Mikes and Bachs

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 21:00

Good evening,

I just finished playing a game with Markus and Ophidity, and I must say i am unimpressed. Their "strategy" consists of building as many happy wonders as possible, attaining "the republic" advance as fast as possible, jacking up the luxury rate under the republic, and, when they have enough cash in their coffers, win the game by bribing civilizations without happy wonders and warring against those without. Those without happy wonders are doomed to lose.

No WONDER (pun intented) they want to play without wonders, without city bribe, and on king level. The happy wonders destabalize the game, the diplomats are unstoppable when one player has two or more of the happy wonders, and king allows for greater military action and the use of wonders.

This has to be the lamest "strategy" i have ever seen. Well, okay, not the lamest; I have played RISK many times, and know that the Indonesia "strategy" debalances the game ...

Now, Risk is obviously a flawed game: it is based largely on luck, the country and continental borders are far too simplistic (allowing for Indonesia and North American to dominate), and the "production" factor, ie turning in cards, while creating a certain level of excitement, turns the game into a "who gets the cards first". These flaws are fundamentals that can not be changed. Any rules you add, you still have RISK.

Fortunately, civ is different. The inherent flaws, mikes without expiration and bachs without expiration, can be cleaned up quite simply. Limit mikes and bachs.

This is my suggestion:

Mikes expires with the corporation (the rise of secularism) and Bach's expires with electronics (the rise of secular toys).

Limit these, and the game becomes much more stable, much more skilled based, and less lame.

markusf · March 10, 2001, 21:23

here is a link to most of the game.
http://216.232.3.182/agharta

There is no way you could have won. I had 80 cities, 25 settlars 80 musketers etc. I was moving all my units in under 2 min (very difficult)

$900/turn at 400 ad when our war started, and i just bought everything in sight. I would have done the same to SF, and when he manages to steal and go to dem i would get 5000 cash and go to fundy, and with maggellans + draggons i would finish him off. Also me and sf agreeed to no wonders and no bribing at the start of the game but you didn't want that as it wouldn't be a "real game" So live with it and stop complaining when you lose on your own settings.

markusf · March 10, 2001, 21:24

I was impressed that you stayed in the game to the last city in the board.. That is rare indeed.

SmartFart · March 10, 2001, 21:52

How old are you?

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 21:55

The settings you play make it inevitable: 50x80, roaving bands, only human players. The med map gives no room for "non-happy" wonder players to breathe; the roaving bands gurantees that a player who builds military early (Markus), gets many extra cities (minor tribes are much more impressed with chariots than warriors! or with horseriders!); and only three players (without ais) increases the chances of one player monopolizing the happy wonders.

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 21:58

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by SmartFart on 03-10-2001 08:52 PM</font>
How old are you?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Who are you asking? Markus, or Agharta_id?

Berzerker · March 10, 2001, 22:00

I try to avoid city bribing since it is so unrealistic. Tell me how fundy cities can be bribed when they are the most fanatical... But if the strategy that defeated you was so lame, what do you suggest is a better strategy? And weren't you the one claiming any game below deity was !@#$%^&*() because the game was meant to be played on deity? So, it was designed to be played with city bribes too.

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:09

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Berzerker on 03-10-2001 09:00 PM</font>
I try to avoid city bribing since it is so unrealistic. Tell me how fundy cities can be bribed when they are the most fanatical... But if the strategy that defeated you was so lame, what do you suggest is a better strategy? And weren't you the one claiming any game below deity was !@#$%^&*() because the game was meant to be played on deity? So, it was designed to be played with city bribes too.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Bezerker, this thread is not a thread for ramblers. So, lease, go ramble somewhere else!

Now if you want to talk about why diplomats are so powerful, you are welcome here (in this thread).

The simple fact is this: diplomats become amazingly powerful when one civ has a ****load of money, and another civ does not. Otherwise, the diplomat is a balanced unit. It is very hard to bribe someone's city when they have as much money as you or when they have a big military ready to pounce on any city that rebels.

Therefore, the question is: how does one make sure happy wonders are not monopolized? 100x100 maps, raging hordes, seven civs, and! (a new idea) a limiting of mikes and bachs.

SmartFart · March 10, 2001, 22:10

What do you think?

