Course description for AU207

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by minke19104
How bout:

7. Geonocide.

Basically close to total warring but you are NOT allowed to capture and assimilate any cities/workers. Every cities captured must be razed, and every foreign workers created/captured must be disbanded on site.

The main objective is Conquest and having your civ's native citizen as the sole survivor of the whole planet.

Now THAT's a great idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can I reconsider my vote??

[Dominae]

Genocide is not that hard. When I played my NIC game, I assumed the NIC rules meant that you would always have to raze a city when you conquered it (otherwise you would get to sell the improvements, which did not feel right).

Again, this would be fun to try out, but what would we learn? I suppose I'm just being a wet blanket because I've done Genocide already.

I know I'm pushing this point, but Total War is going to be hard. Consider that the first civ you meet you have to declare war on immediately. This means that, if you're playing on Monarch/Emperor, the AI's free units are going to beeline for your capital. I cringe to think about trying it on Deity (4 free Warriors and 2 Spearmen, is it?). This effect is also present in Always War, but here you can pick and choose your enemy based on how threatened you feel once you meet multiple civs.

I voted for OCC, but Total War is the one I would prefer to play, by far. Arrian is right in that China would be the civ to be, unless you really wanted to beeline for the Great Library, in case a Commercial civ might do better (Carthage?).


Dominae

[minke19104]

Always war is a moot point since you can just basically reduce a civ to 1 city, keep a ring of defender around it, and stay at war with that civ from beginning to end.

I guess you're kinda right with Genocide thing, Dominae. But in your NIC game, you did keep the captured workers rite?

[Dominae]

Yes, I kept a few captured Workers (maybe around 15 total), but most of these joined my cities. I conquered many many Workers on the continents away from my home, but I never had the patience to ferry them back by Galley. So they mostly just went into a big foreign Worker stack of doom, which grew to size 50 or so by the time the game was over.

Anyway, I can see how not being able to capture Workers can be a big deal for some players. So Genocide sounds like a fine option after all (just not for me!).


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Personally, I have very little interest in games where peace and building are denied their proper place. The game is Civilization, after all, and while I'm quite happy to use warfare to bring additional people and cities into my civilization, I find flagrantly uncivilized styles of play distasteful. If people want to go for "always war" or "total war" or NIC or such, I won't stand in the way, but I seriously doubt that I'll participate either.

Nathan

[nbarclay]

What would people think of having a huge-map game in parallel with a couple back-to-back "bloodthirsty warmonger" type games? That would, admittedly, leave builders with slow computers in a bit of a predicament. But since both types of games have a bit more of niche audiences than most AU games, the flexibility of being able to choose which type of game people prefer to play could be nice.

Nathan

[BRC]

My vote goes for OCC. I think there's more to learn with it.

[Dominae]

Let's wait another couple of days to see where the voting gets us. I would like all the AU games to occur sequentially (just my own preference), but I can see the merit of doing the Huge map one "in the background".

Nathan, exploring the various possibilties of Civ3 undoubtedly involves some very warmonger-ish games. Maybe we could try harder to come up with some more peaceful ideas? Like...OCC?




Dominae

[Arrian]

Have we ever done a "no fastmover units" game?

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Arrian
Have we ever done a "no fastmover units" game?

Not that I know of.

[minke19104]

What would that be? Anything with 1 move only?

Does it mean you cant use Mech Inf, since its 2 move? And attack with Guerillas only in late game?

[Dominae]

I would use Infantry/Artillery (especially with the AU mod). But I do that already, so the Industrial age would not be a problem for me...!


Dominae

[Arrian]

Hmm... the late industrial -> modern age does present problems for that type of limitation, it's true.

Then again, I love fastmovers, so that type of game might end up annoying me.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

I was thinking about a real "island hopping" game... not a 'pelago map, since those give you long stringy (but still pretty big) continents.

No, I'm thinking of a plethora of little islands. Maybe a few medium sized ones (room for maybe 5 or 6 cities, if building with 4 tile spacing) but nothing bigger.

Exploration & Expansion are fun "builder" things to do. So let's lengthen that process. Lots of small islands (some reachable via coastal waters, some via sea, and still more via ocean) would do that, I think. Say a standard map with 4-6 civs, instead of the normal 8, or even a large with 6-8 civs. It would have to be a user-made map, of course.

Just a thought.

-Arrian

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae

Nathan, exploring the various possibilties of Civ3 undoubtedly involves some very warmonger-ish games. Maybe we could try harder to come up with some more peaceful ideas? Like...OCC?

If you think I mind warmonger-ish, you've obviuosly forgotten my AU 206 AAR already. But that came naturally due to the nature of the map and the civ I was playing, not artificially due to special rules that said I had to fight whether it made sense to or not. There's a huge difference between the two. at least for me.