 |
| |
|
|
Aqualung71
|
 |
Lord Desolator of the Desolation Row, C3CDG
Oct 2002
time: 12:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kloreep
Wow. Quite a powerful ability, to be able to communicate from the start of the game, but I suppose that might be useful in balancing out various degrees of geographical closeness between teammates. |
And don't forget the idea is a total team game, so giving this ability to communicate with your partner from the start is in keeping with the spirit....not to mention fair to all players.
quote:
Originally posted by Kloreep No research discussions before embassy is established??? I'm not sure why you would have that rule. |
I think the idea is no discussion on future research until embassy. But once contact is made you can discuss and trade techs you already know. I'm not sure the embassy thing is a big deal, but it's a rule we're using in the iron civers tournament.
quote:
If we want to ensure teams start far apart and/or equally far apart, we might want to enlist a mapmaker. |
I think the culturally linked starts should take care of that, if everyone's ok with the civs I've suggested. If not, we can put together another combination or as you say, ask someone to do it for us. I would like to eliminate agricultural civs though.
quote:
Teams don't necessarily have to go right after each other, though it is a military advantage. |
My idea was to have the order ABCABC, so that there are always 2 civs playing between each team member. This is fairest and most balanced.
quote:
As for allocating civs, first come first serve works to break ties, as does RPS or a dice roll. |
Yes, on the basis of who expressed interest first.
quote:
:/ I'm not a fan of starting with more pop units, but I'll go along with it if that's what the majority wants. |
Let's wait and see - my only reason for suggesting it was to speed the game up somewhat at the front end.
quote:
But what if teams don't meet up quickly? |
Team members will still be co-ordinating research between them. I guess this means you need to prioritise meeting your teammate.
quote:
Originally posted by Kloreep Also, one problem with PBEM is that luxuries are not recognized for one turn after the deal expires even if they are renewed in time, because the city happiness does not update with the new luxury. This can be fixed by using the F1 during production phase exploit and upping, then returning to its previous setting, the luxury slider to force a re-count of happy faces. Are we going to allow this work-around or not? |
Seems ok to me.
I think Regent would be fine too. Looks like we're leaning towards standard map 70% water.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
 |
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
I think the idea is no discussion on future research until embassy. But once contact is made you can discuss and trade techs you already know. I'm not sure the embassy thing is a big deal, but it's a rule we're using in the iron civers tournament. |
Yeah, I figured it was only on coordinating future research, not on trading already researched techs. But I'm at a loss as to the why behind that rule...
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
My idea was to have the order ABCABC, so that there are always 2 civs playing between each team member. This is fairest and most balanced. |
Sounds good.
So I'd be teamed with MWIA under this system? And you with 1889?
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
Let's wait and see - my only reason for suggesting it was to speed the game up somewhat at the front end. |
Yeah, it does speed it up, it's just normally it takes a little longer to build two settlers and two workers, and there's generally exploration units built in between that give you an idea of the area. That among other things changes quite a bit with any additional pop units, especially settlers.
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
Team members will still be co-ordinating research between them. I guess this means you need to prioritise meeting your teammate. |
Yep...
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
quote:
Originally posted by Kloreep
Also, one problem with PBEM is that luxuries are not recognized for one turn after the deal expires even if they are renewed in time, because the city happiness does not update with the new luxury. This can be fixed by using the F1 during production phase exploit and upping, then returning to its previous setting, the luxury slider to force a re-count of happy faces. Are we going to allow this work-around or not? |
Seems ok to me. |
I agree. While I find most other uses of the F1 phase explotish, I look at that trick as simply correcting for a bad PBEM mechanic.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aqualung71
|
|
Lord Desolator of the Desolation Row, C3CDG
Oct 2002
time: 12:35
|
|
Ok, time to make a few decisions. All participants please give your views and specific objections if any. Things we need to decide on are:- Teams/play order - play order for now is as per time zones. Tentatively, teams are as per play order, with groupings being 1/4, 2/5 and 3/6. If anyone has an objection or would prefer to try to balance the perceived skill levels of each team, speak up now
- Game setup - standard size map, pangea, 70% water, regent difficulty, roaming barbs, climate/temperature/age random.
