I'm on board with all of this, and agree with a ban of WE + adjacency at least as a stopgap pending the April patch release. If there's a sixth person out there who is interested in playing, feel free to say so! I'm a little undecided for time commitment reasons, and may end up backing out.
|
New CIV VI PBEM
|
|
Wait...you made a positive comment about something a mapmaker did? I thought that was strictly against forum rules!
 (And thanks -- what did you like so much about the CS placement? [spoiler tag it in case Ichabod comes through])
Sending units to their death since 2017.
Don't do what I did: PBEM 3 - Arabia , PBEM 6 - Australia This worked well enough: PBEM 10 - Aztecs Gamus Interruptus: PBEM 14 - Indonesia Gathering Storm Meanderings: PBEM 15 - Gorgo You Say Pítati, I Say Potato: PBEM 17 - Nubia The Last of the Summer Wine: PBEM 18 - Eleanor/England Rhymin' Simon: PBEM 20 - Indonesia (Team w/ China)
The preview video for the update patch has been confirmed for Monday (12 Apr): https://twitter.com/CivGame/status/1380551084809187330
Sending units to their death since 2017.
Don't do what I did: PBEM 3 - Arabia , PBEM 6 - Australia This worked well enough: PBEM 10 - Aztecs Gamus Interruptus: PBEM 14 - Indonesia Gathering Storm Meanderings: PBEM 15 - Gorgo You Say Pítati, I Say Potato: PBEM 17 - Nubia The Last of the Summer Wine: PBEM 18 - Eleanor/England Rhymin' Simon: PBEM 20 - Indonesia (Team w/ China) (April 9th, 2021, 11:42)suboptimal Wrote: The preview video for the update patch has been confirmed for Monday (12 Apr): https://twitter.com/CivGame/status/1380551084809187330 Final free update, huh? So does that mean we can expect the inevitable balance issues created by a patch of this scale to forever go unfixed?
Okay, I think we need some sort of Work Ethic ban because at least Russia would get the banhammer if we allow it. Great synergy and cannot be stopped due to 1/2 districts. The two options I see are ban outright, or ban with adjacency bonus ban (there's no need to worry about it "accidently" spreading because it can only have one religion active at a time expect for Congo but they are a OCC enabler civ).
Thrawn I disagree and that tactical DoWs happen all the time. It happened in V when sevensprits declared to deny CSs and it should have happened in 4 when rego should have got his rails removed to stop commando and 6 against Persia. Australia is way too strong if we allow tactical DoWs but fine otherwise, same level as Russia without Work Ethic. Nan Mandol might be able to come off the list with just making it +1 culture, instead of stripping districts. You have to give up stuff to put it on the coast, even on islands, and if you lose Nan Mandol your stuck with bad placement. And if you do it your way your admitting that Auckland is too strong on islands, extending the banned list.
@MJW: Indian cities under either leader would also get the benefits of Work Ethic since it's a Follower Belief.
I think we tentiatively ban Work Ethic (and the settler pantheon) until we see if/how Russia gets affected by the rebalance.
Sending units to their death since 2017.
Don't do what I did: PBEM 3 - Arabia , PBEM 6 - Australia This worked well enough: PBEM 10 - Aztecs Gamus Interruptus: PBEM 14 - Indonesia Gathering Storm Meanderings: PBEM 15 - Gorgo You Say Pítati, I Say Potato: PBEM 17 - Nubia The Last of the Summer Wine: PBEM 18 - Eleanor/England Rhymin' Simon: PBEM 20 - Indonesia (Team w/ China) 
I might vote for a WE + adjacency ban rather than an outright WE ban, but that creates a bunch of problems if someone with an adjacency pantheon doesn't found a religion themselves and has to avoid the WE religion spreading to them. I'm fine with whatever rule the rest of the players would prefer.
|
