Ancient Empires #2

[ISeeALL]

Ok, I made the turn. Both in revolution now. Smashed some barbs near Sparta.

Just give me any techs as gifts. The science output is so low that I can't research anything all the same.

[Peaster]

Originally posted by Bostero
I hope we can share this site, and build a super-strong civ2 community

Yeah, me too! Maybe the next step towards this dream will occur when some Poly and EVO people play in the SAME PBEM together. (Hint Hint).

[RobRoy]

Minoans: 1 slave raid, cost a unit. Made peace with the Egyptians, again. Ensured that Minoans are STILL "worshipful" to the Egyptians, again. The attitude you see must be adjusted from the one I set by some AI algorithms; Egypt is also "receptive" according to the Minoan screen. Wanna try "allied"? Maybe we can do a teleport exploit...I'm still missing why they are so egregious, just a quicker way home. I've never even bothered with them much.

Events: Got ANOTHER storm message. Was going too fast, but I THINK it was another Zagros one, rather than a desert one. Don't see anything wrong with Hittites; did anyone suffer mysterious casualties this turn? Third one in the game, so far...too frequent? or just some bad luck?

Hittites: Barb alert! New horde just outside a newish Hittite city. Sea People bypass a vulnerable city and appear headed toward defended capital. Did another round of map trades with everyone but the Babs, who still aren't "worshipful".

Originally posted by Peaster
Maybe the next step towards this dream will occur when some Poly and EVO people play in the SAME PBEM together. (Hint Hint).

Minoans? Hittites? Maybe the Assyrians or Greeks?

Originally posted by ISeeALL
Just give me any techs as gifts. The science output is so low that I can't research anything all the same.

All available tech already gifted, but one. Let me know if/when you want that last one (set science rate to zero if you want to try to avoid Bronze Working and/or Navigation).

Originally posted by Peaster
I have also enjoyed this fast test game. But with all the experimenting, "cheating" and mistakes, I can't take it very seriously and can't promise that it will hold my interest much longer. I wouldn't mind giving Egypt to someone else, though, if people want to play further than I do.

I don't think anyone would really want to continue if people are losing interest. But I have this sense that stopping is an admission that we may never get seven. I suppose it might be an option to start a "real" game with the 4-6 we have (assuming we can agree on things like time limits and house rules). BTW, is "cheating" a reference to all the exploits we're engaging in? Or has some behavior been truly inappropriate?

Originally posted by Peaster
...And I thought you were the anti-exploit guy!

Not at all, I'm the anti-house rules guy. I just think its inconsistent to ban the cheaper, quicker, easier to use/understand exploits, while allowing/encouraging cumbersome, time-consuming, complex exploits that are just as "bad" or worse. If we ban fairly simple things, such as van rehoming (which isn't really that bad, IMHO) because trade is perceived as "too powerful" , we really should ban things like avoiding techs designed to bring trade levels back into line, planning city placement based on Hides availability, taking advantage of unit gifting to artificially speed up/enhance trade, perhaps even some of the trade micromanagement tricks designed to open up supply and demand slots.

The area in which I'm ambivalent are the truly scenario-specific and/or one-time things, like the BW avoidance. As you've just experienced, if someone screws up or misses their window of opportunity or comes into a game late, it's gonna feel "unfair". I suspect that would limit their subsequent enjoyment of the game. Other exploits are generally equal opportunity for all players/times/places. To me, house rules should be more about scenario flavor and handicaps than trying to pick out which exploits are more egregious than others ('cause, hey, opinions are gonna differ).

Originally posted by Peaster
I think you may be taking this test game a bit too seriously!

I guess that means the Levant is all Hittite! I'll fill it with purdy white cities. Maybe even a purple one or two...

Platy, y'all are up

[ISeeALL]

Originally posted by RobRoy
All available tech already gifted, but one. Let me know if/when you want that last one (set science rate to zero if you want to try to avoid Bronze Working and/or Navigation).

I see. Yeah, right at the moment Bronze Working would be a burden. Maybe I'll need it when barbs are dealt with.

[Peaster]

Originally posted by RobRoy
The attitude you see must be adjusted from the one I set by some AI algorithms; Egypt is also "receptive" according to the Minoan screen. Wanna try "allied"? Maybe we can do a teleport exploit...I'm still missing why they are so egregious, just a quicker way home. I've never even bothered with them much.

I guess you are right about the adjustment; Egypt has been worshipful to all known civs for several turns (at least on the Egyptian F3 screen). Yes, let's try "allied".

