The Best of the Best

Theseus · July 3, 2002, 15:45

I'd like to propose a new group effort.

For several reasons, I want to get a lot sharper at CivIII. First, I just enjoy it. Second, I've really liked some of the tourney / tournament discussions, have learned a bunch, and have been waaay impressed by some of the strategies and tactics employed. Third, MP is coming, and while I never partipated in CivII that way, I intend to this time around.

Also, although I still enjoy playing the stock game, it could definitely be more of a challenge.

So what I want is a combination boot camp and War College, leveraging a varied group of players and a variety of techniques, to polish collective skills.

Some thoughts:

* I don't know much about mods, but I'd suggest starting with one that's already been done, or quickly developing a new bic as Vel just proposed. What's important is that the group agree on a standard mod to use. I do think the tweaks should be minimized, so as not to throw off technique for unmodded games.

* Hi .... I'm intrigued by what Panag has been talking about, setting the AI to Deity in the editor rather than on world settings. Maybe start with Emperor AI on a Monarch game. Have a nice day ....

* I'd like to focus on my methodology for creating "killer AI civs." I know it works, and can give a work-out that most closely matches a human opponent.

I'd suggest informal tourneys similar to what we've had for the last couple months.

We should do extreme experiments, like Aeson's iceberg, Arrian's UP (tm), Sir Ralph's effort to create WWIII, etc. Maybe we can also approximate some of the PTW games, like Regicide and King of the Mountain.

I also think it will be useful to start developing a more advanced lexicon for strategies, tactics, and exploits. We've been doing that informally, but it will make life a lot easier for new players.

There's too many great players and thinkers to name that should partake... one thought does occur to me though, I'd love to get Barry Caudill from Firaxis involved, who is supposedly their best player. Also, some of the flamers should be welcomed, if they can participate positively... maybe we can get the game to where the flames are put out.

MarkG, if you read this, and there's enough interest, a separate forum would be a great meeting place for a cross-section of the strategy and mod members.

Maybe not a great name for the effort, as it sounds elitist and it shouldn't be. But I'm sure you all get the intent.

The best gameplay, the best AI civs... and then, hopefully, the best players.

Velociryx · July 3, 2002, 15:52

Count me in! I totally agree that whatever changes are made need to be widely supported...standardized, such that the modified bic is widely known and accepted.

And...don't tell anybody, but I'm currently putting together another strat thread....

-=Vel=-

alva · July 3, 2002, 16:08

Quote:

* Hi .... I'm intrigued by what Panag has been talking about, setting the AI to Deity in the editor rather than on world settings. Maybe start with Emperor AI on a Monarch game. Have a nice day ....

AFAIK this has to do what level the AI plays:
default level: regent : 3? pop happy before unhappines kick in
so if you set it to deity, he will get only 1 happiness.
Therefore if want to make a tougher game you need to set it at chieftain. That way he will harly need and luxeries etc... but like I said this is all IIRC and AFAIK

have a nice day
( maybe we should all start doing this

, this will drive a few people through the roove , but hey

)

Arrian · July 3, 2002, 16:14

Interesting idea. I'd like to have a "standard mod" of sorts, where we agree on changes.

Hi, I assume the effect of setting the AI to "emperor" in the editor....would give the AI "emperor" production/science bonuses.... but leave everything else... like tech trading and barb bonuses... the same. Have a nice day.

I would definitely lobby for "Ultimate Power" experiments to relieve depression that would result from "iceberg" experiments

I suggest that at least some of these things be partial games, instead of starting at 4000bc. Like what Vel has done with the Babylonian game. Have one player set it up according to certain parameters, and then go from there.

-Arrian

alexman · July 3, 2002, 16:18

Theseus, I 100% agree with your proposal. I have been thinking of the same thing for a while.

However, since the patch is coming out any day now, shouldn't we wait before making any changes to the bic file that we would have to remake after the patch?

alva, you are right. I tried to tell this to panag once, but he didn't get it.

Catt · July 3, 2002, 16:23

I'd probably play in a few games. But I would absolutely, certainly, without-a-doubt read through all the threads -- I've been learning a lot from our mini-tourney games.

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
* Hi .... I'm intrigued by what Panag has been talking about, setting the AI to Deity in the editor rather than on world settings. Maybe start with Emperor AI on a Monarch game. Have a nice day ....

I played with this a while ago, but not extensively. And with all due respect to panag, the only difference I saw was a more challenged AI -- its size three and four cities all had entertainers, and its size 6 cities were severely challenged. I did not see any increased desire for luxuries, increased aggression, better tactics, etc. I think Alva is right on point, here. The default setting is Regent which means that when the player is playing at Chieftan and Warlord, he has an advantage (more content citizens), at Regent is even, and above Regent is at a disadvantage -- just like most of the rest of the "standrad" changes encountered in moving up the difficulty levels.

