Posts: 6,141
Threads: 10
Joined: Mar 2012
(May 3rd, 2013, 10:58)T-hawk Wrote: (May 3rd, 2013, 09:23)teleh Wrote: I had thought with TT off I'd only ever seen 'Tech Trading Not Allowed' messages in the screen you'd usually see 'can research' etc.
With TT off, the "Tech Trading Not Allowed" message still disappears at Alphabet. The techs show up in the "Can't Trade" column instead. You probably just never thought to check F4 later in a NTT game to see that.
however, the "wants" column disappears. you can still get the same info from the "can research" column, but it requires a little more thought, hehe.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
Posts: 3,199
Threads: 11
Joined: Jan 2010
(May 3rd, 2013, 08:29)teleh Wrote: Awesome WilliamLP, nice to meet yer too.
Wondering what do you think about no tech trading by rule but on in settings for the diplo screen availability? I think if TT is completely off you can't deduce what techs others have without some heavy power/score/etc demo tracking, but on the other hand not knowing easily is good too imo.
Heheh, I used to be in a band called LongPig (LP) and our drummer's name was Will.
It's seems like the NTT issue is a moot point. I'm definitely not someone who's going to lurk every turn roll to take demo snapshots and deduce who discovered what on every turn, so I hear you.
Yeah, it's just my initials but I've been suspected of being Lord Parkin a couple of times here while lurking, too!
Anyway, I hope this game runs, thanks for setting it up.
Posts: 3,251
Threads: 18
Joined: Nov 2010
(May 3rd, 2013, 10:31)Krill Wrote: I don't think RB mod would be good either if this were a "Greens" game, that would be a lot of extra stuff to think about.
Agree with this. After thinking a bit more (and reading in a report about 'hunting' being required for pastures) I realized that I'm totally unfamiliar with RB mod, regular Civ IV I know from SP, at least. So I heavily prefer the regular mod. Vanilla mod. The Unmod. You know.
Otherwise I'm a perfect gentleman, just ask anyone but my wife, so I'm fine with gentleman's agreement about double moving as well as other kinds of agreements.
AI diplo, yeah perhaps this is best. Just realized that a PB would have more people in it than a PBEM, so could be a lot more emails going out and in...OR some sort of limited.
Posts: 264
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2013
There are a few features from RBMod I would really miss (that change in particular, Molach, is one I think very good - Hunting is almost useless in any opening that doesn't involve deer in unmodded BTS), but I'm fine with either BTS or RBMod with a banlist. I do think that stealing the RBMod practice of "everyone starts with a scout" is a good change, and easy for the mapmaker.
I'll reiterate that AI diplo is a strong preference; without diplo to form cartels, I'm not sure how TT on would seriously negatively impact the game, but if the vets say it's a bad idea I'll take them at their word.
Let's not get caught up in the specifics of double-move rules (though I think "don't be a dick" should be fine) until we know that we have enough people to merit a PB instead of a PBEM (what's the cutoff at which PBEM starts getting super unwieldy? 6ish?).
Playing: PB11
(March 3rd, 2012, 21:07)antisocialmunky Wrote: Civilization Economics: You have 1 Cow. You build some pastures around it to feed your people. The population grows uncontrollably. You enslave everybody and work half of them to death.
Posts: 10,039
Threads: 82
Joined: May 2012
6 is the general maximum.
I don't know of any problems with ai diplo. Fakedit: ah, I realise you mean tech trading. TT definitely impacts the game massively. Its not necessarily a bad change, but it definitely massively changes the metagame.
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
Posts: 17,857
Threads: 162
Joined: May 2011
One general note, it looks like if you guys want to make this PB-sized, maybe you should allow a bit crustier greens. Quite a few here with only one game under their belt, I'd class them still very green though.
If you guys want to do a random/random thing in BtS, may I suggest the slightly balanced plan, a la PB9? 3rd party rolls 18, picks the #players civs that are closest to one another. I don't have time to build a map, but I'd roll a script if needed.
Posts: 1,683
Threads: 16
Joined: Feb 2012
This looks fun, especially now that I have a new job and more free time. I' ve only play one MP game so I guess I green.
Posts: 3,680
Threads: 23
Joined: Oct 2012
So ... would I qualify for this? I'm not expressing definite interest yet since I need to figure out if I'd have the time, but just so I can consider. I am currently playing in four games on this site, but I have no completed games and my playing quality has varied wildly between the totally newbish and somewhat competent.
Posts: 1,448
Threads: 14
Joined: Mar 2013
I would love to atempt to attend this Green's Game, however I believe I will probably have to drop out towards the middle portion of the game.
I am leaving on a trip to Alska in late June.
May 3rd, 2013, 22:57
(This post was last modified: May 3rd, 2013, 22:58 by Kuro.)
Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
If I qualify, only having a single complete Civ IV PBEM to my name, I would be interested in joining. Considering my reputation from that one game (Being slow), perhaps someone would want to be my partner/co-person/dedlurker? But I am, if nothing else, interested if you will have me.
EDIT: Perhaps TheHumanHydra could join with me, assuming he qualifies, since he has so many other games he is playing and thus it would help lighten his load?
|
