|
Is that character a variant? (I just love getting asked that in channel.) - Charis |
|
Ministry of Silly Walks
|
 ![[Image: SillyWalks.jpg]](http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc432/numismatist93/SillyWalks.jpg) First off, the youtube link for anyone who does did not see the sketch I'm referring to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqhlQfXUk7w In this thread, we will post C&D Stuff, as well as disuss and evaluate our opponents and their actions during the course of the pitboss - with a few less Sulla patented weed smileys 
As a relative newcomer to Realms Beyond, I know very little about each of our opponents. However, this is everything I do know, with some guesses thrown in
 Team #1 AKA "The Dream Team" Sulla Speaker Sunrise089 I hardly think this team needs an introduction. What makes it especially scary for me is the fact that Sunrise and Speaker, both tactical masterminds, are on the same team. As if it already wasn't apparent, they are definitely the team to beat in this game, and are most likely to win. However they also have that working against them. Additionally, Speaker and Sulla's inflexibility in the organizing thread didn't exactly win them many friends, and I wouldn't be surprised if Team #2 was gunning for them. Team #2 Lewwyn Luddite Antisocialmonkey From seeing Luddite's actions in PB4 and Lewwyn's play in PBEM14, I have both of these guys pegged as extremely aggressive players. I know very little about ASM. I think this team is most likely to pick the tried and true India-China-Japan combination and go for a medieval beatdown right off the bat. A very solid strategy, if they can make it work. Lewwyn strikes me as the player who quickly loses interest in a game if it does not go his way (no offense to him), so I think if this team fails in their initial attack or falls behind, the team may fall apart. Luddite and Speaker already have been butting heads in the organizing thread, and I would not be surprised if Ludd wants to go all out and try to kill them at the start of the game. Team Reject Twinketoes Kuro JKaen BobChillingsworth (ded-lurker) Pindicator (ded-lurker) I have been talking to the members of this team extensively and have played against all of them except Jkaen. This team is thinking along very similar lines to us. They're still finalizing leaders, but the three TT proposed in the latest exchange were: Pacal of India Gandhi of France/Arabia Genghis Khan of Rome/Cyrus of Mongolia Some variation on that will likely be the final picks. I would really like to see this team's discussion after the game and compare it to our own. This team really feels like the underdog, and is unlikely to play an aggressive early game unless pushed to it. Pin, at least, believes that the game will be over before getting to muskets or rifles. The Individual Players: Twinkletoes - I've played 3 MP games against this guy, and he's handed my ass to me every time. He's competent all around - though not very aggressive from what I can tell. Came a long way from PBEM3. Kuro - Still learning the ropes of online multiplayer, throws out weedy ideas. Overall though, Kuro is a decent player from whom we can expect to see generally decent play. BobChilliingsWorth - If there is a tactical pro on their team, it's BCW. I played with him in one game and he was aggressive and tactically adroit. Pindicator - Pin is something of a wild card. He doesn't have a lot of experience with the MP side of civ, but has been playing it for a long time and has a good grasp of domestic micro. Jkaen - From the little I've seen of JKaen, he is not a very competent player. His team knows this and Kuro is vocally not happy about having him on. I can't say I blame him. PBEM 21 Spoiler Overall Skill Rankings/Odds of Winning the Game 1. Team #1 2. Team #3 3. Team #2 4. Team Reject If the Dream Team is allowed to expand and war at will, I believe they will win this game through sheer tactical prowess. However, if they do get dogpiled or are under constant military pressure from the other teams, I think of the three we have the best odds of winning Pitboss 6 
Minor Nitpick: JKaen is not in PBEM14, unless I haven't met him yet
. I tend to think that the only thing that gives us a real shot at this thing is the likelihood that the Spullla team gets dogpiled. If teams 2, 3, and 4 all come to this conclusion, then we might very well see a dogpile despite not being able to organize it. I wonder if there's a way to "signal" to these teams without breaking rules or being cheap (like renaming units). Perhaps walking a missionary up to their border or something and just parking him there for a couple of turns? Might get the message. I don't know, just something to consider. oledavy Wrote:Someone else from the team should post their thoughts in this thread so I'm not alone in here Crosspost  .I think you pretty well covered the other teams. Team Spullla obviously is the heavy favorite, and team reject I think is pretty clearly a bit behind the rest in terms of experience. The Lewwyn/Luddite/ASM team is solid, but I think we have a slightly more experienced/skilled group here... Really, I think our best hope is if Lewwyn/Luddite/ASM go for killer-rush civs (taking maybe Rome and Mongolia or something) and goes for Spullla's throat while we REX like mad. Cross your fingers. scooter Wrote:Minor Nitpick: JKaen is not in PBEM14, unless I haven't met him yet As a lurker comment: Is putting whatever up their borders to get the message across that you want them to work with you and attack Spullla not the same as simply renaming units? Sure, harder to understand but I would say the spirit of the rule would still be broken. Not that I am opposed to rename units to tell your opponent: Good work, you ass or something along those lines. But trying to make basically a peace treaty in an AW game seems kinda not playing along the intended idea
Serdoa Wrote:As a lurker comment: Is putting whatever up their borders to get the message across that you want them to work with you and attack Spullla not the same as simply renaming units? Sure, harder to understand but I would say the spirit of the rule would still be broken. I see the difference as using words. To me, what's the difference in naming a unit "peace treaty" or sending a message saying "peace treaty" - either way you delivered a message. What I was suggesting is communicating by actions only. Obviously it would be acceptable if we never tried anything like that and yet neither team attacked each other all game long - it's a FFA, but you don't have to attack EVERYONE. Us never sending anything at them and them never sending anything at us would be both acceptable and obvious what the message is. So sending a missionary at them rather than nothing doesn't seem much different, it just makes it more likely that they'll think the same as us. However, if others think this is over the line then no, we probably shouldn't do it. I'm now curious on other lurkers' opinions on this. Serdoa Wrote:As a lurker comment: Is putting whatever up their borders to get the message across that you want them to work with you and attack Spullla not the same as simply renaming units? Sure, harder to understand but I would say the spirit of the rule would still be broken. It's a pretty simple rule, you're not supposed to talk to the players on the other teams. There's no prohibition against taking actions in the game (that aren't talking, like renaming units or cities to communicate something)... Like for example you shouldn't do this: Quote:I have been talking to the members of this team extensively and have played against all of them except Jkaen. This team is thinking along very similar lines to us. They're still finalizing leaders, but the three TT proposed in the latest exchange were:
EDIT; Crosspost
Serdoa Wrote:As a lurker comment: Is putting whatever up their borders to get the message across that you want them to work with you and attack Spullla not the same as simply renaming units? Sure, harder to understand but I would say the spirit of the rule would still be broken. Serdoa, the good news is I don't think anyone would understand the missionary idea so there's not too much to worry about there. We definitely won't do anything cheesy and I agree the spirit of the game procludes peace agreements. However, I think it goes without saying that there will be some degree of "teamwork." If my rival's rival attacks him, I'm gonna swoop in and take as much of his land as I can! I think that with Spullla there is a 50-50 chance on two things happening: 1) Everyone recognizes they are a threat and focuses on them leading to a "teamwork" that is really just about eliminating a threat before moving on to the next threat. 2) No one wants to go head-to-head with Speaker/Sunrise and instead hopes that it goes something like: Quote:Really, I think our best hope is if Lewwyn/Luddite/ASM go for killer-rush civs (taking maybe Rome and Mongolia or something) and goes for Spullla's throat while we REX like mad. Cross your fingers. But no one actually does it, which results in Spulla attacking on their time and then slowly killing us all. |
