Recommend
13 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization» Forums » Variants

Subject: Wiltgren's Solo TtA v.0.8.1 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Filip W.
Sweden
Linköping
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Euros are better with dice!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm sure that many of us who've purchased TtA have thought about making it into a Solo game. After all, TtA is eminently suitable for solo play – even with four people it's more of a multiplayer solitaire.

With that in mind I've thought out a preliminary set of rules (note the version number – it's not even a beta yet ). The guiding ideas are these:

1. The NPC opponent should be completely abstracted out of the game, i.e. only those statistics of the opponent which directly interact with the player should be used.
2. There should be as little bookkeeping as possible.
3. The NPC opponent should be an equal match for the player no matter what the player's playing style is, i.e. the opponent should be flexible.

So here are the rules:

Unless otherwise stated all rules are like in a normal two player game with the player going second.

Place markers for the player as normal but place only the score, culture and strength markers for the NPC. The NPC's culture and score start at 0, strength starts at 1.

Before the first round of play (the picking of cards and pre-production) there is no NPC action.

After each player round after the first do the following NPC action (Age refers to the current in game age, i.e. 1, 2 or 3):

1. Aggression and events: Draw (Age + 1) military cards and:
A) if there is an aggression card AND the NPC has more strength then resolve the aggression. If there are multiple aggressions pick one at random. If there is a war resolve it only if the NPC has (3 * age) more strength than the player, otherwise choose another aggression. If there are no aggressions then:
B) if there are one or more event drawn then place a random one of them into the future event pile, scoring for the NPC and resolving the topmost current event as usual.
2. Culture increase: roll a D6. if the D6 > 6-age then increase the NPC culture by 1. If the NPC's culture is less than the player's culture (less, not equal) then the trigger is 5 – age and the culture gain is DAge (i.e. 1, D2 or D3)
3. Strength increase: Increase the NPC's strength by D6 – 7 + 2*Age. If the NPC's strength is at least 2 * Age less than the player's then increase it by D6 – 7 + 3*Age instead. Ignore any negative results.
4. Move card row: Discard the first 3 cards for the player as usual, then discard a further 3 + (D3 – 1 min 0) cards. This means 3 cards plus a D3 – 1 (minimum of zero) cards, i.e. there will always be a minimum of 3 cards removed.

Aggressions against the NPC are resolved by drawing age + 1 military cards and adding any defensive bonuses to the NPC's strength. The NPC never sacrifices strength due to aggression. For the purposes of rewards count the NPC as having everything in sufficient numbers.

Colony settlements are resolved by the NPC drawing age + 1 military cards and bidding any colony bonuses + strength equal to a D3 if the NPC strength is less or equal to the player's strength. If the NPC's strength is at least 2* age more than the player's then add Age to the strength bid. The player must bid more than the NPC to win the colony, otherwise take the colony for the NPC and decrease the NPC's strength accordingly.

That's it folks.

Comments
The rules need lots and lots of playtesting. So far I've playtested them a couple of times and ironed out the most grave errors.

What works in version 0.8.1:
Age 1 and 2 works, including culture blance.
Aggressions in age 1 seem to work.
Game speed works – the average game takes slightly more than an hour.

What needs more work.
Aggressions in ages 2 and 3, especially wars.
Colony acquisition by the NPC.
Final scoring doesn't work at all (I need to play through more games and figure out the averages for every scoring card, help is very appreciated here.)

If you're interested in testing out these rules please do. Suggestions and comments are definitely appreciated. Playtesting results are even more appreciated. With any luck we could invent a working solo rule set together.

Edit 25 February 2008: I've gotten in a few more game tests and so far the only issue that's popped up (apart from those mentioned above) is whether the game is over too fast. One one hand, a two player game is fast, with lots of cards going away, on the other it makes the individual ages a bit too fast. I'm thinking whether a D6 minimum of 3 would be a better way to roll it than the 2 + D3 but that gives a 50% chance of not having any extra cards removed and that's just too little risk of losing those cards you might want.

Edit 26 February 2008: More game testing. I'm now at the point where I think that the NPC strength values need tweeking in the 3rd age. On one hand they're steadily climbing, on the other the NPC doesn't react as fast as it needs to to the player's strength increases meaning that a war over culture could potentially cripple it. So now I'm thinking it will need different rules for when wars are declared which goes a bit against the idea of keeping it simple. But I'm working on it.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
badge
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
filwi wrote:
After all, TtA is eminently suitable for solo play – even with four people it's more of a multiplayer solitaire.


