 |
|  |
 |
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
From what we read in threads dealing of strategy, it appears that the type of victory is a late choice and often an opportunistic one. Nevertheless some players discard systematically one or several types of victory.
This observation raised two questions :
- in the case of a democracy game, gamers create an organization pursuing one aim : victory, but which victory ? Should not have been chosen from the very beginning the types of victory desired or accepted, and refused the others ? And if this has not been done yet, should not this choice be decided now, adding a feeling of unity to the community ?
- in the general case of the game, could an early choice of victory bring some light when alternative, and competing, strategies are possible ?
All comments appreciated.
Last edited by DAVOUT on 09-08-2002 at 19:54
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Papa Chubby
|
|
Iceland
Jun 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
I do believe that the the different political parties advocate different aims for victory. The Hawks f.ex. believe that we should go for a dominion victory, or being the only civilisation left. The DIA, being builders, probably advocate using higher production rate to win the space race. Then we the citizens of this fair land can influence this long-term goal by voting.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Robber Baron
|
 |
Commonwealth of Commonsense
Jun 2002 time: 00:21
|
|
Good idea for a thread, DAVOUT. It's probably not to early to begin weighing this question -- although I hope discussion does not get too devisive.
Of course, we will need to remain flexible and open to developments. The map of possibilities before us is going to change repeatedly and continuously.
But my preliminary feeling, given the massive size of Abananaba and our central place on it, is that it's going to be difficult to achieve a space race, for example -- at least, not if we have rival civs on several sides.
Here's a related question: is Abananaba too big to conquer and hold until the Modern era? I assume it is. Then, how completely will we be able to dominate the continent, via vassalization and/or punishment of hostile rivals? We can all probably agree that we want to carve out a central slice. How big do you see our ideal borders getting, in the Medeival era, in the Industrial era?
Our ultimate victory gambit probably grows out of those kinds of questions.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
carpathia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Papa Chubby
I do believe that the the different political parties advocate different aims for victory. The Hawks f.ex. believe that we should go for a dominion victory, or being the only civilisation left. The DIA, being builders, probably advocate using higher production rate to win the space race. Then we the citizens of this fair land can influence this long-term goal by voting. |
Papa chubby is absolutely right. As long as we have a diversified public with different opinions were going to have diversified beleifs on what our aims should be. That is why we have a democracy. So we can hold public poll and get eveyones opinion and then take action by the voice of the people.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
carpathia
|
|
One more thing. I would like to become a member of the thinker guild.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000 time: 07:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GoodFella
All of Abananaba could be conquered and held.
Space race is a good possibility.
I still culture is out of the question. Our best shot would have been generating 20,000 culture in one of our cities, but it is too late for that now I think since we don't have and probably won't build any of the ancient high culture wonders. |
hi ,
indeed it could be done , but not ALL , we should leave one small place , and even give them a second place or so later on , they can become a trade partner , we could sell old tech , and so on , we should get some money out of them in the long run
have a nice day
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jonny
|
 |
Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Nov 2000 time: 23:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by panag
indeed it could be done , but not ALL , we should leave one small place , and even give them a second place or so later on , they can become a trade partner , we could sell old tech , and so on , we should get some money out of them in the long run
|
The problem with that is if they only had one or two cities, they wouldn't be making any money, so they wouldn't have any, so it would be beneficial to totally kill them instead of letting them live. And by then, we will probably know where the other civs are anyway.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000 time: 07:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jonny
The problem with that is if they only had one or two cities, they wouldn't be making any money, so they wouldn't have any, so it would be beneficial to totally kill them instead of letting them live. And by then, we will probably know where the other civs are anyway. |
hi ,
they would make enough money to pay us , ....
the "AI" always finds money , .....
later on we could even allow them to have two or three cities , and we could go to war with it ones in a while , to make great leaders , and to get elite units , .....
there are loads of reasons to keep them small and under control , .....
héhéh , .....
have a nice day
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|