I have never succeeded at F3 giving, and am not sure how it works, so this example is just from my imagination. But suppose Egypt wants to send lots of vans to Central Asia, with Persian help.

1) Egypt builds a city "FarCity" near CA, and a boat there.
2) Egypt gives a Memphis van to Persia, which teleports to Ecbatana.
3) Persia gives the van back to Egypt. It teleports to FarCity.
4) Egypt delivers the van to CA for a quick huge profit.
5) Repeat steps 2-4.

I imagine teleporting could also be used for emergency defense of an empty city, etc. But the main problem seems to be that F3-giving usually doesn't work.

Events: Got ANOTHER storm message. Was going too fast, but I THINK it was another Zagros one, rather than a desert one. Don't see anything wrong with Hittites; did anyone suffer mysterious casualties this turn? Third one in the game, so far...too frequent? or just some bad luck?

I guess 3 is not too much. The storms are probably intended to balance the game, maybe since the central civs get more hut acccess and fewer sea barbs.

Hittites: Barb alert! New horde just outside a newish Hittite city. Sea People bypass a vulnerable city and appear headed toward defended capital.

The Hittites deserve some fun with barbies, too. I have not decided how to deal with the Sea People unit in Egypt, which is probably NOT heading towards a Palace Guard. Maybe 2 Battering Rams could defeat it ? City walls plus lots of spearmen ?

Minoans? Hittites? Maybe the Assyrians or Greeks?

Whatever works. My point was that very few EVO players have joined Poly PBEMs and vice-versa. Not sure why. I played one PBEM at EVO, and Bostero is/was playing a small one here, but those are the only examples I know of.

I don't think anyone would really want to continue if people are losing interest. But I have this sense that stopping is an admission that we may never get seven. I suppose it might be an option to start a "real" game with the 4-6 we have (assuming we can agree on things like time limits and house rules). BTW, is "cheating" a reference to all the exploits we're engaging in? Or has some behavior been truly inappropriate?

Yeah, IIRC we've had 9 players here at different times, but have never had 7 at the same time. About the test game, it can go on as long as 2 players are having fun. Just saying I don't plan to switch from "very casual" to "competitive" and I don't commit to playtesting indefinitely. By "cheating" I meant innocent exploits, quick F3's, peeking at the other civs, playing ahead, etc - none of this bothers me at all, of course.

Not at all, I'm the anti-house rules guy. I just think its inconsistent to ban the cheaper, quicker, easier to use/understand exploits, while allowing/encouraging cumbersome, time-consuming, complex exploits that are just as "bad" or worse. If we ban fairly simple things, such as van rehoming (which isn't really that bad, IMHO) because trade is perceived as "too powerful" , we really should ban things like avoiding techs designed to bring trade levels back into line, planning city placement based on Hides availability, taking advantage of unit gifting to artificially speed up/enhance trade, perhaps even some of the trade micromanagement tricks designed to open up supply and demand slots.

OK - I understand a bit better. I don't mind lots of simple house rules (eg "no van rehoming" is simple), but I don't see simple solutions to the exploits you list. For example, how can you stop someone from building cities that make Hides ?

The area in which I'm ambivalent are the truly scenario-specific and/or one-time things, like the BW avoidance. As you've just experienced, if someone screws up or misses their window of opportunity or comes into a game late, it's gonna feel "unfair". I suspect that would limit their subsequent enjoyment of the game. Other exploits are generally equal opportunity for all players/times/places. To me, house rules should be more about scenario flavor and handicaps than trying to pick out which exploits are more egregious than others ('cause, hey, opinions are gonna differ).

In a case like BW, I'd have to ask, which is worse - the exploit or the rule to fix it ? IMO the BW tech is not a game-killer, and the methods to avoid it are not so bad either. But if someone has a simple helpful house rule, I'll say OK.

[Addled Platypus]

play on here as well

not much to report, tried to gift tech...was asked not to waste their time

http://apolyton.net/upload/view.php?file=22570_sa_b3160.hot

[RobRoy]

Originally posted by Peaster
Yes, let's try "allied".

K, let's see if that does anything...obviously Minoans will have to initiate.

Originally posted by Peaster
I have never succeeded at F3 giving, and am not sure how it works, so this example is just from my imagination. But suppose Egypt wants to send lots of vans to Central Asia, with Persian help.

