HOTW V - Set Up Thread II, or The Return of the Mods

[deity]

Originally posted by The Capo
Well, personally I don't agree with NO-City Swapping, but I understand how it can be construed as unfair by people who are trying to win the Space victory condition.

But I think this should open up the old debate as to how we will name a victor in the game. I have always been of the opinion that for the purposes of a diplogame the space victory is a little unrealistic; mainly because it isn't a victory in a diplomatic measure.

I have a potential solution; I think we should continue to play the game even after the space victory (if possible) and play until "time runs out."

This way it gives rise to multiple victories/outcomes, and also won't end the game on what I consider a technicality (diplogame-wise). I mean, if we end it on space victory conditions there is just going to be an all out war, or even a nuclear war/sabatoge operation by countries who would be inclined to stop certain civs from getting to space first. Basically what I am saying is that it may lead to an entire breakdown in the diplomacy part of the game. Especially when certain "space states" will focus their energies on developing their space program.

Again, I am not saying I think the space victory is stupid, I am just saying I never considered it a fitting end to a diplogame. I think this warrants a discussion.

Thoughts?

I can see how city swapping actually allows for a more diplo space ending rather than a war fest.

I thought we agreed after my atrocious late game war mongering in HOTW4 that world domination was not a viable win in diplo games.

This mirrors real world reality as you'd never get one civilisation on Earth completely taking over the entire planet - yes, not even the USA

So in Terra HOTW5 if India launches the first SS then England would praise their efforts and NOT belt the crap out of them.

Just like Russia on Earth praised outwardly (but inwardly was jeolous) the USA's Man on The Moon.

Otherwise we'd be playing normal civ.

I think the SS win or the Diplo win is viable and is the preferred win in diplogames.

I'm certain a Diplomatic victory is possible in future games but probably not in our current game.

[Robert]

I think that people mix up 'diplogame' with 'peacefullgame'. Diplo game might end imho in a warfest as well. As long as we keep negotiation open. To me a diplogame is just normal civ, but the leaders behave like real leaders and talk and talk and storytell and storytell and aren't real backstabbers (as in 1000 years alliance and then suddenly a blitz invasion)

And we don't know how it'll end on the real earth
Maybe a huge big class of civilization will happen at the same time as our first spaceshuttle reach alpa centauri 8)

[deity]

Originally posted by CyberShy
I think that people mix up 'diplogame' with 'peacefullgame'. Diplo game might end imho in a warfest as well. As long as we keep negotiation open. To me a diplogame is just normal civ, but the leaders behave like real leaders and talk and talk and storytell and storytell and aren't real backstabbers (as in 1000 years alliance and then suddenly a blitz invasion)

And we don't know how it'll end on the real earth
Maybe a huge big class of civilization will happen at the same time as our first spaceshuttle reach alpa centauri 8)

Like I said we discussed this at the end of HOTW4.

If the non contenders in space have no chance then they will create a stalemate war fest which means space never happens (boring). And hard to applaud a winner. SS victory is clearly defined as you stated before.

No civilisation will ever realistically dominate Earth via military means IMHO. It's a game players fantasy - reserved for normal civ games? I'm not sure but further discussion needed....

[Robert]

I was not there at the end of HOTW4 so I call the result of that discussion absolute

And I don't believe that it'll end in a stalemate.
For sure since I believe that in the end game civilizations should be allowed to be destroyed. And alliances can win a game. I'm in an alliance with India. If India wins the game and I have supported it, then I feel like I ended 2nd or 3rd. Which is a honorable position in a 9-player game.

I think in the end it'll be a match between 3 coalition. All coalitions have to find a mix between war and SS construction. Sounds fantastic to me.

[deity]

Yeah maybe, but my instinct says that if one civ is going to win via SS then other civs who can't are going to kill it, unless there are diplo guidelines or at least best practices.

The end game for diplos has never been thoroughly worked out so that's why I refer to the history of these discussions; and I therefore I pose an open question for all to discuss here and now.

I'm just thinking that perhaps, unlike a war game, the diplo genre of Civilisation may best be decided by SS, Cultural or Diplomatic victory for all the reasons Cyber stated earlier.

Few players have seen an MP game through to SS victory and it might be real fun to have a proper SS race.

But I'm not convinced of my own arguments yet either. War needs to play a part but not armageddon.

Difficult... HELP!!

[Robert]

America in our current game has no change to win anyway. My only change is to team up with a bigger civ and assist that civ by winning. There are more civs like America who need to team up with another civ to win.

The bigger civs can't win on their own. Even India, which is the biggest civ as we speak, won't be able to beat the rest of Terra in open war. Therefor there must be alliances. Of course, if the 'head of the alliance' wins, the honor goes firstly to that civ. But if India wins the space race and I have assisted India, then I feel like I won the game as well. Not on the same scale as India, but surely 2nd or 3rd place.

