Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [Unity_Games] [SR] Adv.Civ

Expand Messages
  • Mark J. Edwards
    ... Actually I disagree, I thought it worked quite well, especially at what it was intended to do. The trading sessions had none of that tension or
    Message 1 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
      >
      >ADVANCED CIVILIZATION: Gary, Campbell, Phil, Mike, Mark, Bob, Steve, Bill
      >
      >This variant sort of worked, in that it put more trade cards into
      >circulation. However, without fear of receiving calamities, players tended
      >more than usual to hoard certain commodities in hopes of maximizing sets.
      >While this game rewards players who trade well, this variant seemed to
      >increase the rift between good traders and weaker traders.

      Actually I disagree, I thought it worked quite well, especially at what
      it was intended to do. The trading sessions had none of that "tension" or
      "sleazeball" feeling as there wasn't a sub game of "hot potato" going
      on. The result was quick (we had a 5 min limit that worked very nicely)
      free wheeling trading sessions.
      The inflation of cards was something we knew about going in and trading
      in the 3s, 4s and 5s is a good idea when playing Civ with or without such a
      variant (as most other players tend to have them). I don't think it
      allowed hoarding any more than in normal Civ either and as always, good
      traders fair well (used car salesman can rid themselves of calamities more
      easily too).
      If anything I would open up the trading even more by getting rid of the
      artificial min 3 card limit trade limit. That's obviously tied to the
      tradable calamities. So 2 for 1's, etc could be done and the 1s and 2s
      trade cards would be more valuable instead of just throw ins.
      I'd also give a player another trade card when they drew a non-tradable
      calamity. Again there's that double whammy effect where not only have you
      got a disaster coming that turn, but you're out a trade card to boot.
      I might up the number of meeples thrown into the bag when a trade
      occurs. So trades weigh in a bit more than the city count. As is, I don't
      think that anyone did much more than 3 (4?) trades on a given turn. So
      city count was a bigger factor. I think evening it out by throwing 2
      meeples in per trade might work better.

      There was a bit more bookkeeping involved though, remembering to throw
      in a meeple every trade and then dumping the bag and separating the meeples
      after calamities are done with. Not a big deal, but still more work.
      We also should have drawn out of the bag only when the calamity was
      about to be resolved, as opposed to assigning them all beforehand. There's
      no need to give foreknowledge of who has "Epidemic" coming to assign
      secondary effects.

      >City Status:
      >A|I|I|T|C|A|B|E
      >5|6|5|8|7|5|8|8
      >
      >This total of 52 cities is the high-water mark for the game.
      >
      >CALAMITIES: Seven calamities occurred this turn. Mt. Vesuvius erupted,
      >obliterating a couple of Illyrian provinces. Treachery yet again befell
      >Egypt, with the African insurgents this time taking control of Alexandria on
      >the coast. Famine struck Illyria, and was also felt in Babylon (8pts),
      >Thrace (8pts), and Egypt (4pts). Crete experienced a civil war, and Illyria
      >was the beneficiary, taking control of many holdings in Greece. A coastal
      >flood then took out another Cretan city. The Barbarian Hordes (perhaps the
      >Huns?) knifed their way into several Babylonian provinces. And an epidemic
      >struck Iberia, with the disease mysteriously spreading to Egypt (10pts),
      >Thrace (10pts), and Illyria (5pts).

      Actually I think I had 8 cities at the start of this turn, my high
      water mark. The flood took one and then the civil war took like three
      more. I never really recovered.

      >CIV CARDS: Campbell proved to be a savvy trader, capitalizing on a full

      It never ceased to amaze me what folks were willing to give
      Campbell. He's a shark!!!

      >Conflict erupted in the Middle East, with Crete and Assyria launching
      >attacks against Babylon. Assyria also started skirmishes with Thrace in a
      >successful effort to win back its northern Black Sea territories. All other
      >nations sought to recover from the previous turn's calamities and
      >concentrated on building cities.

      I don't think I started pestering Babylon that early. I was pretty
      much focused on taking my cities back from Bob at that point. I should've
      just looked for other sites for my cities, but his stinky Bob presence
      offended my senses!!!

