Firaxis doesn't care about MP so "working as intended" is n/a. If they did they would have least put in a true PBEM mode.
|
[NO PLAYERS] No players past this line
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Interesting back and forth. This game was nearly decided until the greek intervention and Alhambram taking it a bit too easy to kill off Grotsnot.
An entertaining game, but not a particularly well played one. From TBS' thread:
The Black Sword Wrote:Post Colosseum stats: They just finished Turn 85 - what's going on? Those numbers are pretty bad for everyone other than Russia. Look at the PBEM11 comparison compiled by Cornflakes at the same date: Cornflakes Wrote:T85 Civ Comparison The non-Russian players in this game are barely outperforming the weak Greek effort in that game, and behind all of the competitive civs (Brazil, Rome, Russia). Furthermore, TBS has never played a game of Civ6 prior to this; there's no way that he should be leading the pack right now. Yes, yes, there's been a lot of fighting in this game, but Chevalier and Alhazard and the Arabian civ should be doing at least a little bit better than this, right? Not sure what happened in this game.
December 30th, 2018, 21:44
(This post was last modified: December 30th, 2018, 21:45 by suboptimal.)
 (December 30th, 2018, 11:17)Sullla Wrote: An entertaining game, but not a particularly well played one. Culturally everyone is outperforming or on par with PBEM 11. Scientifically I think they are "on trend". I looked around at a few other PBEMs (complete and in progress) and I think there are a few things going on that dispute your conclusion of poor play. - Brazil's tech rate in PBEM 11 was slightly inflated due to rainforest adjacencies for Campus districts. Cornflakes was also the only player to not engage in war by that point in the game. Everyone else was 30 or below and fighting, same as here. - Other games I looked at were generally in the high 20's or low 30's for science, depending on how much fighting there was, around T85. This includes PBEM 7, where you were the only player (out of 8) to be above 33  per turn at Turn 85.- This map has relatively few mountain locations that provide more than +1 adjacency and only one scientific city-state which only three players are currently aware of (based on mini-map gazing). Is the ROI of a +1 adjacency Campus reasonable value, even when it's the only adjacency available? Alhambram has spammed Commercial Hubs everywhere with no Campus districts. Most other civs have one Campus complete and maybe one marked for construction. Perhaps the players do not feel the return is there to warrant it and have put district production elsewhere? - Russia has Tsingy (+3 science), and the only +3 adjacency Campus. Take away Tsingy and reduce the Campus adjacency to what everyone else has (+1) and Russia would be at....32. - Remember, Rowain is digging out of an exceptionally poor start by marcopolothefraud, so Arabia gets a pass here. He hasn't had enough time to get up to speed with everyone else yet, if that's even possible. Personally I think the slower tech rate makes it a little more interesting. For one, it makes units of a particular era "last" a lot longer. Second, the slow tech pace might actually "pay off" in terms of city development and the players being able to develop their production capacities to match the costs of the current era. While much of the discussion on RB has been "things cost too much production to build" perhaps the answer is to make techs (and civics) more expensive. It'd allow city development (and thus production) to keep better pace with tech advancement.
Sending units to their death since 2017.
Don't do what I did: PBEM 3 - Arabia , PBEM 6 - Australia This worked well enough: PBEM 10 - Aztecs Gamus Interruptus: PBEM 14 - Indonesia Gathering Storm Meanderings: PBEM 15 - Gorgo You Say Pítati, I Say Potato: PBEM 17 - Nubia The Last of the Summer Wine: PBEM 18 - Eleanor/England Rhymin' Simon: PBEM 20 - Indonesia (Team w/ China)
Those are fair points suboptimal. And I think I put my finger on the missing element in this game: no city state captures. Most of the players are sitting down a city as compared to where they would be in other games where the city states have been quickly captured. That makes a real difference in terms of everyone's pace through the tech/civic trees. Still, even with that said I don't think that this has been an especially well-played game from a development perspective. Too much warring, not enough city planning. TBS seems to be the only one building non-Encampment districts at any kind of reasonable pace, and he's soared well out in front of the field as a result. (That and he's playing as Russia; it seems clear to me by now that Rome and Russia are a step above all of the other non-expansion civs.) Once you fall behind on Campus district construction, it's nearly impossible to catch up since the districts continue to get more expensive with time. It will be interesting to watch and see if an anti-Russia coalition develops in this game in the same way that an anti-Rome coalition appeared.
I'm guessing your not counting Scythia and Sumer because they would be banned?
I agree with not counting Germany. They got nerfed in a patch and have never won a game. Pre-nerf Germany also really doesn't count because Scythia and Sumer weren't officially banned at that time. I don't think it's a matter of "if" but "when" Russia gets dogpiled. People will remember PBEM#2 and #11.
I'm really rooting for Grotsnot here. Being within an inch of his life seems to help cut through the foggy decision making.
The most likely outcome to this game is indeed TBS murdering everyone with cossacks. Will the other players recognize that and act accordingly? The science pace in this game has been pretty slow and if everyone is still on medieval tech with cossacks show up it's an instant game over situation.
MJW, pre-nerf Germany is hard to know how to value since the civ was nerfed prior to even the first PBEM game here. Germany has been consistently over-rated throughout our history of games, and I think it's a pretty mediocre choice overall. Sumeria also doesn't seem to be that strong; when it's been picked, it hasn't been very effective. I think that our maps are large enough that the war cart rush isn't too effective. Sumeria would be a lot scarier in randomly rolled maps where players could start six tiles apart or whatever. Scythia is deservedly banned because that civ is one-dimensional and no fun to play against. Would be interesting to see it appear at least once though.
I disagree with needing to play a game with Scythia to see what would happen. It would be an even easier PBEM #8 because Mongols are a worse Scythia (amusingly CMF got Scythia in the draft lottery but didn't pick it).
Now that Germany, Scythia and Sumeria are out of the way which is better Rome or Russia? I'd say it depends on the players and settings so there is no real answer. The fact that handcrafted maps hurt Sumeria solidifies my thinking here. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
/turn)
(+19.2