Berzerker · March 10, 2001, 22:11

I don't need your permision to respond to your hypocrisy!

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:18

Let me reiterate the title of this thread: MIKES AND BACHS.

Got it? GOOD. Now lets move on >>>>>>

Berzerker · March 10, 2001, 22:19

You criticized Curumbor's settings claiming the game was not meant to be played on Emporer, now here you are complaining about city bribes and wonders.

markusf · March 10, 2001, 22:23

Gee i think the US controls the world more through economic power then military which is just what i did. Every time you lose you find something new to whine about. what will it be next? I am not allowed to use caravans? Maybe i can't build ships. Also your the one who insisted we play with happy wonders + bribing so stop your whining.

Berzerker · March 10, 2001, 22:24

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>Let me reiterate the title of this thread: MIKES AND BACHS.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Is that why you "rambled"

on about Risk and how Markus won by bribing your cities? If you limited MC and Bach to your suggestions, it would have little or no effect since by the time they expired, people would have democracy and city bribing would be reduced.

Berzerker · March 10, 2001, 22:30

Well, if you stayed in to the end, you deserve credit for doing what most people won't do, that is impressive. Sorry for my continued rambling...

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:31

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Berzerker on 03-10-2001 09:19 PM</font>
You criticized Curumbor's settings claiming the game was not meant to be played on Emporer, now here you are complaining about city bribes and wonders.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

First off: I am not complaining, i am critiquing.

Second off: I think i have found the flaw of the game and the reason why there are king players, no wonder players, no city bribe players, no unit bribe players, and small map players, and I WANT to REMEDY IT.

Third off: I am still for wonders and city bribe.

Fourth off: I criticized Curumbor in private, not in public, so, please, do not bring it up in public! It was a private discussion, between me and Curumbor. He made it public by slamming me, thus eliciting my defensive rant. A neophyte (agharta_id) can not gain any respect if one of the elder players (curumbor) comes out of nowhere and slams him. All i wanted to do was start a GAME TO FINISH!

SmartFart · March 10, 2001, 22:35

Whatever

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:36

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by markusf on 03-10-2001 09:23 PM</font>
Gee i think the US controls the world more through economic power then military which is just what i did. Every time you lose you find something new to whine about. what will it be next? I am not allowed to use caravans? Maybe i can't build ships. Also your the one who insisted we play with happy wonders + bribing so stop your whining.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Listen fukhead (i am going to get banned for this one!), my argument is still the same: WONDERS, CITY BRIBING, SHIPS, CARAVANS, QUICK WONDER BUILD WITH CARAVANS!

What has changed is this: I am now arguing that mikes and bachs ought to be limited; that they debalance the game; that they are the foutainheads of flaw in civ.

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:39

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Berzerker on 03-10-2001 09:24 PM</font>
Is that why you "rambled"

on about Risk and how Markus won by bribing your cities? If you limited MC and Bach to your suggestions, it would have little or no effect since by the time they expired, people would have democracy and city bribing would be reduced.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

True, true. BUT! BUT! when mikes and bachs expire, players who use them will have civs that are vwery, vwery unhappy. only the managers will prevail.

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:46

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Berzerker on 03-10-2001 09:24 PM</font>
Is that why you "rambled"

on about Risk and how Markus won by bribing your cities? If you limited MC and Bach to your suggestions, it would have little or no effect since by the time they expired, people would have democracy and city bribing would be reduced.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I was using RISK, which is another flawed game, as an example.

markusf · March 10, 2001, 22:48

your halarious, i am not sure whats funnier your stupidity or your ignorance.

Tell me genius, how exactly would you have gotten to electricity? I was 2 turns a tech what where u?

oh wait your where DEAD!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by markusf (edited March 10, 2001).]</font>

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:48

I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!
I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF! I LIKE READING MYSELF!

agharta_id · March 10, 2001, 22:55

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by markusf on 03-10-2001 09:48 PM</font>
your halarious, i am not sure whats funnier your stupidity or your ignorance.

Tell me genius, how exactly would you have gotten to electricity? I was 2 turns a tech what where u?

oh wait your where DEAD!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by markusf (edited March 10, 2001).]</font>
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

you know markus, you ought to think before you write: IT HELPS!

first: i already told you why you won and why i could NOT have got to electricity: 50x80 map, only three civs, roaving bands -- allowing happy wonder monopolization -- and flawed wonders (mikes and bachs) -- allowing a stable goverment (without proper infrastructure) under republic and democracy.

and second: this thread is not about our game, it is about MIKES AND BACHS. so please, stop rambling that i had no chance. I KNOW I HAD NO CHANCE!

