Woops - I missed that it's Warlords.
I'll only be able to lurk
I'll only be able to lurk
Hopefully you'll be able to find just one extra player yourselves. But if not, I guess it's possible that someone on our team might want to play badly enough that they'll support the opposition.We have someone (IglooDude) looking into hosting the game. Looks like we have an 8v8 unless someone from Strategamer wants to change allegiance and even it up to a 9v9.
If you read my original post clearly, I suggested that each side gets to pick its 9 different leaders regardless of the other team's 9 leaders. In other words, duplicate leaders are allowed on the different teams, and in fact it's technically possible that there could be the same 9 leaders on each team (that's perfectly permissible). What is not permissible is for one team to pick duplicate leaders within its 9 - eg one team picking two Mansa Musa's, or three Qin Shi Huangs, is not allowed.DaveShack said:Any thoughts on picking civs so they even out? We don't want one side totally powerful while the other side is not. Perhaps each team should put together their civ list in priority order from 1-18, then have one side pick, the other gets 2, the other gets 2, etc. We can flip a virtual coin for 1st pick.
Assuming that's how we go, I suggest we get started on ranking the civs. If we want a separate forum, say the word and I'll put out a feeler.
Heh, that was sneaky... I'm not complaining though.[not quite an advertisement]
Also, if I may suggest a little duel action to get into MP playing shape, you can find said action in my sig.
[/not quite an advertisement]
Will we be in a premanant alliance from the begining?
You will all be on the same "team" of 9.Will we be in a premanant alliance from the begining?
You will all be on the same "team" of 9.
Ass.'obligatory RM being someones vassel comment inserter here'