|
![[image loading]](http://www.civpbeml.org/civ4logo.jpg)
Including the logo, most everything has been stolen from Fen's thread. Thanks to all who have run a succession game in the past!
As no one has taken the initiative to start this topic, despite the apparently high amount of interest in a lower level succession game, and it's unfair to have a higher skill player running it who is unable to participate (Fen), I'll get the topic rolling.
I'll be copy/pasting a bit from Fen's thread, but also tweaking a few things. As the game hasn't started yet, please feel free to discuss the suggested rules as well as your personal map settings.
What is a Succession game?
For those who do not know. A succession game is one in which a group of people play a single game of civilization as a team, taking it in turns controlling the one player against computers. Players take a set number of turns and then write a report of what happened with screenshots to back it up for others that are playing/following to read.
The goal of a succession game is ultimately for fun. It allows people with different play styles and different skill levels to play together and learn from each other.
Newbie Rules - Changes from Fen's game will be bolded.
- Each player will be placed in a roster and when their turn to play comes up, they will play about 20 turns (It doesn't have to be specifically 20 turns, you can go over or under if it makes sense to end your turn on a specific event)
- After a turn has been completed, a player will write a report including screenshots and the save file. (This is where the fun of the game is, so it is important to put some effort in writing a good report)
- After your turn, you will PM the next person on the list, informing them that it is their turn to play (this prevents anyone missing the bump of the thread. Please make sure you remember to do this)
- A player then has 48 Hours to respond in the thread with a "Got it" notice, or with a completed turn. Should this not happen, play will continue onto the next person
If a player posts a "Got it" notice in the thread, they have another 48 Hours to complete their turn. (Thus the longest time without any new turns is set at 4 days. The "Got it" notice ensures that everyone isn’t waiting 4 days for a no-show)
- If a player feels they will be unable to take their turn within the 4 days, they should post a "Pass" notice in the thread so no-one is kept waiting for them. If you pass, it is your responsibility to inform the next person on the list via PM
- At any time if a player wishes to join or leave the roster, they should PM the person running the game (In this case me ) (You can join in any time during the game) New players will be placed at the bottom of the list.
-If a player misses their turn without passing, they will be removed from the roster(they can still rejoin, but must PM about it)
- The game will be run on the latest version of Civ 4 with the BTS expansion pack
- As I'm not sure where interest stands at this point, and the other game has run into this problem, I'm contemplating a player cap from the start. Players would still be able to leave or join at any time, but once the roster reaches a set number, further sign ups will be put in a backup list, should someone drop out. Haven't figured out a good number cap yet, but they'd like be based on the map settings. A huge marathon game would have a higher cap than a large epic game, and so on.
- I'll be including a poll about crucial decision making during a turn. The higher level game allows for people to make crucial decisions on their own, while taking the advice of previous players and discussing it afterwards. I'm proposing that while the player would still have freedom to do what they wanted during their turn, before making a crucial decision (such as declaring war, placing a city, etc..) they post a poll in the thread and give it an hour or two to generate responses. Obviously this would slow things down a bit, but people still have a four day window to complete their turns, so it wouldn't be too bad. As I said though, it's just a thought and a poll will be included to see how we all feel.
- A note to high level players: Please feel free to post occasional tidbits of advice, but please refrain from voting in any of the polls may pop up regarding crucial decisions. This is our game to either win or lose. Advice, as long as it isn't handing us the game is appreciated, where if our consensus is to place a city in a terrible location, we will be punished for our mistake, and hopefully learn from it.
- Most of the people interested have mentioned Noble difficulty level, however, the poll will include Prince as the point of this is to have a good time and provide a challenge. We'll go with the general consensus, but if we have Noble-ish level players, and we actually discuss major decisions, I'm all for trying a Prince level game.
What game settings are we playing on?
Please vote for what settings you want to see played below. Please read the thread for discussions on game settings before voting. If the poll numbers vastly outweigh the responses in the thread from those signed up to play, we will go with what the majority of those who signed up to play say. For example if there are 20 people voting for one setting in the poll, but there's only 10 people signed up to play and the majority of them want a different setting, we'll go with that. Hopefully that shouldn't be a problem, but as we're the ones playing the game, we should have the settings we want.
All leaders will be random. A poll on victory conditions will be added. Most will likely be available, but we will see how people feel about removing the Time condition.
