Oh anon, immortal leader of one of the chosen civilizations, you and fellow anons must direct the peoples of <insert civ here> to full glory. You see there is computer terminal out there with one highly driven fellow who has decided to play a game. A game against himself. For days this fellow played, directing all the moves for each of the ten nations placed on the map of a civ5 game, taking the time and putting in the effort to fully reach the potential of each of the nations. But now he offers up one of these nations for you to direct. Will you lead that civilization to new heights, or will it fall and turn to sand in your hands.
Welcome, so I'm playing a civilization 5 game with the two major expansions. It's a hotseat game, meaning I'm controlling all the players in the game, and I've been doing it for awhile. I'm the kind of guy who used to play monopoly against himself when I was a child, I have a very active imagination and I thought, why not play a full civ game in which I play to the best of my ability for each nation? And that's what I've begun to do, I'm already 120 turns into the game which really translates to I've played 1,200 turns for each nation on the map(mostly consisting of figuring out the best resource collection tactics and moving units to explore the map, REAL fascinating guys realllll fascinating stuff). I'm hoping to play the game in a way that leads to some really fun political events, crusades/proxy wars/neo-imperialism/territory disputes, we could have religions based around the sun pony, and another religion based on the moon pony(get a catholic/orthodox religion divide in the mix), just think "Super Model UN". When it comes to wars/diplomacy I'm going to play each nation to the best of my ability's, so the game is going to be as fair as I possible can make it when it comes to how nations treat each other.
Final thing, this is going to be a long long long long game, I LOVE civilization, but even I get tired of playing 100's of turns to get a 10 turn farm to be built. So I'm moving at the pace of 10 turns a day(or 10 turns for each player, equaling 100 turns), so everyday at some consistent time I'll check in, give updates, look for the inputs that you have for the next moves or what to build. Think of it like a news site, a slowly evolving world you can come back and check in on daily.
Anyway's let me introduce you to the nations around the our little world. First up, we have the Zulu. Pretty good starting position, but wasn't really going for faith(I figure whatever you guys would want to create a religion around Celestia, so this wouldn't be the best civilization for that). I'm going to go though and present each civ with a map/social policy's/tech tree, feel free to ask for more information on any of these nations. More to come in the next post
138 replies and 100 files omitted.
Next we have Poland/Denmark
Denmark(tech tree)
Sweden/mongolia map
rest of Mongolia
the Incan's
The Aztecs
part of the Persia
>>417Civilization is unquestionably the greatest game series ever to exist in all of human history. I play it almost religiously. I used to lurk Civ Fanatics forums a lot, and enjoyed the play-through threads there. It's good to see one on mlpol. Personally I most prefer Civilization 4 for its infinite modifiability, have played Civ VI some, and have almost never played Civ V.
So... Um... What are the two expansions, what's our civilization, and what's our starting position?
Persia tech tree
Egypt
Map of Siam
>>422Well, our starting point is whatever you guys want. I a huge fan of civilization 4, they have some of the greatest mods out there that put the actual game to shame. But Civilization 5 has some great mechanics, I love the idea that the world get's divided into three ideological camps in the late game.
As for where we start, that's up to you anons to decide, any of these nations are good starting points. Once we pick a nation to play the game with, you guys can direct me on what to do turn from turn. Trust me, since this I'm playing all the other nations, it will be one hell of a wild ride, everything from religious genocide to trade pacts will happen in this game.
But yeah, so every day I'm going to be playing 10 turns(or 100 individual turns for each country). This is marathon speed on a huge map, continents plus.
http://www.strawpoll.me/13431343Here's a poll for your vote on which nation to play as
>>425Well...
Since mlpol is pretty Eurocentric, I'd say go with a European nation, like Poland, Sweden, or Denmark. I have very little experience with civilization 5 and don't feel like I can judge city placement at all. Are the mechanics essentially the same as in Civilization 6, minus the districts feature? Because otherwise I don't know. But it looks to me like Denmark is in an unenviable position so far as expansion opportunities go, Sweden has potential both on the coast to the east and inland to the West, and Poland, which has two cities, has what looks like three tiles on the coast to the south of Krakow which are a prime location for a new city
How is this going to work? Is it certain digits decide certain things, or does whoever posts first get to make the decisions?
>>428City placement is all about the resources the city can take in, which in this game each city can work up to 3 hex's away from the capital(I havn't played civilization 6 yet, I've been playing civilization 4 for years and just this year decided to make the leap into the future!... Or future relative to where I was)
>>429I have a lot of ideas on how to go about this, I think I might write it in a way that feels like all those /civ/ roleplaying threads you might find on 4chan. Kind of turn it into a story.
But fundamentally every day I'll be playing 10 turns(that's as much as I can handle because that means playing all then players Zulu->Poland->Denmark->Sweden->Mongolia->->-> == one real turn) So every day I figure some kind of consensus will have been made as to what to build next, what Tech to research, if were going to war, etc.
