The Perfect Game - READ

[Eli]

quote: Originally posted by rixxe on 04-06-2001 07:26 AM Let's assume that there is 5 people playing together...What if every player is deciding what to do for 1/2/3 cities (and of course, deciding of the movement of the units belonging to his cities)... The other details, like Government Type, tax rates, Science Goal, etc, are chosen by the whole crew... [This message has been edited by rixxe (edited April 06, 2001).]

Yes.
After some time we will have lots of cities and small things to manage, and this may be the best option.

It is very similar to a way a country is running actually.


Btw, the 255 cities limit is a problem, is there anyway to increase this limit?
I know the the map size, population and cash problems are already solved, but for the "main" game 255 cities are not enough.

[Boney]

.
[This message has been edited by Boney (edited April 06, 2001).]

[rixxe]

To me, it seems that 255 cities is enough,... anyway, it's impossible to increase this number,...as far as I know...

There must be a few restriction in the way people are governing their cities;

- Must ask permission to buy something
- Must send a number X of settler to build new cities
- Must send units in the city to war if it has been asked so
- Must keep a log of unit's movement outside city radius
- ??...

[This message has been edited by rixxe (edited April 06, 2001).]

[Boney]

Hi Folks,
I don't think I would qualify for a role as I am still a little green. But I could see that Three simultaneous games would be fascinating, an ICS, OCC and Perfection. All starting from the same position.

It could be done with three teams, each compiled of those most experienced in each field. Each team would be run democratically, as any government. This would be excellent for us beginners to get some insights into tactics, and also to maybe give our civ icons some new ideas.

Whether it would work or not I don't know but the prospect is interesting.

[Eli]

Boney, we can start a 3-4 players game now, to see how it works.


But get me a civ2-->TOT savegame converter first!

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

[rixxe]

Does it exist ?!?

[Eli]

I really hope so...


edit : I think i'm going to *cough*download*cough* Civ 2 now.
What version should I download?
[This message has been edited by Eli (edited April 06, 2001).]

[rixxe]

I have the 2.42,...

[Scouse Gits]

quote: Originally posted by rixxe on 04-06-2001 07:26 AM Let's assume that there is 5 people playing together...What if every player is deciding what to do for 1/2/3 cities (and of course, deciding of the movement of the units belonging to his cities

You haven't played much ICS then rixxe?


------------------
Scouse Git[1] -- git1@scousers.net

"Staring at your screen in horror and disbelief when you open a saved game is one of the fun things of a succession game " - Hueij
"The Great Library must be built!"
"A short cut has to be challenging,
were it not so it would be 'the way'." - Paul Craven

[rixxe]

I prefer perfectionism! For me there's no fun to play in ICS mode,...

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Rixxe has a good idea, altho it could get messy. Maybe the approach could be that one person starts the civ off and settles four additional cities. Each of the 5 players starts with one city; From then on, each may develop as he sees fit. Any cities settled by a settler from your city are also yours to guide. The council of 5 would have to agree on civ-level activities (tax rate, war or no, tech choice, NON-unit use, etc).

This sounds like a republic in action! Each player would need to take the effect on the whole state into account and alter his personal strategy accordingly. There would be the potential for bickering and alliance within the republic, influence peddling, tradeoffs - in short, diplomacy!

The obvious problem is logistics. Each player would need to submit his actions and votes, and the leader would have to implement them and distribute the game. Or the 5 players could all implement them - each game would have identical actions, but unique outcomes. It could be an interesting experiment...

------------------
"There is no fortress impregnable to an ass laden with gold."
-Philip of Macedon
[This message has been edited by Marquis de Sodaq (edited April 06, 2001).]

[Taurus]

Marquis, what you say sounds fine, except for one detail, these 5 players should play the same style.

It would be a weird game, if some play ICS and the others play perfectionist.

------------------
"But as time goes on, they, as all men, will find that independence was not made for man - that it is an unnatural state - will do for a while, but will not carry us on safely to the end..." Aldous Huxley in "Brave New World"

[Blaupanzer]

Rixxe's idea sounds like historical feudalism. I, the king, bequeath such-and-such a duchy on you with the following restrictions. Go forth, prosper, pay your taxes, send me levies when I'm at war, receive protection when you're under attack, etc. A neat way to play actually. Those observing could note and comment on the style of the players. A good way to show off the ICS and Perfectionist styles of the best practicioners (in separate games, of course). Having the game files available every few turns to rest of we humble players, might cause some real dialogue here on the forum.

[Boney]

Hi folks
My vision seems to be a little different. I was more thinking of three different games running concurrently. Each game would be on the same map with the same starting position. We could then compare the three (main) styles of play. IS this possible?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Taurus, you are right for the most part. I think each player would have to have a general style that conformed or complemented the whole, but some individuality would still be possible. Clearly, if one player got out of line by disregarding his part's effect on the republic, the others would have to force the issue.

Perhaps the best way to avoid the type of discord that would spoil the fun is to set up an agreed code of conduct beforehand. Essentially, each player agrees that decisions made by the council of 5 are supreme. If a player does not cooperate, the others can dethrone him and find a replacement.

------------------
"There is no fortress impregnable to an ass laden with gold."
-Philip of Macedon