Having no Expansionist AIs with an Expansionist human player sounds good to me. How about we start it in about a week or so?
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Although it may seem like a good idea to those in GS, as I said it wouldn't be very novel to those who aren't. Plus, I'm thinking that even with identical civs, the SP experience with the AI won't transfer much to the Demo. Game. |
Not to mention the fact that we don't know most of the map settings (unless the save file squealed on them), and the relative placement of the civs would probably be completely different, as would the relative strength of the starting positions....
Last edited by nbarclay on 03-12-2002 at 16:12
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
We seem to be running out of ideas for upcoming AU scenarios. So, here's a little list of interesting "courses" we could try (some are old ideas that we haven't done yet):
1. Total War; never sign a Peace treaty...ever.
2. Expansionism; select an Expansionist civ, and demonstrate that the trait is useful on most map types.
3. Modern War; win by conquest or domination, but never capture a city until the Modern age.
4. Crappy Civ; pick civ among English, Koreans or Spanish, and show that they're not that bad.
5. Deity Game; beat the game on the highest difficulty.
6. OCC Victory; achieve a Spaceship victory with the help of only one city.
7. PTW Scenario; play one of the official scenarios included in the Play the World expansion.
8. No Wonders; never control a Great Wonder...ever (for the truly masochistic, include Small Wonders).
I'd love to hear any comments or possible additions.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Theseus
BTW, thanks Dominae for refreshing the idea bank. |
No problem. Although a lot of us are caught up with MP pursuits (GS and other games), I personally still really like the idea of AU. Hopefully we can maintain a good level of participation.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
Doesn't War Weariness start to eat you up, or do you never use representative governments for these total aggression games?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaveMcW
|
|
For Total War, you can solve WW by wiping out your enemy. Always War leaves everybody with WW so war governments are the only way to go.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dominae
Oh, and I think the Germans are the civ of choice here.
Dominae |
Odd. I'd go with a builder civ.
If you're toast by the time you get to Panzers, don't you have bigger problems?
And Mil/Sci seems kinda weak if we can't wage "real" war until Communism.
I think I might go for Egypt or Babylon(that'd be a first for me) with that much time devoted to not waging war, but since I've never really played Germany (*) I could be wrong.
* - I've started my Black Hole Side game as Germany. It's 1350 and my offensive forces are already larger than my China game (Help at Monarch - FP + Victim Selection).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Germany is my pick:
1. Scientific allows decent Culture and tech parity.
2. Mlitaristic ensures that promotions (and consequently, Leaders) are a common occurence when the real fighting begins.
3. Bronze Working sets up a nice defensive early-game with Spearmen. Warrior Code (i.e. Archers) makes Settler-bopping even easier (this is allowed, since enemy Settlers can be ambushed outside their borders early on).
4. PANZERS!
Of course, anyone can pick whatever civ they choose (barring Religious ones, if we agree upon barring that trait).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
I agree on barring Religious if we're not limiting government to Communism once it's available.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nor Me
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ducki
I agree on barring Religious if we're not limiting government to Communism once it's available. |
A compromise would be to limit goverment to Communism once available only for Religious civs.
I had the Spanish down as the obvious choice.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
I see two options:
1. Religious civs allowed. Players must beeline for Communism in the Industrial age and stay there until the game ends.
2. Religious civs not allowed. Players must beeline for Communism, but can switch in and out anytime.
Note that in both cases, offensive warfare can only be conducted under Communism.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
Just to put it in perspective...
Aztec, Japan, Babylon, Celts, Egypt, Iroquois, Arabs and India would all be disallowed.
I wouldn't miss the 1-turn Anarchy near as much as I'd miss cheap culture buildings and happiness from Temples and Cathedrals as well as the quick border-linking.
Not saying I don't want to do it, just trying to paint a clear picture of exactly what civs and "abilities" we'd be disallowing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
Y'know, I think we should play the same one too.
When did that change, with PtW and all the new civs?
As far as restricting research, I think requiring Communism for Conquest would basically take care of that. If someone wants to play outside the parameters of the game, that's their choice, but it won't help us test Communism.
How much of a "bonus" would having the human start in a "real" government convey vs. the Despot AIs?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by alexman
I kinda miss the idea of everyone playing the same civ. That way the AARs are more relevant to everyone's experience, and we can compare strategies as opposed to civ strengths.
|
I was thinking the same thing (and hinting at it by saying my preference of the Germans), but was afraid that it was an unpopular option. I'm 100% behind this idea. Here are my top 3 candidates:
1. Germans (Panzers)
2. Spanish (Conquistador, 2 peaceful builder traits)
3. Americans (F-15, strong non-military early-game)
Unfortunately, the Americans were already selected for a previous AU game. I would recommend against going with the Ottomans, as we're trying to concentrate on Communism and (relatively) modern war, not Cavalry rushes.
quote:
Originally posted by alexman
I'm not sure I like the idea of restricting our research path to beeline to Communism. How about making the human player start in Communism, and not allowing him to switch at all? It might be a very different experience... |
Well, starting in Communism would create a different experience, to be sure, but it would not be Civ3. I like to play AU to learn about the game, and not to test out contrived scenarios. By forcing the human player to select Communism in war, we can determine just how good (or bad) that option really is (and test out the changes to Communism at the same time).
Perhaps a beeline to Communism is too restrictive. Upon reflection, it doesn't really matter if the human player spends time in the Industrial age before going Communist, because this gives the AI more time to build up (i.e. construct Factories, lay down Railroads, and reach Replaceable Parts). How about : if Communism is available, the human player must start a revolution if the current government is not Communism.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BRC
|
|
quote:
I would recommend against going with the Ottomans, as we're trying to concentrate on Communism and (relatively) modern war, not Cavalry rushes. |
I think that the Ottomans would be just as effective as the Germans, due to Industrious vs. Militaristic. We won't have much use for the Mil. trait, and without offensive wars and capturing workers, I think that Industrious would be even more useful. That being said, let's all play the same civ, and I'll play anyone.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-12-2002 09:55
.
) sound interesting -- I've only had the Korean's in one PTW game and they were eliminated before I even got to meet them.
I would say it's at least 2 difficulty levels higher than normal - I haven't survived to 10 AD on an Emperor Pangea map yet.
|