July 24th, 2014, 16:58
(This post was last modified: July 24th, 2014, 17:05 by Commodore.)
Posts: 18,064
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
(July 24th, 2014, 16:19)Krill Wrote: Anyone want to replay PB1 map? With suitable randomization of start positions, resources etc?
Quote:
me: Huh
Sent at 4:43 PM on Thursday
Brick: ?
me: Krill's PB22 map suggestion
Oddly compelling.
Brick: Was that a really good map?
me: http://realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=2994
Form was pretty decent, Full of Resources
It had some major resource issues, but Krill mentioned randomizing those + starts.
Brick: Or
Replay pb13 map, randomize starts and resources
me: Heh
I'm game
Orrrrr
PB5!
Brick: Lol
Maybe not pb5
me: Dibs on Dying Moosesnake!
Brick: R
Or
I could make an RB medley map
me: Oooh
Brick: Landmasses from multiple games
Rebalance starts and resources
me: I like it!
I'm game for a lotta stuff. But I'll confess, the feeling of exploration is one of my favorite bits of these sprawling messes.
Posts: 1,068
Threads: 12
Joined: Mar 2014
I'm interested in playing depending on settings/allowed to play.
Posts: 18,064
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
(July 25th, 2014, 14:03)Gawdzak Wrote: I'm interested in playing depending on settings/allowed to play. Hrm, I don't know, we hate having enthusiastic new players who are good reporters and show good civ fundamentals... 
Heh, you're welcome here, seriously. Big one FFA style would decidedly be my preference.
July 28th, 2014, 11:40
(This post was last modified: July 28th, 2014, 11:41 by dtay.)
Posts: 1,778
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
I would want to play in the FFA/PB13 style version of this, less likely to want to play in the potentially smaller game.
As Commodore mentioned, I think snake pick would be cool to try out. Reasons:
1) It's a good test of RtR balance since people can deliberately create combos
2) I think it will be interesting to see what people gravitate towards
3) I want to try out particular combos 
4) The smaller var in leader quality means the people at the bottom of the snake pick aren't nearly as badly off as they are in base BTS, so the combo-choosing ability might actually cancel out the later leader pick for once (unlike in BTS where I think first pick of traits is way more important than ensuring the right combo)
Fear cuts deeper than swords.
Posts: 1,778
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
To the extent any of the other rules questions should be discussed at this extremely early stage, things I would want (none are dealbreakers though):
1) City gifting only in peace deals, honor code/don't be a jerk rule on them being "real" peace deals (not sure what an unreal peace deal would be, but just like no peace-deal for cities then pay them afterwards as a loophole, etc)
2) Map trading on. PB18 is an interesting exeriment, but I think I prefer that as a one off
3) If possible, Parkin style turn-enforcer, but I realize this requires a volunteer. PB13 had a fine turn pace though so I feel it's less necessary than the comically oversized PB18
Fear cuts deeper than swords.
Posts: 18,064
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Added Dtay to the pile. PB18 is a huge sump; I think for this game we'll aim for 11 people...that's the PB1 number right there, and what Civ4 calls "huge" so it makes sense as an upper bound. Let's Brick mess around on a map too.
Not sure how much of a turn enforcer we'd need for a merely huge game, to be honest.
Posts: 1,778
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
(July 28th, 2014, 12:23)Commodore Wrote: Added Dtay to the pile. PB18 is a huge sump; I think for this game we'll aim for 11 people...that's the PB1 number right there, and what Civ4 calls "huge" so it makes sense as an upper bound. Let's Brick mess around on a map too.
Not sure how much of a turn enforcer we'd need for a merely huge game, to be honest.
11 is in the range of things I'd want to play, though wouldn't mind larger either (PB13 was what, 18 people?)
Turn enforcer, much less necessary, but still nice to have. And if less necessary it's also an easier job to do, could just be the mapmaker/admin, so getting one could be easier. I should emphasize that this is doubly a non-deal-breaker for me though (that entire list was things low in priority, and that one in particular was even more so).
Fear cuts deeper than swords.
July 28th, 2014, 16:17
(This post was last modified: July 28th, 2014, 16:18 by Krill.)
Posts: 23,667
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Would people be more interested in playing an FFA, of around 12 players, using the next version of the RtR mod? Or would people prefer to play with the stable version?
Current games (All): RtR: PB83
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71 PB80. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 PBEM23Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 5,648
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2014
By next version, do you mean the one you just released with the observer mode and diplo-pause fix? Or the next one after that, with water-walking workers et al?
July 28th, 2014, 16:45
(This post was last modified: July 28th, 2014, 16:48 by Commodore.)
Posts: 18,064
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Water-walking-worker-weirdness: The Civ1 Mod sounds a bit less interesting than the current, to me. But that is just me.
|
