Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An Unusual Mode of Play

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • An Unusual Mode of Play

    For many years, one of my favorite ways of playing 4X games has been to play in a hotseat mode with me controlling two players and the AIs controlling the rest. My general rule is that my civs (using the Civ terminology) don't fight each other but also don't cooperate with each other any more than they are willing to cooperate with the AIs. One of the things I found really frustrating about the PtW and Conquests expansion packs to Civ 3 is that I was limited to eight civs doing that instead of the sixteen that the game supported in single-player mode. Fortunately, Civ IV has no such restriction.

    So most of what I've been doing in Civ IV since it came out has been playing on huge, low-water (i.e. maximum land) archipelago maps with me controlling two civs against sixteen AIs - and I've added the no tech trading option to the mix to avoid the messiness that would otherwise come from the question of how to handle tech trades in a way that is fair both to my civs and to the AIs. I've found it sufficiently fun that I thought I'd mention it in case anyone else might be interested in the idea.

    That kind of framework might also form an interesting basis for true multiplayer games, with players neither fighting nor particularly cooperating but merely working to see who can be most successful in a world full of AIs. I don't want to commit the time to a multiplayer game right now, but I thought I'd mention the idea in case anyone else might find it interesting.

  • #2
    I also do that sometimes, not with the goal of play,but try different ways.
    Best regards,

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the very interesting suggestion.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have considered starting such games myself, but never actually done it

        The day someone invents a way to store my 'human memory' into a HD, delete it from my memory, then load it later, that would be the day when such game could be very interesting. This means that I could play MP against myself, while having no idea what the other civs (who are played by me) are doing
        This space is empty... or is it?

        Comment


        • #5
          Schizophrenics must enjoy Civ alot more than I do...

          Roses are red,
          Violets are blue,
          I'm schizophrenic, and,
          Oh, Hey! So am I!
          THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
          AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
          AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
          DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

          Comment


          • #6


            Thanks for the idea. I was looking for a new way to play (starting in different eras just wasn't cutting it for me)

            I'm just going to experiment/play as two civs and see what happens. If you had two civs working together how fast could you wipe out all the other civs? How fast could you complete the SS? It's probably pretty easy on Noble, but could you dominate the upper difficulty levels easily?

            I can't believe I never thought of that before.

            Comment


            • #7
              I have done what was suggested, and it helps get me thinking of new strats and other ways to play
              "Dumb people are always blissfully unaware of how dumb they really are."
              Check out my Blog!

              Comment


              • #8
                There have been brain damaged people whose short term memory extends no more than a few minutes. They can lead fairly independant lives if they depend upon lists of instructions to get them through the day.

                Such a person would be able to play their own self in multiplayer...
                Voluntary Human Extinction Movement http://www.vhemt.org/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bkeela
                  There have been brain damaged people whose short term memory extends no more than a few minutes. They can lead fairly independant lives if they depend upon lists of instructions to get them through the day.

                  Such a person would be able to play their own self in multiplayer...
                  Shades of Memento!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Cheers nbarclay In C3C PBEM we had a few games going where each player had 2 civs they were fun. may have to have another go at that soon
                    Gurka 17, People of the Valley
                    I am of the Horde.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Bkeela
                      There have been brain damaged people whose short term memory extends no more than a few minutes. They can lead fairly independant lives if they depend upon lists of instructions to get them through the day.

                      Such a person would be able to play their own self in multiplayer...
                      They can also buy the limited Trivial Persuit edition, which is a lot cheaper...partly because it only features three cards...
                      Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
                      Then why call him God? - Epicurus

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I was a "conflict simulation" board game player before I got into computer strategy games. (CTP, SMAC and Civ2, all bought about the same time, were my firsts.) Over the years, trying to test the potential of game systems and different opponents in these cardboard board wargames, I became adept, (believe it or not , ) at shutting off the part of my mind that had just dealt with the one side's strategy and plans, the previous turn, while playing the other side.

                        While this does sound schizophrenic , I must insist that I was reasonably effective in doing this, though surprise attack was a little difficult. In one particularly masochistic exercise, I played the first year of a giant WWII Eastern Front simulation, with a 6'x6' gameboard and about 2,000 unit counters, totally solitaire.

                        Therefore, the proposed variant here sounds perfectly plausible to me.
                        You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I always start those types of games, but never finish them. . As I find out they take twice as long to play.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Generaldoktor
                            .... In one particularly masochistic exercise, I played the first year of a giant WWII Eastern Front simulation, with a 6'x6' gameboard and about 2,000 unit counters, totally solitaire.
                            Ah, Yes! War In the East (SPI) was ... Large. Even played one game (2-player), but I (as the Ruski's) smashed his Luftwaffe following the first Winter, and we never continued.

                            War In North Africa was another huge game. As I recall, it was only 3'x6', but you got to keep track of EVERYTHING, particularly Logistics -- and since this was before computers essentially, you kept track of it all on PAPER! Personally, I couldn't manage actually playing a game (but it was FASCINATING to study).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jaybe

                              Ah, Yes! War In the East (SPI) was ... Large. Even played one game (2-player), but I (as the Ruski's) smashed his Luftwaffe following the first Winter, and we never continued.

                              War In North Africa was another huge game. As I recall, it was only 3'x6', but you got to keep track of EVERYTHING, particularly Logistics -- and since this was before computers essentially, you kept track of it all on PAPER! Personally, I couldn't manage actually playing a game (but it was FASCINATING to study).
                              Yeah, I was referring to the Game Research Design product "Fire in the East" (they also made an African game, "War in the Desert.") But I had "War in the East" too, as a matter of fact my old copy is out in the garage, rotting. I don't have the space to set it up anymore or store it properly, (I live in a duplex; the garage is stacked with other junk.) Computer gaming has really spoiled me. I don't want to do that paperwork, or have my unit dispositions altered by a breeze through the window or the dog. I wish someone would adapt some of those old titles to computer, particularly the old AH "Squad Leader" series. Some outfit called Matrix Games had out a couple titles adapted from the old hexagonal board format, but I don't know if they're surviving.

                              All of this is kind of off-topic though.
                              You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X