That's a real diplogame win, diplo-alliances play against each other. And there's of course no fun in being a part of a 4-6 civs alliance. Then you run the risk to still be the nr. 6.

Alliances have always been a part of our current game, and with more players alliances will be more and more important. Besides that, an alliance that still believes it can win the space race will not be eager to start a war. (as we've already seen in the German-American war)
Therefor open war will not break out before the last 2 or 3 SS-parts are finished. Then a very tense situation will appear in which the leading alliance only has to be able to defend the key cities long enough to finish the spaceship.

Maybe a smart rule is that only a 3-civ alliance can win the game. Out of a 4 civ alliance only the 3 best will be honored, the 4th civ will win nothing.
Of course we need a log of honor for the future as well that logs who are the winners (real winner, the civ that finished the space ship, 2nd /3rd place: allies of the winner).

[deity]

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62360

This is a link to a classic, if not the best Civ2 game I ever played. It was never defined as a diplo game but was played with much role playing and *****iness

Horse and I were at the peak of our dislike for each other. If you read it to the end (tell me if you do!!) you'll be well rewarded A good laugh.

ozzy, maybe add this link to the diplo game links?

[deity]

Yeah, I'm a fan of restricted alliance sizes Cyber and I agree on the team win.

Incidentally what techs did Omni gve you Cyber? He may not have been aware of the rule on techs - can't remember if we told him to only trade techs you learn?

[LzPrst]

Help is here. The wise and magnificent hermit will throw in his analytical contribution

We have 5 possible options.
1. Cultural.
2. Conquest.
3. Domination.
4. Diplomatic.
5. Time\score.
6. SS Victory.

In our case options 1, 2 and 3 will not be likely to happen.
That leaves, SS, Time, Diplo.

Noone is likely to give someone else the win in elections so I think we can exclude the Diplo option.
That leaves Time and SS.

A brief Story of Time
A Time Victory is in my opinion the least fulfilling. It ends with a loose thread, a sort of hanging in the air feeling that some movies have, you feel you've missed the great climax at the end. It rewards the civ that has the highest score, calculated in what I consider to be a somewhat unsatisfactory manner. The game has to end sometime and the time limit is that sometime. But the highest score alone is not a very fulfilling victory condition.

Stars and Wars
The Space race is a way for one civ (or several) to show their superiority in technology and production. However that the first to complete this effort wins the entire game instantly creates a few problems.

First it creates a space race. Not actually a problem in itself, but for those who cant participate it creates a dilemma. Those civs they must choose between sitting idly by and letting another civ win, or assisting that civ or another in the hope that they might get some shared credit. The last option for these civs is a long and brutal war between civs until either someone is wiped out or time runs out.

The Problem
The issue is the sudden death end of the game which will come with the full knowledge of all participants. Everyone wants to win, or be on the winning side, and knowing when and how the game will end will result in a desperate last minute no holds barred effort to prevent the leader from winning.

Very interesting as it is expected, but somewhat unrealistic perhaps. Will China nuke the US if they start colonizing Mars? Hardly. But they will probably demand that it be shared, as was the case with the South Pole. But what if the US refuses. What if they build military bases on the moon and in space and start colonizing Mars and eventually outer space, denying other nations access? Might not the result be war? This is not based on anything that has to do with realism, its merely a thought experiment. Might not a space lead exploited by some nations at the expense of others result in conflict? Perhaps it is not at all unseemly with a large endgame war following the wake of the space race. Perhaps the space race and the resulting tensions even wars is the natural and climactic end we desire?


Endgame
We dont know how or when the history of the greatest civ game of all time (human history) will end. I doubt it will end in 2050 (bad firaxis), but our game has to end sometime. Space race is a fairly good end compared to time victory imo.

However, there is a third option. An option not included in the ingame victories as the game is not really designed for the type of game we play.
A score based on other values than the game score. A vote made by the players on who has been the best player in several respects such as Diplomatic, Technological, Cultural, Storywise, Religious, and Military accomplishments throughout the game.

For example, each player gets 10 points to distribute on his fellow players divided in certain denominations for each category. (the total points would have to be modified for the number of players and the denominations as well, this is just an example, you get my idea).
Example.
Cultural Accomplishments: India 4, Spain 3, China 2, Russia 1.
Military Accomplishments: China 4, England 3, India 2, Russia 1.
Diplomatic Accomplishments: England 4, India 3, Spain 2, America 1.

Total score: India 9, England 7, China 6, Spain 5, etc
These are random numbers. The civ with the highest total score wins. In addition certain things will add to a civ's score. If a civ gets a space victory they will get say 5 extra points. If a civ accomplishes certain other efforts they will get additional extra points.

This system will be quite complex requiring quite an effort once the game has ended, but will result in a positioning based on a consensus total of who has been the best player overall. It will also result in a summary of the game reviewing the game in total.

