[SPOILERS] scooter's PB53

[sunrise089]

What would you like to see different in the next Advanced start game?

I would recommend no changes, or maybe Scooter's idea for all worker techs below. This game had wildly different choices made with respect to number of cities planted, and I think even a single additional iteration of these 'base' rules would see a lot more optimized play. I'd let people optimize the base setup before tweaking it much

[scooter]

I generally agree that you might not even need changes. I tend to think I got my start "right," but I also know if not for a couple surprises found during the actual start, I probably would have gone with 4 cities, which nobody else touched. I think there's a world in which that works, and would love to see someone try.

[Sullla]

If starting techs are too important for Advanced Start, you can always try running a later era start for a change. Classical era gives everyone the same starting techs and then the other eras all have their own distinct metagames. (If anything I think RB should be running more of the later era games, the Industrial game that scooter and I took part in was fantastic fun for everyone involved.)

[BRickAstley]

If starting techs are too important for Advanced Start, you can always try running a later era start for a change. Classical era gives everyone the same starting techs and then the other eras all have their own distinct metagames. (If anything I think RB should be running more of the later era games, the Industrial game that scooter and I took part in was fantastic fun for everyone involved.)

I 100% agree with this sentiment.

[scooter]

Unit gifts are very frowned upon in Civ games still, right?


Trying to ask preemptively here. It hasn't happened, but it looks like Commodore may be either about to do that or straight up defend in AT's cities. I just want to make sure the former is not allowed, while the latter seems fair. We apparently made no rules before starting this game, but I assume this falls under the usual parameters for a game.

[NobleHelium]

There is no lurker consensus on this. We were also waiting to see if you actually objected, which apparently you are.

[scooter]

There is no lurker consensus on this.  We were also waiting to see if you actually objected, which apparently you are.

Hah.


I found Commodore's stack in AT's land that I'm assuming you're all aware of. I declared on Commodore and killed a couple stray units out west, capturing a worker. I then offered him 200g for peace, figuring I'd see if he was amenable to being paid off in return for letting me attack AT without his support. I assumed not. I then figured I should make absolutely sure by posting here that he couldn't have it both ways - taking my 200g and gifting him the units. I assumed this was a no-brainer, but clearly it's more complicated than that.

[scooter]

So, I'll put it this way. I'm opposed to unit gifting. I'm not sure if he was considering it, but that remark makes me think he definitely was/is. I will not be happy and argue my case if he's allowed to gift units, but what can't happen is he takes my 200g and gifts the units anyway, if that makes sense.


If he's already decided to do this, I probably have to suck it up since there's no rule against this. However, if that's the case, I think it's reasonable for him to be informed that my offer of him for peace is null and needs to be rejected if we're going to allow unit gifting. Does that make sense? I thought this was akin to city gifting and frowned upon (as opposed to trading cities for peace, which I think is fine if done in good faith). If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'd like to not get extra-screwed here if possible.

[vanrober]

Im not sure, but maybe if you ask him no trade with at in that offer you would grant he cannot give units isnt it?

[scooter]

As I understand, when Commodore accidentally started playing the turn early last night, he rejected the offer. So that does not appear to be an issue at least.