EitB XXXVIII Setup and Tech Thread

[Bobchillingworth]

We operate on the honor system- don't read your opponents threads while the game is still running.


That said, you are under no obligation to post any of your team's strategies in your thread. Coordinating as a team through private channels and using your thread to post only non-spoiler information to entertain lurkers (such as stories, propaganda reports, heavily cropped images, etc.) would be entirely acceptable!

[Eclipse]

Thanks for both replies

Oh yeah I like propaganda reports, I'm a huge fan of naming units and telling thier stories

[Kragroth]

Am I on eclipse's team or someone else's? We need more responses if we're gonna play this.

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

So we are 3v3 then, with teams themselves able to pick whatever as long as they don't duplicate civs within the team?

If it is possible to infer what people have picked from the interface to a pro I would ask whether it would be possible after the picks to post each teams choices here?

Normally for a team mirrored game I would be very much for no barbs and huts, but I don't know how much that would affect an eitb game. I also think that there should be a grace period where conquered cities can be gifted but no gifting of self built cities - the settler can be gifted. I won't comment too much else as I don't know the game well enough, but definitely agree conquest/domination only!

With teams I don't mind how they are picked but hopefully there is some thought to balance in them

[Kragroth]

Gifting units was take out from ffh by kael. I'm unaware if this was added back in for eitb.

[Qgqqqqq]

Okay so there seem to be a couple of things we need to thrash out.

1. How are we picking civs/leaders?

Are we allowing duplicates or not? Are we choosing privately or snake-picking?

2. How (if any) should gifting cities be sorted?

As Krag notes, units can't be gifted, but cities can, and have some interesting interactions in a team game. Personally I'm in favor of "on the first turn in your teams possession only."

3. Should any civs be banned?

I've been reading up on the pitboss lately, and I'm thinking the clan probably should be. Their strength as a team player is really very powerful, as most of their weaknesses disappear with the nature of the game. Maybe if we allow duplicates, but even then, its a bit boring if each team has a clan - they've been done in a teamer, IMO.

4. How do we want the map to be?

Obviously we won't be too specific, but some general pointers are probably needed before Bob can start work - mirrored or non-mirrored? How close/big do we want the map (roughly)? Do we want something drawn, or just a touched-up rolled script? How big a role should naval be? How natural/flavorful do we want it? How close are players to each other? How many landmasses are there, and how cohesive are they? And so on.

5. Barbarians/lairs/huts?

What it says on the tin.


And more basically, what are the teams going to be? We've got Eclipse/Kragroth on one, so basically who's timezone fits better with them than with the other two. I don't mind which team I end up on, personally, so unless anyone has a preference (seems unlikely) should we random.org it?

[Kredom]

Okay so there seem to be a couple of things we need to thrash out.

1. How are we picking civs/leaders?

Are we allowing duplicates or not? Are we choosing privately or snake-picking?

i would say no duplicates, but as every1 likes

2. How (if any) should gifting cities be sorted?

As Krag notes, units can't be gifted, but cities can, and have some interesting interactions in a team game. Personally I'm in favor of "on the first turn in your teams possession only."

i like the idea of no team gifting, unless its a just conquered city, or by culture.

3. Should any civs be banned?

I've been reading up on the pitboss lately, and I'm thinking the clan probably should be. Their strength as a team player is really very powerful, as most of their weaknesses disappear with the nature of the game. Maybe if we allow duplicates, but even then, its a bit boring if each team has a clan - they've been done in a teamer, IMO.

as every1 wants

4. How do we want the map to be?

Obviously we won't be too specific, but some general pointers are probably needed before Bob can start work - mirrored or non-mirrored? How close/big do we want the map (roughly)? Do we want something drawn, or just a touched-up rolled script? How big a role should naval be? How natural/flavorful do we want it? How close are players to each other? How many landmasses are there, and how cohesive are they? And so on.

i already did my oponion on this:

Map: if it isnt random a suggestion: perhaps a continental map with 1 or 2 big lakes, or oceans and if a the teams want to fight they can evade the water, going through highly defensive land masses, or go on water as a backdoor entrance to the rich places. (note sure if i made myself clear on the idea tongue)

5. Barbarians/lairs/huts?

What it says on the tin.


