An Example of a Great Game of Civ

StrategicKingMi · April 11, 2003, 16:24

I must pre-face this by saying this was a premade board, revealed at the beging of the game and no contact till after 1000 bc. Also, 2 x 2 king, all ships must return to port at 1000 bc. The big southern cont could not be colonized till after 1000 bc along with the two other smaller conts more then 3 away from the 2 main conts.

StrategicKingMi · April 11, 2003, 16:29

What Techs should be done next? what will be the breaking point? Which civ is winning? Notice the difference between the wonderless civ (me) and the wonder civ (Martin)......Throw in your opinions if you dont mind....

atawa · April 11, 2003, 17:51

I guess this is a no bribes game?

oedo · April 11, 2003, 17:55

white has a huge lead. if I was white, I would take first priority on Magellan and see that I´ll make it quick. if I was blue, I´d try to prevent this and build Magellan myself.
I´d say, it´s an easy win for white. but I smell, there will be a surprising turn and you finally will have won. right?

...all ships must return to port at 1000 bc...

strange rule. why that?

atawa · April 11, 2003, 18:00

I think its a no navalwonder game.

And white should just go fundi and outproduce chinese.

With suntsu he should be able to win the war at sea and take the south island.

StrategicKingMi · April 11, 2003, 20:20

Good to see you again there Oedo.
It was a no naval wonder game and a no hut game.
Also, sun tzus and leos are going to be obsolete in about 3 turns.
The problem he must be having is producing 40 shield rifleman and I am producing 20 resource fanatics.
I have barracks and mine are vets. Most of his have most asuredly been upgraded and are not vets.
Production does not really matter anymore.
The only thing that matters is gold. I am trading with his citys and earning expotentialy increasing amounts per turn and with my naval tech lead he can not stop me from getting to his citys. I am going to earn over 5000 gold next turn alone. This buys alot of cruisers and then battleships.
At this point of the game it is all about productivity. How many of your 60-70 citys produce something every turn.
120 gold buys the first 20 resources for me and 160 for him. Thus a battleship costs 120+100+60+240=520.
By disbanding a unit you can reduce cost by 95 gold.

StrategicKingMi · April 11, 2003, 20:30

It is a no bribe game.
The 1000 bc rule was needed to prevent large armies being placed right off the shores of the other civ and then a quick invasion and game could be over.
We wanted to divide the game into a trading + growth segment and then a trading +waring game.
I will have tanks in 3 turns (steel,combustion (steal chivelry,leadership and tactics and then do combined arms)
Also, he cant steal tech from me, all citys that he can possible reach of mine, notice that I have sailed my destroyers out looking for transports and this is why he has none other then in citys 5 away from mine.
Problem is, he already stole from thoose citys and I am throwing tons of units onto every island to prevent assults.

StrategicKingMi · April 11, 2003, 20:40

Sun tzus is over rated at gaining sea power. I get a vet over 50% of the time without sun tzus. And he usually has ships well damaged after they win an attack and i sink them, I just stay closer to my shores so that I can win the numbers game.
Also remember that cruisers dont care weather a destroyer is vet or not, they win either way.
And once battleships are introduced into the game, forget it, all other ships are useless.
(I really want flight, fighters are great at moving out 5, seeing an additional two spaces and being able to detect incoming battleships in open seas.
Cont 17 is hard to colonioze, remember you can drop off large numbers of engineers and build railroads for unlimited movement.

StrategicKingMi · April 13, 2003, 06:50

Well, after another 6 hours of exausting play, which was only 3 or 4 turns, not a game for the weak of heart, we got flight,combined arms and I am 3 turns from advanced flight.
He has reached the breaking point. I am closing in on many of his citys and have uncontested dominance at sea. My cruisers immediately made his destroyers obsolete, vet or not. This gave me the intiative. I also was first to automobile which gave me even more power as i sailed battleships within shorebombardment range of his coast. I plan combined arms assults all over his coast line. I anticipate victory in 3 or 4 turns.

DrSpike · April 13, 2003, 09:12

Sounds like a cool game.

I empathise with the premade map no hut setup, even though the spirit of exploration is important to many. However the no attacking in early game just seems to limit the options for the players.......and you have always said that restrictions should not be placed on alternatives.

What gives?

