Looking for a reliable opponent

[Socrates]

Yo. With only a few orders to write each week for my Diplomacy game, and no Civ game to play at all these days, I'm starting to get bored in this area. ;) There will surely be that multiplayer PBEM, but I'd also like to play a 1v1 PBEM now. I don't want to play it very quickly (I won't be able to, because some days I will only work and sleep this summer), but I want to play it regularly (meaning : at least one turn every 2 or 3 days, so as we don't lose the pace).

If you're up for it, you can challenge me. I'd like to play on either Deity or Demi-God (I don't care), on C3C 1.22, with water being an important element of the map. Remember I like to use the RBCiv set of rules, but we can discuss these things before. If someone plays well on Emperor but finds Deity a bit hard, then it's good for me, because it's been ages since I completed (and won) a Deity game, and that was on PTW (a little easier, they say).

[Beam]

[evil]

I take the gauntlet Krys! You already knew Demi has my pref for the fun of it and the pace of the game you're suggesting fits me perfectly.

For the rules, I like honorable play. How about Aggies set of rules? In most games I play there is no MA vs. the human player and no MPP, both being subject to discussion of course.

[akots]

I would be interested as well. Any setting would be OK.

Did you ever try to play on a tiny map without the AI? Just two humans and some barbarians to spice the things up? Can be continents then. Means always war probably.

[Socrates]

Well, akots, I can play you on a tiny or small map if you want, with no AI. I also want to know how it feels. It could indeed be 2 continents, separated by an ocean or not, but I'd like a real symetrical map this time. Maybe we could chat on MSN to discuss that? :)

[akots]

I have mirc client and we can meet in CFC chat room where you can come from the CFC front page then. Have a strong allergy to msn. Do I have to set up a NetMeeting for this? Another problem might be with time. I'm now in Houston which is +6 GMT IIRC. And am working usually till 6 or 7 pm. So, this leaves only weekends.

Symmetrical map would be great.

[Socrates]

Well, we can play at a low but regular pace. Thanks for the offer, but I won't come back to the CFC chatroom, I lost too much of my free time there a few months ago ! [lol] My email is the same as my MSN address (check my profile). With this time zone delay, we can be sure to play at least one turn a day. And I sometimes go to sleep quite late, so we could even play many turns on some evenings/nights. And I don't forget the weekends.

By a symetrical map, I meant a real one, ie. : same luxuries and strategic resources at identical places, same rivers, barbarian camps and huts, EVERYTHING !! Just have half the world reflected in a mirror... either west/east or north/south (though it's not recommended to start in the middle of the N/S axis for the former...). Or we could even have a symetrical map using a central symetry (a dot, not a line)... [crazyeye]

Do you want 2 seperated continents or a pelago map with coastal tiles everywhere ? What about the game level (no idea, at least Emperor ?) ? Do you want SGL's, SoZ ?... What about civs ?

Or another idea : why not play the same neutral civ with no trait and no UU ? Or same traits and same UU ? So as it's even more on a same comparison. [...] Do you play chess ? :D :D :D

[akots]

Symmetrical map sounds good. East-west hemisphere then (mirror) and certainly continents. Archipelago is fun but may be a bit too boring to make it through.

Emperor level may be sufficient since there is no AI. There is nothing to gain from increased difficulty but corruption and research time. Actually, there are supposed to be some barbarians... IIRC, there are enough of them on Emperor (roaming-raging or something else; I'm always confused about barbarian settings). But there should be no huts. We are supposed to be the hard-working folks who get every peace of knowledge about this world through sweat and tears not some lucky accidents.

SGL or SoZ - whatever you want, I'm fine with either their presence or absence. Civilizations... Hm... You just pick up something you like and I pick up something else independently or until we reach a mutual agreement. However, same civ without traits (only UU-specific) would be great as well. Or why not just have all 6 traits enabled? Also might be fun, IMHO. And it would be always war from the very first contact apparently.

I do indeed play chess. :) I've stopped to play seriously 17 years ago in the university. By then I was rather strong (2250 FIDE rating). Now I play mostly at pogo a couple of times per month for about the same strength fluctuating from 2100 to 2200. We can set a time to meet there and play a couple of games if you want to.

[Socrates]

I agree with most of your latest post. So it will be an entirely symetrical map, with a central north-south axis as the symetry line. And the game will feel like continental (ie. : a main continent and some islands which would have some crucial strategic resources and some luxuries too (I'm a fan of that !)). The question for the map is about having one (err... two actually ;) ) ocean between us, which will be hard to cross (we may even want to promise not to send suicidal crews on high seas), or some isthmuses which will allow for some early contact (and why not trade ? it's not always about war !).

