November 8th, 2011, 16:47
Posts: 8,022
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2006
I think the war thing just ends up being a problem that's best sorted by the map. We don't really want a rush on a human player here, but beyond that offensive war for the greater good of the empire seems perfectly reasonable once everyone's had some time to set-up. If anyone has any great ideas though, I encourage the conversation continuing. I don't get the impression Mist has finished the map so no reason to keep it going.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
November 8th, 2011, 17:14
Posts: 7,902
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2006
I haven't read through all the details in this thread, but I'd just like to say that I think the core idea of a "Capture the flag" game of civ is brilliant. I'm really looking forward to lurking this game.
If you know what I mean.
November 9th, 2011, 20:20
Posts: 18,066
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
So, what are we waiting on for this to kick off? Mist need more information from us? Shall we PM our picks? I'm a little less than up on what all is required for FFH, I imagine we send in an ordered ranking like Diplomacy.
November 9th, 2011, 20:33
Posts: 2,521
Threads: 26
Joined: Oct 2010
You're waiting for the map. And the map is waiting until you finalize what you want from it in terms of early conflict prevention and Hills placement. You're still not really firm on the 'conflict prevention' bit, so unless something changes I'll hold out 'till the weekend and then start drawing on assumption no early wars should be possible. Once I start, it'll take me about a week to finish.
November 9th, 2011, 20:43
Posts: 18,066
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Well, this is from 51% of one team, but I'm thinking in general a lot of the more intricate anti-war rules can be waived if the map make early conflict, if not impossible, at least difficult. I'd say hills in the middle near each other but not ICS-placed, and players have equal access to the hills (not within an exact tile count, just generally).
Again, that's my 2c. Jkaen, Amelia, Ravus, Gaspar Hive Mind, seem like a good general thought?
November 10th, 2011, 02:01
Posts: 2,257
Threads: 13
Joined: Jun 2010
November 10th, 2011, 09:21
Posts: 12,510
Threads: 61
Joined: Oct 2010
Fine by us. Using map design instead of negative points would make the game simpler to run.
Really, as long as Mist posts a general overview of the map philosophy before we send in picks, things should be fair.
About picks - yes, Commodore, submit an ordered ranking of leader/civ combos to Mist. You'll probably want to talk it over with DaveV first. You won't need more than 5, at worst, but usually people end up with their first or second pick. Mist will break ties exactly like in diplomacy, by randomly assigning a civ among people who've ranked it equal. We generally only allow one copy of each civ, so there's not competition for the heroes.
Once all the picks are in, I'll ask T-Hawk for a new subforum and we can start spamming up the threads in anticipation.
EitB 25 - Perpentach
Occasional mapmaker
November 10th, 2011, 17:02
Posts: 18,066
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
Okay, cool beans. I'm assuming this is FFH 2 and not EitB? Either is fine by me, as I have very little experience in either. Also, fine with OO being gentleman's agreement nerfed, if I didn't say so before.
November 11th, 2011, 02:50
Posts: 5,157
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2011
My play times are GMT 0500-0600, 1600-1700
Dont want a rule that makes me unable to declare on an opponent, happy with either map design or negative points making a drawn out war against a non hill owner unprofitable.
November 11th, 2011, 09:59
Posts: 2,390
Threads: 20
Joined: Oct 2011
I haven't read the entire thread, but this setup sounds like fun. Is anyone still in need of a teammate/dedlurker?
|
