Thoughts on the next AU scenario

[Hot_Enamel]

Originally posted by Thrar
what about
about the Big Brother thing, I think it would be quite easy by cutting the BB down to a few cities as early as possible, so you can easily control and defend him, then go for a domination victory, and as you get close to reaching that goal, gift him your cities.

Rule #1 ... You dont ever attack your Big Brother. (He is family!)

(Not sure what happens if he attacks you ... perhaps defensive war only ??)

Other rules...
You must gift any researched tech to Big Brother.
(Or if thats too hard.. you must sell it to him at whatever price he asks)

And when buying tech from him, you buy it at whatever price he sets.

[Dominae]

Thrar stole my idea: forget Big Brother, conquer the world, then gift Big Brother all your cities. There needs to be a rule against this for the scenario to work.


Dominae

[Tassadar500]

Personally, I don't know how good the Big Brother idea will be but if the majority wants it then so be it

[Hot_Enamel]

Just so the appropriate people get the credit ...

I was lurking on CFC 6 months ago, and followed the following SG's.

It has the rules for BB and is good read.

CFC Big Brother Link


I obviously for the Big Brother / Little Brother mixed up

[Rhothaerill]

Let's give another day or two to gather ideas and then put it to a vote to see what happens.

So far the main ideas are:

Limited resources - from PeaSoup
UN Peacekeepers - from TheArsenal
Big Brother - from Hot Enamel
Meet And Greet - from Beta
Contact from Conquests prelude - from PeaSoup
No extortion/no research - from Thrar
Multiple ideas - from Godking and fanes7

[Tassadar500]

My vote...... UN Peacekeepers

[Mountain Sage]

Standard (or large), archipelago, 12 civs, all islands (lots of!) smaller than 5 squares, no continents, half resources, the human civ is NOT a seafaring one (no English, no Scandinavians...).
Win by domination.
The naval game.

[Konquest02]

UN peacekeepers and Big Brother seem like fun games....

[Harovan]

I'd say the peacekeepers. I have played peacekeeper in my SP games on occasion and it's great fun. Especially when you get sneak attacked by the civ you're trying to keep in the game, and suddenly your forces are attacked by both sides. (As Aztecs and Iroquois in my game "Rise and Power of Uncle Sam") Or in another game, I remember, I (Russia) placed a wall of mechanized infantries around the Chinese capital, so the Germans couldn't wipe them out. Until the Chinese didn't want to prolongue my RoP and told me to get the hell out or declare war. I then have chosen the wrong solution. I pulled my units out, and the Germans wiped the Chinese out the very next turn. The right solution would've been to declare war and stay, even though this would've starved the city.

Peacekeepers is an interesting concept.

[Arrian]

Peacekeeping. Hmm. You mean I can't kill them all? Awww, comeon, can't I just kill some of 'em?

No "deception" in that game, eh?

-Arrian

[Beta]

I like the Peacekeepers idea as well. I presume it is on Pangaea. Otherwise - some civs may be gone by the time you even meet them.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

REAL WORLD SCENARIO

What about this one:

real world map, correct starting locations, free civ choice
standard to large

goal: become the main power; this means: control all 8 luxuries and resources (no monopoly required, just have at least one of them all) and have a foothold on all continents (2 or 3 metropolises).

What civ would you chose, why?
How would one proceed to accomplish?

Seems like a fun game to me and, hey, we haven't played an AU real world map scenario so far, have we?

Come on guys, give me your votes !!!!

AJ

[Dominae]

Could someone describe the "peacekeeper" idea in detail?


Dominae

[TheArsenal]

Pretty straight forward: use whatever means are available to you to make sure no civ is destroyed by rampaging others before the game ends. I’ve tried it a couple of times as a secondary goal on a large map*, as opposed to a full game-play commitment, and was not actually able to pull it off. It would be an interesting exercise to see how it would play out as a primary goal and to see how some of the more experience players went about it.

As I played it, in one game in particular, the term peacekeeper is deceptive. At one point it required dismantling a belligerent and constantly warring German Empire to three cities and surrounding it with my own empire. It also required fighting the Mongols again and again over time, and weakening their cities without actually taking any. I kept several “mobile forces” of horseman then knights “stationed” at various places throughout the continent and even had a floating mobile force. In diplomacy, I strived to keep global tech parity, and even traded extra iron away cheaply to try to keep some level of essential resource parity.

My problem was that this style of play meant civs remained annoyed with me throughout the game, and I had two civs attack me via an alliance. As the “peace keeping” was secondary, as I said, I was not committed enough to defend my own turf and keep China (I think it was) from eating up England - who was in terrible shape any way by the time I even had horseman - on the other side of the continent.

* I think this game would have to be on a large map, where AI civs looking to expand always do so at the expense of others and love to pile on the weak, or a standard map seeded with particularly aggressive civs.

[Dominae]

How about making it a little tougher and requiring that you cannot capture enemy cities (only recapture your own)? Seems to me like the best "peacekeeper" game is to just beat each other civ down to one city, which is not really anything new for some (most?) of us.


Dominae