The Perfect Game - READ

Eli · April 5, 2001, 17:26

Let's arrange the "perfect civ2" game.

The concept is :

A civ2 game.
Every turn is discussed by the posters here, and one selected poster will make the moves that we decided to make.

Before each move the "selected poster" will upload the save, so that we will be able to see it before making suggestions.

----

What is it good for?

A) The not so good players will be able to see the decisions that all the "deity sucks" players make together with their arguments.

B) Fun!

----

Many games by different players can be played like this but here is my main suggestion :

A game, on a HUGE map, like those that Julius Brenzaida's add-on on TOT allows.

Why is this good for?

A) The "Deity sucks" players wont enjoy from the regular games in this style, but on such map the game will be very complicated and it will allow the DS players to have some fun too.

B) Fun!

-----

Of course that questions, suggestions and "go away idiot" comments are welcome.

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

Sirotnikov · April 5, 2001, 17:28

go away idiot

Sirotnikov · April 5, 2001, 17:31

Sorry I was tempted.

I think this is a cool idea. The only problem I have with it is that it should be on regular civ 2.42 as this is by far the most plain and familiar version of civ, and also the most widespread one.

suually all the people who have newer civ versions also have the previous version as they play civ for a long time and wouldn't just go out and buy a "newly packaged" game with an game engine dating to 1995.

I don't have ToT and don't have MGE

. So I think unless you can provide me with it, it would be no fun.

Eli · April 5, 2001, 17:34

Siro :

I thought about it.

solutions :

A) savegame converters.
B) different games.

----

Another problem that may rise is players who load the game, and using the cheat menu learn stuff and make better suggestions.

But I hope we will be able to avoid such problems.

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

Deity Dude · April 5, 2001, 17:39

It sounds like you're already in a democracy and we are the Senate

. "Senate overrules Eli's attempt to move settler one square right."

Seriously, I think it is a great idea. What might be interesting is if there is a significant dispute between people here as to the next move the game could break into 2 games played simultaneously (i.e. ICS versus Perfectionistvs size 5 city etc.). I only say this because different strategies/approaches will always be in conflict.

Blaupanzer · April 5, 2001, 17:41

Last time I checked, both ToT and MGE were available on-line. Sounds intriguing, Eli, but very cumbersome.

Eli · April 5, 2001, 17:45

Deity Dude :

We can have more than one game running in the same time.

ICS game, perfectionist game etc.

The main game in my suggestion will take a lot of time to play.

But the thing that is important is the concept. You dont have to play like this with the whole forum, but with X friends of yours. And this will make it run faster.

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

Eli · April 5, 2001, 17:49

quote:

Originally posted by Deity Dude on 04-05-2001 05:39 PM
It sounds like you're already in a democracy and we are the Senate

. "Senate overrules Eli's attempt to move settler one square right."

While this is a joke I want to talk more about it.

The main conflicts can happen on the issue of "in what style should we play?".

All those settler movements can be most of the time solved by arguments, and if not we can make X players to have special status in the game and they will be able to choose if such problem arises.

edit : we can just flip a coin in such situation!

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"
[This message has been edited by Eli (edited April 05, 2001).]

Deity Dude · April 5, 2001, 20:44

Like I said I think its a great idea and I am more than willing to participate. In fact I would be honored to be in the inaugural game.

East Street Trader · April 6, 2001, 04:53

I have some doubts about the logistics, but if it turned out to be workable what might be interesting (it would certainly interest me) would be to run a perfectionist game side by side with an ICS.

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 05:06

To have a different player every 5 turns, per example, could be great too,...Obviously, I think it won't be THE perfect game,...but...

Scouse Gits · April 6, 2001, 07:06

It does indeed sound fun - as long as the logistics don't go wild - one can imagine five splinter games from each turn ...
Some 'rules' would be needed -- as always controlled by an 'Honour Code' there is no room for 'Thought Police' (other than Ming

) in these fora
I would suggest no use of the cheat menu or restart - possibly a small 'oversight committee' that would not play, but could use 'reveal map' or somesuch to advise when equally sensible moves were in dispute -- I would love to know how some of you Perfectionists get anywhere with eight cities ...

------------------
Scouse Git[1] -- git1@scousers.net

"Staring at your screen in horror and disbelief when you open a saved game is one of the fun things of a succession game " - Hueij
"The Great Library must be built!"
"A short cut has to be challenging,
were it not so it would be 'the way'." - Paul Craven

Eli · April 6, 2001, 07:14

As you said, the logistics is the main problem.

It wont be hard to organize small games when 3-4 people are playing, but for the "main" game it will cause some problems.

I'm still thinking about it, any ideas on how to solve the problem are welcome.

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

La Fayette · April 6, 2001, 07:26

quote:

Originally posted by Scouse Gits on 04-06-2001 07:06 AM
I would love to know how some of you Perfectionists get anywhere with eight cities ...

ask solo

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 07:26

Let's assume that there is 5 people playing together...What if every player is deciding what to do for 1/2/3 cities (and of course, deciding of the movement of the units belonging to his cities)...

The other details, like Government Type, tax rates, Science Goal, etc, are chosen by the whole crew...

[This message has been edited by rixxe (edited April 06, 2001).]

Eli · April 6, 2001, 08:14

quote:

Originally posted by rixxe on 04-06-2001 07:26 AM
Let's assume that there is 5 people playing together...What if every player is deciding what to do for 1/2/3 cities (and of course, deciding of the movement of the units belonging to his cities)...