      >CIV CARDS: Africa acquired [PO] and [MET], Iberia got [MED] and [AR],
      >Illyria received [PO] and [CO], Crete put a scare in his neighbors by
      >acquiring Monotheism [MO], Assyria discovered [DEI], Babylon looked upward
      >and found [AS], and Egypt acquired [LI], [CL], and [PO].
      >Babylon is still ahead of Iberia in Civ Cards, but only by -- 1290,1185.

      By this time I knew I was out of it, so I figured Monotheism would be a
      lot of fun. It was! Oh the depths my neighbors went to in order to escape
      it. Oddly the only ones I had ever targeted (by attacks) to this point in
      the game were Campbell and Bob (just trying to get my rebellious cities
      back from him). I'm not sure why Mike got so nervous. I think he was
      enthrall to Campbell's whisperings.

      ><snip> Crete then utilized its
      >monotheism ability to convert an Egyptian city in Gaza. Take that, Mike.

      Sans Mike's attack on me, I would've just taken one of my original
      cities back from Bob as Campbell had reduced his cities near me via calamity.

      >Congratulations, Gary!!!

      We kneel before Zod!

      >Gary is a cagey trader, and managed to corner the market in commodities 2 or
      >3 times during the game. His last conversion of trade cards into 445 pts
      >was timely, but certainly not the only reason why he won. He was never
      >really threatened in his corner of the board, as Bob and Bill mostly fought
      >each other. He maintained huge tracks of land throughout the game, and so
      >was always in a position to easily recover from calamities. Campbell had
      >the same thing going for him, but Mark and Steve (and the Barbarians) caused
      >enough grief to trip him up towards the end.

      Yeah the best traders did well, as is usual. Poor Campbell had the
      misfortune of having Steve and I as neighbors, while Gary had somehow used
      Jedi mind tricks on wild Bill to keep him at bay. I think Bob just wore
      out to the point where all his aggressive tendencies were lost! So while
      Campbell was brought back a bit by Steve and I, no one ever put any
      pressure on Gary, even when they had a chance.
      Of course Campbell deserved it, with the 2nd pick he took Babylon
      instead of letting one of the newbies have it. Wimp! Gary played the
      "I'll just lay low over here tactic" to perfection. Phil has that same
      quality so in these games you've gotta watch these types.
      Next time I'm going to take some civ between Gary and Phil and extract
      some blood. Lie low will yah! And if Campbell takes a wienie civ with his
      pick, I'll go after him full time. Then again I do have more vengeance to
      wreak on Mike and Bob (sure it was just a random thing that you got my
      cities, but I'll never forgive you nonetheless!). ;-) I figure the only
      people I'll keep the peace with are Bill and Steve, and Lord knows they'll
      end up attacking me at some point. They can't help themselves.

      >Thanks to Mark for hosting!

      NP and I forgot to thank you guys for trying out an untested
      variant. Thanks!

      Not sure I have the stamina to do Adv Civ more than once every couple
      of years, but it is fun to play.

      Mark


      "Logan... you renewed!"
      Francis-7
    • mrhaleon
      ... I don t ... I also think it would be a good idea, starting in like turn 8 or so, to have 1st, 2nd and 3rd place in Civ card points put 3, 2 and 1 extra
      Message 2 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
        --- In Unity_Games@yahoogroups.com, "Mark J. Edwards"
        <danger-mouse@c...> wrote:
        >
        > I might up the number of meeples thrown into the bag when a trade
        > occurs. So trades weigh in a bit more than the city count. As is,
        I don't
        > think that anyone did much more than 3 (4?) trades on a given turn. So
        > city count was a bigger factor. I think evening it out by throwing 2
        > meeples in per trade might work better.
        >
        >

        I also think it would be a good idea, starting in like turn 8 or so,
        to have 1st, 2nd and 3rd place in Civ card points put 3, 2 and 1 extra
        meeples in, just to reinforce the theoretical "tag the leader" aspect
        that the calamities are supposed to have.



