Are you, in fact, a pregnant lady who lives in the apartment next door to Superdeath's parents? - Commodore

Create an account  

 
[PB90] Lurking Deity lvl Crazy People

So I had assumed copper on home island as well, but I hadn't really considered the consequences of copper elsewhere.

Quote:It might seem like putting all the copper on the mainland prevents rushes, but in reality the first one to sailing can cut off their neighbors access to copper, from which there would be no recovery. Whereas if copper is on the starting island anyone with bronze working can adequately defend themselves even if they are later to sailing.

YAAAAA...... this seems like a poor map maker decision. Sailing is already heavily incentivized, but Cornflakes is right that being slow to it could just be horrendously punished....

I'll be curious if anyone has realized this and can punish one of the myst civs for instance.

Edit: punish is the wrong word. "Exploit this against a myst civ" is better wording
Reply

Bad luck for Ginger. Although sending the warrior onto the tile first surely could have prevented the chance for combat?
Past Games: PB51  -  PB55  -  PB56  -  PB58 (Tarkeel's game)  - PB59  -  PB60  -  PB64  -  PB66  -  PB68 (Miguelito's game)     Current Games: None (for now...)
Reply

Quote:This is some fantastic bullshit RNG. Not specifically the combat, but the ability for the barbs to delay settling like that. It could have indefinitely camped around the site of our city and copper. Additionally, as it was an amphibious landing, and we had to stop on that tile, it's not like we had a choice to creep up the settler and "double move" the animal.


I mean RNG of barbs and how much time we spend on these games is a reason I've moved to the "no barbs" camp.

I don't have a good sense of how Ginger takes feedback so typing this here for him to see later. The obvious careful play would have been to land the warrior first for vision. Could then delay landing settler by a turn to see result of the battle. Still wouldn't have been great losing the warrior and delaying settling, but would have been merely annoying instead of depressing....

Edit: Amica and I posted sameish time and I didn't see had already mentioned.
Reply

What Ginger did was the careful play, just in the wrong mod: Ginger's been playing CtH and had forgotten (or hadn't realized) the rules were different in the base game, and so thought animals would never attack an escorted Settler. That's what's so shattering about it: You do everything right as far as you know, and then because you missed a subtle difference between the rules of different mods and there's a lion in just the wrong place and you lose a battle against the odds, you're out of the game just when - two months in, with a year or more ahead - you're finally about to start getting to play outside of your tiny starting island. I'm glad I'm not in that position....
Reply

Quote:Ginger also told us in the tech thread  that they lost a settler to a low odds barb [Image: alright.gif]  - and apparently the referee and lurkers decided to return them


However bad you may feel for Ginger, I'm actually shocked the Germans did this.
Reply

The problem is barb combat not barbs themselves. Barbs should automatically lose in certain conditions, which are known beforehand, but exist to punish lax play and delay expansion and war.

This whole scenario is essentially bullshit on a highly balanced map as there is no true defence against it, just luck.
Current games (All): RtR: PB80 Civ 6: PBEM23

Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6:  PBEM22 Games ded lurked: PB18
Reply

(May 18th, 2022, 15:08)Mjmd Wrote: However bad you may feel for Ginger, I'm actually shocked the Germans did this.
Wow, yeah; I find both parts of that astonishing: Posting in-game events not known to all (or indeed any other) players in the tech thread, and then reloading or editing the game to correct a mistake dependent on a combat roll - since if the roll had gone the other way, the issue wouldn't have been raised, and the city would have been founded sooner than it safely could have been under the rules by which everyone else is playing - are both surprising to me. Their (out-of-game rules) indeed seem to be rather different from ours in unexpected ways. More so: If I'm reading PBSpy correctly, they didn't e.g. edit the Settler onto the boat (so it would be "as though he knew the actual rules and played it safe") but must have deleted the lion and put the Settler back in its place (surely not with the Warrior too?) because Xist10 founded the city that same turn. That's very generous; I hope other players didn't have to delay their settlements because of barb animals....

(May 18th, 2022, 15:52)Krill Wrote: The problem is barb combat not barbs themselves. Barbs should automatically lose in certain conditions, which are known beforehand, but exist to punish lax play and delay expansion and war.

This whole scenario is essentially bullshit on a highly balanced map as there is no true defence against it, just luck.
I basically agree with this, by the way. One idea: "Barb units do not attack unless they have at least N% (call it 50% maybe) odds to survive," and then also give barb animals a maximum damage limit on attack (maybe also 50%) like Catapults so they can eat unescorted noncombatants and cripple combat units (and be more likely to survive and therefore to attack since they have to survive fewer rounds) but can't actually kill real units. This is untested, so will probably have unintended consequences; just thinking aloud.
Reply

I was also surprised, probably a generous decision because of different playing sites/mods. CtH is very close to (doh!) BTS, so it's not feeling different most of the time. Very easy to miss an important detail and Ginger probably considered a guest to this other "mod".
Losing the first settler basically means losing the game and waiting to get killed 40 or 140 turns later. So, I think it's ok in this special situation. I expected the revived settler on the boat though, someone proposed a new one in the capital.
BTW, Warrior and Lion both live too, but xist said he would disband the warrior himself, I guess he realized that lurkers and referee were extra-generous.
Reply

(May 20th, 2022, 00:08)RefSteel Wrote: I hope other players didn't have to delay their settlements because of barb animals....

(June 2nd, 2022, 14:57)Miguelito Wrote: I like to gamble, but the iron rule is that these are always losses, so I kept the settler on the boat and loaded up the second quechua (and pulled the third from the city such that he can upload next turn if needed).

This makes me sad - and also makes me root for Miguelito even more!
Reply

AND Cornflakes screwed by not setting on copper. Map so good for play noidea . I know they spent literal months putting this map together, but they added an element that is going to cause massive unbalanced shock waves through the game.

On a side note I love Nauf's play stealing silver on not Mig's copper continent. Seems like a solid play because Mig may not fully realize and even if he does won't have a developed presence over there.
Reply



Forum Jump: