Posts: 556
Threads: 15
Joined: Mar 2015
(March 21st, 2016, 06:43)Jowy Wrote: Still need one?
Potentially. Really Evil Muffin made a tentative comment, I will PM him for clarification. I suspect he's not interested, in which case the spot is yours (and please confirm your preferred timeslot to play and whether you prefer a point based picking system or an alternative system).
Posts: 556
Threads: 15
Joined: Mar 2015
Ok, Jowy, you're in. Please confirm the info requested in my last post then we can split this into two games.
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(March 19th, 2016, 14:44)Khan Wrote: [*]Map: Either crafted or heavily edited. Feel free to get creative. But, please get lurkers to vet it heavily. I don't like the idea of any player being severely handicapped from the start. I also milldly favour a FLAT map.
I might be willing to do this, two 4 player maps right? and the goal is balanced but not mirrored?
Posts: 556
Threads: 15
Joined: Mar 2015
(March 21st, 2016, 12:09)BRickAstley Wrote: (March 19th, 2016, 14:44)Khan Wrote: [*]Map: Either crafted or heavily edited. Feel free to get creative. But, please get lurkers to vet it heavily. I don't like the idea of any player being severely handicapped from the start. I also milldly favour a FLAT map.
I might be willing to do this, two 4 player maps right? and the goal is balanced but not mirrored?
I think one 4 player map should be sufficient. You'll need to play about with leaders/civs once players have chosen, but that should be easier than making two completely different maps.
Yes, you seem to have the essence of it. In an ideal world, there should not be some starts that are really obviously stronger than others or one player that clearly has a massive land advantage. That said, you can be creative. We're not after an exact science.
Posts: 556
Threads: 15
Joined: Mar 2015
Ok, we have our player list.
I take Sian's point into consideration but I don't think that any one player here is so good that it will distort the games, therefore I think we should divide the players up by time slot to ensure a good pace in both games.
JOWY: I took your time slot from your previous game. If this has changed, please do let me know so I can find a better fit. Apologies for being presumptuous.
Proposed Games:
74a:
El Grillo 03:00 -> 07:00 GMT
Gingereagle 09:00 -> 18:00 GMT
AdrienIer 17:00 -> 22:00 GMT
Khan 19:00 -> 00:00 GMT
74b:
Jowy 14:00 -> 20:00 GMT
greenline 16:00 -> 18:00 GMT
picklepikkl 16:00 -> 00:00 GMT
Sian 17:00 -> 22:00 GMT
Considerations I took for reference:
picklepikkl mentioned about playing late, perhaps he would be best after Sian?
Sian not after gingereagle.
Both games have two players with some games under their belt and a couple with few/none.
Posts: 2,958
Threads: 12
Joined: Apr 2015
Sounds good to me. I'm up for a challenge, and I wouldn't mind a crushing defeat :D
Posts: 696
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2016
I meant that I can play late, not that I would prefer to play late :P The order for 74b looks fine, though I am definitely going to get crushed.
I abstain from the question of pure snake/points-based, as I feel I lack the experience to have an informed opinion.
Posts: 8,293
Threads: 83
Joined: Oct 2009
(March 21st, 2016, 11:36)Khan Wrote: (March 21st, 2016, 06:43)Jowy Wrote: Still need one?
Potentially. Really Evil Muffin made a tentative comment, I will PM him for clarification. I suspect he's not interested, in which case the spot is yours (and please confirm your preferred timeslot to play and whether you prefer a point based picking system or an alternative system).
GMT 15:00-21:00 GMT, can often play earlier but not every day.
EDIT: That slot you put me in works great for me.
Fine with any picking system.
Posts: 1,126
Threads: 9
Joined: Dec 2010
cool groupings; at least I should have the turn when I get up in the morning and there's a little leeway if future work gets in the way 
PBEM12 - Shaka of Inca [6/6*] PBEM18 (Apps) - Augustus of China [4/4*] PBEM31 - Hannibal of Greece [jnt2-4/5*] PBEM72 - Willem of Oranje - Dutch [3/4*] PBEM74A -Catherine of Babylon [4/4][*ended early]
Posts: 556
Threads: 15
Joined: Mar 2015
For 74a folks (74b, feel free to use also if you want it):
How do you feel about the below points system:
You are allowed 5 points
4: FIN
3: EXP, India, Inca
2: SPI, IND, CRE, ORG
1: PHI, IMP, Civs that start with Agriculture Tech
0: CHA, AGG, PRO, All other civs
Alternatively, since there's 4 of us and there's plenty of good leaders, I'd personally be happy to just ban Inca and India and do a regular snake pick. Maybe I'm making this more difficult than it needs to be. Sure the leaders will all be predictable but this is base BTS, EVERYTHING is predictable at this point.
Option 3, if folks really wanted to be 'different', we could ask Brick to send us 5 random civ/leader combos and pick our favourite? He can discount any REALLY strong ones (Sury India, Pacal Inca and similar).
I am perfectly happy with any of those options.
|