Anyone interested?

[Robert]

I'm sorry LzPrst, but your last option is as unsatisfying as the time victory to me.
Not in the last place because it's impossible for us to make an objective choise.

Your most important reasons against a space race victory is that it's not realistic. Well, I'd say: **** realism, it's a game
And we do not know if China will nuke America if it's about to colonize Alpha Centauri since it didn't happen yet

[OzzyKP]

Lz, Frank proposed something like that here:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=4428909#post4428909

I think it is an option we should seriously discuss and consider. Since as Deity mentioned, there really hasn't been a diplogame with a satisfactory ending. Taking a vote might be the best way to do it. Maybe it's the only way to do it. It was suggested by someone at the ApolyCon workshop too.

It might be good too since it would give people a built in incentive to engage in diplomacy, and write good stories, and get involved militarily, etc. It would keep people's gameplay balanced as they try to excel in many different categories.

With the caveat that you can't vote for yourself I tenitively throw my support behind such a plan.

Some of the categories Lz proposed to vote for seem difficult to decide on a subjective vote. Like how do we decide who should win in the technology category? I think we should have votes for Diplomatic, Storywise, and Military accomplishments, as Lz outlined, and then have set points for the following categories/accomplishments:

Traditional victory options:
First to launch Spaceship - 10 points
In alliance with first to launch spaceship - 5 points
Winning diplomatic victory - 10 points
Longest time served as Secretary General - 5 points
Most proposed UN votes passed - 3
Highest population - 8 points
Highest land area - 8 points
Most wonders - 6 points
First to circumnavigate the globe - 3 points

Religion:
Founding a religion - 2 points
Builder of the most missionaries - 3 points
Founder of a religion with over 25% distribution - 5 points

Technology:
First to invent liberalism - 4 points
First to invent fusion - 4 points
First to invent economics - 4 points
First to invent physics - 4 points
First to invent music - 4 points

Culture:
Having the top cultural city - 5 points
Haivne the 2nd most cultural city - 4 points
Having the 3rd most cultural city - 3 point
Having the highest total culture - 6 points
City with legendary culture - 3 points

Plus as Lz said, all surviving players get 10 points to vote in the categories of diplomacy, storytelling, and military accomplishments that should be divided up into 4, 3, 2, 1 for who we think is 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th in that area.

I think this provides for a good mix of real victory acheivements, other in-game achievements, and rewards for meta concepts like war, diplomacy, and storytelling.

The game ends when either a spaceship or diplomatic victory is acheived in game. Then we go to the forum and tally up the points and take hte vote.

What do people think?

[Robert]

Like I said before, I think it's not a good idea to vote.
But if the majority wants to do it that way, then my comments are:

there are 2 much things you mention that should give victory points that already give in-game benefits, like circling the world, discover liberalism.

2nd this means that we have to do some bookkeeping.

3rd it removes some game elements since ie. voting for a UN resolution means that a player receives victory points. The UN will completely stop working in that case.
Not to mention that only 2 players are able to become SG o the UN. And the largest population civ already receives points for having the largest population.

In the end if we use such a score system then we need much time to decide on a ballanced score system. It's not easy to come with a good score system.

I stick with my:
1 winner
(max) 2 co-winenrs
the rest are losers.

Determined by an in-game winner and it's allies. (where the in-game winner says who are the 2 co-winners)
It's simple, it's easy, it's perfect, it keeps civ civ.

[OzzyKP]

And I know Capo and others may think this will unnecessarily complicate the game, but all of these things are goals we all go for anyways, this idea just makes them a factor for victory. Plus areas like diplomacy, storytelling & war that are all essential parts of any diplogame anyways. I don't think the character of the game would change much, just that we'd hopefully have a more satisfying ending.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by CyberShy
there are 2 much things you mention that should give victory points that already give in-game benefits, like circling the world, discover liberalism.

I did that on purpose. These are already goals that people strive for naturally, so they should be rewarded for it. We wouldn't want to assign points for having the most colleseums, or the first to invent horseback riding, since that would give people unnatural goals they wouldn't have gone for otherwise.

Originally posted by CyberShy 2nd this means that we have to do some bookkeeping.

It shouldn't be too difficult, and the pay off is worth it.

Originally posted by CyberShy 3rd it removes some game elements since ie. voting for a UN resolution means that a player receives victory points. The UN will completely stop working in that case.
Not to mention that only 2 players are able to become SG o the UN. And the largest population civ already receives points for having the largest population.

Well we can tweak the system I suggested to avoid circumstances like that.

[Robert]

I'm currently trying to install the SDK btw. I hope I'll be able to learn the programming. If I'll be able to shortly learn how to change stuff then I know that it'll hook me up and I'll be able to do everything in the end.
If it'll be difficult for me to get things going I might lose interest.

I have some knowledge about myself 8)