        > There was a bit more bookkeeping involved though, remembering to
        throw
        > in a meeple every trade and then dumping the bag and separating the
        meeples
        > after calamities are done with. Not a big deal, but still more work.
        > We also should have drawn out of the bag only when the calamity was
        > about to be resolved, as opposed to assigning them all beforehand.
        There's
        > no need to give foreknowledge of who has "Epidemic" coming to assign
        > secondary effects.
        >
        >

        Also agreed... the foreknowledge was a killer on the game, and it
        wasn't helped by people even showing the non-tradeables they had
        during the trading round.



        >
        > >CIV CARDS: Campbell proved to be a savvy trader, capitalizing on a
        full
        >
        > It never ceased to amaze me what folks were willing to give
        > Campbell. He's a shark!!!
        >
        >

        You try playing this game with Adam, Matt and Kyle a half dozen times
        and see if it doesn't improve YOUR trading skills as well!

        The only two Civ games I've ever played where I did better than middle
        of the pack were this one and another one where Adam and Kyle weren't
        present.



        >
        > I don't think I started pestering Babylon that early. I was pretty
        > much focused on taking my cities back from Bob at that point. I
        should've
        > just looked for other sites for my cities, but his stinky Bob presence
        > offended my senses!!!
        >
        >

        Yeah, you didn't attack me during this turn. I think you DID land men
        on Cyprus though, which may have led to Phil's confusion on that one.



        >
        > By this time I knew I was out of it, so I figured Monotheism
        would be a
        > lot of fun. It was! Oh the depths my neighbors went to in order to
        escape
        > it. Oddly the only ones I had ever targeted (by attacks) to this
        point in
        > the game were Campbell and Bob (just trying to get my rebellious cities
        > back from him). I'm not sure why Mike got so nervous. I think he was
        > enthrall to Campbell's whisperings.
        >
        >

        Yeah, the Monotheism was a huge wakeup call to me. In hindsight, I
        should have kept better track of what you were buying. The moment you
        bought Enlightenment, I would have immediately changed my plans. I
        could easily have bought it during this turn and had monotheism by the
        next, had I paid more attention.



        >
        > Sans Mike's attack on me, I would've just taken one of my original
        > cities back from Bob as Campbell had reduced his cities near me via
        calamity.
        >
        >

        Yeah, I was never so happy to get calamity secondary effects as I was
        that turn...


        > >Congratulations, Gary!!!
        >
        > We kneel before Zod!0
        >

        Definitely... a scary-good player. Had I known that beforehand, I
        would definitely have taken something closer to him (though I believe
        Illyria and Africa were both taken by the time my pick came).



        >
        > Yeah the best traders did well, as is usual. Poor Campbell had the
        > misfortune of having Steve and I as neighbors, while Gary had
        somehow used
        > Jedi mind tricks on wild Bill to keep him at bay. I think Bob just
        wore
        > out to the point where all his aggressive tendencies were lost! So
        while
        > Campbell was brought back a bit by Steve and I, no one ever put any
        > pressure on Gary, even when they had a chance.
        >
        >

        Yeah, it felt like a bit of kingmakering towards the end, since the
        "attack the leader" stuff that you expect to see was so one-sided, but
        that's just the way these things fall out sometimes.


        > Of course Campbell deserved it, with the 2nd pick he took Babylon
        > instead of letting one of the newbies have it. Wimp!
        >
        >

        I would actually like to point out that I picked FIFTH, not second,
        Mark-o... And I was DAMNED surprised to have such a choice pick as
        Babylon left to me.



        > cities, but I'll never forgive you nonetheless!). ;-) I figure the
        only
        > people I'll keep the peace with are Bill and Steve, and Lord knows
        they'll
        > end up attacking me at some point. They can't help themselves.
        >
        >

        I have to say that I second that one... I've never had a neighbour so
        completely keep me on my toes as Steve did. There were very few turns
        the entire game where I didn't have to make some sort of defensive
        move or leave room in my calculations for possible harm from Steve.

        But to his credit, he did it in such a way that it only rarely
        actually became open conflict. Mostly he just made threatening moves
        that kept me wary (until the end), which is the smart way to do it, as
        conflict is as costly to the aggressor as to the agressee in this game...



        > >Thanks to Mark for hosting!
        >
        >

        Hear-hear! Thank you from me as well!



