Round Up for a Green-faced PBEM

[Gazglum]

For a review/reference:

Gazglum as Brennus of Sumeria
Took it over Stalin of Mali or Charlemagne of Egypt

Any thoughts/second thoughts on your selections, gentlemen? I always find it a fascinating discussion.

I went through some of my thinking in my thread. I chose Brennus because I was unfamiliar with him and Sumeria, and I had just played a very similar game to Charlemagne of Egypt. I thought Stalin sounded fun, but too situational, and I didn't want to base a gameplan around landing wonders which I would likely keep losing to another IND leader, due to my frequent micro errors.

In hindisght, I made the worst choice. Nobody else took IND so Stalin would have won me the Oracle at least, which would have been huge. And as some of the others can attest, CHA turned out to be pretty terrible on this map. That's nobody's fault, just bad luck that we picked it on such a food-sparse map. CHA didn't make any real difference at all until Turn 100 or so, by which point our fates were pretty much set in stone, and SPI likewise wasn't going to come into play until the midgame.

On the other hand, I thought I came very close to taking Yuri's third city with Vultures, so if that play had come off I would have been singing the praises of the Sumeria choice to the skies. I did enjoy Sumeria a lot, and gained a lot of respect for them. Brennus...not so much.

[Dhalphir]

Really well played Ilios.

[Hashoosh]

CHM was definitely the difference in holding the capital for us. Formation pikes and CG3 longbows saved its hide. My fault for not reporting as well as I could, but you played the turns were SPI/CHM are almost useless, while I played the turns where they start to really come into their own.

[Ilios]

Any thoughts/second thoughts on your selections, gentlemen? I always find it a fascinating discussion.

I am so glad I picked the IMP leader. I dismissed Monty immediately, but hesitated on Peter. I would have picked the same leader/civ combinations as the others, except for Gazglum. I think I would have picked Stalin over Brennus.

I went through some of my thinking in my thread. I chose Brennus because I was unfamiliar with him and Sumeria, and I had just played a very similar game to Charlemagne of Egypt. I thought Stalin sounded fun, but too situational, and I didn't want to base a gameplan around landing wonders which I would likely keep losing to another IND leader, due to my frequent micro errors.

In hindisght, I made the worst choice. Nobody else took IND so Stalin would have won me the Oracle at least, which would have been huge. And as some of the others can attest, CHA turned out to be pretty terrible on this map. That's nobody's fault, just bad luck that we picked it on such a food-sparse map. CHA didn't make any real difference at all until Turn 100 or so, by which point our fates were pretty much set in stone, and SPI likewise wasn't going to come into play until the midgame.

On the other hand, I thought I came very close to taking Yuri's third city with Vultures, so if that play had come off I would have been singing the praises of the Sumeria choice to the skies. I did enjoy Sumeria a lot, and gained a lot of respect for them. Brennus...not so much.

I still think with the Slavery nerfs that CHA is a pretty good trait.

Really well played Ilios.

Thanks!