The Imagination Factor

[Derek]

Part of the draw of Civ that makes us come back to it again and again, is believing that we are actually the masters of our own civilization. Calling every shot, we can shape the way we would want our own utopia.

Some of the things I find myself doing in the game actually go against my chances to win it. But I do them anyway because of the roleplaying aspect to it. It adds so much more to the game when you're immersed in it and are actually imagining yourself to be the omniscient leader of your tribe.

If Civ had an "alignment" or class to it, I'd be a Paladin or a Lord. I would want my Civ to be an honorable and fair tribe. Nice guys shouldn't finish last.

Some of the things I do to add to the enjoyment of this role:

-Never sneak attack anyone, even though by the end of the game the AI is sneak attacking like crazy
-Always stick by treaties
-I like to keep my continents aesthetically pleasing, even though I could throw railroads all over to get a bonus, or chop down forests, I won't, I couldn't imagine what my cities would look like with all their natural resources stripped. One strip of railroad between cities and that's it. I especially hate it when the AI turns continents into one big railroad.
-Only use nukes under cover of SDI and when provoked
-I'll always leave each opposing civ one city left. I feel like in real life that it's differences that make everyone stronger, and that different cultures teach us new things and that we can always learn from a civilization we make think is "primitive."

I've never played multiplayer so I'm not sure how I would do it there.

What kind of quirks does everybody have? Anybody else enjoy this roleplaying aspect of the game?

[finbar]

Nice stuff, D. You might run into trouble on MP with players who aren't quite so ... aesthetically and honorably inclined.

------------------
finbar
Mono Rules!
#33984591

[klesh]

Derek,

I too enjoy the feeling of glory associated with the rigors of leadership. I try my hardest to prevent what will most certainly be the fall of mankind....nuclear war. My last game I had to destroy the Manhattan Project production in no less than 7 diffenent enemy cities. I sabotaged a few with spys, bombed then paradroped a few, and good ol' howied a few. I never let the nukes get built, I try to save humanity this way.
I always wished that when you had a nation down to one city, that they would hand themselves over to be ruled by such a glorious ruler. That would boost the ego.
I wish there was a way to get the alliances to mean more too. But another thing I do is to put "New" in front of every captured city, to reflect the change in leadership. It messes up telling where units are supported from, as they all end up being NEW units, but it is fun to rule over the conqured lands. I also have a tendancy to name the clusters of my units....Army Group North, 7th Royal Fleet, 107th Cavalry ect. It's fun to order"8th Armored move into Persipolis!"

[Derek]

Thanks fellas.

Yeah I do the naming of battle groups too! Also I will identify fronts. Usually I try to keep my advance on one front, but by the end of the game it's impossible because it's 3-6 civs against you at once!

The most dramatic part of the game is to establish a "bridgehead" on an enemy continent and hold it. Then the march inland is just icing on the cake.

Using the "spy corps" in all sorts of intriguing missions is alot of fun too.

[poppawoppa]

I agree it looks weird to see railroads in every square: I too tend to set one rail line between cities...so once in a while I do get stymied when a different civs caravan is parked on MY railroad However, I do find that railroaded parking lots give my troops a lot of possible ways to get around in the enemy territory...he he he.

Derek, Even when the AI has declared war on me from 3 different sides...West East and North, I find they attack so badly (just one or two or three units rush in against my city) that it isn't any great problem defending from 3 attack angles...in fact, I usually try to attack them on two or more areas at a turn, so the AI doesn't get time to send all it's defense to the one attack point. Guess maybe I ought to attack in one area, then the next turn, attack another area, so the AI would get even more confused.

[Alexander's Horse]

Yes but Derek, horses don't have imagination. So much for your theory


------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Off Topic (PROT)

[Rathgar1]

I also will use my imagination to stimulate gameplay. I will sometimes name my Flagships, particularly the Aircraft Carrier. When I am not feeling too Imperialistic(In that I don't feel the need to destroy all who don't bow before me...) I only make a handful of Carriers, and surround them by support Craft. In most Games I tend to enter battle with several AI's despite my peaceful intentions.
Then my strike Groups, led by the USS Enterprise and USS Independence, control the Seas. I almost always play the USA, and play with similar strategies. Control the Air, and control the Seas. In a relitively peaceful game I will place Cruisers around the enemy ports, to keep tabs on all ships. I absolutely HATE when the AI Sneak attacks Islands that are out of the way.
I am also reluctant to use Nukes. Their benefits are outweighed by their terrible cost. The pollution never gets cleaned up quickly enough. But once they nuke me, or (Heaven Forbid)take some of my unsuspecting cities, all bets are off. I strike back with the fury of God's own thunder!