        --Campbell
      • Mark J. Edwards
        ... Yeah that s a good idea. I had originally toyed around with everyone getting to throw the meeple of their choice into the bag but that works a little
        Message 3 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
          At 12:22 PM 8/30/2005, mrhaleon wrote:

          >I also think it would be a good idea, starting in like turn 8 or so,
          >to have 1st, 2nd and 3rd place in Civ card points put 3, 2 and 1 extra
          >meeples in, just to reinforce the theoretical "tag the leader" aspect
          >that the calamities are supposed to have.

          Yeah that's a good idea. I had originally toyed around with everyone
          getting to throw the meeple of their choice into the bag but that works a
          little cleaner (and with less whining involved).
          One of my problems with the tradable calamities rules in Civ is that
          they were intended to target the leaders, but in my experience they were
          simply treated as hot potatoes and getting rid of them to *anyone* was
          preferable to keeping them. They just never "targetted" as much as you
          think they would have been.

          >You try playing this game with Adam, Matt and Kyle a half dozen times
          >and see if it doesn't improve YOUR trading skills as well!

          I can see that.

          >Yeah, it felt like a bit of kingmakering towards the end, since the
          >"attack the leader" stuff that you expect to see was so one-sided, but
          >that's just the way these things fall out sometimes.

          Yeah I think Gary got away with having more peaceful neighbors than he
          should have had. Did Psycho Bill ever attack Gary?

          Mark


          "Logan... you renewed!"
          Francis-7
        • mrhaleon
          ... than he ... I do not believe so, no. The only exploration teams I recall him sending out were to Sicily and Egyptian territory. Westernmost africa was
          Message 4 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
            --- In Unity_Games@yahoogroups.com, "Mark J. Edwards"
            <danger-mouse@c...> wrote:
            >
            > Yeah I think Gary got away with having more peaceful neighbors
            than he
            > should have had. Did Psycho Bill ever attack Gary?
            >


            I do not believe so, no.

            The only "exploration teams" I recall him sending out were to Sicily
            and Egyptian territory.

            Westernmost africa was actually held more by Iberian troops than
            African for most of the game...


            --Campbell
          • Doug Orleans
            ... For a long time our group had the mantra when in doubt, pick on Gary . Somehow he still managed to always win despite this. I don t know if it s the same
            Message 5 of 8 , Aug 31, 2005
              mrhaleon writes:
              > > >Congratulations, Gary!!!
              > >
              > > We kneel before Zod!0
              > >
              >
              > Definitely... a scary-good player. Had I known that beforehand, I
              > would definitely have taken something closer to him (though I believe
              > Illyria and Africa were both taken by the time my pick came).

              For a long time our group had the mantra "when in doubt, pick on Gary".
              Somehow he still managed to always win despite this. I don't know if
              it's the same Gary but feel free to borrow the mantra if you play with
              any Garys in the future.

              --dougo@...
            • Phil Alberg
              ... Actually, we use a variation of that mantra at GSG: When in doubt, get Mark . Or Bob, if Mark s not at the table. So, it seems natural enough to extend
              Message 6 of 8 , Aug 31, 2005
                On 8/31/05, Doug Orleans <dougo@...> wrote:
                > mrhaleon writes:
                > > > >Congratulations, Gary!!!
                > > >
                > > > We kneel before Zod!0
                > > >
                > >
                > > Definitely... a scary-good player. Had I known that beforehand, I
                > > would definitely have taken something closer to him (though I believe
                > > Illyria and Africa were both taken by the time my pick came).
                >
                > For a long time our group had the mantra "when in doubt, pick on Gary".
                > Somehow he still managed to always win despite this. I don't know if
                > it's the same Gary but feel free to borrow the mantra if you play with
                > any Garys in the future.

                Actually, we use a variation of that mantra at GSG: "When in doubt,
                get Mark". Or Bob, if Mark's not at the table. So, it seems natural
                enough to extend this to "Get Gary".

                - Phil

                Games Played Last Night: Razzia (Dorra) x2, Trendy, Reef Encounter, Diamant x2

                --
                Eastern MA Gaming, Unity Games X - October 8, 2005 Waltham, MA
                http://www.unitygames.org/

                "When playing a game the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is
                important, not the winning."
                - Reiner Knizia
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.