Who would you trust?

[Adm.Naismith]

Re: Concealment

Originally posted by ruby_maser
Is there gonna be an option or a way to conceal the fact that your civilization is being run by a human?

will there be a way to make it impossible for you to know the difference?

Are you looking for a Civilization AI able to pass the Turing's test or for a human being so erratic to seems a computer program?

Thinking twice, I don't want to risk my play style to be judged "another example of that crap AI strategy"

I want a flag for my Civ, with enough room to host this sentence:
"Look, I'm human, right? Not one of that Cyberspace AI Sterling and Gibson wrote SF books about them. Honest. "

[ruby_maser]

Re: Re: Concealment

Thinking twice, I don't want to risk my play style to be judged "another example of that crap AI strategy"

Good point

[JtheJackal]

There will be some humans who you can trust and some you can't. Sometimes the AI will attack thier friends, sometimes they won't.

[Cidifer]

Way to sit on the fence. I think most of us were able to come up with that on our own though

[The Emperor Fabulous]

DTA: Don't Trust Anybody

Meaning, I wouldn't rely on any one else, because everyone just wants to win.

[Caliban]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
DTA: Don't Trust Anybody

Meaning, I wouldn't rely on any one else, because everyone just wants to win.

Not if there is some kind of cooperative victory condition(diplomatic victory?). This way, allies could prove useful...

[Cidifer]

Yeah it would be cool if they ha a kind of co-op play, for example 2-4 human teams, each team has 2-4 players, then 0-8 AI are put in and all you need to do is have one of your players win a victory condition or have your team be the last team of humans left, or maybe just take over a certain % of the world for your team.

The teams would be chosen in the beginning of a game (for example similar to a game of star craft or red aleart 2) and you could still ally with the AI and trade with anyone but your goal would be to help your team win. It would be especially exciting for a game with 3 or 4 teams, that way two teams could gang up on the more powerful team which is maybe leading by alot, but then that team could go to another team or the AI for help.

Oh well maybe some day.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

I still wouldn't trust them any further than I could throw them.

All's fair in war

Love, on the other hand, isn't fair at all

[Zero]

Depends on human... I would join a game and help out a cause for other human player to come on top agst bunch of AIs, since I place fun over win and dont necessarily need to have win to get fun... but if the players are competitive, they might be looking for that win agst you. If so, they will have to backstab you at one point. Back stabbing is not a bad thing,... I would be more than happy to co-operate with player who backstabbed me earlier in the game if I see that he has "reformed" his ways. But sadly theres only one slot available for victors in Civ III, so if you want the Big "V" you gotta have to keep that in mind

[Zero]

AIs can (most of the time) faithfully wage war for 20 turns on your choice of target as long as you can persuade them with pretty flowers and gifts and that you have decent reputation for keeping treaties (then AI tends to keep their end of bargain better)

[Cidifer]

I would join a game and help out a cause for other human player to come on top agst bunch of AIs, since I place fun over win and dont necessarily need to have win to get fun

That was what i was saying, just becuase I don't end up winning if I'm alive at the end and still have considerable power I'll probably be more then happy with the way I played. Also I don't think I need to finish the game to have fun either, I'll probably play a game with a friend of mine or maybe my brother and load the rest of the slots up with AI and play over lan, then we'll probably work togeher (for the most part) to get rid of the AI then probably quit once it's down to the 2 or 3 of us.

This is similar to how we'd play Europa, we'd work toget her to kill other people and colonize most of the word then we'd call it a victory and quit. After a certain point in the game it become methodical anyway and why bother going through it just to get a "win" when you could just start another game and go back to the fun part.

[Cidifer]

By the way I was really just using this poll to find out if I could trust other players, and apparently I can't!

haha suckers you fell for my plan

[statusperfect]

It would be cool with many winners. Each player could choose or be given a Victory condition secretly. (Like in RISK.)

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Cidifer
By the way I was really just using this poll to find out if I could trust other players, and apparently I can't!

STOP THE PRESS! Cidifer just discover hot water!

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by statusperfect
It would be cool with many winners. Each player could choose or be given a Victory condition secretly. (Like in RISK.)

That's an interesting option! While it is probably difficult to have players with too much evident victory condition (i.e. a diplomatic victory would be impossible to obtain against humans), I suppose that different target point to conquer and keep for every player should be possible, like in Risk boardgame you mentioned.

Owning of every tile of a given resource or luxury should be a "trade / monopoly victory", if not for the depleting of resource that randomly reallocate it on another square