[PB62] Organizing and tech thread

[vanrober]

I was very pro war wariness until PB56 where it essentially said "oh your war didn't end really fast, you have lost". Multiplayer games already HEAVILY incentivize fast wars. Sure you could have a holdout on an island slowing down top contender, but it could also happen to anybody else as well, which is miserable. That being said it is a vote, you can vote in favor of.

I would also want to consider that playing without WW almost make you playing for fighting, i think the cultural and space victories are way too impossible without WW. The game jsut dont get to that point. Because the one with more neighbour/land luck just gets another empire "without cost" and is able to make it to win. 

I think the atack has to be well planned and only succeding if you are the one ahead on tech or able to making it surprisely or getting a good diplo to dogpile more people into that person. PLaying without score it makes it already easier for the atacker to succeds (and i think thats good).

Im sorry Mjmd i know you know already my position in PB56, but atacking the second one in power that has walls in all cities because is celts and is also PRO and you have no cats, makes the atack no sense (to me at least), if you also feel that you should have no punishment to atack a leader ahead on tech and making the war even easier for the one that has a good UU then i cant agree. Its true its a matter of voting, but let us at least try to convince people of the importance of this feature of the game.

And if you were wondering, i think nerfing it a bit would be nice, at least on the decayment, so that ending the war has a huge reward, also the innactivity makes sense to me.

[Fabled]

What are the pros / cons of no score? I'll admit I'm reluctant to vote for changes away from BtS, but I also don't have the multiplayer context to understand why some of these options were introduced.

[civac2]

It generally increases knowledge about other teams. PBSpy logs all score changes because it is meant to ensure logging in often does not convey an advantage. With these score changes you can track whips, drafts, new cities and city growth (to an extent). Some people don't like this because you can see a military buildup coming more easily. Moreover, in the early game score changes combined with other sources of information can provide an enormous amount of intel about the field to the point that you can deduce their entire early game progression (techs, cities, growth). The latter is a serious time sink.

[Mjmd]

@Fabled:
What civac said. Basically it makes attacking a lot harder. Your neighbor starts whipping heavily so you know to start whipping heavily. As game is pretty advantageous to defenders as is, the lack of forewarning I like. I also HATE having to care about pbspy score changes.

@vanrober

Im sorry Mjmd i know you know already my position in PB56, but attacking the second one in power that has walls in all cities because is celts and is also PRO and you have no cats, makes the atack no sense (to me at least), if you also feel that you should have no punishment to attack a leader ahead on tech and making the war even easier for the one that has a good UU then i cant agree. Its true its a matter of voting, but let us at least try to convince people of the importance of this feature of the game.

The idea you can get to culture or space without expanding is a very single player idea. The game rewards more land with more tech. Sometimes instead you turn tech into land then back into tech.

My thoughts are also already written and all my overall macro game analysis I think was spot on (execution eh). Focusing on the WW issue as suggested: My main point is that the multiplayer games already heavily reward fast conquests. Most of the time long drawn out wars already means your doomed. Is there a reason to add more pain to that? I vote no.

[superdeath]

Im torn. I like having No-score because then everyone is on a more even playing field as far as amount of time spent on game. BUT i also would love for the game to reach pb43 levels of tech where the POSSIBILITY of a space victory is at least in sight.

[Commodore]

So is this still open, or should I embrace the disjointedness that is seven players by putting you all on an England map as the heptarchy?

[Mjmd]

COME ON PEOPLE MAKE IT 8!!!!!!!!!

Just sign Thrawn up

[Charriu]

So is this still open, or should I embrace the disjointedness that is seven players by putting you all on an England map as the heptarchy?

Alternatively you can put Superdeath on an island surrounded by barbs. 

[Tarkeel]

So is this still open, or should I embrace the disjointedness that is seven players by putting you all on an England map as the heptarchy?

I put tomorrow as the last day.

[superdeath]

COME ON PEOPLE MAKE IT 8!!!!!!!!!

Can i sign up twice? Give me half as much land, or some other handicap (i think you can edit me to a higher difficulty?)