Think of it like a story that is always going on, you guys will be behind what trade deals we make, what wars we declare, how to handle all the other nations and there actions as time goes on.
I'm looking forward to this, this will be fun.
>>433Hahaha, it really is going to be fun, I'm going do some really crazy stuff with it. Like, having other more advanced nations force you to sell all of your strategic resources to them, or multiple countries calling for restriction of trade to <insert_militaristic_rogue_nation_here>
Anyways, Poland would be my choice, they are already going down the religious route and have two city's and good paths to growth. You guys could create a religion around KEK or something MLP related or just some meme in general if you want. Also, obviously you guys can rename the city's and units
The game is going to last up to 140ish days, so things you do now will be set the stage for future anons.
>>427>My first thoughtsZulu looks like good position for expansion north to the river.
Poland looks like a really good position to resources. They just need to expand and kill the tribe people.
Denmark is hard to tell how it will go they have potential, but also potential for big struggle.
Sweden looks like good position, but they only have free access to/from the desert like today so they will soon be sand people.
Mongolia has a good-ish position, but they are vulnerable, they will soon have to let people travel through their land.
Inca also have potential for good start Looks like they will be able to make a stronghold fairly soon.
Aztec is uncertain. They have fertile land for, but they might lack a few resources.
Persia is in a very good spot. But they have to go to war soon to expand or be locked in their peninsula.
Then there is Egypt could perhaps lock in another nation, but looks like that nation will have plenty of space unless Egypt takes it first. But looks like they are in a good position. Just need to get the fishing and expand west to get the mines.
Finally we have Siam. I love that they have Pony Vil, but they will struggle in the start. Jungle is a bitch for expansion before it is burned to the ground. But it also provides some cover.
>So who do I want to be...
Poland, Denmark, and Sweden, are the European civilizations in the game. Denamrk has a bad starting position, so I say Poland or Sweden.
If we go with Sweden, it appear Sweden is at the bottom of the bottom of the map, limiting expansion to the south, but also limiting attack. Expansion would be first to a city on the coast to the east, and then to a city on the west on a river tile. It looks like a desert to the North inhibits expansion slightly, and it can only go so far to the west. The northeast looks like it holds the most potential for expansion. But it's also unknown.
If we go with Poland, the next moves are obvious. A city to the south to take advantage of a good coastal position, and a city on the isthmus to cut off other civilizations in the south from settling in the area around the core. If that is accomplished, Poland will have an area to itself, or to only a few civilizations, and a clear idea of where other civilizations must attack from if they attack.
>>438Looking at the map again, it looks like Poland is at the top of the map. That means Poland can't expand far north at all, and also that it can't be attacked from there. I'm less sure about the area to the east.
>>435Poland has a very good starting point and would be a really fun nation to play.
But I want them to worship Ponies and have an ultimate goal of freeing all enslaved Poines (mislabeled as horses in the game) from their captivity in Pastures all over the world.
Here
>zulu
>poland
>denmark
>Sweden
>Mongola
>Inca
>Aztec
>Persia
>Egypt
>Siam
I've basically become obsessed with these maps given that I've been playing them everyday. The aztecs are uncertain, but they just completed the calendar tech meaning they could take advantage of all the stuff to there north. Sweden seems pretty isolated so far, but I'm guessing there must be something to my north. Denmark has room to expand, but Egypt is near by, Mongolia has the problem of sitting right between Persia and the rest of the world, so that would lead to conflict possibly. Incia and the Aztecs are right next door to each other, and the aztec's went down the Honer social tree, so that might end up in conflict some day. Eygpt is great, except it's surrounded by desert, they really need another settler, which might be my next goal for them. They have alot of gold though, so it's not all bad. Siam is surrounded by riches, gold/gems/citrus they kind of have it all and feel like one of the better starts.
>>443Oh, and Siam found the "ancient tech" of bronze working in a ruins 6 tiles away from their capital. They really have a good game going.
Right, and Poland I think is to the west of Mongolian/Persia
Once the real game get's going I'm not going to revile anything about what the other players are doing.
I usually play the turns when I wake up, after some coffee. So I'm going to use the Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) when it comes to all time things related. Right now it's 7:56AM(UTC), so let's just say that when I wake up, probably around 6 or 7 PM(UTC) or about 11 to 10 hours from now I'll look at the staw poll and use that country to gather input as to the next moves we make as a nation. That's our next step in this, I figure a few more people might appear, and as time goes on more and more will notice and participate(optimism!) But whatever happens, I was planning to go foreword with the game so there is no fear of this project being canceled, unless a mod says otherwise. Things will be slow for a week or so, but the game will really start to pick up when we reach 300+ turns
I probably should have kept my mouth shut about Poland, because it's the winner of the straw poll and other might think I railroaded the decision. But no matter, Poland is a good choice and it's one of the civilizations that are moving down the religion route. I sense the sun pone cult will soon make it's entrance to the world stage. PRAISE THE SUN
Anyways, let me get the game up and I'll give you a quick run down about the poles.