I think we should put this notion to bed. There are quite a few subtle interactions that can have a huge impact on the players' games: card drafting, military build ups, aggressions, pacts, bidding on territories, resolution of events, etc. This game is not multiplayer solitaire! You are trying to build your civilization's engine AMIDST the competition from the other players. This fact becomes evident when the difficulties of simulating the whole game with a solitaire ruleset arise.

I'm all for solitaire play -- I LOVE Agricola solitaire (as well as multi) -- I wanna get my TtA fix as much as possible. I just don't think a solitaire version would be all that satisfying. I dunno, I could be wrong.


That said, I will try and test our your "alpha" version and see how it goes.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Webb
United States
Western Mitten
flag msg tools
designer
badge
GET A SILK BAG FROM THE GRAVEYARD DUCK TO LIVE LONGER.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I also appreciate the effort, and though I know that solo TtA lack many of the positives present in the multi-player game, a workable solo rules set could be a nice thing to have.

I'll post if I get a chance to try this out.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Filip W.
Sweden
Linköping
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Euros are better with dice!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:
There are quite a few subtle interactions that can have a huge impact on the players' games: card drafting, military build ups, aggressions, pacts, bidding on territories, resolution of events, etc.


Very true, but the game doesn't rely on direct interaction between the players. For example; you could not make a solitaire version of Chess or Go with a static rules set - but it might be possible with TtA. The difficulty lies in simulating the subtle interactions with a minimum of additional overhead. So far I haven't gotten even close, but someday, who knows?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Nisoff
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mb
I for one applaud the effort. I really hope a playable solitaire version will evolve, as I have just bought the game and only have potential opponents once a month or so. Your version may or may not be that; I haven't read the rules yet so I can't wrap my head around it yet.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
badge
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
omnivore wrote:
I for one applaud the effort. I really hope a playable solitaire version will evolve, as I have just bought the game and only have potential opponents once a month or so. Your version may or may not be that; I haven't read the rules yet so I can't wrap my head around it yet.


If you are really intent on playing it solo, then just play both sides of a 2-player game. That's what I do. It's impossible to surprise yourself, of course, but it is much easier to objectively make optimal decisions for each individual nation than it is to simulate an opponent via some algorithm.

Of course, if you can't "play fair" against yourself, then it won't work very well either.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd Nisoff
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mb
I hear what you're saying but I've always preferred defeating algorithms. Playing against myself seems too much like kissing your sister. (I don't mean YOUR sister specifically.)

I can play both sides objectively but it's just too dry, like playing both sides of a chess game.

Now a game where random challenges await; THAT'S fun to me.

Subsequent to yesterday's post I have played a simple game (three player) and an advanced game (two player.) I was up until one am despite having awoken at four the previous morning to go to work at five.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Larry Levy
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Best hobby, with the best people in the world. Gaming is the best!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Okay, Filip, I just finished my first solo game using your rules. The good news is that I enjoyed it and the game plays very fast. But there was also very little tension, as the outcome of the game was never in doubt. For most of the game, my culture score was 10-15 points higher than the NPC's. I wound up with 150 more points and that was before scoring for the Age III events (which, as you say, really doesn't work at present).

Maybe some things worked out for me. I benefited from some nice Age A events early on, but that's not that unusual. The NPC didn't roll well early on; his strength remained at 1 for most of Age I. A second game will verify if this was a fortunate result, but it was so lopsided it's hard to believe it could be attributed purely to luck.

Here are some of the issues I had with my game:

* The events seem broken. Obviously, the Age III events need work (I don't see any other way than a set of average values for each card, possibly with a random factor), but even the earlier ones didn't work. The only way the NPC can score is for a strength award, while any other positive card that is put in the pile is guaranteed to benefit me. Either the procedure needs to be made different than the one in the multi-player game or some set of average values, probably by Age, needs to be developed for the NPC.

* The NPC's culture score didn't seem to increase quickly enough. I have a tremendous amount of freedom to maximize my score. Key technologies, leaders, and wonders are almost always available for no more than two actions. So starting in Age II, I really started to pull away in culture. I think the NPC needs to increase faster than it would in a normal game. Maybe something like D6 > (5 - Age) [(4 - Age) when trailing], with the increase being 1, D3, and D5 in the three Ages would work better.