That being said, you could set it to "Chieftan" and help create the Killer AI.

Quote:

We should do extreme experiments, like Aeson's iceberg, Arrian's UP (tm), Sir Ralph's effort to create WWIII, etc.

Could be fun!

Quote:

The best gameplay, the best AI civs... and then, hopefully, the best players.

I too am happy with the standard game (after experimenting with some modest modding), but increasing the fun and challenge would be great.

Catt

Harovan · July 3, 2002, 16:56

Good idea, Theseus

. There has been an idea to create a "Apolyton mod" by a british poster a few months ago, but this time it was too early, because we had still 1.17 and it was obvious, that the next patch would bring some changes. Now it might be the right time. And "Apolyton mod" would be a cool name

.

Wish I had more time these days... Oh well, Friday is my deadline and hopefully next week I can play again.

alva · July 3, 2002, 17:42

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman

However, since the patch is coming out any day now, shouldn't we wait before making any changes to the bic file that we would have to remake after the patch?

I too agree on this. But we could get some preparation work done. I.E. agree on the basics.

Quote:

alva, you are right. I tried to tell this to panag once, but he didn't get it.

Actually, I don't mind him doing this all that much.

Velociryx · July 3, 2002, 17:46

Very cool! Will have a look at the mod that's already been done, and yeah...with the new patch coming, it's not something I wanna devote a TON of time to, but it'd be kinna cool to fiddle around with....

-=Vel=-

DeepO · July 3, 2002, 20:44

I don't know much about mods, so won't comment on that, but I have been thinking on one particular play style that would definately add a challenge (kind of regicide - king of the hill).

What If the human player is not allowed to build a settler? It would not mean OCC -- which I consider more of a show-it-to-be-possible thing -- as you can capture and build up everything you like. It could be interesting, because if you want the production, you need to capture towns quickly. But not too quickly, or you would negate your own growth: no enemy cities mean no cities for your own. And razing cities becomes not only morally hard, but also sets you back as to denied growth...

It might not work on all maps, though. I can't imagine a deity archipelago map, as it would become 'simple' OCC.

Any thoughts on this?

DeepO

Soren Johnson · July 3, 2002, 20:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus

* Hi .... I'm intrigued by what Panag has been talking about, setting the AI to Deity in the editor rather than on world settings. Maybe start with Emperor AI on a Monarch game. Have a nice day ....

I'm afraid this terminology is somewhat confusing. If you want to make the game easier for the AI (and thus harder for you), change the editor setting to Chieftain, not Deity. Think of it as what difficulty level the AI picks to play at. It only affects things like combat barbarian bonuses, goody hut probabilities, and free content citizens. It does NOT affect the AI production bonuses in any way.

btw, if you want a killer AI, have you considered lowering the production bonus below 6 (the Deity level)? Has anyone tried it at 1?

FrustratedPoet · July 3, 2002, 21:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis

btw, if you want a killer AI, have you considered lowering the production bonus below 6 (the Deity level)? Has anyone tried it at 1?

/me runs screaming into the hills in terror with nightmare visions of being pursued by hordes of killer AI civs who attack him with thousands upon thousands of regular riflemen.

Soren Johnson · July 3, 2002, 21:06

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet

* FrustratedPoet runs screaming into the hills in terror with nightmare visions of being pursued by hordes of killer AI civs who attack him with thousands upon thousands of regular riflemen.

MUAH-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

Nakar Gabab · July 3, 2002, 21:51

Now look what you've done! The P in PTW may stand for "pain" now.

We were just kidding Soren! Honest we were!

Tuberski · July 3, 2002, 22:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis

btw, if you want a killer AI, have you considered lowering the production bonus below 6 (the Deity level)? Has anyone tried it at 1?

Another one of those things that aren't documented and yet could change gameplay.........

I think you guys have more going on than you let on Soren.

Except, of course, what you told me and a few others in chat the other night.

Theseus · July 3, 2002, 23:30

Well, it brings a smile to my face to see Soren here, but:

What are you talkin' about?

Can one of the modders fill me in?

* Combat barbarian bonuses - This means likelihood of promotion?

* Goody hut probabilities - No idea.

* Free content citizens - Got it.

Aside from that aspect, which seems to have gotten some attention, I made some notes tonight on how to organize the effort. I'll put'em up tomorrow.

So, Soren, how 'bout getting Barry in on this?

have a nice day ....

Catt · July 3, 2002, 23:42

The idea of a 6 shield AI temple, an 8 shield library, a 7 shield knight . . how many turns for a 1-shield-producing Persian city to produce an immortal?

Barbarian combat bonus: don't remember the exact scale, but at Chieftan the human has (IIRC) an 800% bonus and at Deity a 0% bonus. Your 1/1/1 warrior at Chieftan acts like and 8/8/1 warrior against barbarians. (I think it goes something like 8x, 4x, 2x, 1x, 0.5x 0x)

Goody Hut Probs: more goodies at lower difficulty levels; more barbarians at higher levels.

