Deathmatch IV - Discussion Thread

[Beam]

Introduction
Matrix introduced the Deathmatch (DM) concept which ultimately resulted in the very dynamic DM III won by Domination by the author of this piece of proza. Revenge feelings never left akots and Matrix so they were eager to sign up for DM IV as was Dell who also has to settle a bill with said author and as a matter of coincedence was looking to start a 4-player game.

What's a Deathmatch?
Matrix made this into a plain and simple concept. Each player starts with all techs available, worked and settled lands, most if not all improvements in all cities, most Wonders obsolete and a small but nice Army to start with. In other words, main focus is on the military to get each other down.

What's so nice about it?
The straight goal and the many, many options to achieve that goal. DM III learned that it really is a game of combined arms and theatre awareness.

What will be different compared with DMIII?
The map can make a huge difference and should be balanced without being identical from each players starting perspective. Some new units add juice to combined arms / theatre awareness. Like the Russian Alfa attack sub and spy satellites (will post some pix when back home). Some units probably need to be more balanced as well. Last but not least incorporating Kingreno's Small Wonders producing units is a nice addition.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Right now we are with 4 players and my personal experience is that the more players there are in a game the higher the chances it stagnates. So, is this the optimal number or can there be more players without the game stagnating to often?

Maptype? Pelago really is very nice for combined long range arms, but other maps might give quicker gameplay?

Which units need to be balanced, if any? ICBM's seem to be overpowered for example.

Feedback appreciated.

PS: 20th Century Contest isn't dead, but a more challenging project than this one.

[Matrix]

How about we start in at the end of the Industrial Age?

[akots]

Yes, I completely agree with matrix on this. It might be not exactly the Death Match but the concept would still remain. We can move nukes a bit further up the tech tree and free some room for slaughtering each other with more conventional weapons. We can have all mandatory techs from IA leaving combined arms and amphibious warfare to research.

The concept of ICBM is not very appealing either. Tactical nukes are more than enough especially considering the SDI small wonder is moved down the tech tree. If the game is to be traitless, the idea of making Manhattan a small wonder is worth consideration which means no Golden Age ever. Or there might be some civ-specific units which make GA possible like specific Russian Sub or American fighter plane or Chinese guerilla or something else.

IMHO, we should start in Republic but not in Democracy like it was in a previous game since ww is a huge issue in these games. Also, I disliked the concept of possible trading luxuries in that other game and would suggest that all players start in locked war against each other. This excludes trading of resources and luxuries and techs between players although still permits espionage and military alliances (not on paper but de facto). There is also a possibility of having more balanced map.

These are just random thoughts without much thinking on the matters.

[Kingreno]

If you guys want I can make a map.

[Beam]

No prob for me starting in the late IA, I'd also like to have Dell's feedback.

Not sure about locked in wars, I like the prospect of being able to trade, even in a war game.

At work, so can't spend a lot of time now, more this weekend.

[Shabbaman]

DM3 was a race towards completion of the SDI. To me, that doesn't seem like a lot of fun. (at least, taking over from someone who thinks the SDI wouldn't be necessary isnt' that much fun). A game with a lot of room for strategy and tactical manoevres is good though.

Alt+u all your tanks to modern armor >>> having no SDI

[akots]

Modern armors proved to be a nuisance since all resources went to ICBM and it was indeed a key. Tanks were good only to wrap up what has been already evident. Just remembered killing 25 or so Modern Armors landed by Matrix in a single turn without losses. Also, luxuries and resources were of extreme importance. That is the reason for no trades between players. Once Uranium is disconnected for a few turns, game is over. Same goes for luxuries. Also, IMHO, we may try to play without settlers. And on a Standard map with more cities. And with less ridiculous improvements like temples whose only purpose was to feed the nuclear race. At least having a possibility to research will prolong the life of Universities and Libraries for a few extra turns.

[Beam]

quote:Originally posted by Kingreno

If you guys want I can make a map.

Many thinks for that, are you aware it also includes setting up cities, adding buildings etc.? And I recommend to wait until I've completed the mods, I found some Tutorials at CFC how to add units, buildings and wonders including graphics and civilopedia. The hardest part actually is finding nice graphics, from there it is pretty straight forward.

[quote]Originally posted by Shabbaman
You heritaged a nice fleet of Carriers tough, pity there were no planes to load.

But indeed, balancing the nukes is one of the key challenges. We might skip ICBM's altogether which means the delivery of Tactical becomes a challenge.

@akots, we can propose and agree on a typical buildings list for each city (*: if applicable):
- Barracks
- Granary
- Marketplace
- Aquaduct *
- Hospital
- Bank
- Stock Exchange
- Library
- University
- Harbor *
- Offshore Platform *
- Factory
- Mass Transit
- Recycling Center
- Airport
- Civil Defense
- ...

Great Wonders are either obsolete (majority) or become Small Wonders so every player can choose to build Hoovers or not for example.

[akots]

Offshore Platform required Miniaturization which is Modern tech and Recycling center - Mass Transit also belongs to Modern Age. It might be possible to move them down though.

There were Mass Transits during WWII at least in major cities, so no big deal here. But pollution was terrible. We also will need Courthouses everywhere except capital. And may be Commercial docks are worth having as well. We can live without Offshore platforms and Recycling centers IMO, just give more starting workers (1 per each city at least), may be make them industrious. This is pure routine after all.

We can take from WWII in the Pacific the ability of Destroyers to carry one unit on them. And may be worth having extra hit points on units. I've been playing and studying recently the Barbarossa scenario by Sarevok/Rocotech. Even had a dream when my grandfather came to me and said I must play PBEM with this scenario against Aggie. Madness is so close sometimes...

Well, regarding this scenario, they have fancy graphics and good animation. May be Sarevok will allow to borrow a few pieces of art from there. And the combat is greatly increased by having 4-hp conscripts, 5-hp regulars, and 6-7-hp elites (similar to TAM). Believe me, it is much batter and underpowers arty and bombard in general which is actually way overpowered. I'd also give air units lethal land and sea bombardment.

I udnerstand, this is a different game I'm talking about, so no problem if we decide to stick with more traditional way.

[Beam]

Indeed, I'd prefer to start with simple mods and gradually add when it is clear it really adds something. Less-is-more approach. I'd like to reduce pollution from pop and shields however, I'll see what is possible.