Team Bring It!™ Planning Thread

[Kuro]

Eh, NVM then(It's a reference to the awesome show Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann)

[Amelia]

If you're organizing a 3v3 mp game, i'll be up for it. (on the team of dedlurkers).

[Twinkletoes89]

I prefer Team Reject to be honest!

Seen as we have some interest now - here's the idea for our 3v3 test game

Team 1 - TT, Kuro, JKaen (if available)

Team 2 - Bob, Amelia, Pindicator

We need to now look at arranging some stretch of time where we would all be online at the same time for a couple of hours or so.

My best window is normally from 10pm GMT until 3am GMT but can be flexible.

If everyone else can state their preferred play window (and JKaen confirm if he is available and up for it) then we can get planning our practice!

[Bobchillingworth]

TT's window works for me.



What combos do you want us to test? If you are serious about taking HRE if the difficulty is Monarch, then one of you should probably try them out to make sure you like them.

[Twinkletoes89]

Well lets see:

Ideally the 6 combos will comprise of something like:

Gandhi (Spi/Phil) of Arabia
Cyrus (Imp/Cha) of Mongolia (fully on war cavalry machine!)
Qin (Pro/Ind)? of Spain
Julius Caesar (Imp/Org) of HRE
Pacal (Fin/Exp) of India
Napoleon (Cha/Org) of Aztec

Divided like so:

Techers: Gandhi of Arabia (T1) - (T2) Pacal of India

Full on War: Cyrus of Mongolia (T1) - (T2) Napoleon of Aztec

Defensive 'Castle' Player?: Qin of Spain(T1) - (T2) Caesar of HRE

Does that look OK?

Some of those suggested combos are what I have been thinking about today but none of them are set in stone.

I want to try and compare 2 different approaches in similar roles to see which is more effective:

For example, seeing if an SE by Gandhi falls far behind a Cottage Economy of Pacal of India.

What do you think?

[mackoti]

Why is no love for imperialist finacial of inca for example? Of course you guy are my favorit team.

[pindicator]

Hey TT, like the idea. You put two Org leaders on team 2. Maybe we replace one with Fin/Imp of Inca? (Thanks for the support, mackoti!)

[Twinkletoes89]

We would then end up with two financials and two imperialistics on team 2 too.

I would like to see Aztecs given another try with the whipping as you seemed to work it quite well yesterday. Could try it without organized bonus and try a mass whipped army under Boudica (Agg/Char)?

I want to see if mass whipped army could beat a higher promoted but potentially slower-built super cavalry stack.

Fin/Imp of Inca could swap in for Gandhi if we really wanted, but I think we need to compare Gandhi against Financial opposition first.

If Financial wins, then we test Fin/Imp of Inca against Fin/Exp of India afterwards.

I also am more of the opinion that IMP may work better for a warmonger seen as we can't duplicate traits as the GG bonus is not to be sniffed at for extra promos.

[Bobchillingworth]

Mack is a much better bts player than I am, so he probably knows what he's talking about better, but I don't see a whole lot of value in the Inca. You get +2 free culture per city, great, but you give up a UU for it, and that hurts in a game where combat is central and some of the UU available could be game-changers. Plus the team techer is going to surely want to spread missionaries to all their cities anyway for the Org religion bonus, and monuments are just a chop or one-pop whip (and you can build culture), so getting border expansions probably won't be an issue.


I'd consider dropping spain for aggressive france. Tough call, since Spain basically has two UU... depends on whether you need slow but very powerful seige / collateral + decent late mounted, or excellent somewhat late mounted cover.


Spain would probably pair well with HRE, for a slow but deadly force- but as you point out, they also fulfill somewhat redundant roles. They're both "support" civs, gifting / building support units and in HRE's case also cities.

[Kuro]

I don't really like Napoleon of Aztec. Shrug.

Incans could be good, but very map dependant. Needs France or something for defense, too.