Epic One: Sullla's Report

[Bruindane]

Beelining for Forges I bet it be the true stength of industrious civs at the higher levels. Personally, I glossed over this completely but getting forges quicker is a much bigger deal than say building theaters faster with a creative civ.

Gandhi backstab? Did you compare Gandhi's relations with Washington to yours? I had nothing but steadfast support even though Gandhi and Washington were +10 to each other, I was +20 and +19!

[Ormiss]

Thanks for the detailed report, Sullla! (Why do you write it with three Ls sometimes, and sometimes two? Personally I think Sulla with two Ls looks better... I guess there's a story there somewhere?)

You've got the walkthrough mindset firmly stuck in you, which is great. For a newbie like me, I devour any and all commentary you make to justify your decisions. Every time you choose something over another thing, I'm always curious to hear a detailed reasoning as to why you chose it rather than the other options. Thanks for that; it really helps my understanding of the game. This report gave me a number of things to keep in mind for the future.

As for the Diplomatic Victory: I ran into this the first time I tried diplomacy (I played Tokugawa on an archipelago with small islands and ended up with a really small island just north of the south pole!) and reached the conclusion that it was very realistically built: Just like in real life, the UN is completely useless, unless you've already conquered the world.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that diplomacy should be the tiny nation's best bet of winning a CIV game. Therefore I think that the way the UN works at the moment is unfortunate. Just my two öre (Swedish cents, so they're not worth nearly as much as yours.)

Thanks again!

[ukrneal]

Yours was the first I read and I'm pleased to see that at least one person (probably more) chose a different starting location (from the original). That usually makes for a different and fun game.

Actually, I think it's logical that Ghandi did not change his vote because you made a small change. Is it possible that his relationship was even better with Washington than with you? Or is there a mechanism that prevents him for voting you over the top. If a human player was in his place, and he thought he could take you, he might have voted 'no' too. This is all speculation, but perhaps there was some logical reason.

I only just got the game, but am excited with all the new people here. Now if only I could play at work....

[Sirian]

Now if only I could play at work....

I used to think that, too.

Who says dreams can't come true?


- Sirian

[DaveShack]

Nice report, I really like the way you explain why certain moves are good in certain situations.

On domination victory, if you accepted an early alliance with someone else vs. Gandhi would that have been enough to push him over the edge into declaring war later on, to meet the honorable definition and let you conquer him?

[Drasca]

On domination victory, if you accepted an early alliance with someone else vs. Gandhi would that have been enough to push him over the edge into declaring war later on, to meet the honorable definition and let you conquer him?

That is a difficult gamble for these reasons:
0. You have very little control over when your ally asks you to go to war. I do believe they are more likely if you gift them military units however.
1. It may or may not be possible to conquer Ghandi, especially if he has a defensive pact with washington (varies per game)
2. Under this ruleset, you must offer peace if your war ally (that requested war) has signed a peace treaty with the faction they asked you to go to war with! This does not mean you must offer tribute for peace, but if Ghandi offers tribute for peace when your ally asked you to go to war and has made peace with Ghandi, you must accept.
3. If you ally yourself, and your ally is too successful, there may not be enough land left for a domination victory.
4. War timing. Even if you conquer an enemy that declares war on you (thus completely negating issue #2), you will fall behind in tech while warmongering, especially if it is a large enemy civ, it'll take some time to come back in tech. I did this a little too late in my game. I completely overtook Montezuma by 1742, but at the cost of being behind in tech . (Riflemen vs their infantry... and tanks soon). It also would've been wiser to stop warmongering earlier... but I was going for domination until then, and hated Monty...

[kryszcztov]

Great report, as usual, even if you didn't play a real Epic since Epic29 (those 5 pillars that I enjoyed so much), ie. right before I came in. The only thing I can say is that our games look very different, starting on turn 0. And I clearly have to play more, because I'm a few levels behind for the moment. I'm glad that you chose wisely yourself (signing peace with Monty), because I myself chose unwisely by deciding that both Genghis and Monty had chosen unwisely...

A quick note on the Diplo victory, that you won't like. I still think that this victory just plain sucks. It makes no sense, never works, and describes AIs as objects whereas we all want them to look like real players. They really should get rid of it, and add some kind of commercial victory, to counter the logical spaceship victory (that'd be interesting : Representation or Universal Suffrage ?).