Time for AU 204?

[Dominae]

By the way, I still think 'Total War' is a great idea for an AU course. If we all face our fears (and accept that we may lose this one), a game without peace would definitely teach us a thing or two.


Dominae

[Konquest02]

Maybe not total war, but always war...?

I can see the lesson I will get from always war coming: Do not fight multi front wars, or you shall get crushed... Always war woudl thake oscillating war to the extreme.

I would rather like a random game, though. We could restrict our civ choice to civs that are considered usually pretty "crappy" (i.e. India, England, Korea, Russia, Spain, Vikings?. They are the one I think can satisfy...) The civ choice would force us to break some gaming habits as they would be less/not effective.

--Kon--

[nbarclay]

Here's an idea: how about if we would make a list of civs people don't play much and have people use a die roll/card draw/whatever to pick a civ at random from the list (choosing only from among civs not already taken)? That would avoid repeats, at least until all the civs on our list are assigned, while at the same time helping with the goal of exploring various ways of trying to make good use of relatively rarely played civs.

Nathan

[Dominae]

Going along with Nathan's idea, here's a list of the least favored civs:

Russians
Spanish
English
Mongols
India
Koreans
Zulus
Vikings

And maybe Greeks and Babylonians could be added to the list, although they would definitely be the favorites.

To avoid any hassle, I suggest we set up the scenario to pick the civ randomly from this list, for any particular game. To clarify, although Random will be the only civ choice available, the only possible civs will be those mentioned above. The disadvantage is that there could be duplicates among all players, but the size of the list plays against this happening frequently.

We therefore have "Random Crappy Civ" as a theme, which I think is nice and AU-like.

I also suggest we play with random world settings, apart from map size, to keep with the flavor of alexman's idea.

Unless anyone else steps forward, I'll gladly set up this game. If I do not hear any objections to this, I'll have the game ready by tomorrow afternoon.


Dominae

[Bluefrog]

Go for it, Dom.

Though I've been playing the Vikes a lot lately, and they are a lot of fun, heh. Especially on 80% water pangea maps, heh. :smile:

[alexman]

Sounds good!
Dominae, wait for AU 1.16 before releasing the game, OK? I'll have it posted tomorrow morning.

[Dominae]

Sure thing, alexman. ETA on the scenario is 5pm (my time) tomorrow, just in time for the weekend.


Dominae

[BigDork]

Guys

Everything sounds good I can't wait to get a go at this.

BigD

[Stuie]

Odd; my most successful games have been when playing (in order)...

1. Zulu
2. India
3. Mongols

Anyway, this is really good timing (for once) as I just finished the India game mentioned above, so I think I'll finally play an AU game; the only thing that will bother me is the vanilla ship speeds. I've modded mine such that they get progressively faster, with the modern ships able to really MOVE. Guess I'll adapt.

[Bluefrog]

I've had some pretty successful games as the Vikings, myself. Berzerks are almost unfair in SP. On the plus side, it is the only civ where you really benefit from controlling the seas, heh.

Oh, darn. Sorry for being slightly offtopic.

[Konquest02]

I agree with Dom's choce of civs, except with the Zulus, as they will probably trigger some bloodthirsty warmongers, with is the playstyle of many...

--Kon--

[Konquest02]

After further reflection, I think thye zulus are OK. They should be left there as a builder like me may get them and be in big trouble and then forced to think...

--Kon--

[BRC]

Originally posted by Konquest02
After further reflection, I think thye zulus are OK. They should be left there as a builder like me may get them and be in big trouble and then forced to think...

--Kon--

Don't think. Don't ever think. Kill. That's the way they were meant to be played.

[Arrian]

I've got multiple games going now.

1) SP Japanese game that's going REALLY well.

2) SP Japanese "minitourney" between a friend an I that is going "ok" at best (I made some mistakes and it's costing me). A leader relatively soon will change all of that, though.

3) Civfanatics tournament game (Regent, China) that I've put aside for the time being due to extreme frustration. I should be KILLING that game. Yet I'm not, and the icing on the cake was a particularly awful RN roll that cost me 14hp worth of swordsmen to 1 regular spearman. I had to take a break, or toss my girlfriend's computer out the window.

4) PBEM game w/aforementioned friend and girlfriend. China. Going well (mmm... settler from first hut popped).

5) Minitourney PBEM with strat forum fellas. Going pretty well, considering I chose BABYLON for no reason at all - total whim. My score looks awful, though (if IIRC, I'm DFL).

And that doesn't even include the SP Roman game I haven't gotten around to finishing.

So, no time for AU right now. "Always war" could be intriguing, though. But who to be? Best to be militaristic, or with the sheer number of battles is that overkill? Hardcore ancient UU, or hold off for better, later results? Industrious a must? Definitely not expansionist... you don't WANT to meet people right away. Can you develop an empire while under fire (serious fire, that is. Barbs, especially for somebody like me who plays on "roaming", do not count)? Is religious a waste? Always war screams "get Monarchy, switch, and never switch again."

-Arrian, rambling (not for the first, or last, time).

[Dominae]

On average, I'm assuming at least half the civs on my list are atypical for each person. Other than Catt, I know of very few players who truly enjoy random games. If you get a civ you play all the time, you can just start over (but try not to start over just because you think the Koreans suck!).

I'll also let everyone choose their own difficulty, as that kind of randomness is not fun (yay, Chieftain!).


Dominae