Weekly World War

[Uriens]

I could try to participate in this one. Sunday evening (Europe) suits me best.

[Lightbringer]

We'd be glad to have you aboard! Sunday eve in Europe is early afternoon over here, I'd have no problems with that, but I think a few others might have obligations. I've dealt with Euro/American time difference difficulties before, and what might have to happen is two seperate games. One for the grouping want/needing/able to play 6-8 hours earlier. Lets go fishing and see if many other European players would be interested. If not, then we can look at afternoon timeframes (U.S.), or maybe sometime in between the two extremes. (kind of late for you...maybe after an evening nap....and kind of early for those who want an American evening time slot)

[rhjyyz]

Ya, the problem with AI is that the game will come down to who manipulate the AI's the best. I know everyone loves to beat up on the AI, but I play MP for the human factor, not the AI fodder. I can do that in SP.

[Lightbringer]

I agree with you in general principal Rhj, I am helping set this up to play with, and compete against, other Humans. When next I shanghai some players into a "one night stand" I'm going to push VERY hard for a much smaller map for just that reason. I've got two points to make for including some AI in a multi session game though...

I mentioned earlier, but I'll be more plain with it now; I want to tailor the mapsize to fit the number of players. Meaning, that if we have 3-4 players showing up every week, I don't want to have to slog through 4 AI regions before I have to start figuring out how to deal with human player X. So please don't keep the image of this being an automatic world map, we might end up on a much smaller region.

Secondly, please remember that this is intended to be a long, detailed, and arduous undertaking. That was the whole point, was it not? So even if you don't have much to do with the other humans playing the first week, or even the second, eventually you are going to come up against the other non-AI regions and deal with them. I highly doubt that you will watch the AI's destroy all the other players before you get a good strong dose of the Human factor. It might take some time, but again, to play this game in it's larger aspects, and with detail paid to "down the road" consequences, everything is going to take some time.

As far as other, more experienced players grabbing the lion's share of the AI spoils? Well I'm concerned over that as well... but that is part of playing with other humans. If there was no AI available to divvy up between us all, I'd have to be worried from day one who was gonna march in and divvy ME up! With at least some cushion, I can get some recon on how the other humans are playing, and who knows? I might just be able to snatch up my own share of the pie while the other humans are not focused directly on me.

Your opinions are as important as mine or any other players in this...so lets keep the dialogue going and feel-out where the comfortable middle ground is for everyone.

Be well.

[Samuel the Great]

I agree with Lightbringer.

[tkobo]

The problem with multiplayer games now, is that the only features that really matter in the game are war oriented.

There is NO way to win by non-militaristic means (without setting them specifically in the victory conditions).

AND

Even when victory conditions are set for possible non-violent ways to win (like reunification or score),over the top aggression often is the more successful route to winning even then( You dont have to worry about a reunification vote, IF there are no other regions left on the map)(your score can go thru the roof with the added population ,resources,etc.. that come from successful wars)

Multiplayer games,even with alternate victory conditions set, still promote war.
To me, theres so much more to this game than just a war game.

There needs to be some serious drawbacks to war in the game.

[margab]

But an MP game would be boring without war...

[Samuel the Great]

Oh, I disagree with that tkobo. The economy and diplomacy are simply means to make your nation better at war.

[bergsjaeger]

Sadly if this is going to involve world war 3 I won't be able to play along with u all for reasons most should know. Course I can try to play the bigger maps. Never really tried. And still wondering y u pointed me and Red out as the ones that would wipe out ur "pet" AI allies. Red would I know. Course I might too. But anyways if it involves smaller maps I join in. As for mp games without war. Don't think it be possible unless u have ppl playing that are stead fast at not DoW on u and Red not one of the players. And yes a Mp game without war would be boring.

[Lightbringer]

As usual the answer is somewhere murkily in the middle...

Tkobo does indeed make valid points concerning the lack of totally economic /social roads to victory. Considering how completely inept the AI is at any sort of concerted and extended aggression (at least when the target is human), a score victory game in say...WWIII might be interesting. Play with a few rules such as: No aggression against the AI's. You would be allowed some freedom to fight back effectively if/when they attacked you, but no conquering would be allowed. A few hexs here and there for a better defensive position or some "just over the border" resources, but the instant a capital surrenders to you the rest of the Humans would be (within our own set of game rules) justified in nuking you or economic sanctions ..etc etc etc. The rules could be worked out.

That being said, StG and Margab are right as well. The purpose of an elite socio-economic effort is to make going to war with you a stupid thing to do. I can cover ALOT mediocre generaling when I'm churning out dozens of M1-A5s, top of the line long range AA, F-22's and all those really neat toys the rich countries tend to have blueprints to after having a vituoso at their controls. And although I dislike having my toys broken, what good is having the best bike on the block, if you never ride it?

Let us have a discussion concerning rules for a "Pacifist's Guide to WWIII" type game Tkobo. With the proper set of rules in place, and a few people willing to give it a try, (as a new way to play if nothing else) we could detour arround that whole "war is King" way of playing.

[Lightbringer]

LOL actually Berg I envisioned you completing research on...and using Nuclear weapons on my little AI buddies... It wasn't meant as an insult, and I freely admit I was stereotyping you and Red "off the cuff" so to speak.
My bad

(btw.. what reasons are there, that you can't join in?)

[Khapheen]

Hello everyone,

I would love to participate in a weekly game if it ends up being feasible. I've had the game for a while, but am not very good. I'll have lot of free time after the middle of August, could probably do any day.

[Lightbringer]

Good to meet you Kapheen, keep following these threads and we'll have something worked out sooner or later. At the very least I'll be bugging folks into playing "one night stand" games pretty regularly. Feel free to chime in with suggestions and ideas, and don't worry too much about being some uber genius at this game, I'm not, and it doesn't decrease my enjoyment of it.

[Khapheen]

Thanks, I'm leaving next week overseas for a month, but will have all kinds of time after that.

[bergsjaeger]

Y does everyone think I will use nukes? Oh yeah because I would. Nah. Didn't take it as an insult. Just thought it was funny u pointed me and Red out. And for my reasons of not joining. I got a dail-up connection. So either I slow down the game play or freeze the game all together if it involves a large map like World war 3. And to note something about Red. I may not be sure but I think i am the only one ever to make Red change his plans. Too bad I still lost but he had to wait over 6 months i think to finally beat me. But I proved he got predictable. I bet his not the same way now. Haven't played him in a very long time.