Beta Gauntlet One

This one sounds like it will be more competative. :goodjob:

I am not sure if multiple copies of leaders should be allowed. I don't think I like the idea. I would imagine it would be really confusing for the player.

Plus the imagine to writeup: Ghandi declared war, so I got Ghandi and Ghandi to declare war on Ghandi, but Ghandi wouldn't agree to help. :mischief:
 
Zhahz said:
If I indulge in this I'd prefer to see the normal number of random AIs for the map type too.
You are allowed to play with more than the minimum. How many you choose might be different depending on difficulty and Victory condition.

The only reason to change the minimum would be to counter exploits, like a conquest against only one opponent on a huge map. I don't think 4 vs. 6 would make that much difference on a standard map.
 
I think multiple AIs of the same type gets so far from "normal" play that others that dont participate in the contest wouldnt be able to relate to what your doing here as well. So i vote no. Certainly the homogony doesnt help.

Also im very suspicious of letting people turn off barbarians. IMO alot of the skill with early starts and alot of the nuances of starting play goes out without any threat at all of barbarians. I suspect though this is a matter of personal preference. However its hard to imagine anyone being competitive with barbarians on even if that is their preference. Its just to big an advantage to know only the AI nations will be the ones to attack you if anyone does.
 
jeremiahrounds said:
Also im very suspicious of letting people turn off barbarians. IMO alot of the skill with early starts and alot of the nuances of starting play goes out without any threat at all of barbarians. I suspect though this is a matter of personal preference. However its hard to imagine anyone being competitive with barbarians on even if that is their preference. Its just to big an advantage to know only the AI nations will be the ones to attack you if anyone does.
Ah, but there are benefits for having barbarians on. Experience and promotions for your units or free cities and workers.

Like with the number of Civs, barbarians and other options where you have a choise, which settings you choose is very dependant on circumstances and what you are trying to accomplish. One player might do better with more Civs and Barbs on while another might do better with the minimum Civs and no Barbs. Only the results count.

IMHO, only unbalancing exploits should be banned. Those are usually bugs that destroy basic game balance.
 
I am wondering,
how can you tell wether worldbuilder has been activated or not?

When I have messed around creating supercities with all resources squares etc, I never saw anything in the high score.
 
How would you prevent people from reloading a saved game?

I could be playing for an hour. I save the game at that point. I lose a city in the next 5 turns. I reload the saved game.

I don't see how it is possible to enforce that rule.
 
storeslem said:
I am wondering,
how can you tell wether worldbuilder has been activated or not?

When I have messed around creating supercities with all resources squares etc, I never saw anything in the high score.
Those two events go hand in hand. Use of the worldbuilder automatically precludes that games inclusion in your high score screen.

KazumaQB said:
How would you prevent people from reloading a saved game?
We on the HOF staff handled over 1000 games in just the past year in III. Granted, IV is a different game, but for us it's just another chapter in the same book.

You shouldn't worry about other players reloading their games. Most players don't, and the ones that do will get dealt with quietly by us on Staff.
 
So what's the final answer on the topic of 'Multiple Occurances of the SAME Civ as Opponents'?

I'd like to try this out, but would like to know the rules beforehand......
 
Definatly would be all ghandis if they allowed it for this one. Complete and total lilly with an a desire to trade techs. I dont think they should allow it.

Playing with 5 ghandis would be easier then playing with no civs at all.
 
al_thor said:
So what's the final answer on the topic of 'Multiple Occurances of the SAME Civ as Opponents'?
It's still being debated.
 
Wouldn't having randomly generated leaders be more interesting? That way you'd also avoid the 4 ghandis issue...lol.
 
superslug said:
Those two events go hand in hand. Use of the worldbuilder automatically precludes that games inclusion in your high score screen.

No, in all honesty, those games where my capital had 20 cows within its fat cross, do show up on my high scores. What I meant, is that I saw nothing special that marked them as world-edited. I really hope there is a way to tell though.
 
I'm on the fence personally about the Gandhi issue, my gut says its wrong, inherently, but thats not to say they will act the same. If you think they are nice to you, imagine how they feel about each other!
You may find your multiple enemies will act as a single super power and blow you away.
 
I think with Gandhi's fanatic religious beliefs you would end up with 5 gandhis all with different religions and all hating each other. Also Gandhi is the most insane about building every wonder in the game. You'd be hard pressed to build any yourself with 5 of him in your game. Personally, I wouldn't want more than 1 gandhi in my games. Mansa Musa is just as peaceful and he techs a lot faster than Gandhi does. He also doesn't go crazy about religion. So I would probably go with 5 Mansa Musa's before 5 Gandhis.
 
Do you allow to submit RB-epic1?
 
OK. Sorry Ronald, but no. See the following part of the rules in the "Disallowed" section:

Map Generation
Only random maps may be used that you have generated yourself. You may not share maps with other players.
 
Back
Top Bottom