Idea: Multiple-condition Victories

[nbarclay]

There have been many games where I've been disappointed at the game being officially over just because I've met one of the victory conditions, because there are other victory conditions that I would also like to achieve. The game allows me to play on after winning, but it's not quite the same with the game officially over.

The thought occurs to me that it would probably be relatively simple to add an option where players could pursue multiple victory conditions instead of just one. There are two different ways of doing this, and ideally, I'd like to see both.

1) A mode where the first player to achieve a specified number of victory conditions wins. (A victory condition only counts if the player is first to achieve it.) If a player achieves conquest, the player is presumed to have won under all unresolved victory conditions since there is no remaining competition for them.

2) A mode where the player who has achieved the greatest number of victory conditions can declare victory at any time, provided that no human player objects. That would allow players to see how many victory conditions they can achieve while at the same time giving them an option to go ahead and end the game victoriously if it becomes boring.

[snoopy369]

I think the only real problem with that is that victories generally have two categories:

1. Victories permitted by virtue of size. Conquest, Domination, to some extent Diplomatic, and to some extent Space, all have this as a category (plus Time). For these victories, the victory is related to the size of the civ. Bigger = Better for all of them (although space and diplo have other factors as well), and a civ capable of achieving one will generally be capable of achieving the other, so you're just extending the game in a relatively boring way.

2. Cultural, and to a lesser extent Diplomatic, have a 'unique' element, that means you have to play a particular strategy from a relatively early point. (Diplo you can win while not being the largest civ if you are very AI-friendly, almost to a fault, early on.) These victories do not mesh well with other victories because they are a particular strategy, so it would be quite hard to require (Cultural + Domination), for example, unless you were already winning by a ton; or (Cultural+Space) unless you were again winning by a ton.

I think ultimately it comes down to, Civ is generally considered to have a boring end game, and it's not due to the victory options; it's due to the fact that you're either winning by enough that it's not interesting, losing by enough that it's not interesting, or in the hunt but it's fairly clear who will win even quite a distance out. Those games where that is not true, are quite interesting, but they are relatively rare, and the complexity of the late game (the turn time) is big enough that many people don't play through late games. Anything that lengthens that without significantly increasing the fun (or decreasing the difficulty) is probably a bad idea.

[nbarclay]

Note that in the second mode I suggested, players would be free to declare victory as soon as they meet one victory condition unless an AI reached a victory condition first. The game would only last longer if players consider it fun to keep it going - for example, if they were close to one victory condition when they reached another one, or if they enjoy stomping other civs with modern units but also enjoy winning the space race along the way. (The biggest thing that inspired me to start this thread is how I routinely win the space race, thereby officially ending the game, before my modern armor and stealth bombers can reach the domination threshold on huge maps.)

Setting up a requirement for multiple victory conditions would give players an incentive to broaden their focus a bit more instead of focusing narrowly on what is required to achieve one single victory condition. Granted, sufficient military success would enable players to achieve all of the victory conditions eventually - at least as long as players can kill any AI that threatens to snatch away a victory condition. But if players want to win relatively quickly, they would have an incentive to pursue a strategy that balances the various goals.

I don't know how many players would be interested in using either of these options, especially on a regular basis. But then again, how many players play OCC or "always war" games on a regular basis? The key question is whether enough players would be interested enough to make it worth the small amount of extra code that would be required to make the option available.

[Fitz]

Originally posted by snoopy369 These victories do not mesh well with other victories because they are a particular strategy, so it would be quite hard to require (Cultural + Domination), for example, unless you were already winning by a ton; or (Cultural+Space) unless you were again winning by a ton.

That's a wierd point of view. I was just thinking to myself "this would only work with Cultural combined with the other categories really. Maybe Space." Domination is most easily met by conquering and keeping cities. Nothing says you can't crank up the culture in 3 core cities while doing this (admittedly it will take longer to do both).

IMO this would work best with "achieve any victory at any point, you don't have to be the first". I guess that colored my point of view. If you have to beat everyone else to the cultural victory AND a space victory, then it would probably be another matter.