 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Robber Baron
|
 |
Commonwealth of Commonsense
Jun 2002
time: 00:25
|
|
Here's another suggestion for an AU session -- actually, a rather bizarre one I have been kicking around in my head for a little while.
I've been contemplating structuring a varient game based in some way on the concept of using luxuries to hire mercenaries to do most of my war-making. And at the same time, I've been following the progress of the "Menagerie" succession game over in CivFanatics (where any civ can build any UU).
A link: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showt...&threadid=39756
A combination of these two concepts might be fun to play.
Specifically, a game could be set up in which:
1) any AI civ could build any UU;
2) the player civ could build one type of each UU for each luxury he managed to draw into his territory (e.g., get control of wines and you can build immortals .....)
3) the player civ would be able to attack or defend in his territory with vanilla units (e.g., spearmen), but would be able to engage in any military activity (including pillaging) only with UUs when in foreign territory;
4) only wonders could trigger a golden age.
In the CivFan version, most of the pre-play discussion revolved around the upgrade chain. My suggestion would be to cut off upgrades altogether.
Instead, the player would have to buy UU mercs with luxes. (Think: the late stages of the Roman Empire, descending into decadence.) The (human) player would only be able to build a new type of UU when /f he had control of a new luxury. That is, one type of UU allowed for each luxury controlled. Once you've built a type of UU, you can't switch the luxury/UU assignment for that lux. And if you lose control of the lux, you can no longer build that UU.
Obviously, this would take some work with the editor. Work that, frankly, would be beyond my (limited) skills.
I figure the player (as well as the AIs, of course) need to be given access to all UUs. (The mercenary rule would have to be observed by the player in his build choices.) And I assume, all UU-triggered golden age activity needs to be switched off.
Is this a loopy idea? Wouldn't it be fun, though, to field an army of immortals and numean mercs and ..... ?
The strategic implications would be tricky, too: when to "spend" a lux on a particular merc assignment.
If anyone is intrigued, and willing to undertake the editor work -  - I'd love to play this out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:25
|
|
I'm up for the random game... and now to admit to one of my ignorances... what do you mean by AAR? I've searched all I can but I can't find an explanation of the term.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Yep, time for another AU.
I like alexman's idea, but there is problem that some of us might get "stuck" with a pretty common civ (Americans for me, Romans for nye, Chinese for Arrian, and Egyptians for everyone else!).
To address this and force most people to really change their usual play habits, maybe we could disable all Industrious civs. For those of us who play MP, I'm sure this will be a breath of fresh air.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
By the way, I still think 'Total War' is a great idea for an AU course. If we all face our fears (and accept that we may lose this one), a game without peace would definitely teach us a thing or two.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Going along with Nathan's idea, here's a list of the least favored civs:
Russians
Spanish
English
Mongols
India
Koreans
Zulus
Vikings
And maybe Greeks and Babylonians could be added to the list, although they would definitely be the favorites.
To avoid any hassle, I suggest we set up the scenario to pick the civ randomly from this list, for any particular game. To clarify, although Random will be the only civ choice available, the only possible civs will be those mentioned above. The disadvantage is that there could be duplicates among all players, but the size of the list plays against this happening frequently.
We therefore have "Random Crappy Civ" as a theme, which I think is nice and AU-like.
I also suggest we play with random world settings, apart from map size, to keep with the flavor of alexman's idea.
Unless anyone else steps forward, I'll gladly set up this game. If I do not hear any objections to this, I'll have the game ready by tomorrow afternoon.
Dominae
Last edited by Dominae on 07-02-2003 at 08:41
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Sure thing, alexman. ETA on the scenario is 5pm (my time) tomorrow, just in time for the weekend.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BRC
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Konquest02
After further reflection, I think thye zulus are OK. They should be left there as a builder like me may get them and be in big trouble and then forced to think...
--Kon-- |
Don't think. Don't ever think. Kill. That's the way they were meant to be played.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:25
|
|
I've got multiple games going now.
1) SP Japanese game that's going REALLY well.
2) SP Japanese "minitourney" between a friend an I that is going "ok" at best (I made some mistakes and it's costing me). A leader relatively soon will change all of that, though.
3) Civfanatics tournament game (Regent, China) that I've put aside for the time being due to extreme frustration. I should be KILLING that game. Yet I'm not, and the icing on the cake was a particularly awful RN roll that cost me 14hp worth of swordsmen to 1 regular spearman. I had to take a break, or toss my girlfriend's computer out the window.
4) PBEM game w/aforementioned friend and girlfriend. China. Going well (mmm... settler from first hut popped).
5) Minitourney PBEM with strat forum fellas. Going pretty well, considering I chose BABYLON for no reason at all - total whim. My score looks awful, though (if IIRC, I'm DFL).
And that doesn't even include the SP Roman game I haven't gotten around to finishing.
So, no time for AU right now. "Always war" could be intriguing, though. But who to be? Best to be militaristic, or with the sheer number of battles is that overkill? Hardcore ancient UU, or hold off for better, later results? Industrious a must? Definitely not expansionist... you don't WANT to meet people right away. Can you develop an empire while under fire (serious fire, that is. Barbs, especially for somebody like me who plays on "roaming", do not count)? Is religious a waste? Always war screams "get Monarchy, switch, and never switch again."
-Arrian, rambling (not for the first, or last, time).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
On average, I'm assuming at least half the civs on my list are atypical for each person. Other than Catt, I know of very few players who truly enjoy random games. If you get a civ you play all the time, you can just start over (but try not to start over just because you think the Koreans suck!).
I'll also let everyone choose their own difficulty, as that kind of randomness is not fun (yay, Chieftain!).
Dominae
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-02-2003 07:48
).
|