Posts: 3,140
Threads: 26
Joined: Feb 2009
If people want to send their choices in to someone, I can volunteer for that.
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Hey Mardoc, first thanks for making the map for us. I made a general statement before about maps so to not go over it again, I just say that the map should be balanced and fair. As for your questions:
Normal Map with slightly less water - I don't want to get rushed like crazy but also don't want to not meet anyone for 100 turns.
Map Type: Something which is natural without being unbalancing (yeah I know SL but it really is getting boring if you get twice in a row the worst start). No Archipelago or similar stuff - it simply makes no sense in FFH imo.
Lush: Rather lush map. Not overly so but not something like 10:1 plains to grassland ratio or similar "funny" things which surely entertain the lurkers but are probably not really that fun to play, especially given that with unrestricted leaders we have enough gimmicky stuff as it is I think.
Tailored starts: As you described making strategic resources needed for units of that civ available is fine (like deer for elves). But no in regards to floodplains galore for malakim or other stuff. I'd rather have completely equal starting locations for everyone (with strategic resources in reach) then natural, flavorful starts which in the end unbalance the game.
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Hey Selrahc, thanks for doing that. 
For the others: Have we agreed how to do it?
1. Duplicated leaders allowed?
2. Duplicated civs not allowed was agreed I think.
Then do we send 3 combos to Selrahc and he sorts it and tells us afterwards? If we agree to duplicated leaders (which I would agree to if it does not make problems ingame because it seems a bad idea to have someone play his second or third pick simply because his leader was taken despite that the civ was different and the game would actually haven't had an issue with that) I would think that is the best solution. If no duplicated leaders then I feel we should only have him post the picks of everyone as soon as he got them from all of us and we can discuss how to distribute them. Seems better for me especially as otherwise someone might make all his 3 picks with the same leader simply to make sure to get his first pick...
Posts: 2,521
Threads: 26
Joined: Oct 2010
What do we do with Ilians?
As everyone knows, Stasis is no fun.
As was demonstrated in PBEM IV Stasis + FtH is even less fun.
Outright ban? Or just excluded from game if someone picked the clan?
Posts: 3,140
Threads: 26
Joined: Feb 2009
You guys could discuss banning worldspells. It's a game option... Obviously helps some civs more than others.
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Well, I am against banning all worldspells. As for Stasis and FTH:
FTH never produced big amounts of troops for me in a normal SP-game. Of course I never tested it extensively and a high difficulty, big parts of the map unclaimed, many preplaced cities or a preplaced Archeron will make it OP but I think that is something the mapmaker can take care over simply by getting rid of Archeron and not preplacing any cities. I think - but please correct me if I am wrong - that mostly either Archeron, preplaced barb units or a map designed specifically to make it possible to do an early rush was the reason for issues with FtH. Basically a map maker who did want to give the clan a chance or overlooked something. Both should not happen in our game as we asked for a normal map without fluff (I guess that is what we ask for at least) so FtH should be a possible weapon to use for an early rush but not without using up own troops as well and potentially crippling one-self. Thats fine with me.
As for Stasis: Yes it is unfun for the other players (I guess, never happened to me) but if I look at FFH1PBEM1 Selrahc made a near perferct PoW-rush I think and still no civ died. Sure Sareln was pretty much done afterwards but also Selrahc had to pay dearly for it I think. He of course can tell better what happened but I don't feel Stasis itself was so OP. Of course with a non-agnostic leader it might be better (after all the techs you research are no dead end) but still, I think using Stasis to help an early rush does cost you quite a bit and if you cannot win with it why do it?
Basically I think that is the issue I have with most of the FTH or Stasis uses in the FFH games here at RB. Using it is fine but normally won't get you in a position for you have a locked win except for when something is overlooked. Though I am surely not as knowledgable as other guys (Selrahc, Sareln, PB) so I guess I am fine if my opinion gets voted off by the majority.
Posts: 3,140
Threads: 26
Joined: Feb 2009
In short, PoW rush could have very easily killed both Sareln and Cull.
In long
In PBEM IV the combination of Stasis and FtH ended the game, knocking out one player and locking another into vassalization. That was kind of an odd game though.
I don't think the issue with Stasis is really overpoweredness. Certainly not for standard Illians. More that it really can be deathly dull for all the other teams.
Posts: 2,852
Threads: 20
Joined: Feb 2011
Let's just ban the Illians. Varn of the Illians would be so OP, it's not worth having.
Active in:
FFH-20: Jonas Endain of the Clan of Embers
EITB Pitboss 1: Clan/Elohim/Calabim with Mardoc and Thoth
Posts: 23,669
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Boo. Banning because one is OP isn't exactly a good way to start off leader picks.
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
Bobchillingworth
Unregistered
Trust me when I say that Varn of the Illians is far from being the most broken combo in Unrestricted Leaders FFH.
|
