IMO it's stronger than those on the right map. I'd prefer that we get a map where it isn't overpowered, and leaving it unbanned. Also, the more players there are in the game the easier it should be to have enough open borders to fuel your lighthouse.
|
Pitboss 17 Organizing Thread
|
|
Current tallies, because I had time
Barbarians: On 6 / Off 4 Starting units: Everyone starts with a scout 9 / Normal 1 Huts: On 2 / Off 7 Random Events: On 1 / Off 10 Espionage: On 2 / Passive only (no spies) 8 Corporations: On 4 / Off 6 Vassals: On 2 / Off 9 Difficulty: Prince / Monarch 4 / Emperor 3 These should be banned: War Elephants: Agree 9 / Disagree 2 Nukes: Agree 8 / Disagree 3 Blockades: Agree 8 / Disagree 3 AP resolutions: Agree 8 / Disagree 3 Statue of Zeus: Agree 7 / Disagree 4 Cristo Redentor: Agree 6 / Disagree 5 The Great Lighthouse: Agree 4 / Disagree 3 + several votes for mapmaker choice Regardless of pick method we should ban these: India: Agree 6 / Disagree 3 Inca: Agree 6 / Disagree 3 Pacal: Agree 6 / Disagree 3 Willem: Agree 6 / Disagree 3 Pick method: A 4 / B 5 (December 4th, 2013, 11:52)yuris125 Wrote: Why are we even considering banning Great Lighthouse all of a sudden? In an AI diplo game, it's easy enough to keep closed borders with its owner If you guys are playing BTS and not RB Mod, yeah, it warrants consideration at least. Just because players can close borders with someone who builds the Lighthouse doesn't mean they will, even if it's in their best interest to do so. I don't know how many times I've seen that. So you can leave it up to the map maker to make the call if it's unbalancing or not (probably the best option, if I was playing), ban it outright (seems a bit severe to me), or just burn the city that builds it, it'll be coastal after all (this is my vote since I'm just lurking  ).
Played: Pitboss 18 - Kublai Khan of Germany Somalia | Pitboss 11 - De Gaulle of Byzantium | Pitboss 8 - Churchill of Portugal | PB7 - Mao of Native America | PBEM29 Greens - Mao of Babylon  (December 4th, 2013, 02:48)2metraninja Wrote: Corporations: On (why are those always banned BTW?) I've never used or seen corporations in my SP games, and multiplayer games have them disabled  I guess it's kind of a testament to how little BTS I played, I was way more active in Civ4 in vanilla. I have no idea if they are fun or not, but I don't really feel like finding out in a PB game.
You need to take into consideration what wrap you might be using. I don't know BRicks plans, but if you end up with Toroidial even monarch is brutal, let alone emperor.
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
(December 4th, 2013, 15:04)Qgqqqqq Wrote: You need to take into consideration what wrap you might be using. I don't know BRicks plans, but if you end up with Toroidial even monarch is brutal, let alone emperor. I always think mapmakers choice is sensible for both difficulty level and GLH bans they know the quantity of coastal cities and wrap.
December 4th, 2013, 16:39
(This post was last modified: December 4th, 2013, 16:39 by slowcheetah.)
 (December 3rd, 2013, 18:57)yuris125 Wrote: Any non-objective ranking of players is a controversial subject which will inevitably cause bad blood. Not mentioning other issues with this method - for example, some people (myself included) may not be interested in playing a game with starting handicaps, however minor they are I agree with this. At least the second part. 
Since we plenty have time, should we close the questions with decisive votes and see if anyone wants to campaign for one option or the other on the questions with close votes?
Also, I'm not completely sure exactly what picking method B entails: - How many combos are rolled? - Who will select the "balanced ones"? - How will they be selected? - How many combos does each player get to choose from? - Will duplicates be allowed? - Can we go ahead and ban Protective from the combos as well? (December 5th, 2013, 12:34)Catwalk Wrote: Since we plenty have time, should we close the questions with decisive votes and see if anyone wants to campaign for one option or the other on the questions with close votes? From when I've seen this before, a helpful lurker rolls a slection of combos (usually 30 or so I think). They then make a thread where they've removed the best and worst leaving a 'balanced 12'. Other helpful lurkers can chip in with whether they think the 12 are accurate. They are then randomised and given to the players I'm not quite sure about the multiple combos thing, that was done in PB13 where you were presented with a combo and if you didn't like it the lurkers would roll you another one from the pool of remaining (unpicked) leaders and civs. PB13 used RB mod though, so all of the leaders were better balanced, I don't think the multiple picks would work as well with base BTS. No idea about duplicates, I still think it's kind of dull. I'd hope protective would get removed in the culling process anyway. In fact it's pretty much inevitable, Wang Kon might get through. I'd say Mao as well but since Xenu isn't playing this game I can't see Mao making an appearance. I still prefer a snakepick. But that's mainly because I find some traits more fun to play than others. It also allows you to tailor starting techs in a way which randomised civs won't |