* The strength increase tended to work out okay. I was just trying to stay even with the NPC, but eventually I fell behind. My lead was so large, however, and my ability to increase my culture rate each turn so easy that I just took my chances with it. I did, however, try to stay close enough so that the NPC wouldn't use a War against me.

* The colonization rules were weird and seemed to help me even when I lost. First, I don't understand why the NPC won't sacrifice strength when his strength is only a little more than mine. But most of the colonies don't help him (only ones adjusting his strength would), so I either decide to sacrifice enough to gain the benefit, or let him win and lower his strength. The latter is often better for me, as it takes pressure off my keeping up with his strength increases. Like the other events, this was usually a win-win for me.

* I think the game length is about right, but maybe the NPC discards a bit too many cards. Maybe discarding D6 - 1 (min 3) would work a little better. I assume the extra cards that are discarded are the leftmost ones. I don't see any other way of doing this, but it does make the card selection very predictable. If a juicy card comes up in the 3 Actions section, you can afford to leave it, as it will not only still be there on your next turn, it will almost certainly only cost you 1 action. It would be nice if there was a risk of not taking such cards.

* There was a definite cost to falling behind the NPC in strength, as I lost several aggressions costing me 20 or so culture. But my lead in culture more than made up for this.

The variant shows enough promise to work on. I do want to try it again with the original rules. But I was wondering if you had seen any of these problems and if you had considered improvements to deal with them. Thanks, Filip.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Filip W.
Sweden
Linköping
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Euros are better with dice!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi Larry,

thanks for giving me your input! I've seen some of these problems but some of them were completely new. I'll keep a running comment below:

Larry Levy wrote:
I wound up with 150 more points and that was before scoring for the Age III events (which, as you say, really doesn't work at present).

Wow, I've seen some loop sided results myself but 150 is a record.

Quote:

Maybe some things worked out for me. I benefited from some nice Age A events early on, but that's not that unusual. The NPC didn't roll well early on; his strength remained at 1 for most of Age I. A second game will verify if this was a fortunate result, but it was so lopsided it's hard to believe it could be attributed purely to luck.

Well, that's not all that unusual. In my experience it should be around 3 or 4 at the end of the age but the averages aren't that great.

I've been toying with a system where the NPC would get a trigger roll and an increase roll but the system doesn't work that well in terms of keeping things simple. I'm still not convinced that it's a good solution but I'm not giving up on it yet.

Quote:

* The events seem broken. Obviously, the Age III events need work (I don't see any other way than a set of average values for each card, possibly with a random factor), but even the earlier ones didn't work. The only way the NPC can score is for a strength award, while any other positive card that is put in the pile is guaranteed to benefit me. Either the procedure needs to be made different than the one in the multi-player game or some set of average values, probably by Age, needs to be developed for the NPC.

Yeah, I've seen this problem too, but I haven't found a way to solve the visible increases yet. The way I've been thinking of is to let the NPC have two boards where they put bonus counters by some random decision. One board increases the chances to roll for culture, the other increases the chances to roll for strength. That way events would be at least partially beneficial to the NPC - and one could have the NPC suffer from bad events as well by removing counters. It would also solve the advantages for the NPC of taking colonies.

The troubles with this are that A) it complicates matter making the game slower and B) I haven't figured out a way to balance it yet. Suggestions and thoughts are highly appreciated.

Quote:

* The NPC's culture score didn't seem to increase quickly enough. I have a tremendous amount of freedom to maximize my score. Key technologies, leaders, and wonders are almost always available for no more than two actions. So starting in Age II, I really started to pull away in culture. I think the NPC needs to increase faster than it would in a normal game. Maybe something like D6 > (5 - Age) [(4 - Age) when trailing], with the increase being 1, D3, and D5 in the three Ages would work better.

I'll try this out and see how it balances. It seems like a good idea though and it could be a "handicap" too - if you want a more challenging game simply increase the culture increases.

I've tried handling culture a bit like strength, with larger and steadier increases, and have that balance out the age III events but so far it's been a complete flop - too much randomness in the scoring.

Quote:

* The strength increase tended to work out okay. I was just trying to stay even with the NPC, but eventually I fell behind. My lead was so large, however, and my ability to increase my culture rate each turn so easy that I just took my chances with it. I did, however, try to stay close enough so that the NPC wouldn't use a War against me.

How was the age III strength increases for you? Did they feel to small compared to what you could do?