<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by agharta_id (edited March 10, 2001).]</font>

War4ever · March 11, 2001, 03:32

R U related to EYES

?

markusf · March 11, 2001, 03:36

I wouldn't be surpised.

rah · March 11, 2001, 04:01

war4, could have used you earlier to continue that game.

Markus, tring to master how you do it (to compete), (without jumping on you early.

A-man, the game has many flaws, and everyone has their favorite settings. Sounds like you compromised and you still lost. There's a different strat for every situation. Maybe instead of whining, you aught to take notes.

And for the record, i'd prefer to have mics, and bachs, not expire. If you play on small maps, the physical limit of cities can reduce the advantage of the happiness wonders. (but the great players adapt and prosper, especially learning from those that beat them.)

And for the record, the Indonesian strat didn't always work. And sometimes if you had two stubborn people at the bigining and both wanted it, they'd cancel each other out. North America was always reasonably contested, unless you're playing with idiots, so stop trashing an old board game that was better designed/and playtested than most computer games.

RAH

Crustacian · March 11, 2001, 11:11

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Berzerker on 03-10-2001 09:00
PM</font> I try to avoid city bribing since it is so unrealistic. Tell me how fundy cities can be bribed when they are the most fanatical... But if the strategy that defeated you was so lame, what do you suggest is a better strategy? And weren't you the one claiming any game below deity was !@#$%^&*() because the game was meant to be played on deity? So, it was designed to be played with city bribes too.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Agharta, Berserkers subject material is very much to do with "why diplomats are so powerful" Bribing is one big function of diplomats in the game as designed and Berserker asked you a question regarding it with you avoided answering.

Of course we do not all like to "balance" the game in various ways to suit our own sense of playing enjoyment...yes even you the professed "true game"
(true game = a players favorite settings)<----see new thread on this old subject.

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by agharta_id on 03-10-2001 09:09 PM</font>
Bezerker, this thread is not a thread for ramblers. So, lease, go ramble somewhere else!

Now if you want to talk about why diplomats are so powerful, you are welcome here (in this thread).

The simple fact is this: diplomats become amazingly powerful when one civ has a ****load of money, and another civ does not. Otherwise, the diplomat is a balanced unit. It is very hard to bribe someone's city when they have as much money as you or when they have a big military ready to pounce on any city that rebels.

Therefore, the question is: how does one make sure happy wonders are not monopolized? 100x100 maps, raging hordes, seven civs, and! (a new idea) a limiting of mikes and bachs.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Limiting Mikes and Bachs is only one approach.
Wonderdog for example
1)enhanced Oracles benifits, and made it not expire
2)made it cheaper to build caravans
3)created a non happiness creating(0-attack factor) vessel for non happyness wonder owning poor folk.

Others tried other things along this line too.

It must be mentioned that Milo and Kengel are two players I know who can flourish very well without happyness wonders. I am sure others can as well.
Apparently you could learn much from them.

Many including me have tried to find a so called more "balanced game" in order to hopefully give more of a chance in case someone hogged the happy wonders.

A no wonder or Appollo/Manhattens only game is a valid means of attempting this.

It is good to see you becoming less judgemental of these things as you progress. Things like no wonders, and limiting Mikes and Bachs were things against the "true spirit" of the game you used to argue.

But it is not at all a new idea as you claimed!

It is comendable you are now ready to consider these as valid options rather than argue foolishly for the "true game"
It is comendable also that you played to the last city.

------------------
The journey itself is the thing~Odysseus
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Crustacian (edited March 11, 2001).]</font>

agharta_id · March 11, 2001, 14:40

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by War4ever on 03-11-2001 02:32 AM</font>
R U related to EYES

?
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Yeah, I am his mother.

I JUST had to do it! That is the first "mother" joke i have ever made. My GOd, i am becoming pop-culture lame.

agharta_id · March 11, 2001, 14:52

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by rah on 03-11-2001 03:01 AM</font>
war4, could have used you earlier to continue that game.