And more basically, what are the teams going to be? We've got Eclipse/Kragroth on one, so basically who's timezone fits better with them than with the other two. I don't mind which team I end up on, personally, so unless anyone has a preference (seems unlikely) should we random.org it?

barbs: on (raging!!!)
lairs: on
huts: on (far away, to give a reason for explorers, besides opening the map)

iam gmt -3 and its the same on what team i end up.

[ReallyEvilMuffin]

1) I think that each team could pick whatever they like, no duplicates on the team. However we could do a modified draft where one team picks there top choice, then the others pick 3 then their team picks the final 2, or iterations therefore.

2) if there is no unit gifting then first turn possible gifting opens up some interesting possibilities, without any gamey ones. Certainly conquests should be giftable.

3) I don't know enough to comment on bans, although they shouldn't be needed if we allow duplicates of the same civ both teams.

4) I always like inland sea for a team game. Gives 2 obviously contentious points, and then the naval option. You can then add a few resource rich islands in the middle to make that more appealing and close or open the chokes at will. It also gives obvious uncontested and contested expansion zones.

5) I don't know how balanced these things are in this mod but I would say all off

[Kragroth]

1. How are we picking civs/leaders?

Are we allowing duplicates or not? Are we choosing privately or snake-picking?

I seem to be in the minority here but whatever. I am not in favor of restricting other civs or leaders. If people want 5 os gabellas so what I say.

2. How (if any) should gifting cities be sorted?

As Krag notes, units can't be gifted, but cities can, and have some interesting interactions in a team game. Personally I'm in favor of "on the first turn in your teams possession only."

If you don't want gifted cities then you should mod it out. This is unenforceable.

3. Should any civs be banned?

I've been reading up on the pitboss lately, and I'm thinking the clan probably should be. Their strength as a team player is really very powerful, as most of their weaknesses disappear with the nature of the game. Maybe if we allow duplicates, but even then, its a bit boring if each team has a clan - they've been done in a teamer, IMO.

I don't see why the clan is boring: they're one of my favorites. And please do tell why they are so unbalanced for teams? Pray tell exactly why? And tell me why a barbarian Sheiam or barbarian Doviello won't have similar benefits.

No, I don't like restricting people's choices. THAT takes away the fun imo.

4. How do we want the map to be?

Obviously we won't be too specific, but some general pointers are probably needed before Bob can start work - mirrored or non-mirrored? How close/big do we want the map (roughly)? Do we want something drawn, or just a touched-up rolled script? How big a role should naval be? How natural/flavorful do we want it? How close are players to each other? How many landmasses are there, and how cohesive are they? And so on.

I want a pangea mirror like map or just pangea. I see no need for navy. Except as another attack avenue

5. Barbarians/lairs/huts?

No barbarians

Seriously barbarians are an xp store. Smart players plant their units in strategic locations and don't explore parts of the map purposefully to get more barbs to kill. It's an abusive mechanic with abusive results. Eventually the barbarian fighters get so much xp they learn to topple cities. At least with No barbarians you actually have to kill units an opponent made and not an infinite number of randomly generated ones.

If you are barbarian instead early on you settle with impunity to boost your economy and then set your reaearch low when you find goblin forts to buy a whole bunch of extra units to topple your enemies' cities

No huts: Huts give technologies which give an already accelerated tech pace even more. Do we really want knowledge of the ether or mysticism or bronzeworking granted for free? Not the other team at least. This unbalanced mechanic can have serious effects for MP and especially team games. Free Gold is also unbalancing, letting civs keep unsustainable growth longer without the sacrifice. Free settlers the same.

No lairs: Seriously. Take all the above and add free religious units to found religions early. Even more fun is moving a stack of units near enemy territory and popping lairs multiple times to set a horde of high hp
The worst though is having a nearby lair to your cities and being unable to move about / settle where you would like to. Read my previous game experience: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=343735

And you missed one: No events.

We don't need free great prophets or free settlers or extra food mushrooms or clan goblins trashing our land. The game is much more balanced without these. And no, despite the note there is nothing game breaking about leaving it.

And more basically, what are the teams going to be? We've got Eclipse/Kragroth on one, so basically who's timezone fits better with them than with the other two. I don't mind which team I end up on, personally, so unless anyone has a preference (seems unlikely) should we random.org it?

Please random it. People aren't responding. We can change parts of it later.

[Qgqqqqq]

Random.org puts Auroracher on your team. Is this okay for everyone?

Respond to the rest later.