Your best game and your most successful game

[ramses II.]

In my opinion, these are two different things - the best game and the most successful game.
My most successful games:
1) SP - about 8000 pts, Deity
Had had a lot of luck finding NONE settlers and advanced tribes. Extincted 4 civs except a pet city.
Other civs had been wiped out by others (civs and barbs).
2) MP - nearly no experiences
3) OCC - my first OCC game on a medium map. Had two wine hills and silk on a river ...

My best games:
1) SP - Had a 4000 year long war with all other civs - they were bribed step by step
2) MP - nearly no experiences
3) OCC - reached AC with a medium site - buffalo, wheat, coal, whale - not typical for an OCC game.

[rah]

Most successful,
When ming and I were trading point records games. The last one I did before he just topped it. I don't remember the exact point count, but is was momentarily a record at Apolyton, and even now, many years later, It still ranks in the top 5 out of all the sites where I've seen high point count records. BUT IT WAS SO STINKING BORING AND NOT A LOT OF FUN. I probably could have gone back and beat Ming's score, but I had no enthusiasm for it at that point. Nor the free time. It took months.

My best game was one of my attempts at the Nomad challange. "you can't establish a city" you can only get cities through conquest. It was early in the 1800's and I launched my spaceship then preceded to conquer the world before it landed. Quite satisfying and not boring at all.


Rich

But for fun and exitement, nothing can top MP. It's a whole new ballgame when a human is directing the attacks against you.

[Scouse Gits]

Most successful was a landing in 875 on a large world ... this was a restart

Best and by far the most enjoyable was winning a PBEM playing the Rome Scenario ... OK ... I played Seleucia with the Gardens and had a great bit of real estate

----------------------

SG(2)

[War4ever]

My favorite game , involved a four player game with the lads, there was a lot of jockeying for position, and the lead changed quite a bit.

However the game ended quickly once i snuck in the Manhattan Project, and dropped a few nukes

However one civ was sneaky in his own right and lived to see another day......and wreaked a bit of havoc on me too

The game had everything associated with MP, and its those kinds of games , that i wish i could find again.....

One a side note, well two actually,

the cities i nuked , i believe i lost more units than they did, i forgot to move my 20 troops off a mountain adjacent to the metropolis, the others were howling with laughter....

and to this day, there is still some friendly resentment, from my peers whom were nuked when we all play together

i felt like the USA of WWII, the only civilization to use nukes......so don't vote for me as your prime minister lol

[Straybow]

"…i forgot to move my 20 troops off a mountain adjacent to the metropolis…"

I'd have to say my best game was my personal Deity OCC record game. It didn't beat Paul or Ribannah, but it went well and was enjoyable. Most of the other OCC games were frustrating in many ways.

Most games I play only for enjoyment. I rarely try to conquer any civ completely, and I often launch only to prevent some other civ from beating me to it. Sometimes I play bloodlust just to play to 2020 without having to mess with the space ship. None of my scores would impress anybody.

[samson]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
Most successful was a landing in 875 on a large world ... this was a restart

875 on a large world, that's impressive. Good going.

[rah]

Originally posted by War4ever
However one civ was sneaky in his own right and lived to see another day......and wreaked a bit of havoc on me too

Yes, I was happy to have SDIs (thanks to spys) before you unleashed because I know who your first target would have been otherwise.

Originally posted by War4ever
The game had everything associated with MP, and its those kinds of games , that i wish i could find again.....

It's tough to continue games for a couple of reasons. The only real games I've continued were those that I was getting my ass kicked in. No one ever seems to want to continue when I'm doing well. It's hard to find a game where everyone is doing well enough to want to continue, and then there's the schedules. Maybe the boys that play on the larger maps have the right idea. With no early contact and lots of room for everyone to expand, people aren't knocked out of the game as quickly. But alas, I find playing on the larger maps quite boring early on. It's just a settler spitting contest.

Originally posted by War4ever
and to this day, there is still some friendly resentment, from my peers whom were nuked when we all play together

I really don't think so. Everyone seems to remember that game quite fondly. Especially those that got to do a little back stabbing


And I think that later in the game, there are three units that can really unbalance the game which can lead to the game being quite uninteresting for those on the short side.

Spies. Almost unlimited repeated tech stealing and city trashing for 30 shields is so unrealistic. Watching a hoard of spys decimate every improvment in a city in one turn, and most of the escape just takes the fun out of the game.

Nukes. Can quickly turn the game into a farce.

Howies. Unstoppable on rail networks. (but of the three, this one bothers me the least, since it comes late in the game, and it's usually decided by then. If not, it gets decided quickly.

So the early sessions are the most fun to me. I do wish we could average two sessions a game though, because that's usually when the most fun would begin. And after two sessions, it's usually real obvious who really won. Unlike some of those one session games where someone has a huge PG lead but is soon ready to be plucked.


RAH