The Perfect Game - READ

[Eli]

quote: Originally posted by Boney on 04-06-2001 11:05 PM 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?

This can be interesting...

Yes, I think this is possible.

[Sirotnikov]

One important thing, one of the goals of this is to make newbies and weaker people learn.

So what you should do is have your discussions ever these boards so that everyone will be able to see and download the game.

I also suggest the following: Each game consists of basically 5 people. A republic if you will. In elections, held on request or every 40 turns a new head is decided. The head is not to be a dictatoral leader but one who will break the tie and have the main say.

The five players need not bee constant through out all of the game as participants may get tired \ bored.

All the discussions are posted here. Anyone can participate in the discussion but the 5 players have the final say.

As later the 5 people devide the republic according to provinces, in the first turns before there are enough cities, decisions are made together.

The leader is the one comitting the turns. He is to play a turn twice. Once he does not commit any action but only writes down every decision he is prompted to make with it's choises and writes it down on the forum.

After all decisions are made he reloads the game with the same turn and applies the submitted and decided uppon choises for each decision.

In case of a unique event demanding real time attention:
Some events are random that may happen during play time, such as a special request by the AI civ, a demand to withdraw, make peace anything else. for that option the actuall turn is committed while players are online so a conference may be held.

The leader must be online together with at least one more player to decide or commit turns. Those two however can't be the only one deciding. They must hear the advice of atleast one more person.

The devision of cities isn't permanent and isn't equal. It can be equal but it isn't required. That is, if one player has sprawled many cities, he can give some of them bordering other provinces to other players to effectively devide responsibility.

Also if there is one player especially succesfull at raising new cities, he should be put in charge of new cities. If one is good at getting good happyness, he should replace another player for the time of the rebellion.

No selfishness! A selfish player should be voted out of the game!

People can ask questions about chosen decisions and it's the duty of the players to answer why they did this instead of that.

There is no limitation or copyright on games. That is, if one team, determined to play OCC and one player wants to use the first turn save to develop it into an ICS he is allowed to do so. Infact he is welcomed to do so.

No one game is to be considered the ultimate one or the perfect one. All teams try to perfect their game according to their strategies, the circumstances and the advice they get.

I think it is very important that natural dieties and very good players participate since learning is a big part of it. If you don't want to participate as a player, fine, but do visit the forums and give advice.

These are the joint team open source civ games.

---

I suggest a first group:

Taurus, Builder and I.

Who wants to join ? do you two agree?

[Eli]

Then get some really good deity player too.


On Emperor I win if i'm lucky enough, and on Deity only on maps that I make, on which the AI stuck on mountains.

Ok, I'll play.


Deity Dude said he wants to play in the first game.

Btw, time zones can be a problem. DD, ni what timezone are you?

------------------
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"

[Taurus]

I could play, although I'm not sure I'm good enough.

But... If Eli is playing and he didn't win a single Deity game (AFAIK) I can play.

------------------
"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"

[Sirotnikov]

I'm in the same time zone as you eli, what a stupid question!

[rixxe]

I'd be happy to play in the first game too,...

[Eli]

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 04-08-2001 07:17 PM I'm in the same time zone as you eli, what a stupid question!

I was talking to Deity Dude!

[Edward]

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov on 04-07-2001 09:35 PM The devision of cities isn't permanent and isn't equal. It can be equal but it isn't required. That is, if one player has sprawled many cities, he can give some of them bordering other provinces to other players to effectively devide responsibility.

Good caveat. I can see these feudal providences getting into a little "friendly" competition.

"Oh?!! Were you planning on building cities here too? So sorry. Well, looks like that rocky mountain range to the east still has some space for new cities."

"We'll see what the King / Neighborhood Planning Committee has to say about your shoddy sprawling slums. I see you've forgotten to zone any city improvements and totally ignored the guidelines on exterior paint color! And don't expect my knights to rescue your 'defended' by one warrior cities when the enemy comes along."

Your fellow dukes and duchesses will be your biggest competition for land (due to being both smarter and closer than the AI). I can't say I'd blame an expansionist for spreading like a virus. It's in your blood - unsettled land makes you drool.

[Deity Dude]

im in the eastern time zone, United States.

[rixxe]

And what about a group of 5 players playing against another group of 5 players,...It could be done if we play in an HotSeat game,...

[Sirotnikov]

You know we could play the perfect game, 7 teams of 3 in hotseat, but, A. it would be too easy to cheat. B. we wouldn't see opponents attacks.
C. we would know about opponents attacks as they would have to vote over attacks on these public forums . We could do it covertly but then the fun is less. THe idea is os everybody see everything.

As to claims about competition, I know. I think it'll spice up the game and that's how it also often works in real life. We'll see.

So:
[*]Taurus[*]Eli[*]Deity Dude[*]rixxe[*]Sirotnikov

Cool.
Now we have the bloody job of voting for leaders.
One can't vote for himself.
And yes I see it is unfair as 3 of us live near by, and 2 are best of friends. However I am pretty sure of my skills. And I'm also sure of Taurus's. So I nominate Taurus for King.

Note: Elections will be held. Onfortunately he can't really oppose it. No secret police and stuff
Though he could as a leader lower happyness, build a happy wonder / improvement in the capital (his control) and have us begging for mercy

Oh, wait, was I showing how cruel I am???

[Taurus]

I don't know about Deity Duke or Rixxe, but Siro is better than Eli.

So I vote for him.

[Eli]

So in what style we decided to play?

The hotseat, my original proposal, or other?


Btw, dont vote for me.

------------------
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"

[Taurus]

I think it's your proposal.

Btw, what will be our general playing style? ICS?

------------------
"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"

[Eli]

Depends on the map we choose to play on.


If it's some giga map that we will have to use ICS in the early ears, but I think we should start the first game on a small or normal map.