Catt

Tuberski · July 3, 2002, 23:49

The reverse is true for the AI. At lower levels it's bonus would be zero, while on diety level his barb bonus would be 800%.

Soren Johnson · July 3, 2002, 23:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberski
The reverse is true for the AI. At lower levels it's bonus would be zero, while on diety level his barb bonus would be 800%.

Only if you alter the default AI setting in the editor. Otherwise, the AI is always set to "Regent" levels with regards to the barb bonus (and the other things I mentioned...)

Theseus · July 4, 2002, 00:05

More tidbits!!!

I feel like that dog in the TV commercial...

BAAACCCOOONNN!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tuberski · July 4, 2002, 17:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis

Only if you alter the default AI setting in the editor. Otherwise, the AI is always set to "Regent" levels with regards to the barb bonus (and the other things I mentioned...)

Well, of course, that's what I meant.

Jaybe · July 4, 2002, 18:15

Duplicate from Civ3-Strategy > The Quest for Deeper Strategy....

Quote:

Don't forget changing the "Attack Bonus Against Barbarians" to zero (under Difficulty Levels).

JB,
President of the Equal Combat Rights to Barbarians Society

Alright, already. Maybe I WILL just put it into my signature (later).

Soren Johnson · July 5, 2002, 12:21

oh, and also (OT), I am curious if anyone has figured out the trigger for Barbarian Uprisings. It is not random in any way...

alexman · July 5, 2002, 12:33

AFAIK nobody has methodically looked into this, but it seems to depend on the number of turns a barbarian camp remains in existence. First it generates warriors, then horsemen, then uprisings.

Soren, since we have your attention in this thread, do you see anything wrong with the way the AI uses offensive units? It seems like now that he can use defensive units for offense, he doesn't produce nearly enough fast units (horsemen, tanks, et cetera). Is this by design?

Also, what about using more than 2-3 units for defense when he has zillions of riflemen wandering around outside his cities?

Velociryx · July 5, 2002, 12:33

Soren, that's just MEAN to dangle a carrot out there like that! LOL! Tell! Tell!

-=Vel=-

Solver · July 5, 2002, 12:34

Have you guys finished PTW already, or? Soren, I see you posting so much now? What is it?

And, you asking a trigger for uprising?

Who programmed Civ 3, you or us?

Well, being serious, I've only encountered those when I had Barbarian Villages near one of my cities, just outside the border, that I didn't clean out. Happened a few times, and then I got uprisings.

Solver · July 5, 2002, 12:37

Nah, Soren, please tell, otherwise I will send some 1337 guys your way

.

OK, so my guess is: a Barbarian Settlement outside of your cultural borders, but close to a city, that stays untouched for x turns. :hmm:

Do I get to beta test PtW if I'm right?

Soren, I'm also waiting to see you discussing some stuff in the CtP forums, you know, if you post so much

.

Soren Johnson · July 5, 2002, 12:51

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
AFAIK nobody has methodically looked into this, but it seems to depend on the number of turns a barbarian camp remains in existence. First it generates warriors, then horsemen, then uprisings.

Soren, since we have your attention in this thread, do you see anything wrong with the way the AI uses offensive units? It seems like now that he can use defensive units for offense, he doesn't produce nearly enough fast units (horsemen, tanks, et cetera). Is this by design?

Also, what about using more than 2-3 units for defense when he has zillions of riflemen wandering around outside his cities?

yeah, well there was a problem with the AI upgrading defenders and then using them as offensive units. I have fixed this for the next patch...

Soren Johnson · July 5, 2002, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Solver
Nah, Soren, please tell, otherwise I will send some 1337 guys your way

.

OK, so my guess is: a Barbarian Settlement outside of your cultural borders, but close to a city, that stays untouched for x turns. :hmm:

Do I get to beta test PtW if I'm right?

Soren, I'm also waiting to see you discussing some stuff in the CtP forums, you know, if you post so much

.

I'm afraid you are on the wrong track about Barbarian Uprisings. Try to think of it in "Global Historical Terms." Tell you what, if no one figures it out in a week, I'll come back and post the answer.

hey, I'd probably get fired if I started posting in the CtP forums. Well, maybe not, but I would certainly get some funny looks around here.

Theseus · July 5, 2002, 12:57

Hmmm...

As far as I can remember:

1. No uprising ever before 1000BC. Most in a band betweeen then and, oh, 850BC.

2. I believe uprisings are a worldwide event. I know I've seen stacks also attacking AI civs concurrent with my own (I've actually used this tactically, btw).

3. Uprisings can be avoided, if you scour the land and keep the fog pushed back.

# of cities?
A tech?
War?

C'mon, give a hint at least!!