Quote:

* The colonization rules were weird and seemed to help me even when I lost. First, I don't understand why the NPC won't sacrifice strength when his strength is only a little more than mine. But most of the colonies don't help him (only ones adjusting his strength would), so I either decide to sacrifice enough to gain the benefit, or let him win and lower his strength. The latter is often better for me, as it takes pressure off my keeping up with his strength increases. Like the other events, this was usually a win-win for me.

Yeah, I'm at a loss as to the colonization rules. I've tried different variants and they just don't work that great - either the NPC snatches up all the colonies at no cost or it becomes a win for the player no matter what. Suggestions on how to solve it are highly appreciated, especially ones that don't increase the complexity of the NPC algorithm (see above with the resource tables).

Quote:

* I think the game length is about right, but maybe the NPC discards a bit too many cards. Maybe discarding D6 - 1 (min 3) would work a little better. I assume the extra cards that are discarded are the leftmost ones. I don't see any other way of doing this, but it does make the card selection very predictable. If a juicy card comes up in the 3 Actions section, you can afford to leave it, as it will not only still be there on your next turn, it will almost certainly only cost you 1 action. It would be nice if there was a risk of not taking such cards.

I've tried doing it with trigger + step rolls so that the extra 1 or 2 cards are random, but that takes up too much rolling and gives too little back - most of the results aren't that interesting.

I've thought about having a single extra roll on a table where the NPC would take the first or last tech, urban, leader, wonder etc. instead of the fourth card. So far it hasn't given that much extra to the game but I think it's worth working on.

Quote:

* There was a definite cost to falling behind the NPC in strength, as I lost several aggressions costing me 20 or so culture. But my lead in culture more than made up for this.

The variant shows enough promise to work on. I do want to try it again with the original rules. But I was wondering if you had seen any of these problems and if you had considered improvements to deal with them. Thanks, Filip.


Once again; thanks Larry!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Larry Levy
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Best hobby, with the best people in the world. Gaming is the best!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Wow, I've seen some lopsided results myself but 150 is a record.

Well, there wasn't much concern over attacks and I could grab just about all the cards I wanted, so I was free to concentrate on my infrastructure and maximize my culture. I began with Aristotle and that and two labs gave me a good start on my science. My wonders were Hanging Gardens, Taj Mahal, and Eiffel Tower, all good culture additions. My Age I leader was Michaelangelo, seemingly a natural choice, and he really boosted my VPs, particularly when I added Organized Religion and upgraded both of my temples. Then when he bit the big one, I brought on Bach and went the theater route. I didn't even change my government until about a third of the way into Age III--there was just too many ways of adding culture.

The thing is, it seems the solo game might be solvable or at least play very similarly, as there's little to keep a player from doing the same things each time (at least, based on my one play). Do your games tend to play out similarly?

If so, one way of dealing with this might be to take some cards out of the decks before beginning play. For example, having only one farm and mine in each Age seems to be appropriate. I'd say do the same thing with each of the urban buildings and special technologies--only one copy of each. You could conceivably do the same thing with the military techs and governments, although now we're really reducing the number of cards in the game. Maybe you do that and play with three player rules--only remove two cards per turn, plus an additional random number for the NPC. Finally, I'd randomly remove one leader and one wonder per Age before the start of the game to show what the NPC is selecting. All these cards would be revealed at the start of the appropriate Age, so you know what the NPC is "choosing", but you can't plan for it too far in advance. What do you think?

Quote:
* The events seem broken.

Quote:
Yeah, I've seen this problem too, but I haven't found a way to solve the visible increases yet. The troubles with my solutions are that A) it complicates matter making the game slower and B) I haven't figured out a way to balance it yet. Suggestions and thoughts are highly appreciated.

I was thinking about this this morning. Why not continue to go the simple and abstract path that you've done with the rest of the variant and simply say that each positive event that is revealed gives the NPC a certain number of VPs? Things like additional food, ore, and bulbs aren't the same as VPs, but their benefit should indirectly lead to a higher score, so that really isn't a problem. Do the same thing with colonies the NPC wins. Off the top of my head, maybe something like 2, 4, and 6 VPs for Ages I, II, and III might work. The tough ones will be the "if you're leading in X, this happens". For those, we'd probably have to give the NPC an average value. I'll have to go back and check how many of these events there are.

Quote:
How was the age III strength increases for you? Did they feel to small compared to what you could do?

