Your Civ VI Wish List.

[Unorthodox]

The merc forum is open:  http://apolyton.net/forumdisplay.php/279-C4DG-The-Mercenary-Team

Contract history:  http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/162033-Merc-Contract-History

Cliff notes version:  We started on a continent with 2 other teams.  Sarantium and Horde.  Roughly Triangular continent/setup.  Going into the game about the only team Sarantium hated more than the idea of team Merc was the Horde, from player feelings about a former game.  I very well knew this as I kinda sorta used to keep psychological profiles of frequent demogame members. 

Horde kill one of our settlers early (lucky 50-50 odd strike, iirc), thus we go to war to get paid, but only half-heartedly, hoping to involve Sarantium.  Sarantium seizes the opportunity and pounces thinking they'll join in a dogpile.  As suspected, Horde then makes peace with us and hires us to attack Sarantium.  Sarantium now pissed off we bartered peace with Horde ALSO hires us to attack the Horde. 

When each team finally finds out we're playing both sides (MERCS.  DUH!) They both get pissed, and jointly concoct a plan to eliminate the Mercs, have us sacrifice the units they've hired on each other, and jointly invade along 2 fronts.  WE FOLLOW THROUGH AND SACRIFICE OUR UNITS TRUE TO OUR WORD EVEN THOUGH IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUST TO WEAKEN US.  Simultaneously someone took advantage of team Merc policies of everyone being allowed in, created a DL, joined  team Merc and sabotaged a turn, whipping recklessly in all cities, and moving the army out of position.  (verified with administration, I won't name names, it was kept hush hush for the better of the community and I'm not entirely sure what name they may go by these days) 

In a particularly satisfying moment, we still beat back both invading armies, had a choke on the Horde and had broken and invaded Sarantium, all the while trying to sue for peace as all we wanted was the gold.   

High points of our victory involve the unorthodox  philosophy of defending against horsemen with horsemen of our own (Spears were REALLY BAD in Vanilla Civ IV when you do the math, actually) and ignoring the obvious choke point to force Sarantium to split their defenses (Hiked our army around their stack of doom, daring them to attack us on the hills, once outflanked, our force was more mobile). 

A bilateral compensation was drafted with a Horde/Sarantium alliance forming and agreeing to pay us off.  I don't know if they ever would have followed completely through as about this time, it was discovered one civ had emerged as the sole survivor of the other 4 civ continent and garnered an insurmountable lead, so the game stalled. 

Sarantium, particularly come away with hard feelings, thinking I purposely manipulated them for my own amusement.  The bone of contention is they thought an agreement to trade them a tech on turn Y meant they would have peace from now until Y.  When the Horde hired us for 10 turns that would have ended before Y, Mercs saw no problem following the money.  They say I lie and or misrepresented how the contracts work.  It's all in public, I stand by my interpretation. 

[Oerdin]

I hope 1UPT goes into the dustbin of history but it doesn't look like that will happen.

[Rusty Edge]

No, but it sounds like siege could be more like Civ III, something that attaches.
Also, with corps (still sounds like III, doesn't it? Well, they could do worse. ) and formations, it should help the A.I. with routing.

[Rusty Edge]

The merc forum is open:  http://apolyton.net/forumdisplay.php/279-C4DG-The-Mercenary-Team

Contract history:  http://apolyton.net/showthread.php/162033-Merc-Contract-History

Cliff notes version:  We started on a continent with 2 other teams.  Sarantium and Horde.  Roughly Triangular continent/setup.  Going into the game about the only team Sarantium hated more than the idea of team Merc was the Horde, from player feelings about a former game.  I very well knew this as I kinda sorta used to keep psychological profiles of frequent demogame members. 

Horde kill one of our settlers early (lucky 50-50 odd strike, iirc), thus we go to war to get paid, but only half-heartedly, hoping to involve Sarantium.  Sarantium seizes the opportunity and pounces thinking they'll join in a dogpile.  As suspected, Horde then makes peace with us and hires us to attack Sarantium.  Sarantium now pissed off we bartered peace with Horde ALSO hires us to attack the Horde. 