About the level, Emperor if you prefer ; anyway the tech pace will be very quick on a tiny map... I can agree on sedentary barbarians, but then I wonder why you're OK with SGL's and the SoZ ? But I can go with that too.

About civs, we could set up a unique game. I'm fine with any choice. If we go for classical Civ3, then it would be nice not being seafearing, so as conquest is harder. If we go for no trait, then disable SGL's (pure luck, not needed for a scientific civ), but we can have a different UU (and thus, a different civ). If we go for the same civ (same UU, same traits, but a different name so as the program doesn't get lost !), then it can be a real basis of comparison but maybe less funny. We can also go for a "blank civ" : no trait, no UU, but then it looks too much like Civ2, but it could be of some fun for one little game. Well, up to you. [goodjob] Or all 6 traits for both of us... Or/and all UUs in the game !!? [eek]

My question about chess was a bit of a joke, since it came after me pulling away several elements from Civ3... which lead me to think we could as well play chess. [lol] But I see you're an excellent player (like col was one day (and I bet he still is)), and so why not ? We may want to discuss this later and somewhere else (that reminds me that you should use MSN, it's not that bad, in fact it's pretty OK). I reached... like around 1600 ELO when I was younger. I definitely need practice.

[akots]

OK, so no sedentary barbarian huts to pop, no seafaring civilizations to slow down the conquest, no SoZ or we both have ivory (?), ocean in between so we can more or less safely develop to Astronomy/Navigation/Magnetism and would not be able to trade. And probably would not have contact as well. Even if we do, it would be war from the first turn...

Your argument about the traits is very fair. So, lets stick to what is on hand. I'd like then to play the Ottomans and have SGL enabled. If SGL are disabled, I would be willing to take the Maya since we are supposed to have lots of barbarians. Another good civ would be Persia and/or Babylon. I'll make final decision after you make your choice but these 4 are booked... unless you object with some reason.

Also, if we want to block the landing spots completely, is it fair? I know, it is possible but don't like it. Some blood must be shed from time to time. Or we just assign amphibious attack ability to some of the units like MDI or knight (or Sipahi)? [lol] Or better just wait until marines are around?

[Socrates]

Very important point as for landing blocking. More generally I'd like to stick to some RBCiv kind of rules, though in this game a lot of rules are simply obsolete. One rule concerns landing blocking ; it was forbidden to do blockades with non-fighting units on that purpose, but I think that now any unit can land and capture such non-fighting units on the shore, so that's not a rule anymore... Blocking with military units is allowed, but obviously here it would alter the game. I don't know ; don't know if it can be cool to allow them and possibly wait for marines (bloody war by that time, then !), because the game could be too straightforward. Or we could make a rule like "no unit on the shore ever except moving units, working workers". [???] Tell me your preference (I don't really want to add an amphibious ability to other units, all the more as I might get confused with tweaks in my games !!).

If this game feels cool, we could even try another one, further in simplified rules (so as to check how it feels). Maybe we should start with a more standard approach : civ's traits and UU, allow SGL's and SoZ. In this case, I'd like to be... why not Greece ? (I suppose barbs can't trigger a Golden Age ?) Why do you say there will be plenty of barbs ? Because there will be no AI to handle them ? [estwing]

[akots]

Re blocking: Then, we just try not to block too much. Lets put it this way. "Every island having more than 3 coastal tiles should have at least 1 costal tile unoccupied by a military unit at any given turn." We can specifically ask the mapmaker to avoid islands with less than 4 tiles in them or to put an equal number of small islands nearby each of the continents.

Rules are then completely unmodded. SoZ is enabled and both continents have ivory. I'm Ottoman and you are Greece. SGL enabled as well. We can take some decent rules like Aggie's. Of all the exploits there is only Palace jump and negative cash research which make sense in a game without AI, IIRC. We (I) try to play Always War with no Embassies, tech stealing, city investigation and other weird things.

Anything else to discuss?

[Socrates]

I'm OK with gentleman rules of course. Noted for blockades, and agree ; does it mean that a 100-tile island may have only one free tile for the opponent ? And BTW, I suppose we can change this tile every turn ? We need a little more thinking there. I agree on not playing such things as city investigation, tech stealing, and no embassy if you ask. But as for always war on the turn we meet, I'm not sure. Imagine we both want, for some resons, to stay at peace for a while (like preparing our troops, or whatever)...

I wonder why I chose Greece... My hoplites won't be of great effect, but at least I'll be scientific and commercial, not so bad... [crazyeye]

[akots]

Yes, with 100-tile island and a single coastal tile empty, you have a strong point. Don't know how to fix it. If I can suggest the following:

"The tiles on southern and northern tips of large islands or continents (over 20 tiles area) should never be blocked with military units. If there is a city placed on these tiles, then at least one coastal tile within this city radius (21-tile) must remain unblocked." Since these tiles would be within 3 tiles, the enemy can unload troops on that tile even if it is changed.

