Solver:	Indeed, you can't. What was your first Civ experience that suckered you into this addictive and remarkable series?
Sirian:	I live in Pennsylvania and have all my adult life, but I grew up in the Washington DC area. All my friends were still back there, while I was living in seclusion up in the mountains and keeping my expenses down. So I would work on writing my novels for months on end. I worked ten, twelve hours a day when I was "on". If I hit a rough patch, I'd go in and out of writing. I had a dual-floppy CP/M based PC and no video games. NONE! So it was all work and no play for months on end. Then I would take a break and travel home to the Washington area and stay for a week at this friend's house, a week at that friend's house, a week at my Dad's place, etc. WALL TO WALL GAMING, BABY, YEAH! Or maybe some nights on the town, too, of course. At these pit stops, I got introduced to Pirates!, then Railroad Tycoon. Railroad Tycoon... Man, that was -the- game. Nothing like it ever existed before. (Sid [Meier] is the man!) I could not get enough of Railroad Tycoon. My friends would entertain themselves to no end by asking me questions while I played RT. They would ask me about X, and instead of an answer about X, I would turn to them and explain what was going on in my game. "Hey Bob, you want a slice of this pizza?" "I just hooked up that lumber outside of Philadelphia." "We're going out to the movies. You want to come?" "I can't believe the money I just made on that load of mail!" I was really badly in to that game. I think I stayed almost two months, just to keep playing it. Civ was Railroad Tycoon with history instead of trains. I made more frequent trips to DC when Civ came out. Like a month down playing Civ nonstop, then a month back home working again, then more Civ. "Hey, guys. I'm coming to town this week." I went most of a year without having a date. Too busy either working or Civving. *shrug* Those were happy months, too!
Solver:	So you actually started playing Civ with having a clue what it's all about? Many civvers were playing almost randomly until they figured it out.
Sirian:	Well, my first game was a joint venture. The friend I was staying with, who introduced me to the game, and a second friend who was addicted, too... The three of gathered at his place the two of them "showed me the game", letting me play along with them. Then I played one part of a game by myself, on Warlord level (second of five levels). Then I declared, "I'm going to play on Prince." There were gasps! There were laughs. The cocky newbie was going to get his lunch handed to him. Only... that didn't happen. (Playing Railroad Tycoon, I understood many of the underlying game mechanics that Sid used to craft Civ.) Two games later, I was playing on King. And then we tried Emperor! ... And limped back to King for a couple more games. I had to use a couple of reloads to win my first Emperor game. (Oops!) But eventually I learned to win there the right way, without the crutches. By the time I had the A[rtificial] I[ntelligence (AI)] pinned down... knowing the exact turns it would always declare war on me, knowing where it would try to attack... I had probably played twenty full games of Emperor. I burned out and didn't touch Civ again for many years.
Solver:	What year was that?
Sirian:	1993.
Solver:	And you left the Civ scene until... ?
Sirian:	A victory in Master of Orion, winter 2004: weakest civ played at the highest setting, barely eked out a diplomatic win. My MoO1 "revival" effort met a mysterious end when I suddenly found myself working on something that would be appreciated by hundreds of thousands, instead of just by hundreds. (My apologies to those who expected me to keep going with more MoO1 activity, as I had indicated I would. I hope now you understand!) Until 2000. In 1993, Master of Orion came out. That game (sorry Sid!) was a better game than Civ with longer legs, at least for me. I was still able to enjoy it across many years without burning out on it because the AI was stronger and better balanced, and the gameplay offered more variety for replay value. I tried CivII in 1997 or so, but my initial impression was unfavorable. That impression was unfair, though. Too much burnout still present in the back of my mind. I eventually came to appreciate and enjoy CivII, but not until 2000, more or less in a warmup period before CivIII was coming out. I skipped Alpha Centauri entirely. (That may be blasphemy to some, but I have no regrets.) I asked my friends who played it if the AI would satisfy me, and they told me no. I think that was probably the right call. CivIII promised something intriguing when it came out: that the A[rtificial] I[ntelligence (AI)] would not distinguish between the human and another AI. THAT is what I had been waiting seven years to hear! I was ready to Civ again. I dove in to CivIII, and the game was renewed for me. The CivIII AI was not without its flaws, of course, but it delivered on its promise. The AI was moving in a positive direction, and so I opened my CivIII fansite and projected my enthusiasm for the game on to the pages there, through my game reports and other writings.
Solver:	Before we continue to what happened after you started being active in the CivIII community, I notice that you seem to have a special interest in the AI in Civ games, even skipping SMAC because it lacked a decent [enough] AI [in your view]. So what exactly do you think about the importance of the AI in Civ games and its design principles?
Sirian:	The AI is the life of single player. More than merely the animation of the game's moving parts, the AI is the only hope for immersion in the single player game. Nothing is more important than vibrant AI, at least to me, personally. The AI is the companion, escort, rival, opponent, and fellow adventurer. When I have figured out the entire AI and it is no longer able to surprise me, I have reached the end of the road.

PAGE 1 | PAGE 2 | PAGE 3 | PAGE 4