The Creativity of 2 x 2

StrategicKingMi · February 12, 2003, 02:11

Recently I played a great game with Martin. He built Leos, Statue, and pyramdis and I Mageleons, Mikes, hangings , Sun Tzus and Leos.
He tried to break my ironclad patrols but failed.
He had to get more creative.. How about this... Go to the southern artic. Build a city on the tundra, a fort on any tundra adjacent. Load both with a ton of thoose free muskets and all your clads in the city. And simply city hop all the way to my main city mass an unleash a huge army of cannons upon my rail net, take my wonder citys , force my government into revolt and win the game.
Of course, the counter is to simply fort the tudra as a defensive measure to force thoose clads to stay out at sea where they can be destroyed.
Another option is to build a ton of citys in a certain area. Use explorers to clear the land of any enemy canons. then , in these newly constrcted citys, disband a musket every turn and, using gold from trade routes, buy an ironclad out of each city! Now you can pretty much overwhelm my ironclad patrol with supurior numbers.
Cant do that in 1 x 1.
Just my moment of insanity. now back to the nonsense...Ming..

Ming · February 12, 2003, 03:06

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
Recently I played a great game with Martin. He built Leos, Statue, and pyramdis and I Mageleons, Mikes, hangings , Sun Tzus and Leos.

It must of have been a fun game with both of you building Leos

And why can't that be done in 1x1x...

I thought one of the best strategies I've seen is the use of explorers paired up with Alpine units. Flood your enemies territory with them (they can slip past any zone of control) move them two, then finish the turn fortified on solid terrain, and use them to block reinforcements. They are hard to take out and only a solid wall of units will stop them. Xin Yu first trotted that out in a game to block key rail points while taking forward cities... It would even be deadlier in your 2x movement games

DrSpike · February 12, 2003, 06:17

The game is what fosters creativity, not the settings. Besides, whoever hosted used some 'creativity' with the rules.txt if you both built the same wonder.

War4ever · February 12, 2003, 17:06

ANOTHER CASE OF DOCTORED RULES

Hydey · February 12, 2003, 17:22

I don't like the idea of 2 players building leo's

DrSpike · February 12, 2003, 17:43

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
ANOTHER CASE OF DOCTORED RULES

Hey! Leave me out of it.

ColdWizard · February 12, 2003, 17:46

2x2x doesn't change the amount of creativity, but it does require an adjustment of tactics

Ming · February 12, 2003, 18:09

That is true... there is creativity at ALL settings. And you have to make an adjustment for tactics at all settings as well

War4ever · February 12, 2003, 19:02

gotta love those units that can attack from one side of the screeen and make it there all in one turn too

just what i want to do, patrol each city with horsies and dips each turn just to see if my opponent is a million miles away

x2x2 is great if you want a short game....but i think there are many "better" war games out there ...

personally i like civ for the expansion, build up, war, trade etc.....

if i wanted a wham bam thank you maam game....... i would have an orgy

Alexander's Horse · February 12, 2003, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Hydey
I don't like the idea of 2 players building leo's

Hydey sighting +1.

StrategicKingMi · February 12, 2003, 22:01

oppppps, I meant I built Bachs, not leos...

War4ever · February 12, 2003, 22:05

hehe you stirred up a hornets nest...

StrategicKingMi · February 12, 2003, 22:08

This was not a fast game, it took 4 very long, 5-6 hour seessions. It was a fantastic warring, trading and growing game. The end game, with my powerfull democracy overwhelming the godless fundies, was very quick indeed. But with a little more creativity, It should have been a less dramatic ending..
Oh yeah, we started with 5 settlers in Monarchy with 0 techs on a pre known board for fairness, to speed things up, sort of a controled accelerated start. if you want to see the map. ill post it, from beging to end...

War4ever · February 12, 2003, 22:12

i would be curious to see it....though i have never like premade maps as they become to obvious, but i will concede they do offer a fairer starting position

deity · February 13, 2003, 00:12

Some of my best and most favourite games were on pre-mades.

Ming · February 13, 2003, 00:23

Half the fun is the thrill of discovery and having to deal with what the game dealt you. I'm not a big fan of pre-made maps.

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 01:02

Well like i said before.......premade maps will make for a fair starting position...but they do take away the discovery age of the game...

its a trade off

Graag · February 13, 2003, 01:10

I tend to dislike premade maps, they can be fun if you just want a quick start for a duel but otherwise they just bore me. Civ is a nice random game, just how I like it.

Ming · February 13, 2003, 01:36

Yes... the random part is what keeps the game fresh. Granted, in duels you need pretty equal starting positions... but in 3 or 4 person games, you can make up for a bad start, and screw up a good one

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 01:39

and we have ALL been on both sides of that coin

Ming · February 13, 2003, 01:42

I love when you get great land... You're in heaven... and then the next 3 huts give you sciences off the path, and you don't get monarchy until hell freezes over

So many factors come down to luck... whether it's land, huts, barbs, combat... an even starting positions doesn't mean an equal game.

At least in most games, the luck balances out in long run.

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 01:54

actually its getting great land and going , Wow..stroke of luck, then you realize there are two neighbors on either side of you

Ming · February 13, 2003, 02:05

Yeah... you send out your first two settlers in different directions, and they both meet other players...

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

*time to consider map making*

StrategicKingMi · February 13, 2003, 02:16

Unfortunately Civ can never randomly give fair starts. I put it at about 5% of the time starts are some what fair. And the really sad thing is , that if you look at a board, and replace the civs in fair spots, it can be done on virtually every board.
It would be interesting to have a "bank" on this forum of randomly created boards for duels, 3 player or 4 player games. where the civs have been physically placed by a human for fairness. This way, you can choose the pre-made map and if you trust the other player not to have looked at it, it can be both pre-made and unknown.
The really interesting part of this game was the 5 settler, monarchy start. This simply took hut luck off the table. If you get a tech from hut, your happy cause it does not screw up a government tech path and saves you time for having to do a tech. And if you get an early city/settler instead of 2-1 advantage, iots only a 6/5 advantage which is no big deal.
Toss in the fair start, even on a known board, where you can deign a strategy to go along with the fair ness, and you got potential for a great game..
Heres the starting board..It was a random board with opnly civs replaced.

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 02:20

i totally see where premade maps are great.....but one would need a large data base of maps otherwise its only a matter of time before you "recognize" which map you are on....

find a way around that and you will have me sold

Ming · February 13, 2003, 02:23

No matter how much you even out the start, luck still plays a roll. And I like that. It keeps the game from getting stale. An early barb king... a few mobile units early from huts... Barbs knocking out your early searchers or taking a new city... That's why I don't mind random starts (except duels... we reset a "few" times until both are happy)... there is enough other luck in the game.

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 02:26

i guess the point is to limit the hut as much as possible and allow skill to shine through....

but part of skill is overcoming/enhancing some of the luck you pick up on the way

Ming · February 13, 2003, 02:30

I agree... I don't consider a "set" game plan skill. That's just knowing "a way" to win. True skill is dealing with whatever comes at you, good or bad, and making the most of it. Your strategies need to vary as you adapt to the game. Having a single killer strategy that only works at one setting or if you get a good start isn't skill

DrSpike · February 13, 2003, 05:55

I like premade maps generally.......for most RTS they are fine. I also think they offer the best chance of a fair start. Despite all that I still prefer random maps in games like civ......the spirit of discovery is just so intrinsic to the game. Over time the better players will make the most of their good starts and hopefully minimise their bad ones.......some would even say that is a large part of MP.

War4ever · February 13, 2003, 11:26

truer words were never spoken spike...as usual with your eloquent little twist