1) Egypt builds a city "FarCity" near CA, and a boat there.
2) Egypt gives a Memphis van to Persia, which teleports to Ecbatana.
3) Persia gives the van back to Egypt. It teleports to FarCity.
4) Egypt delivers the van to CA for a quick huge profit.
5) Repeat steps 2-4.

hmmm...I'm missing something. As I understand it, the F3 gifts in SP or hotseat would be NONE homed. So the caravan delivered would establish a route and give the one-time bonus for the closest city..."FarCity". So it's just the same as building a van in "FarCity" in the first place.

Where gifts start to look more abusive is in standard MP diplomacy. If I were to gift a Caravan in Knossos or Kydonia to Egypt. It would stay put, you'd deliver it and the route/bonus would be based on the closest Egyptian city (maybe not the capital, but proabably a sizeable core city). It's only in Civ2Dip, if I understand it correctly, that the units keep their home. So there, the van example you set forth would be more cheesy, since the home would be Memphis. But the abuse would come as much or more from the oddity in its home as from the teleporting.

Originally posted by Peaster
OK - I understand a bit better. I don't mind lots of simple house rules (eg "no van rehoming" is simple), but I don't see simple solutions to the exploits you list. For example, how can you stop someone from building cities that make Hides ?

Right, you can't. There aren't simple solutions. My other point, though is that by banning the simpler exploits, you encourage/reward the more complex ones. But who's really going to bother to micro-manage trade to such a degree if they can achieve the same bang more easily via re-homing? (note: NOT a BIGGER bang, at all, but the SAME bang) You're more than encouraging trade micro-management, though, you're practically mandating it, since you know some of the other players have the time/inclination to do it. Frankly, I'd feel a tad resentful being motivated to build cities around Hides production when I'd much rather place them according to personal preferences, historical antecedents, strategic position, spacing for optimal growth, or just plain aesthetics.

There's no good fix to the BW exploit, unless you impose more house rules (e.g., the restriction that you can't get any of the dependent techs). And no, it's not a game-killer. No exploit really is, IMHO (hence my reticence to ban any, so quickly). That one just bugs me a bit more than others, 'cause it's so easy to screw it up, and it's such a limited window. I'd hate to come into a game as a sub for a civ that accepted BW when some/most opponents managed to avoid it.

Yeah, Platy posted as I wrote. Peaster's up!

[Peaster]

RobRoy - "As I understand it, the F3 gifts in SP or hotseat would be NONE homed."

OK. In that case, I can't imagine abuses with vans (and if van rehoming were illegal then F3 van gifts would have to be, too). But we'd need some rule requiring prompt homing of these NONE units. And what about a war situation... couldn't an entire army be moved across the map in 1-2 turns this way ?

Not sure about your BANG rk. IMO rehoming vans from lots of hides cities to a STC would give much bigger profits than in Game #1, and this would encourage the same kinds of micromanagement ... or worse. No?

But with all the barbs we are seeing in our test game, it's not clear that heavy trade is even going to be possible.

Egypt: Business as usual - except for those annoying Sea People. The original horde has not visibly dwindled, but it is clearly under control.

ISeeAll - you are up!

[Straybow]

Yes, an entire army can be moved (and made NONE) with F3 gifting = reason for disallowing it entirely.

[ISeeALL]

Both Persians and Greeks now enjoy monarchy. Nothing important to report.

[Bostero]

Originally posted by Peaster
Yeah, me too! Maybe the next step towards this dream will occur when some Poly and EVO people play in the SAME PBEM together. (Hint Hint).

Hello Steve!
As you see we have decided to move here!. hope we don't have caused nothing terrible for you guys in the process.

we are willing to cooperate together in order to build friendship, and good challenges!

you mention about a new Pbem... sure. i'm here to participate. i can take a civ. i guess.
also RobBoys showed himself very enthusiastic. Hope the rest of the people, too.

[Peaster]

Bostero (Dario) - Very good! Of course, EVO players are welcome here. We are glad to see more action at Poly!

I will sign you up for Game #2. We MIGHT be ready to start now - if we can get 2 out 3 maybe's to say "yes" [ST, Straybow and Eurisko]. Feel free to join the rules discussions in this thread. You can also join this test game if you want some practice with the scen - you can play Egypt for me, if you want.

[academia]

hi everyone!
i´m one of the inmigrants from evo
nevertheless, i used to play pbmes here like two years ago...

as dario said, i hope we don´t disturb you here guys, and work together to create a bigger civ2 pbem community.

moreover, i invite you to check some of our pbems... we need some players there, so you are all welcome to join them

cheers!

[RobRoy]

Minoans: 1 Slave Raid. Egypt are no longer our bitter enemies, but our faithful allies.

