Duplicate leaders?
- Thread starter DaveShack
- Start date
Sounds great to me too Lord Parkin. I know a lot will depend on the map; I understand many leaders are played very differently and should have put an example like 2 Ramses, much more likely to both rush for GW, Pyramids, Oracle, etc... Two Roosevelts would likely have no problem at all, compared to two Ramses (just an example again) I'll always be optimistic and hope that everyone gets their first choice; however I have no business dictating what the other teams are allowed to choose. Like I said, if another team chose a duplicate I'd likely want my team to just change to make things more interesting. (Edit: right, oyzar, I'm not trying to speak for our whole team here, just me) Of course, I'm also hoping for some delicious irony when some team finds out another team chose their first choice as a leader they had rated a horrible option.
Krill
Deity
That would only be ironic if said team was crushed by the civ they rated as useless
Sullla
Patrician Roman Dictator
The Niklas/Lord Parkin plan looks like a logical and fair way to handle the civ/leader choices. I will type it up into a more formal proposal for the team forums on Wednesday, AFTER the current discussion of game and map settings concludes. 
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
I can see both points of view - the proposed solutions sound great to me!
Each team can submit their first choice to Ginger_Ale (or Sulla?) via PM - and if there any duplicates, they can be informed privately and given the option to submit a second choice if desired.
What will we do if BOTH teams decide to take their second choice?
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
Just a comment, I deliberately worded the description slightly differently than this to avoid potential problems. Arguably there is a slight advantage if a team picks another leader after they know that another team has picked that same leader. (For instance, they may know that there is at least one other team starting with Mysticism, and thus that getting another leader that has Mysticism will not give them as good a chance of getting an early religion.)Each team can submit their first choice to Ginger_Ale (or Sulla?) via PM - and if there any duplicates, they can be informed privately and given the option to submit a second choice if desired.
What will we do if BOTH teams decide to take their second choice?
That's why I suggested that all teams make their lists of preferences first, and then in the case of duplicates where a team wants to change leaders, their second (or third etc) choice is selected from that list as necessary. This avoids any issues with picking a leader with extra knowledge of what other teams are picking.
General_W
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Perfect!
Good thinking.
Of course, If a team is committed to not caring if there's a duplicate out there, then they only need to submit 1 name - those that don't want a duplicate should submit a list of 5 names.
Sounds like an awesome plan.
Good thinking.
Of course, If a team is committed to not caring if there's a duplicate out there, then they only need to submit 1 name
- those that don't want a duplicate should submit a list of 5 names. Sounds like an awesome plan.
Diamondeye
So Happy I Could Die
Fulfills my desires - basically same as Niklas', I would hate to play a duplicate leader. Fortunately we're on the same team 
.
.
Speaking for myself, and not Team 5, I support the Parkin Compromise.
It´s a nice compromise.
If you vote only 1 leader you get it; if you vote 5, there is at least 1 no other team has voted for.
There remain a question:
If 2 teams vote for the same single leader, they get it or not?
What I don´t understand is the reason behind this discussion, what is wrong with 2 or3 Montes and a fight of Jaguars in jungle.
If you vote only 1 leader you get it; if you vote 5, there is at least 1 no other team has voted for.
There remain a question:
If 2 teams vote for the same single leader, they get it or not?
What I don´t understand is the reason behind this discussion, what is wrong with 2 or3 Montes and a fight of Jaguars in jungle.
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
They both get it, since those teams will have agreed to have duplicate leaders (since they're only picking 1 single leader).
That's exactly what I thought originally.
NeverSurrender
Warlord
Personally I will vote against duplicate leaders. Just my personal preference.
Tinkerbell
Prince
Just in case we are voting, I vote for no duplicates!
Well, we aren't.
Hercules90
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2007
- Messages
- 2,557
I would vote no duplicates.
And though it is not relevant to the main discussion here. I would ban Civs with the financial trait.
And though it is not relevant to the main discussion here. I would ban Civs with the financial trait.
If we did that, then there'd be a good case for banning e.g. the Romans too and continuing like this we would quickly limit the choices severely while we wouldn't get rid of the fact that someone wanting to play the "strongest" leader would still only have a few possible choices (once some civs are removed, new ones shine through as the "best"). So while your concern is valid, I don't think banning leaders would do much other than limiting each team's choices and consequently reducing variety and flavour in the game.
That`s absurd.
Do you all have the meaning, that another team will be better play with your chosen leader? On the other hand if a second team choose your leader, you should be gratify that your opinion about the best leader is not so bad.
And if you have the opinion that romans and Cesar are the best, then choose him and look what will be the result.
sry Calis
Do you all have the meaning, that another team will be better play with your chosen leader? On the other hand if a second team choose your leader, you should be gratify that your opinion about the best leader is not so bad.
And if you have the opinion that romans and Cesar are the best, then choose him and look what will be the result.
sry Calis
Calis
on time
At least for me it's not about the best leader at all.
For me it's just a question of feeling. And for me it feels wrong, if the same person appears twice on the same world. It has nothing to do with the game itself or strategy.
And I feel you should not call someones opinion ABSURD!!
There's a reason I put "best" and "strongest" in quotation marks... part of my point (maybe it was too subtle) is that everyone has their own opinion about who is stronger and a leader that's strong in the hands of one team might be average in the handsof another.
And choosing a leader one deems strong and then judging the leader based on the result in one single game would be a clear third-grade abuse of an anecdote.
Similar threads
- Poll
