Apolyton University

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Arrian
Theseus, what do you think about that Japanese game of mine that you played for AU 108 always war? Played normally on Monarch it was a nice romp, but this is another beast. It might need a few tweaks, perhaps changing the human civ to whatever people want to play (I'd vote China), but the start spot is strong, and you have lots of neighbors, some of whom are quite dangerous.

Or do you think having 5 neighbors on the home continent (3 with ancient UUs) is too much?

-Arrian

Arrian, sorry I didn't respond sooner. Hmmm, I dropped that game for AU 107... I'm a little vague, but it could definitely work. You called it though, having that many neighbors in an 'always war' condition could be waaaaay tough, no matter how good the start position is.

Let me through the question out for the crowd: if we're going to do this, what should the set-up look like? Do we want hordes of slavering AI early units too contend with? (A part of me is panting: "Yeah, yeah, yeah, bring'em on, the bastards!)

Also, who to play as??!! I get China or Japan... survive, or maybe wreak some Sword mayhem, and then take control (I now firmly believe that I can win ANY game with Samurai). Perhaps something more challenging?

I like the idea of this game, although it scares me a little... no extortion??

Cry havoc...

[Dominae]

I was thinking the best map for the "Always War" scenario would be a Pangea-like one. With many continents, being always at war is equivalent to having bad reputation (in other words you have no trading partners). As we know the AI is not very good at intercontinental invasions. But the same AI is likely to put up quite a fight if adjacent to the "evil" human player right from the start.

Ideally, the map would have one or two rather large landmasses, with some interesting map features (chokepoints, highly defensible mountain ranges, lakes, etc.). As I alluded to above, the point of this the total war scenario is (I think) to fight, and not to build up alone on some isolated continent.


Dominae

[Theseus]

How about no civ-specific traits?

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Theseus
How about no civ-specific traits?

Why? To me, no civ-specific traits is big enough of a change from standard Civ3 that it should be a "lesson" in itself (AU-109?). Let's see how people do with "just" total war.

As for civs, I guess we need to select a Militaristic one. To fit the theme (and to mirror the AI tendencies) my vote is for the Zulus, but we may need the raw power of the Aztecs or the Japanese to compete with the AI at Emperor level.


Dominae

[FrustratedPoet]

Choosing the Zulu's would be good. Not many people usually play as them so it'd be an interesting excercise.

And I agree that a Pangea map is the best way to go.

I also think that Nathan is on to a winner with his over-crowding idea. We could even combine this with 'always-war'. If there are gonna be 15 AI Civs + Us on a Standard map Pangea then the whole world should be at war right from 4000BC. When the AI has no space to expand it is far far more agressive.

[alexman]

Not that recycling themes is bad, but wasn't AU 101 titled "Overcrowding and War"?

I don't like turning off the civ-specific abilities. Besides being one of my favorite improvements of Civ3 over previous versions of Civ, turning them off you get a GA whenever you build ANY Great Wonder, everyone can build scouts, and there are no free starting techs, so all the AI don't have anything to trade and they all research the same techs. Too easy to get a tech lead at any level.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by alexman
Not that recycling themes is bad, but wasn't AU 101 titled "Overcrowding and War"?

The name was "crowding and war," not "overcrowding and war," and from what I recall, the number of civs involved was not abnormal. The only thing special about the game was that it specifically called on players to use a highly militaristic strategy.

I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of having a huge number of civs in an "always war" game. I do know that what I'd like to see in a "course" titled "overcrowding" is a game where we have all our options open, to provide a wider contrast of strategies and victory conditions.

Nathan

[Theseus]

Nathan, good idea.

Re "always war' has anyone played one fo these, either at CFC or Sullla's site? There must be some experience with what good settings would be.

[realpolitic]

Originally posted by Theseus


7. Science

Goal: A blinding tech lead. Is it possible to hit Modern before any AI gets to Industrial? The comparison will be on the number of techs lead at the win. Gold star for a super-science city. A twist: Must own all science GWs at the win.

Settings: Small, continents, 60% water, 6 civs, wet, temperate, 5B, no barbs, Monarch. All win types.

Civ: Greece

Notes: My guess is that the tortoise beats the hare.

Do this with a Civ with an Ancient UU or China, and preferably Scintific Greece is definately a good choice. Use 10% Science or 1 Scientist early on. trade techs early, realizing costs will crash when Map Making is discovered., then Use $$ to buy techs, Consider using 1 Scientist to get to Monotheism. Change To Republic, buying luxuries, still sellling to those who can pay good price for a while get Education. When you get to Military Tradition, beat up your technological competion.

[kmill25]

An AU question.

Much like there is a files manager in the files/creation forum - I can't remember which one at this time.

