Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
Yeah, we might want to cut down on that list for a 4-player. I don't care much though, maybe just cut out the obvious(Willem/Pacal/Sury/Joao) + India/Inca(/Rome?).
Also on the subject of SS/Map trading, I don't really like screenshot trading because it essentially gives you Paper map trading before Paper. At least with describing there is always a chance the other guy is lying or something. So I like map trade @ Paper, no SS trade.
Posts: 13,237
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
That's the thing though, we're not really players who have played many games around here. 
Posts: 23,667
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Actually, scrap my last. I just thought of something.
Current games (All): RtR: PB83
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71 PB80. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 PBEM23Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
PBEM E-Mailer doesn't seem to be working for me. I guess until I can get it to work, I'll have to send it by hand, though that's not much of an issue for me. As long as people w/ the PBEM E-Mailer can send stuff to me I don't think it'll slow the game down =)
EDIT: With a map being made and discussion for rules almost done, perhaps PBEM21(?) should get a forum?
Posts: 23,667
Threads: 134
Joined: Jun 2009
Well, I've got you a new map design that I think you'll like, but I need to say that you will have a coastal start, and a navy will be important on this map.
Current games (All): RtR: PB83
Ended games (Selection): BTS games: PB1, PB3, PBEM2, PBEM4, PBEM5B, PBEM50. RB mod games: PB5, PB15, PB27, PB37, PB42, PB46, PB71 PB80. FFH games: PBEMVII, PBEMXII. Civ 6: PBEM22 PBEM23Games ded lurked: PB18
Posts: 12,343
Threads: 46
Joined: Jan 2011
Kuro Wrote:PBEM E-Mailer doesn't seem to be working for me. I guess until I can get it to work, I'll have to send it by hand, though that's not much of an issue for me. As long as people w/ the PBEM E-Mailer can send stuff to me I don't think it'll slow the game down =)
I never use the emailer. I send everything by hand and it takes half a minute.
“The wind went mute and the trees in the forest stood still. It was time for the last tale.”
Posts: 13,237
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
Kuro Wrote:Yeah, we might want to cut down on that list for a 4-player. I don't care much though, maybe just cut out the obvious(Willem/Pacal/Sury/Joao) + India/Inca(/Rome?).
Also on the subject of SS/Map trading, I don't really like screenshot trading because it essentially gives you Paper map trading before Paper. At least with describing there is always a chance the other guy is lying or something. So I like map trade @ Paper, no SS trade.
Yes, I agree that trading screenshots before Paper basically means you're trading maps before Paper. That's why I prefer waiting until Paper access for that. Not sure why you want to ban screenshots entirely though?
And about the leaders, if there are four leaders that you want to ban, I don't see a reason to ban them, since there are four players total. I haven't played a game here, and I don't think you or Ellimist have either (Jkaen has played one, I think?); so I think it'd be fine to allow the power leaders, since we haven't played several games with them or anything.
Posts: 5,157
Threads: 37
Joined: Jan 2011
I am part way through 1 BTS and 1 FFH game atm here.
As I said, don't really mind about the leaders.
As for screenshots, the only reason I was leaning towards banning them is to see peoples paint skillz!
Posts: 2,852
Threads: 20
Joined: Feb 2011
pling Wrote:I think it grew out of a desire to move away from everyone playing the same thing every time. So it was "Civs we've seen a lot of".
Ellimist is the guy that wanted the Tatan list most strongly - probably best to wait for him to have a chance to comment on it now 
I'm fine with doing no ban list. I just think it's silly to have everybody be a financial leader just so they can keep up with everyone else. I mean, in a NTT game nobody is going to choose Catherine, Shaka, or Isabella if they can choose Willem, Ragnar, or Mansa.
We'll end up with 4 financial leaders, and if we're going there we may as well allow two players to choose the same leader. My preference would be to ban all financial leaders except Wang Kon.
Krill Wrote:Well, I've got you a new map design that I think you'll like, but I need to say that you will have a coastal start, and a navy will be important on this map. So we should first-pick the Netherlands, then.
Kuro Wrote:Also on the subject of SS/Map trading, I don't really like screenshot trading because it essentially gives you Paper map trading before Paper. At least with describing there is always a chance the other guy is lying or something. So I like map trade @ Paper, no SS trade. People trust screenshots WAY too much.
Besides, long and complicated descriptions accomplish basically the same thing. Plus, many people send screenshots that give away WAY more information than they wanted to.
NobleHelium Wrote:And about the leaders, if there are four leaders that you want to ban, I don't see a reason to ban them, since there are four players total. I haven't played a game here, and I don't think you or Ellimist have either (Jkaen has played one, I think?); so I think it'd be fine to allow the power leaders, since we haven't played several games with them or anything. I have not played a game on here yet. Though I will be demsonstrating soon just how stupidly broken Charadon is.
Posts: 3,924
Threads: 19
Joined: May 2011
Well, I'll switch my vote to SS ban until Paper if you guys want it. I don't think it matters much either way.
I say we just go with Ellimist's idea(All Financials except Wang Kon) and India + Inca(Because those civs IMHO are very polarizingly good). Should be various while still allowing basically all of the leaders, all of them.
|
