|
As a French person I feel like it's my duty to explain strikes to you. - AdrienIer |
|
Intersite Game - Turn Discussion Thread
|
NobleHelium Wrote:Uhm, not that I've looked at the micro plan, but why put the turn into the road? Moving onto the forest uses all movement, and Hunting will finish before the worker finishes. You're just delaying the deer camp by one turn, without gaining anything. Corn and deer are 3 tiles apart. After roading, it's still a full move to reach the forest.
Oh, I didn't realize the corn was being farmed first. Whoops.
Civilization IV: 21 (Bismarck of Mali), 29 (Mao Zedong of Babylon), 38 (Isabella of China), 45 (Victoria of Sumeria), PB12 (Darius of Sumeria), 56 (Hammurabi of Sumeria), PB16 (Bismarck of Mali), 78 (Augustus of Byzantium), PB56 (Willem of China)
Hearthstone: ArenaDrafts Profile No longer playing Hearthstone. 
I just got a turn reload announcement via the mod site. Anyone know what's going on?
If the turn really did reload I hope rolo is very careful to make sure things are replayed exactly.
Apparently CivFr mis-moved their settler on the very first turn, and requested a reload. It's very understandable, after all they only had three weeks to plan out the movements of their two units.
 I would make them eat the wasted turn rather than force everyone else to reload, but I think everyone knows I'm not very forgiving on this stuff. Here's hoping nothing was disturbed in the process. Another 36 hours left on the first turn - which you know is going to tick all the way down to zero - so we won't be up to play again until sometime on Thursday. Maybe I will get to play Turn 2 before I leave for vacation next week.
Apparently the "reload" email from the Spanish mod website is inaccurate - it's more like a Civstats "timed out... uploader reconnected" message. Whether or not to reload is still being debated. Sommer has been sure to make the first post and frame it such that any team that disagrees will look bad.
I'd be tempted to ask if any new tiles were revealed to CivFR by the misclick, but that might just be viewed as antagonistic. Lord Parkin Wrote:I'd be tempted to ask if any new tiles were revealed to CivFR by the misclick, but that might just be viewed as antagonistic. Heh, that was my first thought too, but probably not worth it.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
I would post something like:
Team RB is of course fine with reloading for a misclick in the first few turns while everyone gets used to the pitboss, as long as r_rolo confirms that no benefit was gained by the move (e.g. revealed tiles). Hm, what do we want the reload policy to be, anyway? Suppose someone on our team had logged in before our turnplayer and settled our capital in place, would we ask for a reload? How about if they had moved it 2N (wasting only a turn)? How about if it was our turnplayer that did one of these things? There is a lot to be said for minimizing reloads in a game that will already take forever. But of course some cases are really gamebreaking.
Great, Sommer's pushing for a T0 alliance with CivFr.
Two things. 1) Opposing the reload is basically begging the two to team up and screw us over for metagame reasons. Blah. We have to play on those terms, play nice and let them have their turn advantage back. Not worth antagonising everyone over something like that. Annoying as fuck. 2) This provides precedent for Sommer asking for a reload for himself. Remember when he threatened to ragequit when he mis-settled last demogame? We have to remember to deny him: I'd be more willing to grant a reload over 2 units moved than over an entire empire moved. |