Hittites: 1 Slave Raid. Traded maps with everyone but the Babs, who now seem to be at war with me. Set up Tyre, intending to test whether a primo STC will really outperform modest trade micro-management.

If I continue playing both, Minoans will not rehome 'vans...Hittites will... Neither are trying to maximize Hides production, though. Minoans will probably do some modest manipulation to open up trade slots on occasion.

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
tried to gift tech...was asked not to waste their time

Could this explain the fact that the Hittites and Babylonians are now at war? Set the Babs to "worshipful" and we can get back to peace and I can include you in the incremental map exchanges I've been doing the last few turns.

Originally posted by Peaster
...But we'd need some rule requiring prompt homing of these NONE units. And what about a war situation... couldn't an entire army be moved across the map in 1-2 turns this way ?

Yes, if this is really viable, we'd need to restrict it. Not clear to me that it is viable. And not clear that teleported units would really be moved someplace useful. But wouldn't simply banning unit gifting eliminate the possibility of these and many other exploits?

Originally posted by Straybow
Yes, an entire army can be moved (and made NONE) with F3 gifting...

In theory, perhaps... But I ask again: have you or anybody been able to consistently, successfully use F3 (not as part of a MP diplomacy session) to unit gift? In a MP session, they wouldn't be teleported, IIRC. We were frankly surprised that we were able to do it at all. But it has been so oddly inconsistent as to be useless and not worth the worry. And the odd side-effect (granting the "special" tech to the recipient) makes the whole thing even more problematic.

Originally posted by Peaster
Not sure about your BANG rk. IMO rehoming vans from lots of hides cities to a STC would give much bigger profits than in Game #1, and this would encourage the same kinds of micromanagement ... or worse. No?

But with all the barbs we are seeing in our test game, it's not clear that heavy trade is even going to be possible.

Don't forget, the one-time bonus has a max, based on number of techs you have. Careful manipulation of supply and demand, freeing up slots, etc., can generally get you that max without having to rehome, at least in SP. But I find that approach incredibly tedious. If you focus on building/growing Hides cities, you only have to manipulate demand, which is a bit easier. But it all feels cheesy to me. A super trade city approach strikes me as less abusive, to be frank. And it's a whole lot simpler, quicker, and less likely to result in odd city placements. In the late game, if you ever got that far, the STC non-demanded yields might outstrip the demanded yields of "average" cities. But, it's pretty marginal compared to the increase in trade bonus that you get by avoiding BW (or lack of decrease, I should say). So, I reiterate that it seems questionable to ban the one (van rehoming) while allowing the others.

Yes, the barbies are liable to change the trade dynamic in ways we haven't fully appreciated, yet. 'Vans and improvements will continue to be vulnerable even if cities can be preserved. That's one of the reasons I want to continue the test. I hope and suspect that the increased risk and vulnerability would add a lot to the game. Protecting Caravans would suddenly become a useful occupation for military units. And trade, in general, might shrink, relative to the other game.

Originally posted by Peaster
... sure. i'm here to participate. i can take a civ...

Peaster, I assume you're better able to double check with Straybow and ST? THIS COULD BE #7!! Or Paliologus, are you properly settled and ready to return? Maybe we can REALLY start arguing about house rules!

If they're still ambivalent, Bostero, or in the meantime, take your pick and we'll continue the test. Easiest might be to take either the Hittites or the Minoans. I doubt ISeeALL would mind getting rid of the Greeks. And Platy only recently inherited the Assyrians, so he might not mind you taking them, either. But can you guys confirm that these are candidates? Or are you attached to these and would prefer to offer up your other ones (Persia and Babylon)? Peaster offered the Egyptians, but he's only got the one and I'd prefer to torture him and force him to continue.

Originally posted by academia
i hope we don´t disturb you here guys, and work together to create a bigger civ2 pbem community.

moreover, i invite you to check some of our pbems... we need some players there, so you are all welcome to join them

The more the merrier, certainly! My own free time tends towards feast/famine, so I wouldn't want to commit to too much. I could probably sub if I've played the scenario before. But some of the thread titles imply you're only looking for veteran EVO players?

Platy, you're up! And is either civ a candidate for Bostero, if he'd like it?

[Bostero]

re:

@steve:

i'll take command of a civ if we start a new one. go ahead testing this one as long as you want.
play egypt!!
no rush, we are just meeting each other.



@Robroy:

we are tunning things and contacting the old players from Evo that still need to show up!. asimilition is a slow procedure.