Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(March 29th, 2016, 08:02)scooter Wrote: (March 29th, 2016, 05:02)Sullla Wrote: I also noticed something else: Defensive Pacts are an available diplomatic option. That could be very interesting...
Yeah I hadn't thought about that either until I saw the diplo screen. I sat there for a few minutes and tried to figure out what implications that could have for this game, and I'm still not quite sure.
I hadn't thought about them either, as they aren't an option you can disable in the game setup menu, and I guess they're patched out in the mods we usually play with? I'm not seeing them ruining the balance of the game here though, anyone else think there'd be an adverse effect?
Posts: 18,036
Threads: 164
Joined: May 2011
With humans? Nah, only means you can basically form trade embargo treaties (trashing peace bonus). Given they'll be probably using Mercantilism 90% of the time...
Posts: 1,508
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2009
Just wanted to briefly comment -- this is one of the most interesting games I've seen so far on this site. Thanks for getting this started! 
Bobchillingworth
Unregistered
Scooter Wrote:I'm not too concerned about an opponent trudging a big stack across land to attack us
I think Scooter's right that naval dominance will prove decisive in most conflicts, but will land stacks really be "trudging" in the era of railroads? It should only take a couple turns to move a stack from one border to another.
Posts: 1,075
Threads: 14
Joined: Oct 2010
Defense will also be a lot easier though for what it's worth.
Bobchillingworth
Unregistered
Yeah, but they'll massively facilitate dogpiles. None of the logistical failures which plague earlier era attempts, where armies regularly trickle in one at a time to be defeated in turn, like ninjas in a bad martial arts movie.
Posts: 3,898
Threads: 26
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:armies regularly trickle in one at a time to be defeated in turn, like ninjas in a bad martial arts movie.
Good image.
Scooter and Sulla's enthusiasm for early research builds while dismissing the benefits of bulbing GPs seems inconsistent. GP bulbs are a much more efficient method of research, even more so while Pacifism is so cheap. I'm really looking forward to everyone's reaction when Dreylin and OT4E land the Kremlin.
April 7th, 2016, 07:06
(This post was last modified: April 7th, 2016, 07:09 by Zed-F.)
Posts: 3,043
Threads: 49
Joined: Mar 2004
They are planning to bulb with their first GE and GS (assuming they don't get a second GE instead), which doesn't suggest to me that they are dismissing the idea. Sulla does want to maximize the beaker output from their great people, though, which is why I think he doesn't like the plan of getting a great artist for bulbing afterward -- he'd probably prefer another scientist or to throw a GA for more settlers faster.
Posts: 3,898
Threads: 26
Joined: Apr 2013
Dismissing might have been harsh word, but the general feeling I get is that they aren't valuing bulbed beakers as high as they should. In particular the comment about using a GE to rush a settler sparked my comment. If you could do it, you'd be trading roughly 3b for each 1h into the settler. Research building is obviously a much worse rate at 1b to 1h.
Even consider generating a 300GPP(or 600GPP with Pacifism) artist for bulbing Communism. That's worth around 900 base beakers, so each artist is equivalent to a 13b/4cult tile, again a lot better than research building. These opportunites aren't really mutually exclusive with more powerful scientist bulbs or GAs either.
On a semi-related note, I'm curious if we'll see any early culture bombs here.
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
Even if it is their plan, it's funny to see scooter and Sullla having spent probably the most time on their plan, and being in the bottom of the demos.
|
