[SPOILERS] PBEM 11 Lurker Thread

[MJW (ya that one)]

Pindi's dead in the water now because he cannot build melee units now and archers are too weak.

[Ituralde]

The war between Archduke and Banzailizard is a dream come true for Cornflakes.
Have the lesser powers duke it out while he races ahead in research.

[VoiceInTheWilderness]

Well, this is a disappointment. I can't say I expected pindicator to resign.

[pindicator]

I like that idea. Put the builders together, put the warmongers together - it'd be like PBEM2, which was a pretty exciting, balanced game.

The only reason I wanted to give them direction towards CS is due to the Aztecs being in the game. If each player has knowledge of the middle They can keep pind in check. My worst case scenarios is Pind takes out two of the CS and neither player notices. 

I'm still reading the lurker thread, but I was pretty appalled by this. I'll write up my thoughts more later, but this is far out of bounds for what a map maker should be doing.

[MJW (ya that one)]

I agree Pindi that is BS. I thought about attacking you for rage-quitting but then I remembered that oledavy did it too and no-one cared because it was obvious who would win, but that's not good enough. It even had an influence on the game because he made a mistake that he would have been able to undo if he didn't quit.

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

I think both decisions are defensible, but I'll let pin make his case before I defend Emperor & I. 

Sorry things didn't work out for you, pin.

[MJW (ya that one)]

I think both decisions are defensible, but I'll let pin make his case before I defend Emperor & I. 

Sorry things didn't work out for you, pin.

I was talking about oledavy. www.realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=8327 Failing to make peace wasn't very impressive but Ichabod was able to avoid having to take a useless city which was impressive. What were you talking about?

[pindicator]

I'll say all this with the caveat that I can't read inside your minds and only have the conversation in this thread as insight into what the thought process was: so if I have misunderstood then I'm certainly open to hearing what the idea behind the map design were. But my initial read through lead me to believe that 1) the map was specifically made in it's shape to limit Aztec's rushing of city states, and 2) that no other considerations towards the strengths of other civs were given, at least to such a degree as to change the map for them. Again, perhaps there were considerations not written about and I'd be happy to hear them.

Why is this upsetting? Apart from learning that you were deliberately set against from the start of the game, this is also just bad process for making maps. Picking favorites or trying to adjust difficulty of civs is really outside the scope of what a map should be designed for. Civ 6 is an inherently unbalanced game with different civs having strengths and weaknesses (some more than others), and it isn't the map maker's job to try to smooth out those differences. That has always fallen on the players in the dorm of drafts or other pick selection methods. And while it was not specifically stated it has always been custom that a map should be made independent of the knowledge of which civs or would be participating. Balancing a map to account for multiple possibilities is good; but specifically designing a map to keep just one player in check is not. This is also why it is practice to randomly allot players to starting positions. Choosing to move them around after to set up a map makers desired confrontation is just over the line and heavy handed.

Second, the map making process didn't even mention the strongest civ in the game: Rome. If we are going to cut off one civ's strategy why leave the strongest civ untouched? Why not move Rome's iron far away so the unbalanced legions don't just roll over a continent and then tech into space - this seemed to be a concern that Aztecs would do so, but no thought of Rome doing so when Rome's path is much easier! Ironically, that is likely going to be the outcome of this game now.

Third, this all was done without much thought given to other consequences of these decisions. Again, maybe there was but the only talk in the thread was about how this affected one civ in particular. Rome was deliberately switched with Germany after the random allotment - that decision in itself warrants the appalling adjective I used earlier - but there was no consideration to how this impacted other teams. How do you think Rowain is going to feel when he learns that he had to border 2 neighbors with ancient era UUs because Greece was deemed a warmongering civ? Was it considered that hoplites are weak to melee units and that Rowain would be at a disadvantage for much of the game? Or what about moving Germany away from civs likely to rush it early on when that civ's middle and late game production strengths are offset by early game weakness? Going back to Rowain, was there any consideration to how putting all the city states in the middle would effect a civ that has unique abilities tied to gaining suzerainity over city states? Or was every decision made just to "keep pind in check"?

[MJW (ya that one)]

Second, the map making process didn't even mention the strongest civ in the game: Rome. If we are going to cut off one civ's strategy why leave the strongest civ untouched? Why not move Rome's iron far away so the unbalanced legions don't just roll over a continent and then tech into space - this seemed to be a concern that Aztecs would do so, but no thought of Rome doing so when Rome's path is much easier! Ironically, that is likely going to be the outcome of this game now.

This wouldn't work because UUs don't need resources. There's other ways to attack Rome, by cramping them and denying them luxs to make it hard to go wide, but this is not it. 

I will enjoy Rowain's inevitable vicious attack. 

[Grotsnot]

Second, the map making process didn't even mention the strongest civ in the game: Rome. If we are going to cut off one civ's strategy why leave the strongest civ untouched? Why not move Rome's iron far away so the unbalanced legions don't just roll over a continent and then tech into space - this seemed to be a concern that Aztecs would do so, but no thought of Rome doing so when Rome's path is much easier! Ironically, that is likely going to be the outcome of this game now.

This wouldn't work because UUs don't need resources. There's other ways to attack Rome, by cramping them and denying them luxs to make it hard to go wide, but this is not it. 

I will enjoy Rowain's inevitable vicious attack. 

Overall point is valid, though moving the Iron away would at least delay boosting Iron Working, maybe give Rome's neighbors an extra 5-10 turns to prepare. The UU not requiring Iron means there's no balance need to plant it right on their doorstep. Rho had an Iron literally next to the starting Settler.