PB 59 organizing and tech thread

[GeneralKilCavalry]

If WW is off, we ought to be playing on emperor to make maintenance costs that much higher. Conquest needs to come with some kind of difficulties.

[naufragar]

If WW is off, we ought to be playing on emperor to make maintenance costs that much higher. Conquest needs to come with some kind of difficulties.

Conquest is its own difficulty; no need (at least in multiplayer) to use mechanics to slow down the winner. That's the opponents' job.

Having just been eliminated from a large map on a high difficulty, I'm not looking forward to the tedium of high tech costs and crippling maintenance.

Miguelito, if we're using Google Sheets to vote on settings, could you put the link in your OP? Edit: I'm an idiot and you have.

[Jowy]

If WW is off, we ought to be playing on emperor to make maintenance costs that much higher. Conquest needs to come with some kind of difficulties.

Conquest is its own difficulty; no need (at least in multiplayer) to use mechanics to slow down the winner. That's the opponents' job.

Having just been eliminated from a large map on a high difficulty, I'm not looking forward to the tedium of high tech costs and crippling maintenance.

Miguelito, if we're using Google Sheets to vote on settings, could you put the link in your OP? Edit: I'm an idiot and you have.

In a way that's exactly the problem.. You win by conquering, because going wide is always the best in Civ4. Or would players better than me disagree with that? I'm curious.

That said, Civ4 is what it is. I'll roll with high or low difficulty.

[The Black Sword]

I might play, but map size might be a deal breaker for me, need to think about it for bit. PB38 end game was rough.

[Miguelito]

I might play, but map size might be a deal breaker for me, need to think about it for bit. PB38 end game was rough.

I'll not take it yet as a signup, although I hope very much to hear back from you!

Updated the OP a bit, including some explanations on the more unusual settings (also for non RB folks who might want to join). On that issue Charriu, what happens if we both vote for city trading on and city count tied to espionage? Not that it's looking like it, but do we have a city list in that case? Ideally containing only those that have been unfogged?

[Ramkhamhaeng]

The advantage of making the spreadsheet was to include no score as the default to get Ramk in!!! […]

Well, I do not want use my vote like a dealbreaker. Fortunately the 'no score' option leading isn't narrow

[Charriu]

I might play, but map size might be a deal breaker for me, need to think about it for bit. PB38 end game was rough.

I'll not take it yet as a signup, although I hope very much to hear back from you!

Updated the OP a bit, including some explanations on the more unusual settings (also for non RB folks who might want to join). On that issue Charriu, what happens if we both vote for city trading on and city count tied to espionage? Not that it's looking like it, but do we have a city list in that case? Ideally containing only those that have been unfogged?

If city trading is on then city count tied to espionage doesn't matter anymore, because you will have a list of cities in the trade window.

[Flunky]

Hello RB

I'm still fully engaged in PB88, but happy to apply as dedlurker/designated substitute player for any one of the civforum guys. I have the feeling some more will join.

[Elkad]

I'm in.

I'd like to cast my regular useless vote for turning espionage back on (with civic and religion swap missions disabled of course)

[GeneralKilCavalry]

A huge torusland map would be hilarious to play on.