StrategicKingMi · April 13, 2003, 13:12

Pretty simple really, i got tired of fighting with horses. The game on a smaller board like this just will not progress to this phase and be this competitive. If you dont have time to build up before attacking, not only do you slow down the game by having to defend early, but with fewer units on the board a small mistake and the game will end. Also wonders become much more important with out the time to over come them. I did not want a tactical game where one small good move wins the game. I wanted a game with strategic attrition. You dont give the knock out blow, but rather a bunch of smaller blows till your opponet is punch drunk and throws in the towel.

atawa · April 13, 2003, 18:46

Nice game, only downside is its decided for at least 80% by trading witch to me gets a bit boring...

DrSpike · April 13, 2003, 18:49

Yeah, you are kind of switching caravans for horses, whilst adding many hours to the game.

Still, whatever floats your boat (ship chain?

) is fine.

atawa · April 13, 2003, 19:05

In my recent games with Makeo we just put sience on hold at a certain time (usualy at engineering)

I'm beginning to like the old trench warfare games again

Makeo · April 13, 2003, 20:03

Yeah they are fun games

StrategicKingMi · April 13, 2003, 20:39

If you just play short games with no tech advancement you are cheating yourself of all that civ has to offer not to mention that you will just be playing the same game over and over again.
Trading is the coolest part of this game. Not only does it expotential increase your capabilities with lots of gold to buy many numbers of units but also newer, better units.
Also it adds great strategy to the game as you work feverishly to trade with the other civ, choose which citys to produce vans/freight, building huge citys of 20+ (which i failed to do this game) to get giant returns.
Also, its the great unknown, you dont really know what your going to get paid, and being a salesman, I like the action. Horses just run around and gain you nothing, and actually slow down your progress.

MartinMS600 · April 16, 2003, 14:26

Oh, our little game is posted in this little community.
Nice. We spent about 20 hours to play this game and it were fun to build up a huge and powerful civ. We made much gold and both nearly every turn a new tech. Its really funnier to fight with better units each turn. Thats realistic. But destroying factories and naval fortresses with a 30 shield diplomat is pissing me off.

MartinMS600 · April 16, 2003, 14:35

I think next time we need a rule for this problem, because no dip or courthouse in demo governement prevents me for enemy dips which destroyed my expensive city improvements. Good old common terry is right to make the dips much more expensive (especially in this game). Another bug or shitty programming has to be fixed. If i took garies cities in an earlier phase of the game it resets his gold and he were able to made strong conterattacks with this extra gold.
In our last turn i took back 5 cities on islands and he got over 6000!!! gold benefit as i took these cities and me... 22 gold per city. But he were serious and told me that.
But in the end its ok that he won this game. I wont change to fundy and thats were the losing point. I lost many units on transports on the sea (mistake in calculating the moves :-( ) and my early attacks were not strong enough to hold the cities (and gave him good money).
But i loved to build the hoover dam in a multiplayer internet game and loved to see my cities produces tanks or fighters in one turn.
We all have to learn new tactics in games with tanks and fighters and battleships - its great!
PS. Next game will have a 50*50 map maximum, lol.

StrategicKingMi · April 16, 2003, 21:12

Winning or losing is not what i was looking for in this game. I wanted to advance to the WW2 weapons if you will. It really changes the game alot. Martin is the most fun person to play and I really look forward to our next meating. I did build a 50 x 50 board for the next game with less land. Somethings we might explore is a restrictive 5 min time limit ( 6.5 mins for non-host) though a restriction, it will make you use your time as a very valuable resource.
To fix the assanine problem of free money for a fundy when losing a city to a democracy, we simply split any free money .
Increase the price of diplos to 70 to componsate for thier huge power to sabatage.
Tactically, I think we learned that major rail junctions have got to be defended with units in a fort. I got the 3rd army on his rail net and my 11 armor units nearly wiped out his entire civ.
I wont be so fast not to build the hoover damn.
Also, If I go democracy, with mikes and bachs, Ill build libraries and Unis to do 2 techs a turn and gain the iniative.
Thanks for the game Martin...

Cyrion · April 17, 2003, 02:23

Quote:

Originally posted by StrategicKingMi
To fix the assanine problem of free money for a fundy when losing a city to a democracy

What's that??

StrategicKingMi · April 17, 2003, 16:45

When a democracy takes fundy citys, the gold level of the fundy is reset to the level that player started the turn at. Stupid glitch or programming.

Cyrion · April 18, 2003, 03:00

Didn't know that, thanks!

Only valid if the taker is a Demo??