Across the world the first real question of strategy was, to build a second city or to focus on growth? Poland had the advantage of having a decent production/food base so it went for the second city, and is now quickly catching up to having a 4 pop city. The two luxury resources around it's capital ensure that happiness won't be a problem for awhile. Having taken the piety social policy, the shrine in the second city seemed like a better priority then the granary. After finding a ruin that supplied the inintial warrior unit with spears, defense wasn't a problem and it allowed for the focus on the three building in the capital, yet now barbarians are starting to ramp up, and protecting the tile improvements calls for more military. Bronze working is being researched at the moment.
So, first off:
1.Should we change what each city is building
>>457>1.Should we change what each city is buildingHaving a few troops that can move with the expansion of territory protecting the outer borders are good so Warsaw should do what they do for the moment. Then Granary for expansion.
Krakow is to place I am a bit worried about. They need to exterminate the barbarian camp to the south and get some defence. But cultural expansion is good to have. Someone needs to weigh in, the barbarians look a bit too strong and bold for my liking... We better not give then any ideas that they are stronger than us in any way or form. And as long as they threaten Krakow, Krakow will stagnate in growth.
>>458I agree, taking out the barbarian heathens to the south is vital for the prosperity of Krakow, so keeping the warrior production choice in Warsaw is solid.
What about Krakow production, they could build a monument for more culture, or they could keep building the shrine for more faith. Given that it's only has one population, it really won't be a contributor to the kingdoms production at the moment.
So
Krakow should build:
1. Warrior unit
2. Shrine
3. Granary
4. Monument
I figure the stone age is going to be painfully slow, so I do plan to add more flavor. I'll come up with a story to go along with the game. But for now, how about naming the cities?
Give suggestions for what Krakow should be renamed, and in a few days we will change the name to whatever is most popular.
>>459Krakow might sadly have to switch to Warrior to deal with the barbarians so they don't become a long drawn out nuisance.
>>460Names for cities I have to think a bit about.. I might not be the most imaginative when it comes to this.
Alright, let me play a few turn then and report changes.
>>448The hell is UTC?
>>457Reeee... Poland won...
I've always felt like city spamming is a winning strategy. While Krakow is much to small to produce settlers any time soon, Warsaw should be allowed to grow to size 4, and when that size is reached, production should begin on a settler. It looks to me like barbarians are an issue. Krakow, or possibly both Krakow and Warsaw, should begin production of additional warrior units to take care of barbarians, and to escort future settlers. I'm less certain as to what should be done in terms of buildings
>>463>the hell is UTCI had to pick a timezone to coordinate when I would be here.
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/aboututc.htmlSettle spam definitely could work.
>>461We could name it ponyville, I'm working on the story for the game and will start adding character lore tomorrow or so. Something Something, anon ends up becoming an immortal leader somehow and has to live though 100's and 100 of years directing his followers to do basic things, like building a shrine. #stoneageproblems
Good news from Warsaw! The Farm has been finished and it's adding to the speed of growth in the capital city! Thoughts on what the workers should do next? Also, the brave spear men have defeated the barbs roaming around Krakow and are currently celebrating in the streets while they recover for there next mission.
We do have Trapping, so we could improve the ivory or the fur.
>>465What fur? All I see is three Ivory resources. I don't really know what technologies are required for the Civ 5 terrain improvements, so I'm not sure what all of the possibilities are
>>466To the east of Warsaw there is a fur luxury resource. Here is a guide written in 2010, I don't know off the top of my head how tile improvements effect resources, so maybe this could help.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/tiles-resources-and-improvements-a-guide-to-explaining-yields.382196/As for the tech to build the improvements, we currently have the ability to improve all the current resources around the two cities(I'll let you guys know about the other tech needed as it becomes relevant)
Right now we can create
Farms for more food
Mines for more production
Camps to collect the ivory and furs
pastures to collect horse/cattle/sheep
So, outside of Krakow there is a horse resource we could go and improve, I think it would turn it into a 3 hammer/ 1 food tile, and by the time the city grows to two pops, it would be ready. That way we don't have to sacrifice food for production.
Here
We should use the worker to:
1. improve a luxury resource for more global happiness
1.a Go after whatever will make us more gold/food
1.b Go after whatever will make us more production/gold
2. Use the worker to improve resources around Krakow
2.a Food focus
2.b production focus(build up the horse first before the mine on the hill because the horse give food)
>>4641. build a farm around warsaw for more food
2. build a camp for ivory(not sure what it gives in terms of hammer/food/gold)
3. build a camp for fur(no idea hammer/food/gold)
4. build a pasture around the horse in Krakow(3 hammers/ 1 food)
5. write in
>>468For the time being farming and road between the two cities is most important. Luxuries count for nothing if cities aren't connected. Horses in the start are most useful when you get horsemen in my opinion, so it can wait.
>>470So, should we build a farm next to the other farm around Warsaw?
>>471I think just below the horses is best position at this moment.
>>472So that it's protected by the mountains? I see, good thinking