Difficulty
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Difficulty levelPrince (18) 62% Noble (11) 38% 29 total votes Your vote: Difficulty level (Vote): Noble
(Vote): Prince
Map type
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Map typeContinents (12) 46% Pangaea (10) 38% Fractal (2) 8% Inland Sea (1) 4% Lakes (1) 4% Archipelago (0) 0% 26 total votes Your vote: Map type (Vote): Pangaea
(Vote): Continents
(Vote): Inland Sea
(Vote): Archipelago
(Vote): Fractal
(Vote): Lakes
Map size
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Map sizeHuge (12) 63% Large (6) 32% Standard (1) 5% Small (0) 0% 19 total votes Your vote: Map size (Vote): Large
(Vote): Huge
(Vote): Small
(Vote): Standard
Climate
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: ClimateRandom (10) 50% Temperate (5) 25% Cold (2) 10% Arid (2) 10% Tropical (1) 5% Rocky (0) 0% 20 total votes Your vote: Climate (Vote): Random
(Vote): Temperate
(Vote): Cold
(Vote): Tropical
(Vote): Arid
(Vote): Rocky
Game speed
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Game speedEpic (15) 75% Marathon (4) 20% Normal (1) 5% Quick (0) 0% 20 total votes Your vote: Game speed (Vote): Epic
(Vote): Marathon
(Vote): Normal
(Vote): Quick
Other settings that can be changed
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: BarbariansOn (9) 64% Raging (4) 29% Off (1) 7% 14 total votes Your vote: Barbarians (Vote): On
(Vote): Off
(Vote): Raging
Poll: Tech TradingOn (9) 75% No Tech Brokering (3) 25% Off (0) 0% 12 total votes Your vote: Tech Trading (Vote): On
(Vote): Off
(Vote): No Tech Brokering
Poll: Vassal StatesOn (10) 91% Off (1) 9% 11 total votes Your vote: Vassal States (Vote): On
(Vote): Off
Poll: Huts/Random EventsOn (10) 100% Off (0) 0% 10 total votes Your vote: Huts/Random Events (Vote): On
(Vote): Off
Poll: Victory ConditionsAll enabled (7) 54% All other than time (6) 46% Other (Explain in post) (0) 0% 13 total votes Your vote: Victory Conditions (Vote): All enabled
(Vote): All other than time
(Vote): Other (Explain in post)
Poll: Do you agree with a player cap?Yes - Suggest possible caps in post. (11) 65% No, I don't mind taking fewer turns if it lets more people in. (6) 35% 17 total votes Your vote: Do you agree with a player cap? (Vote): Yes - Suggest possible caps in post.
(Vote): No, I don't mind taking fewer turns if it lets more people in.
Poll: Should we run important decisions by each other before making them?No, everyone should have the freedom to do what they want. If it screws us, that's part of the fun. (20) 83% Yes, all decisions should be given ample time to be discussed. (2) 8% Yes, but people should only have an hour or two to respond before they're free to continue. (2) 8% Other (0) 0% 24 total votes Your vote: Should we run important decisions by each other before making them? (Vote): Yes, all decisions should be given ample time to be discussed.
(Vote): No, everyone should have the freedom to do what they want. If it screws us, that's part of the fun.
(Vote): Yes, but people should only have an hour or two to respond before they're free to continue.
(Vote): Other
Nothing is set in stone yet, and I'm just merely suggesting some different things that are a bit more tailored to a lower skill game. Feel free to discuss everything, as it's all open for change up until we get the game running.
Let's have some fun
If you wish to play, please sign up in the thread [b] and PM me with your post in this thread[b], it will also help if you post your current skill level in civ (what difficulty you play on). This is a newbie game, and thus only players at below a Prince level should sign up. There's going to be two higher skill games going on shortly, so if you fit in that category, please find the corresponding thread.
Every newbie is welcome to play. Let's have some fun and learn something so we can move on up!
Final note on etiquette
This really goes without saying, but don't be an asshat. If you disagree with a decision, point it out in a constructive manner.
Also, when writing your reports, please justify your decisions (especially big ones). It will help everyone understand what you were thinking and help those trying to learn.
Remember that the fun of this game comes from the reports. So if you sign up, please be prepared to put the effort in for writing a report.
We are here to have fun, so winning or losing doesn't matter. There's still plenty of fun to have with a losing game.
I'll give a few days for people to sign up/discuss game settings, and then we'll get this game going. Depending on how many people sign up, it might be as early as Saturday, or as late as Tuesday.
Once again, many thanks to all those who have run previous games, as well as those who have played in it. And many apologies to Fen for ripping off so much of your post. 
The Roster (Signups open) Please sign up/post your preferred settings in this thread and then copy/paste them in a PM to me. Thanks!
