Tech thread for EITB 29

[HidingKneel]

* Orthus on

*gasp*

And I thought I was alone.

I like all of Plako's suggestions, except that I don't mind varying the starting units a little (and want to include the shade),
and think the human Hyborem takeover should be optional (i.e., only if we can find someone who wants to do the takeover). Also, I wouldn't mind this being a standard FFH game instead of EitB (though maybe that wouldn't mix so well with the "losers" concept).

[DaveV]

The settings proposed by plako are fine, except I have some reservations about human Hyborem. Adding an extra person to the rotation can blow up the carefully arranged turn order if the takeover player isn't extremely flexible. There's also a fairly narrow window where Hyborem can actually be a factor in the game; if the other civs are sufficently advanced, even a human player can't do much with him.

[plako]

Hyborem on without human takeover is definately ok.

[Mardoc]

No one wants an islands map but me; the most favorable responses seem to be 'maybe it won't be horrible.' I'll build something more conventional, then. Maybe some later game will want an islands map.

Would greatly appreciate Kyan's help in balancing a map, yes . Assuming no one else is going to step up as primary mapmaker, anyway - I could enjoy dedlurking if someone's been dying to try their hand with worldbuilder.

Your map desires are currently confusing me, though. I've seen requests for cylindrical, for Torusland, for huts and no huts, for guarded lairs and no lairs - could someone collect votes?

Also, it seems like you're set on most of your other settings - enough to pick leaders? I can collect those too if you want.

[Brian Shanahan]

I'll echo Dave and Hiding and vote Plako with reservations on Hyborem.

If we're not going islands, then a pangaia is probably best.

[DaveV]

Also, it seems like you're set on most of your other settings - enough to pick leaders? I can collect those too if you want.

My picks, to at least some extent, will be based on the map type. We also haven't decided yet on whether we're going with "best of the losers" or "the *real* losers". I'm leaning more toward the latter; maybe allow each player to strike one leader/civ combo from HK's list in post #25?

My preferences for map type: 70-80% land, chokepoints from lakes and mountains, cylindrical wrap. The highlands script produces interesting terrain, but its balance is terrible: southern starts are much stronger than northern ones. I'd be fine with Torusland, Lakes, or Inland Sea, too.

[plako]

Torusland makes the lakes and mountains pretty well. However many of the FFH specialities would need to be fixed by the map maker e.g. It has more cattle food and less calendar resources than normal FFH maps. Mana nodes are there, but it doesn't seem to place huts or lairs.

[HidingKneel]

I'm leaning more toward the latter; maybe allow each player to strike one leader/civ combo from HK's list in post #25?

Alternate suggestion: we each make a list of three leaders who should be eliminated. Any leader on two or more lists is unavailable. (That way, if one of us happens to be the only one who thinks leader X is any good, we get a chance to prove it.)

[DaveV]

I was thinking about HK's suggested leader elimination method, and I've flip-flopped back to advocating that we just choose from the full list in post #25. When I was trying to come up with three leaders to cross off that list, I didn't really see any of them as being super overpowered.

[Ellimist]

I agree. My reasoning for proposing the idea had more to do with variety than balance.

I would also prefer to avoid any bans on written diplo, but am fine with restrictions. AI diplo in particular can be quite frustrating.