Victory Conditions

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
Toss out some Ideas like.
5 points for every tech.
20 points for every wonder.
50 points for taking an enemy capital
20 points for taking an enemy city.
5 point for every 100 gold
1 point for every pop point.
1 point for every military unit.

By next year, I'm sure we'll come up with something.

I got a better idea, how about actually playing a second session to see who wins

[rah]

Yea yea yea, stating the obvious again.

Try being a little more useful smartass.

What things do you think should be counted for points towards a victory. It would be fun to have more sense of closure after a one seesion game.

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
Yea yea yea, stating the obvious again.

Try being a little more useful smartass.

What things do you think should be counted for points towards a victory. It would be fun to have more sense of closure after a one seesion game.

If me and you are ahead in a game when it ends chances are we would win. If someone like barono is ahead in session one chances are they wouldn't be in the second session. Session 1 is heavilly based on luck and starting position where as session 2+ is mostly about skill. In my experience the person with the most infustructure wins in the long run.

[rah]

As long as you can keep it. That's the one thing that might not be recognized when a session ends. Your forces may be just ready to move out. While infrastructure will help you respond quickly, it doesn't always allow you to stop something if enough is coming at you.

RAH

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
As long as you can keep it. That's the one thing that might not be recognized when a session ends. Your forces may be just ready to move out. While infrastructure will help you respond quickly, it doesn't always allow you to stop something if enough is coming at you.

RAH

Early 2x is a defensive game, your virtually unattackable. I don't care if you send 50 crusaders at me you won't get a single city (unless you use ships) If you have units that move 2 squares inside the city you can just move them out and kill any attackers.

Once railroads are discovered the only defence is offence. And if you don't pay attention you could lose 15-20 cities a turn to a well planed attack.

[rah]

The moving fortress up the river/road can be very useful early in 2x games.

Or that mountain square that's two squares away from the city can also be a great attack point. Having a horse or chariot in a city can't defend against that.

[markusf]

Originally posted by rah
The moving fortress up the river/road can be very useful early in 2x games.

Or that mountain square that's two squares away from the city can also be a great attack point. Having a horse or chariot in a city can't defend against that.

saying it and doing it are 2 different things

[Hydey]

In alot of games someone gets the dream start and the winner is clear enough, other games are closer and should be saved and continued if you want a winner, if winning or losing is that important to find out.

It would be very hard to find a system of scoring that doesn't involve changing your gamestyle . eg build 200 warriors to get points for military units, I would hate to play a game where for the last 10 turns someone does that and is declared the winner.

[Deity Dude]

Another problem with the point system is what about teh person who is one turn away from building the wonder or getting the key tech that allows the window for an attack.

I'm with Markus on this one - play a second session. I know that isn,t always possible but it never even seems to be discussed in the RAH games I've played.

[Flatlander Fox]

I'm up for continuing games, but how much fun is it to continue a game (Second session) when you are losing?

The obvious answer is none, but you would be suprised at how comebacks are possible.

The problem is (I've this stated before) is that the really good players won't let a guy up after he is down.

If you continue games, you would have to change the rules that many play by now. Makeshift alliances, tech trading after a certain date, and other measures can be taken to increase the fun for the "losers" who seem to tag along in the evening games.

I would like to get a continuing game going, because no one has seen me in my full glory as a mid-game manager!

As markus said (I'm agreeing with Markus ) it's all about the luck of the start with good players. Some players, myself included, can f**k up a good thing quite quickly, but a better player won't. And if that better player doesn't blow it, he is in the driver's seat for the game.

Now to contradict myself entirely, I really don't care if there is a "winner". I like the game, the challenge of playing good MP players, and the little squares surrounded by darkness at the beginning of the game. As long as I am competitive, and stay away from the big boys who like to pick on me, I'll keep playing.

[War4ever]

well often it becomes a duel with what feels like a bothersome ai in the game.....

you need three of the four playrs to be somewhat close....when the advantage is huge there can feel like little point..

also with the ever revolving door of playrs....its hard to get the same group all the time

[rah]

That's probably the biggest problem. When you have 7-8 regulars, the odds of the exact same 4 being around are not good. It's always tough to exclude someone that was looking forward to playing.

RAH

[War4ever]

its almost impossible to get back to backers...ie fri/sat...and when we do, two of us are in the lead ...with cannon fodder pulling up the rear

[rah]

The trick is to schedule both nights at the same time and hope no one has mysterious connection problems.

RAH

[War4ever]

speaking of mysterious connection problems..my connection was lousy all night ....seeemed slow, i dropped once, you dropped, and caused me a huge problem...sigh...