So no fek
nosliw
Eben
TestSubject893
ElyAs
Albireo
banana
Dobrev
Biochemist
Jaxx
Tadzio
Tdelamay
Cloud
[url blocked]
4000 BC save
|
I chose Prince, Continents, Huge, Epic, Random climate, with all the standard stuff on. I honestly couldn't say where my skill level is at, as I've played on Chieftain, Noble, and am currently playing a game on Prince. Got quite a lucky start on Prince, but I'm still quite a ways from winning. Generally when I'm playing, I like to turn off victory conditions that are anything other than domination/conquest, and I inevitably get bored and spam ICBMs before quitting the game without finishing it. I'd probably be a Chieftain/Noble level player with all settings standard though.
As far as player caps go, I'm all for letting as many people as possible in, but depending on the settings, we may need to put a rough cap on. If we're playing a Huge/Marathon game, I'd have no problem letting 15-20 people in, but in the off chance we go with a quick/small map, it would probably be closer to 5. Though honestly I'm not quite sure how much the different speeds change things, nor do I play on smaller maps often. So I'd like everyone input on the subject.
|
Sign me up please!
I went with Prince, Fractal, Huge, Epic, Temperate, standard other stuff. I'm barely Noble, but I like challanges 
|
You can sign me up for this one as well.
Lets hope we can get some more interest!
|
Hey great, you guys have got this game going. I was going to make this myself, but ive got exams and they are killing me at the moment so ive got no time to do anything. Im happy someone took the initiative and made this thread.
Good luck guys!
|
I'd like to sign up for the game.
I just started playing civ 4 again after having not played in a while. (Actually it was spurred on by reading the succession game thread, haha.) Anyway, because of this, I'm a bit rusty and I've been playing on Warlord difficulty (one below noble), so I'm voting Noble for our difficulty. If we do end up on prince, I'm sure that with everyone's help, I'll be fine. As far as setting, I'm pretty much fine with whatever. I voted Continents, Huge, Epic, random climate and sea level, but none of those really make or break the game for me.
As far as player caps and poll based decisions, I'm a little torn on both. I feel maybe if you get in before the game starts you should be able to be on the active roster no matter what, and then maybe instate a cap once its started? I'd hate to leave someone out just because they waited too long to post after they've been keeping an eye on the thread for a while. Poll based decisions sound like a good idea in principle, but I'm skeptical as to how well it will work in practice.
And finally, to anyone who was in the same boat I was, and had civ 4, but not any of the expansions, but would like to participate; Gamestop is offering the complete game with all expansions for only $10 for a digital copy. + Show Spoiler +http://www.gamestop.com/Catalog/ProductDetails.aspx?product_id=74585
|
Yeah, as much as I hate GameStop, anyone who doesn't have the expansions or the game at all shouldn't think twice about picking it up; it really is a great deal.
Honestly, with the interest shown thus far I'm not too sure we'd have too worry about a player cap. Might get the game started a bit later than I had said in the OP, as the signup number is now at 5 (including myself.) While that's not a bad number by any means, I know there was quite a few more people than that posting for a Noble level game in the other thread. And if we're playing a Huge/Epic game, there's no reason we can't comfortably accommodate ~10 people.
I actually agree with your post in the other thread, Fen. People are probably just afraid of making mistakes and losing the game for everyone. While it's possible, I'm sure that we have enough higher level players to compensate, and I think it would make for a quite enjoyable game to have a selection of all skill levels. Maybe for the next game, since there's a pretty large selection of people playing now, you could take a sign up list with a person's rough skill level, then divide them in 2-3 teams (depending on the number of people), and start them off from the same save.
Notice you had talked about splitting teams in the current game, but it's a bit hard to do once it's already started. And hopefully there being more spaces available (well there was never a set number of spaces) may encourage those uncomfortable with their skill level to sign up, as they'd be less likely to feel they're taking a spot from a skilled player.
|
Well, I'm interested in this kind of succession games. Sadly, while I am good with Civ2, I'm not that good with Civ4. Too many "bad" reflexes from civ2 (expand expand expand) and I find it more difficult to conquer cities in Civ4.
But well, i picked up the game recently, so with good advice I might be able to do something.
So if you let me in, don't expect too much at first :3
|
Added. And sorry I haven't gotten this game up and running yet for those that have signed up. I've been busier than normal over the weekend (versus my 100% uptime on the computer ) and it looks like I will be for the next few days with things I have to do. However, as the poll results are in favor of certain options, it looks like the only thing that hasn't been decided yet is what difficulty we're playing on. As Huge map size is comfortable leading the poll, and Epic is dominating, those are the settings we'll most likely be playing, so I think we should wait until we have about ten people before starting the game. Of course it's no problem adding people, but this gives me an excuse to do what I need to do in the next few days, and hopefully I won't lag behind too much in starting it.
|
I'm interested in playing as well.
