Survival Of The Fittest And Not Fit To Live

Dr Shot · March 13, 2003, 16:12

Modern day 'civers' have a wide array of tools for victory.
Most of these tools are common place in MP games (my favorite venue for civ

). However, there are some that seem to be mysterious and even distasteful(perhaps merely misunderstood)to our fellow 'civers'.

The notion that alliances are written in blood and looked upon as ' Holy'r than Holy' is foolishness,and nothing more.There is only one reason to form an alliance, survival. There may be different applications,but the root is SURVIVAL.
Lets say an opponent tries to recruit you for an alliance,certainly the thought of...WHY? ...would be first consideration.Possibly the recruiter is fearful of being squashed by the intended opponent of said alliance.Often the old ' safety in numbers' bit is a good method for a long life.Perhaps he is concerned of your forces,an alliance may make the feared enemy your new best friend.Sometimes,with certain players the alliance may be brought forth on grounds of advancement in ladder ranks,or simply 'he has more points'.Everytime it still boils down to...Survival.
Circumstances, and ideas can change quickly,often requiring reconsideriation of game strategy(we do play to win,right?).The ally is now increasingly strong and perhaps pulling away towards a point victory.True,
an alliance was formed,but it was not an alliance 'for you (opponent) to win' with me as a patsy happily watching from the throne.Again the motivation is survival(winning is often a by-product of survival),thus alliances can be reversed and even doubled.
The two way alliance is a strategic ploy used by many(I'm sure),with much success. However, when an 'ally' thinks/knows of a counter alliance things can get ugly,in the game and outside of the game(yes , it still is a game).
I would hope any player joining an alliance would be cautious,not leaving cities weak merely on the bassis of an alliance.There are two particular players I game with
that routinely form alliances to 'catch off guard' the ally. This is not surprising nor frustrating because it is the nature of the game, i accept the risk and deal with it accordingly.
I hope my babble is understandable for I have a dual purpose with my writtings. I cannot elaborate now,as I 'm sure some one will pick up the ball from here and run(forwards I hope).Sleepless,sickly and sober(my fingers are frozen too)I bid you farewell...

If i ever get some rest I will try to sort things out here,or simply foward a certain someone to this thread.

bongo · March 13, 2003, 18:38

Have you been backstabbed in a MP game recently

I guess that kind of behaviour is expected in such games. One of the most entertaining risk(the board game) games I ever played was against two of my cousins. We played a domination game. The moment one of us got significantly stronger than the others a new alliance were immidiatly formed against the strongest. This alliance were of course dissolved the moment someone else became the strongest. We were never able to finish the game because of the ever shifting alliances. Great fun

Master Zen · March 14, 2003, 02:54

bongo,

Sounds like you and your cousins have been reading 1984 a lot lately

bongo · March 14, 2003, 04:35

I have read it but that must have been over 15 years ago...not sure about my cousins though.

Good observetion BTW. It never occoured to me to look to 1984 for strategic advice

Master Zen · March 14, 2003, 04:56

I'm actually working on a Civ2 scenario based on 1984 since it is an incredibly rich story from a grand strategical point of view.

Orwell, I

you

bongo · March 14, 2003, 05:16

Can you get that to work in civ2? The basics behind this strategy is to always ally against the strongest nation and change sides when he drops at the power rating. In civ2 the AI always unites against the human player after a given year.

Sallandair · March 14, 2003, 10:00

Alliances - the double edge sword.

Yes, 1984 is a great reference to use, and I would like to throw another one out there - Diplomacy, the game by Avalon Hills.

In Diplomacy, alliances are a must. Alliances change as easy as my daughter's new "heart-throb" of the week. And one must learn to wear their "thick-skin" when playing (Yesterday's backstabber might be your best friend tomorrow).

The key to success is to know when to form an alliance, when to break them, and to know when your ally is about to break his.

G' Luck on that senerio Master Zen...sounds good

Fried-Psitalon · March 14, 2003, 12:05

It is also good to have a few folks you play with semi-regularly that you know are at least unlikely to break an alliance with you without some form of warning. I would certainly not take offense at Sallandair breaking an alliance with me, but I might be a bit annoyed with him if he wasn't decent enough about it to at least warn me first.

(Although come to think of it, I have no idea if he would warn me or not. Heh.)

Master Zen · March 14, 2003, 13:40

Quote:

Originally posted by bongo
Can you get that to work in civ2? The basics behind this strategy is to always ally against the strongest nation and change sides when he drops at the power rating. In civ2 the AI always unites against the human player after a given year.

For SP: Using the events editor when one nation captures certain disputed cities alliances break and reform.

For MP: I think the players will do it by themselves...

Switch · March 16, 2003, 05:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Master Zen
I'm actually working on a Civ2 scenario based on 1984 since it is an incredibly rich story from a grand strategical point of view.

Orwell, I

you

Sweet!

Now, if I can only find my Civ2 disk....

Master Zen · March 16, 2003, 15:09

Trust me.... it's far from being completed. You have time to search every corner of your house for it.

Reinhard-Baer · March 16, 2003, 20:17

Yup, alliances are good as long as they are an advantage for you. For example you are a little bit behind in the techrace and need some safe years to build up or you just want to gang up on someone who is clearly winning the game and must be stopped before it's too late. When you sign an alliance always take into account when you will break it. You have to figure out when it's the best opportunity. Perhaps when your ally let your forces deep into his territory or you get a better deal with his enemy.
When I establish an alliance I immediately contact the others and see if I can work out an even better deal when this is not the case than I will stay with the original one. This way you can never loose. Always remember an alliance must bring YOU an advantage not your partner if you will get into a bad position because of the alliance look how you can get out of it but before you do that think how you can get out the most for you before you leave.