- Out-of-game discussions - unlimited between partners, banned with other civs until met in-game. Discussion of future research and trade deals can then be done, but map information not to be exchanged until available in-game.
- Extra units - open for discussion. I'd like to start with extra to speed the game a little, but this does change the game somewhat. If at all, I suggest we restrict it to one extra settler and worker each.
- Civs used/map setup - currently under consideration is my list of culturally linked civs from the Mediterranean and Middle East. If this is not agreed then we will probably need to ask an independent party to draw a map and set the starting positions, or else there could be some unfair imbalances in distance between partners' start positions. Note - I have tried a few debug starts using these 6 civs and it definitely does not give 2 distinct groupings of start locations on all occasions, so using culturally linked starts and a random map will not guarantee equidistant starts for teams, though it should help.
Please all post your views on these and any other issues that I may have missed so we can decide and get this game moving.
Cheers!
Last edited by Aqualung71 on 10-05-2004 at 10:07
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kloreep
|
|
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[*]Teams/play order - play order for now is as per time zones. Tentatively, teams are as per play order, with groupings being 1/4, 2/5 and 3/6. If anyone has an objection or would prefer to try to balance the perceived skill levels of each team, speak up now |
By the current play order is okay with me, as would trying to balance skill levels.
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[*]Game setup - standard size map, pangea, 70% water, regent difficulty, roaming barbs, climate/temperature/age random. |
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[*]Out-of-game discussions - unlimited between partners, banned with other civs until met in-game. Discussion of future research and trade deals can then be done, but map information not to be exchanged until available in-game. |
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[*]Extra units - open for discussion. I'd like to start with extra to speed the game a little, but this does change the game somewhat. If at all, I suggest we restrict it to one extra settler and worker each. |
As stated previously, I would prefer the standard one settler/one worker.
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[*]Civs used/map setup - currently under consideration is my list of culturally linked civs from the Mediterranean and Middle East. If this is not agreed then we will probably need to ask an independent party to draw a map and set the starting positions, or else there could be some unfair imbalances in distance between partners' start positions. Note - I have tried a few debug starts using these 6 civs and it definitely does not give 2 distinct groupings of start locations on all occasions, so using culturally linked starts and a random map will not guarantee equidistant starts for teams, though it should help. |
I'm tempted to say abandon the culturally linked idea and just let people choose among all the civs. (Though I'd agree to banning the Agr ones.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MrWhereItsAt
|
 |
New Year's Resolution: 2005 is the year of Where It's At - come get some.
Nov 2001
time: 17:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aqualung71
[LIST]
[*]Teams/play order - play order for now is as per time zones. Tentatively, teams are as per play order, with groupings being 1/4, 2/5 and 3/6.
|
So I'm with Klo? Sounds common sensical and fun!
quote:
[*]Game setup - standard size map, pangea, 70% water, regent difficulty, roaming barbs, climate/temperature/age random.
|
Sounds fine. For the record I normally play SP at Monarch, and have one the few games I've finished on that difficulty, or come close enough that I consider myself to have won.
quote:
[*]Out-of-game discussions - unlimited between partners, banned with other civs until met in-game. Discussion of future research and trade deals can then be done, but map information not to be exchanged until available in-game.
|
Am a little confused about all that earlier talk of not coordinating future research plans until you have an Embassy... is that still going to happen? And map info - I can understand not sending the other player a screenshot of your map, but can you broadly describe the map you have seen to date? If not, what about in the case you want an exploring unit to find you for the purposes of cooperation/figuring out a border arrangement? Would it be OK if you broadly directed the unit eg " from where your Warrior is now, head straight west until you reach a lone mountain, then SW and you will find me just at the start of a large plain"?