When each team finally finds out we're playing both sides (MERCS.  DUH!) They both get pissed, and jointly concoct a plan to eliminate the Mercs, have us sacrifice the units they've hired on each other, and jointly invade along 2 fronts.  WE FOLLOW THROUGH AND SACRIFICE OUR UNITS TRUE TO OUR WORD EVEN THOUGH IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUST TO WEAKEN US.  Simultaneously someone took advantage of team Merc policies of everyone being allowed in, created a DL, joined  team Merc and sabotaged a turn, whipping recklessly in all cities, and moving the army out of position.  (verified with administration, I won't name names, it was kept hush hush for the better of the community and I'm not entirely sure what name they may go by these days) 

In a particularly satisfying moment, we still beat back both invading armies, had a choke on the Horde and had broken and invaded Sarantium, all the while trying to sue for peace as all we wanted was the gold.   

High points of our victory involve the unorthodox  philosophy of defending against horsemen with horsemen of our own (Spears were REALLY BAD in Vanilla Civ IV when you do the math, actually) and ignoring the obvious choke point to force Sarantium to split their defenses (Hiked our army around their stack of doom, daring them to attack us on the hills, once outflanked, our force was more mobile). 

A bilateral compensation was drafted with a Horde/Sarantium alliance forming and agreeing to pay us off.  I don't know if they ever would have followed completely through as about this time, it was discovered one civ had emerged as the sole survivor of the other 4 civ continent and garnered an insurmountable lead, so the game stalled. 

Sarantium, particularly come away with hard feelings, thinking I purposely manipulated them for my own amusement.  The bone of contention is they thought an agreement to trade them a tech on turn Y meant they would have peace from now until Y.  When the Horde hired us for 10 turns that would have ended before Y, Mercs saw no problem following the money.  They say I lie and or misrepresented how the contracts work.  It's all in public, I stand by my interpretation.

My impression is that team Merc had an outstanding credibility rating.
Well, the constraints were Confidentiality, Honoring Contracts, but you needed to have that to make the business, work.

The problems were Communication  and the subject of buying "Mercenary Insurance", because it 1) verges on a permanent alliance, 2) it's potentially difficult to discuss that without hinting at existing contracts or lack thereof. Probably better to have a policy of saying that the best way to protect yourself is to keep us fully employed.  Or of not discussing it, only shopping it around when things are slow.

But it was a noble experiment!

[Unorthodox]

I can't find the other two experiments.  One is gone for good, I'm not sure where the other ended up.  Team Pirate was a little more...uncivilized.  We COULD be bought but we were more proactive about taking things for our own gain as well. 

[Rusty Edge]

While V tried to put in some interesting things diplomatically with hosting the Olympic games or World's Fair, in general, I find diplomacy more closed than it used to be. III felt more wide open than IV , and IV more open than V. I understand that humans can abuse A.I.s, but if you can program limits to re-declaring a war , why can't you do something similar with regard to a tech trade? Or why can't things be more open where humans are concerned? Again, either a hard rule for human-human, or a check box option.

Oh well.

[Rusty Edge]

New Topic-

Civ I had a customizable palace that was built piece by piece by your subjects when they were happy with you.

III had a trophy room at the end of the game, with the vanquished leader's heads sticking through the wall.

Civ Rev had a Throne Room. I understand that one of the versions of II had something similar.


I wish that they would bring something like that back. For the sake of glory and story.

[Unorthodox]

New Topic-

Civ I had a customizable palace that was built piece by piece by your subjects when they were happy with you.

III had a trophy room at the end of the game, with the vanquished leader's heads sticking through the wall.

Civ Rev had a Throne Room. I understand that one of the versions of II had something similar.


I wish that they would bring something like that back. For the sake of glory and story.

I never particularly cared for those. (well, maybe if I wasn't addicted to poprushing my people would have been more happy and built more stuff for me) Now, what would be NICE is a list of benchmark achievements more akin to SMAC. 

First tech researched year x. 
First military victory year Y. 
First civ to start religion.
Built wonder year Z

Etc.  They kinda worked like steam achievements long before those existed, and resetting each playthrough. 

They could even have some unique to civs/leaders. 

I'm forgetting what SMAC called those, but they always interested me more than the throne room stuff.  (that's not to say the two ideas couldn't be coordinated together.) 

[Buster's Uncle]

Monuments.

[Rusty Edge]

I'm fine with Monuments for actual acomplishments as opposed to building them to produce culture. It sounds cool.

Steam achievements - well sometimes I think they're geared to selling me stuff, rather than doing anything that makes sense in a game context.