That's why we tank our GNP lead by going nuts with expansion. That's why I am against building an early library and going for an early academy. Not only does it slow down our expansion by eating up food that could be going into settler whips, but an academy encourages us to keep our science slider high when in reality we want to make long term investments by expanding and dropping our slider.
If you guys think we can slot in Oracle, then fine, go for it, but nevertheless, get some scouts pushing our vision outwards and focus on expansion.
(October 24th, 2012, 17:21)SevenSpirits Wrote: I wouldn't expect a team to mess around in mediocrity for the first fifty turns and then suddenly become novice.
(October 24th, 2012, 21:15)WilliamLP Wrote: I fear we might be overlooking macro for the REX micro. A lot of good things happen when we have more units scouting and near enemy cities, and sooner. Right now, do we even know we aren't getting screwed over by CFC in their settlement deal? What about future settlement deals? What about logistics of knowing where enemy cities are very early? Did you see what Krill was able to do in PB5 because he had more military than anyone else at a crucial early point in the game? What if horse is right at one of nearer tiles and another team is soon to pink do it when we could have grabbed it easily just knowing it was there? Etc.
We don't really have a deal with CFC - the deal is basically "we'll talk later, until then, don't settle past the oasis"... Once we re-open border discussions with them, it's all fair game. Having "more military" than everyone else is worthless when you're still 15 tiles away from your nearest enemy borders. This is a spacey map, so you play it accordingly. Edit: basically I'm just saying I don't think we have anything to fear here.
I love you all, but this talk that keeps coming up of playing sub-optimally in order to disguise our score is dumb.
To me it seems feels a little like saying you should always bid like crazy when you have the best hand in poker...
In other words, if something increases your chances to lose it is _not_ playing optimally, period. You might not feel that that part of the metagame is right or just, but it's a very real part of it that needs to be taken into account if you're going to play as seriously as possible to win the actual game. This, as opposed to a moral victory where you dominate early Sim City and get wiped out later, and then shug with moral indignation that things aren't fair and nothing could be done or something
Anyway, I'll go back to the sidelines now, as I'm not enough of a good nuts and bolts Civ player except to make the odd inane high level comment
(October 24th, 2012, 22:24)WilliamLP Wrote: This, as opposed to a moral victory where you dominate early Sim City and get wiped out later, and then shug with moral indignation that things aren't fair and nothing could be done or something
It's this assumption that playing SimCity early will lead to getting wiped out later that is the problem. It's unfounded paranoia IMO.
(October 24th, 2012, 22:24)WilliamLP Wrote: This, as opposed to a moral victory where you dominate early Sim City and get wiped out later, and then shug with moral indignation that things aren't fair and nothing could be done or something
It's this assumption that playing SimCity early will lead to getting wiped out later that is the problem. It's unfounded paranoia IMO.
I see no reason why we can't get dogpiled, beat it back, and still win.
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.
(October 24th, 2012, 22:33)scooter Wrote: I feel like the paranoia stems from the PB2 dogpile. Do people forget who still won that game?
He he, I was actually going to reference that, but then decided everyone has heard that story enough times. I guess it's always good to be reminded.
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.
(October 24th, 2012, 22:36)WilliamLP Wrote: Do people forget that the nearest neighbour in the failed dogpile had never completed a full game of Civ before?
Yeah, but I'd probably take the half that game to beat the worst teams in this game.
