Would you like to play a game??

[Bloody Monk]

Let's see if there any interest in a Succession Game with minimal restraints. That way maybe some new players will join in the fun.

Suggested ruleset:
1 No reloading bad outcomes
2 No peeking at the map or other uses of the cheat menu
3 Maintain a Spotless or Honorable Reputation (If someone screws up they should pass and let that game save be played by another.)
4 Just about anything else (that is not an obvious 'cheat') is allowed. So go ahead and rehome vans, click around in the black, open huts, use helper programs.
5 Deity, 7 civs, raging hordes, restart dead civs, v2.42
6 Have fun and hopefully learn something

Format--FreeForAll...Everyone but the last player eligible to call the ball and control the game for 48 hrs.

Objective-- To Win!!...by Early Landing

I recommend an Early Launch Game, just because that seems to be an area that generates more questions and discussion. If that is what folk want, I have a very nice map that can be used. Very small, based on a thread idea from defrancoj, last Oct, it is 35X40. It has all seven Civs on multiple land masses, so offshore trading will be in order.

If there is interest I will post the save.

The Players:

Elephant
atomant
rjmatsleepers
Sharkbait
dunnm
Stu
StuporMan
Ecthy

Anyone with Classic v2.42 is invited to drop in for a turn or to provide RCC.

The initial save can be found in post #23.

Monk

[Addled Platypus]

Civ2 MGE need any patches?


have not played this in a looonngg while

[Bloody Monk]

The save I had in mind is v2.42. We'll have to all play the same version or some folk will not be able to open the save.

Monk

[atomant]

objective: to win?

[Bloody Monk]

Originally posted by atomant
objective: to win?

Yes, Sir Ant, but how?? By Landing or by Conquest.

Should we play a one dimensional War Game or a multi-faceted Landing Game wherein the cities are allowed to develop into a Civilization that is something more than a collection of dirtholes?? Not that I have a preference...

Also, didn't mention that dead Civs are set to regenerate.

Even though the original save might be v2.42, if everyone would rather play MGE, the game is readable by the Gold version. Folk should state which versions they have so we can reach a consensus.

Alternatively, if we don't get enough players for a Succession Game, we could each play a given number of turns and then post, compare and discuss. This might generate some opportunities to rethink how and why, and in what order, we do things.

Monk

[atomant]

Originally posted by Bloody Monk


Yes, Sir Ant, but how?? By Landing or by Conquest.


Monk

Yes.

Seriously though, I usually play conquest but don't actually attack anyone till after I discover advanced flight (it is one of my odd querks). I figure I can land on another planet 'after' I conquer the world. Got to do something after tea right?

So I am open either landing or conquest. Landing is good for me as I don't play that style that often. Or (just to throw a spanner in the works) how about most points or highest score?

I agree about regenerating dead civs and prefer not to play on flat maps (but will do if that is what the concensus is....

Any version of the game is good for me.

Cheers....

[rjmatsleepers]

I don't play much Civ II these days, but put me down for a turn - 2.42, win by landing. Oh and allow honerable if you must, but I'd prefer spotless.

RJM

[Sharkbait]

I'd be keen for a slice of the action. v2.42 and spotless with landing.

[dunnm]

I would be interested but I have played a conquest game with the save BM refers to. It was last year or early this though so my map knowledge has probably completely faded

If I am allowed to join I would prefer spotless

[Bloody Monk]

Originally posted by dunnm
I would be interested but I have played a conquest game with the save BM refers to. It was last year or early this though so my map knowledge has probably completely faded

If I am allowed to join I would prefer spotless

Welcome dunnm and well met. Everyone is welcome to play, no experience necessary. So now there are 4 and the game should be Spotless and v2.42, yes??

Since I have played this map already, I should not take any turns. Part of my interest is seeing how others will develop the game. I hadn't played since I got so sick a few years ago and there was much that I was fuzzy about. Also, I couldn't manage more than an hour at a time, if that, so I never developed a rhythm. Thus, I feel sure my Landing date is beatable. I had a Spotless Landing ~ 1200A. (Even if the Succession Game doesn't make, I hope someone, or ones, will take up the game, as a challenge so I can get a comparison.)

To have a smooth, continuous Succession Game, w/o long delays between turnsets, it will take at least 6 folk, so two more are needed, four would be even better. That assumes a set roster. Or it could be a free for all with only the last to play ineligible.

Monk

[Bloody Monk]

@ atomant

how about most points or highest score?

I remember playing a high score game once, ONCE!! And for sure, once is enough. At the end it becomes so mind numbing boring with turns that never end. So, I would not recommend that course.

@ dunnm

I would be interested but I have played a conquest game with the save BM refers to. It was last year or early this though so my map knowledge has probably completely faded

This is a diffferent map, dunnm, so no problem.

That map had many good points but this one adds the attraction of Civs on multiple land masses which sets up for some very nice trade bonuses.

I am glad to hear someone else played that map. How did you do?? I played it both ways, with a Landing in 1685 with only one, size one AI city left. It was so much fun to be playing again, but I don't think my "game" is up to what it used to be.

Monk

[Elephant]

I'm in - I can play Classic/2.42 easiest, but I have MGE too, just have to find the CD again. For Landing Classic may be better, as you can maintain an alliance with an AI civ in Classic much easier than in MGE. I prefer SG's Free For All style, with just the last player out and "call the ball" for say 48 hours at a time. That should allow playing and writing up a sufficiently humorous log...

Perhaps we should limit maximum number of cities we build/capture too?

[fed1943]

I would play, if it was DG,not SG.

So,if someday you decide to play a SPDG count me in,please.

Best regards,

[Bloody Monk]

Okay, Elephant makes five. Since you mentioned this idea before in another thread I was pretty sure you would opt in.

My inclination is to avoid further restrictions, but the players might want to discuss a city limit or any other restriction...before the game starts. I will edit any new limits into the first post so they will be easy to find as the game proceeds.

Monk

[Bloody Monk]

Originally posted by fed1943
I would play, if it was DG,not SG.

So,if someday you decide to play a SPDG count me in,please.

Best regards,

Hello, fed1943!!

I'm guessing that 'DG' means Democracy Game, yes?? There hasn't been much interest in DG for quite some time. But SG has great merit, too. Why don't you lurk about and if you decide later that you want to play a turnset, feel free. And of course, kibitzing, suggestions, and constructive criticism are always in order.

Monk