Is there a way all of the AU threads can be put into one sticky thread??

I think it would be helpful.

Edit for spelling.

[Theseus]

Good idea.

Someone did a collection of links to all the games in the last several weeks.

[FrustratedPoet]

I'm not sure if the threads themselves could be put in one sticky. However, what we could do with relative ease is make a Database thread with links and descriptions to all relevant AU threads. Hopefully the almighty Mods could be persuaded to top it.

I think alexman (or was it Sir Ralph?) made a post in some other thread which included a few good links. If some brave soul could organise a complete version and post it as a new thread it would be helpful for general reference if nothing else.

[FrustratedPoet]

bit of a cross-post there.

I'm glad to see the chancellor of the AU didn't disagree with me. And I see we both remember that post from a few days ago.

[Theseus]

FP, great minds think alike!!!

[nbarclay]

I came up with an idea for a possible AU elective - not something everyone could play or would want to, but that could be interesting for some. The title is "Ultimate Power in a Huge World," which helps explain why it's not for everyone. Here's the background:

When I first started playing Civ 3, I played on huge maps with 16 civs. My first game was on Regent level as America. I then moved up to Monarch for a couple games - one as America where the save got corrupted and another as France that I stopped playing for reasons I no longer remember. Then I decided to try my hand on Emperor. (Throughout this time, I had a habit of restarting if I didn't like the starting position or how the early part of the game went.)

In my first half-zillion Emperor starts, I fell behind quickly and abandoned the game in favor of looking for a better starting position. But then I got IT: THE GAME, my game of ultimate power (although Arrian had yet to coin the term). Thebes, my capital, had four or five cattle and lots of shielded grasslands, and there were a fair number of other cattle on the map (albeit not all especially close). I trounced two opponents, built up my empire, and built every single wonder from the middle ages on (with a total of nine wonders in Thebes alone). I actually left off the game in the mid-industrial era in 1350 because it was starting to get boring (especially since 1.16f didn't have the newer versions' tools to help manage workers). By then, I was so far ahead it wasn't funny and my score was up to 5809. (That's also the game where I first learned how to use railroads for a cavalry blitz, by the way.)

The thought occurs to me that if there's a way to extract the map and build a 1.29f scenario around it, it could be interesting to see how I could do on a replay knowing all the tricks I've learned since then. (Also, the lower corruption in newer versions would make the game a lot less painful in later stages, although the fact that retreat doesn't always succeed would weaken early fighting with War Chariots.)

And if I can pull that off, I'm wondering if anyone would be interested in replaying it with me. Since I already know the map, I could even switch out Egypt for other civs for those who would prefer a different choice, and that might provide something else interesting to compare: How do people use different civs from the same starting position?

The object of this game would not be simple victory; it would be Ultimate Power itself - leading the rest of the world by as much as possible in as many different ways as possible. That might be an interesting change after the AU 107 game.

By the way, if it's possible to set this up and people are interested in adopting it as an AU game, I propose the course number 201. Ultimate Power just doesn't feel right as a freshman-level course.

Nathan

[jshelr]

I can think of one guy who has to play

[Dominae]

nbarclay, I probably wouldn't play the "Huge Map Ultimate Power" game if it were adopted by AU. First, simply because Huge maps get pretty boring in the middle of the game, when things get too tedious and long. You said yourself that you stopped playing your Ulitmate Power game eventually yourself for the same reasons, so what would the victory condition be? Second, Ultimate Power as a goal in and of itself seems strange to me; if you don't end up being the best in the Middle ages, you've lost, right? Maybe if 'Ulitmate Power' were defined a little more precisely (access to all luxuries, 75% of all Medieval Wonders, or a combination of such conditions...)?


Dominae

[Arrian]

Hmm, discussing Ultimate Power are we? Excellent, Smithers.[/Simpsons]

Well... my problem is that I just can't play Huge maps. My computer slows to a crawl, and I just don't have the patience (even if the time between turns is reasonable, my own turns are gonna take FOREVER).

This is why I play standard maps usually, and only occasionally play large worlds.

Dominae - yeah, if you're not already rocketing into the lead by the mid-medieval age, you just don't have UP. Up, to me, is defined as follows:

1) #1 in the important categories on F11.
2) Most of the wonders. Having them ALL is great, but there are several that just aren't important (oracle, g.lighthouse). Even missing a good one is ok, especially if you have good odds of taking it later.
3) Luxuries... access to lots as quickly as possible.
4) Tech - as large a lead as possible - a full era being the goal.