The other details, like Government Type, tax rates, Science Goal, etc, are chosen by the whole crew...

[This message has been edited by rixxe (edited April 06, 2001).]

Yes.
After some time we will have lots of cities and small things to manage, and this may be the best option.

It is very similar to a way a country is running actually.

Btw, the 255 cities limit is a problem, is there anyway to increase this limit?
I know the the map size, population and cash problems are already solved, but for the "main" game 255 cities are not enough.

Boney · April 6, 2001, 08:24

.
[This message has been edited by Boney (edited April 06, 2001).]

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 08:34

To me, it seems that 255 cities is enough,... anyway, it's impossible to increase this number,...as far as I know...

There must be a few restriction in the way people are governing their cities;

- Must ask permission to buy something
- Must send a number X of settler to build new cities
- Must send units in the city to war if it has been asked so
- Must keep a log of unit's movement outside city radius
- ??...

[This message has been edited by rixxe (edited April 06, 2001).]

Boney · April 6, 2001, 08:36

Hi Folks,
I don't think I would qualify for a role as I am still a little green. But I could see that Three simultaneous games would be fascinating, an ICS, OCC and Perfection. All starting from the same position.

It could be done with three teams, each compiled of those most experienced in each field. Each team would be run democratically, as any government. This would be excellent for us beginners to get some insights into tactics, and also to maybe give our civ icons some new ideas.

Whether it would work or not I don't know but the prospect is interesting.

Eli · April 6, 2001, 08:41

Boney, we can start a 3-4 players game now, to see how it works.

But get me a civ2-->TOT savegame converter first!

------------------
Builder.

"Antisemites? They are just the descendants of monkeys and are jealous of the descendants of Adam and Eve"

"The length of a minute depends on which side of the toilet door you're on"

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 08:44

Does it exist ?!?

Eli · April 6, 2001, 08:59

I really hope so...

edit : I think i'm going to *cough*download*cough* Civ 2 now.
What version should I download?
[This message has been edited by Eli (edited April 06, 2001).]

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 09:06

I have the 2.42,...

Scouse Gits · April 6, 2001, 09:22

quote:

Originally posted by rixxe on 04-06-2001 07:26 AM
Let's assume that there is 5 people playing together...What if every player is deciding what to do for 1/2/3 cities (and of course, deciding of the movement of the units belonging to his cities

You haven't played much ICS then rixxe?

------------------
Scouse Git[1] -- git1@scousers.net

"Staring at your screen in horror and disbelief when you open a saved game is one of the fun things of a succession game " - Hueij
"The Great Library must be built!"
"A short cut has to be challenging,
were it not so it would be 'the way'." - Paul Craven

rixxe · April 6, 2001, 09:42

I prefer perfectionism! For me there's no fun to play in ICS mode,...

Marquis de Sodaq · April 6, 2001, 10:08

Rixxe has a good idea, altho it could get messy. Maybe the approach could be that one person starts the civ off and settles four additional cities. Each of the 5 players starts with one city; From then on, each may develop as he sees fit. Any cities settled by a settler from your city are also yours to guide. The council of 5 would have to agree on civ-level activities (tax rate, war or no, tech choice, NON-unit use, etc).

This sounds like a republic in action! Each player would need to take the effect on the whole state into account and alter his personal strategy accordingly. There would be the potential for bickering and alliance within the republic, influence peddling, tradeoffs - in short, diplomacy!

The obvious problem is logistics. Each player would need to submit his actions and votes, and the leader would have to implement them and distribute the game. Or the 5 players could all implement them - each game would have identical actions, but unique outcomes. It could be an interesting experiment...

------------------
"There is no fortress impregnable to an ass laden with gold."
-Philip of Macedon
[This message has been edited by Marquis de Sodaq (edited April 06, 2001).]

Taurus · April 6, 2001, 11:33

Marquis, what you say sounds fine, except for one detail, these 5 players should play the same style.

It would be a weird game, if some play ICS and the others play perfectionist.

------------------
"But as time goes on, they, as all men, will find that independence was not made for man - that it is an unnatural state - will do for a while, but will not carry us on safely to the end..." Aldous Huxley in "Brave New World"

Blaupanzer · April 6, 2001, 13:18

Rixxe's idea sounds like historical feudalism. I, the king, bequeath such-and-such a duchy on you with the following restrictions. Go forth, prosper, pay your taxes, send me levies when I'm at war, receive protection when you're under attack, etc. A neat way to play actually. Those observing could note and comment on the style of the players. A good way to show off the ICS and Perfectionist styles of the best practicioners (in separate games, of course). Having the game files available every few turns to rest of we humble players, might cause some real dialogue here on the forum.

Boney · April 6, 2001, 23:05

Hi folks
My vision seems to be a little different. I was more thinking of three different games running concurrently. Each game would be on the same map with the same starting position. We could then compare the three (main) styles of play. IS this possible?

Marquis de Sodaq · April 7, 2001, 00:48

Taurus, you are right for the most part. I think each player would have to have a general style that conformed or complemented the whole, but some individuality would still be possible. Clearly, if one player got out of line by disregarding his part's effect on the republic, the others would have to force the issue.

Perhaps the best way to avoid the type of discord that would spoil the fun is to set up an agreed code of conduct beforehand. Essentially, each player agrees that decisions made by the council of 5 are supreme. If a player does not cooperate, the others can dethrone him and find a replacement.

------------------
"There is no fortress impregnable to an ass laden with gold."
-Philip of Macedon