quote:
[*]Extra units - open for discussion. I'd like to start with extra to speed the game a little, but this does change the game somewhat. If at all, I suggest we restrict it to one extra settler and worker each.
|
Am not too fussed about whatever choice will be made here. What about Accelerated production? That would certainly speed things up, but perhaps TOO much. I am personally slightly against it, but I have to throw the idea out there...
quote:
[*]Civs used/map setup - currently under consideration is my list of culturally linked civs from the Mediterranean and Middle East. If this is not agreed then we will probably need to ask an independent party to draw a map and set the starting positions, or else there could be some unfair imbalances in distance between partners' start positions. LIST]
|
Sounds OK, as the civs you have paired up are fairly well matched in traits, just not quite so in UUs. Babylon and Carthage I would consider defenders, Rome and Persia attackers. The third civ is balanced but for the Arab's UU coming in the Medieval Age. If everyone else is happy with them then I am though.  And there's no guarantess that later tonight I will have the time to think about alternatives. I certainly think no Ag is a good idea. I don't think altering the map so each person ends up near their partner is necessary. It would be helpful yes, but needed?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aqualung71
|
|
Lord Desolator of the Desolation Row, C3CDG
Oct 2002
time: 12:35
|
|
Ok chaps, we've all given ideas and suggestions and it seems like we're either all agreed or no-one has any strong objections to the setup as proposed.
MWIA is right that the Persia/Rome combination is pretty awesome offensively. I did look at switching Rome and Greece but that unbalanced the traits too much with one team having 2 Scientific civs, which I don't think is wise. So we'll just agree that the other 2 teams have the right to gang up on Persia/Rome 
So without further ado, here are the final settings based on what is pretty clear everyone feels comfortable with:
- Teams/play order - teams are MWIA/Kloreep, Aqualung/1889, and Krill/Platypus Rex. From what I can see we don't have any great imbalances in SP skill levels so it shouldn't be an issue. MWIA will start the ball rolling after I've sent him the first save.
- Game setup - standard size map, pangea, 70% water, regent difficulty, roaming barbs, climate/temperature/age random.
- Out-of-game discussions - unlimited between partners. I'm sure no-one's going to object too strongly to MWIA's suggestion that it's ok to direct a player in the early game in order to meet you so you can trade, etc. Seems reasonable to me and if we all can do it then no big deal, it's in everyone's interests to meet early. I'm more interested in banning outright exploits which I think have been pretty well covered elsewhere and so you will all know them. Note - this is a change from the suggested rule I posted earlier.
- Extra units - none. While there was some interest, some players preferred not to so let's leave it standard.
- Civs used/map setup - I'd like to stick to the civs I've suggested, if for no other reason that to see how the culturally linked start locations goes. I tihnk we've got some reaonably interesting combinations and early units (mostly) and it will be up to the teams to combine their usage well and to share the benefits of their different civ traits to the benefit of the team. While it's been pointed out that some UU's are stronger than others, I'm quite interested in how we will all formulate strategies to take advantage of the different traits in our teams, so that was more compelling for me than the UU's.
Ok, now for selecting civs. I'll pre-empt it based on what you've all posted already: As it happens, 1889 expressed interest to me before I'd even got this thread started, so he gets the first choice and asked for Babylon, which means I have Carthage. 1889 - get back to me ASAP if I am mistaken.
Platypus was next, and from an earlier post it seems his choice would be Greece, which gives Arabia to Krill - get back to me to confirm this please.
This leaves MWIA/Kloreep with the awesome combination of Persia/Rome and 4 instant enemies from turn 1, unless either of my above assumptions turns out to be inaccurate.
Seriously though, I suggest you all consult your partners to decide how to split the civs between you. I'm just glad we don't have the Vikings lurking in there somewhere!
Once the civs are confirmed, I will open a new tracking thread and the carnage can begin
Cheers!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-05-2004 06:36
|