My tendency in multi-player games is to just keep pace with the military leaders and not try to gain too much with aggressions, so I'm probably not a good one to ask. The NPC was gaining enough strength in Age III for him to consistently win aggressions and to worry me about the prospect of wars, so for me, it worked just fine.

Here's one last very weird thought. To better reflect the unpredictability of what cards the NPC should be taking, maybe you should randomly remove some cards from each Civil deck before the game begins

Quote:
Once again; thanks Larry!

Oh, thank you, Filip, for coming up with this. I look forward to working on the TtA solo game!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Marjoram
United States
Harbor City
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I also tried this variant today. Firstly, thanks for the effort you took to put it together. I had an enjoyable time trying to beat your 'algorithm'. In light of the earlier comments, I tweaked things slightly in the following ways:

1. For colonization, I played that if the NPC won a colonization attempt, but the colony did not offer it any real benefit, then the NPC did not deduct any points from its Military strength. This seemed like a reasonable way to avoid it losing strength unnecessarily. I was happy with how that worked.

2. When discarding cards for the NPC I proceeded as follows: If n cards were to be discarded (not including those that are automatically discarded from the first 3 positions), then I formed pairs of cards starting from the lefthand end of the track, rolled a dice for each pair, and discarded the leftmost of the pair if the roll was odd and the rightmost if the roll was even). I continued this until the required number of cards had been discarded. If I needed to discard more cards than there were pairs I simply discarded cards from the lefthand end until the number of pairs that remained was equal to the number of cards that remained to be discarded. Despite having to roll the die a fair few times, I liked the uncertainty this introduced - I was unable to simply wait for card to be cheaper next turn since there was a roughly 50-50 chance that they would be removed.

3. Before play began I examined the cards that were removed form the deck in a two-player game and then removed an extra copy of each such urban or mining/agriculture card if that meant there was still at least one in the deck. (e.g. in age 1 I removed a further iron and agriculture-upgrade card [I forget the name of that one]). This helped make it more difficult to take these key cards into my hand.

I felt the military strength worked very well, and I was the victim of acts of aggression on several occasions, but the pace of the game did feel rather too quick for my tastes. I would have been happier discarding an average of 1 less card per turn I think. However, the outcome of the game was never in doubt as I was always well ahead on the culture track. I felt that culture increased too slowly for the NPC. I would actually argue for an automatic gain of 1 culture per turn in Age 1, 2 in Age 2, etc, with the die roll being made if the NPC was behind in culture to see whether it should receive a further culture gain that turn.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on these suggestions. I shall certainly be giving your variant another try in the near future, so thanks again for taking this initiative.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darrell Hanning
United States
Jacksonville
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
We will meet at the Hour of Scampering.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Please, don't misinterpret this - I started out with wargames, and wargamers are notorious for playing solitaire, if for no other reason than to try out new strategies.

But the reason I like boardgames closer to the Euro side, now, is that I get to play them with other human beings (particularly, more than one at a time), who have this funny way of screwing with my plans - even in games such as TtA. And it's a lot more fun to do that sitting at the same table with them, than it would be online, for instance.

I really can't see myself ever playing this game solitaire. What's the point, when I can get on the PC and play the inspiration for this game, solitaire?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Scatliff
Canada
Winnipeg
Manitoba
flag msg tools
It's about time, too.
badge
I hate overtext but love irony.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like this method so far of trying to make a standard "bot" to play against. But I wanted to find a version that didn't involve rolling dice and doing too much math. So I toyed with some ideas and have come up with this so far... some of the numbers may need tweaking.

Track the human tableau and stats as in a normal game. The Bot will only track its Strength (start at 1) and Culture (start at 0). Also, keep the pile of (3+) and (4+) cards handy for the current age at all times (removed from the civil decks, of course).

HUMAN TURN
Mostly as normal, with the following notes:

I. The Card Row
Empty the first three spots as normal. Then, of the cards remaining, remove the 1st/3rd/5th/7th cards of the ones still on the board, reading from the left. If the human player has any government other than Despotism, also remove the 9th (if present).

Example, at the start of your turn, the card row looks like this:

O _ O O _ / O O _ O / O O O O

(O = card present, _ = empty, / = break between civil cost sections)

...when you are done the card row should look like this:

_ _ _ _ _ / O _ _ O / _ O _ O

Then slide cards left and fill the row as normal. Process Age changes at this time if necessary.

II. Resolve a War

Human sacrifices first. Then the Bot will: if losing, sacrifice the lesser of (half its strength) or (enough to cause a tie); if winning or tied, sacrifice half of its current token lead.