Markus, tring to master how you do it (to compete), (without jumping on you early.

A-man, the game has many flaws, and everyone has their favorite settings [didnt i say preferences are a problem? read the damn thread]. Sounds like you compromised and you still lost [no, i compromised and lost, not compromised and still lost]. There's a different strat for every situation [yeah, and me and ophidity did not use it: ganging up on Markus as soon as he got the gardens]. Maybe instead of whining, you aught to take notes [again, not whinning, critiquing; attack the arguement please].

And for the record, i'd prefer to have mics, and bachs, not expire. If you play on small maps, the physical limit of cities can reduce the advantage of the happiness wonders [HOW SO? you are simply asserting]. (but the great players adapt and prosper, especially learning from those that beat them.) [they cant if the game is inherently flawed]

And for the record, the Indonesian strat didn't always work. And sometimes if you had two stubborn people at the bigining and both wanted it, they'd cancel each other out. North America was always reasonably contested, unless you're playing with idiots, so stop trashing an old board game that was better designed/and playtested than most computer games. [did i mention the two other major flaws of RISK? 1. the game tends towards major showdowns. 2. if there is a suberb player, it is more than likely that the other players will gang up on him or her.]

RAH

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

agharta_id · March 11, 2001, 15:29

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Crustacian on 03-11-2001 10:11 AM</font>
Limiting Mikes and Bachs is only one approach [So what! Does the fact that there are many "approaches" mean that most of those approaches are valid? That is what is in question in this thread: the validty of these approaches].
Wonderdog for example
1)enhanced Oracles benifits, and made it not expire [and what is the justification for this? Remember, my point of departure is realism. I would not be arguing for a limit on Mikes and Bachs if i did not think that those limits were realistic. The oracle, ie paganism, became an ultra-minority after the ascent of christianity. Thus an expiration due to theology is quite justified.]
2)made it cheaper to build caravans [This is interesting, but still does not elimnate the long or short-term effects of Mikes and Bachs. It just makes the race to them faster]
3)created a non happiness creating(0-attack factor) vessel for non happyness wonder owning poor folk. [You will have to be clearer, i dont understand]

Others tried other things along this line too [What line? Oh! you mean these lines].

It must be mentioned that Milo and Kengel are two players I know who can flourish very well without happyness wonders. I am sure others can as well.
Apparently you could learn much from them [Apparently i have to bring up the game between me and Markus, since everyone wants to attack me personally. The game between markus, ophidity, and myself was an experiment. I wanted to see how a game on 50x80, without any barbs, and only three players, played out. My suspicions were correct. HAPPY< HAPPY< JOY!< JOY!<. Thus i will not play those settings again, and will thus have NO (boo-hoo) chance to learn from Markus how to play the strategy I OUTLINED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS THREAD. <<<PERFECTLY>>> His "strategy" is easy: get to the gardesn ASAP]

Many including me have tried to find a so called more "balanced game" in order to hopefully give more of a chance in case someone hogged the happy wonders.

A no wonder or Appollo/Manhattens only game is a valid means of attempting this. [How-fuking-so! You are simply asserting!]

It is good to see you becoming less judgemental of these things as you progress. Things like no wonders, and limiting Mikes and Bachs were things against the "true spirit" of the game you used to argue[Listen Punky Brewster, i have always played against the "happy wonder" strategy, from day one. I REFUSE TO BUILD EM. Under my rules happy monopolization does not happen very much (100x100, seven civs, raging hordes), thus i have not seen the full effects of a monopolizer. Now i have, and I am unimpressed. This "strategy" is nothing more than mindless button pushing (just like macro-managing)].

But it is not at all a new idea as you claimed [assertion. Who else came up with it? By whom else have the sacred cows of happiness been assaulted rationally? I would like to meet this player.]!

It is comendable you are now ready to consider these as valid options rather than argue foolishly for the "true game" [I am still arguing for the "true game," and always kept the wonder manipulation option open. (ask deity; i have been talking about limitin Mikes for about two weeks) It is only now that i have the info to argue for limiting mikes and bachs]
It is comendable also that you played to the last city.

[Well thanks Crust, you completed the "ad hominem" circle. First, you attacked me instead my arguement, and now, you praise me instead of my arguement. AW-SHUCKS!]

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>