Re Always War. Surely, we can live in peace. I just don't see any benefit from this atm with a symmetrical map. There should be nothing to trade unless some resources start jumping all over the place. But it is quite possible things might change during the game...

If you agree to the above suggestion, we might consider asking for a map and starting soon. No need to rush the things though. I'd like also to see the list of what is allowed and what is not. As you already probably know, I'm a big ICS fan but it is not an exploit even with the RBC rules. All other RBC exploits are fine with me. I'd also like to specifically disable ship chaining and free Palace jump but would try to allow Palace built brick-by-brick or with MGL.:)

[Socrates]

About blockades : could we even not bother about it ? We may end with a big continent, and it would be very difficult to blockade everything, and very costly... I could agree on your latest proposition, but it means that we may want to land on already known places. [blush2] Maybe it's more simple if we don't bother, but you might have a strong idea that such a situation will eventually be achieved in our game. Dunno, never played such a game. Or maybe we could say that every unit should be parked in cities, or on just a few tiles within each city radius...

No, didn't know you were a big fan of ICS... Do you know if I'm a fan of anything in particular ? :D Not sure if it is a real exploit in RBCiv, but the common sense says that it's not a nice way of playing ; I usually follow the rule that states that every city should be at least 3 tiles away of any other city (1 turn for slow units on roads). ICS allows 2 tiles away... Of course you're allowed to do it for an occasional situation... But ICS isn't only about placing cities in sardines boxes, it's also about cranking out settlers like mad ? Tell me your opinion on that please.

The complete list of RBCiv rules can be found on their site :
http://realmsbeyond.net/civ/etactics.html
Some of them are obsolete with C3C 1.22, but most of them still apply. We can also pick Aggie's rules to complete the list (and use the common PBEM rules as for human-human relations). Of course the Palace can be built brick by brick somewhere else ; but if you want to rush it, then use a SGL, not a MGL. [crazyeye] Or am I ignorant ? Can a MGL rush the Palace in C3C ?

I'll post a request for a map this week, once those last things are sorted out. I hope we can start by next week. :)

[akots]

Re blockades: I would not bother much, just probably would try to block some critical tiles. By the time marines are running around, there would be many obsolete units. Instead of upgrading/disbanding them, they can be used to block the coastal tiles if the upkeep permits. There might be enough of them to block the coast completely. Hence, we might want to add a rule about sothern-northern tip but keep it optional, for example, "unless there are more than 75% coastal tiles blocked".

I'll try to limit my ICS ambition to a reasonable distance between the cities. Distance 3-3.5 (2-tile N,S,E,W or 3-tile SE, NE, SW, NW and their combinations) seems reasonable but 3 tiles always (distance up to 4.5) might be too much for my taste. Distance 2-2.5 indeed can be handy sometimes but not on a regular basis. And surely, I'll try to crank settlers like mad. :)

I know you are a seafaring fan and do not like Pangea maps. :)

You can rush Palace with MGL in C3C since it is a small wonder/city improvement IIRC.

Otherwise, should be an interesting game overall.

[Socrates]

Well, dunno if it sounds good, but about blockades I think I now want to wait and see what happens in the game. Surely it won't be of a big deal in the beginning, so we have some time before that. I keep your proposition optional too, and put it somewhere in my head.

About ICS, well, do as you want. After all I'm your only opponent, so it's not like if we had to face stupid AIs or any other humans. Dunno what I'll do myself ; I tend to pack my cities closer than before (before = no overlap !). And on a tiny map it will be useless to have cities not packed at least a little (big corruption !!). So ICS is all in all fine with me. ;)

No, who said I don't like pangeas and like seafearing civs only ? [lol] It's just that I played my first pelago games very recently, and am pleased with them (hence why I wanted a pelago map for the 8-p game...). And the Byzantines are my new toys... Anyway this map will be a continental-like map, so...

I hope it will be an interesting game, very different from what we're used to. I think Skyfish (RIP [}:)] ) and someone else tried such a game recently. And if we're happy with this game, I propose we start another one like that, but with little tweaks (remember the no-trait or no-UU propositions ?... and other stuff).

Well, I think we're getting very close to our map request. I'll post it tomorrow if you don't mind. :)

[akots]

quote:Originally posted by kryszcztov
... It's just that I played my first pelago games very recently, and am pleased with them (hence why I wanted a pelago map for the 8-p game...)

This basically means that you like it...

IMO, we are ready to place the map request and to start. :)