"Jekyll & Hyde" Variants

[yin26]

It would be interesting when the next AU game gets posted to see some people try a "Jekyll & Hyde" approach whereby they play two complete games -- one dedicated to peaceful building and the other dedicated to warmongering. For a true Jekyll and Hyde variant, you'd have to toggle between these modes with each age advance. Now THAT could be quite neurotic but interesting.

Anyway, I plan to try this once the next game gets posted. I suspect learning to play these extremes would eventually produce a skill set quite capable of handling most any situation. Learning to be either Jekyll or Hyde, then being able to switch at will effectively, would take learning the game from many angles.

I suggest this as well because the AU games give people a lot of time between releases (so far anyway), and it would be neat on a personal level to approach each AU game from completely different perspectives.

[Addled Platypus]

and this meaning-war agaisnt all civs?

and if they dont want peace at the next age-sol?

I could see two seperate games one peace all times, the other war all times

[yin26]

I wouldn't try to box the player in too far except to say at least in one game you are a "nice guy" and in the other you are a complete bastard. This could leave room for interpretation. When I warmonger, for instance, I avoid being at war on more than one front, as I imagine most others try to as well. But certainly each neighbor gets a beating and then, if there's time, all civs.

On the idea of mixing at era advances, it would be interesting then to become the nice guy after pissing everybody off. You could, at minimum, just stay on defense and weather that era as civs attack you. Style points could go to people, however, who figure out clever ways to be loved, hated, and loved at will. I guess this would mean giving back some conquered cities, adopting religions, bribery, etc.

I should say that in a "real" game, you'd never be this wild with your strategy, but as a form of strategic exercise, it would pack a great deal of learning in to a small time frame.

[Arrian]

The only problem, of course, is that Mr. Hyde would have the advantage, because Dr. Jekyll would have played already and revealed the map and encountered various things in-game (even if you switch back and forth every, say, 25 turns).

Whichever variant comes second has the advantage, wouldn't you say? You could do your best to play "as if you didn't know" but I'm not sure that really works.

-Arrian

[gdgrimm]

It's a neat idea, but I think it'll place a LOT of pressure on the game set-up.

Certain leaders are just better suited for war than others. Also, initial starts, in terms of resources, geography, and nearby neighbors (if any), can clearly dictate one approach being better suited for that game than another.

I'd prefer letting the players decide where they want to go with it, rather than trying to make them fit a square peg in a round hole.

Now, setting up the next 2 UA's to specifically focus on one extreme or the other might be interesting. Make one a Ghenghis start with nearby horses, and the other a start with a industrious/spiritual leader with nearby marble. If a player wants to buck the obvious, let them, but you'll at least be pushing the player to try different strategies.

[Konquest02]

Originally posted by Arrian
The only problem, of course, is that Mr. Hyde would have the advantage, because Dr. Jekyll would have played already and revealed the map and encountered various things in-game (even if you switch back and forth every, say, 25 turns).

Whichever variant comes second has the advantage, wouldn't you say? You could do your best to play "as if you didn't know" but I'm not sure that really works.

-Arrian

The way I understand it, he's talking about doing so in the same game. Ancient era, your a peaceful builder, but when the classical era starts, you turn out a complete bastard and wreck havoc all around. Then, at medieval, you're back at peaceful, etc.

The problem I see with this is the transition. It's easy to go from peacenik to warmonger, but the opposite is rather dependant on how the war goes and how the AI is willing to make peace with you.

[Arrian]

No, unless I'm totally misreading his post, he's talking about playing 2 seperate games.

I like the general idea, I just see problems.

-Arrian

[UnOrthOdOx]

I'm reading it as 2 different games as well.

I say you need two maps with a similar starting locale in terms of resources and neighbors, but everything else different to prevent the corruption in the second game Arrian points out.

[Krill]

you could do it another way. One map, but you only play one of the versions. So, about half play peaceful, the rest play aggressively.