[Hodad]

I also identify fronts and love making battle units... specially naval. I love a tidy navy.
I am such a pacifist that many times I overlook enemy espionage so as not to get into a war.
I NEVER sneak attack, they attack first.
However, I find roads untidy, so all my city using squares are railroaded, but only the ones used by cities and the odd strip connecting distant ones.
Another thing I love is looking for little islands off the mainland where my enemies are and establish military outposts where I usually dock my giant navies and have an airport to transport freights easily.
I hate going to war unless as a last resource.
But I am a spy-loving communist... he! he!

[My Wife Hates CIV]

This is why I still like SP over MP. Now MP is a better game as far as humans over AI. With the AI it's a more relaxing fun game. Against humans it's too stressful. Every turn has to count to the max. When the AI attacks it's like, oh... ok, whatever.

Besides, MP is just to darn slow.

[Fiji]

I like to make a distinction between my "native" cities and my "colonial" cities.
both terms are rather flexible.
my native cities are the cities on my homecontinet and often the islands/continets that are reachable by trireme.
All my other cities are colonies.
the diffrence is in the names.
my native cities are all named after real life Flemish cities, the others are named after real life ethnic groups (when playing on a random map; excluding the ethnics groups who match rival civs), the once closest to Belgium first or the real life contry they would be in (when playing on earth). yes, this means I rename all captured cities, but only after I've secured them.

[mindseye]

Thank you, thank you Derek!

After reading so many posts about hair-splitting OCC tactics and ways to work around the edges of the game logic to pump up your score, I thought I must be the only Civ2 fan who consistantly loses because I become so immersed in the drama of "leading my people"! For me, that's what keeps me coming back to the game - it's not only challenging, but the personal involvement in the drama of the unfolding of history is so addictive!

I routinely commit terrible "mistakes" like wasting massive amounts of resources to "rescue" a city which has fallen into the hands of a treacherous invader. Who cares about my "score" - a city is occupied, my people enslaved!

I also see I'm not the only one who would give anything to have the game allow the naming of warships (and spaceships)! If my civilization only manages to build one or two major ships, they SHOULD have names!

Thanks for your note!

[toofergo]

I find the role playing aspect interesting. Myself, I play as if I was a "polite" organized crime boss. (Drop into your favorite movie voice here.) I'm a businessman. I protect my territory. If I offer someone a good deal they join me. You gotta problem with that?

I'm a peaceful man, my people like it that way. But you mess with my people, I gotta protect them. And I gotta teach you a lesson until you learn proper respect. You don't learn proper respect, you ain't gonna be around for Alpha Centurai, see?

Translation: I play under Democracy, bribe like a madman, get the other guy to declare war, take a city or three, accept truce/peace offers, consolidate and repeat the process.

[Fiji]

I dislike pre-emptive strikes, so i only attack civs who have wronged me in some way (attacked me, allied with an enemy, sent units into my lands)
basically, 1 attack in 3600BC provides me with an excuse to stomp them for 6000 year.
but as the game progresses, there is sometimes an anoying civ who is nice to me (indians mostly)!!! at that point "wronged" becomes a flexible concept ... "that cavalry got to close (3 spaces from my border city) ... it's war."
kinda like Modernday russia ... i'll be nice to you until i get fed up with you

[OzzyKP]

You guys who like the imagination faction should try Diplogaming online. It is a style of MP Civ2 play that focuses much on imagination and roleplaying.

[Shaka Naldur]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
You guys who like the imagination faction should try Diplogaming online. It is a style of MP Civ2 play that focuses much on imagination and roleplaying.

weren´t you a little bored?
this thread it was done before i registered