An Example of a Great Game of Civ

[StrategicKingMi]

I must pre-face this by saying this was a premade board, revealed at the beging of the game and no contact till after 1000 bc. Also, 2 x 2 king, all ships must return to port at 1000 bc. The big southern cont could not be colonized till after 1000 bc along with the two other smaller conts more then 3 away from the 2 main conts.

[StrategicKingMi]

What Techs should be done next? what will be the breaking point? Which civ is winning? Notice the difference between the wonderless civ (me) and the wonder civ (Martin)......Throw in your opinions if you dont mind....

[atawa]

I guess this is a no bribes game?

[oedo]

white has a huge lead. if I was white, I would take first priority on Magellan and see that I´ll make it quick. if I was blue, I´d try to prevent this and build Magellan myself.
I´d say, it´s an easy win for white. but I smell, there will be a surprising turn and you finally will have won. right?

...all ships must return to port at 1000 bc...

strange rule. why that?

[atawa]

I think its a no navalwonder game.

And white should just go fundi and outproduce chinese.

With suntsu he should be able to win the war at sea and take the south island.

[StrategicKingMi]

Good to see you again there Oedo.
It was a no naval wonder game and a no hut game.
Also, sun tzus and leos are going to be obsolete in about 3 turns.
The problem he must be having is producing 40 shield rifleman and I am producing 20 resource fanatics.
I have barracks and mine are vets. Most of his have most asuredly been upgraded and are not vets.
Production does not really matter anymore.
The only thing that matters is gold. I am trading with his citys and earning expotentialy increasing amounts per turn and with my naval tech lead he can not stop me from getting to his citys. I am going to earn over 5000 gold next turn alone. This buys alot of cruisers and then battleships.
At this point of the game it is all about productivity. How many of your 60-70 citys produce something every turn.
120 gold buys the first 20 resources for me and 160 for him. Thus a battleship costs 120+100+60+240=520.
By disbanding a unit you can reduce cost by 95 gold.

[StrategicKingMi]

It is a no bribe game.
The 1000 bc rule was needed to prevent large armies being placed right off the shores of the other civ and then a quick invasion and game could be over.
We wanted to divide the game into a trading + growth segment and then a trading +waring game.
I will have tanks in 3 turns (steel,combustion (steal chivelry,leadership and tactics and then do combined arms)
Also, he cant steal tech from me, all citys that he can possible reach of mine, notice that I have sailed my destroyers out looking for transports and this is why he has none other then in citys 5 away from mine.
Problem is, he already stole from thoose citys and I am throwing tons of units onto every island to prevent assults.

[StrategicKingMi]

Sun tzus is over rated at gaining sea power. I get a vet over 50% of the time without sun tzus. And he usually has ships well damaged after they win an attack and i sink them, I just stay closer to my shores so that I can win the numbers game.
Also remember that cruisers dont care weather a destroyer is vet or not, they win either way.
And once battleships are introduced into the game, forget it, all other ships are useless.
(I really want flight, fighters are great at moving out 5, seeing an additional two spaces and being able to detect incoming battleships in open seas.
Cont 17 is hard to colonioze, remember you can drop off large numbers of engineers and build railroads for unlimited movement.

[StrategicKingMi]

Well, after another 6 hours of exausting play, which was only 3 or 4 turns, not a game for the weak of heart, we got flight,combined arms and I am 3 turns from advanced flight.
He has reached the breaking point. I am closing in on many of his citys and have uncontested dominance at sea. My cruisers immediately made his destroyers obsolete, vet or not. This gave me the intiative. I also was first to automobile which gave me even more power as i sailed battleships within shorebombardment range of his coast. I plan combined arms assults all over his coast line. I anticipate victory in 3 or 4 turns.

[DrSpike]

Sounds like a cool game.

I empathise with the premade map no hut setup, even though the spirit of exploration is important to many. However the no attacking in early game just seems to limit the options for the players.......and you have always said that restrictions should not be placed on alternatives.

What gives?

[StrategicKingMi]

Pretty simple really, i got tired of fighting with horses. The game on a smaller board like this just will not progress to this phase and be this competitive. If you dont have time to build up before attacking, not only do you slow down the game by having to defend early, but with fewer units on the board a small mistake and the game will end. Also wonders become much more important with out the time to over come them. I did not want a tactical game where one small good move wins the game. I wanted a game with strategic attrition. You dont give the knock out blow, but rather a bunch of smaller blows till your opponet is punch drunk and throws in the towel.

[atawa]

Nice game, only downside is its decided for at least 80% by trading witch to me gets a bit boring...

[DrSpike]

Yeah, you are kind of switching caravans for horses, whilst adding many hours to the game.

Still, whatever floats your boat (ship chain? ) is fine.

[atawa]

In my recent games with Makeo we just put sience on hold at a certain time (usualy at engineering)

I'm beginning to like the old trench warfare games again

[Makeo]

Yeah they are fun games