III. Political Action

If an Aggression is played on the Bot: Draw (Age+1) Military cards. Use any defense cards drawn. If still losing, will sacrifice up to (Age) strength to defend, if that is sufficient. If not, the aggression is successful. (For the case of a Raid, use Urban Building value of (Age*3). For other aggressions, the Human player simply gains the spoils. Treat the Assassination aggression as a loss of 10 Bot Culture with no Human gain.)

If an Event is revealed, the Bot is only affected by culture changes. The Human player is affected normally.

If a Colony is revealed, shuffle the pile of 3+/4+ cards for the current age and draw one randomly. Look at the technology cost of the building. This is the minimum bid the Human player must make to win the Colony. If the Human does so, the Colony works as normal. If the Bot wins, it is only awarded Strength or Culture bonuses. Keep the Bot colonies near the tableau for purposes of the Annex aggression.

V. Civil Actions
The Human player is required to use all civil actions to the best of their ability. The Human may not simply decline actions to take advantage of convenient card row planning. (Trust me - this *will* come up.)

All other Human player phases proceed as normal.


BOT TURN

Important: If at ANY TIME (even on a human turn) the Bot's Culture score reaches a multiple of 5, increase its Strength by 1.

I. Resolve a War
Bot sacrifices first. Will sacrifice the lesser of (half its strength) or (its current strength lead, if any). It will not sacrifice anything if it is currently behind in strength.

II. Political Action
Draw (Age+1) Military cards. Play one as follows (if more than one option, play the first one drawn):

1. If a War is drawn and the Bot Strength lead is (Age*3) or more, play it. The Bot will then play three full actions on its turn (see below) regardless of relative strengths.
2. If an Aggression is drawn and the Bot has any level of Strength lead, play it. The Bot will then sacrifice Strength equal to (Age*2) to supplement the Aggression.
3. If an Event/Territory is drawn, play it into the Future Events pile, score culture as normal, and resolve the event.

(Discard the remaining Military cards.)

III. Military Actions

If the Bot does NOT have a Strength lead, or if it just played a War card, the Bot will buy 3 Strength points for a total cost of 10 Culture. Otherwise the Bot will take no actions. It can only do this, of course, if it has at least 10 Culture to spend.

IV. Production

Increase the Bot's Culture by (Age*4). Remember to increase Strength for every multiple of 5 it reaches.

Then proceed to the Human turn.

--------------------

I have test driven a rudimentary version of this once so far. The version I used had the Bot's culture only going up by (Age*2) every turn and it became clear near the end of Age II that I was going to absolutely destroy it. Age*4 should be significantly more challenging. I'll take it for a spin tomorrow.

The Bot should get enough culture (I'm hoping) that it won't need Age III scoring to do well, so that solves that problem. If it winds up not being enough, it's easy to modify its gains up to (Age*5) or even higher. I also like that the Strength mechanism will react to either a passive or aggressive opponent, while still attempting to remain dominant.

Any thoughts? It would be nice to find a way, using only the game components, to create uncertainty and variability in which cards get removed from the card row, for instance. Ideas for that would be spiffy.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Filip, there are no news since february 2008 and you said you were working on it :-)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Duda
United States
Greenbelt
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
This is very similar to a solo Bot I was working on. Neat! Mine is more abstract, so good for teaching yourself the game and exploring strategies whereas I think yours provides a closer, more immersive solo game.

Again set up for 2 player game with 3 markers for score, culture, and strength for the Bot. Set all 3 to zero. Bot goes first.

Bot's turn:
- Event: Put next card from military deck into future event and play current event. Discard if event is tactics or bonus. Declare war or aggression if Bot is stronger.
- Increase Bot strength and culture by 1. Score. Bot's strength and culture NEVER change otherwise.

On your turn discard the first 6 cards rather than 3 cards.

For colony, your strength + bonus + sacrifice must be > Bot strength for you to win, else discard colony.
For raids etc., assume bot has the same as you. (i.e. if you destroy up to 3 Bot's buildings of same level and score 1/2 resources, instead you pick up to 3 of your buildings, don't destroy them, but score 1/2 their resource level.)

That's it.

Bot scoring geometrically is challenging. It is possible to win by either culture run-away early or War Against Culture later.

I realize you can always get the cards you want, so want to try it where instead of discarding 6, you remove 3, then discard 3 directly from the deck.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.