But that's just my definition Anyway, I prefer standard maps, but I could deal with large. It's my opinion (based on an educated guess, really) that normal maps are more conducive to UP anyway, due to resource and luxury distribution. Luxuries in particular. There are 8 types in the game. On a standard map, that's one per civ (and if you overcrowd, killing a civ and stealing their luxury is only a matter of taking a couple of cities). On large maps, its still 8 luxuries, but now 12 civs. On a huge its 8/16. You could start on a continent with 4 neighbors, whack them all, and end up with 3 luxuries... or even less! On a normal map, you would have a minimum of 4, and probably 5.

-Arrian

[punkbass2000]

'Get UP, Stand UP'

[nbarclay]

Well, SOMETHING is going really wierd with the save game I made. I'm into the New This and New That on my cities, and the most cities any AI on my continent has is three. (Someone just recently discovered Map Making.) And that's supposedly on Emperor! I wanted Ultimate Power, but this is ridiculous!

Nathan

[Arrian]

One time, using the "quickstart" feature, I mistakenly started a chieftain game. I had been restarting to find a decent spot, and at one point, I went down 1 button too far and hit "tutorial." I backed out, but failed to realize that the difficulty level was now set to chieftain, and the restart feature just stayed with it. So there I am, playing what I meant to be a Monarch game, and I'm just KICKING ASS. Not a shot fired, and I'm gobbling up all the land, wonders, etc. Unbelievable!

Then I hit F8. I looked at the scoring, and it dawned on me. Man, did I feel smart.

-Arrian

[Theseus]

First off, I need a little more time to finish AU 107, but yeah, after the loooong come-back, I'd love to play a UP game (and not 'always war' for the moment).

I'd vote for standard or large, with a non-winning endpoint... early in the Industrial Age, maybe. TOE?

[ducki]

Oh, NOW I know what all those "AU 10X Spoiler" Threads are about...I was wondering where to get those and what the heck AU was... know I know.


This looks like great stuff, and once I am "up to snuff" I'd love to participate.

What a great idea!

[nbarclay]

I tried reloading the game more than once to make sure the program really thought it was suppsoed to be Emperor, and that's what it keeps claiming. It looks like something was lost in the translation trying to get a map from a 150 BC 1.16f save.

Nathan

[Dominae]

I'm up for a UP AU game, as long as the UP victory condition is clearly defined. Or maybe you would need to somehow "prove" on the spoiler that you've achieved UP?

Oh, and it would have to be Standard or Large map size for me too.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

I think I came up with a basic idea for an Ultimate Power map set-up (probably starting with a random map and doing some tweaking), but the question is, what civs? The thought occurs to me that if I can get a list of civs people want to play, I could assign the ones that don't make the list to the AIs and let the player choose. (Something tells me Japan and China belong on top of the list of player civs.)

Does standard map, 60% water, pangea sound good? Or would continents be better? And since we're after Ultimate Power, how about sedentary barbarians so we can expand without much fear?

As for where the game ends, part of me thinks it should last until entry into the modern era since it's hard to claim Ultimate Power if a civ can't do four-turn research throughout that era. Of course another part dreads the extra couple centuries of micromanagement.

Nathan

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae
I'm up for a UP AU game, as long as the UP victory condition is clearly defined. Or maybe you would need to somehow "prove" on the spoiler that you've achieved UP?

One twist would be to have a "What Ultimate Power Means to Me" thread and then judge our games against our own goals. (Maybe have one post before the game starts and an optional update early in the game revising the goals in light of what the starting position looks like it should make possible.)

That's not to say that you fail if you miss your goals. Indeed, something would be questionable about a concept of Ultimate Power that is guaranteed to be reachable even with an exceptionally good starting position. Rather, success would be measured by setting high goals and coming as close to reaching them as the starting position permits.

Nathan

[Dominae]

nbarclay, I'm with you on this one...now I just have to think what "Ultimate Power" means to me. Maybe I'll just play the game and see at what point I do reach ultimate power, then post my results at that time. If I can't do it before the Modern age, I'll have failed...


Dominae

[DaveMcW]

What is the difference between ultimate power and an ultra-early conquest victory?

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by DaveMcW
What is the difference between ultimate power and an ultra-early conquest victory?

When a nation conquers the world, the only power it demonstrates is a power to destroy. Ultimate Power involves not just the power to destroy, but the power to create as well. A nation with Ultimate Power must be capable of winning any war it chooses (or is compelled) to fight quickly and decisively, but that power need not be exercised beyond securing whatever lands the civilization actually has a use for. A nation with Ultimate Power must also be able to create many great wonders, to lead the world decisively in science, and to build a culture that is the envy of the world. Anything less than that is not true Ultimate Power because the nation does not have the power to succeed militarily without compromising the rest of its potential for greatness.

Nathan