I'm pretty new to the game, but good advice should help out a lot. I also talk to TestSubject every day so I'll probably get help from him as well. I voted for Huge, Epic, Continents, Random Climate, and Noble difficulty. If people want to play on Prince that's fine too, I'm not too attached to any certain setting.
|
Newbie Civ4 player here, so sign me up for this.
Discovered Civ4 in the past week after seeing a thread on TL about the game, gave it a shot and was hooked right away. Amazing in depth strategy and feel about the game, been without a good TBS game after HoMM3 and never found another love to keep me busy at late hours building an empire and playing it out. I just love how you can achieve victory in so many ways in civ4, all requiring different strategies and approaches to the game. Been reading alot on civ fanatics, crash coursing the beginner things and going a difficulty up at a time. I'm stuck on prince currently, and hope this will help me improve my game and learn from you and use the knowledge in my own 20 turns!
For anyone wanting to try out a great strategy game, definatly recommended, also the game + 2 xpacs cost about 10 bucks, so amazing value for money.
edit: Noble, Continents, Large, Temperate, Epic, everything else on including time. I'm fine with or without a cap, 10 players sounds reasonable per game. I think people should just play as they play, and learn from feedback or maybe insights into better strategies, makes it more enjoyable.
|
On June 07 2010 01:45 So no fek wrote:
I actually agree with your post in the other thread, Fen. People are probably just afraid of making mistakes and losing the game for everyone. While it's possible, I'm sure that we have enough higher level players to compensate, and I think it would make for a quite enjoyable game to have a selection of all skill levels. Maybe for the next game, since there's a pretty large selection of people playing now, you could take a sign up list with a person's rough skill level, then divide them in 2-3 teams (depending on the number of people), and start them off from the same save.
If you want to avoid people trying to play it safe for the team, perhaps it is an idea to set forth a list of goals from the onset (or amend the list from time to time). Goals could be
* the building of a specific wonder at 400BC
* getting x number of cities before 0BC
* destroying at least x other civilizations before 200BC
That way people will need to take risks and can do so with full justification. If this is any idea, starting simple with perhaps 1 or 2 short term goals would be best to test this out.
|
I'd like to jump in this one, if possible. The Emperor game is full and it's probably too good for me anyway. I can beat prince but not monarch.
|
Hey So no Fek... I know I'm playing on the Emperor game (I'm a monarch player trying to get to Emperor level) I would still like to place in this game. I think if you guys started at Noble level I could give out some helpful hints. Plus, I could help answer any questions people might have (or to the best of my ability of course)
The key here is for everyone to understand how Leaders and special units/buildings for those leaders affect the game.
For instance, in our Emperor game, we are the Romans with Julius Ceaser: (Organized and Imperialistic) -50% civic upkeep (nice) Double production of Factories, Courthouse, and Lighthouses (good also) and Imperialistic gives +50% settler production (good for expanding) and +100% for Great General emergence (really good once you get Military Science as the Great General can be put into a city to increase military production by 50%)
Our "specialized" stuff is: Praetorian 8 attacker (replaces swordsman 6 attacker) Which means, we have an early advantage against civs early (although axeman do still get the bonus against Praetorians) and the Forum building (replaces market) adds the +25% to getting a great person.
I don't have to play if you don't want me too, but I can help people with questions they might have.
|
On June 09 2010 00:14 catabowl wrote:
The key here is for everyone to understand how Leaders and special units/buildings for those leaders affect the game.
With the exception of game breaking units like praetorians/quechuas, traits and UU/UB won't dramatically change fundamental gameplay. With the same map, different leaders played by the same player should choose to expand/rush, go the same tech paths, and improve the same tiles almost identically.
|
On June 09 2010 06:41 igotmyown wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2010 00:14 catabowl wrote:
The key here is for everyone to understand how Leaders and special units/buildings for those leaders affect the game.
With the exception of game breaking units like praetorians/quechuas, traits and UU/UB won't dramatically change fundamental gameplay. With the same map, different leaders played by the same player should choose to expand/rush, go the same tech paths, and improve the same tiles almost identically.
True, but on the lower levels you can still get "certain" wonders if you don't have the traits. Like, you could build the stonehenge on Noble if you didn't start with Myst... but on the higher levels, you have no shot.
|
So on lower levels, traits and starting tech matter even less.
|
|
|
True on that. But still knowing the basics about traits will help you ultimately. Just b/c you can "5 pool (on Noble against Really) and win, does not mean you can 5 pool (on Emperor against Flash) and win. :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
