(March 2nd, 2013, 17:19)AutomatedTeller Wrote: Markets are buildings no one gets discounts on, so they are good for us.
What kind of logic is this? You should build a bunch of aqueducts because they're the same price for you as everyone else too, then.
Wow, uh, yeah, surprising to see this from AT.
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
Uhm, I'm not sure if Jowy should be allowed to declare and raze AT's city before AT plays his next turn.
Last turn (let's say t0), Jowy played after AT and moved his chariot under AT's unit. This turn (t1) he played before AT and moved next to AT's city. Next turn (t2) if he moves before AT, he'll be able to raze the city. However, I would argue that if Jowy had played before AT on t0, then he would have noticed Jowy's unit that turn and reacted a turn earlier. Thus, I would say that Jowy should play after AT on t2.
I've asked Krill to weigh in on this (and as you can see I've asked Cornflakes to hold the turn).
(March 4th, 2013, 20:43)NobleHelium Wrote: Uhm, I'm not sure if Jowy should be allowed to declare and raze AT's city before AT plays his next turn.
Last turn (let's say t0), Jowy played after AT and moved his chariot under AT's unit. This turn (t1) he played before AT and moved next to AT's city. Next turn (t2) if he moves before AT, he'll be able to raze the city. However, I would argue that if Jowy had played before AT on t0, then he would have noticed Jowy's unit that turn and reacted a turn earlier. Thus, I would say that Jowy should play after AT on t2.
I've asked Krill to weigh in on this (and as you can see I've asked Cornflakes to hold the turn).
By the way if any other vets want to weigh in here (novice, Seven?) and maybe communicate something to the respective parties it would be much appreciated.
