Small map games. Host advantage.

markusf · November 13, 2000, 16:13

I played 3 4 player games yesterday and i won each one in about 30 minutes.

The problem is you can't play 1x 1x on a small map with 4 players. I got either a lot of tech in which case we restarted, or when i didn't get any tech i got a nice start with specials and no one around. Because i had no one around i was able to get tribes galore. I got 6 tribes one game and 4 or 5 in the other game. Not bad having 10 cities before 2200 bc on diety 1x 1x. Since the other players where close together they all got units or tech from huts and no tribes.

Anyways i think we should start creating some scenarios. *Create small maps even the starting positions* From which we can play small games.

rah · November 13, 2000, 16:45

Did you choose the white civ?
I usually choose the green civ when I host for two reasons. 1. no surprise by barbs. 2. Gives all the other players a fair shot at the white civ. Since I was taking abuse for always being the white civ and the supposed advantages associated.

But back to the point. My experiences are opposite. My great openings (trade specials and huts in sight)are negated by techs, and my crappy openings are no techs. (not always but generally so) I also very rarely get advanced tribes. More likely to get a non-settler.

We always play on small worlds. With 4 players it's usually not a problem. With 6 or 7 the last couple of civs usually are placed real bad which will necessitate restarting on a slightly larger map.

RAH

Mercantile · November 13, 2000, 20:35

i was in one of those games actually two yesterday with markusf and he just kept getting tribe after tribe. Meanwhile i got it in the @ss. Oh well back to the drawing board.

KenThur · November 13, 2000, 20:50

Boy, let me weigh in on this 1!

I too was a "casualty" of the above. Tho i'd didn't get it in @ss as Merc did (how'd U do that?), did get in on the map.

Perhaps the diff in RAH's experiences & Mark's = 2x vs 1x? Don't U guys do alot of King level too, RAH? Perhaps that/those R factors?

Isn't this game amazing? All this brainpower for all these years & no one seems to have a total handle on how the sucker was programmed /setup.

Mercantile · November 13, 2000, 20:59

I have never played anything less than deity raging x2x1 with Rah , although the game with markusf was deity x1x1, it was villages only , evolution only knows why?

rah · November 13, 2000, 21:10

2x1x-deity-raging exclusive.

What the computer considers a bad start and what I consider a bad start are two different things. But having said that, the first civ to move (mostly white) usually gets a river basin. (this has been thoroughly discussed in other threads though no definitive answer was agreed on)

On how close are your competitors on a small map. Usually pretty close. Who ends up with the most land can be sometimes determinded by who loses that first combat or who gets a 2x unit from a hut or another that pops a barb legion that just won't go away. A chariot killing one of your warriors will make you wary of moving a settler into that area until you can send along a phalanx. I personally move to the middle of the map as quick as I can. If I get pinned in, i develop map quickly to get around it while there is still land to be claimed. (which works well if everyone moves to the middle assuming the area behind them can be settled later.
There are a lot of factors, some luck, some not, but that is what makes each game a little different and keeps it from becoming stale.

RAH
endless babbling...........Take you pill RAH