Poll, should Vel write another strategy guide....

[Velociryx]

So...based on the teaser in the other thread, the question is....are you interested in such a guide?

Soren and Company have proved that the strategic depth is certainly there, and in ways that it just plain wasn't, in Civ III, and I've been itching to do another comprehensive strat guide since the SMAX one, soooo.....



-=Vel=-

[One_more_turn]

You are the best!

[Swiss Pauli]

Look forward to it. Will you post a synopsis?

I have one gripe with your prose: it's capital, not capitol.

[Velociryx]

D'oh! Man, I shoulda caught that! Absolutely right, and it'll be corrected....there are an awful lotta Civs and leaders, so this isn't something that's going to come together overnight (thus far, I've finished with Ghengis and Kublai, of Mongolia), and of course, the Civs themselves are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, so I can't really say yet, when this will come together....I only know that there's certainly enough material here....

-=Vel=-

[fed1943]

Voted yes.

Best regards,

[Lesbaker]

Vel
Am an avid reader of your strategy guide workshops and would love to see another one. Its the little details that are always the best such as the Border Bump using Caste system and Artist specialist if Spiritual that sticks in my mind!
Some suggested themes in case your short of ideas!?
Great Wall, Great Engineer/Pyramids opening play which seems to be the easiest opening play in Warlords. Would be interested in your opinions as to how viable this approach is at higher levels as I can only seem to make it viable at Prince & below.
Rush to Engineering and warmongering using Trebuchets. Although more long term than your Jaguar rush I would be interested if a strat could revolve around this powerfull middle game unit as others seem to imply in these threads.
New traits and their uses. Not really sure about the value of Protective or Charismatic. Imperiallistic rocks though! Maybe Im not getting the best from the new traits yet?
Use of the Warlords unit. First off the bat I used to use the Warlord unit to attach to a unit for attacking with. In more recent games I have tended to use them to settle in cities for the extra experience points as this has a better long term advantages. Again I would be interested in your overall strategy using these units.

Les

[Verrucosus]

Vel,

it was well past my bedtime when I finished reading the teasers you posted last night. Having pushed the "yes" button for this poll with as much strength as I could muster, I drifted to sleep, happily thinking both about my next Mongol game and the day when Vel's Guide to Civilization IV will proudly sit on my bookshelf.

Your SMAX guide is still a joy to read as I discovered a few weeks ago when a post on the SMAC forum prompted me to take it from the shelf and look for a quote. As much as the thoughtful analysis it's the sheer enthusiasm and love for the game that captivates me and, if I'm able to put it down for a moment, it's usually to start up a new game and try out the stuff I've read about. Your guide is certainly one of the reasons that I still enjoy Alpha Centauri as much as I do after all these years and despite its flaws. If you can provide a similar longevity treatment for Civ4, I'm willing to pay good money for it. If the excerpts you posted are anything to go by, the magic is as strong as ever. The methodical approach, the willingness to consider "odd" strategies and the conversational style ... it's all there and, to me anyway, it's an irresistible combination.

I can only imagine that planning to write something even close to comprehensive about Civ4 strategy is a daunting task to set oneself, but by all appearances you will really have a great time doing it and enjoy the game even more than you already do. Civ4 may not have as much "atmosphere" as SMAC, but it is more balanced and it still offers a staggering number of elements to combine into strategies.

Other than my warmest encouragement, I have not much feedback to offer at this point. In particular, I don't have a wishlist of topics that you wouldn't think of anyway. Regarding your earlier comment about the Civs themselves being only the tip of the iceberg, you might want to consider moving the Civ-specific notes towards the back of the guide (maybe along with map-type-specific notes and so on). It's probably tempting to start by discussing Civ-specific strategies because you can do so in more detail since you know about the starting technologies, traits, special units etc, but with eighteen Civs there's a real danger of some redundancy. If you move the Civ-specific notes backwards, you could build on the main body of the guide, concentrate more on what makes each Civ different and reduce the risk of having to repeat yourself. You could still pick out a couple of Civs (maybe one for each of the main styles of the builder/momentum spectrum) and give them a more detailed treatment, not because they are more important than others, but because they are particularly suited to illustrate the various styles of play. It would be a departure from the tried and tested arrangement in the SMAC Guide where the faction notes are included in the first main chapter, but it may be worth giving it a thought.

In any event, you should have no doubts whatsoever that your guide will be well received.

Best wishes,
Verrucosus

[Velociryx]

Thank you for the votes of support and all the kind words!

Les, I'm glad you mentioned some things that you liked about other things I've written, and also that you had some sugesstions about what sorts of things you'd be "looking for" in terms of what would make it a good guide for you. If you think of anything else, feel free to add to the list!

And Verrucosus, that's high praise indeed! I sure hope I don't screw up the writing of this puppy!

It's funny you should mention the notion of splitting the discussion of broadly based strategies away from specific civs...as I continue adding to the article I posted (it's now about twice as long as it was when I posted it), I reached that same conclusion...if I don't split them away from the Civs, there'd be a fair bit of repetition, because what works (at least in general terms) for one aggressive civ, would work for them all...so, I've been shifting stuff around as I continue to write, trying gamely to give the whole thing some sense of order and cohesion....tricky business, but yep, I am enjoying it!

-=Vel=-

[Swiss Pauli]

Originally posted by Velociryx It's funny you should mention the notion of splitting the discussion of broadly based strategies away from specific civs...as I continue adding to the article I posted (it's now about twice as long as it was when I posted it), I reached that same conclusion...
-=Vel=-

I'd be tempted to go more along the lines of your strategy thread: describe the playstyles and mention good civs and maps/starts for each, then opening moves, then Ancient/Classical strategies (Pyramids, CS Slings, Lightbulbing), again recommending civs and maps/starts for each.

Key concepts like synergy (traits and Wonders), chokes, over-expansion, binary research, etc., might even squeeze in after the playstyle descriptions.

Finally, I'd put the walkthroughs at the end as a series of annexes.

[Nevordan]

This game needs all the guides it can get. Especially when it comes to retards like me.

[Addled Platypus]

another vote for he## yes

[couerdelion]

Well if you enjoy writing this sort of thing Vel then I for one would recommend it highly. The existing level is already very good with the strongest part for me being the section on individual leaders.

I’d agree with other comments that the strategic depth will make this a daunting task and suggest you might want to try farming out some parts if you can handle the number of replies and suggestions you’ll get with each one.

But I certainly look forward to reading these things. Even if I consider myself quite good at this game I never fail to learn something new.

[Illyrien]

I would like indepth sections regarding the traits and the synergies amongst them.

Besides that I really liked the SMAX guide, and prefer something like that.... with the section about the individual civs replaced by the above menthioned traits instead

[Velociryx]

Trait synergies and detailed notes about each Civ....you got it!

-=Vel=-

[Smellycowsquid]