I love the idea of arming the lurker civ with nukes and commando/woody2/guerilla2/morale mechanized infantry. The only problem is how they would get said infantry out of their mountain-isolated city.
|
Pitboss 18 Organizing Thread (RB Mod 34 Civs)
|
|
Is this a serious discussion? I think it's pretty obvious why any of these "destroy everything" solutions are worse than just retiring the Civ to AI (after a replacement is deemed impossible). Destroy everything solutions will probably really screw with one player to keep the overall balance of the game, which is blatantly worse than hindering the overall balance of the game to not screw with a specific player. You can't keep a game strictly balanced anyway (it's obvious that some players are better than others, it's obvious some starts are better than others), but you can avoid ruining the game for the players (just imagine that the guy you are about to attack decides to leave the game and is suddenly replaced by fallout - what are you going to use your army for now?).
Besides, destroy everything solutions are bound to rely on admin decisions to solve important issues (when should a civ be replaced by fallout and when another player already received the right to conquer that land seems a pretty obvious one), which is never a good thing.
February 28th, 2014, 08:42
(This post was last modified: February 28th, 2014, 08:43 by Commodore.)
I've been assuming "unserious". Retire to AI is going to be permitted, with the clear caveat that diplo with an AI must be limited to "Declare War" and "Cease Fire". Human replacement is ideal and will be attempted if at all possible...in PB13, clearly if I'd abandoned for some weird reason Mostly Harmless could have filled in without and worry about neighbor grudges or whatever. This is going to be big and sprawling, free-wheeling is fine.
I was planning on rolling random for leader/civ combos and then permitting trades if free (hint: NOT "trade or I'm going to just rush everyone" or "trade and I'll give you 1k gold on contact"). If you crazy kids wanted a snake pick I wouldn't stop you, however, it's not fast but it is a heck of a way to roll call. On the gripping hand, however, the random method gets you seeing all your leaders fast...  Formal request for Gaspar to spend a month's time giving his award-winning "pick and player" analysises.  I'll do it too in the lurker thread. 
If only you and me and dead people know hex, then only deaf people know hex.
I write RPG adventures, and blog about it, check it out. (February 28th, 2014, 07:41)spacetyrantxenu Wrote: C&D practitioners would have to deal with a bit of a blip for rival best power rating throughout the game, but it wouldn't mess with anyone's graphs since the lurker civ's graphs would never be obtainable anyway. The python code that does the demo screen specifically excludes barbarians. We can change it to specifically exclude the lurker civ too.
I have finally decided to put down some cash and register a website. It is www.ruffhi.com. Now I remain free to move the hosting options without having to change the name of the site.
(October 22nd, 2014, 10:52)Caledorn Wrote: And ruff is officially banned from playing in my games as a reward for ruining my big surprise by posting silly and correct theories in the PB18 tech thread.
I do not support assisted suicide. Doing C&D for a 34 player game would be suicide. So don't help it.
If only you and me and dead people know hex, then only deaf people know hex.
I write RPG adventures, and blog about it, check it out.
Was there a plan to categorize players by how much space they'd like?
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld (February 28th, 2014, 09:12)Old Harry Wrote: Was there a plan to categorize players by how much space they'd like?Mildly, it was going to be a two state thingy, normal or lusher-but-tighter.
If only you and me and dead people know hex, then only deaf people know hex.
I write RPG adventures, and blog about it, check it out. 
In general please continue the settings discussion. It is always refreshing and could lead good ideas to further games.
However don't expect anything to change or being added to current set. I won't do it uless there is pretty much unanimous and well supported suggestion concerning it. All players have signed up using the current set and I wouldn't take any risks of losing players because they didn't get the game they were signing in. My view on some of the latest ideas or questions: * Quitting players - Quitting without finding a replacement is not legitimate. I won't add any rule that would make it look like it is a valid alternative. We still might lose players that are hard to replace, but I suggest we solve the issues when they come up and not try to make rigid rules that won't handle the varying real world cases * Leader/civ picking method - Described in the settings * "Atlantis event or Nuclear holocaust" - I hope no one is very serious about this This is also the reason why I'm not heavily trying to get Events back on. |
