Realms Beyond Pitboss Planning Thread

[Krill]

Snake pick is used primarily in teamers, where the balance is spread over several players, so the tems are quite balanced even if the individual players aren't.

This doesn't work in an FFA environment, played Ironman style; the person placed last on traits is probably completely screwed when there are 11 people picking Beforehand. This isn't a single era game, where the UU and UB will dominate the game. This can be extremely unbalanced, especially when we consider that we aren't going to know what the map is like. It's simple, but not good. The best balance is always going to be given by allowing duplicates.

One note: basically the first person to pick has to pick one of civs or leaders to choose, and that has to be what everybody picks until the bottom of the list is reached. Then the guy at the bottom of the list picks the first choice out of the unoicked category. Otherwise the technique doesn;t work.

[Ruff_Hi]

that snake pick is also used in fantasy baseball drafts when you are selecting 25 players. Its fair there but not when you are only selecting 2 items (as Krill pointed out).

[shadyforce]

It seems that allowing duplication will make things a lot easier.

[Broker33]

Either way works for me. Honestly I dont know enough about the combinations to really make a perfect pairing. I know kind of what I want but dont have a clue if it is good or not.

[Dantski]

I would just randomize civs, makes things a million times easier.

Some people are maybe getting a little too serious here?

[mostly_harmless]

2) 18 -> 24 -> 12
3) restricted -> unrestricted
4) none -> civs only -> leaders only
5) teams submit lists of choices get highest availble choice -> team list randomly assigned -> Sulla -> Random
6) Normal -> Quick -> Epic
7) -

I hope Kodii agrees.

mh

[sunrise089]

18 hour timer has won. Normal speed has won.

@Krill - Your point is well argued, as usual. But I think we can find 11 acceptable leaders for a game that isn't always war. For instance:

EDIT: I don't want to be a spoiler even ex ante. Suffice it to say there are many leaders which combine the traits generally considered to boost the overall economy with traits that boost early growth and expansion. Add in traits that boost chasing wonders and warring for players who want such a strategy and I really think we can find 11 good combos.

[Broker33]

Wow shows you how much I know. Wasnt thinking about any of those...

[Krill]

In isolation they look like decent leaders, but we don't know about the map; I can think of at least one way Sullla can neuter Financial etc, and that would make 5 of the leaders on your list less useful. The list of leaders (from best to worst) is thus in flux, and attempting to rank them to show that there are enough "good" leaders to choose from relies on unknown infomation (defeasible argument).

EDIT: I saw, luckily I didn't quote

[sunrise089]

In isolation they look like decent leaders, but we don't know about the map; I can think of at least one way Sullla can neuter Financial etc, and that would make 5 of the leaders on your list less useful. The list of leaders (from best to worst) is thus in flux, and attempting to rank them to show that there are enough "good" leaders to choose from relies on unknown infomation (defeasible argument).

EDIT: I saw, luckily I didn't quote

Ok, sure, but that holds for duplicates allowed as well, right? Even if we let everyone pick X leader, if the map lacks food, or production tiles, or water, or strategic resources, or whatever that can neuter everyone right? So it's still a gamble, no? I just want to meta-game a bit more, and I'd rather gamble in a way that makes the game interesting to me; namely having different leaders and civs for everyone.

EDIT: Sorry, I also should have been more clear - that wasn't an attempt to rank them, just to offer 11 honestly decent picks. Obviously we know some pairs, like Charismatic+Protective just aren't that strong.