January 12th, 2010, 13:00
Posts: 2,088
Threads: 31
Joined: Apr 2004
Question for you, Sullla: assuming Dantski declares war, AI-style, with his lone skirmisher, do we prefer the first half or second half of the turn time? I feel like fighting a defensive war is mostly reactionary, so I'd rather go second, but I'd like to hear what you think.
"There is no wealth like knowledge. No poverty like ignorance."
January 12th, 2010, 14:55
Posts: 174
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2009
Your screenshots and summaries are very helpful for the spectators, thanks for the effort!
I think from a lurking standpoint, the RBP1 game suffers greatly for lack of the coherent narrative (complete with maps/screenies) that you kindly provide here.
January 12th, 2010, 15:11
Posts: 6,654
Threads: 246
Joined: Aug 2004
The rules for this game overwhelmingly favor the second mover, since you can't whip or change much of anything once the turn timer split goes into effect. The person playing the second half of the turn can watch the other side move, then react accordingly; not so much the team on the first half!
Unfortunately, as the defender we would have little say on which half of the timer we would get. The attacker generally dictates that... Of course, if we ever declare war ourselves, we're doing it with like 1 hour left on the timer, in total cheese fashion, therefore securing both the element of surprise and the critical second half timer window!
January 12th, 2010, 15:12
Posts: 7,548
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2005
m4gill4 Wrote:Your screenshots and summaries are very helpful for the spectators, thanks for the effort!
I think from a lurking standpoint, the RBP1 game suffers greatly for lack of the coherent narrative (complete with maps/screenies) that you kindly provide here.
In PB1's defense, IMO it's a lot harder to do this kind of detail the longer the game goes, as you have to talk about 15-20 cities instead of 6.
January 12th, 2010, 16:28
Posts: 2,764
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2009
@ Sullla
Can the team moving in the first half not watch what the team does in the second half of the previous turn and react accordingly, taking advantage of the first use of promotions and any new techology/income?
January 12th, 2010, 16:36
Posts: 614
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2005
I think shady listed some drawbacks for second moving team. One of them is, you can't use promote a unit until first moving team moves again....
Mwin
January 12th, 2010, 17:09
Posts: 2,088
Threads: 31
Joined: Apr 2004
MWIN Wrote:I think shady listed some drawbacks for second moving team. One of them is, you can't use promote a unit until first moving team moves again.... Huh?
"There is no wealth like knowledge. No poverty like ignorance."
January 12th, 2010, 17:15
Posts: 614
Threads: 2
Joined: Oct 2005
First moving team attacks. Your unit wins and gets a promotion. But you cannot promote it during the second half of same turn. They can attack your unit again in first half of next turn...
Speaker Wrote:Huh?
Mwin
January 12th, 2010, 18:14
Posts: 128
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2009
wouldn't that be true for both first and second time slots (not being able to promote your unit until the other side has acted)
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind
- Mohandas Karamchand "Mahatma" Gandhi, 1869-1948.
January 12th, 2010, 18:25
Posts: 6,654
Threads: 246
Joined: Aug 2004
Not to interrupt this wonderful debate, but there's a new turn up. Everyong else had ended their turn but us, and I didn't want to hold up the game, so I rolled it over to Turn 91. Jowy did whip a unit in Sparta right before I logged in, however.
Highlights of the new turn:
- Nakor has founded Confucianism; it appears they rushed to Code of Laws to take advantage of their Fin/Org Holy Roman Empire combination. They might do better than expected, since we've got these Toroidal maintenance costs in play.
- Jowy is a moron:
Unprotected settler, and we have the option to kill it with our Woody II warrior. We can still do so, actually, but I don't think we should, since we have the NAP in place for another four turns. Seriously though, we could kill that unit so easily; all it would take would us being an unscrupulous leader, and that settler is dead. Why take the risk, when even a warrior would render the settler totally safe?!?!
Here's the Power chart:
More imporantly, the summary after working the numbers suggests:
Jowy
2 scouts
2 warriors
4 archers
3 phalanxes
2 spears
2 chariots
Dantski
4 warriors
3 skirmishers
1 axe
1 chariot
2 spears
I've mostly left our units unmoved; I'll get to the turn later tonight. Speaker, and thoughts on how we want to respond to that latest email from Jowy?
Jowy Wrote:Hey Sullla,
From your recent silence, I guess we can conclude that you're not interested in further spread of our religion. Very well!
If something sounds too good to be true, then it probably is Unfortunately I couldn't figure out what's the catch, so yeah let's forget about it. Don't take it personally.
Then let's discuss the subject of that barb city which has popped up in the east. You have a pair of chariots moving in the direction of the barb city - are you planning on capturing the city? Razing it? Or just trying to gain some experience for your units? We should put our heads together and discuss how this affects the settling plans outlined earlier.
Didn't really have anything particular in my mind. I should probably raze it since I promised that you'll have a land route to east. Anyway it's no big deal to me and it's size one so I would have had to wait if I wanted to capture it. Feel free to join my warrior-smashing, though I doubt I actually need any help
~ Jowy
Not much there of interest, just the idea that Jowy plans to raze the barb city. OK, I guess. I don't see any real way to play this to our advantage. Thoughts?
|